Dr Davaulus

Riobux's page

Organized Play Member. 163 posts (166 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 4 Organized Play characters. 1 alias.


RSS

1 to 50 of 163 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

I'm currently toying with a food article based on a weird throwaway commentary in the Abomination Vaults book about fishcakes and the prevalence of cider in the Swardlands. Do plan to do a Side Trek seed as a second with nothing springing to mind quite yet, and might just sit and wait to see what strikes me for a third.


I'll likely just be sneaking around Twitter/message boards/etc to see comments on Wayfinder. I don't expect my Side Trek Seed to get much attention, but any shout-out would be fantastic. Also will be excited to read the other entries, see if there's any good ideas I can use in my own campaigns.


Zombkat wrote:
Kind of wish I had thought ahead and set up a reading.

You could actually do it as an audio-only reading via Discord, making sure to mute everyone except you and then just post artwork when relevant to the piece you're reading into a channel. Less work than OBS/Twitch at least?


Would authors have to pay for the little thing online if there may be one?


Zombkat wrote:
There are a few communities for gaming writing, if you're curious. There's also a November RPG Writer's Workshop that's highly recommended (although it is a bit 5e biased).

I might begin crawling into such communities once I know what I'm doing right and wrong, although likely stepping clear of 5e ones since I don't really have many positive things to say of the system besides its community is staffed by devoted and talented folk.


Timitius wrote:


If you are truly concerned about it, email me/Wayfinder and ask for an update. I can let you know what I know, and supply you with the edits if you are truly interested or concerned. I would, however, prefer to wait on that until after Round 2 edits.

Tim

I think after all's said and done I'll definitely reach out for information on what got edited. Mostly to find out what I'm doing right, what I'm doing wrong and how to generally improve. The accepted submission, while short, was genuinely fun to write up (as well as personally a smidge humorous) so would like to do more.


Honestly, at this point I'd just hope if an editor is trying to contact and it is all quiet, there'd be a post here just reminding said person to email back in case the emails are going nuts. Like those supermarket tannoy announcements. Otherwise, I do get the anxiety of being worried if an editor has tried to reach you but your email account has secretly thrown the message into the spam folder. Then again, I'm kind of new to this so maybe I'm hoping too much or being unreasonable.


Castilliano wrote:
Nik Gervae wrote:

"Body? What body? All I've got is this here bag of weasels."

Possibly dead weasels. If you toss a corpse in, maybe it turns into a weasel, just not a live one.

Toss dead weasels in, call it a Bag of Resurrection and sell it.

No assurance the weasel coming out looks at all similar though. :P

Definitely a wild way to do Performance checks for income or as part of Extinction Curse's circus trick system.


Castilliano wrote:

As for the water, it only comes out if retrieved (and there's nobody to do that) or if the bag's turned inside out (which means the bag can't be used and the water cannot enter.) The water would overload the bag and it'd rupture, with the water being lost.

That is if the water can even enter without a sentient creature activating the bag, depending on how one interprets the metaphysics/rigor of the rules. Since there's a limited air supply in a Bag of Holding, it's obviously not "open" in the traditional sense, but what would the ramifications of that be? I for one wouldn't want Bags of Holding to lose function underwater because nobody dares put something in (or maybe just dare to untie the top) and flood their bag until it bursts.

Now creating new possibilities of using Bags of Holding as improvised air canisters if you get caught underwater. Now curious though of the logistics of storing incriminating evidence in Bags of Weasels so when removed they harmlessly flee the site as weasels. Maybe a murder mystery subplot involving returning a weasel to a Bag of Weasels to turn it into the incriminating evidence.

One player did figure you could also have a golem putting sand in a Bag of Weasels and retrieving it to unleash weasels. Which does seem like another adventure hook.


Hey,

So my party while looking up Bag of Holding stumbled upon a Bag of Weasels. They now have a scheme involving having a Decanter of Endless Water pointing upwards with the Fountain setting on, a Bag of Weasels upside down a few feet up so whatever is in the bag falls out therefore creating thousands and millions of weasels to ransack the local countryside of food, wildlife and plantlife. Another idea related to this was filling a Bag of Weasels up with sand, with the hope each sand particle counts as its own separate object and therefore unleashing up-to 10,308,750 weasels with each full bag over-turned.

As part of the thought experiment though (as we were just laughing our heads off imagining this), we never could find how an object is defined for the purposes of magical spells and magical items. If a grain of sand is an object in of itself, or if it must breach a certain bulk to classify as one.


Cellion wrote:


  • Reloading Strike (6th level) for the Way of the Drifter saves you the reload action if you're alternating melee and ranged attacks.
  • Personal annoyance that I shared in the main thread about this: As reloading is an interact action with the manipulate trait and Reloading Strike specifies you take an Interact action, if the enemy has attacks of opportunity then they shut down the sword-n-pistol build pretty hard against the AOO enemy since the action would just lead to free attacks on you.

    If duel-wielding pistols (or maybe pistol-n-sword builds too) though, the Dual-Weapon Warrior archetype is a no-brainer for Dual-Weapon Reload (as it lets you reload without a hand free). However, it does lead to spending a painful two actions to reload your double pistols and, like others mentioned, reloading is an empty action that I'm not sure gets fixed enough with things like Reloading Strike along with a damage output that I don't think is strong enough to compensate for two actions to activate (one to reload, one to fire). That's putting aside you need the Free-Archetype rule to make it worthwhile.


    I'm having a good time with these classes and think they're fun, there's just one part that I'm not sure is intentional:

    Reloading Strike is a Melee Strike and then an Interact action to reload. The feat itself doesn't have the manipulate trait, but Interact does. This is kind of important concerning attack of opportunity. Is it intended that Reloading Strike, for a sword-n-gun build, can provoke attacks of opportunities?


    Hhhmm, got me concerned that I've not heard from the editor at all in case there's been some odd email glitch.


    I did find out what entry out of the three snuck in, and it was one without a stat block. So, I have that going for me? I do predict there will be some grammar mistakes though.


    I'd be surprised if Gunslinger isn't on the cards. There's been artwork of them in PF2nd for quite some time. I'd also love a bit of gunslinger action.


    Oh gosh. Genuinely surprised I actually got picked (even though I blundered communicating action-economy in the stat blocks of one entry). Just got to find out which one made it in. Thanks!


    I'm also checking once every few days in anticipation. Although I'm really not sure what to expect besides probably not making it (it is my first entry and does include things like farcical humour).


    3 people marked this as a favorite.
    Zapp wrote:
    Wouldn't it have been easier to come up with a story where the fair clean humans were actually in the right and where the ugly smelly monsters were actually in the wrong?

    Yes.

    It would have been totally unsatisfying and I would have checked out long ago. My players also would be annoyed because they wouldn't have anything to dig their teeth into.

    I don't want stories where the "fair clean humans" were totally absolutely 100% right and the "ugly smelly monsters" were actually totally 100% in the wrong. It may work in more dungeon-centric gameplay where the gameplay is front-and-centre, but when the story has to (at least) share the limelight it just has to do a lot better than "GOOD HUMANS, KILL BAD MONSTERS!" and I keep suspecting a lot of the story problems do boil down to the lack of commitment of going far enough.

    If they want Aroden depicted as kind of a colonalist who doomed a race to devolution to help bring life to the surface surrounding the Starstone, then that's actually a really interesting take. However, where it staggers is actually because the xulgaths, run as is, are just undeniably evil. You can't even say "well, because Aroden damned the race, they were exploited by a demon" because if you take the temple in Chapter 2's accounts of the events then the Zevgavizeb worship predates even finding the vault and if you don't then the temple to the deity was erected before the orbs were taken. Otherwise you're trying to justify the signs of steel xulgath weaponry in the barracks and advanced-for-their-era bartering system within said temple. I do try to run that line of logic, but Book 5 contradicted that strong enough that it's flimsy at best.

    The druid thing does need to be fixed by doing something like saying the old druid order they were a part of actually broke the orb. That they had noticed it was dying and tried a ritual, but the ritual failed and the orb disintegrated. Then the group fragmented as the larger amount decided to vacate to other pastures under the orders of a guilt-ridden druid leader. A smaller group stayed behind, hoping to keep the tide of pestilence back despite senior members of the original order saying it was hopeless and that "maybe nature needs to naturally become what it really is under this interventionalism". Not tried this and does need some polish, but it does solve two problems in one hit. It not only means players don't observe the obvious problem of "why don't we get the original orb in Absalom?" and it ups the stakes because, as one of my players put it, the xulgaths actually never accomplish anything so there's so way of knowing the orbs are even able to be broken.

    Then again, I suspect things like pacing problems (like the xulgaths never achieving anything, so there's no "raising of the stakes" before the finale) are born from Paizo's fragmenting the campaign into different books by different authors approach. That said, I'm going off topic now.

    Generally though, if anything, I want more grey-scale morality adventures from Paizo. Something where the players really have to think about what they're doing and how they want things to pan out. It's definitely harder and would require a ton of planning (especially on an over-arching plot scale), but it would definitely make players pay close attention to what is going on in the plot and really engage with it. As is, and I do genuinely sympathise, the plot sometimes one too many times focuses on "players as heroes" rather than "players as adventurers". Maybe that's part of their writing philosophy though?


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Golbez57 wrote:
    Whether a bug or a feature, Sympathy for the Xulgath is inevitable among both my players and their current (Book 1) characters, so I am proactively layering in options for how they might address the injustice.

    Yeah, I've been seeping this in for a while. It's a point of frustration that was heightened when Ron mentioned the intent was you were just facing the bad evil Xulgaths and that there were some neutral/good ones (I believe it is book 2 where there's a chapter I dig about Xulgaths that describes some of them more like peaceful druids who uses natural occurrences as omens and signals), and yet if you run as is every xulgath is evil. I've already had a Cavnakash subplot (the boss from Book 1) where players converted on a nat-20 30 Diplomacy roll (it kind of made sense he was grossly frustrated enough to think there has to be a better way). He had a might-means-right mentality, but was trying to learn from the NG bard/champion about how sometimes protecting innocent people are good. When the bard died, Cavnakash went off the next day (canonically, likely to seek out a temple of Shelyn to work as a Champion, using his might to make things right while playing the drums in his free time as taught).

    Book 5 I'm definitely going immensely deeper on this. I'm doing a side-plot involving one of the Cults of the Darklands called Tanagaar's Arrows, with hopes of using that xulgath to really underline "not all xulgaths are evil, really". Actually going to be involving a weird mix-up with the Cult of the Faceless Sphinx where the Tanagaar's Arrows ghouls will be trying to assassinate the group under the belief that they're working with the Faceless Sphinx (due to some weird mix up involving an Oracle who gets their powers from the dark tapestry and a Amnesiac rogue who was an assassin/thief for the cult).

    Along side this insanity, I've already underlined that there's nothing to say they have to take the orb to the surface. The core mission is to just get the reflection. Willowside will rot without the orb, but maybe if Shraen has the orb and if the urdefhan and drow fighting is imbalanced enough to severely weaken both sides enough for Tanagaar's Arrows to swoop in (especially if word travelled that a city might get a certain shift in alignment)... Well, it could be a rare good-aligned haven in the Darklands. It's unlikely my group will go for that due to the sacrifice of Willowside, but I like it being on the table.

    Both maybe a bit wild, but I'm hoping with things like this to really help give players options to do good things in a terrible dark place (already had one or two players really let down they had to let a prisoner die in the urdefhan camp) and to reinforce there are good xulgaths out there.


    Doesn't help that Blackjack is basically Bruce Wayne.

    My players back when I ran this was losing their mind and kept expecting Rolth Lamm to come back as the Joker after falling in a vat of disease in the last stretch of Book 2 (I forgot the exact circumstances).


    Liam wrote:

    I am loving the AP so far. My players are loving it too.

    So here's my question:

    How did you handle the Iffdhasil encounter with how straight up
    deadly it can be?

    So, I actually preloaded this entire module by warning them there are two fights in Chapter 1 that are Extreme difficulty. Considering how often they actually struggle with even Moderate fights (going to get to that with my own comment on the module), they knew that when the Extreme fight hits they probably don't want to be in the area. I did not tell them which fight though. It was enough to put the "fear of god" into them and dampen their "if it breaths, we can kill it" mentality.

    So, when I ran it and it crawled out the ground consuming the worms, I emphasised the aberrant nature of it. The fact it had just eaten the last worm that was alive, and that even the aura was making them Doomed (I even got cheeky and increased by 2 on a crit fail) on a pretty high DC, they booked it hard. Which it just watched, like the book says, as it is more just confused about the Orb Reflections than much else. I might bring it back between Chapter 2 and 3 for a lark though.

    However, to get to my own moan, I do wonder how Paizo rates the level of these creatures. The Lesser Death fight in Chapter 2 nearly wiped my party hard, and even with fudging it left one character at 13 health and another with regenerate running. As a Moderate 16 fight (so, two level 16 creatures), it should take the wind out of the characters. Instead, with a mixture of 60ft AOO range that disrupts on a hit, 20ft Misfortune Aura, Negative Healing which prevents positive damage (while the undead element prevents negative damage), it is actually pretty devastating. I was disrupting spell casters up-n-down the field. The attack modifier was high enough crits were semi-common. Finally the Status Sight meant they kept targeting weaker characters.

    This is also putting aside that the Roll20 version of the stat sheet is just wrong. It keeps happening with books that crucial typos make it in, like how the AOO range was written as 100ft and the fly speed as 50ft instead of 40ft. It's rare, but it's common enough to be a genuine issue.


    I actually don't mind throwing money down on the table if there's particularly good newbie friendly one-shots to introduce me and the players into the swing of things.


    Hey,

    I'm thinking of giving Starfinder a go and could do with a one-shot to give a bit of a test run to but I'm struggling picking one. The obvious one was Skitter-Shot but, well, one of my players hate the Skittermanders on sight and another find their cute naivety frustrating as they wish they could just play them as furry goblins in their CE glory. So I'm back to trying to pick an one-shot that features the standard races, but there's no more under the Adventures tab.

    Could someone give me some advice for a good early-level one-shot to try the system with?


    2 people marked this as a favorite.

    Today we offer thoughts to Jeremy, the last remaining member of the original party who strolled into the town of Abberton and first discovered a subterranean race was trying to spell doom to the surface dwellers. He has come a long way, from diving head-first into Black Puddings and allowing the circus to get burgled because the thief told him to go away in strong words all the way to level 15. We hope he rests easy now, since Jeremy spent his adventuring life as a fighter diving head first into fights with complete disregard to tactics, opposing force and even his own life.

    This death wish came to ahead when, clutched within the maw of a transplanar being in the black irradiated desert below, he opted to trip and attack it instead of trying to escape. This was when the sinister being tried to suck his soul out like a child with a straw and cup of shaved ice and, as though his death wish had decided it was time, Jeremy was offered two bouts of “snake eyes” as Nivi would put it. While his companions are keen to bring him back from the boneyard, his soul’s reluctance to return to an existence he seemed to want an end to and questions of if his soul hasn’t been absolutely destroyed by the consumption of his essence do rest upon them like a dark cloud upon this funeral. We will none-the-less keep Jeremy's chalice of wine prepared for his returning, or merely respected as a symbol of his life if he isn’t.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.

    If in doubt, go for it! If it's an idea you really dig, then you're bound to do something awesome within the category which I think is what counts. I think the hardest submission for me to write was when I was (happily mind, like I work best bouncing off things or working with an expectation in mind) specifically writing to an unpicked category based on the last count. I think Timitus would prefer just great content, and based on the theme of Tar-Baphon I think monsters would be a fantastic fit.

    That said, sorry if I'm accidentally putting words in people's mouths.


    Ron Lundeen wrote:


    The spear is magical, and can be thrown--either of which might matter in some situations. You're right, the claw is the better option if they're only mixing it up in melee.

    The treasure a creature can get is usually based on the level of the creature, not the level of the heroes expected to encounter them; even though the heroes are 16th level, the wights don't all have greater striking runes because that would be too much for level 13 creatures. Now, monsters in adventures break this general rule all the time--particularly the significant NPCs--and sprinkling interesting treasure around to get the expected treasure for the heroes is important. But that's why their spears are less magic-y than you expect.

    Interesting. I'll try to run as intended then, likely favouring the claw even though the imagery of these warriors showing their spearmanship kind of stuck in my mind. Then again, the spear could be akin to a javelin as an opening volley before closing in and attacking. Thank you.


    Deriven Firelion wrote:


    If you want the party to be more surprised, I would remove the pollywogs from the pond outside. It is pretty easy for any character with a Nature check to determine what they are. Once a character does that, they are unlikely to trust any food or similar creatures inside the place.

    So, I ran as is and my fighter ended up just seeing shadows in the pond swimming around. So he put his face under the water as the others went for the stable. I ended up having a bit of fun as the players had to do perception checks to hear the sound of their fighter getting pulled under face-first over the sound of music coming from inside the hall.

    One nature check later, they decided to deal with the brugdahatches via a hostage situation. So, they might see through the bluff but it might also lead to very inventive solutions.


    Timitius wrote:
    Riobux wrote:
    Bugger. I just used more-than (i.e. >) symbols to indicate actions. I don't think there were any actions that weren't just single actions.
    Should be OK, as long as you indicated what the symbols represent!

    ...Oh no. The only hope I have is the context lending some clue.


    Bugger. I just used more-than (i.e. >) symbols to indicate actions. I don't think there were any actions that weren't just single actions.


    I once ran Curse of the Crimson Throne to near completion, only stopping due to a toxic group. It's a personal shame as I kind of adored Curse of the Crimson Throne. The others I can't really comment, although I do keep wanting to play Carrion Crown one day as a player rather than GM, but CotCT is a safe bet.


    I suspect it isn't a mistake, but on pages 23-33 there's the stat block of the Raptor Guard Wrights. Under weapons they deal 3d6+14 with their claws, but only 2d6+14 with their spears (+1 striking according to inventory). Feels weird they don't have Greater Striking (level 12 rune, which as they're level 13 in a level 16 fight, doesn't put them so beyond the curve it'll create a financial problem) which would put the spears in line with their claws, as I'm not sure why they'd use their spears when claws just do better damage with no downsides (in fact, with Agile they've got a better MAP than usual).


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Timitius wrote:


    No, we got them just fine, Riobux. I am usually pretty quiet until the last 30 days as to the current state of submissions, as most people don't even start writing until the last month.

    If you are ever worried or concerned if we got your submissions or not, ask here or follow up with an email.

    Lastly, we don't review submissions for accept/reject until after the close of the call, when we give all articles equal attention.

    Oh, phew! I can live with the review not happening until after it closes, just was curious in case it needed to be spruced up in some way.

    Timitius wrote:


    Lacking right now?
    Weal or Woe

    I had actually been toying with a Weal or Woe idea based in the Gravelands as the third submission. Considering that's lacking, I might gun for it.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Zapp wrote:


    Heck, considering the trivial consequence of critical failure, why didn't Helg just visit the Water Temple, and then did and redid the ritual until she scored a critical success to be ensured a full week of uninhibited travel?

    Because Helg only knows how to reach the caves via Willowside (she doesn't know about the waterlogged tunnel, this is heavily implied in her entire motivation). She needs the adventurers to get the statue out of the caves so she doesn't have to invade Willowside with the xulgath threat. Like, the reason is already baked in, but you're insisting there's this plot hole that isn't there.

    Even saying about siege towers and how they work is built on the assumption the siege tower is built like siege towers as we know them and not as a glorified cart with more stable wheels (as Helg's intention is not to use the siege tower beyond as a cart to wheel the statue into the Darklands, so she could steer the creation of the cart to suit the purpose).

    Knowing my group, they wouldn't spot this plot hole you're insisting exists. Even if they raised questions, you can always lean into "because Helg isn't as smart as you" because even if a player spots a hole in logic of a character it doesn't mean there's a flaw in anyone except said character's train of logic.

    If you really need a ghoul to use the caves (who somehow hasn't consumed the inn-keeper in all this time and hasn't been killed by the elemental blocking the water tunnel leading to the sea), then by all means. Seems to be fixing a problem that doesn't exist.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Zapp wrote:

    Just as a heads-up, I find Helg's plans to use the siege tower to transport the Statue of Bogruk (and keep her exposed to the dangers of a whole Xulgath army) rather nonsensical.

    There is no reason (at least that I can find) why she doesn't simply use her Statuette ritual only.

    I'll bite:

    She needed a mode of transport to put the statue on, which is why the "siege tower" was erected. She needed to do this because the ritual lasts for one day (and the ritual takes an hour to do) and travelling back to the Darklands (and to her intended site of worship) would take quite a few days. So rather than constantly redoing the ritual over and over, she wants the statue in the "siege tower" (which actually isn't intended as a siege tower in Helg's eyes, but disguised as one for the xulgaths). She can't sneak into Willowside to access the caverns below (she is unaware of the tunnel from the docks into the caves), which is why she is having the xulgaths siege the town (despite questions brewing of why they're not sieging the orb towers). The adventurers are more going to let her break the siege by giving her the statue by going into the caves she can't access, and putting it on the tower that will carry the statue. Once she has what she wants, she's disinterested in murdering the town and will just want to go back to the Darklands to set up her own cult. She'd likely go back underground under the idea of "we've done the task, time to report to our masters" (with xulgaths pushing the tower back) or at least just skimps off in the middle of the night back to the Darklands, "siege tower" carrying said statue.

    It isn't just about "getting away", it's about getting to where the statue is in the first place and where she intends her statue to be without the chaos of constant ritual casting. The only weirdness to Helg's plan comes in the form that she is able to convince the xulgaths to attack the town instead of the tower, not to mention if they'd notice their leader is acting odd, which is kind of explained by one of the higher up xulgaths in camp noticing something is odd and confronting her about it soon after the adventurers attack.

    All due respect, but this is in the book either explicitly or implied.


    Woran wrote:

    Hi Tim, like last issue, would it be possible to know how many submissions there are per category at this point?

    Definitely curious as both submissions by me have led to a bit of silence, and very new to the process so not sure if this is expected or a sign of rejection/being buried.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.

    So, my sessions have turned a bit... Odd, and I feel like it might twist the campaign into a bizarre direction.

    I'm GM. We have Bard Champ, Fighter, Ranger (who has alt-character Cleric she never uses) and Champion (who also dabbles into Monk alt-character every so often). A fight with a certain skeleton in a certain stable killed Bard Champ, so he rerolled as a Witch. Knowing what we were hitting, I joked about the idea in a veiled way about his new patron being Bokrug. He seemed to be into it, so he rolled CE (knowing him, he wouldn't use this to derail but rather to work towards his patron's goals) and we said that maybe his character was silently suggested to come to Willowside for an unknowable reason. The closest is Bokrug once in a vision suggesting that if it can overthrow Zevgavizeb (aided by this witch via the destruction of their worshippers and spreading of the faith), it can ascend into demonhood with its own plane.

    Where things have gradually taken a strange turn isn't so much an unexpected area. I knew Witch player tends to be the leader/face of the party, so them being weirdly open to evil deeds (which includes, I wish I was joking, rescuing someone from a stone beartrap formation via the Regenerate spell, cutting the victim's legs off, carrying them to safety and putting them back on) could lead to other players also being open to it. I also trusted my player not to openly just recruit the party into being evil (as it would end badly for obvious reasons), and kept a watchful eye for open recruitment. I'm more astounded that Witch is slowly accidentally recruiting Ranger into worshipping Bokrug through Ranger's player's natural love of lizards and being enamoured by taking on more lizard features as a hobgoblin after a successful baleful polymorph saving throw (with the spell being cast as a trap by Witch days ago and accidentally being triggered by Ranger) left her with scales and a small lizard tail.

    This likely wouldn't derail the campaign, as Bokrug's goal is still inline with the campaign (i.e. kill worshippers of Zevgavizeb) but may lead to a very odd subplot emerging involving recruiting people into worshipping Bokrug. This is especially considering Helg's motivations (i.e. share Bokrug with the Darklands) and the potential for players to reencounter her there in Book 5 which is in the Darklands.

    I don't need advice of such, but it has definitely been a bizarre campaign.


    So, weirdly, based on my experience of playing as a Swashbuckler in Organised Play, I would actually say you should pick a style that plays into how you want to play and the feats on hand. As a Braggart Swashbuckler, 80% of the time I've gotten my panache back via tumbling or insane daring feats I've rolled and passed (e.g. skidding on ice around a corner). The styles give you options, but Tumbling/Improv Daring Acts does seem to be the bread-n-butter of the Swashbuckler.


    What are the chances we'll come across a series of strange plates that react only to light conjured via magic that look like once upon a time they'd be worn, discovered in a maze-like Azlanti ruin?

    Would the Azlanti, using magic and metallic properties lost to time prior to Earthfall, play laser-tag?


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Cydeth wrote:

    And... another AP that's 'meh' to me on the face of it. I never was interested in Magaambya, though.

    Generally my outlook. Age of Ashes was cool, Extinction Curse is pretty neat, Agents of Edgewatch seems to be totally my jam, the mini-ones don't appeal to me (not really into Eastern Fantasy or dungeon-crawls) and while faux-Harry Potter does seem it'd be ripe for a lot of fun and silliness (even if I didn't grow up with the books/films) I'm not really into the Magaambya at all. Each their own though, it's not exactly a put down but rather "not my cup of tea".


    I honestly have a vaguely different take on the "the problem with evil is you should kill all evil" issue. The problem isn't the lack of complexity nor is it that some people approach evil to be smited which can side-step RP. Both complex diplomatic narratives and tactical combat simulators style games work for different groups, and it's down to preference rather than skill (e.g. my current group likes the RP-style game where imagination is rewarded and side-plots happen a lot, but they tend to be unfortunately passive of what to do despite a clear direction and hints of other directions).

    The problem with evil is evil is subjective.

    This means on one hand you have the tactical players getting dragged out of their pressure release when they're reminded of the complexity of morality (I mean, philosophers have been at that subject for thousands of years), you also end up with diplomacy-focused players using alignment as a litmus test of if to trust or not. It also leads to all the many tired frustrating arguments of why a good aligned character probably shouldn't be torturing cultists (genuine conversation I got dragged into).

    It lead to me kind of thinking of what separates an evil character/god from a good character/god. In the end, I'm not sure if I read this somewhere, but came to the conclusion good-evil alignment seems based on the value of life by the person. This includes quality of life, not just the existence of life. If they view every life is sacred, they're probably good. If they view life as cheap, then they're probably evil. Complete with sliding scale rather than hard categories. It doesn't mean good people can't kill nor does it mean evil wouldn't save, but that their world philosophy, their actions and culture tends towards a high or low value on life.

    It does present a labelling issue (i.e. what happens when a civilisation with an unintentional high mortality rate is then called evil for it), but that's really the closest measuring stick I've found that means "evil" doesn't mean unapproachable and undeniably corrupt. It means evil isn't stale or antagonistic, just a way of life (albeit with an unfortunate name that if I had the gall I'd change the Good-Evil alignment slide to probably something like High-Low). Good-Evil does have potential, but the label does feel like a relic of earlier editions of D&D.


    2 people marked this as a favorite.
    Tangent101 wrote:

    Funny thing is, I thought of Reign of Winter as well and it was due to how the Kingmaker Hardcover is doing just what RoW should have done.

    Funnier still is slightly related to your recommendations and what I know of Reign of Winter, I actually nearly wrote "Curse of the Crimson Throne" as the example due to similar issues (i.e. you spend 3 books building up the queen and the descent of Korvosa into madness, you have her as the final boss in book 6 and then for books 4 and 5 you leave the city to go get McGuffins). I actually kind of wish you never left Korvosa at all because, like with how you'd fix RoW, it makes the villain still the forefront in everyone's mind. It makes your big bad a constant antagonist that is active, rather than this passive thing to, uh, maybe get around to putting down.

    But yeah, RoW feels like it puts you on the railroads pretty hard and I'm not sure there's a good way to fix that without a total overhaul of the AP. Maybe it'd lose its classic D&D 1st style it was inspired by, but honestly it's one of those stylistic things that I'm happier without than with. It's a shame though, because I can count on one hand the amount of APs that sold me as quick and as hard as the phrase "one AP book is set in Russia during the Russian Revolution where you have to go kill Rasputin". That said, if it did get its railroads fixed and a more present antagonist like you're suggesting, I'd be totally down with trying to run it.


    Is there any art of the other officers? Ollo seems to have art secretly tucked into Chapter 3 of Book 1, so curious if the other officers have art I can use or if I should dig for my own.


    Timitius wrote:


    Using Legends is fine. It came out after our Call for Submissions went up, but does indeed work well for this issue too!

    Oh phew! As daft as it is, I didn't think about the possibility Legends would be discounted due to the book's release date. More that it's not as known as World Guide or Core, would be referencing things that may sound like I made it up for the seed (i.e. Razmir's interesting relationship with Jaklyn) and so wouldn't be suitable as you can't assume audiences would have read that book.


    3 people marked this as a favorite.

    We gather among this sacred burial site to say farewell to Tavia who escaped the mortal coil at level 12 to frolic in the gardens of Nirvana. A bardic champion in the sacred name of Shelyn, she brought together the circus of Wayward Wonders and helped bring more performers into the fold, including some even Shelyn could not have predicted. It was then she helped guide them towards a more humanistic path that for one xulgath follower involved teaching him to bath, play drums and not cook meat to charcoal on camp-fires in enclosed spaces. Surrounded by less confident adventurers, Tavia similarly guided them through the methodology of diplomacy, Veil spells and face palms.

    However, alas, the life of those enamoured by art, forgiveness and xulgath rehabilitation is a dangerous one and she finally succumbed to wounds after being swallowed by a giant skeleton who, without a stomach, still somehow consumed her whole. We can only suspect her fellow travellers were so overcome with grief as to misremember her demise details. It is on this grave her devout xulgath follower finally swore off his demonic god and sought to be a soldier for Shelyn and the voiceless dwarf of clay offered a single clay Lyre on Tavia's resting place. May her soul find peace, and her light-hearted cheeky paintings of misfortune of her allies be shared with the world.


    RoseTheLesbian wrote:
    What do you guys suggest/what was meant for this instead of the shifting rune?

    Honestly, since players tend to stick with one armour type, I'd assume it would be just about changing the appearance. So, maybe Glamered Property Rune?


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Deadmanwalking wrote:


    Really, all the Monk class does in PF2 is make you good at unarmed combat, so anything from "I PUNCH BEARS!" to the most esoteric and spiritual martial arts is totally acceptable.

    Totally agree. That said, if you're itching for what kind of monastic monk could be CG, CN or CE, I would start to look in terms of real world philosophies that could illustrate a disillusionment of societal structures with varying values upon life (from good's high respect for life, to evil's low respect).

    So, for instance, I would think about Utilitarianism for CG (the greatest good for the greatest number, although this can veer into NG which is the humanitarian alignment to me), Social Darwinism for CE and maybe Anarchism, Libertarianism or Absurdism for CN (basically more focused on opposition to social structures than the argument about the value upon life).


    Only just noticed this, so thought I'd give contributing a go. Not sure if it'll be accepted as it's referencing Lost Omens Legends and is a smidge morbid (Ustalav isn't a happy land), but figured it was worth a shot. Might come back in the following week to do something else as well as the Side Trek Seed.


    3 people marked this as a favorite.
    Zapp wrote:
    I'm just pointing out that Ron's answer maintains the illusion NPCs follow PC rules.
    Ron Lundeen wrote:
    Can PCs do this? Nope. Can monsters and NPCs do things PCs can't do? Yep.

    I'm not sure if we read the same thing here.


    magnuskn wrote:
    Riobux wrote:
    CorvusMask wrote:


    If they do more hardcovers, really crossing my finger for Second Darkness or Legacy of Fire, but mostly Second Darkness ;p
    Still hoping Carrion Crown is resurrected from the dead, especially if they want to help give new players context for The Whispering Tyrant. Love me some gothic horror.
    As much as I love Brandon's later work (Rasputin Must Die! comes to mind), the last module would need some rework. It just doesn't fit with the earlier five modules, which were pretty much all divided into an investigation and then the action part, while the sixth module was pretty much only action throughout. Also, the villain pretty much needed to be worked into the first five modules (which was acknowledged in the foreword to the sixth module).

    I don't mind being corrected on this, but the Kingmaker Hardcover seems to be doing what you're describing somewhat. It wouldn't be able to completely redo the last book, but it'd be able to add extra content so the villain is more sprinkled through-out rather than coming from nowhere. Still, I don't mind some flaws in an AP of a genre I do adore. There's a lot of APs I'd hold in lower regard, either because it's just not my thing (e.g. Wrath of the Righteous) or because they possess flaws that are more critical (e.g. Reign of Winter's chaining you to the rails).


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    profounddark wrote:

    Possible errata:

    I'm getting ready to run the battle with Nemmia Bramblecloak and I'm a little confused. Is her sickle damage incorrect? It says she does 1d4+3 damage on a strike instead of 1d4-1 (based on a -1 STR). It wouldn't bother me that much, except that her staff DOES deal 1d4-1 on a hit. And, I assume that if she used the staff two-handed, the expectation would be that she does 1d8-1 (and not 1d8+3).

    Okay, so, I might have tracked down the oddity. This involves giving some benefit of the doubt and a strong leap of logic. In the Gamemastery Guide they give you information of how you'd go about making your own creatures, and they have a chart of Strike Damage and Strike Attack Bonus. On the Strike Damage, for level 3 Low (which Low is intended for spell-casters), they list 1d6+5. In fact, the lowest they get is a straight 1d4. The key part is they don't actually go into minuses for damage. So it is kind of possible when they did the Staff they were using PC rules (i.e. strength determines damage) but when they did the Sickle which seems to be the main weapon they used the creature building rules (which back then were still in beta as the Game Mastery Guide, I believe, was released the following month). There does seem to be a bit of an aversion to having minuses to damage, instead just lowering the damage dice to as low as a flat D4 which at level 1 is kind of a laugh of a fight.

    So, I believe what may have happened was a weird blend of PC building rules for the staff and then the in-house beta rules for strike damage for the sickle.

    1 to 50 of 163 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>