Ssyvan's page

Thanks for the help everyone! Damage it is.

I can't find anyone else asking about this so I started a new thread. Geist, doesn't list the type so I'm not sure. The only other similar monster I could find is the CR 5 Wraith which does a constitution drain but has a save.

Thoughts?

It seems to me that the Cruoromancer is taking damage while casting a spell and would need to make a concentration check, is that correct?

Blood Infusion (Su): When a cruoromancer casts a spell of the necromancy school, he can opt to infuse that spell with his undead-tainted blood as a swift action. As he increases in level, the power and effects of such infusions become more potent. Each time a cruoromancer uses blood infusion, he drains a portion of his own blood either by cutting himself with a blade or by opening a scab from a previous wound. When he does this, he takes an amount of damage equal to 1d4 + the level of the spell being infused. A cruoromancer can only affect a spell with a single type of blood infusion. At 1st level, he can infuse his necromancy spells in either of the following ways.

Some general confusion on if this is a -3 or a -2 penalty.

The player is a Level 1 Titan Fighter using the Giant-Blooded Campaign trait and is wielding a Large Quarterstaff.

Hey Everyone!

I've been thinking about starting one of these for a while now, and just now finally got around to it. I've got a group of 5 PCs, and we play for about 6 hours twice a month. For the most part I've made very minimal adjustments to the book but I'll cover what I did in later posts where relevant.

We just wrapped up the first book after 6 sessions, and are looking forward to starting the second book next week.

Character Creation:
-15 Point Buy
-Average Starting Gold
-1 Campaign Trait
-Medium XP track (and tracking XP)
-1 Custom Trait (kind of meaty)

Here are the characters along with their custom traits:

Artorus Orzhov - Dhampir Necromancer 4/Fighter 1

Eternal Slumber - Once per day you can still the spirit of a creature you've just slain. As a swift action you can place your vow of the restful dead on a creature you've slain in the last round, and in thanks its spirit lends you its strength. For 10 minutes per level you gain, 1d8 temporary HP, +2 sacred bonus to strength, +1 sacred bonus to AC. This is considered a good act, and also sends the spirit along more favorable paths to be judged.

John - Human Druid 5

Lost Childhood - The harshness of your childhood forced you to grow up quicker than most but have also granted you with a deeper insight to life than others. You receive a +2 bonus to all wisdom-based skill checks.

Raegar Thunderkeg - Dwarf Ranger 5

Improvised Combat - Your family's generations of toil against innumerable undead has given your lineage a rather impressive well of inspiration in battle. Three times per day as a free action you can gain the benefits of a combat feat which you do not posses for one minute, as long as you meet all of the feat's prerequisites.

Nobnog - Goblin Cleric 5

Firewielder - Ever since you were young you realized that you were different than other goblins. Clearly smarter, and though like others you were fascinated by fire, you also discovered you could control it. Once a day you can use control flames with a caster level equal to your own.

Rasmus - Halfling Sorcerer 5

Truth Expert - You've got more secrets than you can keep straight, not to mention you're constantly having to cover for your friends as well. Years of doing this have made you particularly glib, and as such you're particularly good at lying. Bluff is a class skill for you, and you gain 1 rank in Bluff every level. Furthermore you gain a +10 trait bonus when telling lies, er truths.

My 5 player group took it on at level 2, however they were effectively a 4 player group for this fight. One of the PC's stayed back on the Aceron because they rested before they finished exploring the Drift Rock, and they became more ill instead of better. Instead they ran one of the Space Goblins they'd befriended.

Anyways, they never figured out the creature's vulnerability, and it ended up being a very close fight. By the end of the fight 3 of the players had fallen unconscious (some more than once), and most resources spent.

The weird thing was that players kept stabilizing, regaining consciousness, attacking, and getting attacked back and going unconscious again. It felt kind of like whack-a-mole, not exactly great. Also having the RP to spend removed the pressure of needing healing, since 1 HP was as good as any healing spell could do for them.

It appears the player's get no XP if they don't kill Jabaxa and her crew, if they learn all of the details they can from her, should they receive XP as though they defeated them in combat?

Also the same thing happens with Clara-247 (no apparent XP if they don't kill her), should the PCs also get XP as though they defeated her if they convince her to ally with them?

I've dug around on the forums and it looks like my issue is similar to this one?

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2uizt?Error-With-Starfinder-Order

Hi,

I emailed about this yesterday, but no one has responded and it seems people on the forums are getting responses. I've been trying to purchase Dead Suns #1 but I can't make it past the purchase screen, let alone make it to the download section where it seems everyone else is having problems.

Any help?

I've recently been sketching a ton of maps, as it is something I'm not particularly good at. To that end I've also picked up a bunch of the first books in the Adventure Path lines as those are typically around the level of games I enjoy running. (I have Wrath, Hell's Rebels, Hell's Vengeance, and Strange Aeons)

One thing I realized recently, is that I tend to draw rooms too small. I typically have 5 players, and love to draw 10' x 10' rooms. Obviously this doesn't work as you end up with a party that can't fit in the room before even adding an encounter to it. The same goes for hallways, which was mentioned in the Gamemastery Guide (Amazing book by the way!).

To get better at design in general, I would find it super useful to have a director's commentary printing of one of the modules or AP books, that goes into the why things were developed that way.

-Is that something you would be interested in doing?
--If so, what would be the best way for me to support that happening?

-Of the books I don't have, which do you think would be a good addition to my above collection?

I was hoping to get your personal opinion on a question about a Wizard school power. There are a bunch of powers worded roughly something like the Core's Enchantment School's Aura of Despair. (Elemental Manipulation, Aura of Banishment, Foretell, Shape Emotions, and Bedeviling Aura are the others)

Aura of Despair (Su): At 8th level, you can emit a 30-foot aura of despair for a number of rounds per day equal to your wizard level. Enemies within this aura take a –2 penalty on ability checks, attack rolls, damage rolls, saving throws, and skill checks. These rounds do not need to be consecutive. This is a mind-affecting effect.

I've looked around and it seems quite clear that to activate a supernatural power is a standard action.

Supernatural Abilities (Su): Using a supernatural ability is usually a standard action (unless defined otherwise by the ability's description). Its use cannot be disrupted, does not require concentration, and does not provoke attacks of opportunity.

My question is how long do these powers last after activation? Do they last one round and require another standard action subsequent rounds to remain active? Or do you just need to use a free action to maintain them similar to the Bard?

And bonus question. What about Paladin Auras? If a Paladin is knocked out in combat, once they regain consciousness do they need to spend a standard action to use their Auras?

Tarantula wrote:

Well then you didn't even move 5 feet, just 1 foot, so it shouldn't even use your 5-foot step. In fact, it shouldn't even change your squares since you didn't use any actual ability!

Really, you are in the square. You don't get the option to say you are "on the edge" or not of a square. RAW you are within the effect, and acrobatics should apply to move out. Have fun with your way though.

No the rest of my 5ft step is used to get to the edge of that square. The rules are silent on where in the square you are. You're using the example of being not on the edge, and thus some steps must be in the grease. But my equally legal example has no steps in the grease. Thus even though you started your turn in the effects of grease, you never move within the grease, I'm only moving out of the grease.

...So you don't have to make an acrobatics check to get out of the grease?

This is a question because Grease specifically references moving through the area of grease if you make an acrobatics check. The question really is: does leaving a square affected by grease count as moving through the area?

I think it does, and I would require an acrobatics check to leave as you are moving through the space to exit.

This pretty much, and I think everyone would agree that if you're in a grease square you'd need to do an acrobatics check before moving anywhere. At least, I don't think anyone previously disputed that.

It's been a while since I've seen this discussed, and I'm curious if anyone has any new thoughts to add to the discussion. My group is still fairly undecided on it, and I wouldn't mind seeing some clarification on the subject.

thegreenteagamer wrote:

Jiggy wrote:

thegreenteagamer wrote:

Lemmy Z wrote:

What's jigging?

A type of dancing. ;-)

Heck if I know. My name has nothing to do with any verbs.

Is it that you were a big Will Smith fan in the late 90s?

Nope, has nothing to do with Will Smith either.

Banjo-Kazooie?

Blocked at work. What's it say?

Verbatim - "Trainers, a new bug affecting throw accuracy increases the odds of escape and omits the XP bonus. We are working on a fix, stay tuned..."

The most basic way is just a list: write out a list of what spells you know or are preparing. When you expend a prepared slot, put a checkmark or something by that spell. When you expend a spontaneous slot, put a tally mark by that spell level. Simple and easy, except that if you're a prepared caster you have to write a new list a lot.

An interesting option for prepared casters would be to make a bunch of "spell cards" (many applications exist for doing this easily) and put them all in some kind of sorted box. When you prepare your spells, simply pull out the spells you're preparing and keep them stacked in front of you. Whenever you cast one, it goes back in the box.

What I did (back when I still played Pathfinder) was to make my own custom Excel-based character sheet. One tab was spells, and listed (among other things) my spells known/prepared for each spell level. If I was a spontaneous caster, I just left the list alone and marked my usage of slots in designated cells. For prepared casters, I had all my prepared spells in bold, then when I cast one, I un-bolded it and italicized it (better than deleting it, since pearls of power are a thing). Worked pretty well.

Yeah, I have a google sheets doc that I use. Each spell links back to the PRD entry, and I can mark down how many times I memorize it, and one of my tabs is only spells that I have memorized. I also track stuff like page numbers, components, casting time, so I can quickly sort on it if I need.

I shared that with the group, so they can peak in at any time. The DM can verify things by checking out revision history if he really wants. It works out pretty well.

Guess I'm done with this game, then.

...And I spoke too soon. Sorry about that. Now they're saying this

RainyDayNinja wrote:

Nope, never seen that. But Weedles are the most wily of the trash pokemon as far as I've seen. What color was the ring when you went to throw? Even the <100 CP Weedles have yellow-to-orange rings it seems; they're just harder to catch.

Bright green. And not just Weedles, either; other green-circled pokemon have been breaking out a lot.

Additionally, I've had yellow-ringed pokemon (like bright yellow, not yellow-orange) break out five times in a row (each with a berry and great ball) and then run away.

During these times, I'm not successfully catching even a single pokemon.

Apparently this was intentional, link

Does anyone know the purpose of throwing a curve ball? I can do it pretty reliably now, but I only rarely get the curveball bonus (which is the same as a Nice bonus).

For those of you doing the gyms, I've only just found out the following.

-You have to tap the enemy to attack them (some pokemon like Scyther or Slowpoke attack really fast and do more than you'd expect them to even at lower CPs).

-You tap and hold to use your secondary power. Use that when your bars are charged up.

-You can swipe to dodge incoming attacks.

-Sometimes its better to take out the first pokemon at a gym and then retreat over and over. That way you only have to heal up a little between battles.

-Most importantly, if you attack a gym while someone else is attacking (not sure if they need to be on your team or not) they'll assist you in the battle. You'll see their pokemon in the background occasionally attacking, and you can rack up quite a bit of damage this way.

-I usually snipe the lower level gyms to collect the 10 poke coins, sometimes I try to be polite and leave a lower level pokemon so the next person can take it faster. If you're traveling in a group, you can take out a few gyms really quick and rack up more coins and stardust. In those cases its good to leave your more sturdy pokemon behind.

-Also keep an eye out on who is taking back your gyms, you can buy time by picking a counter pokemon to whatever they tend to leave at the gym. (Usually that's their best pokemon, so if you leave a counter it makes it that much harder to take back the gym).

Trigger Loaded wrote:

Oncoming_Storm wrote:

James, what sort of food do trolls eat?

You asked that already. Less than a week ago.

Anyways, some questions for the great Theropod:

Ever met (even if just online) people that hated prepublished adventures? Not just ones they claim are badly written, I mean any published adventure? I remember seeing some people comment (Admittedly, years ago) that they figured any GM who ran prepublished adventures didn't even deserve to run a game. Admittedly, haven't heard this recently, but then I probably haven't been hanging around the areas they do.

Favourite thing to drink during a game? (I believe you've cut sugary drinks from your diet.)

Have you ever read the comic Knights of the Dinner Table?

It's fine if someone asks a question more than once. Don't let it bother you, and don't use it as an opportunity to shame other posters, please. Not classy.

I've met plenty of people that profess to hate published adventures; I usually feel that their stance and opinion are fueled by arrogance and ignorance. Anyone who doesn't think they can learn how to do something better from someone who does that thing professionally or has done that thing for years is a fool.

Favorite thing to drink during a game is either coffee, cider, or water. Depends on my mood, the time of day, and whether or not I'm being calorie conscious.

I've read Knights of the Dinner Table; started reading it when it first got published in Dragon, and stopped when it wasn't. It's not really my sense of humor today.

My group refused to play published anything up until a few years ago. I suppose at some point we must have played something and decided it was bad so everything else must be bad too, certainly I was both arrogant and ignorant.

I'm not sure what changed, but I ran a Ravenloft adventure in 2nd ed which was fun. Then we swapped to Pathfinder (about 5 years ago), about a year later I picked up Wrath of the Righteous which we're still having a blast with! In the meantime we've also had a Mummy's Mask game, only lasted a book, and an Iron Gods game start in its place, which is still going too.

Anyways, since then we've learned a lot from the adventures you guys have published and I think we certainly enjoy the game a lot more. Which brings me to my question. We've been playing Wrath of the Righteous and Iron Gods for years, and there is constantly new material that comes out. What does a group do when the scope of Adventure Paths for them is in years?

Also what's a good environment to refine adventure design, when the iteration loop is so long?

Looks like my last post was collateral damage in the most recent post removal. I wasn't trying to insult anyone, and the post I was replying to WASN'T removed, so here goes again:

Ssyvan wrote:

{. . .}

I don't understand this. What is the purpose of granting the PCs extra points if you're going to compensate?

At least in my mind, you're not really granting the players anything and it seems a bit dishonest, unless you're upfront about it. On top of that it just creates more work when there isn't a need for it, assuming the balance you're striving for is the balance achieved with a 15-point buy.
{. . .}

The purpose is to grant more options. For instance, for all that I hate when people say that Wizards are overpowered, I found that it is surprisingly easy to build an almost normal Wizard on 15 point buy without dumping anything, and 5 more points could either be used to eke out another couple of points of Intelligence or for something more interesting like actually having a decent Charisma; the Wizard could even be done effectively on 10 point buy, although some dumping would be required. On the other hand, building a switch-hitter Magus requires hard dumping on 15 point buy and some dumping even on 20 point buy. The Two-Weapon Fighter and Eldritch Heritage builds have been mentioned before (as previously noted, the feat prerequisites are fixed, unless you restrict yourself to classes that specifically bypass them), and Monk (either type) just really hurts.

So even if you compensate on the opponents' side, even if the compensation is slightly more than what the PCs get by going with 20 point buy instead of 15 point buy, it's still a win-win. If future APs were designed for 20 point buy (as is tried-and-true in PFS, even though I'm not into that myself), but with compensation added on the opponents' side (even to the point of becoming "Hard Mode"), this would likewise be a win-win.

I actually saw your original post, but felt like the second post I made in this read was response enough to what you were saying. Let me know if there is something I missed! Quoting below:

Joana wrote:

As taks says, it makes more character options possible, particularly if the player wants feats with ability score prereqs. For example, with a 15-point-buy it's hard for a fighter to get a 13 Int for Combat Expertise and the Improved line of combat maneuver feats and still have fighter-like melee damage (Str) and front-liner hit points (Con).

Right, so if you're trying to retain balance and characters in addition to having higher stats can also qualify for more feats, it becomes a more complicated than compensating with higher stats for the monsters. I feel like in that case the experience simply won't be the same as a 15-point build versus a 20-point, because those new options are possible.

Also, why does more options equate to more fun? I feel like Chipotle is a good example of this, where there aren't many options on the menu but you can mix and match and end up with a number of very satisfying options. Probably more than any one person could ever try. In the same way, you can already do a lot with a 15-point buy, more than probably anyone will ever exhaust. So how does expanding an already impossibly large set of characters to an even more impossibly large set of characters objectively help?

I feel like I could easily make an opposite point that 15-point buy is more fun because those fighters with Combat Expertise are more rare, therefore playing one is more satisfying.

I think my attitude on this comes from experience with, admittedly, my one group. I feel like the more options they have, the more likely it is they become paralyzed by those decisions. Anyways, this is clearly a topic that'll vary from person to person, but I appreciate everyone's input! I'll certainly continue reading this thread!

Ssyvan wrote:

taks wrote:

It doesn't equate to more fun unless that's what you enjoy. For that matter, all PCS could be commoners, or deities, it's just personal preference.

Exactly, I just like to learn about other people's preferences, especially when they're different from my own.

For me personally, I don't like that point buy produces nearly similar stat arrays, but at the same time I don't like that rolled stats produce wildly different stat arrays.

I'm only just now surprised that there is no method for rolling stats that produced random stat arrays at a given point buy.

Although the 'common' is 4d6, you could tinker or use some online programs to find something closer with lower point buys.

IE:
2d6+6

or a combination.
3 stats by: 4d6
2 stats by: 3d6
1 x 16 for free

I personally enjoy rolling, even if I get worse stats that I would using point buy. Rolling dice is part of the allure of this hobby at some subconscious level. So if you're going to roll, no matter what version you use, the group as a whole just has to be prepared for the random outcomes of a small sample size. If you created several sets of stats and took the best, you'd see less variation, but its possible with 4 players rolling 4d6 to see a pretty big swing in the 6 scores produced. A few hot rolls and one player can have multiple 15+, while another has 1 x 15 and the rest 13 and below.

Like Jiggy points out - this difference can affect encounter design and balance more at the beginning levels, but once you're hitting mid-levels the bonus's from progression and gear start balancing those things out, and at 15th plus are nearly negligible. It'll also show up more or less depending on the play style, level of optimization.

Yeah, I agree. I do feel like something was lost when our group moved over to point buy. But the benefits far out weigh the downsides for us. I might poke around and see if anyone has looked into what you said.

It doesn't equate to more fun unless that's what you enjoy. For that matter, all PCS could be commoners, or deities, it's just personal preference.

Exactly, I just like to learn about other people's preferences, especially when they're different from my own.

For me personally, I don't like that point buy produces nearly similar stat arrays, but at the same time I don't like that rolled stats produce wildly different stat arrays.

I'm only just now surprised that there is no method for rolling stats that produced random stat arrays at a given point buy.

As taks says, it makes more character options possible, particularly if the player wants feats with ability score prereqs. For example, with a 15-point-buy it's hard for a fighter to get a 13 Int for Combat Expertise and the Improved line of combat maneuver feats and still have fighter-like melee damage (Str) and front-liner hit points (Con).

Right, so if you're trying to retain balance and characters in addition to having higher stats can also qualify for more feats, it becomes a more complicated than compensating with higher stats for the monsters. I feel like in that case the experience simply won't be the same as a 15-point build versus a 20-point, because those new options are possible.

Also, why does more options equate to more fun? I feel like Chipotle is a good example of this, where there aren't many options on the menu but you can mix and match and end up with a number of very satisfying options. Probably more than any one person could ever try. In the same way, you can already do a lot with a 15-point buy, more than probably anyone will ever exhaust. So how does expanding an already impossibly large set of characters to an even more impossibly large set of characters objectively help?

I feel like I could easily make an opposite point that 15-point buy is more fun because those fighters with Combat Expertise are more rare, therefore playing one is more satisfying.

I think my attitude on this comes from experience with, admittedly, my one group. I feel like the more options they have, the more likely it is they become paralyzed by those decisions. Anyways, this is clearly a topic that'll vary from person to person, but I appreciate everyone's input! I'll certainly continue reading this thread!

James Jacobs wrote:

It's certainly strange how often experienced gamers prefer to play the game on "easy" mode (higher point buy) rather than test their skills and try for the challenge of "hard" mode (lower point buy).

You say that like the GM doesn't up the challenge of higher point buy games.

It's also certainly strange that you use disparaging language about such games.

I don't understand this. What is the purpose of granting the PCs extra points if you're going to compensate?

At least in my mind, you're not really granting the players anything and it seems a bit dishonest, unless you're upfront about it. On top of that it just creates more work when there isn't a need for it, assuming the balance you're striving for is the balance achieved with a 15-point buy.

I get that we're talking about very marginal differences here, which just makes it a bit more baffling to me that there is such a strong discussion about the topic.

Anyways, the point of my reply is that I feel like I'm missing some perspective, and I was hoping you could enlighten. Thanks!

It depends on who/what is left. If the Blackfire Adepts are around, the book suggests having them by Vang's side for ~24 hours.

If there is nothing left at all, why would Vang stick around? The odds are stacked against him, and I think he'd realize that. I'd imagine he'd take what he could from the IS and leave, as detailed in his tactics.

However, if the party was just camping for an hour or so, nearby, where Vang could find them, then I'd have him hit them while they rest.

So we've had a few sessions since I last updated. They've completed the redoubt, and rescued Arushale, killed the Woundwyrm, and are nearing their confrontation with Vang.

The redoubt took a long time to run. They scouted it and were able to discover the location of the two Drake Riders. And decided that they were going to Dimension Door right next to one.

Initially this worked well. They were able to quickly kill the Rider before anyone else could act, but soon the entire redoubt was on high alert. The surprising thing was even with Invisibility Purge up those Will o' Wisps were absolute nightmares. Zack left himself exposed during their ambush to a direct charge from the other Drake Rider, who was more than happy to take advantage of the opportunity. That knocked him down to 8 HP. That caused every Will o' Wisp to dart over his direction and start zapping him, which quickly killed him. Galvak doesn't quite see the threat yet and Breath of Lifes him, but doesn't get him enought HP to go above that 10 HP threshold, so the Will o' Wisps quickly kill him again.

Other than that Marcus decided to tangle directly with the Hag. He flew up to her, got grappled provoking an AoO, and eventually was tossed back down to the ground. I'm not sure why he didn't remount his Griffon, but that took him out of the combat as he was busy with left over grimslakes.

Eventually through attrition they had the Hag nearly dead, and I went for the heal scroll. But Eb actually managed to Sunder the thing, only hitting because he had the higher ground bonus. And honestly at this point had he not, I'm pretty sure they would've been done for. After that they quickly finish the Hag, and most of what's left decides to head its own way.

The Woundwyrm encounter was okay. As usual any all on one fight that they have some prior information for ends up being one sided. They did manage to prebuff Resist Energy acid, so the Woundwyrm's Acid Fog didn't eat through their gear. I got lucky and managed to roll only 1s on the recharge for her breath. I ended up having her fight from inside her fog. That certainly kept damage to her down to a minimum, but eventually Zack summoned something that had Gust of Wind, and they slowly ate away at her fog.

I'll update with the rest later.

I was just running the Drake Riders last session (need to update my journal soon), and the numbers I was using for Mounted Spirited Charge are 3d8+66+1d6.

Spirited Charge should be a total of times three, not times five. Alter Self should add an additional +1 to hit, but a +2 damage (due to two-handing). Add in Power Attack -3 to hit, but +9 to Damage and you're at 1d8+22+1d6(electrical).

Not to mention the Rift Drake also gets his pounce on the charge which is (adding in charge and higher ground): bite +21 (2d8+10/19–20 plus bleed), tail slap +15 (1d10+3 plus trip) -or- bite +18 (2d8+16/19–20 plus bleed), tail slap +12 (1d10+6 plus trip) if you're power attacking.

If all connect, you have a PC that just took over 100 damage and may be bleeding and prone.

I'm curious, how did your party prevent the charges on those 3 rounds both drakes were up, and the additional rounds the second one was up? My party tried summoning creatures in front of him, but couldn't block him entirely. They're a pretty scary encounter, at least for my party, every time they've encountered one at least one PC has died.

Just to be clear by upgrading, I'm usually just altering tactics or changing memorized spells. I try to keep things the same as much as possible.

I ended up running the Fallen Fane this session. And I did make some alterations.

I changed the spells the antipaladins memorized from Command and Death Knell to Magic Weapon and Litany of Weakness. While it wasn't a change I spotted that the Unhallow's Magic Circle against Good wasn't included in the stat blocks so I tossed that in to my cheat sheet. The last change was rather than have the Antipaladins use their profane weapon for a +1, I used Magic Weapon to allow them to use Keen on their glaives.

With Zanedra, I added two rounds on to her before combat tactics; casting both Shield and Barkskin on her Eidolon. I also added in the Unhallow's Magic Circle against Evil.

For the Mihstu I made sure to adjust for the tentacle's weapon finesse on the grab rolls because of the FAQ that lets you use weapon finesse in applicable situations.

That's the extent of the changes I made.

Also, Galvak was absent this session and the party decided to leave him back in Drezen (their loss).

Anyways, the group while investigating the cave decided to buff up and scout as much as they could. However the sounds of casting and fully armored characters quickly alerted the occupants of the party's arrival. Sadly, the group took about 10 rounds to enter giving everyone ample time to prepare, and by the time they entered Zanedra had already hasted all 6 Templars.

Demitrius was the first to go in as he won initiative, and in a fit of Bravado strayed right into the thick of things. If you look at the map there really isn't a lot of room in there and with 8 pawns, no matter where he went he was surrounded. The player of Demitrius hesitated for a moment, but the player of Marcus assured him it'd be okay.

So he finishes moving in, provoking 4 AoOs (since both sides were buffing and acting before this, it was really the 2nd or 3rd round when Demitrius entered so no one was FF), and taking some minor damage. At this point they weren't smiting and I'd decided Power Attack was a dead feat so I wasn't using it. I think he got two hits, each was between 10 and 15, so his ablative barrier and DR soaked up most of it. That reassured him.

At this point 5 of the 6 templars go. They've all got haste and smite. One of them gets lucky and manages to Crit Demitrius for just over 60. And a bunch of others connect all doing d10+13, and quickly knock him out, before a templar manages to coup de grace him and he dies.

I had the wonderful plan of mixing Litany of Weakness and Touch of Corruption (Fatigue) to exhaust some players, but from here on out no one gets close enough for them to connect.

Every is worried at this point, and cautiously enters. Marcus closing with Zanedra, and Eb tosses a fireball in. Zanedra manages to summon 3 babaus though, and soon Eb and Wiki are bordering unconciousness/death. And the babaus start counterspelling the fireballs, but in a total screw up on my part Zack manages to end the encounter with Black Tentacles and Eidolon Surge(Breath Weapon).

I goofed because the Unhallow has a Freedom of Movement tied to it but in the heat of the moment I forgot that. Zack also rolled a 19 on his combat manuever check so everything was grappled, and quickly dead.

I actually didn't use Zanedra as effectively as I'd hoped. She got two Hold Monsters off, both were saved against. She also managed one summon, and then she teleported away.

Had I been thinking better, I would've used her Eidolon to block the path to her, but it wasn't until a player pointed out that Svennarobeth had wings on his pawn that I remembered he could fly.

All in all I think those adjustments worked out really well. I was quite bummed that antipaladins don't have a Divine Favor esque spell, but thought the use of Magic Weapon for Keen was handy. I really wanted to exhaust a player, but never had the chance. Though I did get to use Litany of Weakness to block a charge on Zanedra. The look on Marcus' face when I reminded him it was 3 rounds to cast Lesser Restoration was classic.

I'm not sure if they'll go for the Woundwyrm next or what. But we've got a cabin trip planned and 4 days to play, so I expect next time I update we'll have wrapped up Book 3.

Whew, a few sessions have happened since I last reported. But things have certainly swung back in favor of the player's, but I suspect that's about to change.

I'm only going to cover what's stuck out in my mind, as a lot has happened.

I wanted to take a step back as Andrew's post got me thinking a bit, I was curious how things would run if I ran them exactly as presented. So starting with the Mythic Vrock encounter I ran(ish) the tactics as stated.

As I had thought the Dance of Ruin was entirely wasteful. It did manage to damage Jesker and Sosiel (Sosiel was their captured NPC, and Jesker was just along for the ride as they'd just rescued him) and brought them near unconsciousness, but the PCs shrugged it off. It wasted three creatures turns for paltry damage, I don't advise this.

I did have a bit of tension when Marcus and Grimwing (his Griffon mount from monstrous mount) nearly were entangled into the lava, but a few mythic surges righted that and the encounter proceeded from there. The Vrock managed to escape, so I'll be able to retry a few things later.

And so it was for Delamere's Tomb, Wintersun, and the other encounters I ran. They were much less of a slog than it could have been. The players for the most part enjoyed it, but are getting a sense that things might be a bit too easy.

At least for now, I can answer that I do indeed suspect that the vase majority of difficulty arises from tactics employed.

We ended last session after Wintersun Hall. The player's used stone shape to break in undetected. They killed most of the Barbarians there before they started to realize something was wrong. I'm not sure how they're going to handle that, but we'll be picking up there.

We should be getting to the Zanedra and the Woundwyrm next session (which is Saturday) and I'm looking forward to seeing how some of the things I switched up will run.

Hey James,

I was wondering your opinion on this. Unless I've misunderstood, monsters such as Demon's Heresy's Fallen (Or the Bestiary's Wraith which is similar) can use their negative energy attack to heal themselves. But just because something can do something doesn't mean it will, and I was wondering if such creatures ever would?

Specifically with the Fallen, in general would they enjoy their few days of rest until they're rejuvenated, or would they prefer to stay unslain to better seek out someone who can perform their funeral rights?

Especially in the case of incorporeal undead, considering that they can hide inside of objects to heal, this could be a particularly vexing tactic that I'd hesitate to deploy on my players.

Gronka wrote:

Harleequin wrote:

Point buys are the fairest method - I've seen some horrendous situations arise from rolling.

That being said I have less of an issue with rolling for HP at leveling time - although in my mind giving max HP is the fairest way to reflect the differences between classes and give some balance to caster/martial.

In fact some way to give a min HP per level for martial (D10+ hp) classes might be a good idea.

I believe 2nd edition had this; with a high constitution you rerolled a 1 (or even 2) on your hp die. I think they may have even brought it back for 5th edition?

Actually stat array is the 'fairest', because it restricts how high of stats you can have, while letting you assign them where you like. So mages can't buy down Str and Con and Wis to up Int and Con and Dex better then, say, martial classes.

As for rolling hit points, easy fix. just use d6's.

D6 for hp = d6 for hp
d8 for hp = d6+2, instead.
d10 for HP = d6+4, instead.
d12 for hp = d6+6, instead.

So mages get 3.5 hp/die
Rogues and monks get 5.5 per die...better by 1 on avg, but the minimum is 2 better.
Fighters get 7.5 per die. Now the wizard needs an 18 con just to have as many HP as a fighter does with no con bonus. And a minimum of 5!
Barbs end up with 9.5 per die, which makes them incredibly tough, and no way a mage will ever have as many hit points.

In effect, everyone has the same hit die, you're just handing out Toughness feats instead of bigger hit die. And ENFORCING the idea that combatants really will have more hit points then casters.
=======
Of course, the cleric blows this comparison out of the water. The cleric should be divided into two classes...a d6 9 spell levels primary caster, and a d8 6 levels mixed caster (like the inquisitor/magus/bloodrager, etc) to equalize things. No way it should get the best of both worlds.

I probably wouldn't let this happen for any class that has 20 levels of spellcasting. They have enough advantages...an Inquisitor and...

My group is actually in the middle of a rather large discussion about this. The issue with allowing for max HP is you change the ratio of HP because the classes.

3.5/6.5 == 0.538 vs. 6/12 == 0.500

That means higher HDs end up benefiting more from this method, than the default.

(Same with adding +2 to the d6s, but more amplified 3.5/9.5 == 0.368)

We're currently between allocating average HP (starting at 2nd level with the low part of the average first), and rerolling all of your HD every level and taking the new result if it's higher than your previous result.

e.g. 6th Level Fighter -
1st - 10
2nd - 10 + 1d10
3rd - 10 + 2d10
4th - 10 + 3d10
5th - 10 + 4d10
6th - 10 + 5d10

So at 6th level you only keep your total if it's higher than whatever you used at 5th.

In term of HP, my group generally leaves up Ablative Barrier and Shield Other. That takes the brunt of any HP damage. On top of that we've got two guardians one with Absorb Blow and the other with Sudden Block, so they're really sturdy.

Their ACs (at levels 10/4) are all between 26-31, so they get hit a lot, but they can take quite the beating (and do regularly).

Hah! That's a bit of an extreme! As I mentioned, I'm running Wrath of the Rigteous, and seeing how we're in the third book my players are already very familiar with demon basics. They know about how their DR works, that they can summon in friends, they can teleport, their resistances, and that they don't need to sleep.

They've also learned quite a bit about recurring monsters and usually get pretty detailed in taking notes, not too dissimilar to Van Richten's Guides if anyone remembers those.

If a crunchy number spills out during the game I certainly don't penalize someone for meta gaming with that knowledge. Though I have pointed out that acting on certain knowledge would be meta gaming in the past, but I leave the decision of whether or not to do that up to the players. I don't mind when they act on it as each player has their own tastes.

Also I do share stat blocks with players after the fact, especially if they're curious. I rather enjoy the discussion that brings, and sometimes they'll notice things I don't so I learn from them!

Jiggy wrote:

In my experience, hiding mechanical information from the players actually hurts the narrative and the roleplaying, rather than protecting it. There can be exceptions, of course, but as a general trend, my games keep getting better and better as I hide less and less from the players.

Beautifully, beautifully put. And this exactly matches my experience as well.

It's funny because this is exactly the opposite of what I'd expect. Anyways, you've both got me curious. =p

Ssyvan wrote:

Ah, that is really interesting!

This goes back to what you're saying about a player's decisions impacting the game, but with a slightly different flavor. For me, being given the chance of a desirable outcome for a variety of actions why wouldn't I always choose the action that's most likely to give me a desirable outcome?

Well, what would your character do?

Is your character a highly pragmatic wizard (with the INT to match) who carries a deliberately-diversified assortment of spells that target different saves so you're ready for anything? It's good roleplaying for this character to notice (for example) a high will save and switch to a different tactic, but you can't do that good roleplaying if you don't have information.

Conversely, is your character someone who fights according to a personal code of honor? It's good roleplaying for this character to choose to use a less-than-perfect tactic with full knowledge of the sacrifice he's having to make. If you don't have that information, you can't (meaningfully) make that choice; you're just sort of... doing stuff.

Some characters (not players, characters) would be trying to use the best tactic to stay alive and protect the people they love. Other characters would knowingly choose an inferior tactic for various reasons. These (and other) differences are what separates one character from another, and that is the foundation of "roleplay". If the players don't have enough information to be able to make those differing situations, then they can't really roleplay.

Quote:

But, for me personally that would turn each round into a math problem; robbing me of decisions as I solved for the best outcomes. Statistics is making the decision not me (as I would see it).

In addition to the above, there's also the fact that a decision without information isn't actually a decision. It's a guess. You fear you wouldn't get to make the decision yourself if you know the "right" answer? Well, if you don't have any...

Hm, I should've been a bit more clear. There is still information that I give the players, like number of attacks that creature just made. Chances to determine what spells are cast, they know when their spells fail, how much damage they take from a given attack, and so on. So they are getting meaningful information which they can certainly use to make decisions, not just shots in the dark.

I try not to give out actual modifiers, but have thought quite a bit of thought about that in the case of saving throw modifiers. The reason is that anything a players roll to hit, the DC (or AC) can be inferred based on what does and doesn't hit. It isn't exactly fair to the casters, where the enemy rolls to hit the player's DC, leaving that information in the dark for the players.

Seeing how we haven't run a session that way I can't exactly answer you questions. I can run it past my players next session and see if they'd be up for it, and if not our current game it is certainly something we can try down the line. There's a good chance I'm over thinking it and these may be imagined issues after all!

Anyways, thanks for your replies, they've been helpful.

Ssyvan wrote:

Also, I was wondering, since you roll your dice along with modifiers in front of players do you ever have any issues with someone acting on that knowledge?

I ask because as a player I know I wouldn't be able to help but do that. Not maliciously mind you, but I'd worry that those things would start impacting my decisions and I couldn't help but feel guilty about that.

I've certainly wondered from time to time whether or not my GM has fudged a number here or there, so having them rolled out in the open would alleviate that.

Also, what caused you to start doing this?

What's the problem with them acting on that knowledge?

I mean, imagine you're somebody who routinely gets into life-threatening situations. People have swung weapons at you countless times. If someone manages to hit you, you can probably tell the difference between somebody who hit you mostly by virtue of being really good at what they're doing, versus somebody who's kinda sloppy but just happened to swing right where you were headed.

So if a player sees that I rolled a 20 to hit, I see no problem with them knowing whether the roll was a 4 with a +16 bonus or a 19 with a +1 bonus. I figure these fantasy heroes can tell the difference. They wouldn't describe it numerically, but they can tell who was good and who was lucky.

Not only is this not a problem, but it can actually enhance roleplay. Someone who takes a couple of hits purely because of lucky rolls gets the opportunity to roleplay their own sloppiness in defense (perhaps with jokes, perhaps with frustration, depending on the character). By contrast, if they see a 4 on the die and still get hit, they can roleplay that "OH CRAP" moment as they realize this guy is serious business (maybe panic, maybe "finally a worthy opponent", depending on the character).

But if all the player ever knows is that they got hit or that the total was a 20, you've actually taken away those roleplay opportunities.

In my experience, hiding mechanical information...

Ah, that is really interesting!

This goes back to what you're saying about a player's decisions impacting the game, but with a slightly different flavor. For me, being given the chance of a desirable outcome for a variety of actions why wouldn't I always choose the action that's most likely to give me a desirable outcome?

I like that your groups finds that an enhancement (I think a couple of players in my group would actually enjoy this as well). But, for me personally that would turn each round into a math problem; robbing me of decisions as I solved for the best outcomes. Statistics is making the decision not me (as I would see it).

Does that make sense?

Seeing how I haven't actually done this I could be overlooking an aspect entirely. But I do find it interesting that in your experience I'm hiding opportunity, but in my experience I'm granting it. Either way, I'm certain to think about this more. =p

Ssyvan wrote:

Took me a few days, but I finally caught up (sort of) on this thread. It's an interesting read, as I've had a different experience.

My groups been playing about 15ish (+/- some) years 2nd through Pathfinder with a brief stint in 4th, plus a smattering of other table tops. In that time, up until maybe 2 years ago, we never played by the rules at all. I'm not sure any of us even took the time to understand the rules. Now we've been running Wrath of the Righteous (In Book 3 now), Iron Gods (Just finished Book 2), and Mummy's Mask (Ended this campaign in Book 2), and we decided to try and stick the rules as best we can.

Coming off of 3 sets of 4d6 for stats to a 15-point buy was absolutely massive for us. Not to mention going 2 traits, plus other special traits (we really just winged it), to only the campaign trait, rolled gold vs. max, and countless other house "rules".

On top of that, our rotating group of DMs (myself included), really stuck to goblins, hobgoblins, kobolds, giants, trolls, ogres, seeing a trend here?

So for us we're in the midst of gigantic rebalance, and I'll get back to you (the collective you) on whether or not we feel things are nutty or not. For the moment things are working, and working well.

Anyways, we may have thought ourselves veterans, but it seems like we're only just getting introduced to the game. Since we've been a fairly closed static group for those 15ish years, I can only wonder what other groups may be like and if any of them were/are like us.

I find your level of self- and group-awareness impressive and refreshing. :)

I have often been in discussions with people about balance or other topics relating to "what Pathfinder is like" and begun to get the impression that one or more of the participants has spent their gaming career much as you have spent yours, but were less self-aware than you and thought that the type of experience you describe is the "default" of Pathfinder. (Unfortunately, asking people for details about their...

Thanks, but that's largely a credit to everyone here on the forums. Growing up in a smaller town we all largely had our tastes converge, so the anecdotal evidence I did have suggested groups did indeed play like ours. College exposed me briefly to other groups and I didn't enjoy it, and I regret not trying to take the plunge on change then.

So we were stuck in our own echo chamber eventually stagnating before deciding to try an AP. I think that's what eventually led me here, and really opened up my understanding that other groups are different.

Our experiment as you put it, has certainly taught us that there were other ways to play the game. And running an adventure that none of the rotating group of GM's had written was sort of like getting someone else to stand in to run a game for our group. The player's couldn't see our fingerprints so the game has that magic again. Plus as GMs we could focus our energy on other things, like reading the rules for once.

Even still a question like "Is Pathfinder becoming unbalanced?" escapes me. We've yet to really play anything else like we've played Pathfinder, so it is my only valid point of reference. Thankfully in the meantime I can read about all the varying opinions here, so that should I need to deal with such a situation, I'll be all the more prepared. And maybe someone find something useful out of my experiences. =)

Also, I was wondering, since you roll your dice along with modifiers in front of players do you ever have any issues with someone acting on that knowledge?

I ask because as a player I know I wouldn't be able to help but do that. Not maliciously mind you, but I'd worry that those things would start impacting my decisions and I couldn't help but feel guilty about that.

I've certainly wondered from time to time whether or not my GM has fudged a number here or there, so having them rolled out in the open would alleviate that.

Also, what caused you to start doing this?

Took me a few days, but I finally caught up (sort of) on this thread. It's an interesting read, as I've had a different experience.

My groups been playing about 15ish (+/- some) years 2nd through Pathfinder with a brief stint in 4th, plus a smattering of other table tops. In that time, up until maybe 2 years ago, we never played by the rules at all. I'm not sure any of us even took the time to understand the rules. Now we've been running Wrath of the Righteous (In Book 3 now), Iron Gods (Just finished Book 2), and Mummy's Mask (Ended this campaign in Book 2), and we decided to try and stick the rules as best we can.

Coming off of 3 sets of 4d6 for stats to a 15-point buy was absolutely massive for us. Not to mention going 2 traits, plus other special traits (we really just winged it), to only the campaign trait, rolled gold vs. max, and countless other house "rules".

On top of that, our rotating group of DMs (myself included), really stuck to goblins, hobgoblins, kobolds, giants, trolls, ogres, seeing a trend here?

So for us we're in the midst of gigantic rebalance, and I'll get back to you (the collective you) on whether or not we feel things are nutty or not. For the moment things are working, and working well.

Anyways, we may have thought ourselves veterans, but it seems like we're only just getting introduced to the game. Since we've been a fairly closed static group for those 15ish years, I can only wonder what other groups may be like and if any of them were/are like us.

My WOTC game just reached the point where the PCs kill their first demon (last room of the Lair of the Vile and Vicious). I'm assuming these demons came into the material plane through the rift of the Worldwound since they are clearly stationed there as a defensive measure. I assume if they had been summoned, they'd pop back eventually, so that wouldn't be a very efficient way to protect the lair.

First question: what happens to a demon when it dies if it's not summoned? Does it just die and become a corpse? Since lots of demons are going to die over the course of the AP, I'd like some advice on any special way to handle deaths of demons.

A second question is just speculative: how did these demons get to the Lair of the Vile and the Vicious? The text says Hosilla installed them there, but at that point, the city of Kenabres was still controlled by crusaders, so how would she get a couple of dretches down into the underground? Is there powerful magic that can just summon a demon in a way that does not have a duration after which the demon returns to the original plane?

It's possible there are underground connections between the rift and the tunnels under Kenabres, of course, but that seems like a lot of work to get a couple of demons to place of minor strategic importance.

Sorry Clebsch GM, didn't see your question earlier. I know James Jacobs has answered this before. You can see what he's said there.

As for you last set of questions, check out the Abyssal Rift in Book 2, things can certainly spill over from the Abyss in that way. Also if you check out The Worldwound source book, there is a lot of information in there about how else it can happen. Lastly, I believe Book 4 also covers this a bit.

I appreciate your response!

I think there are a number of things that are keeping the challenge up for them, a lot of which you identified. Outside of that though, there have been a few tough decisions on the party's part, which isn't entirely their fault. For example, when they faced the Dweirgeth Demitrius (the party's barbarian and main source of damage) got sucked up into the tornado because he failed a Will save. That kept him out of the fight entirely, though that would've all changed had Zack (the summoner and main spellcaster) cast Dispel Magic on the tornado, but hindsight is 20-20.

Anyways, I've certainly been using the enemies effectively, and I think that as long as I continue to do that things will continue to be challenging. I try to be inventive where I can, my group still talks about the time the gargoyles tried to throw them off the cliff at the Lost Chapel. Or resourceful, having Janeamine summon a Babau so she could use Vampiric Touch on it. In fact I've had most luck with the encounters that seem the easiest, as there is often something I've missed which I can use.

I think with a group of 4 and 25 point-buy you can still present a challenging AP. And I look forward to seeing how it goes, especially if you start your own campaign journal!

Let me know if you have any other questions, as I'd be happy to answer!

I was actually curious about your character creation rules, and what you think of the difficulty of the AP so far?

I'm running for a group of 5 players, 15-point buy, 1 Campaign trait, using the AP unmodified and we're in the 3rd book now and they're having a really hard time.

Beyond the mechanical, I'd be really interested to read the backgrounds of the other characters in your group! That is if they have them and would be willing to share. I really enjoyed yours!

You'll also have to read through book three to decide on how you'll want to handle the starting traits, as they're deeply tied into the game up to that point.

Instead of doubling all encounters you might want to smush a few together and then tack on enough extra mooks to hit the right CR. The goal being to reduce the overall number of encounters, since with 7-8 players the time to complete a single round will be really really high.

Be careful when increasing room size, as that can create a huge advantage for ranged characters/monsters.

I think there are a few campaign journals with 6 players, and you'll certainly want to read over those. My worry would be that the player power curve with mythic doesn't go up linearly as you add players. I find that it is easier to give things to players than it is to take away. Thankfully you have until the end of Book 1 to make that call with mythic.

Just so you know, I am reading this! I really enjoy seeing a player's perspective, so please keep it up.

I think you're going to get a lot of varying answers, and I think it depends on the group.

I've got a mythic party, 15-point buy, 5 PCs and they're struggling to get through book 3 with me running things as presented. Just in book 3 we've already had 1 death and are only 3 sessions in. There have also been an additional 2 almost deaths (still just in book 3), one the players voted to undo, and the other was a goof on the rules. If I were to drop Mythic I don't see how they'd last.

Either way you probably know best, but you're in a good spot considering. If things start to get difficult you can always ramp up their legendary-powers.

We're 3 sessions into Book 3 and there is still definitely a challenge. As one player put it, he feels like every encounter is risking death. I'm running everything as presented, and haven't made any efforts to buff up the encounters or make things more difficult. I feel like everything is balanced in favor of the enemies, at least for the moment. We'll see as they level up and get more tiers how things go, but running things exactly as presented is a challenge for this group of 5 players.

Yeah. The incorporal part about him is about the only thing I actually like. Otherwise, I just find him to be boring as a boss fight. I've never been a big fan of possession type abilities.

As for the darkness, there's a wand of daylight that they got earlier in the module. The wizard has been using it for the last few dungeons as his go to light source because of the area of effect. If he's not using it, I'd be surprised. So there goes that advantage.

Well not exactly, read of this blog, #6 covers daylight. Anyways, the light levels would go back to whatever they were when no spells were cast which I think is Dark. Because of that he'd pretty much always have the option to go invisible, even if Daylight was up. In fact you could probably stick with the Deeper Darkness at will and use the Shadow Evocation for something else.

I don't have his stats in front of me at the moment so I don't really remember what else he can do, I'm just going off the base Shadow Demon.

You also don't need to run this fight as a possession fight. I totally missed this when I ran it, but River of Wind would be an excellent spell to pick, from Shadow Evocation, as it could push plenty of creatures into that green slime. Resilient Sphere is great for control. And you've always got Dragon's Breath if you want to crank out some classic evocation spells.

Aqueous Orb, Spiked Pit, and Stinking Cloud are also great uses of Shadow Conjuration.

All of those should get you 6 rounds of fun casting, with some of those effects lasting well beyond that. That coupled with renewable Invisibility + Incorporeal should keep the fight going that long.

Well there wouldn't be much point to that as the Change Shape ability doesn't adjust ability scores (I literally just found this out).

This ability functions as a polymorph spell, the type of which is listed in the creature's description, but the creature does not adjust its ability scores (although it gains any other abilities of the creature it mimics).

EDIT: Nevermind, I guess it would gain the size changes. -1 Hit, -1 AC, Increased Damage Die, 10' reach.

But still, this seems a bit weird.