eyelessgame's page

I have a pair of related questions about Invisibility Purge that somehow has never come up before in anything I've run, and I can't find it on the forums. It is described as having a target/range of 'Personal/You', but that the caster is "surrounded by a sphere of power".

1. Does anything block the "sphere of power"? Can a cleric on one side of a brick wall cast the spell and render visible any invisible creature on the other side of the wall? It's not an emanation or spread, so nothing indicates that it can be blocked by anything - and indeed there is no spell effect to block, since the spell effect is only on the caster.

2. If within the sphere of the purge but unable to see the caster, can the spell be dispelled? A spell with a range of "Personal/You" normally can only be dispelled if the dispeller has line of effect to the caster.

I recognize I'm a bit late to the party, asking v1 rules questions, but either my search-fu has failed me or this hasn't been asked before (which of itself seems baffling).

Staves are spell-trigger items. The wielder needs the spell on their list in order to use the ST item.

For the first time in any campaign I've run, a random treasure selection came up with the staff of radiance, so I looked up the spells.

There's no character class that can cast all three - glitterdust, searing light, and daylight.

Am I misinterpreting what this means? I know you can recharge a staff if you can cast any one spell the staff holds, but you can only spell-trigger spells that are on your class list, yes? And thus is it the case that to make "full use" of this staff - to be able to use all three of the spells - you'd need either (a) to make Use Magic Device checks for at least one, (b) be cross-classed, (c) hand it back and forth between different casters, (d) take Unsanctioned Knowledge or other random weird way to gain a spell not on your list?

Or did I misread the rules, and you can use any of the spells on a staff if at least one is on your class's caster list? Where's that rule, if so?

As I'm still running 1st Ed (this is my last PF1E campaign, but it's still enormous fun) and trying to do it as much by the book as possible, I have just come to realize a property that may be what ultimately annoys me more than any other thing about 3.x/PF1 magic items.

Our party rogue is, with significant reluctance, finally going to ditch his cloak of elvenkind - a marvelous item, perfect for the character's atmosphere, an item taken from a body with story significance early in the campaign - because having failed yet another Fortitude save (and in this case being turned to stone), the player has realized this character can no longer afford not to have an item that grants him multiple points of resistance bonus to saving throws, and that means a cloak of resistance. Now, even though clearly that cloak of elvenkind was no longer serving much of a purpose - the maxed-out Stealth of this character is such that the cloak hasn't made the difference in a skill roll in several levels - this was great character-building.

I volunteered to look through the Ultimate Equipment book for alternatives... and what I found is not just irritating but, in context, is now pissing me off, quite apart from the lack of any alternative to this specific item.

Why? Because twenty or twenty-five different items give resistance bonuses to saving throws as one power among several - but with the exception of the cloak of resistance, and a few items that cost several times as much (e.g. the 75000 gp resplendent robe of the thespian), every other item that gives resistance bonuses gives them only for one specific sort of save - and further, gives this as one of several different powers that combine to make the item far more expensive than the much more useful cloak of resistance - such that these special-purpose bonuses (typically to poison, to fear, to disease, to mind-affecting effects, or occasionally another specific sort of saving throw) will wind up benefitting virtually no one, since by the time they could find or afford such an item, they'd already have a fairly buffed-up cloak of resistance since the item is among the most useful items for the price that anyone could obtain - or, more often, make.

Grr. What this ultimately does is remind me that certain items, like that cloak and like the stat-boosting headbands and belts, are simply far too useful for their price, and everything else is overpriced in comparison. And thus we come back round to one of the reasons why this will be my last 3.x/PF1 campaign.

Don't mind me, I'm just venting. Of course I could introduce an alternate item that gives a resistance bonus, to let the rogue keep his cloak. But ... I'm simply sad, because the player is so disappointed by being forced to give up such a satisfying plot-grounded and thematically appropriate magic item.

A rogue used a limning dagger on a shadow mastiff; I ruled that it worked, negating the creature's shadow blend power - but now I wonder if that was too generous. Shadow Blend states

Shadow Blend (Su) In any condition of illumination other than full daylight, a shadow mastiff disappears into the shadows, giving it concealment (50% miss chance). Artificial illumination, even a light or continual flame spell, does not negate this ability...

So if light and continual flame don't negate it, does faerie fire? The latter states

Outlined creatures do not benefit from the concealment normally provided by darkness (though a 2nd-level or higher magical darkness effect functions normally), blur, displacement, invisibility, or similar effects.

I'm a bit curious what others think, but I guess it's fairly straightforward that it ought to work.

Paizo worked so hard to disambiguate how illusions work, and things keep coming up.

Mirror Image has a straight-up contradiction in its description.

"These images remain in your space and move with you, mimicking your movements, sounds, and actions exactly"

versus, a paragraph later:

"An attacker must be able to see the figments to be fooled. If you are invisible or the attacker is blind, the spell has no effect..."

The thing that's precious about this is that looking at the 3.5 rules, the paragraph about "must be able to see the figments" is unchanged, but the line about mimicking sounds was added - which suggests that Mirror Image having nonvisual elements is a deliberate addition. And yet.

Sigh.

Permit me to grumble once more that invisibility adds to your Stealth even in a completely dark room but Silence doesn't add to your Stealth even against a blind opponent... :) Pathfinder 1st gets a lot of things right, but it really screwed up how different effects and skills work on different senses... still love the system, though.

One player's barbarian now has Shield Master, dual-wields shields, and has Shield Slam (among other feats).

He naturally wants to have this explosive ability to bash everyone away in all directions with a full attack (he also has the Crowdfighting urban barbarian power) and he wants to do full attacks with two shields (his feat choices are all in service of this), bashing everyone away with shield bashes and free bull rushes from both shields.

Of course he won't be moving with the bull-rushed opponents because he's doing a full attack.

But the question becomes this. How would you rule the situation:

He has a Small or even tiny creature (let's say a stirge) adjacent to him. He does a Shield Slam, rolling twenty feet of bull rush. He declines to move with the bull rush (he has other opponents to hit, and this was his first attack of a full attack). Directly behind the stirge is a fire giant, size Large.

By the rules, he's allowed to do a combat maneuver check (at -4) on that giant, to have it also affected by the bull rush. But he never moves adjacent to it; the only thing hitting the giant is the Tiny stirge.

Would you rule the giant could be knocked back by the bull rush in this scenario? Is there a rule I missed that disallows it?

Locate Object/Creature have a Long range "centered on you (the caster)", take a standard action to cast, and have a duration of one or ten minutes per level.

I am presuming - but I realize it is only an assumption - that if (for example) one casts the spell looking for a specific known creature and that creature is not within range when the spell is cast, the caster can then move, and the divination effect moves with her, and if she moves such that the creature enters the range of the spell, she will detect the creature?

Our campaign takes place in a fairly sophisticated Waterdeep-like city (Monte Cook's Ptolus) about twenty square miles in size, where it is not uncommon to have flying wizards. So I am presuming the wizard can cast overland flight, cruise over the city with locate creature active, and find the person she's trying to find, if they're anywhere in the city and not otherwise protected from detection.

Does that match others' understanding? Is how this detail works clarified anywhere in a PF1e book? Or is the range/area fixed at the point of casting (that would be the other interpretation of the spell)?

I'm interpreting these the right way, right? My party of PCs has just reached 11th level...

Smite Evil (Su):

Aura of Justice (Su):

Holy Ice [Cleric/Oracle 5]

Does this mean that the holy ice spell cast by an 11th level cleric or oracle who's been given Aura of Justice by their 11th level paladin associate can spit eleven javelins at a boss target with this single spell, each one bypassing DR, each one getting the paladin's high-CHA bonus to hit, and then each javelin getting +11 to damage (+22 for evil outsiders)?

11th level characters, who focused on obtaining +6 headbands, for primary stats in the 24-26 range at this point in the campaign, provide this scenario: the cleric now gets +21 to hit (exclusive of bless, prayer, heroism, point-blank shot, or any other spells) with each of these 11 javelins, each bypassing DR and doing 1d6+12 damage.

I didn't miss anything here, did I? Just checking.

Curious what the RAW people would say. If several PCs are on one plane and a Life-mystery Oracle is on another, can the PCs cast Planar Binding to call the Oracle to their plane if the Oracle is using Energy Body as the spell is being cast (thus having the Elemental creature subtype for the N rounds while the power is active, and elementals being subject to Planar Binding)?

My inclination is "no", if for no other reason than Planar Binding has a 10-minute casting time and oracles can only use Energy Body for rounds/level/day.

So we've not been sticklers for this in all the years I've played 3.x, but it seems that scrolls are not designed to be used in a single round of combat. It is a move action to pull a scroll box from a belt or pack, and a move action to pull a scroll from a container - so then you wind up taking a second round to cast the spell.

The physical description of scrolls says "To protect it from wrinkling or tearing, a scroll is ... placed in a tube of [materials type list]."

Does a handy haversack allow you to safely store scrolls outside of scroll cases or boxes? It indexes them for you (you can just pull the one you want). Are they proof, in the haversack, against "wrinkling or tearing" if just tossed in the haversack?

How have other DMs played it? I don't expect there's a RAW; do you generally let a haversack-equipped wizard/cleric cast a spell off a scroll in a single round?

I know the answer is almost certainly "not covered in the rules", but how in general do GMs interpret "kind" similarity for locate object? Is it based only on physical description, or can it include magical properties?

Would "the closest +1 anarchic longsword" work? That is, can you search for an item with a specific enchantment? In the real world two longswords can look very different from one another; does the *look* of the item matter? (Of course the caster would have to have handled a +1 anarchic longsword at some point).

How about "the closest +1 anarchic weapon"? How general can "kind" be, and can it be based just on enchantment? Or on enchantment at all? Or "the closest magic dagger"?

(It did occur to me that any D&D3/PF1 setting that includes any sort of secret society where everyone in the society wears or carries the same token to indicate membership, e.g. some nonmagical membership ring, is a setting where someone didn't think through the magical implications.)

I have a few problems with the Serpents Skull AP that... are making it really hard for me to set up and continue the story.

Both Bestiary 4 and the d20pfsrd say the following about the Seaweed Siren's Water Dependency:

Water Dependency (Ex) A seaweed siren can survive out of the water for 1 hour per point of Constitution (typically 22 rounds). Beyond this limit, a seaweed siren begins to suffocate.

The appendix helpfully disagrees with both:

Water Dependency (Ex) A creature with this special ability can survive out of water for 1 minute per point of Constitution. Beyond this limit, this creature runs the risk of suffocation, as if it were drowning.

but of course that's likely meant as a default: the karkenoid and oceanid (also in Bestiary 4) explicitly list water dependency as 1 hour per point of constitution, while the lorelei says nothing (thus presumably is the default 1 minute per point). Other monsters in other bestiaries have their own rules (1 minute per CON, 1 hour per CON, or a flat 2 hours).

Obviously I can choose any of the three, but I'm curious what the consensus is as to which was meant. I am guessing they meant 1 hour per point of con, since the creature can talk and converse (which it probably does to most victims outside the water) so hours make more sense...

I am trying to nail down the behavior of Tiny creatures and combat.

The relevant rules leading to my question below...

Big and little creatures in combat
Very small creatures take up less than 1 square of space. This means that more than one such creature can fit into a single square. A Tiny creature typically occupies a space only 2-1/2 feet across, so four can fit into a single square. … Creatures that take up less than 1 square of space typically have a natural reach of 0 feet, meaning they can’t reach into adjacent squares. They must enter an opponent’s square to attack in melee. This provokes an attack of opportunity from the opponent. You can attack into your own square if you need to, so you can attack such creatures normally. Since they have no natural reach, they do not threaten the squares around them. You can move past them without provoking attacks of opportunity. They also can’t flank an enemy.

Moving through a square
You can’t move through a square occupied by an opponent unless the opponent is helpless.

You can’t end your movement in the same square as another creature unless it is helpless.

A Fine, Diminutive, or Tiny creature can move into or through an occupied square. The creature provokes attacks of opportunity when doing so.

Square Occupied by Creature Three Sizes Larger or Smaller
Any creature can move through a square occupied by a creature three size categories larger than itself.

Accidentally Ending Movement in an Illegal Space
Sometimes a character ends its movement while moving through a space where it’s not allowed to stop. When that happens, put your miniature in the last legal position you occupied, or the closest legal position, if there’s a legal position that’s closer.

My question: How do these rules work with each other? Specifically, is a Tiny creature allowed to end its turn in the same space as a Medium creature?

It's ambiguous, but I think I know the answer, and I'm asking here to make sure I have the same answer others have come to.

"You can’t move through a square occupied by an opponent" is the general rule, except "A Fine, Diminutive, or Tiny creature can move into or through an occupied square." That word "into" does a lot of work, because it contrasts with "through", which would mean "entering and exiting." So to contrast, "into" has to mean "entering but not exiting." So does that mean a Tiny creature can end its movement in the same square as a Medium creature?

The answer has to be yes. Because if it can't...

"Sometimes a character ends its movement while moving through a space where it’s not allowed to stop. When that happens, put your miniature in the last legal position you occupied."

Note "when that happens". "That" refers to "ends its movement" (not "ends its turn"). So going back to a legal position would be done after moving but before attacking. That is clearly nonsense, because then tiny creatures could never attack anyone larger than themselves!

So if a Tiny creature can end its movement in the same square, and then attack from there, it clearly remains there to the end of its turn because there is nothing saying it needs to be moved after it performs an attack. Is that correct?

So I'm finishing Ire of the Storm - I'm very pleased with the adventure, and the players now have at least some interest in the Storm Kindlers and possibly learning more about the Eye of Abendego (which I'm perfectly willing to start speculation on). And I went and purchased Seers of the Drowned City as a potential follow-on sequel for them to do next.

But I have a little bit of a problem with it... The Age of Lost Omens began over a hundred years ago, Lirgen was drowned, and Hyrantam has been right there, with ruins to explore only a few feet under the water, the whole time.

In general there are long-term issues with the Golarian timeline - to accommodate elves, we have to have very long time periods through history where effectively nothing happened for countless lives of humans - but I need to account for humans being active for a hundred years, right there in the ruins, between the city flooding and the PCs showing up in Hyrantam and starting to loot it.

If I'm right, from the description, people have been living in the upper floors of these buildings for a hundred years. Clerics have been getting water breathing and freedom of movement all that time. And it's a harsh environment; those who survive to adulthood aren't first-level commoners.

How is it that nobody's looted the buildings over the course of that century? They're accessible to sixth-level adventurers. Hyrantam must have spawned a couple of those, given a century. Why is it that there's still a bunch of barely-guarded treasure down there, literally within a mile of them all, and a few feet below the surface?

Now, I'm not going to ask the question without suggesting a few possible ways to address it...

- It might be assumed by everyone that the buildings are worthless ruins by now, since they do have magical protections, which presumably the settlers thought had failed and the submerged buildings emptied.

- I could easily believe the water levels shifted - making a bunch of the city that formerly was under deeper water now in shallower, because the main fork of the river has now opened a different path. But I can't move an *observatory* to lower ground; everybody puts observatories on hilltops.

- I might make it that the whole of the current established town is newer, that storm patterns have shifted and people moved there only a relatively short time ago when it became less inaccessible, where it wasn't before (for some reason I can invent - it was totally flooded, or there were lots more sea monsters, or lightning used to hit everything regularly - I can work something out).

Does someone else have a better explanation, for how the timeline of the storm, ruins, settlement, and unexplored treasure accessible to sixth-level characters sitting a mile from where people (who can, after all, gain XP and levels) have been living, albeit uncomfortably, for a hundred years?

I've been playing this campaign, with long breaks, for a couple years now, and tonight my PCs have finally acquired Briar and heard the story of Nyrissa from Evindra.

I've posted before, but to review: I have three players - twin half-elves and their gnome druid friend. Royce and Serafina share rulership: Serafina, a sorceress of Sarenrae, is the Queen, and her brother is the Spymaster and father of the Heir.

The Consort is Melianse the Nixie. This has led to a satisfyingly deeper relationship of my players to the Stolen Lands...

Melianse, Evindra, and Nyrissa, a nixie, a nereid, and a nymph, are all water fey. I have decided that fey families need not be all of the same species... and thus decided early in the campaign that Melianse is the daughter of Evindra, and Evindra's grandmother was the sister of Nyrissa.

This means that by marrying Melianse, the player characters are <i>family</i> to Nyrissa - and not only that, the Heir to the Throne of Narland (and thus all the Stolen Lands) has fey blood and is of Nyrissa's bloodline.

This has opened the door for me to play up the fey connections of the Stolen Lands - and to have legend lores suggest that the Lands themselves, even without the machinations of Nyrissa, would have eventually destroyed their kingdom - were it not for the fact that the legitimate royal family is now tied into the fey nature of the Lands.

I decided tonight also to pull back the curtain a bit. My players are quite impressed by the way this has fit together and foreshadowed all along - it has been great fun to leave little hints of Nyrissa starting all the way back with the Stag Lord, and with little stray comments by their old friends Tyg-Titter-Tut and Perlivash, that now finally make sense and have context.

Because Darby, the gnome druid, has been slightly less of a central character, she has been brought into the center of the adventure now by the revelation that Briar is an undersized scythe, and thus clearly intended to be wielded by the gnome druid.

The players were kind of astonished that it was not part of the module as published for the ruler to marry a fey, specifically to marry into this family, because it seems so obvious to them in retrospect, and to add so much to the story to make the Heir so crucial.

I reminded them that the original reason they had for Royce to pursue Melianse was actually nothing but powergaming: the Consort would add half their Charisma bonus to the nation's Loyalty, and Melianse's Charisma made her an obvious choice. The story parts came later.

As my son (who's watching the campaign) put it: "Let me get this straight. Marrying Melianse makes sense from the roleplaying standpoint, because a fey heir can save the kingdom. It makes sense from a powergaming standpoint, because she gives the most plusses to running the country. And it makes sense from the horny teenager standpoint, because she's the hottest girl in the story. Those are like the three demographics of roleplaying games. How is it that the designers didn't expect her to become the consort?"

We had a moment of pure joy… when the Celestial Sorcerer Half-elf Queen of Narland, in defense of Tatzlford stood, glowing like an angel of Sarenrae herself, casting bless and haste on the archers firing on the barbarians charging the city, while the druid's lightning storm blasted the grounds around the intruders, and the Queen's brother, invisible, wearing the Helm of Erastil, became an unseen force shredding trolls as they reached the bridge, and the Consort Melianse, River Princess, raised the waters to drown the foes as they fled….

(Yes, Melianse is the Consort - she is the sister-in-law of the Queen, bride of the Prince her brother. They're enthusiastically working on an heir.)

There are LOTS of parallel stories and parallel themes throughout Kingmaker, some of which I've been pleased to incorporate (or just by fortuitous circumstance have wound up incorporating)…

- Lords of a land form a triangle - Hannis, Pavetta, and Quintessa; Noleski, Natala, and Elanna; to which in my campaign I add Narland's Serafina, Royce, and Melianse. My PCs' parallel with the Surtova family was played up a bit at the wedding and will return in the political shenanigans I intend to add throughout parts 4 and 5.

- A "disguised power behind the throne" - not just Nyrissa being a power behind the Stag Lord, Hargulka, and Irovetti, but also Tartuk behind Sootscale, the will-o-wisp behind Vesket, the spirit naga behind Sepoko, and even Irovetti and Gyronna behind Armag, who is behind Drelev. Definitely some good fodder for Beldame to mutter cryptic things about, on their next visit.

- The similarity between the romance of Melianse and Royce (in my campaign) and Nyrissa falling in love with Ranalc has not escaped me. As Nyrissa's influence becomes more and more felt throughout the Stolen Lands over the second half of the Adventure Path, we will see some strange behavior in Melianse, this fey who married into royalty, and who might start acting somewhat above her station…

Oh, and just on a wholly unrelated note: The Old Beldame is an old green woman who knows magic and lives in exile with a Scarecrow. I know who she is. In my campaign she's still defying gravity...

We are at the midpoint of Kingmaker, and one of the things about the developing campaign was that we need to produce an heir (for the stat bonus; the players claim they don't care about the campaign ramifications, but I think they are lying.). So there has to be a wedding, and I have a question at the end of this for anyone reading.

We have a three-character campaign - half-elf brother and sister (rogue and sorcerer; she's the Sarenrae-worshipping contessa, he's the nation's spymaster and convert to Erastil who has been wearing the Helm ever since they took it off the Stag Lord) and their best friend, a gnome druid who serves as the Marshal.

Contessa Serafina has no interest in the time and distractiom required for childbirth, so it's been expected that her brother would be the one to produce the heir (by way of a Consort, of course; Jhod insisted things needed to be done properly; besides, a consort gives another bonus) :-). So Royce has been romancing Melianse, and now that Vordekai has been vamquished and the new lands in yhe Nomen Heights have been absorbed (the mechanics worked very nicely to simulate the difficulty; plans had to go on hold and resources diverted to accomodate a bumch of uncleared land in order to get Consumption down, kudos), it's time for a wedding.

I have decided that Melianse is the daughter of Evindra, as they are both water fey, and this gives a different potential angle to her eventual rescue since she will now be a PC's mother-in-law. Her absence at the wedding will be a mystery, and cause for some concern.

What I plan to have in the works, even though the alignments don't really work out, is that is Issia is making an alliance with the Church of Asmodeus, and their representatives will offer assistance to Narland should they encounter any difficulties, perhaps with Irovetti... I working toward providing the realization that if their kingdom fails, it will probably cause the Swordlords to fall to Issia and to the church of Asmodeus; in the final module they should get the idea that a combination of an actively diabolic civilization to the north and a huge hole into the First World where their kingdom used to be probably has even wider implications for the whole region. Winning against Nyrissa will free them to assist the swordlords, and turn them into a fulcrum for the future of a whole part of the world.

So my question, and the reason for posting all of this: The royal wedding will bring announcements and guests, of course. Irovetti will send someome, though probably not come himself. I am soliciting ideas for other wedding guests, both from Rostland and from the other River Kingdoms - anyone have suggestions?

My Kingmaker campaign is currently finishing RRR. But I wanted to take the time to share this story from earlier this year, because my PCs are still talking about this battle. The climax of Stolen Lands was one of my favorite sessions in nearly forty years of DMing D&D in all its various editions.

This is the tale of how 3 PCs, having just reached 3rd level, took down the Stag Lord and all his minions.

Cast of characters:
Serafina, a half-elf Celestial-bloodline sorcerer, follower of Sarenrae
Royce, her twin, a half-elf rogue, dual-wielding a pair of shortswords
Darby, a gnome druid, with Norbert, her badger

Having interrogated prisoners and learned what they could of the Stag Lord's forces, our intrepid adventurers decide to make themselves look disreputable (as much so as Serafina could manage, anyway) and present themselves as new mercenaries in the cause of the Stag Lord.

Successful Bluff and Diplomacy checks (from Royce and Serafina, respectively) get them into the fort. They are introduced to the soldiers. Royce throws around Sense Motive liberally, identifying the simmering conflict between Akiros and Dovan, and divining the Stag Lord's issues with alcohol. Darby remains beneath most of the bandits' notice and manages to climb to a spot where she can observe the owlbear in its pen.

The day passes into the evening; Royce works hard to bond with Akiros, eventually encouraging him to spar and discuss elements of his life. Darby meets several of the isolated guards in their towers and spends time talking to Auchs, repulsed by his casual cruelty but finding his low intelligence and bravery to be a potential tool; she also quietly directs Norbert to undermine certain post-holes around the owlbear's pen. Serafina has a moment to cast message on her friends around sunset, and with her 18 CHA, has convinced Dovan of her helpfulness and pretended to a level of dimwitted loyalty, favorably comparing him to Akiros and suggesting her brother could be a more loyal and helpful lieutenant to the Stag Lord than one whom Dovan so obviously mistrusted. She then engages three of the off-duty bandits in a game of cards, gathered around a crate in the armory, while Dovan sits and contemplates her words (and her).

Royce ultimately gains enough information from Akiros to figure out his discontent with the Stag Lord, and in the course of their sparring and conversation becomes increasingly direct in suggesting that Akiros was too good a man to follow such a dark course. When Akiros looked like he might consider those words, Royce turned his head and murmured "We have an ally. We should act" into the message.

Darby, having returned to the pen, summons a monkey and speaks to it, telling it to throw the other latch; she and the monkey unlock it as she prepares to throw a flare to enrage the owlbear. "Go," she whispers into Serafina's spell.

Serafina goes to the door of the armory. "Dovan? Should there be a light out there by that beast's pen?" Dovan goes through the door and temporarily out of line of sight. Serafina smiles sweetly at the three mooks and color sprays the room. None of them make a DC 15 save.

She then whirls to face Dovan, who walks directly into Serafina's charm person without seeing the room of unconscious brigands behind her.

The owlbear roars and smashes through the open gate of its pen.

Royce, two blades in his hands, looks meaningfully at Akiros. "We are taking them down. Are you with me or with them?"

Meanwhile, Serafina looks at Dovan with a mixture of alarm and craftiness. "If that creature is loose, I can get Akiros to die defending me - with your help. Come on!"

From the watchtowers come calls of alarm. "That gnome let the beast out!" The mooks on guard start descending their towers to the main floor.

Akiros makes his decision. "Through that door -- " he points -- "is the Stag Lord, drunk off his ass."
Royce nods. "What are you going to do?"
Akiros swings his sword in a vertical salute to the half-elf. "Deal with Dovan."

Darby curses her poor stealth; she hadn't avoided drawing attention. Norbert snarls and stands beside her.

Dovan and Serafina, the mooks from the watchtowers, and Akiros all reach the common area in the center of the keep at the same moment. The owlbear leaps out of its pen. "Dovan! Auchs can distract it!" Serafina shouts. Dovan nods to the huge man and points; Auch's eyes widen, but his pride in his brawn overcomes what little sense he has, and he charges the huge creature.

"What about the gnome!" shouts one of the mooks. "She came in with that witch-woman, and she's who let out the owlbear! Aren't they together?"

"No!" should both Dovan and Akiros at the same moment. The two lieutenants stop, do a doubletake, and stare at one another for a moment, each trying to figure out the other's motives for lying.

But faced with this unambiguous direction from their two usually-at-odds superiors, the remaining mooks charge Darby, leaving Akiros, Serafina, and Dovan facing one another. Dovan draws his knife and smiles cruelly as Serafina slips behind Akiros.

"Flank him, lady, and I will do the rest," shouts Dovan.

Serafina drops her staff and backs away as Akiros raises his sword.

Royce, meanwhile, has snuck into the chamber of the Stag Lord; he raises his shortsword to apply a coup de grace to the bandit leader - but something in the helm must have warned him; Royce lands a blow but not a fatal one, and the huge man roars in outrage, rolling away and stumbling to his feet.

The gnome stands her ground, a tiny figure against four charging humans. She gestures, and a flaming sphere appears, rolling right into one of the mooks, who spins screaming, on fire from head to toe. Norbert the badger leaps at the second, enraged, and drops him instantly. The remaining two reach the gnome, but her small size and quickness evades their first blows.

Craft and malice turn to shock and betrayal in Dovan's eyes as, instead of a rogue with a flanked opponent, he finds himself a small, poorly-armored man facing an enraged, greatsword-wielding ex-paladin. He has time for only an oath and epithet at the sorceress - better omitted - before finding himself impaled on Akiros' blade.

The Stag Lord, meanwhile, gains a shaky equilibrium and, even hung over, is better than holding his own against the inexperienced young half-elf -- but knowing where his true power lies, he wastes an opening to dive instead for his bow, and snatches up an arrow with it. "Somebody get this damned bastard off me!" he roars; Royce pursues desperately, less interested in landing a blow than denying the Stag Lord the opportunity to step back and shoot, perceiving that a great power lay in that helm, and that a single shot from the bow could prove lethal.

"I need help! A distraction! Anybody? Sister! Please?" Royce calls into the message. But he and the Stag Lord are on the far side of the owlbear from any who might interfere.

Darby rolls away, gets back to her feet, and redirects the sphere into another of her opponents; he to lights afire, screaming. She then makes a dramatic gesture and produces flame from her hand. Firelight from multiple sources gleaming in her eyes, she smiles at her final target. "Sure you want to do this?" she asks.

The owlbear, nearby, rips Auchs in half and roars.

The remaining mook drops his weapons and scampers for the exit.

"Norbert! Help Royce!" Darby shouts. Norbert scuttles into one of his pre-dug tunnels, emerging, moments later, thirty feet away, behind the Stag Lord.

Royce leaps forward with both of his swords as the raging badger tears into the bandit king's flank.

The owlbear, so terrifying during the chaos, proves no match for the combined might of the three heroes, a flaming sphere, a still-enraged badger, and an experienced and battle-tested ex-paladin/ex-bandit.

But this means that no one is beside the Stag Lord as he breathes his last. And thus no one hears the name that escapes his lips, in a final, silent plea...

I don't like how Bluff (opposed by Sense Motive, with modifiers), Diplomacy (DC depends on attitude and opponents' CHA), and Intimidate (versus opponent's WIS + HD) all use completely different mechanics, and (among other things) scale very differently (Intimidate is useless at higher levels, Diplomacy becomes awesomely trivial, Bluff becomes trivial except against those trained to notice it).

Further, the mechanics for Charm Person use yet another mechanic - uses the Diplomacy attitude ranks but then just bases further success on opposed CHA rolls.

And yet further, I've been clashing with my players over what seem very inconsistent (and sometimes overpowered) interpretations of how Charm and Suggestion work. A player who was given a suggestion was quite irate that the spell could force him to tackle (grapple with) a friend who was about to attack the person who'd given him the suggestion.

I'd like to unify these mechanics somewhat - and more importantly clarify just what Charm and Suggestion can and can't do, both for gathering information and for gaining advantage in combat, but I am not starting out certain of how I want to do it.

My feeling is that Charm X (person/animal/monster) should be a mostly noncombat spell: a creature already in combat won't change a mind or a target from it. Does that underpower it, in your opinion? Whereas Suggestion, while it is designed primarily for noncombat use, should work like a hypnotic suggestion - "statement X" (whatever the suggestion is) is now part of your assumed reality, and unless/until the target is forced to confront the assumption, they'll unconsciously act in accordance with it. Like "we shouldn't be fighting" or "the baobhan sith must not be harmed", which are ideas you can introduce with a standard action even in the midst of combat.

The place where Diplomacy/Bluff/Intimidate really get into trouble is when they're combined with Charm Person, in my experience so far. It seems like Bluff is the better/more frequent skill one might use to accompany Charm moreso than Diplomacy, but the spell description seems divorced from skill use (might the CHA vs CHA mechanic predate 3rd edition entirely?), and that seems like one of the holes we could plug.

My vague thoughts on charm:

- Mostly for noncombat uses. You basically can't cast it usefully when already in combat (+5 to save) - it does not cause amnesia.

- You become trusted. Anything else requires more skill rolls - Diplomacy, Bluff, Intimidate ("I need to know NOW!" "Okay, sheesh!") and so on.

- Makes target friendly, but only that. He's not your confidante, or your comrade-in-arms. Remember there's another category - "helpful" - better than "friendly", and the spell doesn't make the target "helpful".

- A suspicious person is still suspicious. He doesn't forget his secrets need to be kept secret.

- The target still doesn't know you (unless he already knew you). You're a friendly stranger.

- If the target knows you they also know whatever they already knew about you. "I know he attacked me the last time I met. But he seems friendly today. Maybe I'll give him a chance to explain the misunderstanding."

- Works better if the target is isolated. She doesn't forget her other friends, or prefer you to them.

- If you act in a way counter to the target's interests, the game is up and the spell ends.

- It is not an opposed Charisma check. It is an opposed skill check of one or another Charisma-based skill (see above) on your part, and a passive or active Cha, Wis, or Int skill on the target's part (most often Sense Motive or their own Diplomacy).

My vague thoughts on Suggestion:

- Can be cast in combat but works much better if cast outside combat. In combat it lacks the ability to be subtle.

- Can't make the target completely switch sides in combat - won't attack friends with lethal damage.

- Needs to be specific. "Defend me" works.

- The command takes precedence over other priorities. It's like being hypnotized. While spell is in effect, "I have to do this" - you're otherwise normal, but you have a compulsion to perform the specific act and you don't know why or think about why.

- Taking damage in the course of the action, or seeing an action result in damage to a friend, entitles target to another save.

- They don't get stupid, except about this one thing. The target still knows what she knows.

- The reason it's better than charm is that it allows an arbitrary mental-state change (not just "friendship"), lasts longer, and does not require a skill roll.

What do people think? Am I repeating a question others have asked? Does this bother anyone besides me?

My players are almost to the best epic visual (imho) of the whole RotRL - they're in the dam, about to sneak past the trolls and get to the control room.

But they're irritated - well, one of them is, anyway. He asked a really good question.

"So I get that with all those people in Turtleback Ferry marked with the Sihedron rune, Lucrezia was doing some kind of ritual, like Aldern and the Brothers of the Seven were doing on those people they killed, and she wanted to drown the town and get power from it for something. But all this is really convoluted. If she could get thirty or more ogres to attack the fort *and* try to sabotage the dam at the same time, why not just use thirty ogres to slaughter everybody in the town, including all the ones with the rune? The highest level guy there is what, fifth level? Most of them are first-level commoners. They'd be no match for thirty ogres."

I allowed as how this was a good question. I don't know yet whether (a) there's some good reason that I haven't noticed yet in the module series itself, (b) I'll come up with a good reason, or (c) I'll just tell them "okay, so the bad guys are kind of insane, just go with it". The problem with (c) is that it discourages players from trying to "figure out" the bad guys - if the bad guys are this convoluted, why bother trying to duplicate their thought processes and figure out their plans?

We had a similar problem with the timing in the module. My players noticed there seems to be an inconsistency in how long it had been since the ogres took Fort Rannick.

By the storyline, the ogres had to take the Fort, at which point the Fort would "go dark". It didn't make everyday contact with the outside world, so some amount of time - a week, at least - would have to pass before anyone became alarmed by this -- and then they'd have to realize this was something beyond "bad weather can cause messages to get lost" ... and after that, a message would have to get to Magnimar that something was wrong -- and the travel time is ten days. And only then would the Lord-Mayor decide to send the PCs to investigate. Then it takes the PCs another ten days to get there.

So it seems like it has to have been at least a month since the fort was taken. But there were still prisoners alive -- and some of the evidence suggested it had only been days since many of the rangers were killed. I can't make the timeline work.

Any help on either of these from anyone?

Edit: I should stress that we all are loving the series and the writing is, in general, excellent. These kinds of questions and problem-solving are what I've wanted my players to do for a long time, and could never get them to put this kind of effort into. It's because the adventure is so good that this kind of nitpicking comes up - they're no longer satisfied with "okay, it's an excuse to go beat up monsters and go up levels". They're actually investing in the world and the story, and I love it. So this is all nitpick. But I'd like to know if anyone's answered this.

I'll be writing much more about our campaign in the upcoming weeks and months - Burnt Offerings, done with Pathfinder characters and rules, is the most fun gaming we've had in years.

But today I want to discuss how they handled Erylium.