selios's page

487 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


1 to 50 of 487 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Chris Lambertz wrote:
It does not appear in full color in the limited edition (it is featured on the title page, but in a monochrome treatment with text/images overlaid on top).

That's too bad, I think I will go for the regular edition. Thanks for the answer !

I would like to know if the awesome cover illust of the regular version will appear in the deluxe edition ? I would prefer to buy the Deluxe edition, but I really love the new cover...

Strange. Mine contained two boards and one sheet of magnets. Has there been some change in the product ?

Thank you all !!
I've been thinking to restarting the campaign, since it was a little chaotic to say the least (a lot of stalling, and some players leaving with new ones coming), but I still have Age of Worms to run (and as a die hard Greyhawk fan, I really want to run it). But I'm beginning to become a little bored with 3.5/Pathfinder, so I will need a change for a time. But it was really great to play these adventures.

Oliver McShade wrote:
So a 9th level wish spell, was not powerful enough to close a portal, but was powerful enough to send a someone into the distant future.... (( while a typical cleshay of the spell, not a very wise use by GM, unless it is to kill off a character permanently )).

Oliver, you should read the wish spell description, and with some examples there, maybe you will understand my decision.

Lucio wrote:
With regards to the OP, you decided to remove a character from the game because you didn't want the Wish spell to work. That's pretty bad GM'ing and if I were the player, I'd be pissed at you.

The player was totally aware that if he wished something too powerful, the consequences could be dire. I don't see how this is bad GM'ing any more than killing a character behaving foolishly by attacking an opponent too powerful for him. Unless you want that characters can do anything without any consequences whatsoever.

Also, I didn't remove his character, I just wanted him to go through some trouble before he could eventually return. If I just wanted to remove his character, I would not have asked a question on how to make him come back by opening this topic in the first place.

Anyway, thanks to all others for contributing with good ideas and hints.

As for the character, he has found a way to come back now, with an idea similar to the one Kadance proposed. Thanks again.

Thank you all for your replies.
Selgard: yes it's my idea, but it's also the best one I've thought it was to make for unpredictable result for a wish spell above the normal limit of its use.

Since the undo misfortune choice from a wish spell change reality for an event in the last round, I don't think a "normal" wish is enough to cancel the time travel.

Kadance, I like your second idea. If my player think of it, I might allow it to function, just for him to go back in time.

Here's the situation, I'm asking here since the the Shackled City board is mostly dead, and it's a rule question anyway.

I'm running this adventure path, and in a high level adventure, the adventurers must stop cultists to open a portal to a fiendish realm. They found a way to cast a wish spell and since they were too late and the portal was opened, they decided to wish for the portal to be closed definitively.

I thought that it's really above the guidelines of the spell, so I send the wisher into the future (and just him), when the portal has been finally closed by some epic adventurers. The player understood quickly he was sent in time, and want to try to come back. I told him it is going to be very difficult. He plans on tracking an NPC to have access to a wish spell, which is possible in the campaign.

But again, such a wish would be above the limits described in the spell. So it could be again dangerous.

What do you think ? Should it be possible ? Does a wish should be enough of more ? Another thing to do ? Another way for him to go back in time ? Ideas ?
Thanks in advance.

Ok, they decided to continue to explore a little and encounter Shebeleth who told them they were too late. They fought him but took a serious beating because they were low on spells. So they fled to rest. Now it's too late and the portal opened. They decided to use the wish to make it close. I think it's really above the guidelines of the spell, so I send the wisher into the future (and just him), when the portal has been finally closed by some epic adventurers. The player understood quickly he was sent in time, and want to try to come back. I told him it is going to be very difficult. He plans on tracking Celeste, hoping that she can do something, and since he saved her, he hopes she will try.
Since Celeste is a servant of Tenser according to the Age of Worms AP, I think it might be possible for a such mighty wizard to send him back in time.
What do you think ? Should it be possible ? Does a wish should be enough of more ? Another thing to do ? Ideas ?
Thanks in advance.

Oh and by the way, since the wish is available only to a character with the smoking eye template, he was the only one of course to have it. So to release Adimarchus in Asylum to fight him for good, it's going to be problematic.

Thank you !

Yes I agree.

They have found the collar in Moltenwing's treasure, but didn't find yet enough info on it.

Well I think I will go for a total of 10 flamewarders (4+4+2).

My players found the secret room with the altar to Adimarchus, and so the character with the smoking eye template understood he can use a wish in this room.
They have been thinking of different uses for the wish.

Cancelling the ritual: I think it can't work, it's far beyond the power of a wish to chance to much things affecting different people.

Wishing to be in the ritual room (because they know they're short on time): I think it could work, travel anywhere is part of a wish and wish can bypass some spells like mind blank, so it could bypass the capacity of the Tree of Shackled Souls to block divination.

What do you think ? For those who have played this adventure, what your characters have done with this wish ?

The text is very confusing about the number of flamewarders in some places. The descriptive text mentions 4 while the stat block says 2 or vice versa. And it's becoming more complicated since some flamewarders can move from room to room.
Any clarifications official or not ? How many are they ?

Also it is said that Shebeleth can use a scroll of gate to summon a glabrezu, but I can't find it anywhere. Could be just a typo though.

Yes, I agree with that. But my question was regarding using the spell inside the Fiery Sanctum, which has thin walls to counter find the path. I don't understand the point of these walls, since as soon as they enter the Fiery Sanctum, they can't use find the path to find the Tree of Shackled Souls.

3.5. But I've read it in all editions, even Pathfinder, and it's still useful to find a locale not an item (I noticed they dropped the part which finds tripwires and password of glyphs but that's not the point).

This phrase "Find the path works with respect to locations, not objects or creatures at a locale." which exists in 3.5/PRPG for me is enough to ruin all attempt to use the spell to find the Tree of Shackled Souls. Or am I missing something ?

Making it like a Pathfinder version could do it. Changing it to a death effect would not be consistent with the implosion spell.
Thanks for the suggestion Tormak, I will consider the damage version.

I was wondering about the thin walls destined to block the most direct route. As I have always played this spell since 1st edition, you can't use it to go where the Tree of Shackled Souls is (it's an object not a locale). So I'm wondering how it could even be useful, to the point of these thin walls to "counter" it.

Thanks a lot for the link and info, Greystaff ! Glad to see some official errata for this. Now I need to figure how to deal with the implosive strike.

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Ok, Savage Tide is finished ! I've run this battle this afternoon, and the PCs have been succesful even if they were almost short of healing spells, one or two rounds more, and they would have die.
I didn't remove epic DR, and this has been a good thing. They had the help of Gwynharwyf for the most of combat. They managed to heal her to keep her fighting for long, and she drew most of the Prince of Demons' attention.
The special abilities' DCs were really too low, only when a character has several negative levels (and thus a lower save) could the saves fail on anything else than natural 1.
I made Demorgorgon AC 40 (a loss of 3 points per 2 negative levels) with the full negative levels, and his SR still at 36, so it didn't take many spells, and the sorcerer quickly couln't affect if with some negative levels.
I have used the critical and fumble decks, which help a lot the players. I've made a few bad fumbles for Demorgorgon (one made him dazed for 3 rounds !), and the players scored a lot of good criticals (which help to do signifant damage despite the epic DR).
But I completely forgot that a character was affected by Kallum's curse, which would have surely change a lot of things.

Anyway, I'm very happy to have finally completed this great campaign ! Kudos again to the authors !!

I see two potential big problems with this BBEG.
First his caster level is huge (30th, better than Demogorgon by the way). A group of 19th lvl, even 20th, has no chance to dispel his spell-like abilities, d20+20 with greater dispel magic against a DC 41 (and I think about his summon ability too...).

Also this makes his blasphemy spell-like ability mortal to the point of immediate TPK. I'm playing in 3.5, so baring spell resistance (32 with a spell resistance's spell at caster level 20, so 1 on 20 chance for him to not penetrate it, and automatic against 19th lvl characters for which the adventure is written for), 20th characters or less will be dead, no save in a 40-foot radius. 21-25th lvl characters will be "just" paralyzed for a few minutes, so certainly dead too.
Same problem with his word of chaos.

Also his implosive strike is huge. The DC is wrong. It should be, as a supernatural ability, 10+half 30 HD+Con mod (according to what is written in his stat block)=10+15+13=38 ! Which is almost an automatic kill, baring a really good roll on save.
I was thinking of using his strength for this ability (seems to make sense to me), which would reduce the DC to 33, which is still very high (and still higher than what is written). It looks like he will easily kill 3 characters with this. And since it's not a death effect, death ward is useless.

For those who have run this fight, how did it go ? Did you change anything ?

Thanks again for your answer. Unfortunately, last session, they find the master pearl and Demogorgon arrived throgh his gate, so it won't be possible. I need now to figure if it's possible to win with this epic DR or not, based on their average damage and hit chances.

Thanks again for your answer.

But this will not do for my group. The adventure as written will be enough too difficult for them, I can't raise the difficulty. As I said, I don't think they're able to complete the adventure without resting.
Anybody has had this problem ?

Thank you Mykull for your answer.

As for the epic DR, if I remove it, only the fighter will be able to ignore the remaining cold iron and good part. The only other characters who will eventually attack him in melee can't. One is a druid who obviously fights under wild shape, so no cold iron. The second is a sacred fist (monk/priest prestige class) who can't use weapons, again no cold iron weapons. I'm afraid that leaving Demogorgon wih a DR20 against the only character who can really hits him would be too difficult, especially with fast healing 20 and some heal spells under the belt.
His SR will be fairly low though against the sorcerer's spells (who has a +23 to penetrate SR).

I agree with you for natural armor. Lowering by 2 by negative level may be too important, leaving him with only 12 points of natural armor.

If I understand correctly, the PCs need to destroy/stop the Tree in one foray, since it is said that they shouldn't stop to sleep/recover. Even as written with some fairly weak adversaries, that is a lot of taxing encounters. I'm not sure my group can handle the big fights after so many battles.
Did you have run it by the book ? Were your groups succesful ? Or did you allow more time for the PCs to rest before completing the adventure ?

I have a few questions about the weakened prince.

Even with 10 negative levels, he doesn't lose his epic damage reduction ? That seems very tough with DR 20, far more than losing his mage armor ability.

It is said in text that he loses 2 points of natural armor for every negative level, but according to the table, he loses only 3 points for every two negative levels. Which one is correct ?
(also his touch and flat-footed AC seems wrong, should be touch 23, and flat-footed 11 less than normal AC).

Also, I think losing 2 points of DCs for special ability per negative level is a little harsh. With 10 negative levels (so -20 to the DCs), most characters will fail only on a natural 1. If someone has run the encounter, what are you thoughts about this ?

In the critical and fumble decks, it is said that bleeding occurs at the end of victim's turn. In PRPG, it's at the beginning of the turn. Which one should I used ?

I'm wondering... What's the use of the next round magnet ?

Is the rune giant available now outside the subscription ?

James Jacobs wrote:
As it turns out, that information DID get into Lords of Madness. It's right there on page 28. The fact that I couldn't just use those names for the elder evils is what annoyed me, but being able to put that section in anyway was a good consolation prize.

Oh my bad ! Sorry. I missed that. Anyway, I think that adding the Cthulhu mythos in D&D or Pathfinder is a great idea. And since I love Lovecraft's writings, all the better for me. ^^

Hello again James
I have seen this answer:

James Jacobs wrote:
The closest thing aboleths have to deities are the Great Old Ones and Outer Gods. Which is, more or less, the same as how aboleths worked in "Lords of Madness," save that Paizo's not afraid of using names like "Yog Sothoth" or "Nyarlathotep" or "Azathoth" as part of the game setting.

And I would like to know if you had designed the Elder Evils in Lords of Madness to be equivalent to some Lovecraftian's entities, and so could you give the "equivalencies" (which one is which) ?

I have a complementary question to this. If your dispel check exceeds several spells of the same caster level (say a magic vestment, greater magic weapon, divine power, righteous might, all cast by the same cleric on himself), which one is dispelled ?

James Jacobs wrote:

The bit about Athux being the son of Graz'zt and Eclavdra was one of those little easter eggs I threw in there with the plan of building more off that in future D&D stuff... but that article ended up being the last thing I ever wrote for D&D, so it kinda went nowhere unless they picked it up for something in 4th edition.

It's been many many years since I've had my head space in that level of deep D&D/Greyhawk continuity, but I did have SOMETHING worked out for how it all matched up. A secret dalliance or something like that that Eclavdra did as a sneaky preparation for what she was up to in Against the Giants, with Graz'zt being her first bit of "drift" from Lolth, but I can't remember for sure, alas.

Thanks a lot for this answer. It's kinda sad since this seemed very promising, and I really enjoyed what Paizo have done for the Greyhawk setting in the Dragon/Dungeon era. I put it on the same level that Carl Sargent has done back in 2nd Edition. And I wanted also to congragulate you, Erik and Jason for the amazing Expedition to the Ruins of Greyhawk.

Thanks a lot again.

Icyshadow wrote:
Selios, those might be WotC material now so he might not be able to give a super extensive answer on the topic.

I know, and I apologize again for that, but if James thinks he can answer this question, I will be glad.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Hello James.

I have a question not related to Golarion if you don't mind.
It's about the Demonomicon of Graz'zt in Dragon magazine pdf and the Greyhawk timeline.
It is said that Athux is the son that Graz'zt had with Eclavdra.
I'm wondering when this happened.
According to the Shackled City adventure path, Athux triked Adimarchus 50 "years ago". If the campaign is set after 591CY, that means around 540-550CY. So Athux is at least older than that.
I thought that Eclavdra didn't have dealings with Graz'zt until after the events of Queen of the Spiders, which should occur around 580CY.

I concluded that Eclavdra had dealings with Graz'rt well before the priestesses war in Ereilhei-Cinlu or the events of Against the Giants, am I right ?

Sorry for such a long question not related to Golarion, but I really enjoyed what you have done for the Greyhawk setting, so I was wondering.

Macona wrote:

Thanks all. :)

The unclimatic end battle was no fault of paizo's. My group was full of powergamers who were over-buffed for the encounter. Adimarchus couldn't do much to them, and likewise they had a hard time getting through his own defences. Most things on both sides would either miss, fail to get through SR, or just get foiled by a saving throw...

I'm wondering. Did you use 3.5 or PRPG ? Because with his blasphemy spell-like abilities at caster level 30, it's a automatic kill for 20th level characters, baring silence effects or SR.

Also his Implosive Strike should be a DC 38 accroding to the rules, so it's pretty high, and since he can use it 3 three times after he strikes. Since I'm currently DMing it, I'm wondering how my PCs will survice this.

As for the foreshadowing, I'm not sure it is entirely the problem. The 3 last adventures are fairly standard dungeon crawls, without much originality. Which is not good after all the preceding adventures.

Sorry to unearth this topic, but I have the same problem. I don't find this sunshield anywhere. I have checked the april 2006 issue of Dragon, and I can't find it either.
Any more info someone ?

Thanks everyone for your answers !

Thanks for the answer. Sorry, I didn't ask properly. I wanted to ask if there has been official clarifications by Paizo staff.

I would like to know if there are some clarifications for noticing traps and secret doors without actively searcing for them, and if the time required is a move action if activeley searching (a change from 3.5).

Midnight_Angel wrote:

Ah, but there are already a plethora of spells that allow a save after you succeded in your attack roll.

And as for the damage dealing touch spells (like [/i]Scorching Ray[/i] and its cousins)... would you also allow tougher monsters a save vs the damage the fighter inflicts? After all, on a lot of creatures, the fighter must roll a natural 1 for his target to escape the roll...

That's the point. Why is there an attack roll and a save, except to nerf the spell ? Why finger of death has only a save while slay living or disintegrate have an attack roll and a save ? I can't see the logic.

Nerfing ray of enfeeblement by reducing the duration and adding a save make this spell a joke IMO. Compare it with touch of idiocy: no save, long duration, and caster can lose his highest level spells and more. It just doesn't scale with levels.

My point is to have a more unified magic system. You save against spells, you make an attack roll with a weapon. You get rid of a stat, it gets simpler, and you also lose a paragraph in the rules.
Also, it's one less roll to made.

Of course not, that just doesn't make sense and it's ridiculous. The normal AC, and the touch AC are not the same except for a very few creatures. You have a save for half damage on fireball, why can't it be the same with scorching ray ? Of course you'll need to rewrite some spells or balance them differently.

That's just my thoughts to make the game evolve. And some things can't please everyone, we already know that.

But I'm waiting to hear Mr James Jacobs here, it's the ask James Jacobs thread. ^^

Do you think that touch spells (melee or ranged) could be changed to an appropriate saving throw instead of an attack roll ? That would remove the touch AC system, and some characters/monsters would have a better chance to avoid or diminish the effect of these spells (negates the effect or half, or partial). On a lot of creatures it can come quiclky to the point that the caster must roll a natural 1 for the creature to escape the spell.
That would still impact on incorporeal creatures, but some changes could be made there too.

I really don't like the storm giant, at least the rendering. I hope the actual figure will look better.

I don't like these goblins, but the lamia is great.

As for the price, ouch ! I hope there will not be a set like this too often !

1 to 50 of 487 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>