| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
MY BABY!!!
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Just wanted to drop by and say: I've ran this already since I've written part I of the saga, and Alex has wrought pure GOLD here.
Seriously, this adventure beats many campaign-finales in just how epic it feels. I'm super-excited to see the final version!!
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I cannot wait to check this series out! Enz + AA = PURE GOLD!!
|
Huh. I'm honestly curious though,
|
|
Auuugh.. I really want to buy both of these, but it just keeps saying "Your request produced an error." Boooooooooo.. Hopefully that's fixed soon. It sounds like these are going to be great, and just what we need for our TTS sessions.
You can avoid that by either cleaning your browser's cookie cache or using incognito mode if you don't want to delete cookies
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have to say that I'm baffled by the reviews since my experience running this scenario was much better than I was led to believe from reviews. I dunno if I got lucky, but this scenario is way better than 3 stars if you ask me :p
Thank you, that's wonderful to hear! If anyone is a World of Warcraft player, I was heavily inspired by the Battle for Dazar'alor raid and the Halls of Reflection dungeon when writing this!
I wanted a scenario that captured the feeling of being in this fantastic location with chaos all around you while you're fleeing from something truly horrific.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
MY BABY!!!You're baby's first combat encounter made my players want to kill you.
It was wonderful.
I'm okay with being the Jack Sparrow of OP authors.
Your players: "That combat encounter was too hard! You're the worst author I've ever heard of."Me: "But you have heard of me."
I'm glad you enjoyed the scenario!
MY BABY!!!Questions for the author:
** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted **
So, all three of these questions are better suited for a developer than an author. I don't want to tell you that it's okay to do something that inadvertently creates table variance on a massive scale after all!
I'm sure this isn't the answer you wanted, and I profusely apologize. I just don't want to get into a situation where I said something that doesn't align with OP and cause them trouble. ^_^"
Organized Play Developer
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
MY BABY!!!Questions for the author:
** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted **
Re: Question 1, the GM should always warn the player(s) that a PC action is about to earn a point of Infamy. It's in the Infamy rules:
"When a character expresses the intent to perform a wantonly evil or callously criminal action and you inform them that their action would be considered an evil action, if the character still persists in performing the action, apply a point of Infamy to the character."A GM should never give out Infamy without first making the player aware that their PC's actions will earn it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Is there any clarification that can be provided on what level the Fey Influence feat allows the spells to be cast at (given that half of them can be heightened)?
MY BABY!!!Questions for the author:
** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted **
Re: Question 1, the GM should always warn the player(s) that a PC action is about to earn a point of Infamy. It's in the Infamy rules:
"When a character expresses the intent to perform a wantonly evil or callously criminal action and you inform them that their action would be considered an evil action, if the character still persists in performing the action, apply a point of Infamy to the character."A GM should never give out Infamy without first making the player aware that their PC's actions will earn it.
I think this should be explained a little better. Because the next paragraph in the Players guide makes it sound like if it is a scenario based decision then it shouldn't be warned. Otherwise, why would you present an option only to tell a player it is not an option. "Beyond GM intervention, some scenarios and written products may present evil solutions to situations. These actions will be called out within the adventure text as causes to give a character partaking in them a point of Infamy. Still, the GM is the final arbiter on what constitutes an alignment infraction and when Infamy is gained by a character at the table."
Hi, I have a question about this scenario.
In Webhekiz's Vaults, there is a hazard called Blood Haze:
A contingent of canine-featured Bhopanese guards has wandered into the passage ahead, into a sanguine haze. The guards tear at each other in confusion, unable to tell friend from foe.
If the PCs fail to overcome the hazard, this is the listed outcome:
The PCs succumb to the blood haze themselves, blacking out and taking 2d6+5 damage (2d10+13 damage in Tier 5-6). When they come to, the PCs discover blood on their weapons and all the guards dead. The lingering mental fog leaves the PCs stupefied 1 for 10 minutes (until after the encounter in area A).
The main penalty for failure seems to be some damage and the stupefied condition, but it is implied that the PCs kill the guards while under the confusion effect of the blood haze.
It seems that this action (killing the guards) could trigger the anathema of certain deities. For example, Apsu has this anathema:
Attack a creature without certainty of wrongdoing
A strict reading of the scenario text, along with the anathema, certainly makes it seem as though a PC failing the hazard would run afoul of the anathema.
On the other hand, the Guide to Organized Play states:
To allow a wide variety of characters in Society play, the rules around edicts and anathema are slightly relaxed. It is generally assumed that all characters can participate in Pathfinder Society adventures without running afoul of their deity’s edicts and anathema—attempting to perform the primary objective of an official Pathfinder Society mission by itself will not cause a character to fall out of favor with their deity.
In order to complete the scenario, the PCs must attempt to pass through the Blood Haze hazard, and can fail simply due to bad luck.
So my question is, does failing the Blood Haze hazard trigger relevant anathemas?
Thanks!
They have no control over it, so similar to if they were confused or dominated, it really doesn't make sense to punish the players.Hi, I have a question about this scenario.
** spoiler omitted **...
Thanks for the input. It's actually my character that this happened to. I'm trying to decide if I should get an atonement (not strictly needed, as my character isn't a cleric or paladin, but I feel like the character would still care).