In the interests of accuracy...SD was not actually written for the Pathfinder RPG at all, but for 3.5. I even have articles in this forum with character conversions.
Grab is a different ability to grapple. Grab is a creature ability that allows a creature to auto-grapple someone they either just hit with an attack with this trait, or else renew someone already grabbed with this ability. Grapple is an action to grapple a target for a round.
Return of the Runelords has one major chunk of one of the books set in Riddleport, and seems to account for a version of events from Children of the Void. However, the chunk in question really only involves one location that wasn't really used in Second Darkness, and heavily involves a character who was likely killed in most playthroughs of Second Darkness. Oh, and a part of the final book involves the Cyphergate, and it's construction. And, to add my thoughts to the thread, I really enjoyed running most of Second Darkness, and my own group (who are/were more roll than role players) didn't even notice any 'changes' in motivations. But there weren't many parts of the story that stuck with us, and that could be divorced from the Drow/Elf connection. However, if I were to rescue any part of the AP, it would be Children of the Void. It is the most self-contained, standalone and overall interesting part of the narrative to me, and barely involves the Drow at all. The only other piece of the AP I would think that deserves rescue is the concept of the Armageddon Echo. I actually really liked the concept of exploring a ruined city, and then visiting what appears to be the city in its prime. It wouldn't even need to involve the Drow at all, and could easily be altered to any other group with shapeshifting or glamour magic, and that magic could then be borrowed for the infiltration of the perpetrator's home.
I think people are confusing 'Disrupting' an action with an action being disrupted by the actor falling unconscious. I agree with Cordell - regardless of whether or not the AoO is a crit, the hit point loss happens immediately on the attack being resolved. If the hit point loss knocks the target out, then they are no longer able to do anything. Although this might look mechanically similar to the action being Disrupted, it isn't. It just isn't able to complete any more. Similarly, if an AoO somehow caused the target to be immobilised on a hit...are people seriously saying they would allow the target to complete their move after triggering on a non-crit? Really?
yes you can channel while paralyzed as long as you can present your holy symbol. birthmark on the face is popular for this. It depends on whether or not you believe 'presenting' an item can be done without moving. I personally don't believe you could, regardless of where the holy symbol is. Never really had a definitive answer. Also had a real shock of dejavu when I saw the thread title. Had a laugh when I saw I started it :)
I had actually considered a cleric who worshipped Shyka, but sincerely believed they would one day become Shyka themself. It's built into the deity explicitly that they are many beings reincarnated and travelling through time.
My group is now about two thirds of the way through book 2, and having a blast. Exploration buggies from very early have made exploring nice and quick, and by the current charter turn (10) they've almost finished exploring both halves of the charter. They know where cave entrances are, and even went a short distance into one, but have yet to find the Gyre. They have just finished with the inter-camp security disruptions, and have just been made aware of Fishfair. The most recent highlight was the reveal of the great sugar caper :)
Right, I finally had a chance to do the research, and I can see I mishandled thistle a bit. So, for the benefit of anyone else running this...don't run Event 3 before the PCs meet Thistle. The info passed along at the end of this Event was the main reason my group didn't trust Thistle at all. <sigh> guess I now need to have Thistle offer to turn on her allies BEFORE Fishfair exists.
The details for translating the notes are actually in the second part of the AP, Racing to Ruin, on p8. Yes, this should probably be in the first book, happens every now and then with adventure paths, since the different books are often written by different authors. The relevant bit says
There are more details in book 2 about using a library and a few other things.
I guess it depends on your players, but...can you not tell them 'I made a whoopsie, and we need to retcon a little...your group discussed with Erizand on the trip out that starting with the western half of the claim was the best bet.'?
Not sure about rOLL20, but one of my players combined the first 2 maps. I'm also still not sure if the map from book 3 is meant to directly abut the other two? Anyway, here's a copy of the merged first two maps, does this help?
There seems to be a bit of a disconnect on details about Threl Rustos.In the Runeseekers event of book 1 (p15), Threl approaches the party (in person!) and asks for access to information about the spire, with a promise to share information in response. The group also have the opportunity to find (before or after) the body of Threl's spouse, who died travelling between their charters. Threl seems genuinely appreciative of the news when told. Then, in book 2, there are a couple of references to Threl. In the Charter Updates section (on p49), there is a mention of Threl,and a mention he 'stresses diplomatic solutions over violent ones'...but in the same book, earlier on in Event 3, we have yet another Plaustov charter member walking into the player settlement, this time bearing a letter from Threl telling the party to keep out of Plaustov...this seems a little out of character? “Rustos has asked that you stop trespassing on their charter. If you do it again, he’s going to seek compensation from you for lost revenue.” I get this is a false flag operation, and being blamed on the player charter, but the response seems weirdly aggressive, especially when at least three different members of Plaustov have travelled to the player charter? Also, given their information-sharing arrangement, I might have expected Threl to contact the party directly about this issue? Also...Threl's apparently taken a Sex Change Serum since the first book - listed as female in book 1, male in book 2? Which one is canonically correct?
Apart from Mnemonic Editors (which only undo 2 levels), are there any retraining options in Starfinder Society at all? I have a player with a character who would like to take advantage of some of the new options in the Tech Revolution, but those choices were made at level 1, which a mnemonic editor won't help with.
As much as I hate to add this to the discussion...Evil divine casters would likely have no problem at all casting Evil Divine Lances at everyone walking in the castle/cathedral gates to weed out the good townsfolk...And an evil nation or government (*cough*Cheliax) could easily be seen to have laws permitting their agents to fire divine lances into a crowd to find the troublemakers responsible for some heinous act or other.
From the Settlement Events Spoiler:
Earlier events presume there aren’t many settlers beyond
those who came with the PCs; later events assume the charter has grown significantly and attracted many—possibly dozens more—additional, unnamed settlers. One of the later events says that it should happen
Spoiler:
once they've claimed 6 hexes, or else played more than a dozen charter turns. That's about all I could find.
There is a lot of nonsense in the PF2e rules set unfortunately. At least this one has some guidance on the issue. Ironically, I find the large numbers of 'the GM can interpret this in different ways' to actually solve a large number of weird situations that PF1's rigid rules never did. Having flexibility in approach acknowledged and built into the rules is a good thing, imo.
Being blind and and deaf might provide natural Immunities though. Maybe. But closing your eyes and screaming would not. In addition to the tags, the spell itself says it "generates the appropriate sounds, smells, and feels believable to the touch." Both the Auditory and Visual traits say not being able to see/hear gives immunity to any part of the effect relying on seeing/hearing. Being blind and deaf will make you unable to be affected by the visual and audible parts of the illusion, but they do nothing to stop the touch (or smell) parts. So, to me, it seems pretty clear you could still be affected by being punched by an illusory critter.
From what I understood, based on the text on p14 'and are effectively immune to its effects.' - the PCs are already infected with seedborne consumption, but despite being carriers, they are immune to the effects. This says to me they don't suffer ANY effects of being seedborne, and so don't have the automatic compulsion to walk to the Husk. And, even if (when...) they fail the Unspeakable Presence, they will be compelled to move into range of the Husk, and will still suffer the Dex loss and staggering, but they won't become seeded. After all...they already ARE seeded, just not being consumed. Honestly, after I realised the PCs are immune to the effects, I stopped bothering to have them save against the consumption. There really was nothing added in tracking it.
Therefore, from a story perspective, that oneirogen doesn't exist and a GM can simply ignore the requirement of killing that last one to lift the fog. Personally, I tend not to change this sort of thing on the fly, as it breaks my versimilitude. YMMV. If the fog lift doesn't lift after killing the big T, it basically forces the group to explore any areas they haven't explored. I'm also fairly sure Doc Elbourne points the group at that tower, so he could be used to remind them, if they forget.
A is essentially the correct answer, but only on a hit. There is a difference between the Splash trait and splash damage. Weapons with the Splash trait can deal splash damage on anything but a crit fail. The Acid Splash spell only deals splash damage on a hit/crit hit. Splash damage is a damage type, and can feature in a resistance or vulnerability. About the only other interaction I could find with splash damage was the Hydra, which can have all neck stumps cauterised by splash damage. The description of Hei Feng seems to misinterpret how splash damage works.
TBH I heavily dislike PC deaths in my groups unless they are meaningful. Personally, both as player and GM, I despise the GM going to obvious great lengths, or making bad guys do illogical things, to prevent a death. Without death being a possibility, players don't need to consider their tactics as much. If circumstances say a character should die, they should die, no matter how much sympathy the table feels for the victim. And if that is the whole table, then so be it.
I personally try an foster an environment where players stand by their decisions. Discussing options is fine, but wanting to change AFTER performing an action, particularly if consequences not obvious to the actor have occurred, is a no-no to me. Yes, this has caused my characters to die more frequently than others.
This is a change of mindset, and I don't mind it too much. About the only issue I see is that it reduces the amount of potential content available for Pathfinder Society 2 games. Even though I can give my players PFS rewards for 2nd ed modules and APs, they can no longer play those games with their actual PFS characters. It's almost like someone totally outside the Society participates in the adventure, and then a PFS chronicler goes out and interviews the participants about what happened. Not terrible, but different.
I wish there weren't spoilers for the AP in the Adventurer's Guide. I don't think they were necessary. (Talking about the 'castle' details on p. 9 under "Downtime in Breachill"). I recall the exact opposite type of criticism for Second Darkness, where the players start in a particular location with local ties, but move on from that location about a third of the way into the path. People who didn't know this up front, and designed characters with closer ties to the starting location were disappointed when they didn't stay. Personally, I think the way they handle these details in the Player Guides now is pretty darned good, both from a GM and player perspective. Who wants to play an undead hunter in an AP with no undead? Or a Cultist in an AP focused on hunting down the evil cult?
It makes no sense that using a gladulius one way you're an amazing swashbuckling boss, but used to cut instead of stab you become inept. My own disbelief suspenders actually feel differently here. I find it far more sensible that the swashbuckler gets better results when using the weapon with a technique he's trained in. Clearly, YMMV.
Yes - you can read about it here
The the OP, you seem to have missed a couple of small details in your wall'o'text that you may like to also make your GM aware of. When using Spell Combat, the Magus can cast his spell either before or after the 'normal' melee attack. By casting a touch attack spell prior to the first attack, the magus then effectively gets two attempts to apply the spell as a spellstrike, one from the free attack generated by the spell, and one from the normal melee attack (albeit, both at -2 to hit). Combined with a spell such as Chill Touch gives potentially multiple successful spellstrikes on one turn. Also important to note is that if you touch anything other than what is already already in hand, you discharge a held touch spell. You also discharge a held touch spell if you cast any other spell. These two limitations apply even to a magus, so it is quite difficult by default to combine spellstrike with normal two weapon fighting, or to change spells if you miss your target.
Good question! Thematically, the spell should work. It's only some pesky RAW that is preventing it. Normally, very little gives out the Broken condition. Instead, any object that is reduced to half of it's hit points is automatically Broken. A misfire is one of the few ways that Broken can be inflicted without hit point damage being done. So, in my own games, I would rule that a misfire is causing the gun to lose half of its hit points. Voila, Mending can now fix the gun.
Nope, none whatsoever. Just as useless as ever. My son has also been playing a Psychic, of the Psychedelia discipline. The biggest issue he's had is just how many creatures have been immune to mind affecting. Will of the Dead has helped, but there have still been a bunch of encounters where his options are quite limited. So, if you can include non-mind-affecting spells, do so. |
