Pathfinder Adventure Path #73: The Worldwound Incursion (Wrath of the Righteous 1 of 6) (PFRPG)

So, looks like I'm going to be running this for my online group. Any chance we'll be seeing a paper miniatures set for these AP books as they come out?

Absolutely love the paper minis in my tabletop games but they're a lifesaver when it comes to running a game online!

Agree. The forced inclusion of minority, majority, gay, lesbian, abled or disabled feels wrong. It's a little like the idea of the female quota that sees to spring up here from time to time: we need more females in business or politics, well then lets set a minimum quota of women in these jobs and employ women to meet that quota. The inclusion feels false and betrays the whole concept of equality.

This is a different issue. When you see these sorts of measure implemented, if they're being implemented responsibly and not for political/marketing reasons, it's generally because the profession in question has a problem with entrenched misogyny. Internal bias means you have to force the people involved to change through assimilation.

Let's be clear, we're talking about people who literally think '<insert minority here> is not <good/qualified/talented/smart/genetically or emotionally suited> enough to perform this job'. Don't feel sorry for them.

Shalafi2412 wrote:

Will there be info on how to play it sans mythic?

EDIT: To make it a little more clear... you can play characters who aren't mythic in this adventure, and that will put very little onus on the player side of the screen, but the GM will need to do a fair bit more work. Mythic Adventures is VERY tied into this adventure path, in that the Worldwound has been intended, more or less from inception, to be a high-level adventuring site. Furthermore, this AP will be the one that spends the most time off the Material Plane yet—the Abyss is going to play a big role!

In terms of playing difficulty, does the high-level nature make this AP less suited for players new to the game?

Would removing the Mythic aspect make this even more challenging for inexperienced players?

Cat-thulhu wrote:

Agree. The forced inclusion of minority, majority, gay, lesbian, abled or disabled feels wrong. It's a little like the idea of the female quota that sees to spring up here from time to time: we need more females in business or politics, well then lets set a minimum quota of women in these jobs and employ women to meet that quota. The inclusion feels false and betrays the whole concept of equality.

This is a different issue. When you see these sorts of measure implemented, if they're being implemented responsibly and not for political/marketing reasons, it's generally because the profession in question has a problem with entrenched misogyny. Internal bias means you have to force the people involved to change through assimilation.

Let's be clear, we're talking about people who literally think '<insert minority here> is not <good/qualified/talented/smart/genetically or emotionally suited> enough to perform this job'. Don't feel sorry for them.

I dont know, it came off as forced to me, (that is to say more like trying to force a ethical/social/philisophical agenda or belief) than really serving any purpose as far as the story or for inclusiveness. That seems to be the reasoning more behind the complaints, if its even really a complaint. That it seems more like just doing it to do it., and goes more into the overcompensating side that not.

Shasazar wrote:

Cat-thulhu wrote:

Agree. The forced inclusion of minority, majority, gay, lesbian, abled or disabled feels wrong. It's a little like the idea of the female quota that sees to spring up here from time to time: we need more females in business or politics, well then lets set a minimum quota of women in these jobs and employ women to meet that quota. The inclusion feels false and betrays the whole concept of equality.

This is a different issue. When you see these sorts of measure implemented, if they're being implemented responsibly and not for political/marketing reasons, it's generally because the profession in question has a problem with entrenched misogyny. Internal bias means you have to force the people involved to change through assimilation.

Let's be clear, we're talking about people who literally think '<insert minority here> is not <good/qualified/talented/smart/genetically or emotionally suited> enough to perform this job'. Don't feel sorry for them.

I dont know, it came off as forced to me, (that is to say more like trying to force a ethical/social/philisophical agenda or belief) than really serving any purpose as far as the story or for inclusiveness. That seems to be the reasoning more behind the complaints, if its even really a complaint. That it seems more like just doing it to do it., and goes more into the overcompensating side that not.

I think "just doing it to do it" is the whole point. If you need some bigger reason before you're willing to include that kind of character, then it's not actually inclusive. It's not overcompensating, it's just regular old compensating. And for a lot of us, it's a very welcome thing. Just to clarify where I'm looking at this from, I'm a straight, white, middle class, fully able man. I still appreciate when authors make an effort to include people who aren't like me, because the world includes those kinds of people. In an ideal world, stories that lacked that kind of variety would be the ones that felt forced, or false, because they are.

I didnt say it was unwelcome, bur rather that the way it is came off as strong rather natural. Likw the things that are notable about the characters are that they are in a homosexual multiracial relationship, rather than being people and just happening to be those things. See the difference? Anyway, thats more of the "compliant" Ive heard than Shasazar was implying, which kind of seemed like a different thing entirely. I had not read the entire thing here, and was just going off of thier reply and a few comments earlier, so might have missed something others are referring to.

I didnt say it was unwelcome, bur rather that the way it is came off as strong rather natural. Likw the things that are notable about the characters are that they are in a homosexual multiracial relationship, rather than being people and just happening to be those things. See the difference? Anyway, thats more of the "compliant" Ive heard than Shasazar was implying, which kind of seemed like a different thing entirely. I had not read the entire thing here, and was just going off of thier reply and a few comments earlier, so might have missed something others are referring to.

That's a fair point. I haven't read the adventure (and might not for a while, since I'm hoping to play in it), so I can't speak to the details of how things are presented.

I just figure when there's a post by "Devil's Advocate" it demands a reply on principle. :P

Fair enough. :)

Just looking at my pdf for the first time right now. I have to say, I really love the picture of Wendaug on p.20. One of the best looking mongrelmen pictures I've ever seen; very colorful and I love how different it looks. One of the things that has always bugged me about most mongrelman artwork (especially during 2E) was that for a race that was supposed to be defined by being a patchwork, individually visually distinct group, all of the pictures of them looked remarkably similar to one another.

I can't quite tell whose signature that is on the piece; is that one by Fabio Gorla?

EDIT: I just can't help admiring it; for all that the individual pieces put together makes the figure so grotesque, there is still something stunningly beautiful about the whole.

Not my favorite opening to an AP.

This adding 'progressive' relationships to everything is starting to seem forced... and slightly offensive. By offensive, I mean that it is starting to look like pandering to a specific group, rather than it being a natural part of the story.

I mean... if we are going to keep pandering, why don't I see any positive examples of fat characters? Don't we fatties deserve it?

I am being facetious.... but the point still stand... it just seems like pandering.

Luckily, all it takes to be fixed is the GM fixing it for their groups. It otherwise wasn't that bad.

Also, the tiefling Faxon on p. 37? Really cool. I love the design of the armor, the coloring is elegant in its simplicity, and the tattoo. Really well done!

So anyone mind tossing out some details on Xoveron? Any cool abilities? I won't be able to download my PDF copy until Wed.

you know there is a whole other thread, I think in the campaign setting forum, about Paizo's treatment of homosexuality?

Just saying that might be a better place for this discussion.

As for the AP, I didn't really thing the inclusion of transgender or homosexuality was that big a deal.

the half-orc born to loving parents is really the most unique thing about the paladin character. The description of her dad is very very different than Paizo's hardline stance on Orcs as always evil murdering/raping bastards.

you know there is a whole other thread, I think in the campaign setting forum, about Paizo's treatment of homosexuality?

Just saying that might be a better place for this discussion.

As for the AP, I didn't really thing the inclusion of transgender or homosexuality was that big a deal.

the half-orc born to loving parents is really the most unique thing about the paladin character. The description of her dad is very very different than Paizo's hardline stance on Orcs as always evil murdering/raping bastards.

Well, in my case I was just pointing out why it was my least favorite AP opening.. and I could have actually put in in a review.. but I was feeling nice to not do that and be forced to give it however many stars... which I suppose in thinking would probably still be 3... which isn't bad.

you know there is a whole other thread, I think in the campaign setting forum, about Paizo's treatment of homosexuality?

Just saying that might be a better place for this discussion.

As for the AP, I didn't really thing the inclusion of transgender or homosexuality was that big a deal.

the half-orc born to loving parents is really the most unique thing about the paladin character. The description of her dad is very very different than Paizo's hardline stance on Orcs as always evil murdering/raping bastards.

I mentioned here because it was about this product more than in general, and that other thread is borderline hostile sometimes (and I hid it). One thing I did like about it is that it sort of seems like how in some video games there is one of those moments "if you do this" towards the beginning you "get this little extra story part" later on.

MMCJawa wrote:

you know there is a whole other thread, I think in the campaign setting forum, about Paizo's treatment of homosexuality?

Just saying that might be a better place for this discussion.

As for the AP, I didn't really thing the inclusion of transgender or homosexuality was that big a deal.

the half-orc born to loving parents is really the most unique thing about the paladin character. The description of her dad is very very different than Paizo's hardline stance on Orcs as always evil murdering/raping bastards.

I mentioned here because it was about this product more than in general, and that other thread is borderline hostile sometimes (and I hid it). One thing I did like about it is that it sort of seems like how in some video games there is one of those moments "if you do this" towards the beginning you "get this little extra story part" later on.

Yeah... No matter my personal thoughts on the subject... that is not a thread I want to be involved in no matter which side I'd be on.

True...but it risks derailing the product thread into a thread on this subject.

On the actual subject of the AP, my big concern was how they could start an AP with level one PCs embroiled in an all out demon attack in a city. I thought they did a good job on providing a plausible way of having the PC's be present but at the same time not in a situation where they could be ridiculously overmatched until they acquired suitable levels.

RE: the arguments that these people are only notable for their LGBT status... Did you even read the rest of their profiles? There's actually a lot more to them than that!

P.S., I personally totally dig the fact that there's a loving couple, regardless of their sexuality or gender identities. Relationships make for great characterisation and roleplaying moments. It's actually not that often that you get a couple (husband-wife, wife-wife, or husband-husband) that plays such a big role overall. :)

True...but it risks derailing the product thread into a thread on this subject.

On the actual subject of the AP, my big concern was how they could start an AP with level one PCs embroiled in an all out demon attack in a city. I thought they did a good job on providing a plausible way of having the PC's be present but at the same time not in a situation where they could be ridiculously overmatched until they acquired suitable levels.

I do want to point out to Amber Scott that I otherwise thought it was a good job. I don't want her to think that just because something wasn't perfect in the minds of some... like me... that they didn't like the entire thing.

Wow to some of the comments here. Speaking from the perspective of a gay man, I find it completely "forced" to see so many heterosexual characters predominating in fantasy fiction. That just doesn't reflect the reality that exists!

How many transgendered characters can we point to in the Adventure Paths that have appeared before? I cannot remember any. I wonder how I would feel if I were transgendered myself, to see this AP and think "Wow, there is an acknowledgment I exist!", and then to come on these boards and see others in the RPG gaming community say that the mere inclusion (the first!) of a person like me is "forced."

I literally feel somewhat nauseous reading some of these comments.

I mean... if we are going to keep pandering, why don't I see any positive examples of fat characters? Don't we fatties deserve it?

Chief Sull is a positive example of a heavy set individual.

Mark Sweetman has you there. He's fat and ugly, and yet a good guy. Double whammy :D

By he, I mean the Chief. Not Mark >.>

lol

I shall concede.

Wow to some of the comments here. Speaking from the perspective of a gay man, I find it completely "forced" to see so many heterosexual characters predominating in fantasy fiction. That just doesn't reflect the reality that exists!

How many transgendered characters can we point to in the Adventure Paths that have appeared before? I cannot remember any. I wonder how I would feel if I were transgendered myself, to see this AP and think "Wow, there is an acknowledgment I exist!", and then to come on these boards and see others in the RPG gaming community say that the mere inclusion (the first!) of a person like me is "forced."

I literally feel somewhat nauseous reading some of these comments.

Well people have opinions.. if they make you feel nauseous, you maybe need to have a doctor check you out. There could be a real problem there.

I lived with gay men and women when I was in New Orleans... none of them would have had any problems with any of it. Most would have agreed.

I pretty much reiterate again. The more unrepresented people we add to a setting, the less special and unique they become and soon, it won't feel forced at all. Whether it be different ethnicities, sexualities, genders, ages, or body types, I hope for a time where we can include anyone and no one bats an eye. Personally, I wish minorities were more represented in fantasy when I was a young lad getting picked on at school for being Puerto Rican. It's nice to have a company say "Anyone can be a hero, no matter your race, gender, or sexuality".

So I say keep them coming, even if it looks like it's pandering to an agenda. The only agenda I see is that anyone can be a hero. And conversely, anyone can be a villain.

I pretty much reiterate again. The more unrepresented people we add to a setting, the less special and unique they become and soon, it won't feel forced at all. Whether it be different ethnicities, sexualities, genders, or body types, I hope for a time where we can include anyone and no one bats an eye. Personally, I wish minorities were more represented in fantasy when I was a young lad getting picked on at school for being Puerto Rican. It's nice to have a company say "Anyone can be a hero, no matter your race, gender, or sexuality".

So I say keep them coming, even if it looks like it's pandering to an agenda. The only agenda I see is that anyone can be a hero. And conversely, anyone can be a villain.

The problem is if you add too much to make it fit everyone.. it really isn't going to fit everyone. Someone is always going to be alienated.

Let's say you have a Catholic or Christian that doesn't want that sort of thing. I'm not Christian, so I have no idea how much of a problem that actually is. But you should balance being progressive with not alienating others...

I'd have been bothered less by the addition in this if it had actually seemed necessary, rather than seeming like it was being "forced".

As I said earlier though.. it is easy enough to change things like that. So it only effects the score I would give in a review... but I am otherwise not unsatisfied with the product. The module does still look fun.

Anyway, I will voluntarily back out, because I know that in most cases people hate opinions they disagree with it. The nausea comment above proves that. So if you have an opinion or belief that is even slightly critical about certain subjects.. you best not put it out there too much. The tolerant usually aren't quite as tolerant as they claim. When you don't tow the party line.. your comments are unwelcome, even if they are about something you paid for... and were not entirely pleased with.

Despite my one issue with this issue... I look forward to the next one. Have a great night everyone.

Odraude wrote:

I pretty much reiterate again. The more unrepresented people we add to a setting, the less special and unique they become and soon, it won't feel forced at all. Whether it be different ethnicities, sexualities, genders, or body types, I hope for a time where we can include anyone and no one bats an eye. Personally, I wish minorities were more represented in fantasy when I was a young lad getting picked on at school for being Puerto Rican. It's nice to have a company say "Anyone can be a hero, no matter your race, gender, or sexuality".

So I say keep them coming, even if it looks like it's pandering to an agenda. The only agenda I see is that anyone can be a hero. And conversely, anyone can be a villain.

The problem is if you add too much to make it fit everyone.. it really isn't going to fit everyone. Someone is always going to be alienated.

Let's say you have a Catholic or Christian that doesn't want that sort of thing. I'm not Christian, so I have no idea how much of a problem that actually is. But you should balance being progressive with not alienating others...

I'd have been bothered less by the addition in this if it had actually seemed necessary, rather than seeming like it was being "forced".

As I said earlier though.. it is easy enough to change things like that. So it only effects the score I would give in a review... but I am otherwise not unsatisfied with the product. The module does still look fun.

Throwing my personal issue with religion aside, that's an issue with the player then, not with the company. As a GM, you can choose to remove that. Just like, if you have a player that hated black people (they exist, read below), then as a GM, you can remove them. And if you have a player with issues with women in charge, you can, as a GM, remove them. It is certainly easier for the company to include all kinds of elements and leave it to the GM to remove them.

Warning: Naughty Language Ahead.

I'm reminded of a GM I knew when I was in junior high named Damian. Damian was practically a white supremacist that gamed at the not-so-friendly LGS where I grew up. He was furious that WotC was adding African characters to their artwork in the rulebooks and adventure modules. He felt like they were pandering to, I paraphrase, "a bunch of dumb n~+@#+s that don't even have a culture, just to make them feel better about slavery." He believed that non-whites don't belong in fantasy gaming since "history had proven that European civilization is superior, so why should we play any other setting?" Non-white characters were never allowed in the games he ran, and most of the non-white NPCs were slaves, idiots, and racial caricatures. He'd also roll his eyes when he was a player and someone (like me) would bring an African character, or a Native American character, or a Japanese character. Sad part is that he had a retinue of two players that agreed with him and always joined in the racial hate. I got called a lot of names at that store, even when I wasn't in his games.

I had a terrible time when it came to D&D in my hometown. And I never want anyone of any group to go through what I did.

That's why whether I like it or not, whenever I hear people complain about "pandering" to LGBT people in D&D, I always think of Damian. It always reminds me that people like him exist for everyone, whether it's LGBT people, non-whites, or women clad in more than just bikini armor. And honestly, whether that opinion is as hateful as Damian's was or as reasonable as yours is, is a complaint I hope will fall on deaf ears.

Anyway, I will voluntarily back out, because I know that in most cases people hate opinions they disagree with it. The nausea comment above proves that. So if you have an opinion or belief that is even slightly critical about certain subjects.. you best not put it out there too much. The tolerant usually aren't quite as tolerant as they claim.

Despite my one issue with this issue... I look forward to the next one. Have a great night everyone.

Don't play the "tolerant is intolerant" victim card. You're smarter than that, I can tell. No one should have to tolerate intolerance. I learned that quickly at a young age.

Don't be a Damian. I can tell you are better than that.

PMed you out of respect of others.

The problem is if you add too much to make it fit everyone.. it really isn't going to fit everyone. Someone is always going to be alienated.

Let's say you have a Catholic or Christian that doesn't want that sort of thing. I'm not Christian, so I have no idea how much of a problem that actually is. But you should balance being progressive with not alienating others...

Confession: I am uneasy in the presence of openly gay men.

Do I think this is right? Should I discourage gay men from coming out, or try to avoid them? Absolutely not. I recognize my squeamishness as a flaw in my personality and in the culture in which I was raised, and it is my duty to look beyond it, and if possible to rid myself of it.

Should we, by way of comparison, balance being progressive with not "alienating" those bigoted against or even somewhat uncomfortable with black, asian, or (like myself) Jewish people? Hell no.

The only way we, as a society and as individuals, will grow out of our intolerance is to make tolerance and openness the default.

Mead Gregorisson wrote:

The problem is if you add too much to make it fit everyone.. it really isn't going to fit everyone. Someone is always going to be alienated.

Let's say you have a Catholic or Christian that doesn't want that sort of thing. I'm not Christian, so I have no idea how much of a problem that actually is. But you should balance being progressive with not alienating others...

Confession: I am uneasy in the presence of openly gay men.

Do I think this is right? Should I discourage gay men from coming out, or try to avoid them? Absolutely not. I recognize my squeamishness as a flaw in my personality and in the culture in which I was raised, and it is my duty to look beyond it, and if possible to rid myself of it.

Should we, by way of comparison, balance being progressive with not "alienating" those bigoted against or even somewhat uncomfortable with black, asian, or (like myself) Jewish people? Hell no.

The only way we, as a society and as individuals, will grow out of our intolerance is to make tolerance and openness the default.

It's just as bigoted to tell others that their opinions don't count just because they don't tow the PC party line. Whether it is religious reasons or other reasons.. people should not be afraid to post their beliefs just because others will jump on them for it. I tend to think of progressives as fascists for a reason. People can't even post their opinion about something they bought without the jackbooted thugs coming out to squash their opinions.

That nauseates me.

Let's keep the product discussion threads about the product, please. If you'd like to discuss this topic in relation to our Adventure Path line, please start a thread in the appropriate forum.

Sooo... back on topic?

How 'bout them pieces of art?

I love that piece with the demon smashing through the city walls in the bestiary. Reminds me a lot of the old Castle Amber cover, but darker and even more menacing.

EDIT: Ninja'd!

Sooo... back on topic?

How 'bout them pieces of art?

I love that piece with the demon smashing through the city walls in the bestiary. Reminds me a lot of the old Castle Amber cover, but darker and even more menacing.

EDIT: Ninja'd!

That I can do. the art was excellent.

Politics, race, sex, this sure is getting fun.

I'm honestly more interested on the adventure itself, the villains, and when the PCs get mythic power. Anyone able to share more information on that?

Politics, race, sex, this sure is getting fun.

I'm honestly more interested on the adventure itself, the villains, and when the PCs get mythic power. Anyone able to share more information on that?

The PC's gain Mythic Tier 1 at the very end of this adventure. More of a Conclusion/Epilogue/Aftermath. (without spoiler details.)

I'm honestly more interested on the adventure itself, the villains, and when the PCs get mythic power. Anyone able to share more information on that?

Villains. There is a mix of big heavy hitter namedrops early and throughout that could be seen as plenty of foreshadowing for later volumes, as well as some fairly neat mini bosses.(which also have some neat/cool artwork at times!)

Adventure wise, it reminds me a bit of Smuggler's Shiv, in that there are several neutral/friendly NPC's to work on standing with, and the 'mini-sandbox' that lets you tackle some events in order of player preference/direction choice.

Mechalibur wrote:

Politics, race, sex, this sure is getting fun.

I'm honestly more interested on the adventure itself, the villains, and when the PCs get mythic power. Anyone able to share more information on that?

The PC's gain Mythic Tier 1 at the very end of this adventure. More of a Conclusion/Epilogue/Aftermath. (without spoiler details.

)

I liked the idea of what happens if you fail. That is when you can use the mythic flaws.

Rathendar wrote:

Mechalibur wrote:

Politics, race, sex, this sure is getting fun.

I'm honestly more interested on the adventure itself, the villains, and when the PCs get mythic power. Anyone able to share more information on that?

The PC's gain Mythic Tier 1 at the very end of this adventure. More of a Conclusion/Epilogue/Aftermath. (without spoiler details.

)

I liked the idea of what happens if you fail. That is when you can use the mythic flaws.

True! It was nice to have that worked in as an alternate Twist. 'If you fail, you get it because 'This Instead' but this is bad/less desirable because 'Flaws!'. heh heh.

The players guide mentions downtime and mass combat rules are "useful" to know. How much do they feature in this part? Still have to await my shipping notice :(

Aaron Scott 139 wrote:

James Jacobs wrote:

Generic Villain wrote:

Another lesbian couple eh? I really appreciate Paizo's inclusion of LGBT characters, but come on - where are the gay men? Sigh.

There's a couple in the 2nd adventure. Never fear!

I hope it doesn't get overdone though. We get it, inclusiveness is good, just don't beat me over the head with it. I'm cool with everyone loving everyone but some moderation makes it feel more organic and less forced. I hope that didn't make me sound like a hater. I'm really not.

All I can say is that I don' think it's been overdone... but my/Paizo's take on what is and isn't "overdone" will vary wildly when compared to the customers' takes.

In the end, it's up to each GM how to handle things like relationships in their games, or how those relationships are organized.

But being inclusive is a big deal for us at Paizo, and including GLBT characters in adventures is important, since that helps raise awareness and promotes inclusivity. And it's something we're going to keep doing as we head into the future!

It looks like the GLBT has become the central focus of this AP. It's a current hot topic that not everyone can agree on, in and outside of this forum. I have no problem with the GLBT war for equality. However, I question the time and place of this battle.

Everyone loves Paizo's creations, that's why many like myself have spent well over a thousand dollars on their product. Its fun to turn off reality and step into a good story every now and again. That's why it saddens me to see this game turned into a bandstand for the current GLBT social movement. If this topic is one that will cause discord within the Paizo family and distract from the product so many love paying for, why force it.

With that being said, I love and accept you all for who you are... great game designers!

Seriously? One gay couple per AP is turning the game into "a bandstand for the current GLBT social movement"? Really? Man, who knew getting bandstands was so easy? Seriously, people who don't like this are really overstating its importance. It mostly consists of two female characters being referred to as each others wives. This is something to be horribly offended and complain about? Really?

However, the adventure itself looks quite a challenge. Plus if I DM this, I just know my players are going to want to throw at least one and possibly two of the featured NPCs down the deepest darkest hole there is in frustration. Having the climactic encounters reinforce if the PCs retreat is a good idea. Gives a sense of a living force opposing them. The article about old Kenebres is nice for background, but I'm not sure how much use it'll get given the players will be struggling around in new Kenebres but it gives a bit of history for them to incorporate.

I wouldn't say it is the central focus of the AP. It really not that prominent, honestly. I'm not sure if, when you say this AP, if you mean this part of the AP, or the entire 6 parts of the AP, which hasn't even come out yet, (no pun intended), and we really have no idea how prominent the topic will be. So far, it seems like a moderately important side story line, that potentially might not even exist if the players do/do not do something at some points.

Littlestump,
Rather than poking the bag, could you perhaps produce your evidence for the rather strange assertion that "these themes" are central to the AP? I mean, clearly you see something in there that I don't.

The players guide mentions downtime and mass combat rules are "useful" to know. How much do they feature in this part? Still have to await my shipping notice :(

At least in the first volume, I don't see much need for either rule set. The PCs are kind of operating on a clock and don't really have time for downtime rules in this AP (and if they have a business, there should be a pretty good chance it was destroyed or looted during the battle).

As written there are also no need to use mass combat rules...although I can see how they might be important later on, like when PC's try to reclaim Drezen.

Take it to another thread guys? And let this thread stay on topic please.

To Cat-thulhu- I didn't see any mention of specific uses for downtime in this module (admittedly, I only scanned through it briefly while at work). I'm thinking the mass combat will certainly come into play later in the AP (one of the blurbs about future volumes mentions fighting armies of demons). Other downtime things might happen between this module and the next, or perhaps in the next volume. I could specifically see some use for the creating buildings rules of either the downtime or even kingdom builder sections after the events of this module.

How is discussing homosexuality in regards to this specific product any less "on topic" than, for example, discussing mass combat or downtime in relation to this product? Now granted, a few people earlier had taken it off the topic of this product into a more general outlook, but really, for the most part it is really about this product and pretty much the definition of "on topic".