Alex Speidel wrote:
This year's special (Blessings of the Forest) is a standalone adventure, and to my knowledge we haven't done anything with any of the story elements in second edition, so I think you're fine to go in cold! If you have any interest in first edition play, you might check out PFS1 5-05 The Elven Entanglement.
…unless you have an aversion to COUS’s
Centipedes of unusual size
It's not an easy thing to design an adventure that is appropriate for 4 level 1 PCs through 6 level 4 PCs. While there may be multiple ways of organizing the changes needed across that disparate range, dividing it into 2 basic sub-tiers as a start seems reasonable, with adjustments from those 2 base lines for more powerful parties.
I can tell you that in practice it works very well.
Also, remember that for parties of 16-18 challenge points, the number of PCs makes a difference. Parties of 5 or more will play the low subtier (with the most adjustments), while 4 PCs will play the higher subtier (with no adjustments). This is because the higher level enemies appropriate for the higher subtier may be very difficult for lower level PCs, even if there are more of them.
Seconding everything ninthwatcher said. To say it more generally, the character's levels are only used to calculate the challenge points. Once you have the challenge point total you then go entirely off the Determine the Level Range section in the Org Play Guide. This would mean, for instance, that a party of 5 level 2s and a level 3 would play in the 3-4 subtier, despite being nearly all level 1-2.
Which scenario was it? Some can be deadlier than others.
Linda Zayas-Palmer wrote:
Replace "shaken" with "frightened 1". In cases where the condition lasts for 3 rounds, add the stipulation that the condition's value does not decrease at the end of each turn until the 3 rounds have passed.
Please see the thread in the GM forum for more spoilery questions.
2 other issues:
The standard DC for a level 5 creature seems reasonable, so until we get an answer I'll use DC 20.
For shaken, frightened 1 perhaps is a good stand-in.
But some more official feedback would be appreciated.
My initial reading of the Fastening Leap ability is that it does allow grabbing automatically (no action), but that it doesn't make the target flat footed. I've always played bloodseeker's attach as not making the target flat-footed, and the dig-widget uses the same language. But it makes more sense for a tiny creature not to bog someone down than it does for a small one.
Doug Hahn wrote:
I have not allowed it; I mentioned my reasoning above.
Wow, completely missed that post.Anyway, before they left Absalom I had some veteran Pathfinders recommend the slower party members get mounts in Aspenthar.
As anticipated I had a low tier party, and two of the four had 25’ movement. As it was they found Star on day 15 without visiting a third ruin site or the western oasis (which cost them a treasure bundle). I was not going to spring this “gotcha” on my players without giving them the chance to buy a mount.
I've seen mention of encouraging the PCs to purchase mounts for this...but seeing how the Society doesn't even have spare food to sell the PCs and if you mention that you have your own mount they foist the supplies onto it and take back the dromedary they're providing, seems pretty unlikely they'd have mounts to sell them. Both of these things I'm pulling from the question and answer portion of the briefing.
Have other GMs been allowing the purchase of mounts? As written, it doesn't make sense to me they would be available. But as written, this scenario is already quite punishing, especially for low tier where most PCs will still have a speed of 25.
I'm going to be running this next week. When I played it, the GM didn't have us affected by the Scale at all (no downgrading the success level of first roll each encounter, and no winds that suddenly abate when you head south). I'd like to play up this aspect more, so that the PCs might be more inclined to dig into the cargo and find the scale, maybe have someone wear it.
For any GMs who have done something similar, how obvious did you make the shifting of the winds during the player's journey? Any winding east-west coastal road is going to have portions where it travels south, did you have the wind just stop every time the wagon turns south along the road? Or did you take into account the intent? That is, if the players are taking the scale to Absalom, the winds still oppose them even if they're coincidentally heading south at some points in the journey?
Edit: Also, how might a PC carrying the scale change how the wild animals react? Kind of doesn't make much sense for them to be diving into the wagon if the scale isn't there.
My 16 archer warpriest might be a good fit for your 6th. She’s a well built archer with plenty of self buffs (of course) plus a few party buffs/status removal, and can give the whole party freedom of movement as a swift and summons a bard song singing azata for us. :)
This is the first year I’ve ever gotten 0 of the events I actually wanted, which was the special and the 2 capstone scenarios. I was 6800ish in line when I submitted right at noon. Also didn’t get any PFS2 slots. I know there are only so many GMs, and so many tables, so this is just me venting and not demanding a solution, but at this point there’s no reason for me to even attend. I also realize things will shift around between now and Con time, so I’ll be watching of course (until June 30, the refund deadline). I’m just rather disappointed and disheartened to have been shut out so thoroughly.
Here’s the email I attempted to send their way:
Due to an injury sustained last night, I may not be able to attend Gencon this year at all. Best case I’ll be there late, but on crutches and possibly still in pain. I regretfully will need to withdraw my GM commitment.
With heavy heart and propped up leg,
Amber Hipsher wrote:
I asked the same question 6 posts upthread. I see it the same way you do. A character who started with Scarab Sages in Season 9 (whether due to switching factions or simply being the character's first faction) cannot fulfill the 10 goals required to qualify for the boon.
This makes my lvl 10 arcanist that I played 9-07 with very sad. 20PP down the drain too.
Correct me if I'm seeing something incorrectly here, but it appears to be impossible to switch to Scarab Sages in Season 9 and be able to obtain the Jeweled Sage vanity.
In order to purchase the vanity, you need 10 Scarab Sages faction goals fulfilled. By switching now you'd have to start with the Season 9 faction card, which only has 9 goals. The faction retires at the end of Season 9, so there will not be an opportunity to start another card. Am I missing anything?
Katapesh Fried Chicken wrote:
Long Arm doesn't affect size, only reach. I see no reason they would not stack.
Chris Lambertz wrote:
My archer warpriest got walled in by herself with the king when I played this. I was resigned to paying the raise dead prestige. When the king's turn came up he rolled low single digits for every attack. Then it was time for my point blank master full attack to his face and he dropped like a 20 ton rock. It was a glorious day.
That's an interesting thought, particularly since I'm considering playing through an upcoming underwater PFS scenario with my Telekineticist.
This brings up something that I've seen touched on but I haven't seen it explored. A telekineticist uses his kinetic blast to throw objects at people. It's a ranged attack clearly, but do you use the range and direction of attack based on the TK himself or from the object that is being thrown? This has implications for cover. I have always assumed the former, and it's the way I've always played it for the sake of simplicity. But it can change how cover is calculated if you use the position of the object. I think that's what the Snake infusion is for.
The above question also has implications specific to underwater combat. If I can throw an object (or a mass of water) at someone from a square adjacent to them do I only take a -2 penalty even though I'm 30 feet away? Or am I taking the entire -12, no matter what I throw? Or if I'm throwing a mass of water, do I not take penalties at all, just like a hydrokineticist?
I think I'd be taking -12 no matter what, but I could be persuaded otherwise.
Either way I'll have to talk to the GM about it and see how he's going to run it, and that may impact who I bring to the game.
There are lots of definitions of 'Move'. We're currently moving through space on the Earth. If you're on a ship, you're moving across the ocean. If I'm on a horse, I can guide the horse to move me across the battlefield. I can (really I can) harness arcane energies to wink me out of existence in one place and make me reappear in another. None of these things prevent a 5' step because they aren't Movement, as outlined in Chapter 7 of the Core Rulebook, starting on Page 160. Note that in the case of the horse, I'm the controlling agent. Is my control of the horse any different than my control of magic that makes me teleport?
I get that there are going to be corner cases and, obviously judging by this thread, disagreements. But that's how every game I've been in has treated the situation, at least as far as I'm aware, obviously it doesn't come up at every table.
@Fuzzy-Wuzzy: Why does it take a feat to take that AoO? Because Teleport magic isn't 'movement' as referenced by the Movement section of the book and the AoO rules. The feat you're referencing has nothing to do with AoOs related to movement.
English is so heavily context sensitive that it makes writing a really tight set of rules difficult. I guess it would be nice to get a FAQ entry to clear the matter up completely.
This feat made me very happy until I realized it is not PFS legal. :(
I'm wondering if the version of Solstice Scar being run at Origins (Jun 14-18) will be the same version run at GenCon? I would think so, but I don't want to assume and find out later I was wrong.
And if they are the same (if I'm reading correctly) that means I would only be able to play in one of them, correct?
Just jumping on the bandwagon here, DM Blake's post here really should have ended the discussion. No touch attack roll, therefore no ranged attack roll (assuming a willing target).