Exactly. I knew you could cause you egg other people's ships.
Also to keep it relevant to the thread: BLOOD PIG!!!!
Creative Director
|
| 12 people marked this as a favorite. |
I ALMOST didn't put stats for Kazavon in the book, because I knew that once something gets stats, there's a certain category of gamer who will interpret that as a sign of weakness and deride it as being not as powerful as it could or should have been.
But in fact, a CR 25 foe is plenty powerful, regardless of how its statted up, and as always, if someone feels the need to make him even more powerful, that's GM prerogative to adjust things.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm incredibly grateful you included Kavazon, especially the emphasis on him
Also, to reiterate, I'll pay cash money if you get the web team to put his human form in the avatar rotation. :-)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I ALMOST didn't put stats for Kazavon in the book, because I knew that once something gets stats, there's a certain category of gamer who will interpret that as a sign of weakness and deride it as being not as powerful as it could or should have been.
But in fact, a CR 25 foe is plenty powerful, regardless of how its statted up, and as always, if someone feels the need to make him even more powerful, that's GM prerogative to adjust things.
You are way too right there. This right here is why that Sorshen AP isn't out yet isn't it? DM to the masses. I really don't envy you, but I do wish you good luck.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
James,
I don't begrudge your interpretation. Hell I think it's fine for everyone. I am different and I know you didn't write this just for me.
If you did, I'd probably owe you 125,000 dollars...
|
Did any feats or magical items get changed between the original iteration of this AP and now?
Arguably, Thunder and Fang... though the new wording reflects how it always seemed intended to me.
Didn't notice any others on my first skim through.
As to Kavazon's power level; the only thing that might seem 'odd' is that his remains created multiple artifacts. However, that can easily be explained as Zon-Kuthon empowering them after his death (as part of a plan to bring him back) rather than Kavazon just being so massively powerful that even after death his body parts were inherently the equivalent of artifacts.
Out of curiosity, did they do anything to
Out of curiosity, did they do anything to ** spoiler omitted **
Out of curiosity, did they do anything to ** spoiler omitted **
What was wrong with the Celestial Plate Armor? That's a solid armor choice for tanks.
Gaaaahh. It's wednesday here already! I want to buy this but it won't let me ;(
The PDF will be available in a few hours, I believe.
Out of curiosity, did they do anything to ** spoiler omitted **What was wrong with the Celestial Plate Armor? That's a solid armor choice for tanks.
I think there were issues due to the fact that now AC is much higher in Pathfinder. But I could be wrong.
As for the Illesoa thing...didn't hurt my PCs. Especially since her regen wasn't strong enough for some of the summoner's attacks.
|
Creative Director
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I removed the celestial plate armor for two reasons.
1: The space was better used on other magic items.
2: Celestial Plate Armor devalues the cool factor of celestial armor by spreading it around. Unique armor and weapons are more interesting when they're not spammed across all armor or weapon types.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
2: Celestial Plate Armor devalues the cool factor of celestial armor by spreading it around. Unique armor and weapons are more interesting when they're not spammed across all armor or weapon types.
I just wanted to bring up a possible different point of view. Food for thought as it were.
Unique goodies are awesome because a designer spent time coming up with a clever package of abilities that are generally different from the "this is a +2 equivalent" menu. They aren't awesome because they're "chain shirt" or "full plate" or "warhammer".
When a player sees a unique item which is appealing to their impression of their character but the one thing that is a menu pick - the physical item itself - doesn't match something their character could or would use, that's a not awesome.
That's when you hit "ask your GM for special permission to find/create a variant version of this." The fewer times in a game a player has to ask their GM for a favor, the better. Not because it's an adversarial relationship, but because players shouldn't be asking for exceptions frequently. Save the exceptions for when they really matter. And "it's a warhammer" versus "it's a longsword" shouldn't (usually) matter.
Anyway, I hear what you're saying and I don't disagree. But I can't help but think that a little bit of dilution to ease the frequency of "this would be awesome for my character but I've got Weapon Focus (not this) and Weapon Specialization (not this) and the Greater feats for same... so... I guess I'll just use some (+1 flaming not this), instead of this."
Note: I'm replying to the reason you've given, not the specific. I've never read the celestial plate armor and don't care about it in particular. I'm more interested in the design philosophy.
Is there no Pathfinder Advantage discount on this PDF?
Well, I hope they correct that soon.
The Want on this PDF is high
|
2: Celestial Plate Armor devalues the cool factor of celestial armor by spreading it around. Unique armor and weapons are more interesting when they're not spammed across all armor or weapon types.I just wanted to bring up a possible different point of view. Food for thought as it were.
Unique goodies are awesome because a designer spent time coming up with a clever package of abilities that are generally different from the "this is a +2 equivalent" menu. They aren't awesome because they're "chain shirt" or "full plate" or "warhammer".
When a player sees a unique item which is appealing to their impression of their character but the one thing that is a menu pick - the physical item itself - doesn't match something their character could or would use, that's a not awesome.
That's when you hit "ask your GM for special permission to find/create a variant version of this." The fewer times in a game a player has to ask their GM for a favor, the better. Not because it's an adversarial relationship, but because players shouldn't be asking for exceptions frequently. Save the exceptions for when they really matter. And "it's a warhammer" versus "it's a longsword" shouldn't (usually) matter.
Anyway, I hear what you're saying and I don't disagree. But I can't help but think that a little bit of dilution to ease the frequency of "this would be awesome for my character but I've got Weapon Focus (not this) and Weapon Specialization (not this) and the Greater feats for same... so... I guess I'll just use some (+1 flaming not this), instead of this."
Note: I'm replying to the reason you've given, not the specific. I've never read the celestial plate armor and don't care about it in particular. I'm more interested in the design philosophy.
That seems kinda pointless reply though, I mean Paizo's design philosophy on that subject is "Change item to match party". Like, I heard one ap has artifact bastard sword in it with note to change it whatever you want if nobody in party would use bastard swords.
Also on CR 25 thingie not being mythic, my comment on that is "Good, you could then have it as plausible level 20 party 'really hard to defeat boss' encounter then" :P
|
Creative Director
|
2: Celestial Plate Armor devalues the cool factor of celestial armor by spreading it around. Unique armor and weapons are more interesting when they're not spammed across all armor or weapon types.I just wanted to bring up a possible different point of view. Food for thought as it were.
Unique goodies are awesome because a designer spent time coming up with a clever package of abilities that are generally different from the "this is a +2 equivalent" menu. They aren't awesome because they're "chain shirt" or "full plate" or "warhammer".
When a player sees a unique item which is appealing to their impression of their character but the one thing that is a menu pick - the physical item itself - doesn't match something their character could or would use, that's a not awesome.
That's when you hit "ask your GM for special permission to find/create a variant version of this." The fewer times in a game a player has to ask their GM for a favor, the better. Not because it's an adversarial relationship, but because players shouldn't be asking for exceptions frequently. Save the exceptions for when they really matter. And "it's a warhammer" versus "it's a longsword" shouldn't (usually) matter.
Anyway, I hear what you're saying and I don't disagree. But I can't help but think that a little bit of dilution to ease the frequency of "this would be awesome for my character but I've got Weapon Focus (not this) and Weapon Specialization (not this) and the Greater feats for same... so... I guess I'll just use some (+1 flaming not this), instead of this."
Note: I'm replying to the reason you've given, not the specific. I've never read the celestial plate armor and don't care about it in particular. I'm more interested in the design philosophy.
Far too late to change my mind, first off.
And I'm not so sure celestial plate armor counts as "unique" or was all that difficult to come up with, since it's a barely different change from an existing item.
Finally, if you prefer having celestial plate in your game, go for it. In fact, adjusting armor and weapons in a published adventure to match the preferences of your player characters is just good GMing.
True James. I once made the Rod of Seven Parts into the Sword of Seven Parts. Just see what would happen. ;)
Is there no Pathfinder Advantage discount on this PDF?
Seems like there isn't for some reason.
|
Creative Director
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've been looking through it. Really cool stuff all around. Definitely a great follow-up on Rise of the Runelords! Though one thing I noticed; the Crown of Fangs here is a bit different from the version presented in Artifacts and Legends (mainly with a higher ego and other abilities). Is this a result of it, shall we say, gaining power as the Queen proceeds with her plot?
I suppose you could say that if you wanted, but it's not the case.
When you build a campaign and use existing material, you should absolutely tailor and adjust that material as you need to make sure you tell the story you want to tell. That goes for us at Paizo as well—in creating this version of Crimson Throne, I needed the Crown of Fangs to be more powerful, and so it was.
YAY! More power to the Fangs! :D
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'd call that fangtastic!
... NVM, I'll get my coat.
Ruyan.
I've a question related to book 3.
I recall the presence of a Sphinx-like monster in that book, that was from the tome of horrors. Is that monster still present or was it changed with something different, more "indian" (like a Naga, for example)?
Contributor
|
I've a question related to book 3.
I recall the presence of a Sphinx-like monster in that book, that was from the tome of horrors. Is that monster still present or was it changed with something different, more "indian" (like a Naga, for example)?
The darksphinx Sivit is still present - without her, all of the symbol spells scattered about would make a lot less sense. ^_^
|
|
I've a question related to book 3.
I recall the presence of a Sphinx-like monster in that book, that was from the tome of horrors. Is that monster still present or was it changed with something different, more "indian" (like a Naga, for example)?
Yep, Sivit is still present.
Paizo still regularly uses stuff from Tome of Horrors.
Edit: Like usual, ninjaed by Kali :3
Still a great book, though James. :)
The House Drake, were they beefed up from the usual Pseudo Dragon due to message board feedback or did Pseudo Dragons become less powerful with the switch to pathfinder.
I was just curious, I haven't had a chance to check out pseudo dragons yet. :-)
James,
Oh. Well still! It's get my vote for best supplement of the 3.0/3.5 years. :)
|
Creative Director
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
The House Drake, were they beefed up from the usual Pseudo Dragon due to message board feedback or did Pseudo Dragons become less powerful with the switch to pathfinder.
I was just curious, I haven't had a chance to check out pseudo dragons yet. :-)
The house drake is it's own creature. It's very similar in power to a pseudodragon, but it's not a pseudodragon. It exists because of the fact that the imps vs. pseudodragons element of Korvosa is REALLY cool, but that idea neglected to back itself up with rules—as written, even in earlier editions of the game, an imp will ALWAYS win in a fight against a pseudodragon, which cannot damage an imp at all.. House drakes can. They're designed to be a very even fight against an imp.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That's what I thought, they're super adorable little drakes that's for sure. :-)
Gin, you do know there's a posting about it right?
How was the Crown of Thorns buffed exactly?
No, I didn't know, thus the asking. Thanks for the link!
Glad I could assist then.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yay!