Does Life Bubble spell protect against the sophorific spore attack of the Zygomind? Here's the monster listing:
Thanks!
Search Posts
I've run kobolds SO MUCH in my life as a Pathfinder 1 GM that I've decided to excise the kobolds from Kingmaker entirely. They will be replaced with all the different kinds of gremlins. And they will feature in book 1 where the kobolds were, but they will also cause all kinds of trouble in book 2 -- in particular, they'll be responsible for ruining the Narthropple expedition (the gnome caravan found stuck in the river). As fey, they will also report back to Nyrissa. The Bestiary says, "Nothing pleases a gremlin more than being involved in the collapse of something complex." They like to destroy machinery, from simple wagons to Numerian tech. But to do this, at least some of their work likely *relies* upon machinery -- that is, traps to break or disable other devices. IEDs when a wagon wheel rolls over it, etc. So I've come to ask for creative input. Any ideas about traps, anti-traps, devices, anti-devices? Anything that would help sabotage the civilized world? Any "trappy but not really an actual trap" ways for the little guys to get some advantage in a combat encounter with the PCs/heroes? The only idea I have so far, aside from an IED vs wheel, is that they might use magnets to "disable" a warrior's weapon or armor. Unfortunately, they probably dislike the magnets themselves! And... ya know... kinda difficult to imagine a bunch of little losers working up a magnet so big & powerful it could tug away a weapon from a range. How would they defend their lair? If found in the wild, how would a "team" of gremlins try to screw up some competent adventurers? If unleashed upon a fledgling settlement in Kingmaker, how could they sabotage the growth/success of that town?
A player is using the Irrisen Icemage power to convert a spell to cold damage. The spell is Umbral Strike, doing negative energy. I thought you could only convert the elements from one to the other. So fire to cold, or acid to cold, etc. But not bludgeoning to cold, not negative energy to cold. The players say yes it does work. Correct?
A player is running a sorceress and wants to put up the personal range spell Shadow Projection, but not on herself only on the familiar. OK so far? Then wants to cast Form of the Dragon on the shadow to give it extra powers. How does that play out, by the rules? Which thing -- shadow or familiar -- counts for conferring the familiar powers to the sorceress? In other words, within 1 mile the sorceress has a link to the familiar. Which thing needs to be within 1 mile to share a link? The body or the shadow?
For reference, here is the battlemap: The PC on the island is fully on land. The creature in the water is fully submerged, and the water is considered murky, and the distance is beyond what is noted for murky water under the aquatic terrain rules. The PC has Freedom of Movement up and flight, and is a zen archer with a bow and 20' of reach if he does melee. He fires shots into the water. He should miss because he's beyond sight due to murky water, right? Or he fires at squares and has 50% miss chance, right? He has a zen archer power called trick shot which should allow him to ignore concealment or cover, but how many points would he need to spend? I told the group it was essentially as if the target was invisible, or they were blind. So I think 2 ki points would allow the archer to ignore the problem, right? However, the PC also moved into melee, hovering at the surface of the water and striking 20' down with his reach, using no ki points. They said this would bypass the murky water issue because they have Freedom of Movement up. However, I said that the issue is sight being blocked, not movement in water. This went over like a ton of bricks. Does Freedom of Movement bypass the murky water issues?
For reference, here is the battlemap: Basically, a huge size PC in a 5' wide hallway. This is not only squeezing, but also the move through tight spaces condition in Escape Artist skill. Movement should take a minute, IF the check is made. However, the PC has Fluid Form up and running. This allows to move through tight spaces, seemingly at full speed. However, IF a fight breaks out in that hallway, is the PC under squeezing rules? Not for movement, but for the AC & attack penalties?
For reference, this is the battlemap in question: Basically it's a huge size PC vs a medium sized chained spirit. However, that PC has some special things about it. First they went invisible and stealthed to that location. They do not have hide in plain sight. But they do have Dampen Presence, which says that it ruins blindsight & blindsense. The chained spirit has spiritsense, which works like blindsight but is not blindsight. My impression is that it... senses spirits. The PC says these things:
I'd love to know what an actual by-the-rules verdict might be here. My thought is "wow that column is small compared to your massive size, does it really let you hide?" And also, does Dampen Presence just ruin everything that works "like blindsight" including lifesense, spiritsense, etc?
Spell for reference: The question is not about failing the saving throw. The question is what happens if you make the save. The spell says you are staggered for 1 round. However, since the spell lasts 3 rounds, on the next round, you have to save again, right? If you keep saving, the spell essentially has you in a "stagger lock" where the best outcome is you are staggered for 3 rounds. Basically, the spell is a guaranteed 3 rounds of stagger, right?
for reference: dread wraith, shell of succor. The shell says, "If an attack deals fewer points of damage than the target’s temporary hit points from this shell of succor ability, it still reduces those temporary hit points but otherwise counts as a miss for the purpose of abilities that trigger on a hit or a miss." The dread wraith has a touch attack that does 3d8 negative energy damage and 1d8 con drain. If I hit a PC and do 10 points of negative energy damage, but the PC has a shell of succor with 11 points of protection remaining, will the shell stop the con drain? (It's very clear to me that when an enemy has a bite attack with poison that the bite needs to work in order for the poison to be administered. In such a case, obviously shell of succor applies. However, with the dread wraith, the way it's worded I cannot quite tell. Is it "when negative energy damages a target then the 1d8 con drain happens" or is it "this attack has some negative energy damage, and also separately it has some con drain.") Similarly, if someone has Death Ward up, it would clearly block the negative energy damage, but would that then cause the 1d8 con drain to also fail? Death Ward has nothing that would normally stop con drain, but if "you never got the energy damage through" stops the con drain, then it should apply here too. Yes?
I'm the GM. I know the big issue -- be sure to foreshadow the final boss more, because she sorta comes out of nowhere otherwise. However, are there other tips that you might say are essential? I don't need every little fix, but just the top 2 or 3 you deem most essential. For what it's worth, I'm running the PF1 adventure path (6 modules) that came out right before the PF2 revision. So I don't have any of the PF2 revisions, and don't really have an interest in them, unless you all agree there was some epic awesome encounter or modification that everyone absolutely should follow. I mostly just want to run the PF1 books as-is but avoiding obvious pitfalls like the final boss issue. Thanks for any tips!
For reference: https://aonprd.com/MagicWondrousDisplay.aspx?FinalName=Assisting%20Gloves The issue with these gloves: it says it uses a command word to activate, which is by default a standard action. However, it then says it's a swift to get the benefit (Aid Another bonus). My question is: is the text about it being a swift action meant to modify the usual activation? So it's only a swift action and the gloves then give an Aid Another check and become inert. OR, is it meant to be that you use a standard action to turn 'em on, then they hover around you for up to 1 minute, waiting for a swift action to make 'em do something? I think the latter interpretation is correct and intended, but also makes the gloves borderline useless in combat. If you're in the middle of a standard action to swing at an enemy, you don't have another standard action available in order to activate the gloves for a +2. What do you think?
I always thought you had to start your turn already in stealth, in order to get a sneak attack. However, I just had a player in the open on his turn then move behind a wall, use the cover to get stealth, and then hurl an acid flask over the wall at an enemy. He wanted sneak damage. I thought no, it won't work for 2 reasons: didn't start the turn already in stealth, AND can't do sneak damage with a splash weapon (unless you take a feat or have a power or something). Am I wrong about that stuff?
Can someone have Phantom Steed do double moves, since the steed has no constitution, it can't be exhausted from running all day. Spell for reference: https://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/p/phantom-steed/
Can someone have Phantom Steed do double moves, since the steed has no constitution, it can't be exhausted from running all day.
I have some players who are joining the campaign but they played the module years ago. I'm OK with that but I want to keep them guessing. What changes can I make to Scarwall that are absolutely fun & surprising? I'd be open to simple things like, "Change that troll so it needs sonic damage to turn off its regeneration." But I'm also open to complicated things like revising the story behind the monsters or even revising encounters entirely. What have you all done? What do you suggest? Any ideas appreciated.
So let's say I 5 foot step up to a target and start a full attack sequence. HOWEVER, the enemy has a feat/power that lets him tumble/move 5 feet away, even though it's not his turn. Because I did a 5 foot step, am I stuck with the gap? OR, can I say, well the 5 foot converts to move action. Note: I'm aware that you cannot 5 foot step AND do a move action. But can it be one single move action, of 10 feet total? My question is, can I close that gap on my turn, if the first 5 feet has circumstances suddenly change? I'm aware you can convert a full attack action to simply a standard + move, if something happens after the first attack to make the rest useless. So if you kill your target on attack #1, you don't have to take attack #2 & #3 on the corpse; you can leave the first attack as a standard action and then give up the full attack action, and move to your next target. Does something like that exist when someone foils your 5 feet of movement? Can you keep going and have it be a move action? That of course would mean that you'd get AOOs. But if I'm fine with that?
I cast Dimension Door, and it says "you can’t take any other actions until your next turn." The bad guy gets a turn, runs past my threatened area. I have a sword, I want to AOO. I can't because Dim Door say "no actions" until my turn comes back up. However, I've seen some say "AOO is no action at all, like a 5 foot step" but I've not seen that in the rules. I would assume it's a free action or a special attack action that doesn't need an immediate action to use it. But what do you all think? And is there rule text one way or the other?
Stat block here: d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/dragons/dragon/primal-umbral/umbral- dragon-mature-adult/ Question: while the "negative energy" breath weapon is obviously negative energy, is the "shadow breath" weapon ALSO negative energy? I ask for 2 reasons: 1. Other monsters that do strength drain, such as the shadow itself, note that the strength drain "is a negative energy effect." Since the umbral dragon lacks that text, do I assume it's not?
The spell in question: https://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/c/command-undead/ Note: that is the 2nd/3rd level spell, not the more powerful 7th level spell. We're dealing with the wimpy command spell here. So here is the issue: the players have control of the undead, it is mindless, so the rules say it will even obey suicidal commands. HOWEVER, it also says this: "Any act by you or your apparent allies that threatens the commanded undead (regardless of its Intelligence) breaks the spell." So is saying "Bite yourself" an act that threatens the commanded undead, in which case the spell is broken? Or is the rule about it mindlessly doing suicidal actions in effect? Which wins? It seems a bit like a race condition where each rule supercedes the other, repeatedly, forever. But what do you all think?
At 3rd level the Shadow Dancer can summon a shadow that can serve as his companion. Some text from the rules for this: If a shadow companion is destroyed, or the shadowdancer chooses to dismiss it, the shadowdancer must attempt a DC 15 Fortitude save. If the saving throw fails, the shadowdancer gains one permanent negative level. A successful saving throw avoids this negative level. A destroyed or dismissed shadow companion cannot be replaced for 30 days. So, if the shadow falls victim to the Dismissal spell, what happens? The shadow dancer didn't "choose" to dismiss it, so I guess the penalty outlined doesn't apply, AND the shadow isn't destroyed. Does anything happen? Will the shadow be able to return if the shadow dancer wants it? Will there be a 30 day wait? How have you guys run this?
Is the alchemist's fire (or a flask of acid, for that matter) "weapon like" enough to qualify for the magic enhancement bonus? And if you think it is, then there is a follow-up question: does the +1 to damage apply only to the main hit, or also to the splash damage? I understand that this is hugely wasteful, that nobody would bother to spend a Magic Weapon spell on a single thrown flask. But IF I wanted to waste the spell this way, does it work? And is there anything in the rules to prove that it works?
I have a player who wants to take Gorum's divine fighting technique, as described about halfway down the page here: https://www.aonprd.com/DeityDisplay.aspx?ItemName=Gorum ...and give it to Ragathiel, the god described here: https://pathfinderwiki.com/wiki/Ragathiel I agree they are both very "fighty" gods, so in that sense it works. However, that Gorum power is for chaotic creatures using a greatsword. The player will be playing a lawful fighter using a bastard sword. Especially after seeing in Ragathiel's description that his "agents" use divine fire, they seem more like Sarenrae style dudes than Gorum style dudes. If your player asked to get Gorum's power transferred over to Ragathiel, would you do it? And if no, would you just stop there, or would you home brew some other divine fighting technique (since Ragathiel doesn't have one yet). What would that divine fighting technique look like? What power is cool, but still realistic for Ragathiel and lawful fighters?
So Caustic Blood not only deals acid damage to anyone who attacks you, but it has ongoing damage: for 1 round after, it deals half damage again, complete with a 2nd saving throw to negate it. So the question: I have a high-level barbarian who just wants to "soak" the damage. The barbarian, not knowing that there will be extra damage on round 2, spends round 1 in full attack on me. He eats 3 Caustic Blood sprays. He lives. HOWEVER, on round 2 he's only going to survive if the residual effect is a one-time group thing. If he has 3 effects (one from each hit), he ded. What do you think? And do you know of any relevant rules that would make going one way or the other "official"?
Player intends to have Magical Lineage to reduce metamagic penalty. Throughout her career the spell selected for this reduction will change. I note that traits cannot be retrained and the trait itself doesn't have text that allows for it to be revised to work with a new spell. It's a once-you-pick-it-you're-stuck-with-it sort of thing. Player says, "But I'm not retraining a trait. I got Magical Lineage via the Additional Traits feat, so I'm retraining that feat using the normal rules for retraining feats." During retraining, her idea is to drop the feat, then repick the same feat with the same traits but with a different spell selected for Magical Lineage. Seems to me that it's... by the rules at that point. Am I wrong? Is there something I'm missing?
If you have a spell that will knock over an enemy (or cause it to fall), can you combine it with Staggering Fall to make their tumble very mean? Here's why I wonder: does the timing work? Any spell effect happens at the END of casting, right? If so you'll cast MM, be done casting as the missiles hit their targets, then you swift/immediate cast Staggering Fall as the target is going down and there is no issue with this combination. However, if targets are getting hit and falling mid-cast then you can't add on Staggering Fall, because you'd be casting that spell in the middle of casting MM itself. I feel like this is an edge case where we won't have any rules text itself, but I bet someone here can get us real close to what the official intended ruling should be. I'd love to hear it.
Greater Grapple says this: Once you have grappled a creature, maintaining the grapple is a move action. This feat allows you to make two grapple checks each round (to move, harm, or pin your opponent), but you are not required to make two checks. You only need to succeed at one of these checks to maintain the grapple. The bolded parts are the parts I have questions about. So first, the lead sentence implies that this kicks in only after the creature is already grappled. This seems to mean that the initial attempt is still done as a standard action. It is only the maintain attempts that are move actions. Correct so far? The problem comes with the last sentence, suggesting that success at either check in a round will maintain. Because what if one of the checks was the initial attempt, not to maintain but just to start the grapple? In other words, a creature with Greater Grapple does a 5' step toward a target, does the initial grapple attempt as a standard action and succeeds, and then uses a move action to maintain but fails. At this point, Greater Grapple is invoked, because success at one of two attempts means the creature remains grappled. (My issue, if it's not obvious, is that the cool "maintain as a move action" grapple checks are only happening once during the initial round. So if you fail to maintain in the initial round, you cannot do a 2nd maintain attempt in order to cover up the failure and keep the grapple. I would say that the grapple ends. However, what if a player focuses on the line "This feat allows you to make two grapple checks each round" and couples that with "You only need to succeed at one of these checks" to argue that even on the initial round, failing to maintain will not release the grapple, because the initial set up roll also counts and therefore the grapple is maintained. Basically, I need to know if "one of two rolls" means 1 of any 2 grapple rolls, or if it means 1 of the 2 special move-action attempts.)
In Trouble At Durbenford, there is a fight in an area under an Unhallow effect, with the following monsters: 24 skeletons, 1 ghost, and 1 lich. I'm using standard Pathfinder v1 stat blocks for them, but I'm OK to change them. In fact I think I need to. The players are all level 8, and they will be fresh for this fight (well rested, full spells, and so on). They are: tetori monk, drunken monk, shadowdancer rogue with a shadow companion, shaman with life link, quickened channel energy, and so on with a cassissian angel familiar, and an arcane bloodline sorcerer with a faerie dragon familiar. I linked to most stat blocks or class rules so you could reference it, but I left out a link to the skeletons because I assume they're irrelevant at this level. The sorcerer will Fireball them as an opener, and kill every single one. So this is a fight against a ghost and a lich. My problem: this lich will kill 'em, right? The lich can open with the maximized Fireball, and that's 60 points of damage against PCs that have about 40-50 HP (for the sorcerer and shaman and familiars). At that point, the fight is just 2 monks and a rogue against a lich and a ghost. The tetori monk can grapple & pin in a single round, so that seems amazing. The rogue can then stab over & over again until the lich dies. If that ends the fight, great, but also anti-climactic. I assume the lich will Dim Door away (if he passes the concentration check) and then come back with Circle of Death -- which likely kills at least 1 of them. At that point, it's maybe 2 level 8 PCs vs. a lich and ghost. I have to admit, without even playtesting this, I assume this is a TPK. Do you agree? Am I accurate? If so, what can change? I was thinking about ways to make the fight seem scary & unwinnable without killing them instantly, thus giving them a chance to run away, or else maybe changing spells to make the fight seem damn hard & scary but while avoiding high-damage save-or-die stuff, so they at least have a chance to win. What do you guys think? How would you tweak this? Does it even need tweaking?
I have the Keep Watch spell on a wand. My GM has laughed at this and said the money was wasted. This is because of this line in the spell: Target one creature touched/2 levels His argument: if you are 1st level, this 1st level spell is useless, as you need to have TWO caster levels before this will target even one creature. I assumed minimum one target, otherwise the spell is indeed useless, a "trap" spell that wastes your money. Is that true? If so, anyone with a normally-priced scroll, potion, or wand of this spell is outta luck. Correct?
My first edition bard archaeologist is going to do a lot of diplomacy checks in an upcoming game, and I'm trying to figure out how my luck powers can affect it. The reason I ask is because the diplomacy skill says you must talk for at least one minute (10 rounds) before you can make a check. So the big question: does the archaeologist's luck power trigger on the roll, burning 1 use? Or do I need to expend many uses, so that luck is on constantly during the entire 10 rounds?
Let's say I have 5 stone golems, all crowded around the party tank. These golems badly want to slow the tank, because he's high level and getting TONS of attacks per round. So the golems all turn on their supernatural slow effect. The hero/tank character must make a DC 17 will save now. That's low & easy for a high-level dude, but with 5 saves to make, we're pulling for the hero to roll a natural 1, maybe. But what about the stone golems themselves? Do they each make 4 saving throws (1 per each of the other 4 golems)? Do they each make 5 saving throws (versus the other golems AND vs. their OWN effect)? Or do they make no saves as if they are immune to the slow effect of golems? Any advice much appreciated!
My players have already done the low-level imp vs. PC fights in 2 other adventure paths. They are sick of imps. I suspect that if I throw yet another imp at them from the Dragon's Demand module, I will end up with a table full of players groaning and saying, "We leave." So, I need to find a substitute monster that is about the same difficulty, and fits in with the story about the imp (that is, it was a familiar that went crazy after the death of its master). The imp in this module tries to convince the PCs to take some damage from a blood-sucking device in exchange for info about the dungeon. So it would be nice if the substitute monster could have the same motivation (so at least it needs to be "roughly" intelligent and able to speak Common). What do you guys think? Can you give me any pointers to a good/fun alternative to the imp?
Burning Touch states: A shining child corrupts the positive energy within a living creature into an unnatural burning light. For the next 5 rounds after a successful touch attack by a shining child, the target takes 2d6 points of fire damage. The problems I'm trying to resolve are twofold. First, since the shining child can do two such attacks per round, does that mean that it stacks with itself, assuming both hits land? So if one shining child hits a PC twice, the PC now has 4d6 damage per round? Second question, similar to the first: what if two shining childs attack? Lets say each one hits once, and misses once. So after they attack, the PC has been hit once from shining child #1, and once from shining child #2. Do those stack? Different creatures, same attack? (A certain module by Paizo has 2 shining childs ganging up on a PC, and I need to know if that 2d6 ongoing damage is rolled into 4d6 ongoing, or if the damage stays stuck at 2d6 but the duration extends similar to how poisons do, or any other weird thing.) Thank you rule lawyers for your service!
An ancient white dragon has an ability called blizzard. When an ancient white dragon creates a blizzard, it centers on him, and has a fifty-foot radius. The major effect of this blizzard is that it cuts movement down to a quarter speed. Does this slowing also affect the dragon? Also, since we are in the rules forum, can you cite a source one way or the other?
The PCs fought the Scribber, the glabrezu, and 2 summoned demons. The PCs trounced the monsters hard and the Scribbler teleported away. So here is what the Scribbler knows about the PCs:
Knowing this, and knowing that the Scribbler has VERY limited mobility and options, what do you think he could do in a rematch? I've tried to limit the party's power by holding them back to level 11 (at this point, they should be level 13). Still, they are game veterans and their builds are so good that I think the Scribbler should see this upcoming fight as essentially suicide. He's lost the glabrezu. He's gonna have to solo this, or have some lame babau demons running interference for a single round before they die. What can he change/adapt to be better against this party that he KNOWS is coming to kill him? Oh, and he'll only have 1 day to prepare. The party left, rested overnight, and came back. So he's got 1 night to heal up and do whatever he could to survive.
I have an initiative order like this: Player A
Player A is at the top of initiative, and goes into delay. Enemy 1 attacks. Enemy 2 goes into delay. Player B's turn begins. Player B fires a quickened Magic Missile at enemy 2, causing enemy 2 to come out of delay. OK, I move enemy 2, so initiative looks like this: Player A
HOWEVER, enemy 2 can't do anything yet, because player B is still taking his turn. He's only done a swift action spell so far. So now player B continues, does a move action, and then does an attack action. At this point, player A announces, "I come out of delay, I'd like to act." I put him after enemy 2, who previously came out of delay. Initiative now looks like this: Enemy 1
Enemy 2 and player A are stacked up, both coming out of delay. Player B wraps up his turn with a free action shout to his allies, and I begin to run enemy 2. Player A asks what I'm doing. I say that enemy 2 came out of delay first, so I'm running it. He says "No, my initiative is higher, I go first." I'm almost certain there are no rules or even FAQs to handle this edge case of 2 delays stacking up, but I'd love it if the forum members could give me their best shot. Is there any info that might help us make an educated guess about the correct ordering?
I have a player, who is playing arcanist, and I'm curious about the level of "optimization vs. reality" that is happening. Would you guys allow this if you were the GM? So this arcanist has the quick study exploit. This allows him to swap spells as a full round action. However, quick study also states that you must have a Spellbook available for use during the quick study action. In order to do that, a player must pull a spell book. This presents 3 problems. First this eats a move action. second, this provokes an AOO, since spell books are not drawn as weapons. And third, spellbooks might need to be dropped or otherwise put away afterwards. That is either using more actions, or leaving valuables on the ground. So what this player proposes, in order to get rid of as many issues as possible, is to wander around with spell books in hand ready to go. When I pointed out that she has multiple spell books, he has decided to put them all on weapon cords, and then in order to not provoke, put them in a handy haversack. I stated that I do not understand how an item could be inside a handy haversack yet also have a cord extended out and attached to his body somewhere. What do you think about all of that? I think it would be fine if the books were stored in real physical space with a real physical cord attached to his body, or if they were not corded, and were stored inside of a haversack's extradimensional space. What decisions would you make?
Here is the relevant text from the Greater Animal Aspect spell:
So... why ever take the frog option, if the otter option is clearly better? Is there some reading of this that makes frog useful in some circumstance?
I'm running Rise of the Runelords. Team is having a rematch against Xanesha, a lamia matriarch (shapechanger). They cast Baleful Polymorph on her. She fails both saves, and is now a harmless chicken or something. HOWEVER, the spell text: https://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/b/baleful-polymorph/ ...says that a shapechanger can revert back to normal as a standard action!!! How does this work? She failed both saves, so she's a pretty dumb chicken now. Does reverting make her a dumb chicken in a lamia body? Or does it give her everything back? I'm interested in RAI more than RAW, but I'll take anything you can give me right now.
So I'd like to spitball with some other GMs and see if there are sensible outcomes to the crazy things happening in my game. The players have been obsessed about finding the Sandpoint Devil. I put together a HUGE multi-map location on the Devil's Platter for them to explore, and eventually fight/capture the Sandpoint Devil. To find the Sandpoint Devil, they began asking around town, and heard the rumor that Ilsoari at Turandarok Academy kept the devil in his basement. They came into the academy and asked the orphans, "Who here is keeping the Sandpoint Devil in their basement?" Ilsoari ran, trying to get to the basement & lock the door. The players assumed it meant he was guilty of something, so they chased, broke down the door, and one player, Zed, beat the crap out of Ilsoari. They eventually learned that there was no Sandpoint Devil there; it was a rumor to keep the orphans in line. They gave him 5 or 10 gold for the trouble, and then walked out past a bunch of cowering orphans, and left. They eventually found the Sandpoint Devil's lair, but had to fight through a bunch of derro that lived in the cave system. Eventually the derro realized they were going to lose and they ditched their lair, went to Sandpoint, and killed as many citizens as possible before being put down. They chanted, "You raid us, we raid you! You kill us, we kill you!" The players remained in the derro lair, scoping out the entire layout, scanning for magic items. They were given hints that the derro were headed to town (lots of evidence of last-minute fleeing, hints that an exit in the direction of town was recently used, and so on), but they didn't get the best result on their skill checks and I couldn't really hit them over the head with it. We did random rolls for a few NPCs to die defending the town in the raid, and poor Father Zantus got his number rolled on a chart of about 60 major NPCs. That was a bummer but it made sense. Of course he'd be the good guy running out to save people, and get caught in the fray. I think Koya Mvashti (also a cleric of Desna) will take over his position. So first question is, does that sound reasonable to you guys? I was thinking about fleshing out all the other clerics at the mega-church. Has anyone done that already? When the gang got back to town, and saw the destruction and bodies everywhere, the Zed character ran up to the derro corpses and looted them until a citizen stopped him. Another player went around town saying, "Wow, who could have provoked this? We were busy doing other things. Surely we will help the townsfolk to get revenge!" Unfortunately that character has like a -5 to bluff, and ended up with a total of 8 to bluff checks. I don't know what the fallout of that is, but I did roll and a bunch of citizens saw right through it. How would you handle that? Before much of that could be resolved, the gang left for Magnimar and took over the Foxglove townhouse. However, it was WEIRD. I used this battlemap for the encounter: https://www.deviantart.com/hero339/art/Foxglove-Estate-First-Floor-59859409 9 ...and I liberally sprinkled citizen NPCs near the surrounding houses. Yet the players just opened the front door of the townhouse and started killing the dudes inside. One of them, the fake Iesha, ran outside calling for the guards. A nearby citizen tried to give fake Iesha sanctuary in her home. The PCs ran out after Iesha, killed her in the street, and then our aggressive player, Zed, went after the citizens for giving Iesha sanctuary. I had the citizens lock themselves in their homes, but the PC ran up and began banging on the door, weapon in hand. I didn't know what to do with that. People were screaming; I eventually had some guards arrive. The citizens lived. The PCs had to bluff like crazy to not be accused of a murderous rampage. It helped that fake Iesha and fake Foxglove turned back into faceless stalkers. (Right? When a faceless stalker dies, its face goes back to its natural blank state, yeah?) They ALSO had a Hat of Disguise, and one of the players assumed the form of Foxglove. They even had Foxglove's repaired noble's outfit. So that player claimed to be the person living there and claimed to have been attacked by the 2 faceless stalkers. The citizens would say otherwise, but damn, having Foxglove himself assert ownership really helped to bluff the guards. So after searching the townhouse, they found the deed to Foxglove's haunted manor, but it appears that Foxglove's townhouse in Magnimar does not have a deed. They have forged one, and just a day after nearly killing the people next door, they have assumed ownership. The neighbors are FREAKED OUT. First, is that right? Is it possible for them to forge a deed and assume ownership that quickly/easily? I called the game at that time, as I did not know the correct handling of this. So I am free to come back to the next game with different outcomes. I thought to myself, "If the bluff/story of the PCs is that Foxglove came home after a long absence to find 2 squatters in his house impersonating him, and if Foxglove had some thugs hired to deal with it, then that can make sense to the guards. However, if Foxglove then signs the deed over to the thugs he hired, wouldn't the town officials balk at that? It doesn't seem to make sense. Foxglove hired dudes to reclaim his home, and then immediately gave away his home. Weird?" Second, does player Zed need an alignment change? What alignment is threatening to beat up or actually beating up multiple citizens but not actually killing them?
My player sent me this sequence, which he is hoping I will confirm works. However, to avoid the sniping penalty of -20 to stealth, he stands in the open and just doesn't snipe, then on the next turn re-hides with no sniping penalty because he didn't snipe. How is it possible that being blatantly obvious gets a player no penalty at all?
tl;dr: my player has assembled what is essentially a poor man's version of Hide in Plain Sight with early access. Does it work? Why or why not?
You see a guy barreling down on you. Your friend, 10' away, draws a sword and readies to hit the bad guy. Seeing this, you pull out a reach weapon with the brace property. Maybe you also have a special ability that gives you extra reach, like that longarm spell or ability. Then you ready with the brace weapon, if the bad guy charges. Well, the bad guy does charge, and runs right up to... your ally. You have enough reach that you can get an AOO. But, does your readied action trigger? Do you get brace damage? Technically the bad guy IS charging. But technically he's not charging at YOU. I know the rules do not explicitly say "the enemy must charge you" but they do talk about "receive the charge" as if it's something coming in at you that you take in and/or handle. What do you think is RAW, and what is RAI?
I have to alter the module to keep it entertaining for some players who have played through it once before. I was thinking that Justice Ironbriar has a big problem -- he isn't well-known to the players, and the GMs here in the forums have struggled with ways to introduce him -- and that problem is my savior. Because he isn't well-introduced, he's essentially expendable or replaceable. So, I've decided that the real villains behind the murders will be the Scarnetti family. The module sets it up, anyway -- Banny stole from them, the villain's business in Magnimar is another saw mill, etc. It's easy to pop in the Scarnettis and have it make sense. I will keep the cult and keep Foxglove, it's just that Titus Scarnetti is pulling the strings instead of Ironbriar. When the PCs are supposed to fight Ironbriar, they'll instead fight the Scarnetti family's "enforcer," Jubrayl. I might keep the Ironbriar stat block and rename it, or I might come up with a more rogue/thug Jubrayl stat block. When they get to the end, they'll either fight Titus in snake form (using the normal monster stat block that the module provides) or if that throws off too many things (like I'd have to rewrite the letter from the sister) I'll keep the original monster and just have her casting Charm Monster on Titus instead of Ironbriar. So basically, small easy changes and not much to alter in the handouts or stat blocks, and yet it makes sense. It might even make more sense than Ironbriar, who the players don't even know. My question for you guys: how badly am I screwing up the module or later modules? What does this change ruin? What am I unaware of for the long term? Any tips of things I might need to change or watch out for?
The monster in question is a fleshdreg with the "wrath" variation. So here's my question: what is officially an "energy" type? Can I have the fleshdreg deal positive energy damage? Negative energy? Sonic? Force? Are there other energy types that are rare/unique? For example, is there a "wind" energy type? An eldritch energy? A psionic energy?
I know that fire can free someone from the Web spell. What about the Entangle spell? I have someone trapped in the Entangle spell, but that person is spamming Burning Hands to try to burn a path to freedom. They insist that if a 2nd level spell like Web can be burned through, then a 1st level spell like Entangle should be even easier. However, Entangle doesn't have any text about being burned away, whereas Web does. What do you guys think?
The spell Tripvine will attack anything in a 10' area. It seems to have no limit to how many times it attacks, or how many creatures. So if a swarm crosses it, what happens? And is it different if the swarm is a centipede swarm, bat swarm, or monkey swarm?
Hey guys, we are trying to infiltrate the keep, and we need to get some small animal creatures to move toward the keep, and then touch one of the bad guys in the keep. We want to scry them as they move in and touch the bad guy. There is a D&D 3.5 spell called chain of eyes, which allows you to touch one creature, scry that creature, and then as the creature touches other creatures you can jump to scrying those other creatures. I recall Pathfinder making an equivalent spell, but it isn't called chain of eyes, and now I can't find it. Can any of you help me?
Maybe this was part of the site redesign, or maybe this was me pressing a wrong setting button. Whatever the case, I hate it. The problem: when I go to a product page, it no longer shows the reviews by default. It shows the product discussion forum posts. I have to click the button/tab for reviews in order to see them. This is annoying -- I'm trying to buy product, but these extra steps make it seem like Paizo has no faith in their products and are trying to hide the reviews. How do I fix this, if it even was my own doing? Is this actually part of the redesign?
Here is a link to a conversation about the level 4 spellcasting issue. The basic gist is that the town-building rules state that Sandpoint should have spells available up to 4th level, yet the best spellcaster statted out for the town only has level 2 spells. For me, I've decided to stick with the specific implementation of Sandpoint as-is, disregarding the generic town-building rules. (So, no 4th level spells. My PCs will have to deal with a town that has level 2 spells at best.) This is partly for the same reason that James Jacobs gives: if there are spellcasters in town that can cast level 4 spells, they mostly don't need the PCs to save them or help them. At least not at first. However, I wanted to honor the idea that they should have higher level spells, even if the NPCs remain capped at level 2 spells. How to do this? Cyrdak Drokkus is a level 6 bard. He can only cast level 2 spells, max. However, many bard spells are also wizard spells, but the wizard has to cast them at a higher level. In other words, the bard has access to some higher level wizard/cleric spells. So I chose spells for him that complement his acting skills, while also being spells that are 3rd level for wizards/clerics/druids. Here is the full list:
Note that he has more spells than a normal bard because he's human (the human "favored class bonus" for bards is that he/she can take 1 extra spell known). So the list is a little bit bulked up, on purpose. If there are any other NPCs with a class that gets early access to some spells, I'll probably find them and do the same thing for them.
|