Pathfinder Roleplaying Game: Ultimate Campaign (OGL)

2: Plenty of awesomeness otherwise, with enough room for a 3PP to do things on top.

Indeed.

Indeed, Part II

I've heard a few people say the paper quality of this book isn't as good as previous books. A friend said the paper is matte as opposed to the usual glossy stuff. Can anyone else confirm?

I just received my copy of Ultimate Campaign yesterday and I wanted to make a note of saying that I'm not a fan of the quality of the matte paper. The coloration on some of the artwork (especially the chapter covers) seems to have inconsistent saturation levels and does not look as rich in direct light.

I also worry about this ink smudging or fading over time given the paper quality.

Is this paper type going to be a trend for the hardcover books, or was it more of an experiment?

Book is awesome, but one thing really loled me.

Where is Brothel building in Kingdom rules? The building was age-censored so fast, that it was removed but references to it (like discounts) were left? LOL :)

As others have pointed out earlier in the thread (several times), it’s been renamed ‘dance hall’.

Still it's called Brothel in all other places :)

Threeshades wrote:

Did i see this right, a child character remains the same size category as an adult?

I might add the young creature template for really young child NPCs (5 to 7 years for humans)

But why would a 5 year old march into battle?

With PCs involved you never know when the kid might need to make an attack roll, save or it becomes relevant how many hitpoints or what AC it has.

As others have pointed out earlier in the thread (several times), it’s been renamed ‘dance hall’.

What bugs me is I've never heard of a whorehouse with a ballroom in it.

I'd use the stats for a tenement for a brothel myself. Maybe an inn, for a nicer one with a formal front, add bedrooms/bunks as needed. Don't actually see why you'd need separate stats for one, most brothels are basically the madam's house and wouldn't be statistically different from any other house.

Dancehall's in its description (apart from whatever was originally intended for it) sounds more like a club or the kind of dance hall they had in the 18th-19th century where the community would go to... actually dance in, like the one the old ladies fixed up in the book Cranford.

If you're just not feeling the "Dance Hall/Brothel" equation, you can use the Bordello improvement in Ultimate Rulership. It's quite unambiguous about what goes on inside. :)

Alright, I have to ask: Why is it people are focusing on making Young Adventurers? I just don't see the appeal of that. Nobody in my group would ever consider that (except for one person who joined for a day and he found out the hard way that even children can die in Pathfinder). Anyways, I see my question about Deserts have been completely eclipsed by talk of Children PCs and just found that rather... confounding.

In the ultimate campaign guide when it shows the make up of the rooms in all the different types of buildings when using the Downtime rules. However they missed out on showing what rooms are used for a Foundry. Has anybody got any ideas for this, though I have a few of my own.

So no one can shed any light on the questions from my previous post? It's fine if you just tell me there's no RAW, I'll fill in the blanks myself, I simply don't want to homebrew something if there's an official answer.

So no one can shed any light on the questions from my previous post? It's fine if you just tell me there's no RAW, I'll fill in the blanks myself, I simply don't want to homebrew something if there's an official answer.

We had a fairly exhaustive discussion on the spell research topic but didn't really reach a conclusion - it's open for interpretation. That thread can be found here.

I did ask SKR about the topic and he said that he would not allow sorcerers to go "above" the normal limit of spells known with the spell research rules.

That said, I'd personally let spontaneous casters immediately replace one spell known with the newly researched spell (at the same level, obviously) at the end of the downtime period.

Alright, I have to ask: Why is it people are focusing on making Young Adventurers? I just don't see the appeal of that. Nobody in my group would ever consider that (except for one person who joined for a day and he found out the hard way that even children can die in Pathfinder). Anyways, I see my question about Deserts have been completely eclipsed by talk of Children PCs and just found that rather... confounding.

Harry Potter, Narnia, Oz, Hunger Games, Percy Jackson......

I would have loved to be able to play a 14 year old back when I was that age. Some gamers have kids who have seen/read adolescent fantasy and would love to play it. Heck I am building a character for that to play a Potter-esque game.

It may not be for everyone, but the Ultimate Campaign if full of rules that are great for some and completely ignored by others. Me, I always come up with solid backstories so the background stuff in the start of the book will never be used by me.

Stronghold (Story) Feat

There is no cooldown on this ability and it can stack with itself in a couple of ways. You can keep dishing out the AC dodge bonus to infinity and it'll stack. And each time you do that you can also apply one of the other four options (attack bonus, fort save, ref save, and will save) due to the double effect bonus for completing the quest.

I now know that I will be building a Pally ~ Noble Scion who buffs his troops into, "You can't hit me, neener neener, dracolich god thing."

We had a fairly exhaustive discussion on the spell research topic but didn't really reach a conclusion - it's open for interpretation.

We've actually had a similar discussion on GitP forums and I've reached the conclusion that nothing in the RAW is against spontaneous casters adding spells to their list spells known, nor is it unbalancing compared to existing methods of acquiring spells (as also demonstrated in your own thread).

I was more hoping someone would offer their opinion on the main issue of my post. Since D&D is a cooperative game, I find it rather odd that the rules are quiet on how the party members are able to cooperate on downtime activities.

Stronghold (Story) Feat

There is no cooldown on this ability and it can stack with itself in a couple of ways. You can keep dishing out the AC dodge bonus to infinity and it'll stack. And each time you do that you can also apply one of the other four options (attack bonus, fort save, ref save, and will save) due to the double effect bonus for completing the quest.

I now know that I will be building a Pally ~ Noble Scion who buffs his troops into, "You can't hit me, neener neener, dracolich god thing."

Wouldn't that fall under "not from the same source without specific exceptions"?

Question regarding the background generator, regarding Table 1-21: Human Siblings. Is it by design that a human character can only have half-sibling that are of a different race, but never human half-siblings? That seems excessive to me.

I believe that when they refer to half-siblings they specifically mean siblings that are half-human, not siblings that do not share both parents.

Note that under human it merely says siblings, while elves specifically list "biological siblings".

So I have a question about the mass combat rules. I am currently running a Wizard in a curse of the crimson throne campaign. We just cleared Scarwall and returned the body of Mandravius and all his gear to the people of Lastwall. They offered us "lands and titles" as the GM was clever enough to try to drag us into their wars with the orcs of Belkzen. Needless to say, we are going to keep Scarwall and use it. So here is my question.

My wizard and his wizard cohort are both very effective in crafting magic items, and have the craft construct and cooperative crafting feats. I even took arcane builder (construct). Seeing as how I can build an iron golem in around 29 days (ring of sustenance lets me double build per day, and assuming I don't do so in my demiplane), there is no reason to not make an army of iron golems. Now using the mass combat rules, I would get a small army of 50 iron golems with a stat line of:

Type: Iron Golem
ACR: 11
HP: 55
DV: 31
OV: 11
Special: Construct, Breath Weapon, Significant Defense

Now my question is this. Does this army have consumption or need a moral stat? Is it impossible to break this army and force it to run away? Because the army doesn't train, eat, drink, or get payed, does it have no consumption?

I'm kind of at a loss as to why anyone with access to the craft construct feat (and especially those with access to a flowing time demiplane) would use any other kind of army other than initial cost.

I'm a bit confused about the conflict points during background generation (which I think is my favourite section, actually).

I understand that CP increase your place on the alignment track, but I can't figure out which track to use: the Law/Chaos or Good/Evil. It seems that the CP are all lumped in together...it can't be that you just evenly split them, or you'd never get mixes from the ends of the tracks (LE, CG, for example).

My only thought is that the player simply decides where to "spend" the CP on the alignment tracks. "Oh...I picked up 3 CP here...okay, I'll spend them on Law/Chaos, which'll push me from LG to NG" ...or..."Oh, I picked up 3 CP here...okay, I'll spend them on Good/Evil, which'll push me from LG to LN".

I'm quite happy with that, but I just want to make sure I'm not missing some vital step (which I suspect I might be!).

Just realized with some disappointment that this ambiguity is in line with the trope Chaos = Evil and Law = Good.

I am not overly fond of this bias in the system itself (rather than in just the fluff of LG characters), though it is common in the game design and has a old history (cf Paladin).

Seeing as how I can build an iron golem in around 29 days (ring of sustenance lets me double build per day, and assuming I don't do so in my demiplane), there is no reason to not make an army of iron golems. Now using the mass combat rules, I would get a small army of 50 iron golems with a stat line of:

Type: Iron Golem
ACR: 11
HP: 55
DV: 31
OV: 11
Special: Construct, Breath Weapon, Significant Defense

Now my question is this. Does this army have consumption or need a moral stat?

Answer #1: Whatever your DM says.

Also, if you're using PC downtime to build your army it'll take you 2-4 years to build it (depending on demi-plane time). People might notice that.

Cheers
Mark

@Theshadowduke

Wouldn't 50 iron golems cost about 4 million gp?

@Theshadowduke

Wouldn't 50 iron golems cost about 4 million gp?

I never said it would be cheap, just highly effective. I will probably start with a unit of 10 for initial raids and the like. And as Mark said, yeah I will need to both lead them and repair them. But if my character is leading them, they now have the teleportation special ability as well...

Holy crap a wizard that wants to have an army can do some really broken things.

Holy crap a [character with 4 million gp] that wants to have an army can do some really broken things.

Fixed that for you. :p

You know... Against your average non-special armies... and even some special ones. A single iron golem will probably do the job.

How to deal with a single Iron Golem:

1) go around it.

2) If you cannot go around it you are probably in a defensible position with siege weapons. Use those to smash the lone Iron Golem.

3) Equip your archers with Adamantine Weapon Blanch arrows.

1000 level 1 archers = 50 hits on an AC28 iron golem. Average damage of 50 hits is 225damage with regular long bows.

Price tag to destroy Iron Golem with your archers using adamantine weapon blanch? 10,000gp. Sell what is left of the Iron Golem to make a profit.

4) Hire an adventuring party to deal with it.

Note: some of these would work against 50 iron golems. Since Iron Golems move so slowly an army would be able to determine where they meet the Golems. They would be able to choose a place where they would have a lot of shots before the Iron Golems even arrived at the army.

Simply put, you give me a regular army and face me with 50 iron golems and I will show you why nobody makes an army of iron golems.

- Gauss

Kudaku wrote:

We had a fairly exhaustive discussion on the spell research topic but didn't really reach a conclusion - it's open for interpretation.

We've actually had a similar discussion on GitP forums and I've reached the conclusion that nothing in the RAW is against spontaneous casters adding spells to their list spells known, nor is it unbalancing compared to existing methods of acquiring spells (as also demonstrated in your own thread).

I was more hoping someone would offer their opinion on the main issue of my post. Since D&D is a cooperative game, I find it rather odd that the rules are quiet on how the party members are able to cooperate on downtime activities.

...

2) No, a bard or sorcerer can't use spell research to increase the number of spells known. Spell research allows you to say, "I've leveled up and can learn new spells, but none of the printed spells are something I want to learn, so I'm going to research a totally new spell."
...

From here.

No offense to SKR, but I don't take his comments as RAW at face value. If they didn't want sorcerers to be wizards, they shouldn't have given them methods of doing so in the first place. It's a bit late to throw a bucket of water on the fire now, isn't it? :p

[sarcasm] I guess it's time to buff the wizard again so they can be more like sorcerers. [/sarcasm]

But like I said, I've already reached a conclusion on that matter. Since I don't ban pages of spell knowledge in my games, I won't prevent spontaneous casters from acquiring new spells via other, equally expensive methods either.

No offense to SKR, but I don't take his comments as RAW at face value. If they didn't want sorcerers to be wizards, they shouldn't have given them methods of doing so in the first place. It's a bit late to throw a bucket of water on the fire now, isn't it? :p

No offense to you, but where in the downtime rules does it ever say that a sorcerer can exceed the number of spells known in Table 3–15: Sorcerer Spells Known? The sorcerer class says:

A sorcerer's selection of spells is extremely limited. A sorcerer begins play knowing four 0-level spells and two 1st-level spells of her choice. At each new sorcerer level, she gains one or more new spells, as indicated on Table: Sorcerer Spells Known. (Unlike spells per day, the number of spells a sorcerer knows is not affected by her Charisma score; the numbers on Table: Sorcerer Spells Known are fixed.) These new spells can be common spells chosen from the sorcerer/wizard spell list, or they can be unusual spells that the sorcerer has gained some understanding of through study.

And the Magic chapter says:

Adding Spells to a Sorcerer's or Bard's Repertoire: A sorcerer or bard gains spells each time she attains a new level in her class and never gains spells any other way. When your sorcerer or bard gains a new level, consult Table: Bard Spells Known or Table: Sorcerer Spells Known to learn how many spells from the appropriate spell list she now knows. With permission from the GM, sorcerers and bards can also select the spells they gain from new and unusual spells that they come across while adventuring.

Table 3–15 is an absolute limit. The advantages to being a sorcerer is that you don't have to prepare a set of spells each day, and can cast them in any combination. The drawback to being a sorcerer is that the number of spells you can ever learn is limited by the table.

Table 3–15 is an absolute limit. The advantages to being a sorcerer is that you don't have to prepare a set of spells each day, and can cast them in any combination. The drawback to being a sorcerer is that the number of spells you can ever learn is limited by the table.

Well, excluding Favored Class bonus for Humans... you could add up to 20 more known spells that way. Not sure if any other races can do that (I didn't look).

No, and that is a shame, because it makes players much more likely to choose human over another race. Not that I find the bonus bad per se, rather the contrary.

Also, bloodlines get their own spells. Arcane bloodline gets even more. ;)

...Or the Expanded Arcana feat, which adds either one or two spells.
Or Spell Pages, which admittedly doesn't permanently add to your spell list, but still acts as extra spells known for all purposes.

In short, the CRB ruling isn't quite as set in stone as it used to be, so it's not entirely unreasonable to wonder if the spell research rules are meant to be read that way. The cost of spell research in Ucamp is roughly comparable to buying (or crafting if you use Magic capital) a spell page of the same spell, and I believe also significantly more expensive than the original spell research rules.

Keneth wrote:

No offense to SKR, but I don't take his comments as RAW at face value. If they didn't want sorcerers to be wizards, they shouldn't have given them methods of doing so in the first place. It's a bit late to throw a bucket of water on the fire now, isn't it? :p

No offense to you, but where in the downtime rules does it ever say that a sorcerer can exceed the number of spells known in Table 3–15: Sorcerer Spells Known? The sorcerer class says:

A sorcerer's selection of spells is extremely limited. A sorcerer begins play knowing four 0-level spells and two 1st-level spells of her choice. At each new sorcerer level, she gains one or more new spells, as indicated on Table: Sorcerer Spells Known. (Unlike spells per day, the number of spells a sorcerer knows is not affected by her Charisma score; the numbers on Table: Sorcerer Spells Known are fixed.) These new spells can be common spells chosen from the sorcerer/wizard spell list, or they can be unusual spells that the sorcerer has gained some understanding of through study.

And the Magic chapter says:

Adding Spells to a Sorcerer's or Bard's Repertoire: A sorcerer or bard gains spells each time she attains a new level in her class and never gains spells any other way. When your sorcerer or bard gains a new level, consult Table: Bard Spells Known or Table: Sorcerer Spells Known to learn how many spells from the appropriate spell list she now knows. With permission from the GM, sorcerers and bards can also select the spells they gain from new and unusual spells that they come across while adventuring.

Table 3–15 is an absolute limit. The advantages to being a sorcerer is that you don't have to prepare a set of spells each day, and can cast them in any combination. The drawback to being a sorcerer is that the number of spells you can ever learn is limited by the table.

SKR the Ultimate Campaign book says that the character gains the spell when the research is completed.

4. Attempt a Spellcraft check and a Knowledge check (arcana for an arcane spell, religion for a divine spell) against the spell research DC. You can’t take 10 on these checks. You may spend Magic to modify a check result, with 1 point of Magic adding 2 to your total (maximum +10). If both checks succeed, you make 1 day’s progress toward
completing the spell. When your days of progress equal the total number of days needed, the spell is completed and added to your spellbook or list of spells known.

So if a sorcerer researches a new spell what happens at this point? Does he have to wait until he levels to know the spell? If you gain the spell at the point the research is complete how do you not get the spell immediately?

I am sure what you are saying is RAI, but I still don't know when I would gain the spell, and if the I don't get the spell when the research is completed I have no idea when I do get it.

When a sorcerer levels up, she gains new spells known. She can either (1) pick a spell from the sor/wiz spell list and add it to her spells known, or (2) do some spell research to create a new spell and add that new spell to her spells known.

It doesn't matter if you're using the vague spell research guidelines in the Core Rulebook, the more specific spell research rules in the GameMastery Guide, or the downtime spell research rules in Ultimate Campaign, none of them allow a sorcerer to exceed her spells known. Sorcerers are not wizards; they can't just add to their spells known as much as they want.

And I get that that's annoying. And I get that the "never gains spells any other way" rule is buried in the Magic chapter and not in the sorcerer class description, and therefore isn't as obvious as it should be. But that's the way it is.

I think the issue is that it's hard to see Table 3–15 as an absolute limit when there are several things that already ignore that 'absolute' limit. Why is research not an exception and favorite classes and Expanded Arcana feat are? It's not that the rule is buried, it's that several game elements don't make a lick of sense if you use it is an absolute limit as you are suggesting.

I'm sure a human sorcerer that takes his human favorite class option expects to gain it's benefit, even though it doesn't state 'a sorcerer can exceed the number of spells known in Table 3–15: Sorcerer Spells Known', much like I after reading the downtime rules would expected the same. Now I'm cool with a ruling that downtime doesn't to this, but I can't agree with the logic you used in your posts here to get there. IMO if downtime can't do it, by the same logic human sorcerers don't get any benefit from their favorite class as neither says anything about ignoring the absolute limit.

I agree, the language could be clearer.

There is a discrepancy regarding the Kingdom economy (Collect Taxes) check.

Is the Income Phase-Step 4-Collect Taxes check compared to the Control DC?

On UCa p207 in the Edict section the example states that to make an Economy check to generate income requires a check against the control DC.

Looking ahead to the Income phase, Jessica realizes that an average roll for her Economy check would be a failure (10 on the 1d20 + 52 Economy – 4 Unrest = 58, less than the Control DC of 60), which means there’s a good chance the kingdom won’t generate any BP this turn. She decides to set the Taxation edict to “heavy” (Economy +3, Loyalty –4).

However, this is not stated in the Income Phase or Collect Taxes wording on UCa p207.

Step 4—Collect Taxes: Attempt an Economy check, divide the result by 3 (round down), and add a number of BP to your Treasury equal to the result.

Example: Jessica and the other leaders need to keep BP in the kingdom for future plans, so they skip Step 1 of the Income phase. They are worried that they won’t collect enough taxes this turn, so just in case, in Step 2 they deposit 8,000 gp worth of coins, gems, and small magic items (Treasury +2 BP). The leaders aren’t selling any expensive items, so nothing happens in Step 3. In Step 4, Rob, the Treasurer, rolls the Economy check to collect taxes. Rob rolls a 9 on the 1d20, adds the kingdom’s Economy score (55), and subtracts Unrest (4) for a total of 60, which means the kingdom adds 20 BP (the Economy check result of 60, divided by 3) to the Treasury. At the end of this phase, the kingdom has Economy 55, Loyalty 42, Stability 55, Unrest 4, Consumption 4, and Treasury 27 BP.

- Gauss

The example kingdom has a control DC of 60 (explained in the first block of text you quoted). In that second quote, they rolled exactly 60 for their Economy check. If they got any less, then they wouldn't have received any taxes at all.

I can understand the confusion, since they don't explicitly state that the Economy check succeeded. In fact, I think the first time I had to re-read those sections to understand that exact point.

I am not confused, I am pointing out an error since examples are not rules. However, examples can be used to clarify rules or to give indications of the RAI.

Because there is no rule stated that this is against the Control DC and the Collect Taxes example does not even make mention of the DC, only the subsequent BP gained, we have either:

A) The rule for "Collect Taxes" checking against the Control DC was removed but the Edict example was not corrected.
OR
B) The rule is not present and thus needs to be added to match the Edict example.

Any guess as to intent is just a guess and not a rule. However, a conservative guess would be that the Edict example is correct even though the Collect Taxes rules and example do not mention it. The rationale for this would be that almost every Kingdom check I can find uses the Control DC.

- Gauss

Interesting. I've been running the economy check as a flat roll (ie no DC) to see how much income you make per turn. If anything it strikes me as a bit odd that a kingdom could simply have no income for a turn. Still, this dramatically ramps up the importance of +Economy buildings and council positions.

I would really appreciate it if this was cleared up.

Kudaku, the original Kingmaker kingdom rules had it against a Control DC. Yes, you could get no income that turn. It appears the Edict example is based on that rule but the rule is not actually present in Ultimate Campaign's Income section.

Note: Command DC in Kingmaker was oddly used in some cases instead of Control DC. Any references to Command DC should mean Control DC.

Here is the original text from the Kingmaker Kingdom rules:

Step 4—Generate Income: Make an Economy check against your Command DC at the end of your Income phase. If you’re successful, divide your result by 5 (dropping any fractions) and increase your Treasury’s BP by that amount.

For comparison here is the text from the Collect Taxes section of the UCa rules:

Step 4—Collect Taxes: Attempt an Economy check, divide the result by 3 (round down), and add a number of BP to your Treasury equal to the result.

Is the removal of the Command (Control) DC line intentional? My guess is that it was removed to save space.

- Gauss

I'm not disagreeing with you, making the economy check the only roll that doesn't have a DC never made much sense to me.
It makes starting up kingdoms even rougher than it currently is though xD.

Random question: Gauss, are you by any chance a forum admin on Roll20.net?

Yes, I am the same Gauss on Roll20.net. :)

- Gauss

I thought the profile image looked familiar - good on ya :)

I am not confused, I am pointing out an error since examples are not rules. However, examples can be used to clarify rules or to give indications of the RAI.

Because there is no rule stated that this is against the Control DC and the Collect Taxes example does not even make mention of the DC, only the subsequent BP gained, we have either:

Page 199, definition of Control DC:

All kingdom checks are against the control DC, unless otherwise stated.

Ahhh ok, for some reason I missed the bolded general rule. Thanks.

- Gauss

So i finally got my copy last week, and im a bit disappointed by the rules for child characters. They only really work for NPCs, I thought they were meant for PCs.

But there is no fun to be had with a nerfed statline and only NPC class levels. Even if that were the entire party.

I thought of it like this...

"You're new, you suck, you're a warrior. You adventure, you get better, and maybe, as you fight a duel against a knight and prevail, despite only being 13, you "unlock" the fighter class, and can now use the downtime rules to "retrain" the warrior levels to fighter."

Or

"Your days of studying books are nowhere near over. One day, you'll be a real wizard, but for now Mr. Potter, you're just a level 1 adept. But ya know what, 3 years later, you've bested Voldemort twice? Yeah, you totally can retrain into wizard now."

"Surprise Weapon" is now the go to trait for Hurler and Breaker Barbarians, Empty Handed Monks, and Cad Fighters. Really quite powerful.

Also very good: Fate's Favored, Reincarnated, Blood of Dragons

Pragmatic Activator, for Alchemist & Sage Sorcerers

Strength Foretold for Sorcs

Lots of goodness...

For those who'd like to add a little something extra to their mass combat, I'll just leave this right here.