morbon's page

After running this scenario, doing normal interactions/RP plus investigation and still having to do 4 higher level combats for a 7 - 10 is ludacris and certainly will never fit into a 4 hour time block, and took us over 6 hours to complete. It has been the trend that I've noted to have 4 combats in most scenarios this season and so everything runs long. That really needs to get fixed as many of these could never be run in a live instore game environment given our usual timing restraints.

Has anyone corrected the treasure drops for this scenario? Reading the third encounter it says you get 1 treasure bundle for completing the first 3 waves (there are only 3 waves) and another 1 for completing the final combat. Even worse, the final encounter says you get 1 treasure bundle for each of the 4 combats that take place, but you only run 1 of the first 3, and then the final 1. So, it seems like there is no way for players to get all of the treasure bundles, which just seems to be written so wrong.

Now getting to play this scenario, it seems the DCs are too high, and getting players to roll against a time limit is just designed to punish players, especially as critical failures happen far too often with the high DC, and just remove research points. Overall, I really liked the story, but absolutely despise how difficult the DCs were made.

Tom Parker wrote:

Milan Badzic wrote:

This is important because if cleaning costs gold, then the PC's will run out of gold before getting to everything, unless they pitch in their own wealth. Then my next question becomes how much progress do they make on their own and does this impact their treasure at the end?

I don't think it's possible to run out of gold.

As I read it, the most they could spend on NPCs is 84 gp if they hired extra help every day. The sidebar says it costs 3 gp per day to hire 3 villagers per PC; a standard table would get 12 villagers each day for 3 gp.

If they hire 12 villagers a day wouldn’t that cost 12 gp per day instead of 3? After only 12 days, they would spend 144 gold and nearly be out of money.

As I read it, it says " It costs 3 gp per day to hire 3 villagers per PC from Prophet’s Rest to put in a full day’s work". To me that says that it costs 3 gp a day, and for that you can hire 3 villagers per PC, or each PC can hire 3 villagers. So for a table of 6 players, you get a real bargain, as you can hire 18 of the 27 villagers for only 3gp that day. So, short of having to buy other material, provisions, or pay bribes, you shouldn't run out of money. This also makes sense, as the remaining money from the 150 gp becomes 3 treasure bundles at the end.

To say I am disappointed is an understatement. I totally understand the sanctioning group for organized play is understaffed and doing their best. I know we constantly complain that it takes to long after product release to get the community the sanctioning. This just feels like a half-hearted effort to get us something to appease us while taking what is three levels worth of content and smashing it into only one level worth of actual character advancement. To add to that you did away with items in favor of keepsakes, which you can only purchase one from all that are listed on the sheet, and the tier 1-2 list has half the items as common items out of the core book that we could purchase anyway once a character meets the level requirement. If we are playing through 3 levels of character content, I would like 3 levels worth of chronicle sheets, so we can play this, in Society mode or home campaign mode, and still get to then have a level 4 character.

I've been trying to do the math, and it seems difficult to make it match up, but feel the intent is to level up at the end of each part. From all I can tell, all of the encounters in part 1 seem to be Low 1 to Severe 1 encounters, assuming a party at level one. All encounters in part 2 are Moderate 2 to Severe 2, assuming a party at level 2. All encounters in part 3 are Low 3 to Severe 3, denoting a party at level 3. However, adding the math this way left me over 100 XP short in both parts 1 and 2, and then over 100 xp over in part 3. I just want to see someone who has figured it out to compare against to see where I'm off.

After playtesting 2 different scenarios, I'm of the opinion that the spell Bless, on both the Divine and Occult spell lists, is just not good any more. Admittedly, I have been playing a bard, but having it on my spell list just feels so dumb.

Bless is a 2 action cast that only grants a +1 bonus to attack rolls, and requires Concentration to keep it active, up to 1 minute. While ok, a Bard at level 1 gets Inspire Courage as a cantrip, which is a 1 action cast, but only lasts a round. Inspire Courage does all that Bless does, granting the +1 bonus to attack, AND also grants a +1 bonus to damage and saves against fear. It is the same bonus type as Bless gives, so they can't stack, and casting it every round, for 1 action, is essentially the same as taking a Concentration action every round to maintain Bless. Functionally the spell ending at the beginning of the round versus the end of the round isn't enough of a benefit to outweigh the other benefits that Inspire Courage gets.

So, why is Bless even on the Occult list, other than for Sorcerers?

I still haven't gotten 7-99 or 8-00 in my downloads, and just checked 5 minutes ago.

I'll try sending you a third response as well via email, but my name on this list obviously means you didn't get either of mynprevious responses. Michael Johnson

You couldn't make them pay for a Raise Dead or Resurrection, as they suffered from a Reincarnation, so they can't go back to their old body, as the new Clone body is the body their soul is now attached to, and is their proper body. You can't really require any of the other solutions, as Wish, Miracle, and True Resurrection are all 9th level spells, and PFS doesn't allow one to purchase spell casting services for spells of 7th level or higher.

I know Azlanti are overpowered, and not legal because the ability bonuses are unbalanced for PFS. My problem is that the effects of the trap specifically explain how to alter the character when they are Reincarnated into the Clone body. If you kill them and then try to Raise Dead or Resurrect them, they will just come back in the Clone body. Either, that first room should not have been sanctioned, as it is where the trap is located, and causes this whole thing to be possible, or it needs to have been added to the chronicle sheet as a boon. Otherwise, it would work like any permanent curse obtained, in that the transformation would stay with the character, and would have to be noted by the GM on the chronicle sheet.

I know it is unbalanced, and could cause players to fight over who gets to trigger, and thus purposely fail, the trap. It is not ideal. It can all be fixed by just not running the first sanctioned room of the dungeon. For some reason that room was sanctioned, and so until it is stated otherwise, the content of that room, and the consequences of the trap, are technically sanctioned. I can't see any other legal PFS decisions to deny that, until someone specifically in charge of PFS sanctioned content states otherwise.

Looking more closely, Reincarnation is the instantaneous duration spell that removes all harmful conditions on the character, so it wold remain in effect at the end of the scenario, and it also removes the Death condition. Clone creates a permanent body, which wouldn't be destroyed, and technically heals all the damage done to the dead character's body when their soul enters and binds to it. While Resurrection may never be used, found, purchased, or learned by a PC, there is nothing that says it can't be used on a PC by an NPC, or the environment. So, a trap designed to use it on a PC is not illegal by the rules of PFS. I see nothing that would make the change illegal, and so it should be listed as a change on the character's chronicle sheet, and seems to be a legal, and valid, way for a character to become Azlanti.

I have major problems with the whole line of reasoning. If a player fails the trap, they die. Then they are reincarnated into the clone, which takes care of the dead condition. Reincarnation is not normally legal in PFS, but as part of the written sanctioned content, it becomes legal for this scenario. I see this working more like a curse, though it is not a curse. There is no spell or service that can undo a Reincarnation, so there is no condition gained. It is a transformation, and so the it seems like a legal way to become, and play, an Azlanti, even though you can't legally start as one. If they didn't intend for this possibility, then they shouldn't have sanctioned the first room of this dungeon.

Battle Skill reads:

"At 2nd level, a battle host's magic item skill ability applies only on checks with weapons, armor, and shields.

This ability alters magic item skill."

Magic Item Skill reads:

"At 2nd level, an occultist's knowledge of magic items grants him a bonus when attempting to use them. He gains a bonus on all Use Magic Device checks equal to 1/2 his occultist level."

This is a bit confusing. I can understand how to activate other magic items that you may not have discovered the activation phrase for, like on many rings, amulets, as well as wands. You just apply Use Magic Device, and you're good. As I can't think of a single piece of armor, shield, or weapon that doesn't have powers that are always on, how does this apply to checks to use them. Usually, with weapons, you are just making an attack roll, and with armor you aren't making any checks.

So, what is Battle Skill meant to do?

As was just stated to me, there are some items that are B, C, or P items that don't possess either the Basic or Elite traits. Do those items stay?

I know that running this scenario at GenCon, or another convention where it is running at multiple tables, counts as running a Special for the 5 star GM requirements. Is this also true if it is run as a stand alone scenario? Is this like Bonekeep I, where it counts as an Exclusive/Special regardless of whether or not it is run at a convention?

Dearest Mistress,

It saddens me that you have so softened your tone as of late. I long for the days when you will once again call me your exquisite flesh morsel. I will continue to serve, as I always have, and hope that my service will once again make you happy with me, as your softened tone only shows your discontent with the work I, and the rest of your servants, have been doing. It is my hope that, with success, we may one day feel the joyous sting of your lash once again.

Having played many of the scenarios that lead up to this one and give background for it, I was really looking forward to finally dealing with some thorns in our sides, especially Tancred Desmire. I was sorely disappointed and feel cheated.

This scenario is inexplicably long. Our group last night was fairly well balanced, lacking only a true rogue to deal with traps (which was not an issue), and a high level arcane blaster. We didn't even finish half the scenario in the about 4 1/2 hours we had. Our first combat went smoothly and quickly, but the second encounter included almost a dozen NPCs for the GM to have to deal with, all of which were made of HP, so without massive amounts of damage, it took us 3 1/2 hours to finally get through. It was just frustrating and lead to a sense of hopelessness in actually finishing the scenario. From what we heard, the last combat had the potential to be just as bad and run just as long, as the final boss was a conjurer.

I'm not sure if this scenario was ever play-tested for time, but it seems that without a high damage skewed party that there is no chance of finishing this scenario in convention time limits, which is what our store has had to default with all of the 7-11 scenarios in this season. I'm not even sure what we could have done to speed things up, short of have a GM who knew every action for a dozen NPCs on their turn, anticipated 5 actions prior, and taking into consideration everything the PCs could have done to them.

In all, I may have had a better rating of this scenario would I have had to time to really enjoy it and get through it. As it stood, we rushed through all of the fluff (i.e. RP, puzzles, plot) just to get to the necessary combats.

I'm kind of disappointed in the writing for this one, as I've seen some glaring plot holes that make no sense.

1.) They clearly remind players that when you enter the Tapestry, that you leave a planar eddie where you came in. It states to the players that all they need to do is enter that eddie and they leave the Tapestry and return to the material plane at the spot where they entered. So, if Zay and Li entered the tapestry, how can they not exit via their own planar eddies? There is no explanation for this, and it is clearly in odds with what they remind the players so that they, and the other pathfinders, can leave the Tapestry.

2.) Even more disturbing is the horrible way that Nikolai is presented. It is claimed in several places that he had fallen under the influence of the Alraune. For most of the scenario I assumed that this meant that it had some power over him that was manipulating his mind and making him more pliable. Having seen both stat blocks, the only thing I can see is the Charm Monster power, and having seen Nikolai's stat block, there is virtually no way that he would have failed the Will save to fall under its effect. So either the Alraune is great at mental manipulation, and therefore didn't need the spell like ability to control the venture captain, or Nikolai is just that pliable and arrogant that he easily fell under the manipulations of the creature because of his own arrogance. Either way, the whole thing makes no sense, and given that it is the entire driving premise of the scenario, it makes the whole thing tenuous at best.

As both a GM and a player, it is hard enough to often remember what most spells do, let alone which ones do and don't have an added descriptor. Does that Protection from Good have the Evil alignment descriptor? What about that Inflict spell? Infernal Healing? What about Disintegrate? It's often time consuming enough to get through a scenario without having to look up every spell or remember which ones are Evil in order to track what players are casting to declare their character Evil.

Also, if you are going to do it with Evil, then why not track Lawful and Chaotic spells, since some classes have alignment restrictions, and even accepting those spells on you could taint you with their alignment energy? When does this go against the core tenant of PFS, which is for players and GM's to have fun. If my players are working out their own conflicts and being respectful of each other, what do I care if one of then animates a zombie or casts Infernal Healing to get the party cleric up. I often offer such spells to the party and ask if anyone has an issue with then, and then respect the player to either use or not use them as necessary. I often don't use spells or act in certain ways because it causes conflict. I've seen more conflict between a Lawful Chelaxian and a Chaotic Good Andoran (and seen it handled respectfully on all sides) than I have seen because someone is playing a slightly Evil character. We really don't need more ways to kill characters.

I'm not reading through all of this because it is just too large. Sorry if I make a point that has already been made.

As a GM, I'm against anything that adds even more to our bookkeeping. I almost never have time to sit at a table and look over every character and every chronicle sheet they have, so to have to track patterns of good and evil acts over multiple games, especially if I haven't GMed for a player in a long time if ever, is just too much to ask.

Second, if we are counting up how many times a character has cast an evil spell, then do we could up good spells as well, with every good spell counteracting an evil one? What about lawful and chaotic spells as well?

Finally, and this one has made me think the most. I'm often more concerned about Lawful characters rather than Evil acts. The Pathfinders may on a whole be Neutral, but there are many more times in which the Venture Captains ask Pathfinders to perform shady, under-handed, and often down right illegal acts for them, just so they can get the newest set of artifacts to the Decemverate. I have on multiple occasions as my Lawful Neutral Cavalier/Hellknight had to look to the Paladin to my right and just straight up ask how we could go along with the requests being made of us for the mission and the tactics we were told to use when they are totally not Lawful. The only response I've gotten from a Venture Captain is that since we are doing it for the Pathfinder Society, we are following their commands, and it is Lawful. This is troubling.

If you are going to start looking too much at Evil acts over time, as compared to overtly Evil acts, they you definitely need to start looking at patterns of Chaotic acts over time on the part of your Paladins, Monks, or anyone else required to maintain a Lawful alignment. I feel that playing Lawful, when post players will play characters that tend more towards the Chaotic side, is even more difficult than not being Evil.

4-24, the Price of Friendship.

I wasn't GMing, but having been witness...

One of the characters had a faction mission that required a "song" of sorts...

The player, playing a very low-charisma barbarian proceeded to spend one hour of real-time composing an epic and scathing five-stanza song which he performed at the top of his lungs while the rest of us banged on the table keeping time.

The GM still had him roll for the mission...and even with a massive RP circumstance bonus, he failed. One of the players at the table used a shirt reroll to let him try again since it was so awesome, and he got the DC on the nose.

The song's lyrics will be posted to the 4-24 GM/Spoiler thread as soon as I can get them from the player (or convince him to post them there himself)!

You need to strike that. My Barbarian is low in Wisdom. He has a 16 Charisma! =) And I really am crazy and had lots of fun trying to come up with an actual song, the last stanza mostly written in the last 5 minutes of my timer while the rest of the party was talking with the target of my song.

Also loved that I was the pretty one in the party and our rogue started pimping me out to all the orcs and half-orcs we came across in town!

That was a really expensive 1 XP! Otherwise, this was kind of fun. Not sure what I really think about the play-by-post and the dice roller on here.

I'll do my best to make sure that your family gets the items. If you let me know the players of the characters, I can make the effort to give them the items when next I see the player.

Vortwyn's PFS# is 17161-5

Well, all I could really do is hide behind the Genie, cast a buff or two on myself, and then try to fire arrows at the enemies and hope to drop them before they catch me. That doesn't seem like a promising idea, because both are still in double digit health. All I have left is Gravity Bow and Magic Weapon, so at most I'm doing 2d6 + 2 with point blank, but more likely 2d6 + 1, though would be shooting at +7 to hit most times. Man, it just sucks, and while I don't want to die, I also don't want to leave everyone behind.

What do the rest of you say?

Let's see if I can't get to a point where I can stand and start shooting!

Do I need to start climbing more, or can I cake a shot from where I am? If I need to climb up more, how high?

Well, I'm not saying anything because I'm still unconscious. =)

Are the Drovers, Atmar, and Hokama going to do anything. This looks like a lot of goblins to deal with if they aren't.

I'm sorry I've been so out of things as well. I know that all of you know I'm really not doing well, but I'll do my best to stay with things. At least this can be a distraction. Also, Vortwyn is probably doing better than the others, since I would have been casting Endure Elements on myself each morning to protect against the desert heat.

Vortwyn moves into the room and casts Burning Hands at some cultists as they're getting up.

Votrwyn thinks for a bit then looks unnerved.

Why would one who worships Lamashtu be tending to the body. Is the leprosy your doing as well, or just a sign of your goddess' favor on your and your companions?

So, why was it necessary to designate that the flag be held in 1 hand. Why not just place it on a pole and strap it to one's back, like people did in real life? Why not do like Cavaliers and stick it on their mount? Can it be used like a Cavalier's Banner ability, or with said ability? It seems like such a good buff feat that has silly restrictions written in for it.

Pathfinder Adventure Path #67: "The Snows of Summer"
Equipment: all equipment except cauldron of overwhelming allies and spear of manhunting are legal for play; Spells: flurry of snowballs, ice spears, Irriseni mirror sight, and snowball

So, why does the official PFS page say that the Spear of Manhunting is illegal for play, yet the sheet for "The Snows of Summer" clearly lists the item on it with a full item description?

Is it illegal because the site says so, or is it legal because the chronicle sheet says so?

Tea sounds wonderful. Name is Vortwyn.

He looks up only briefly from his book to acknowledge the new entrant into the room.

I know that part of this has been discussed elsewhere, but is there any reason that a Cavalier couldn't take the Flagbearer feat and display his flag on his mount other than the rules never take into consideration mounts and states you need to have the flag held in one hand? Can the flag be mounted to a lance which is held in one hand and still give the benefits?

I know that Banner and Flagbearer benefits are both moral bonuses, so some of them won't stack (the bonus to saves against fear and the +to attack roles on charges), but Flagbearer also gives bonuses to all attack roles, damage roles, and saves versus charm effects. It would not be optimal, but would add more buffing to what a cavalier already grants.

Thursday, August 15
Slot 1 (0800-1300): OFF
Slot 2 (1300-1800): #5-03
Slot 3 (1900-2400): Bonekeep Level 1
Friday, August 16
Slot 4 (0800-1300): #5-03
Slot 5 (1300-1800): #5-03
Slot 6 (1900-2400): Gen Con Season 5 Special: Siege of Diamond City 1-5
Saturday, August 17
Slot 7 (0800-1300): OFF
Slot 8 (1300-1800): OFF
Slot 9 (1900-2400): Bonekeep Level 2
Sunday, August 18
Slot 10 (0900-1400): OFF

I'll just say this concerning Shattered Star and sanctioning it. Many of the people in my area and PFS group have very strong opinions about it. Many dislike the concept of Shattered Star as an adventure pack because they already play PFS and because the whole adventure path is just one giant PFS adventure, they were less inclined to want to play it.

Now, if you actually sanction Reign of Winter now, as it is coming out, I'm sure that tons of people will want to play it as a home game and then get credit for their PFS characters. That is because it is a different style of RP from being in the Pathfinder Society, as PFS play enforces. People like the variation, and would play any other sanctioned adventure paths while still having a PFS night.

So, I strongly encourage you to start sanctioning Reign of Winter and any further adventure paths as they come out, since you'll get better numbers on reporting that way. Also, future ones, not being set in the Pathfinder Society, will probably be better received for their contrast from PFS style.

Please, please, please sanction Reign of Winter.

Thanks for finding that guys.

But the wording on the class feature is confusing.

"A cavalier gains the service of a loyal and trusty steed to carry him into battle. This mount functions as a druid’s animal companion, using the cavalier’s level as his effective druid level. The creature must be one that he is capable of riding and is suitable as a mount. A Medium cavalier can select a camel or a horse. A Small cavalier can select a pony or wolf, but can also select a boar or a dog if he is at least 4th level. The GM might approve other animals as suitable mounts."

It lists choices, but before that it states that the mount must be on that he is capable of riding and is suitable as a mount. Suitability as a mount is just defined as being at least 1 size category larger than the rider, and having enough strength to carry the rider and his gear.

By that, the feature lists examples that you can start with, but doesn't say that you can't buy or have other mounts. There is also nothing in the PFS sanction guides that states that you can't buy another animal suitable as a mount to replace the one you start with.

My Cavalier just hit level 7, so my wolf mount should become large. I don't want that. I'm a halfling and want a medium sized mount. Now, I know I can change to a riding dog, which I believe should stay medium in size. However, I was wondering if there were other options for mounts. I looked in the resource guide and there is no mention that you can't just buy a different mount. I looked at the class feature and it says what you can start with, but says that any animal of appropriate size and with the strength to carry a rider can be used as a mount. So, are there any restrictions in PFS for just buying a creature as a mount?

I'm rather curious as to why the Synthesist variant of the Summoner is banned in PFS play. It seems less powerful than even the base Summoner, as we have seen how overpowered summoners and their pet Eidelons can get in society play. So, why would the synthesis be banned? It cuts out the main problem that many pet classes have of having multiple actions and the ability to just buff up you pet and then get your own attacks while your beefy pet charges in and takes the brunt of the attacks.

I guess I've been looking at it wrong.

I would agree that my allies would count as having the feat so that I could move through squares adjacent to them without provoking.

What I was really looking for was to be able to allow my allies, who don't have this feat, to move out of harms way by going through squares adjacent to me but not provoking AoO.

Escape Route
You have trained to watch your allies' backs, covering them as they make tactical withdraws.

Benefit: An ally who also has this feat provokes no attacks of opportunity for moving through squares adjacent to you or within your space.

Solo Tactics (Ex): At 3rd level, all of the inquisitor's allies are treated as if they possessed the same teamwork feats as the inquisitor for the purpose of determining whether the inquisitor receives a bonus from her teamwork feats. Her allies do not receive any bonuses from these feats unless they actually possess the feats themselves. The allies' positioning and actions must still meet the prerequisites listed in the teamwork feat for the inquisitor to receive the listed bonus.

This is a bit confusing. Thematically, I am watching my allies back, so I am the one providing a benefit to them by destracting the monster so it can't take an attack of opportunity on them.

So, does Escape Route work with the Solo Tactics ability or not, since it looks like my ally is the one gaining a benefit even though I am the one using the feat to make squares around me not threaten for them?

Witch: Can you use the healing hex (page 66) to damage undead?

The hex acts like the appropriate cure wounds spell, so it damages undead.
—Sean K Reynolds, 06/30/11

As stated from the FAQ, the Healing Hex acts like the appropriate cure wounds spell.

Also, taken from the Witch character section:

Unless otherwise noted, using a hex is a standard action that does not provoke an attack of opportunity.[/QUOTE}

No where in the description of the Healing Hex does it state that it provokes attacks of opportunity. So, should one assume that since it is just like casting the appropriate cure spell, that if a witch were to use this while adjacent to an enemy (say to use it to make a touch attack against an undead) that they would provoke, or since it doesn't say in the Hex description that it provokes, then it doesn't, as per Witch Hexes normally not provoking?