Pathfinder Society Scenario #2-07: The Heresy of Man—Part II: Where Dark Things Sleep (PFRPG) PDF

3.00/5 (based on 13 ratings)

Our Price: $3.99

Add to Cart
Facebook Twitter Email

A Pathfinder Society Scenario designed for 5th to 9th level characters (Tiers: 5–6 and 8–9).

When a Pathfinder team in the godless nation of Rahadoum disappears, the Pathfinder Society sends the PCs to investigate. Deep beneath the sands of the small village of Wadi al-Hesr, a long imprisoned evil—responsible in part for the destruction of an ancient empire—now stirs and threatens the entire region with a deadly plague. Can the Pathfinders survive a sinister game of cat-and-mouse and escape with their lives?

Where Dark Things Sleep is the second scenario in the The Heresy of Man campaign arc. It is the sequel to Pathfinder Society Scenario #2-06: The Heresy of Man—Part I: The First Heresy and is followed by Pathfinder Society Scenario #2-09: The Heresy of Man—Part III: Beneath Forgotten Sands.

Written by Greg A. Vaughan and Kevin Wright

This scenario is designed for play in Pathfinder Society Organized Play, but can easily be adapted for use with any world. This scenario is compliant with the Open Game License (OGL) and is suitable for use with the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game.

Product Availability

Fulfilled immediately.

Are there errors or omissions in this product information? Got corrections? Let us know at store@paizo.com.

PZOPSS0207E


See Also:

1 to 5 of 13 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

Average product rating:

3.00/5 (based on 13 ratings)

Sign in to create or edit a product review.

Fun scenario with interesting encounters.

4/5

(I played this under Magabeus, below.)

I can be very brief with this review: this scenario is a lot of fun. There's a bigger emphasis on puzzles and there's a bit of a weirdness going on, which is something I really appreciate. But it's not forced down your throat if it's not your cup of tea, which is even better. The location feels exotic and enemies seem initially quite dangerous, but sadly never really live up to their potential.

In the end, this is a fun dungeon romp with some really cool elements. The fact that combats aren't that interesting is more to blame on Season 2 in general than on this scenario in particular, I feel. Still, recommend if you want a fun dungeon to run through.


A solid second installment

4/5

Again I found myself sitting at Magabeus’ table (see the review below). I’m also the player who brought a character with Eerie Sense. I love that feat and thanks to Magabeus, it really made the place come alive and keep us in constant suspense as to what would happen next. I myself ended up being utterly paranoid.

That said, I really enjoyed this scenario. Compared to the first part, this one has aged fairly well. The combat encounters are still a bit on the easy side of the spectrum, but the puzzles and layout were still okay. Mind you, I can see why a few TPK’s have happened here in the past, but I think that the average party will have a way of dealing with the BBEG.

All I can add is that part 2 is better than the first part. I hope this trend continues with the next (and final) part, but I’ll find that out later today. I would recommend the scenario if you’re looking for a creepy dungeon crawl with some puzzles. If you’re purely looking for challenging fights, I’d recommend looking for a different scenario.


Good atmosphere, weak combats

4/5

I GMed this in the standard campaign at low tier for a six person party.

Starting with a 3 score I adjust that for

+1: What the F is going on!
I managed to have the players at full alert with the things that are happening. It helped that one of the players has the feat Eerie Sense. The party managed to deduce what was going on, but the NPC also figured out what they were doing thanks to spellcraft. Therefore the final showdown was still where it is supposed to happen. Note that the scenario specifically addresses the situation where the PC's confront him earlier, which is a good thing!

+1: It gets explained
Luckily the NPC has a diary in which he has written everything down. This is an important part of the scenario as I can understand that players otherwise would feel left out of information if the GM skips this.

-1: Encounter strength
For a regular party in season 8 this scenario should not be a challenge. All combats where walkovers. I did not roll well and think I did less than 20 damage in total. For people that want to be challenged in combat: don't look at this scenario. I can understand that a certain situation with the BBEG might cause a TPK. However at level 5 all parties should have a way to deal with that situation, even if you did not figure it out during the dungeon.


3/5


1/5

Before I go on, there was a TPK when I played, so it might colour my opinion of this module somewhat.
Played at the lower tier.

The concept for this story is interesting, but in practice it just isn't very exciting or fun.
There is quite a lot that is known to the GM only - and may never become apparent to the players.

The combats range from being manageable to being unbalanced - one in particular leans heavily on the side of unbalanced.
There is just a few things in this scenario that scream 'cheap' or 'unfair' to me.

I would say play this if you want your characters to have a decent chance of dying.


1 to 5 of 13 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
1 to 50 of 107 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

Announced!

Paizo Employee Franchise Manager

Now Available!


@ Reviewer.

Its going to be pretty hard to avoid everything by Greg Vaughn.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I have a feeling that it is one of those "I died in that scenario, hence it sucks donkey balls" reviews ...

Frog God Games

heh, heh. I think that review has inspired me to write. :-)

RPG Superstar 2008 Top 16

I'm really curious what happened to that group. On what disaster did the reviewer base his conclusions?

I haven't read or played this one yet, but it was run at NeonCon and I don't remember any howls of despair and frustration.

Paizo Employee Franchise Manager

Sir_Wulf wrote:

I'm really curious what happened to that group. On what disaster did the reviewer base his conclusions?

I haven't read or played this one yet, but it was run at NeonCon and I don't remember any howls of despair and frustration.

Yeah, I'm sort of curious for more details myself. It's my job, after all, to reign in the deadly force of evil that is Greg Vaughan.


Pathfinder Card Game, Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber
Greg A. Vaughan wrote:
heh, heh. I think that review has inspired me to write. :-)

That review not only inspired me to purchase everything Vaughan has ever written, but to create an unholy shrine to his creativity!

Ia! Ia! Vaughan!


Mark Moreland wrote:
Sir_Wulf wrote:

I'm really curious what happened to that group. On what disaster did the reviewer base his conclusions?

I haven't read or played this one yet, but it was run at NeonCon and I don't remember any howls of despair and frustration.

Yeah, I'm sort of curious for more details myself. It's my job, after all, to reign in the deadly force of evil that is Greg Vaughan.

*sigh*. It was a table I ran at U-Con. I'm on my phone now, I can fill in more details later, but they were a table if three 5's and three 8's, and I rolled NINE natural 20's in only 2 encounters. (claw, claw, bite, rend... rinse and repeat)

Frog God Games

Sir_Wulf wrote:

I'm really curious what happened to that group. On what disaster did the reviewer base his conclusions?

I haven't read or played this one yet, but it was run at NeonCon and I don't remember any howls of despair and frustration.

Hey man, you're ruining my buzz.

Frog God Games

Kyle Baird wrote:
Mark Moreland wrote:
Sir_Wulf wrote:

I'm really curious what happened to that group. On what disaster did the reviewer base his conclusions?

I haven't read or played this one yet, but it was run at NeonCon and I don't remember any howls of despair and frustration.

Yeah, I'm sort of curious for more details myself. It's my job, after all, to reign in the deadly force of evil that is Greg Vaughan.
*sigh*. It was a table I ran at U-Con. I'm on my phone now, I can fill in more details later, but they were a table if three 5's and three 8's, and I rolled NINE natural 20's in only 2 encounters. (claw, claw, bite, rend... rinse and repeat)

Ah, there it's back again.

RPG Superstar 2008 Top 16

"Vaughn-an, what is best in life?"

"To crush the Pathfinders, see their character sheets rent before you, and hear the lamentation of the players!"

"That is good."

NINE natural 20s! OUCH!


Pathfinder Starfinder Society Subscriber
Greg A. Vaughan wrote:
Sir_Wulf wrote:

I'm really curious what happened to that group. On what disaster did the reviewer base his conclusions?

I haven't read or played this one yet, but it was run at NeonCon and I don't remember any howls of despair and frustration.

Hey man, you're ruining my buzz.

Ah, so you really are all about killing as many characters as you possibly can with hyper-optimized monsters? Good to know. I'm so glad that it gives you a thrill - we didn't enjoy either of your scenarios.

This reviewer based HER conclusions on a TPK in a dungeon where the only way out is to defeat the final boss. I purchased the scenario after the debacle, and based my review on reading it after our disappointing experience. It wasn't just about the GM's unholy dice luck (though that didn't help) - it was about what seems to me to be a very deliberate design decision to kill characters who turn out to be underpowered. They were smart enough to flee - they simply weren't allowed to.

It does appear that you're very pleased with your design choices. I wish you joy of them. It's not the kind of experience I'd come to enjoy playing Pathfinder since the beginning of the campaign. If it's indicative (as it seems to be, based on Mark's response) of the overall campaign design and direction I'm afraid I'll be parting ways with Pathfinder.

I'm not just whining because I lost a beloved character, though that does factor into it, I'm also very unhappy with the Gygaxian approach used in the construction of the dungeon crawl. It's not fun for me.

I stand by my one star review, and will indeed be avoiding the author's works in the future unless I hear a decent review from someone whose judgment I respect.

Paizo Employee Franchise Manager

JaeWalker wrote:

This reviewer based HER conclusions on a TPK in a dungeon where the only way out is to defeat the final boss. I purchased the scenario after the debacle, and based my review on reading it after our disappointing experience. It wasn't just about the GM's unholy dice luck (though that didn't help) - it was about what seems to me to be a very deliberate design decision to kill characters who turn out to be underpowered. They were smart enough to flee - they simply weren't allowed to.

It does appear that you're very pleased with your design choices. I wish you joy of them. It's not the kind of experience I'd come to enjoy playing Pathfinder since the beginning of the campaign. If it's indicative (as it seems to be, based on Mark's response) of the overall campaign design and direction I'm afraid I'll be parting ways with Pathfinder.

I'm not just whining because I lost a beloved character, though that does factor into it, I'm also very unhappy with the Gygaxian approach used in the construction of the dungeon crawl. It's not fun for me.

Thanks for the more detailed explanation of what you didn't like, Jae. This is useful feedback and I appreciate your candor. As much as we like to hear what people like about scenarios, hearing what doesn't work is perhaps even more productive.

RPG Superstar 2008 Top 16

JaeWalker wrote:
Ah, so you really are all about killing as many characters as you possibly can with hyper-optimized monsters? Good to know. I'm so glad that it gives you a thrill - we didn't enjoy either of your scenarios.

While I haven't played or run all of Greg's adventures, I've dealt with him on a number of occasions. I am 100% confident that the last thing he would want would be to give someone an unpleasant gaming experience. In my experience, Greg Vaughan is a thorough gentleman who wants to give his fellow gamers a challenging and exciting game.

JaeWalker wrote:
This reviewer based HER conclusions on a TPK in a dungeon where the only way out is to defeat the final boss.

I also apologize for the gender mixup there.

JaeWalker wrote:
It does appear that you're very pleased with your design choices. I wish you joy of them. It's not the kind of experience I'd come to enjoy playing Pathfinder since the beginning of the campaign. If it's indicative (as it seems to be, based on Mark's response) of the overall campaign design and direction, I'm afraid I'll be parting ways with Pathfinder.

Greg's scenarios can be tough on PCs. If the party lacks certain skills or abilities, a few of them could fairly be described as deadly. I wouldn't recommend a group playing them to ever "play up". Despite this, I've never had any impression that Greg wants to be less than fair with the challenges he presents.

- James MacKenzie

Frog God Games

JaeWalker wrote:

Ah, so you really are all about killing as many characters as you possibly can with hyper-optimized monsters? Good to know. I'm so glad that it gives you a thrill - we didn't enjoy either of your scenarios.

This reviewer based HER conclusions on a TPK in a dungeon where the only way out is to defeat the final boss. I purchased the scenario after the debacle, and based my review on reading it after our disappointing experience. It wasn't just about the GM's unholy dice luck (though that didn't help) - it was about what seems to me to be a very deliberate design decision to kill characters who turn out to be underpowered. They were smart enough to flee - they simply weren't allowed to.

It does appear that you're very pleased with your design choices. I wish you joy of them. It's not the kind of experience I'd come to enjoy playing Pathfinder since the beginning of the campaign. If it's indicative (as it seems to be, based on Mark's response) of the overall campaign design and direction I'm afraid I'll be parting ways with Pathfinder.

I'm not just whining because I lost a beloved character, though that does factor into it, I'm also very unhappy with the Gygaxian approach used in the construction of the dungeon crawl. It's not fun for me.

I stand by my one star review, and will indeed be avoiding the author's works in the future unless I hear a decent review from someone whose judgment I respect.

I don't think you know me well enough to know what I'm all about. I do admit to enjoying sowing mayhem among the ranks of the PCs, though. No lie there. However, in my experience on both sides of the screen, those are some of the funnest parts of the game; call it Call-of-Cthulhu Syndrome if you want, but the people who have spoken to me about PC losses in adventures I wrote have always prefaced it with how much fun it was. It does stink to lose a beloved character, but it sounds like you've got a pretty epic tale for the bards to sing of there that can be enjoyed in the telling for many years to come.

Anyway, I'm sorry to have contributed to your unhappiness. However, I assure you that I hyper-optimize nothing in my adventures but rather write what I hope to be challenging encounters based on the appropriate CRs for the levels in question. I cannot foresee results of die roles, player strategies, GM decisions, or sub-optimal/hyper-optimal character builds.

Despite your intent with the comment, I can only take a comparison of my dungeon design as Gygaxian to be a complement. He is the creator of this little adventure game we like to play after all, and that is definitely a goal of adventure design for me.

As for avoiding my adventures, that is fair. Everyone has their tastes, and I'm not about to tell you that yours are wrong. But let's not pretend that mine are wrong because they don't match yours.

I/we do appreciate your feedback, and I always take the opinions of the consumers into consideration. I probably won't write the next adventure any easier as a result, but this kind of feedback can help me find ways to make it more enjoyable even for somebody whose tastes differ from mine and just got suckered into playing one of my adventures through no fault of their own.

However, as for quitting game, that seems a bit extreme don't you think? Besides, I promise they only allow me to write so many adventures. ;-)


Nine natural 20s in 2 encounters...that is mind-blowing. That could've ended the whole ball game right there.

How many crits were scored in those two encounters?

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Actually, this thread made me buy the scenario right now :)


To JaeWalker -

I'm Kevin J. Wright, Greg's co-author on this trilogy of scenarios. My adventure-writing naivete (charming though it may be) may be to blame for the difficulty of the adventures. I was just trying to match up appropriate CRs with the level of the adventures, but that can be tricky. One CR 5 is not the same as every other CR 5, and in my inexperience, I may have put too many difficult encounters together. So my apologies if it was ruthlessly lethal.

Much love,

Kevin

Shadow Lodge

Starfinder Charter Superscriber

This module has an unidentified, undisclosed trap with no Search DC, no Disable DC, and no saving throw -- and that is flagrantly unfair. This is a trap that the players don't even know is triggered unless they try to leave the dungeon, and if the players do not complete the module in the allotted time this trap means automatic death for the entire party -- summary TPK. This module also has puzzles. Puzzles are a serious time sink, making it likely that players will fail to finish the module before the slot's time is up, and all their characters are then declared dead. Worse still, one of these puzzles is pointless and has no immediate solution or consequence, making it still more likely that the party will fruitlessly waste time, fail to finish the module, and have their characters summarily executed off stage at the end of the slot.

In detail:

Spoiler:
At the entrance to the dungeon there is a massive 10-foot-thick stone block that I guess slides into place later on. This feature is not mentioned or indicated anywhere in the text or description related to the entrance of the dungeon. There is no way to search for it (no Search DC) no way to jam it open even if you could notice it (no Disable Device DC). The sliding block isn't even described in the box text, which would at least give players a heads-up that they're about to be screwed!

Though not specifically indicated, the trigger for this trap seems to be location based, but there is nothing the players ever hear from the DM that might tell them that there's a massive door that's going to close. In the box text that one might charitably say is related to the passage closing there is a bad guy issuing threats, but absolutely NOTHING that directly says,"You are approaching a point of no return. Turn back now or else you're going to be locked in here with no chance of escape." If you're going to have this kind of module, where the party is going to be trapped and forced to finish or die, then you absolutely MUST have an explicit and unambiguous sign of the point of no return and give players a chance to reconsider. To do otherwise is simply mean, and this module did otherwise.

When a trap is triggered two things always do happen, or always should happen and until this module always did happen in my experience: 1.) the players know that something has happened, that the trap has been triggered, and 2.) the players get some sort of dice roll to determine if they are affected, usually a saving throw of some sort. This saving throw is appropriate to the level of the players, and either negates or diminishes the effect of the trap.

The trigger in this case seems to be an NPC reaching a certain point in a box text monologue. When the trap is triggered there is absolutely no indication that anything is happening at all -- no rumbling and shuddering stone from the direction of the dungeon's entrance, no maniacal laughter from an NPC who tells the characters that now they're trapped, nothing! There is no saving throw! The players are all affected completely, and without any possibility to avoid the danger.

The work-around is not level appropriate; it's DC 40 in an uncommon skill whether you're 5th level or 9th. At DC 40 for the Use Magic Device skill, the work-around method of escape absolutely, 100%, no munchkin can save you now, impossible. That this trap exists or that it's been triggered is passively injected in text meant for the DM alone, as if the author is letting the DM in on the joke that's being played on the party, without so much as the merest suggestion that the PC's should be notified.

So, invariably, the PC's trundle blithely forward, unaware of the dire shift in their circumstances, which is the biggest injustice of this entire module. When the massive stone door slides shut in an adventure movie, it's always done with the audience and the characters watching. It happens on camera. This is for a reason. Players who know their characters are screwed will act differently than if they still think it's business as usual. If the party knows there is no point in retreating, they will not try to retreat and will act more boldly and decisively. If they know they have to complete the adventure within the allotted time or else their characters die, they tend not to dawdle. Players deserve the chance to know they're screwed and act accordingly.

The fact that the author fails to write into the module the revelation of the closed door to the part is why I say that regardless of the authors stated intent, designing this dungeon in this way clearly demonstrates contempt for the players. This dungeon is designed to kill whole parties of characters and that has nothing to do with how GM's happen to run this adventure, how the dice turn up, or how players play it. It is designed to kill the party off stage if they don't die at the hands of the monsters and NPC's first.

This contempt is further revealed in ACT 2, where regarding a riddle the players encounter the author writes, and I quote:"The riddle he has given may frustrate the PCs to some extent as it is actually no riddle at all but rather provides a hint to the answer to the final riddle in Act 6; that is the 'riddle within the riddle.' Regardless of what kind of answer the PCs come up with, nothing happens and eventually they must leave the room." Why does an author write a module in a way he knows will frustrate players and consume time? In practical effect it does frustrate players, and they blow a lot of time trying to figure out a puzzle and they loose time to complete the quest before the DM calls "time's up" and "you're all dead."

I don't know of any precedent in PFS for this kind of module, one where the players are trapped in the dungeon with no chance of escape and automatic death unless you finish. I can't imagine there are any other such modules. Regardless, I really don't think Paizo should tolerate any such modules being written. If Paizo is going to continue to publish deathtrap modules like this one, I don't know why anyone would feel the need to keep playing in Pathfinder Society Organized Play. It as much as tells their customers that "even though you've been loyal to our product for all the time you've taken to play your character to this level, you should know that we might just decide to rip up your character sheet and throw it away without warning, sucker!"

How did this module ever get through Paizo's editorial staff without seeing the trap and recognizing its potential for a dramatically bad, and intently unfair player experience?

Liberty's Edge

Paizo Charter Superscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
kwixson wrote:
spoilers

Woah.... please put a spoiler tag on that post....


That does indeed sound Gygaxian, and not in a good way.

Or to look at it from another point of view: It sounds like a reasonable scenario for a one-shot, time-limited convention session with pre-generated characters (as often was the case in Gygax's time)... but perhaps not for a session with ongoing characters in which character death will render the characters unplayable, especially when it's still time-limited by a convention slot.

Paizo Employee Franchise Manager

We are aware of the issue with the "story element" trap and will be updating the scenario to include stats and suggestions on how to handle it.

Frog God Games

Spoiler:
I understand Kwixson's comments, but they are a vast exagerration. Nowhere in the advetnure does it say that not completing it in the allotted time is automatic PC death or TPK. The "trap" as he calls it has plenty of stats and a method of beating it--it's called completing the adventure. If the advetnure is not completed, there is no condition to add to the sheet on an unsuccessful completion for "trapped in tomb PC is dead". I don't recall that in the PFS rules either. As Mark mentioned, it's a "story element". I'm sure clarification as he suggested is forthcoming will be helpful, but its not a failure of the editors to let it pass. If the scenario isn't completed then the PCs simply don't receive their full rewards for completing the scenario--not a total party kill.

Sorry it wasn't to Kwixon's tastes, and as I mentioned, I do strive to be Gygaxian in adventure design, but this is not a Gygaxian element by design or implementation. It's merely a limiter to keep PCs from leaving and returning to the dungeon at their leisure and to give them a sense of story urgency. Any application of consequences of it outside the actual gaming session as to causing death or anything else is not using the scenario as written.


I realize that this module is only 3.99 but with Christmas coming up I don't feel I can buy it. And based on the reviews I really want it. I love to challenge my players with some really out of the dungeon thinking. And they are just as happy to overcome the challenges of the dungeon and win the day yet again. And if it Gygaxian in any way (even green demon instant die no save, God bless him) I'm even more on board.

The worst part is, this module is a three-parter. This part sounds great and the last part has two new monsters in it in addition to a continuation of this adventure.

Maybe I can sell some plasma and pick up all three parts....

Dark Archive

World I feel the same way. No way i can afford it right now. But I am a fan of Greg's style of adventures. Yes they can be very brutal, but I like that, as does my group. So far I haven't been disappointed with a Greg adventure I have bought. After I get this, likely after the holidays, I will do my own review.

The Exchange

Is it too early to talk about a Greg A. Vaughan dunk tank at PaizoCon next year?


VAAUUUGGGHHHHAANNN!!!!!!!!


You are all fools! Greg A. Vaughan is the antichrist of RPGs. He cares nothing for your tawdry little concerns that you call existence. He lives but to slay and creates but to destroy. A dunk tank, you say? Nay! But rather a vat of acid in which to dissolve the stain of crapulence that is Greg A. Vaughan.

Dark Archive

Heresy of Spam wrote:
You are all fools! Greg A. Vaughan is the antichrist of RPGs. He cares nothing for your tawdry little concerns that you call existence. He lives but to slay and creates but to destroy. A dunk tank, you say? Nay! But rather a vat of acid in which to dissolve the stain of crapulence that is Greg A. Vaughan.

You make him sound all kinds of sexy. Maybe I should recruit him into the ranks of the Demon Princes. Since my Big Daddy Orcus has become focused on other worlds for now.


Dark_Mistress wrote:
After I get this ... I will do my own review.

Get to it! ;-)

Dark Archive

Kyle Baird wrote:
Dark_Mistress wrote:
After I get this ... I will do my own review.
Get to it! ;-)

Water my bank account. :)

Frog God Games

Captain Shatner wrote:
VAAUUUGGGHHHHAANNN!!!!!!!!

You...you, I know. I never forget a face......Names I'm not so good with.


Dark_Mistress wrote:
Kyle Baird wrote:
Dark_Mistress wrote:
After I get this ... I will do my own review.
Get to it! ;-)
Water my bank account. :)

Obviously you should check your downloads first..

Dark Archive

Kyle Baird wrote:
Dark_Mistress wrote:
Kyle Baird wrote:
Dark_Mistress wrote:
After I get this ... I will do my own review.
Get to it! ;-)
Water my bank account. :)
Obviously you should check your downloads first..

Wa? How did that happen?


Dark_Mistress wrote:
Wa? How did that happen?

How did what happen?

Dark Archive

Kyle Baird wrote:
Dark_Mistress wrote:
Wa? How did that happen?
How did what happen?

You know exactly what I mean. How did they get added to my downloads? :)

I am guessing you somehow managed to do it, but I have no clue how. Can you buy things as gifts for other peoples accounts or something?

Paizo Employee Senior Software Developer

Yes, you can buy PDFs as gifts for other people. Add the PDF to your cart and check the "Show gift options during checkout" checkbox next to the "Proceed to Checkout" button.

Dark Archive

Gary Teter wrote:
Yes, you can buy PDFs as gifts for other people. Add the PDF to your cart and check the "Show gift options during checkout" checkbox next to the "Proceed to Checkout" button.

Huh learn something new every day.

@Kyle Baird - Well thank you, since I assume you are the one that bought them for me. I have no idea why but thank you.

The Exchange

Dark_Mistress wrote:
Gary Teter wrote:
Yes, you can buy PDFs as gifts for other people. Add the PDF to your cart and check the "Show gift options during checkout" checkbox next to the "Proceed to Checkout" button.

Huh learn something new every day.

@Kyle Baird - Well thank you, since I assume you are the one that bought them for me. I have no idea why but thank you.

I think it's because everyone appreciates your reviews. You put a lot of thought and effort into them. This scenario is being judged by a single bad outcome, and maybe Kyle would like someone to take a fresh look at it.

Dark Archive

Doug Miles wrote:
Dark_Mistress wrote:
Gary Teter wrote:
Yes, you can buy PDFs as gifts for other people. Add the PDF to your cart and check the "Show gift options during checkout" checkbox next to the "Proceed to Checkout" button.

Huh learn something new every day.

@Kyle Baird - Well thank you, since I assume you are the one that bought them for me. I have no idea why but thank you.

I think it's because everyone appreciates your reviews. You put a lot of thought and effort into them. This scenario is being judged by a single bad outcome, and maybe Kyle would like someone to take a fresh look at it.

I think thats going a bit far, either that or that is a lot more crazy people than I thought on this forum. :)

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

If not everyone, then a significant percentage of the well-informed :)

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

Gary Teter wrote:
Yes, you can buy PDFs as gifts for other people. Add the PDF to your cart and check the "Show gift options during checkout" checkbox next to the "Proceed to Checkout" button.

Dark_Mistress, you should have also received an email letting you know someone has purchased a gift for you.

Dark Archive

Vic Wertz wrote:
Gary Teter wrote:
Yes, you can buy PDFs as gifts for other people. Add the PDF to your cart and check the "Show gift options during checkout" checkbox next to the "Proceed to Checkout" button.
Dark_Mistress, you should have also received an email letting you know someone has purchased a gift for you.

Yeah I did, didn't check the email till after the fact. Just a little blown away a total stranger bought me something. :)


Doug Miles wrote:
I think it's because everyone appreciates your reviews. You put a lot of thought and effort into them. This scenario is being judged by a single bad outcome, and maybe Kyle would like someone to take a fresh look at it.

This. Ho Ho Ho! ;-)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dark_Mistress wrote:
Just a little blown away a total stranger bought me something. :)

And that's why the Pathfinder base are the finest in gaming. :)

Hyrum.

Sovereign Court

Dark_Mistress wrote:
snip

DM, you're the gold standard for reviews. I always read your reviews and have parted with cash on your recommendation many times.

Everyone looking at this thread needs to read Vaughan's KQ article.


GeraintElberion wrote:

DM, you're the gold standard for reviews. I always read your reviews and have parted with cash on your recommendation many times.

Everyone looking at this thread needs to read Vaughan's KQ article.

I hope that's not true (that he decided to write an extra-tough module because someone accused him of writing easy modules). I hate wild variations in difficulty among PFS scenarios.


For a bit of irony, I was the one who told Greg at Gen Con that his part of the Everwar Series was the easiest and provided no real challenge to PCs. And if you missed it, I was the GM for both reviews...

Contributor, RPG Superstar 2009, RPG Superstar Judgernaut

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I thought my part of the Everwar series held that distinction, Kyle. ;-)

And, in fairness, it was my first PFS adventure. I really didn't have any idea how optimized some groups might be in PFS play. Still, I heard a couple of PCs perished in at least one of the runnings. So I guess it wasn't that easy, after all. :-D

As for Greg and his "easy" scenario dilemma...

Spoiler:

LOL!

This will haunt him to no end.

No really. I intend to haunt him to no end over this development. ;-D

1 to 50 of 107 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Paizo / Product Discussion / Pathfinder Society Scenario #2-07: The Heresy of Man—Part II: Where Dark Things Sleep (PFRPG) PDF All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.