Pathfinder Society Scenario #2-06: The Heresy of Man—Part I: The First Heresy (PFRPG) PDF

Announced!

Now available!

Seeing this scenario reminded me of something I've pondered before. The powers that be of Rahadoum do not allow divine healing, but how do they feel about bardic healing? A bard's powers are arcane in nature. You'd think bards would be in demand in the Nation of Man.

I know it's probably been discussed in great length before, just sayin.

Great job getting these out on time!

Seeing this scenario reminded me of something I've pondered before. The powers that be of Rahadoum do not allow divine healing, but how do they feel about bardic healing? A bard's powers are arcane in nature. You'd think bards would be in demand in the Nation of Man.

I know it's probably been discussed in great length before, just sayin.

Bards are cool with the folk of Rahadoum. In fact they're quite popular for that special healing ability that they bring to the table.

Seeing this scenario reminded me of something I've pondered before. The powers that be of Rahadoum do not allow divine healing, but how do they feel about bardic healing? A bard's powers are arcane in nature. You'd think bards would be in demand in the Nation of Man.

I know it's probably been discussed in great length before, just sayin.

The NPC guide describes a Rahadoum General, a very taciturn and stoic guy, who is a huge supporter of the arts: good, bad, and ugly, for the very reason of bardic healing. He wants to install a bard with each unit as medic and moral officer.

What I want to know is how witches, another arcane healing caster, would get along. On the pro side, not divine healing. On the con side, power comes from "pact" with other worldly powers and there is probably a historical/cultural prejudice against users of the "evil eye". If it were my game, I'd say there is an only occasionally enforced law against witchery, i.e., as long as it isn't practiced openly or as a religion, then that is okay, especially for "white witches".

Rahadoum ackowledges the existence of outsiders and Powers, they just outlaw religion. If the witch is just practicing her witchcraft to herself she's probably fine. If she tries to establish a coven and start religious services, she's likely to have troubles. Clerics on the other hand are inherently tools of the gods and are therefore, outlawed for committing First Heresy. Not sure how it would work for druids, but probably something like witches--keep it to yourslef and you're probably fine.

I should probably pay more attention to the campaign setting's idea of an afterlife, but I'll ask here while I am away from material:

Members of society with no connection to a god - what's on tap for after death? I'll go dig around when I can.

I should probably pay more attention to the campaign setting's idea of an afterlife, but I'll ask here while I am away from material:

Members of society with no connection to a god - what's on tap for after death? I'll go dig around when I can.

If not swayed to a particular deity in Pharasma's Court, then the Graveyard of Souls. (The Great Beyond, p. 33)

Also, if the person in question was a particularly vehement atheist (read: not just "I don't care about Gods" but "Gods are a lie !"), there is a very special fate awaiting him/her. See the "Beyond the Vault of Souls" module.

Swiftbrook just posted a review of this adventure that brought up a really good point. Apparently in the editing process, an important line was removed in the section on introductory information that is given to the PCs. As a result he and his group missed a major portion of the adventure due to a really good Perception check.

If you run this adventure, please insert the line below to avoid the possibility of having the same issue encountered by Swiftbrook.

@Swiftbrook: I'm sorry to hear that it wasn't a good experience for you and that I hadn't previously noticed the removal of that line of text, because I think it would have probably made a big difference for you (the scenario certainly would've made more sense that way).

Again my apologies for the oversight in the final version that was released.

P.S.

My guess is that Swiftbrook probably had a bad GM. ;-)

Well, I'm sure he was no "9-20s-roller". ;-)

Well, I'm sure he was no "9-20s-roller". ;-)

Jealous? For what it's worth, before that mess was over, I actually switched dice with one of the players. :D

I think this is the "pick on Greg Vaughan" week. Coming up next: a zero-stars review of Scarwall, with the reviewer accusing GAV of not being able to sleep for 3 weeks after the game.

I think this is the "pick on Greg Vaughan" week. Coming up next: a zero-stars review of Scarwall, with the reviewer accusing GAV of not being able to sleep for 3 weeks after the game.

Every day for me is pick on Greg day. :)

The issue Swiftbrook raises in his review is interesting. I believe this is probably an isolated, or at least rare, occurrence, and a result of both luck and a PC with optimized Perception. It's unfortunate when encounters are bypassed, but it can happen in anything but the most linear of adventures and I don't think the scenario is such that the document requires any changes to be playable and enjoyable.

I think that Greg has sound advice on keeping players on the rails, however. The adventure makes several assumptions in terms of how PCs proceed from one encounter to the next in order to more effectively set up the final reveal, so a GM should urge them toward certain areas as much as possible. As it is, however, even adding this line to the scenario won't guarantee that PCs don't bypass this element of the adventure, as it can be noticed with a Perception check regardless of what PCs are told to do (by an NPC or the GM).

Any GMs with feedback on how this played out at your table or suggestions for getting PCs successfully from point A to point B are, as always, welcome.

I agree with Mark, but in adding that line it will let the players know where they are supposed to be. They can certainly still locate the other option and proceed in that direction without checking out the first, but then it is a conscious choice to ignore the initial instruction or their own fault for missing the instruction completely.

I think they should be allowed to choose the second route if they want, but I also believe that the consequences are just. If you miss the contact because you chose your own route, you miss some of the rewards; if you miss the contact because you honestly didn't know which way to go, I agree with Swiftfoot that it isn't fair or fun.

I'd still include the line so the players have an idea of where to go (whether they choose to do so or not), but as Mark mentioned, a nudge here from the GM would be helpful as well.

When I ran the scenario, one of the PCs spotted the old tunnel on the way in. When she examined the entrance, I advised her that the passage appeared neglected, its masonry decayed and crumbling. The party rowed on to the landing that showed signs of recent use.

When I ran the scenario, one of the PCs spotted the old tunnel on the way in. When she examined the entrance, I advised her that the passage appeared neglected, its masonry decayed and crumbling. The party rowed on to the landing that showed signs of recent use.

That's an excellent example of a good GM nudge.

Sir_Wulf wrote:

When I ran the scenario, one of the PCs spotted the old tunnel on the way in. When she examined the entrance, I advised her that the passage appeared neglected, its masonry decayed and crumbling. The party rowed on to the landing that showed signs of recent use.

That's an excellent example of a good GM nudge.

I ran this last night. The group spotted the other passage and began to investigate even after seeing the beach (I did use the added beach language in the description).

After setting off the first encounter, a certain nameless NPC reminded the party they were supposed to be meeting a contact and that this did not seem the right way to be headed.

Nathan
NYC

If you run this adventure, please insert the line below to avoid the possibility of having the same issue encountered by Swiftbrook.

I think that if that language had been read to us, we would have explored the cave first.

The issue Swiftbrook raises in his review is interesting. I believe this is probably an isolated, or at least rare, occurrence, and a result of both luck and a PC with optimized Perception.

I think I rolled a 18 or 19 for to spot the tunnel. Yes my character has a good perception score. 5th level Elf Ranger. Perception is what a ranger is suppose to do. It's not a min/max build and I don't have any magic items, feats (like Alertness) or traits that pump up my perception. So 5 ranks (+5), class skill (+3), Elf (+2) and Wisdom (+1) for a total of +11. It's only +3 more than any classes maxed out skill. I wouldn't call that 'optimized', it's in the ballpark of a good score. That said, I also played TDWK 3 & 4 against my favored enemy (+4) in my favored terrain (+2) and rolled 10+ every time. A +17 modifier is different story.

As for the boon, I think there is enough information in the positive boon as to foreshadowing if it is just crossed off. Also, we didn't learn anything in the adventure about either the positive or negative boon. It might be better to have two chronicle sheets, one with the boon for those that get it and one blank for those that don't learn anything about it, like our group. But that just an ideas and is also extra paperwork.

Thanks for listening

-Swiftbrook
Just My Thougths

I read the adventure, while the added line Greg mentions would be more clear. I found it really clear anyways. As a GM there are obvious ways to nudge the players the correct way. Natertot's example is as a GM how I would have handled it as well and the first thing that came to mind. So in swifts review I think that failing is mostly on the GM honestly.

Now for the second part, yes for some parties I could see that being a very dangerous fight, if they have no way to counter the issue Swift brought up. For the low tier it is more likely of a issue. With the higher tier I don't think it would be much of a problem.

Other than those two parts which are the two Swift brought up in his/her review. I didn't see any problems with the adventure.

Anyways over the weekend I will try and do a full review. Of this and part two.

And reviewed.

Thanks, DM! An excellent and thorough review, as always.

Rubbish! Utter rubbish!

Thanks, DM! An excellent and thorough review, as always.

Rubbish! Utter rubbish!

FYI/FWIW: Greg A. Vaughn = Heresy of Spam

:-P

-Swiftbrook

I have a question about what this adventure portends for the campaign.

Not saying that "stepping it up a notch" is bad or unwelcome, but it would change my play style so I thought I would ask.

Dr. Welby-

As one of the authors of the adventure, I can tell you that there was no plan by either the authors or the editor to step it up a notch.

It was simple: Greg said, "Kevin J., here is the overarching plot and the adventure's level. Now write me some encounters, boy, write!" And I did. Primarily because of my love of the game but partially because he was holding a beat-stick.

On the encounter you referenced, I was just trying to make that particular type of encounter interesting and challenging. I'd never used that particular thing before and wanted it to be more than just a one-shot spell-effect.

I'm glad your party handled it well, and I hope you all enjoyed it. Danger does add some spice, doesn't it?

KJW

I'm glad your party handled it well, and I hope you all enjoyed it. Danger does add some spice, doesn't it?

KJW

True, and we also benefited from having a good judge that was well-prepared.

Oh man, good GMs are worth their weight in platinum, aren't they? We've probably all had good and bad experiences with the folks running the game; good GMs can make even a mediocre adventure into a fantastic thrill-ride of escapism. Bad GMs can ruin even the best adventure. The people who pour their time and creativity, good humor and discernment into a gaming session just can't be beat.

we also benefited from having a good judge that was well-prepared.

Nonsense. ;-)

Well it has been updated and seems to fix all the small problems the adventure had before.

We have updated the Pathfinder Society Scenario #2-06: The Heresy of Man—Part I: The First Heresy (PFRPG) PDF. The changes are as follows:

• Middle initial "J." removed from all instances of Kevin Wright's name.
  
• Adventure intro read-aloud text and question responses now emphasize the PCs' need to meet an NPC on the beach in the sea caves.
  
• The Perception DC to notice the hidden sea cave in area 2a has been raised.
  
• Section 2g now includes an additional paragraph to get PCs back on track should they skip the other wing of the dungeon.
  
• The creatures section of area 2m has been reworded to ensure that there are enemies present regardless of the PCs' prior actions.
  
• The "Undiscovered Traitor" boon has been removed from the Chronicle sheet.
  
• A scenario reporting sheet has been added to the document.
  

The next to last combat poses an interesting dilema. I don't want to give too much away in case someone hasn't played it yet, but there is an ability that is at will with the creature that makes him basically broken. This is because the result of the ability hampers the PC's horribly and some of these people are coming to the convention where i am running this game from a long way away. I could very easily do a total TPK. What would some of you more experienced GMs do, play it totally by the book, or fudge a little

The next to last combat poses an interesting dilema. I don't want to give too much away in case someone hasn't played it yet, but there is an ability that is at will with the creature that makes him basically broken. This is because the result of the ability hampers the PC's horribly and some of these people are coming to the convention where i am running this game from a long way away. I could very easily do a total TPK. What would some of you more experienced GMs do, play it totally by the book, or fudge a little

Check out the Pathfinder Society subforum for a thread specifically about this scenario.

What you need to do is revise how you're handling daylight vs. deeper darkness. Unless the guy in question readies to cast DD as a counterspell or actually touches the same object the PCs cast daylight on, the effective result is normal lighting conditions (where torches and stuff work fine) no matter how many times he casts it.

If the PCs don't have daylight this is a very deadly encounter.

That encounter can be very challenging, but there are several ways that a party can deal with it. Take a look at the PFS thread on the topic and when you run the scenario, encourage your players' creativity. They'll likely surprise you!

Thanks for all the helpful advice, the subforums really helped me figure this out. Now I hope the party I am running for has a cleric with daylight or cont flame memorized, lol, if not this may be a horrible encounter for them. Now I have another dilema I would like to ask more experienced GMs......This is being run at a convention where there are people coming from miles away, some a couple of hundred. There is a real chance that unless they have a cleric with these counter spells, or a barbarian with the scent ability, that I could very easily kill the entire party. WE are running all three modules at our convention, so I am wondering if it looks like there is going to be a TPK what would you guys do in that situation.

Thanks for all the helpful advice, the subforums really helped me figure this out. Now I hope the party I am running for has a cleric with daylight or cont flame memorized, lol, if not this may be a horrible encounter for them. Now I have another dilema I would like to ask more experienced GMs......This is being run at a convention where there are people coming from miles away, some a couple of hundred. There is a real chance that unless they have a cleric with these counter spells, or a barbarian with the scent ability, that I could very easily kill the entire party. WE are running all three modules at our convention, so I am wondering if it looks like there is going to be a TPK what would you guys do in that situation.

That's the second time you've referenced more experienced GM's. Did I not qualify?

All three parts of this series have a real chance of TPK'ing if the party isn't well prepared or well balanced. Here's some advice from someone who's run them all several times in convention settings no less...

1) Warn the party that this series is difficult. If they're just hitting 5th or 6th level, there's a good chance they haven't played tier 5-9 scenarios before. Warn them of the difference.
2) Encourage the party to play within their "real" tier. If they have the option of playing up or down, ask them to seriously consider not playing up.
3) Encourage them to purchase extra expendables. It's worth spending a few PA or extra gold on some nice wands, potions, and scrolls. Everyone should have a "get out of jail" item like a potion of gaseous form.
4) After all this, don't hold back. Pulling punches does them no good and sets them up for bigger disappointment later. They're "big kids" now at these levels. If they can't deal with common 2nd and 3rd level spells (depending on which part they're playing in), these may serve as a chance to learn
5) Roll out in the open. Don't let there be any question that you're fudging dice, especially if there's a real chance for a PC death.
6) Stick with the designed tactics as best as possible. Obviously if the PC's throw a major curve ball you'll need to adapt, but by sticking with the scenario as written, the players, yourself, and the organized campaign will be better served by your experience running/playing these scenarios.
7) Don't be a jerk. :-) PC Death is never funny* and should be treated seriously.

*unless it's Dragnmoon, BobBob, CatBunnyGnome, Pain, or me.

There is a real chance that unless they have a cleric with these counter spells, or a barbarian with the scent ability, that I could very easily kill the entire party. We are running all three modules at our convention, so I am wondering if it looks like there is going to be a TPK what would you guys do in that situation?

Make sure that they understand going in that these scenarios can be brutal. I wouldn't worry about wiping out the party: There are other ways for a group to survive.

I played this at Games Expo UK came close to being killed in that encounter..thankfully we had an Eidolon with scent and a summoned dire bat that basically hemmed in the bad guy and forced him to stand and fight..throw in a summoned earth elemental and voila..

7) Don't be a jerk. :-) PC Death is never funny* and should be treated seriously.

*unless it's Dragnmoon, BobBob, CatBunnyGnome, Pain, or me.

I agree with this, this is the only time death is funny..;)

Though I am not sure Pain would take it well ;)

Lol I was including all of you as far as experienced Gms go, I am looking forward to running this and seeing how they deal with this encounter. This will be my 6th gm running of organized play events but hopefully I will be able to get more involved down the line. Thanks for all of the advice it will make the scenario run much smoother. I'll check in and let you guys know how it went. By the way, I almost died in this encounter as well, but my half orc barbarian had the scent ability so that helped out tremendously, that and having a high fortitude save lol

Later guys and gals and thanks

Chris Blaylock aka Big Mook akd Mookie

Cape Girardeau, Missouri

The Con was a great sucess, the party had a paladin with detect evil, a melee barbarian, and a melee rogue.......they handled it pretty easy.....as with everything they made their miss chance rolls, so it was pretty much over rather quickly, the barbarian was usiing a great sword and the paladin used smite evil. All in all they showed great teamwork so I was impressed and they seemed to enjoy it. Once again, thank you guys so much for all the advice, the mod went really smooth.

Big Mook