Pathfinder Society Scenario #3-19: The Icebound Outpost (PFRPG) PDF

2.80/5 (based on 24 ratings)

Our Price: $3.99

Add to Cart
Facebook Twitter Email

A Pathfinder Society Scenario designed for levels 1–5.

The Pathfinder Society discovers an Aspis Consortium base in an ancient Vudran temple now encased in a glacier and sends the PCs to infiltrate it and investigate the extent of the rival organization's regional operations. Can the PCs get in the well-guarded Aspis outpost and escape with their lives and the information the Society seeks?

Written by Jeff Erwin.

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.

PZOPSS0319E


See Also:

11 to 15 of 24 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

Average product rating:

2.80/5 (based on 24 ratings)

Sign in to create or edit a product review.

GM Perspective - Meh

3/5

While this is not a horrible scenario, this also isn't a great scenario. It is, quite simply, one long running combat. While the environment is neat and I would love more information, not a lot was given. Yes, the big question of "What are these guys doing here?" arises, but as part of the metastory for this season, and all will be revealed.

If you like combat, you will like this.


Average combat mission.

3/5

Pro:
-Great use of archetypes and classes.
-Great cartography.
-Great flavorful adventure locale.

Cons:
-No roleplaying whatsoever.
-Nothing but combat.
-Falls into the same trap as a lot of other Tapestry missions, which is, go into the temple/tomb, kill all Aspis, get out. It gets very samey and shows a lack of imagination with what Pathfinder rules can do.

This is a good, yet brief, adventure for combat obsessed players.


Great For Novices, But Noticeably Light

3/5

Ran Tier 1 for five players, four of whom were playing their first or second PFS game, two of whom had played Temple of Empyreal Enlightenment.
This scenario had a lot of what I appreciate in a game for novice players. The action was player-directed, but only after establishing boundaries. The scenario called out that action (specifically noise) in certain rooms influenced the creatures in adjacent rooms. As a GM, I am expected to run the scenario as written, so I appreciated when the scenario makes contentions for that kind of logic.
The encounters were a bit on the easy side, which I appreciated because so many of my players were new and they did not have a dedicated healer in the party, nor an opportunity for the druid to rest and memorize CLW. One of the PCs was unconscious by the end of three of the encounters, and two more were unconscious by the end of the final encounter, so any greater difficulty and these new players might have had a much more disappointing experience. I appreciated that the NPCs were virtually all equipped with potions of CLW, which were basically the only reason the players were able to complete the scenario.
The scenario reads like a series of encounters, but there are enough hooks within those encounters that lead to a lot of roleplaying and deduction. Most of the questions the players had for the captured villains and rescued slaves were accounted for in the scenario.
The faction missions were clear and easily accomplished. Too often I’ve had new players latch onto faction missions as the aspect of PFS that excites them most only to have that excitement squashed when they fail their faction mission not through poor tactics or not paying attention but because the skill checks required were unusual or trained only skills with nearly impossible DCs. I accept that faction mission success should not be a foregone conclusion, but I wish it was easier for new players. This scenario’s faction missions were largely binary and plot adjacent, so the players each got to ask questions that befuddled their party mates and had moments in the spotlight.
My major complaint is that the scenario felt like only the first part of the story. It was a metaplot-heavy scenario that engaged the players, but also left them disappointed that they could not follow-up on the Round Mountain bread crumbs until at least 7th level, which will take them years at the pace my area levels at.
Earlier I brought up the Temple of Empyreal Enlightenment. Both players that had played in that scenario brought up how similar the two scenarios are in setup and somewhat in delivery. They are both low-level single map, exploration-based Season 3 scenarios within the Hao-Jin Tapestry. They play out very differently, but not without a fair bit of “been there, done that” feeling.
Overall, the players had fun, I had fun. Everyone wanted more, but in a good and bad way. This is a great model for how to balance and outline scenarios for novice players, but it could have some variety to conclude the adventure.


Too confined

3/5

I thought the layout was too confined for what was being done. Also T1-2 seems too easy. I haven't run a group in that tier that didn't just walk through most of it.


Fun

3/5

This was fun. Nothing exceptional and not enough RP opportunities for my taste, but it was fun none the less. I enjoyed the use of archetypes and the setting.


11 to 15 of 24 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Web Product Manager

Announced! Cover image is a mockup.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

This is my first PFS scenario; hopefully it is a winner!

Shadow Lodge Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8

Gratz Jeff!

Paizo Employee Managing Developer

You're getting out there Jeff! Congrats, man!


Pathfinder Adventure Subscriber

Way to go Jeff! And "Vudran temple encased in a glacier" sounds very intriguing.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

This month's Pathfinder Society Scenarios have been delayed by a week, and are now scheduled to be released on May 2.

Sovereign Court Contributor

Sad Jeff. As my daughter says "hurry! hurry! faster!"


Pathfinder Adventure Subscriber

Awww.

Contributor

Now available!

Sovereign Court Contributor

And it's out. I'll check back on this thread periodically if anyone has thoughts or questions for the author. :)

Dark Archive

I'll be playing this tonight, will report back once we're done!

Sovereign Court Contributor

Dezhem wrote:
I'll be playing this tonight, will report back once we're done!

How'd it go?

Dark Archive

Jeff Erwin wrote:
Dezhem wrote:
I'll be playing this tonight, will report back once we're done!
How'd it go?

We all managed to survive, heh. That's always a good start. Feedback for the mod from myself and various players:

SPOILERS FOR MOD; YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED:

Mod was played by:

Level 4 Monk
Level 5 Cleric w/ spinosaurus animal companion
Level 4-5 (forget which) Vivisectionist Alchemist (Lots of natural attacks/arms)
Level 4 Sorcerer

- The beginning hook was not received very well. Alright, Aspis Consortium have freely been coming and going via unknown means; sure. But if you're able to teleport directly to the temple via the tapestry, it seems weird that they just wouldn't, I don't know, send Adril Hestram to commando drop in and solo the entire place. I know that's not exactly a unique complaint but several players voiced that. I'm not sure if that was just our GM, but very little emphasis was placed on finding out HOW they were doing it. In fact, one of the faction missions seemed more interested in it.

- The snare trap by the tree was hilarious. Could have used more traps! We ended up making so much noise (and through a ludicrously high Str Alchemist just shunted the tree away), that there was absolutely zero hope of surprising anyone. Despite that, the first encounter went pretty smoothly; Mooks dropped one unconscious (more due to GM rolling well) but were cleaned up pretty quick. Seemed odd since we had made SO much noise that they weren't better prepared.

- The general toughness of the encounters, I felt, and the other players felt, was overall fairly weak. High rolls notwithstanding, I feel that the various bad guys could have easily been bumped up 1-2 levels to provide more of a challenge, at least for Tier 4-5. Having said that, 2 of the PC's were fairly optimized. The tactics of the NPC's could have done with some tweaking too, I think.

- The small environment was both a pro and a con. I hadn't adventured in such a small environment before so that was new to me. It's a nice change from having to travel 5000 miles to get to your mission. However, the small environment also led to some weird situations. Assuming party makes ungodly noise (and combat is pretty loud as is), it feels like all the encounters should have triggered at the same time or something. Weird suspension of disbelief moment there. It also seems like you could almost finish the mod in an hour or less if you have a group that excels at combat.

I hope that's constructive feedback for you! We did enjoy ourselves and spent a lot of time RP'ing our characters, which is a big plus in my book. I think had the temple complex been expanded a bit more and some more traps/exploration element been added it would have been received better overall.

Sovereign Court Contributor

Interesting.

Spoiler:

Actually, it seems like the society had a good team (your party) for the mission, considering... and the way the Aspis people were doing it is in the adventure, too. But the clues discovered in the mission lead to other scenarios which direct the society to the actual Aspis portal.
There are some rationales written in the scenario for when and why people might come running; I don't know if they were implemented effectively, and I may need feedback from a different group to judge.
I don't know how your GM interpreted it, but yes, mistakes like setting off traps or noise are supposed to be part of the challenge.


Jeff de luna wrote:
This is my first PFS scenario; hopefully it is a winner!

I just ran this module last night and our group went through it in a different way then I expected. Well, we had 8 people and the module was for 4-6 so had to make some adjustments. Now a lot of my friends have said I am a pretty good tactician, and I definately did some prepping, but things didn't work out the way I wanted, but played high tier.

Spoiler:
Group: Lvl 4 Wizard, 2 Cleric,4 fighter, 5 paladin, 4 barbarian, 4 ranger, 4 monk, 3 Alchemist.I was so looking forward to use the scrollmaster (Transmuter) chick, and I managed to get off a couple of nasty spells, but I wasn't able to use her full potential. Otherwise, I could've killed 2-3 members minimum, I guarentee it. I loved her the second I saw her capabilities. Like that Scroll of Dimension Door for example. She never stood a chance. ^^"
All in all, great first module! I liked some of the tactics. Keep up the good work! :)

Shadow Lodge

Question SA, was this for PFS? Because 8 player tables are not legal, nor is it legal to make adjustments...


Eric Clingenpeel wrote:
Question SA, was this for PFS? Because 8 player tables are not legal, nor is it legal to make adjustments...

yes it was for PFS. and...how are 8 player tables not legal if I may ask? That's just...our group. sometimes we only have 4-5, others we have a full house. it just depends.


Eric Clingenpeel wrote:
Question SA, was this for PFS? Because 8 player tables are not legal, nor is it legal to make adjustments...

and by adjustments, I merely increased the hitpoints. that's all. Otherwise we wouldve finished an an hour. I just made it a bit harder hp wise. is that wrong? I didnt change anything else, just added some hit points.

Dark Archive

Pasted from the current Guide to Organized Play:

Spoiler:
Legal Table Size
The minimum table size for a Pathfinder Society
Organized Play session to be considered legal is four
PCs. Table size is capped at six PCs. In cases in which
you simply cannot seat four players, you may run a table
of three players, and play an official level-appropriate
pregenerated character in order to meet the minimum
table size of four PCs.
Conversely, if seven players show up to an event,
rather than turning someone away from the campaign
altogether, consider adding a seventh person to the table.
These situations should be extremely rare and should only
be used as a last resort to sending someone home without
the chance to play. Seven-person tables often overpower
otherwise challenging adventures and limit the amount
of time each player gets to shine in the given scenario, and
many players prefer not to play at all rather than play at
such a large table. Check with the players to determine
their preferences before running a seven-person table.
One alternative to a seven-person table is to split the
group into two tables of three players, and ask one of the
players to serve as Game Master for the second table, with
each GM running a pregenerated character to fill her
table out. Under no circumstance should a table ever have
eight or more players.

Consider getting one of your players up and running as a GM, in my opinion. As for changing what's in scenarios; it's frowned upon and the developers have asked people not to do it.

Paizo Employee Franchise Manager

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Just for clarification, the 7-person table limit and restrictions on modifying mechanics in scenarios only really applies if you're giving out Chronicle sheets for Pathfinder Society credit. If this is just an adventure you ran for your home group but you aren't playing it as part of the Pathfinder Society Organized Play campaign, then you can run it however you want. Really, if you only ever play with this same group and you want to use Chronicle sheets to track wealth and advancement, you can use them, but if players then go to conventions or game stores or what-have-you, the assumption is that all the games in which they've played with their PC thus far have been PFS-legal, and altered scenarios or ones that held less than 4 or more than 7 PCs don't qualify as such.


Ok, let me clear this up. I'm not trying to make a debate about it. I ran this game at my house, and I didnt make changes to the scenario itself. I ran it as it said, we had a large group which consisted of my dad, brother, and his gaming buddies and they went through the module a different way than I was expecting. It's the same group I play with all the time. it was merely a Saturday night game. Point is, I liked the module, I just wished I could've conducted some of the tactics better. That is all. :)

Shadow Lodge

Whether you ran it in a private home game or a public game at a game store, if you're running it for PFS credit, you need to follow all the guidelines. The scenarios are made for 4-6 characters, so by playing outside those targets things are going to not work. It sounds like you guys are big enough now you could/should split the group. This would allow you to run separate scenarios, or two of you run the same for both groups. Getting too big isn't a bad thing, but trying to squeeze 8 into a scenario made for half that number isn't good for the group in the long run.


Eric Clingenpeel wrote:
Whether you ran it in a private home game or a public game at a game store, if you're running it for PFS credit, you need to follow all the guidelines. The scenarios are made for 4-6 characters, so by playing outside those targets things are going to not work. It sounds like you guys are big enough now you could/should split the group. This would allow you to run separate scenarios, or two of you run the same for both groups. Getting too big isn't a bad thing, but trying to squeeze 8 into a scenario made for half that number isn't good for the group in the long run.

Fair enough, however this group has always been fairly large for many years. Almost as old as I've been alive if not longer if I recall. between 7-10 people. Now, if we have a 2nd person to run, then yeah we split it into two, however most of the time, noone else if prepared to run said module or whatever type of game we may be playing. It merely depends. most of the time we have 5-7 players due to varying circumstances. Some we have 8, others on the rare occasion we have 9-10 just split into a table of 4 and a table of 3, or 2 tables of 4. =/ It really just depends on circumstances ^^". Plus, we, the Waterdeep Boys Club are quite the eclectic group. We have a blast and there's lots of camaraderie between all of us lol.


Question:

How is it that Isehkta has Improved Natural Attack when she has a +2 BAB and the feat requires a +4 BAB?

Shadow Lodge

So I just ran this tonight with 5 predominantly new players, two of them being the fighter and rogue pregens. First encounter was tough for them, and it only got worse with the second. Three people ended up dying and two fled. Has anyone else had a group of all new players go through this? When I read through it prior I was actually thinking this could be a TPK. :-/ Even if they survived the second and third encounters I wasn't optimistic about their chances with the BBEG at the end. I really don't like killing PC's and even gave them tactical combat advice to help out. It also didn't help that I rolled well and they in general rolled petty bad.


I have been asked to start putting up reviews/comments on scenarios. So even though this is an old one, here it be.

We played at the low tier with 5 PC's. Granted they were all 2nd (almost 3rd) so geared pretty well. But the fights were just ridiculously easy. I think almost everyone went down on the first hit. One of the guys who kept rolling poorly in initiative never even got to do anything except move toward the fights before it was over.

But really, I can't see anything that should have kept all the fights separate either. They should have been able to see/hear if on guard. Then if all of them had swarmed us, it probably would have been too hard for 1st level PC's.

Also it was all combat. There were these vast detailed descriptions, we were listening and taking notes since we expected that to mean something. But it was just a series of easy fights.

I doubt I would consider running this unless it was a bunch of newbies who wanted an intro to combat.

I have no experience so far with the high tier.


ElterAgo wrote:

I have been asked to start putting up reviews/comments on scenarios. So even though this is an old one, here it be.

We played at the low tier with 5 PC's. Granted they were all 2nd (almost 3rd) so geared pretty well. But the fights were just ridiculously easy. I think almost everyone went down on the first hit. One of the guys who kept rolling poorly in initiative never even got to do anything except move toward the fights before it was over.

But really, I can't see anything that should have kept all the fights separate either. They should have been able to see/hear if on guard. Then if all of them had swarmed us, it probably would have been too hard for 1st level PC's.

Also it was all combat. There were these vast detailed descriptions, we were listening and taking notes since we expected that to mean something. But it was just a series of easy fights.

I doubt I would consider running this unless it was a bunch of newbies who wanted an intro to combat.

I have no experience so far with the high tier.

Nice comments! If you looks at the tabs near the top, there's a review tab where you can post this same text and even give a star rating; it'll make it more visible.


Ah, missed that. Will do.

Grand Lodge

Pg. 6 - Poisoned snare trap

Better late than never. Two snare traps are on this page. The first snare trap is listed as CR 3. The second snare trap at the higher subtier is the exact same trap, but just adds malyass root paste to the trap. The Subtier header lists it as CR 6, but the trap itself lists itself as CR 3 again. In my opinion it should probably just be CR 4. Adding poison but not increasing damage and not increasing the Perception or Disable Device DCs shouldn't warrant a +3 CR increase. The poison only deals Dex damage anyway.

Community / Forums / Paizo / Product Discussion / Pathfinder Society Scenario #3-19: The Icebound Outpost (PFRPG) PDF All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.