Search Posts
I concur. Frankly, I don't understand how this provides any meaningful benefit worthy of a feat (even if it's just a skill feat), but I can certainly see how I would loathe to figure out how to respond.
50' per square seems to be the consensus elsewhere.
Which is exacerbated by a nearly entirely work-from-home staff, per James' comments in another thread.
So what are you folks thinking of this one? Background: We're currently about to finish book 1 of QftFF. It's cool, but frustrating given the *extreme* survival aspect. We're now on a break that should end in about a month, and I've thrown out the idea of following the last battle of book 1 with a new AP, one that isn't as frugal. No idea where we're going, but this one ranks high on my list. The other options are Season of Ghosts and Abomination Vaults, though the megadungeon aspect of the latter is a complete turn-off for one of my players. The same guy is a huge dwarf fan, too. Also, our end goal is Kingmaker, but I'm not ready for that level of complexity yet. Plus the fact that I typically have to fill in with a PC, which makes KM even more difficult to run. Anyway, that's why short APs are favorable while we search for another player...
And they stuck it in Paizo: Other. Took me a while to find it. Why you do us dirty like that, Paizo? ;)
Maybe, but as it is, it is silly. I get that this isn't a simulation, but rules should at least make some physical sense.
If a magical sword can cut a ghost, I assume that a magical armor can block it. Yup, though it seems the non-magical item bonus from armor/shield should be ignored by ghosts. I'm not a huge fan of the way they changed armor+dex in 2e in the first place, however.
Thanks. In one of the other threads someone replied that Spoiler: they ignored the scale for first half, I presume since scale doesn't matter due to a lack of encounters, then used 5' for the enclosed area. I can easily imagine breaking the map into two halves in case you suspect your party might engage the first area directly.
Exactly. Which is why I suggest using non-lethal damage. It will have the same type, and if the character keeps failing the DC 11 flat check, you can just knock him out.
Taking damage gives a character a new save to recover from the confused condition.
Seems wrong. I wouldn't enforce that. However, have your rogue attack using non-lethal damage. The sneak attack would be as well.
Yeesh, so yes, you cut them yourself. Seems pretty involved! Kudos all around, either way. I'm running this once we get another player. As it stands, I typically have to play a PC as GM, and KM is too involved for the GM to do that while running everything else (IMO).
Yeah, the right side makes better sense, maybe 15-20' on the left.
Did you cut all those hexes by hand?
We intend to run this at some point in the future (when I wrangle another player) and plan on using the remaster as errata and, in some cases, better versions of the OGL rules. For example, crafting is better, the Aid action is better, and some other minor changes. Most of the other changes can probably be handled on the fly from what I've gathered so far. For that matter, our current run of QftFF hasn't been impacted much at all.
Please let me know how you deal with the Spoiler: map of lubya that seems to be suffering from small grid syndrome.
I just noticed the scale on the Lyuba village map is a bit off. It says 5 foot squares. What did you settle on for this, 20' squares? Even 10' seems a bit small, particularly give then description of the corral as "massive" with a dozen large creatures in it.
Just noticed the same. Thanks all.
Updated, no difference. I can still get to my account by going to a product I own and getting into my digital library, which then pops up the login screen.
Chrome Version 117.0.5938.62 (Official Build) (64-bit)
I have a Chrome update pending. I'll check back in a bit with an update.
My Account, Cart, and Help links do not work on Chrome.
My opinion of 2e so far has been that they've put more effort into non-combat play relative to 1e (and every previous version of D&D, for that matter). It seems to me that downplaying combat related magic items makes sense in that regard, though I was certainly put off by how many once/day items there are. I haven't run enough sessions beyond 2nd level to really assess the impact on our gaming (and we're currently paused). I wonder if it will result in more of the 5-minute day scenarios, or convince my players to deal with combat differently? Hopefully, we'll be back to playing by early summer and I'll get to find out. PS: Relic sets in the Treasure Vault may prove to be interesting, IMO.
Return of the Runelords and Strange Aeons as a backup while one of our usual players is out of town for a few months. Unfortunately, I have to play a PC in the latter since there are only 4 of us with the other guy out of town. SA is a tough one to do as a GMPC knowing what's coming. I think I'm going to start Ruins of Azlant after we finish Return, unless the group settles on a 2E AP.
It took about a dozen tries for me to change a shipping method for an item that had been shifted out of my sidecart (thank you, customer service) using Edge, and it ended up with the wrong one. However, I pulled it up in Internet Explorer and it worked the first time (I got it to the one I preferred). I don't have other browsers on this machine, so I didn't try others. Just an FYI.
Spoiler: Are there any statblocks for Cassomir or Katheer anywhere? Or any of the other big places visited in this AP?
Bummer.
If you go to the "Manage Subscriptions" page, there's a button to change methods. Not obvious when you're on the account page trying to do the same. And yes, the "update method" button on the account page seems to be a red herring.
The way this book works out, the party is supposed to be 7th level before they get to The Gauntlet of Fury (D). However, depending upon their path, they either go to Forges of Wrath (B) or Dust to Dust (C) but not both, first. Since the recommended level is 7 for The Gauntlet, this presents a problem. There isn't enough XP in either B or C areas to go from 6th to 7th, not even close. My party went to B first and they have an idea how to destroy the portal. I'm wondering if I should hint a little that maybe destroying the portal now would be a bad idea? I don't think they're ready for D yet and leveling them now would make C just boring mop-up. Of course, if they go to D and deal with it, C is just boring mop-up anyway. Not sure how to do this...
The problem is in the "update payment method" page from your account profile. You can add methods, and update the card expiration date of the default method, and delete any other method, but you can't do anything else with the default method. I finally got to the page on my subscription page - which allowed me to switch my subscription payment method, which is clunky.
Edge on Windows 10. There is no way to switch your default payment, or delete the current default payment, that I am aware of. I need my default payment switched. There should be an option to delete ANY payment method, or make ANY payment method the default.
Why is it so difficult to update my payment method? This is absurd. There's no way to cancel my old card and entering a new card simply never updates the method.
"Casting 5th level fireball" and "casting fireball, heightened to 5th level" are functionally identical statements. This is how the verb is used in the sorcerer spellcasting class feature. (Also remember that Signature spells can be heightened to any level slot you have, and don't need to be in your repertoire at separate levels.) Yeah, that's my point, it's redundant. I don't know why they even bothered to mention it. "Spontaneous casters cannot heighten spells in the same manner as prepared casters, though they can add heightened version of spells to their repertoire" seems less... something. Exceptions noted with signature spells, however.
In other words, the sorceror is not "heightening" his 3rd level version of fireball, he's simply casting the 5th level version that's already in his repertoire.
What all of you said is true for prepared casters, not spontaneous casters. Spontaneous casters have to actually add the spell to their repertoire. Prepared casters do not. You're not "heightening" if it's already on your list, you simply replaced one of your know spells with the higher level version.
Ok, it looks like we're going to play a few weeks of a 2e shortly and I have a question about heightening spells for spontaneous casters. In short, why? If you have to have the higher level spell anyway, why would you ever say you're heightening the lower one? It doesn't make sense. Just cast the higher one. I can see having both... you might not want to burn a higher slot on weaker targets, so having both saves the more powerful one for another battle. But it just seems like the sorceror will never really be heightening anything.
My guys got a 28 (after 2 aids) on this roll, and had already bought him a pastry, so I guess it didn't matter.
I'm starting this for my crew tomorrow and was wondering about the diplomacy check with Kynae. It says he's indifferent with a charisma bonus of +0, but then lists the check at DC 25. Indifferent is DC 15, hostile is DC 25. It has a throw-away line about befriending him first, which leads me into an expectation of role-playing, which I'll probably require (at least a little). As it stands, our diplomat has a +7 and nobody else will be able to aid (the next best bonus is +0). Our diplomat is a bloodrager, for that matter. "Hulk smash?" "Why certainly big guy!" Anyway, I took this one as a typo as the other two hard checks are explicit that the party won't be able to make them yet.
Thanks, James.
Would the pawns from this be usable with the 1E version?
Thanks either way. We're considering doing the trilogy for our next foray and availability of pawns is a factor in that decision.
Any updates on this? I'm interested. I found a site that claims 17 August release date.
I know, makes it pointless to even check. Ability checks have always been suspect anyway.
Btw, I'm aware there's a +5 bonus per previous vision, but that still translates to the check taking till the 4th vision (@ +15 bonus) before it's achievable. They defeated the haunt easily in area E3 with a casting of heal so none are "soul tagged" for the additional +5, either.
We're about ready to start negotiations at the Oak Rib and I was looking at the description of the visions a moment ago. DC 40 wisdom check? Isn't that basically impossible? Since a nat 20 isn't an automatic success, and a reasonable bonus at this point is +7 (+8 since we play 25-point builds), even allowing spells to aid this check I can't see a DC 40 EVER being achievable. Am I missing something obvious? Since I doubt I'll get a response before we get to the point it matters, I expect I'll just drop it to a range they have a 50/50 chance or so.
This. Given other comments regarding splitting resources, I think this would also be more viable anyway. Paizo needs to focus on their flagship for obvious reasons (for now at least), but if they could contract others to create Golarion-based content, particularly module/AP type products, I'd be happy. Clean-up in aisle 4 stuff would be nice, too, i.e., fixing broken rules (I'm looking at you, Monkey Lunge), FAQ updates. Granted I'm subscribing to almost everything, but I don't think my current group is interested in moving to 2E. I'll likely soon be forced to stop subscribing to most products (college kid next year), but an AP per month that I might actually use would be nice.
I think there's a FAQ on this somewhere. Basically, you get the one that was originally replaced when you would otherwise get the greater version. IOW, you push the lesser version off till later.
We just played section B and began section C today. There are 3 of us (I'm the GM) - UC rogue (scout), warpriest, inquisitor (sanctified slayer, my character). The ximtal is a nightmare if isolation affects anybody. We killed it rather quickly, but the rogue got isolated. So I have some questions about that (and miasma in general). Miasma is implemented oddly, to say the least. While in miasma form, why does the damage wait until the start of the creature's turn? Swarms cause damage to anyone in their space at the end of the swarm's turn. Is this a mistake? As KingTreyIII notes, how can supernatural abilities continue to work, particularly isolation, while in miasma form? It seems the wording should be changed to "similar to gaseous form, with the exception that..." HOW does isolation work? Particularly, once you fail your save, are you just plain screwed until you make the next save (minus a wish)? The description doesn't list any way to negate it. The description also says that "true seeing penetrates the effect." Does that mean someone with true seeing can also hear the affected individual? Can someone under true seeing cast spells on the affected individual? If so, what if he casts true seeing on him, then what? The rogue failed his save (it worked out to a total of 6 failed rolls, btw, and he only needed an 8) but the warpriest had true seeing up. He burned a hero point, recalled true seeing and put it on the rogue (extended). My inquisitor can't see him (even though I made the save), but the rogue can see both of us. We now have about 15 minutes left to finish the level. At one point we considered having the warpriest tie a rope to the rogue to lead him around, but I ruled the rogue wouldn't be able to see the rope IF any allies were holding it, which would confuse him at a minimum. This is a tough one because I want there to be a serious penalty (CR17 creature after all), but I don't want to doom the party over something that is ultimately my call. Thoughts?
I just played the one in the book.
Always during. Buuuut, we have Hero Lab which makes it pretty easy. My buddy (the other players are my son and his friend) generally levels up at home (group HL license) before a session to make it quicker, however.
I managed to get it switched on the subscription page, but the My Payment Methods page needs to be... improved.
|
