frank whited's page

Another option is to look at the original formula and apply all of the conditions as they happen to currently occur.

(Example: Concentration check DC = 10 + Grappler's CMB + Spell Level - since there is no "Grappler" that portion of the function would return a "0" making the final DC 12)

Granted this is very weak because most any caster worth the salt to be called one can easily make this DC, but it is a solution.

Personally I feel that the spell's caster is the "Grappler" and would use his or her CMB to determine the DC. This would make webs from lower level casters manageable and give progressively higher leveled casters a greater capability to restrain foes.

Just my 2cp!

F

Quote:

Actually, the MCSW spell is still a 4th level ranger spell, it only take the slot of a 7th level spell. Heighten Spell is the only metamagic feat that actually changes the level of the spell.

No, its treated as a 7th level spell when creating an item. Core rulebook, the description of metamagic feats:

Quote:

Magic Items and Metamagic Spells: With the right item creation feat, you can store a metamagic version of a spell in a scroll, potion, or wand. Level limits for potions and wands apply to the spell's higher spell level (after the application of the metamagic feat). A character doesn't need the metamagic feat to activate an item storing a metamagic version of a spell.

Well, would you look at that. Huh, well, i'll give you a nod toward the "spirit" of the citation; I understand that completely, but being one areound a slew of people who will mince words with the best, the RAW says "the spell's higher spell level" and the feats indicate that they increase the spell "slot" necessary to cast the spell, not the spell's actual spell level.

I understand the intent, but wanted to point out the way it was written.

FW

true, in that comparison i was actually relating the rogues action to a non-attack spell, then move & stealth.

for our purposes i believe that it is reasonable to use the "invisibility" definition of an attack - a spell that targets a foe. given that definition it seems reasonable that a caster could "snipe" with a dominate spell. the snipe stealth check is a move action, so the caster could cast an attack spell every turn and remain hidden (the stealth check satisfies the stealth requirement for subsequent sniping). if he was under the effects of "haste" the caster could even move after the stealth check (prompting another stealth check, but allowing movement). note that there are absolutely no conditions placed on the snipe attack, other then it being a ranged attack from a distance of 10 feet or more. the attack itself can be as noisy or visible as you'd like (e.g. sonic bolts & flaming arrows are fine, as is a sunburst). the same principle applies in modern warfare: hide, shoot a loud & bright gun, hide = sniping.

using sniping: 1d20+x(stealth)+20(invisibility)-20(snipe)=1d20+stealth vs perception -20 to pinpoint. effectively 1d20+(stealth)+20 vs. perception.
this is CONSIDERABLY better than DC20 no-stealth pinpoint.adding in a range modifier makes it even more effective. note that i do not include -20 because of noise, as the noisy spell is the standard action attack (which can be noisy). logic: a bow attack has the same stealth penalty as speaking (-20, counts as combat), and is clearly not included in a snipe stealth check.

I suppose we will have to agree to disagree.

From my perspective, because casting a spell many times has a verbal component, it is not possible to use the Stealth skill at all. I can concede that shooting a bow does make some noise, but the duration of this noise would be very short (a fraction of a second) as opposed to a spell being cast (more than 3 seconds - of a 6-second round). Add that to the potential that the only fighting going on is the actual shots from the sniper and there begs the observation that there is combat and then there is COMBAT.

Invisibility, like darkness, fog or other things, works to confound the visual component of a perception check allowing the minor movement involved in using ranged weapons to snipe. Given a large amount of background noise (aside from combat between a few participants - i.e. hissing steam, volcano eruptions, avalanche, etc.), I would willingly adjudicate that sniping is possible.

Again, just my 2cp

FW

Throwing bombs 100 feet is not enough? (alchemist bombs have a range increment of 20')

hmm...

You could always go with the Flask Thrower from the Gnomes book. Since it is a sling modified to hold flasks, it uses the projectile weapon max range increments (x10 instead of x5). It is an exotic weapon though.

legions of The Gnomish Flask Throwers from HECK!

There is a mental pictures to warm the cochles of an old, evil DM's heart

ahhh!

Quote:

for additional icing on the proverbial pudding consider this:

the same 1st level Ranger can use a Wand of Maximized Cure Serious Wounds with no check.

I love Pathfinder!

Ne he can't. Wands are limited to 4th level spells max. A maximized cure serious wounds is a 7th level spell (6th for a cleric). But, if a wand could hold a spell of that level, then yes. The ranger could use it without a check.

Actually, the MCSW spell is still a 4th level ranger spell, it only take the slot of a 7th level spell. Heighten Spell is the only metamagic feat that actually changes the level of the spell.

In the example you provide, the rogue is not sniping, he merely obscures his location with the second move action. This is possible because concealment granted by shadows makes it hard to see and the stealthy lad (lass) can lose themselves in the darkness/fog/clouds/etc.

I guess for all intents and purposes a spellcaster *could* use sniping assuming he stood perfectly still and did not cast a spell every other round (thereby allowing use of the Stealth Skill), but there would be no material benefit I can think of for doing this.

Even if the caster was a rogue or another class that benefitted from precision damage, there would be no benefit to Sniping while Invisible because ultimately he is still Invisible.

If you are trying to use Sniping as a way to remove the victim's ability to pinpoint the location of the invisible caster, I would say that, again, because he has to speak (assuming there is a verbal component of the spell cast), he has nullified that ability. Using a ranged weapon does not (IMHO) materially invoke the other senses (tremorsense, blindsense, etc. not withstanding of course) to disallow use of the Stealth Skill.

FW

Perhaps allow an increase to the range increment limit based on an exonentially larger STR mod.

Say +1 increment increase for a +1 STR mod, +2 increment increase for a +3 STR mod, +3 for a +6 STR mod, etc. and so on until at 40 STR (+15 mod) he would get the additional 5 increments.

just my 2cp

FW

It's not just that, a 1st level ranger can use a wand of CLW.

for additional icing on the proverbial pudding consider this:

the same 1st level Ranger can use a Wand of Maximized Cure Serious Wounds with no check.

I love Pathfinder!

Don't forget the line which says "If a weapon's designation would be changed to something other than light, one-handed, or two-handed by this alteration, the creature can't wield the weapon at all." So the smaller character couldn't even use the large crossbow.

Bravo!

I even ran across that portion of the rules and it never smacked me in the head.

woah.. woah, woah...

Wait a minute here - crossbows can be used in one hand at a penalty. So are we saying that a medium creature could shoot a large heavy crossbow in two hands, but would not be able to reload it? If so, does the medium creature take the -4 penalty for shooting the humungous thing?

If so...

I am okay with this - it fits my mental picture

Quite humorous in fact.

still, the caster could use the rules for sniping to force an opposed check after a dominate attempt (if you consider it a ranged attack). the stealth roll would be 1d20+?(stealth)+40(invisibility standing still)-20 (sniping)-20 (casting)+20(to pinpoint, really a penalty to the perception roll)= 1d20+20+stealth. not bad, but youd be better off with the DC40 not trying to hide (lol). casting non-attack spells wouldn't even require that, though. he could simply cast, then move and activate stealth (no action) to force an opposed check. for the brief moment he was casting it would be DC 20 to pinpoint, but after movement it would become an opposed check (modifiers are arguable).

My thinking is that the standing still benefit would not apply unless you are using a spell with only verbal components (perhaps material as well as it does not state that one must present the materials, only possess them) and beginning to speak would ruin the ability to use the Stealth skill because it is possible to perceive the caster the moment he begins. The bonus for pinpointing would have no effect because the purpose of sniping is to maintain ones obscured location and once you open your mouth and say something that benefit is lost.

But this is just my 2cp

FW

Dispel Magic would not work, as the target cannot be seen and therefore the spell cannot be targeted. However, just as a side note, Greater Dispel Magic DOES work, since it is a Burst spell, and burst spells do not require line of site but rather affect everything within their area.

The write-up on Dispel Magic does not bear this up. It specifically details a section on targeted dispel of a specific spell and there is nothing indicating that it is necessary to "see" the spell you are targeting (many of the "buff" spells [i.e. Bull's Strength, Bless, etc] do not have a visual descriptor, but it is possible to dispel them nontheless).

To keep this from being too easily defeated, I would suggest requiring the caster to pinpoint where the spell is (using previously established methods) and then casting the spell.

... Am I looking at this wrong here?

Nope, from what I can tell, you hit the nail on the head with this one. one thing to consider though is: most people become enlarged to gain additional benefit from the added strength.

one possible benefit might be that a large crossbowman (crossbowperson?) would be able to stand behind a larger obstruction and be able to shoot over it.

for example:

A 5' tall crossbowman stand behind a 5' tall wall with a pitched battle occuring on the other side. The party's friendly wizard casts enlarge person on him (her) and suddenly she is 10' tall, no worse for wear with using the large crossbow in penalties, and benefits from cover from any return fire.

Overall, the idea has merit with me.

FW

**edit: stupid spelling**

... snip ...

Lets look at another example
My Wizard has gone up a couple of levels he is now quite powerful at level 5. He has picked up Craft Magic Arms and Armor (a minimum caster level of 5 for this feat). He has also gotten a new spell book. My spell craft total is now 13. (20 INT, 5 Ranks, +3 In Class Skill)
I've decided I would like a magic +2 Quarterstaff.

[1] Make sure that the creator has a caster level. Yes I do
[2] Determine what feat the item being created falls under. Craft Magic Arms and Armor
[3] Make sure the creator has the feat. Yes I do
[4] Determine how the item is activated. Use Activated (+2 Enchantment)
[5] Look at the items Requirements. CL 6th.
[6] Are the requirements met? No I'm missing the Caster Level 6
[7] Is one of the requirements that are not met a spell? No
[8] Is the item Activated by either Spell Trigger or Spell Completion. No
[9] For each requirement not met add 5 to the DC.
[10] Determine the highest level spell needed to make the item. None
[11] Can the creator cast that spell if he had it? Yes
[12] Determine the Total DC for making the Item. 10+6+5=21 (Base 10 + Item CL 6 + Requirements Missed 5)
[13] What is the Book Value of the Item. 8300 GP
[14] Determine the cost to the creator. 4150 (1/2 book price)
[15] Determine the amount of time. 8 Days (1 day per 1000 gp value).
[16] Make roll or take 10. I have a skill of 13 I take 10.
[17] Remove gold from character, and add a Quarterstaff +2 to your character sheet.

Remember the CL of the item is added to the base as well as the missing prerequisites. For Armor and Weapons the CL is 3 times the bonus.

As noted above a Level 1 Wizard can not make a +5 sword as he must have Craft Arms and Armor Feat, so he must be a minimum of 5th level even to try. On top of that the DC to Create the +5 Weapon would be Base 10 + CL 15 + 5 = 30, even if one went with the idea of the base being 5 that's a 25 DC the caster would need to be 6th level and more than likely 7+ to do it with a take 10, if he could afford it, which he should never be able to do at those levels.

... snip ...

This does not seem correct.

Reading the Magic Item Creation section on pg 549 of the Core book tells us:

"A creator can create an item at a lower caster level than her own, but never lower than the minimum level needed to cast the needed spell."

Reading it literally one might attempt to skirt the intent, but it is obvious that the rule intends to allow only those who are the proper caster level (in the case of manufacturing armor and weapons). Otherwise there would be no reason to place a minimum caster level at all.

If the DM was feeling generous, he could agree to this, of course, but then it could be a logical extension to say that the penalties were applicable for every level missing from the required CL of a magic item. After all, level 14 IS required before one can have level 15, level 13 IS required before one can have level 14, etc. and so on. Doing the math for a 5th level character attempting to make a +5 weapon.. and assuming a base 10 as above.. one gets:

10+15+5(6)+5(7)+5(8)+5(9)+5(10)+5(11)+5(12)+5(13)+5(14)+5(15) = 75

So an impossibility of a low level character making a powerful magic item is proven to be... impossible

but this is just my 2cp anyway

Warning: Old-timey Player here

I was perusing some of the older editions of the worlds largest roleplaying game and I rediscovered something I always thought was neat, namely the convention of putting a blurb about what was happeing on the front cover.

This was similiar to what you do with the chapter headings in your books (which I love).

I was curious if something like this would be possible?

Thanks,

FW

I would ammend Master Spalding's 3rd option for gaining the ability to perform a Sneak Attack by inserting use of the Feint combat maneuver.

I would also say that either #1 of his list, or use of the Feint maneuver is the most common method I have seen.
Greater Invisibility is great, but few rogues I have seen make provisions for this spell to be used (sadly)

Heck, use of Feint is even a good way to get a Sneak Attack while in melee and in positions where flanking is not possible or with oblivious fellow adventurers.

Thank you Mr. Jacobs, That clears things up for me. I missed the IUS feat reference in the stat.

EDIT: After re-reading the rules/etc of Blood Pig on page 31 (under "Picking Up the Pig" it mentions that the Emporer's men "Spends the next round delivering a coup de grace attack against the pig". I was just wanting to be clear that I wasn't totally mis-reading things.

:^D

FW

While reading the module, I was curious to find that the following was possible to do while playing Blood Pig at the behest of the Emporer:

1. provoke attacks of opportunity although no one is supposedly armed. Is it assumed that the guardsmen are armed when the game begins or do they have the Improved Unarmed Strike feat?

2. The guards, as part of their part of the game immediately commit a coup de grace on the pigs to keep them from wriggling. While the pigs are being held - are they considered to be helpless or pinned for some reason?

The game is interesting and I'd like to run it, but these questions will cause problems for my players.

Thanks for a great product and keep up the good work.

FW

You missed my first post, Frank. With the light of wisdom spell from Complete Champion (+4 level for turning so he turns as a 17th level cleric), all undead in the module can be affected (true, he has to roll really high). But as other posters have suggested, if he makes the rolls, I'll let him enjoy his accomplishment, though the knights will be trying to sunder his holy symbol. :-)

So true, mea culpa. (I don't allow anything but the first set of three Complete's and the Spell Compendium so I didn't register the effects you mentioned)

As an aside, Also consider having the Harbinger use Telekinesis to grapple the spell components and holy symbol away from the spellcasters and then thro them at the bottom of the lake of worms. That will take a little steam out... lol

FW

- blushes -

Thank you, I try, snicker...

In any case, the upper level did work together, but we (co-DM and I) used reason, let then monsters buff-up before showing and let things go from there. The group didn't pre-buff themselves and that was their mistake, but ultimately they took care of Nezzarin and the Eviscerator beetles before leaving, in a piecemeal manner.

After looking through the monsters I can tell you flat out there is no way that the cleric can turn most of the undead in the place. I think the only ones I have seen so far is the:

Sword of Kyuss (14 HD, +2 Turn Resistance = would need a turn check of at least 19 to turn the thingy

Wormcaller (12 HD, +6 Turn Resistance = needs a 22+ on the Turn Check)

Knights are out of reach for a 13th level cleric (16 HD + +4 TR = not possible for a cleric of 13th level)

Eviscerator Beetles just barely possible (same as Wormcaller; needs a 22+ because of 18 HD)

The Harbinger is out of reach for a 13th level cleric (15HD & +4 TR)

Everything else is not an undead so no turning at all for them.

By the Way: The Wormnagas gaze attacks have been going through my guys like ex-lax.. er.. well you get the idea. Feeblemind is a rough spell! I'm just saying

FW

Thanks everyone for your comments. I didn't want to turn this into a post about b&##@ing about bolt of glory. IMO, it's the cleric equivalent of disintegrate (a 6th level ray spell as well, which by the way has a 40d6 cap, so find me that in the rules!). So if you wanted to modify bolt of glory, you could decrease damage to d8s as Frank suggested or add a save and make it exactly like disintegrate. As for my post, I was more worried about the cleric's turning ability than his spells.

Turin, I think said it best, if it's not a campaign breaker and serves to get you to the higher level modules, great. The BBEGs will be prepared for bolt of glory, turning, etc..

Finally, Frank, you are true evil, sending the entire first level against the party! What envy! :-) How they even survived is beyond me. I'm going to play it that if Nezzarin is in trouble, he'll go for help and alert the others, but not before.

Well, by this time Nezzarin is long dead (again) and the top part of the Ziggurat has fallen to the machinations of the goody PCs although, not at great cost.

I had Nezzarin and his Evicerator beetles inside the main area in the Zigguarat (area 3) ready and waiting for the PCs (I ruled he was outside watching for encroachment as a good guard is supposed to do and, once he spotted them (he has an incredible Spot check btw), he went inside toward whichever door was closest to them (near area 1 IMC) and he then called out for the others to assist in guarding the Ziggurat from heretics and invaders.

My reasoning is that they were all set here to guard and guard they shall. These are all reasonably (to highly) intelligent foes and it seems prudent that they would have a plan should they be assaulted. With this in mind Kelvos and the Angels of the Worm came out of their room and the Wormcaller/Sword of Kyuss team was ready by their door for the noise to start (both of these groups also had great Spot/Listen checks)

My PCs didn't learn from past mistakes and they forgot to buff-up before moving into the stone edifice. Worse, once they got there there was no level of teamwork at play and the end result was the loss of the Pelorite, Radiant Servant and a spitting of the team.

Also know that at this level of play I am holding my player's feet to the fire by enforcing a "Say-it and do-it" rule as well as not glossing over some of the mechanics of spells. Said mechanics issues was directly related to the PCs getting caught (the spellcaster's player forgot that he had to actually touch each of the teleporters and that forming a train would not take everyone with him).

Luckily the group is a pretty good 4th-quarter team and they have since recovered from their maligned ways and recovered their friends (mostly) intact.

FW

P.S. I guess you could say that I pulled a "Lucky Monkey" on them, but that really is the only way intelligent foes would fight don't you think? I just think of how the PCs would do it if they were in the evil guys shoes. Besides, there are ways of defeating even the "Lucky Monky" syndrome. Silence Spells and the Still Spell feat come to mind, just for one example.

One thing I did when the group went for the front doors of the Ziggurat is have Nezzarin and others on the top level operate together. He waited just inside the inner doors and attacked as soon as the group opened them.

The eviscerator beetles tore a hole in the warriors as did the eye-bites from Nezzarin (ever meet a Fighter with a 2 Int? I did and made them roleplay the encounter by not being able to understand their comrades when they screamed pleas to them.

Top this off with a Gr Invis, teleporting Kelvos and 2 Angles of the Worm waiting to Discorporating Dive into the first to show his face and the whole came to a grinding halt at the front door

The Swords of Kyuss, bolstered by the Wormcaller, used their Invocations of the worm to great effect and the foolish Radiant Servant of the sun god got up front. Well let's just say he had the chance to have a face-to-face with his maker to whine and complain about the unfairness of it all

By the book, Bolt of Glory is too good (look in the DMG in the section about creating spells and you'll see that BoG's d12's is about the same as 3d6 of damage each. Clerics are not meant to wield the blasting damage spells much, and so I ruled that the damage was being reduced to d8's instead (still more powerful than it should be, but is useful against a smaller list of creatures than, say, Fireball is).

Although I do not change things at whim, I always reserve the right to make changes I feel are necessary to make the game fun for all, myself included.

In any case, my group's bad luck with the Ziggurat (they had to take three tries at it before they finally got it) can be chalked up to two things: failure to buff-up before going in (metagaming thinking bit them by allowing them to believe the "Doorman" wouldn't be tough) and failure to work together.

hope you have a great time running this portion of the mod - they are great

FW

concerning the Morale (?) portion of the liscense, would it not have to establish what is and is not considered immoral before it could be enforceable?

Sorta like copyright infringement. If you do not enforce your copyright, you could lose it.

Of course I am not a lawyer, but read extensively when Metallica was going after some small places for use of their name and this was cited as a reason for such things. These two things may not have a basis in commonality, but they seemed linked to my layman way of thinking.

I'll go back to sleep now <grin>

FW

I must say Mister Logue, I greatly appreciate your work and respect your <positive> opinion of the new game. I know that hearing such from you has definitely given me a balm to rub on my major $$$$ wound inflicted by the change of editions.

Although I intended on buying and looking through the first three books originally, maybe now I can focus on one book in particular in order to get some of the yummy-ness you talk about.

By the way, it seems that your adventure for the Hook-Mountain Massacre was so over-the-top that it had to be pared down some before it could be published. If this is the case, I'd pay good money to see what was on the original manuscript.

What is with bringing up the-Pett monster to the good Master Logue? Some of you have sullied this fine thread.

Shame!

:^D

FW

If I might??

I am also prepping for this stage of tSoLS and Mak'ar presents a trove of as-of-yet unseen issues (I normally don't run games at this level).

In any case, it seems to me that Mak'ar could, by use of the Telekinesis spell,grapple away spell casters' spell component pouch and cleric's holy symbol. Once they are out of reach, just drop them in the bottom of the lake with the Wormswarm with infinite hp. After this, the spellcasters are not such a problem anymore.

Additionally, I think that Mak'ar would see any light as it entered room 6 from across the way - remember light travels a great distance and can be seen for miles away.

just my 2cp

F

My group started AoW in Aug of 06 and we play every-other weekend. Tomorrow I'll begin tSoLS in full with the group meeting Tenser and going from Magepoint to other places (no spoilers). We start at 9am and play until 11pm.

So, yeah, we have an incredibly long day which is broken up by at least 2 meals and a group who is riddled with movie puns and other fun foolishness. The group is on the teetering edge of APL 13 with 5 full-time players, 1 part-time, and 1 cohort.

To be perfectly honest, I don't know how you play for 3 hours (or so). Most of us refuse to get out of bed on a Saturday if we would be playing less than 6, but perhaps I am just spoiled... lol

I am also in my 30's (37 to be exact) with a fiancee, mortage, kids etc. and I am heartened to know at 50 you guys are not "too big" to be playing D&D. I resolve to play until the pry the dice from my cold, dead hand.

FW

Thank you both for your replies, but there is a precendent to having the Eladrin/Archons/undead work with the Kyuss Knight in the write-up to area 3 it is said

"..if they make too much noise here, they'll attract the attention of the guardians who dwell in areas 4 and 5. These guardians do not emerge to confront the PCs unless they are commanded to do so by Nezzarin, but do take time to prepare for combat."

---------------------------------------------------------------------

I appreciate what you are saying Rakshaka and am all but intent on putting Nezzarin in area 1 or 2. There are no ceiling heights listed for that encounter area and so I will arbitrarily assign a 10' ceiling height. If the group gets into area 3 there is a problem; the ceiling there is 30' tall and the whole flying thing is again revisited.

DMR, I liked what you talked about concerning using Nezzarin as a tour guide and would plagarize the crap out of that, but I have a slight problem: a PC Priest of Pelor with a murderous light in his eyes when he sees an undead creature. Add to this the fact that the player is cynnical and jaded to the point that he thinks all NPCs are out to get the group, and doing any of this kind of stuff would be all but pointless. He is like the group's big conspiracy theorist concerning in-game happenings (well no - in life too) .. lol

I think, in the long and the short, I'll blend your collective suggestions and have the outside be really spooky and Nezzarin waiting just inside the door of whichever entrance they go in. I'll be running this Saturday and will check back until then to see if any other good ideas come across.

On a bit of a derailment of the topic, what did the rest of you do with the outer works of Kulth-Mar? I mean there are a wide variety of monsters out there vying (sp?) for the peices of the pie. Bolishwur and Bellaxus are given reasons for being there, but the Yuan-ti are not.
It seems to me that the most logical reason for all of them to be there (with the wild creatures excepted) is to take over the whole and then move on to other plans. Are there any other takes on this? My thinking on this cannot get past the "obvious" reason for being there and add some good twists.

Any ideas on this?

Thanks all!

Hey gang,

I have a question to pose to the collective here:

What to do with Nezzarin the Kyuss Knight at the entry of the Ziggurat of Kyuss?

It seems to me that any reasonable party of 13-14th level PCs can easily mow through the Knight by just using the Fly spell to go over the obsidian ring and then, while flying and after spotting the undead menace and his evicerator beetles, just hammer on them unmercilessly until dead (again).

I though about taking this option out by having a permanent Earth Bind spell active on the grounds inside the obsidian ring. What think you?

Otherwise, if I were Nezzarin and I saw the PC's flying over the ring, I'd high-tail it inside and call out the Eladrin, Archons and others. The problem with this is that playing the monster "smart" makes the encounter WAY challenging if not murderous.

Any ideas?

I know there is someone at Paizo who is keeping count on this and I'll chime in this once:

I will continue to support Paizo in the forseeable future (the unforseeable too, but that is just plain obnoxious - lol). Your [Paizo] work thus far shows an intense level of professionalism and quality which is what I desire.

I will be buying the initial releases of 4e but that does not guarantee that I'll make the switch. If any company should be concerned about losing my business, it is WotC, not Paizo.

Keep up the great work and I'll be here to offer my appreciation ($)

Thanks for the great products,

FW

Does the advent of 4e mean that the Aow as written will convert or will it continue as is? It won't ...*gasp*... end will it?

Should it convert, what is the likelihood of getting some notes on said conversion (after the releases and all of that happy-goodness)?

just curious

FW

Sorry if this was posted before and I skipped it with my bleary eyes..

I converted my subscription over to Pathfinder and am getting 7 copies for the trouble (thanks btw!). I'd like to continue to get Pathfinder afterward, but I do not want to get 2 copies of the magazine (i.e. by signing up now and your records showing I have 2 copies per month - 1 paid for and 1 free (till my 7 converted copies run out)). Can this be done? and would I get the "charter subscriber" moniker added above?

thanks a ton!

FW

also, do not forget that only evil cretures can be summoned in the room due to the Unhallow spell effect. Add this to the point that should a PC cast Summon x in the room and you don't tell them the reason their spell fails, they will be mightily pressed to figure out that they cannot call for extraplanar help as all such non-evil creatures are hedged out.

I am getting ready to run area D9 in the Sodden Hold area and have decided to make the room like this:

The stone ledge and the secret door that Zyrxog stands in is on the same elevation (i.e. 50' off of the room floor). When the encounter begins the drow thralls have readied actions to throw the lever on the column, making it decend, as they both step onto the ledge and one casts darkness at the lead PC. At the same time, Zyrxog will use his Mind Blast on the PCs he can get and then leave, shutting the door in the process (next round).

Although I went into this thinking that the DC was wrong for a rounding error, I now see that Spell-like abilities do have a DC of 10 + ability spell level + creatures CHA modifier (Answer in back of MM1).

What has some down about the scrying pool opening up onto the Cathedral of the Mind? My assumption is that Zyrxog is there alreasdy and is floating near the ceiling and possibly eye-level with that balcony, although not within reah of it. I think there is where the final battle will occur and with Suggestion and the Mind Blast - possibly a TPK. Since this is gritty Greyhawk and the BBEG, I'll let those chips fall as they may.

Any other ideas?

FW

to those of you just now reading this, don't forget that the Unhallow effect prevents a lot of summoned monsters from being introduced in the room (only evil ones) - so most clerics and such won't be able to use those conjuration spells.

For those of you thinking of haveing Zyrxog taking PCs captive, remember that Loris hired him to kill them. I say have him kill them as planned (he's Lawful Evil after all) or have him send them against Loris to attempt to get back the Apostolistic Scrolls and lots more money to boot.

Then he can re-sell them and give the PCs time to break the enchantment of their own accord.

Just my 2cp

FW

<sigh>

Well, apparently they are working you too hard over there Mr. Jacobs!
(whiny)
I want more Tyralandi Scrimm adventures!
(/whiny)

(kicks feet in a temper tantrum)

lol

Seriously though, Hurry.

FW

... The truth is, Bas-Lag could easily be a 224-page campaign setting book, complete with a new magic system, more monsters, national descriptions, new equipment, etc. Dragon invested most an an issue in describing the setting (which fans of Mieville are sure to appreciate), but even that isn't the same as a complete, ready-to-run world.

I hate to be one of the detractors here, but I wish it had received less room in the magazine and more to something else. I run a homebrew, but am extremely interested in Greyhawk stuff, which seems sorely lacking even though it is, IMO, supposed to be the "default" setting for D&D.

F.W.
"More Greyhawk!"

Not to be a whiny arse here, but....

where is some more posting goodness? 17 days is a hard row to hoe while awaiting the excellent and admirable postings of Mistress Tyralandi Scrimm. I think she needs to take that weapon of hers up 'side his head..

lol

Look, I know you guys have the job to die for (I mean who wouldn't want to work in a place where D&D is a staple of the working environment), but you gonna have to get some PRIORITIES here. Here is a sample list:

Play D&D
Eat
Sleep
Work (for you designer guys this one takes the spot right under "Play D&D" - everything else moves down one slot)
Everything else...

<chuckle>

F.W.

I am an automatic fire sprinkler design technician. I take sundry architectural drawings for new buildings and design fire sprinkler systems to protect the lives of those who live/work/play within them and the structure of the building and contents too.

Our products are somtimes considered a fire fighter's best friend because we put out fires before they can really get going and cause a bunch of headaches (or damage and death!)

but I want to work for Dragon or Dungeon instead *sigh*

oh well, I'll just stick with this!

FW

Hey there,

Was reading this thread and was thinking that this had been mentioned/answered in a FAQ or Ask the Sage article. I don't remember the verbatim of it all but the answer went sorta like this:

(Specifically dealing with Detect Magic and Invisibility)

The Detect Magic spell is a creative way to get an idea if there is an Invisible creature in the area.

Round 1 - Caster receives the information about the presence or absence of magic (Invisibility by the spell is magical and would register as being present)

Round 2 - Number and strength of each magical aura (including Invisibility if it is still present in the cone)

Round 3 - Location of each magical aura in the cone (Invisibility would register as a blip in a 5' square (if the creature was smaller than Large). It would then be possible to target the square that contained the Invisible creature allowing the creature the standard 50% miss chance on the attack (unless it was an area effect or some such)

This is the DM's game going on here and so if it is how he wants it - no problem, just remember the things he does for later should you have people looking for you using Detect Magic to quickly cast Invisibility - cause no 0-level spell will outdo a 2nd level one ;^)
To the DM I would say don't punish the players for creative ways of getting around a severe disadvantage. That 50% miss chance is nothing to laugh at and is the same benefit the creature receives because it is invisible anyway. Plus a PC giving up 3 rounds of his combat to find someone should be able to do so given the logical tools.
An Invisible Rogue, even one who is detected using Detect Magic, still gets his Sneak Attack and the like. The detecter (sp? ;^D) only knows that there is something magical in a certain ssquare. Not what it is, what it is doing, nor can he see it in any way, shape, form or fashion.
Should you convince the DM that he needs to change his ruling, I would say that your PCs shouldn't be able to pinpoint the square for a different player by pointing at the square, I'd make the caster tell the others where it was relative to his position.

"15 feet in front of me and 10 feet to my left" when spoken aloud only once will cause all sorts of problems for people as they try to convert the spoken word into usable information on the fly. Try it sometime in a group of six and see how many can accurately pinpoint the location without having to ask for a repeat of the words.

As far as Detect Evil goes, I'd say it works the same way, only in relationship to evil things and in the exact same way. In fact, I wouldn't let players pinpoint the evil creatures by pointing to them (unless there was only one or two of course) but by the whole relative position to their own PC, one time.

Just my 2cp

Frank

Okay,
This has been one heck of a read (whew!). I'll add in my request for a Hardcopy but I'll go a bit further.

I not only want a hardcopy (nice for personal reading at lunch and the like) and a Boxed Set (OMG This would go right beside all my ODD stuff and the other boxed sets for reverant gazing at by visitors to my sanctum of D&D) AND... a 3-ring binder in the fashion of the 2nd Ed. Monster Manuals/Compendiums for actual gameplay with a CD-ROM of the complete shebang incase something happens to the original loose-leaf.

I would not only shell out $200 for each and every one of these, I would also renew my subscription for 3 years in Dragon and Dungeon. Additionally, I would probably give the AoW AP HC as christmas gifts and the like.

I am not rich, I am just very focused on where my money goes and I will be saving for the eventuality / possibility / unlikelihood that any / all of this comes to pass.

Come one Paizo, that's over $1000 from me alone.. I know you want it... I'll trade ya!

FW

Plus the AMF will eliminate their Freedom of Movement buffs, and allow him to crush and snatch them. Crush is especially devastating because it pretty much removes one PC from the combat completely. Especially if its a fighter.

Now I am getting worried though that I'm going to end up killing them all.

In the end I probably won't do it that way, I think AMF causes just as many problems as Polymorph and should probably be a 9th level spell or have something like Implode AMF as a 7th level spell that automatically dispells it and deals dmg to the char in the field.

YuKyDave, according to the Draconomicon (pg 148, Attacks heading) dracoliches lose their Crush ability. James, since you said this was generally a unique creature, would it be appropriate to put the crush attack back in there?

Lord Vile looks in his mailbox for the 8th straight day hoping his issue of Dungeon 134 has finally arrived, only to be disappointed once again.

Curse you all!!! he screams his chanllenge at the powers residing in heaven and hell or more specifficaly the USPS. ]

9 Straight days!!!

10 then 11 straight days have now passed for Lord Vile. His sense of anticpation has passed only to be replaced by a profound disapointment and within his heart a growing sense of anger.

"This time they will pay, this time I will make them pay!!!"

I wonder the level of depravity that the absence of this great adventure is going to push Lord Vile to... hmmm

I wonder how long Lord Vile will wait for this most excellent adventure before spontaneously combusting into a nuclear bomb with a flame-thrower attached... hmmm

I wonder at the ecstasy he'll be in when it finally arrives or he buys a copy from the shelves and kills a USPS man by looking at him angrily... hmmm

So many questions, so few answers...

Nope; it shouldn't change Dragotha's CR. At a certain point when adding templates or class levels or hit dice to monsters, you can't really trust the formulas given in the template to generate a CR. You have to compare the finished monster to creatuers of a similar CR. There's not much out there that's CR 27, alas, but I think it's about right for Dragotha.

Without unholy toughness, Dragotha's hit points would be tragically low; he'd have a glass jaw and the battle with him would be underwhelming and anticlimactic. The lack of a Consitution score does this for a lot of undead; sure, they're immune to sneak attacks and critical hits, but their low hit points means it's really tough to design high-level undead. Which is why you saw a lot of undead in Monster Manual II with dozens of hit dice. Of coruse, that makes them ridiculously tough to turn and causes all sorts of other problems with balance. Unholy toughness is the best solution I've seen yet for making high-level undead tough enough that they'll stick around.

I agree that Dragotha less the hp would be near-laughable, but is the ability spelled out in any resource other than the monster stats for some undead in MMIII (I checked Libris Mortis and it is not in there, but they do use Improved Toughness to decent effect in that book)? I guess one can figure out the mechanics from the write-ups, but I was wondering if there was a book out there with the ability detailed out as one would expect to see in the back of MMIII (Please tell me if I have a defective copy of the MMIII too cuz it ain't in there other than as detailed above).

Thanks for the replies,

FW

A specific writeup is in the glossary. You'll find it attached to pretty much every undead in the book. Say, boneclaws.

Yeah I found the write-up on the quality in a few monster descriptions, but the Glossary was woefully incomplete about the Ex ability, maybe my copy of the book is defective? I dunno.

Since this was not an original ability of the Dracolich, was its CR increased up ward by +1 or +2 due to the effect that the additional 300+ hp has on the creature?

Just wondering what the effect sould have if added to other undead, say ghouls and wights and the like...

<evil chuckle>

F

The unholy toughness quality debuted in Monster Manual III (and oddly, totally failed to appear in Libris Mortis, released a few months afterwards [probably a case of different design teams]). It was effectively duplicated as a feat in the recent Tome of Horrors 3 from Necromancer Games.

I must have missed it, because I don't see that quality in my copy of MMIII at all. Is it listed somewhere other than in the index?

Thanks for the btw..
F

Okay, I'll admit that I was at first pole-axed by the hp of the uber goober at the end of the new module, but Mr. Jacobs, You have GOT to tell me where the Unholy Toughness (Ex) ability comes from. I am obsessive about how these things come together and I initially thought you had erroneously kept the same hp for Dragotha from when he was still living and entitled to a Con bonus. I finally found the reasoning you used, but where did this ability crop up from - Kyuss himself or your diabolical mind???

either way, the beast will be heck to beat.

Great job! Keep it coming and did I read correctly that the new Arc has been approved????

That will make me extremely pleased!! Very pleased indeed!

Thank you,

FW

My group just finished the Temple of Hextor portion Saturday and they seemed to enjoy it very much. They have been through the adventure straight through and had just obtained 4th level prior to decending into the Dark Cathedral (Area 1).

I ran into some problems and wanted to see if anyone else had the same problems or knew of a solution.

First was the differences in maps between Area 1 and the Temple of Hextor. In the first map, it depicts a 5' corridor leading to Area 2, but the second indicates a 10' corridor. This would not have been a big deal until the cultists (I used 9 of them for some odd reason) moved past Area 5 and released Beast. From its perspective, I figured Beast would move to the closest enemy (which just happened to be in that previously described 5' corridor). It had to squeeze to get there and that was a big mistake as the enlarged dwarven cleric/fighter made mince meat of it.

Another area of contention was the summarized tactics sidebar. It used totally different room numbers or room numbers that did not make sense to me. Was I looking at this cross-eyed or what?

Finally, in the arena (Area 11) it talks of Kendra's tactics was to cast Silence on a spellcaster and then cast Sound Burst on that same person. My question, does Sound Burst work within the area of effect of a Silence spell? My players would have had a fit if I had tried it..

With all the ranting overwith, I'll say great arc and keep up the good work. I know you all are human and humans err, but to forgive is not usually part of company policy... lol

Hurry up with the next arc so there will be no delay in great epic adventures! Here's a true Southern "Yee Ha!" to the entire Paizo staff.

F

My guys just ran through the Temple of Hextor on Saturday (25 Feb)and although they were initially intimidated with the level of planning the the Hextorites made, they pressed through and eventually succeeded in clearing it out.

They have gone through every portion of each adventure and had just made 4th level at the beginning of the assault into the Dark Cathedral and so the early encounters were seemingly too easy for them, although they were having fun and that is the key, I suppose.

During the assault in the arena area (Area 11) it talks about Kendra using her scroll of Silence on a spellcaster and then a Sound burst. Since she was not in the silence effect, I'm coll with the tactics, but I could just see the players balking at a sonic effect going off inside this Silence (since it too described it being targeted at the spellcaster). Was I reading this wrong, or does Silence not effect a sonic-type of attack?

Also, the map of Area 1 indicates a 5' wide corridor leading to Area 2, but the map of the Temple of Hextor shows a 10' corridor leading from Area 1. This came into play with me because the players alerted the whole place when they arrived and when the cultists (I used 9 of 'em) released Beast, I thought he would go to the closest enemy, which was in that corridor - and to do that he had to squeeze....

Nuff, said... Poor Beast!

Anyway, great, great arc, keep 'em coming and be working on the next arc while you aren't too busy... <chuckle>

I'll throw my hat into this areana. I too would support Piazo should they release such a CD-Rom. My dreams of owning all the magazines would finally complete and then I could move on to my true objective - owning ALL the D&D Minatures!!!!!

<evil laugh with dry washing of hands>

F. Whited

Mr. Avaritt, although your professional expertise obviously allows you to pick up on errors in representations of real-world versions of the creatures you work with, the people in WotC and other companies must not have your knowledge-base to work with. this seems to me to be the obvious answer and one you could possibly help them with by posting a corrected version of the same monster for their perusal or even publish it yourself.
I know if they ever need assistance with fire sprinkler systems and their component parts - I am there !! :^) All I am saying is: don't be angry with their/our ignorance - show us how to make the monsters behave better and/or appear more realistic.

thanks,
F.Whited