Pathfinder Adventure: Shadows at Sundown

AnimatedPaper wrote:

Looks like I'm in the early group this month.

** spoiler omitted **

One of those seems to have been nerfed in power level :'D

That's a significant plot point. A spoiler, even!

Oki artstyle isn't my personal favorite, but designs in art I do like a lot :O

Anyway, I also like the tease at end of campaign conclusion. I'm kinda sad that this does overlap a bit with my attempt to do crimson throne post campaign until level 20, but I can see how I could use this as sequel to that campaign without changing much here :3 So woo!

Also didn't comment on it before, but I do also like we finally know what the certain types of creatures are like ;D

The art on the paizo homepage and on this page are very different. Which is the actual cover art?

The art on the paizo homepage and on this page are very different. Which is the actual cover art?

The image of the scarlet walker fighting Seelah shown on this page is the actual cover.

The home page also has the wrong art for the Abomination Vaults compilation, and the latest AP #179.

NECR0G1ANT wrote:

Are there any plans for Foundry support?

Not yet.

I'd like to request it. Just vocalizing support for Foundry support on this product specifically.

Aaron Shanks wrote:

NECR0G1ANT wrote:

Are there any plans for Foundry support?

Not yet.

I'd like to request it. Just vocalizing support for Foundry support on this product specifically.

Yes, me too. Also Night of the Gray Death and Fists of the Ruby Phoenix, please.

Who'll say "Now available"?

Looks like I'm in the early group this month.

** spoiler omitted **

Looks like the way we format non-magical armors is the culprit—indication that Gray Maiden Plate is not common got stripped from this at some point.

Gray Maiden plate is, in any case, should be Rare, and should come with story repercussions since wearing the armor would impact others' first impressions of you, particularly in Korvosa or nearby areas.

Alternately, make it a level 3 item with a cost of 50 gp.

Sorry about the confusion.

At this point, the only way to "gain access" to a suit of the armor is to loot it from a Gray Maiden you fight in the adventure or to convince them to give you a suit as a gift. Access is at this point 100% GM controlled.

We may do more with the Gray Maidens in a future product, but this adventure was not the right place to have them play much more than a cameo role mostly kept to the NPC side of things.

Looks like the way we format non-magical armors is the culprit—indication that Gray Maiden Plate is not common got stripped from this at some point.

Gray Maiden plate is, in any case, should be Rare, and should come with story repercussions since wearing the armor would impact others' first impressions of you, particularly in Korvosa or nearby areas.

Alternately, make it a level 3 item with a cost of 50 gp.

Sorry about the confusion.

At this point, the only way to "gain access" to a suit of the armor is to loot it from a Gray Maiden you fight in the adventure or to convince them to give you a suit as a gift. Access is at this point 100% GM controlled.

We may do more with the Gray Maidens in a future product, but this adventure was not the right place to have them play much more than a cameo role mostly kept to the NPC side of things.

This pretty precisely matches my assumption. No worries. I love this adventure. Running our 3rd session this week!

Seems the map labels are screwed up for Aliriel’s Sanctum?? The descriptions dont seem to match whats in some of the rooms??

Up to what level is this adventure? 15?

The PCs should be 13th level before they explore the last area of the adventure.

I am currently running a group through Curse of the Crimson Throne. 4 of 5 players don't play PF2 at all and have no characters built. I am toying with the idea of running this as a one off sequel for the same group right after we complete the AP. 10 years later as the module suggess. I have no PF2 GMing experience and have played about 20 sessions of PFS2.

I have 2 choices:

I could convert the whole thing to PF1. Or I'm leaning toward running in PF2 and having the Players with no PF2 take on a ready made NPC of a personality from Curse of the Crimson Throne.

Has anyone created starting NPC's level 11 of NPC's for this module from Curse NPC's? Not knowing the PF2 rules I would have a very difficult time doing this myself. If I can find ready made character to run through this I would probably run this in PF2. If not I'd do the opposite convert it to PF1.

If anyone has done this or know of anyone who has done this pointing me in that directions would be very much appreciated.

Curse of the Crimson Throne NPC's that come to mind (if they survive the AP):

Sabina Tabor
Vencarlo Orisini
Amin Jalento
Ishani Dharti
Laori Vaus
Krojun Eats-what-he-killsa
Boule
Advancing in levels a Skoan-Quah Bonselayer
Jasan Adriel
Marcus Endrin
Grau Soladro
Tayce Soldaro
Salvator Scream

I mean, if you want the players to play NPCs from crimson throne as pcs in this adventure, just create them with PC rules.

I mean, if you want the players to play NPCs from crimson throne as pcs in this adventure, just create them with PC rules.

Yep, but creating characters in PF2 is not easy, it's not intuitive. Now make them level 11 with almost no game knowledge and have them reflect the similar them as a character from PF1. No thanks, creating a level 1 character is a hard enough. For me it would be easier to convert the entire module to PF1.

I'm hoping someone else with PF2 game experience has done this. I can't possibly be the first one to think of doing this.

Best of luck, good to see you still around.

Best of luck, good to see you still around.

I'd say barely still around. I went from 100% Paizo product game playing time from 2012 to 218 to about 25% today and will drop even more when my current home games wrap up. Mainly due to Paizo making decisions that seem to reverse all the quality decisions that I loved Paizo making from 2012 to 2016. Options are being pulled off the table in organized play, cutting edge products and ideas are now family oriented, etc. etc.

That's better than some who I've learned have passed away. I swear Facebook is just an app letting me know who is still kicking now.

CorvusMask wrote:

I mean, if you want the players to play NPCs from crimson throne as pcs in this adventure, just create them with PC rules.

Yep, but creating characters in PF2 is not easy, it's not intuitive. Now make them level 11 with almost no game knowledge and have them reflect the similar them as a character from PF1. No thanks, creating a level 1 character is a hard enough. For me it would be easier to convert the entire module to PF1.

I'm hoping someone else with PF2 game experience has done this. I can't possibly be the first one to think of doing this.

I mean, if you want, I can create PCs for you?

(I made entire Jade Regent 1e npc cast into 2e pc stats x'D )

Thing is, NPCs in 2e have less versatile abilities than PC do, but have higher stats than PCs do as well. So having players play with four NPC statblocks would skew balance in weird ways

roysier wrote:

CorvusMask wrote:

I mean, if you want the players to play NPCs from crimson throne as pcs in this adventure, just create them with PC rules.

Yep, but creating characters in PF2 is not easy, it's not intuitive. Now make them level 11 with almost no game knowledge and have them reflect the similar them as a character from PF1. No thanks, creating a level 1 character is a hard enough. For me it would be easier to convert the entire module to PF1.

I'm hoping someone else with PF2 game experience has done this. I can't possibly be the first one to think of doing this.

I mean, if you want, I can create PCs for you?

(I made entire Jade Regent 1e npc cast into 2e pc stats x'D )

Thing is, NPCs in 2e have less versatile abilities than PC do, but have higher stats than PCs do as well. So having players play with four NPC statblocks would skew balance in weird ways

Thanks, I didn't know there was a big difference between PC's and NPCs. In PF1 the differences can be adjusted. NPC's have 1 level lower in gear and our built on 15 point buys instead of 20. So bumping an NPC is having a player up the stats to a 20 point buy and upping their gear 1 level.

With this being the case I would be looking for example to make Trinia Sabor a Player character with as many similar choices as possible at the startin level 11. Is that something you could help with? She's a level 9 Bard in CofCT. Vencarlo is a level 10 Vigilante in Curse and he would make a good choice also. I'd have to think about who to add as a 3rd and a 4th. But having those 2 would be greatly appreciated.

CorvusMask wrote:

roysier wrote:

CorvusMask wrote:

I mean, if you want the players to play NPCs from crimson throne as pcs in this adventure, just create them with PC rules.

Yep, but creating characters in PF2 is not easy, it's not intuitive. Now make them level 11 with almost no game knowledge and have them reflect the similar them as a character from PF1. No thanks, creating a level 1 character is a hard enough. For me it would be easier to convert the entire module to PF1.

I'm hoping someone else with PF2 game experience has done this. I can't possibly be the first one to think of doing this.

I mean, if you want, I can create PCs for you?

(I made entire Jade Regent 1e npc cast into 2e pc stats x'D )

Thing is, NPCs in 2e have less versatile abilities than PC do, but have higher stats than PCs do as well. So having players play with four NPC statblocks would skew balance in weird ways

Thanks, I didn't know there was a big difference between PC's and NPCs. In PF1 the differences can be adjusted. NPC's have 1 level lower in gear and our built on 15 point buys instead of 20. So bumping an NPC is having a player up the stats to a 20 point buy and upping their gear 1 level.

With this being the case I would be looking for example to make Trinia Sabor a Player character with as many similar choices as possible at the startin level 11. Is that something you could help with? She's a level 9 Bard in CofCT. Vencarlo is a level 10 Vigilante in Curse and he would make a good choice also. I'd have to think about who to add as a 3rd and a 4th. But having those 2 would be greatly appreciated.

Are you running this game live or on roll20 btw? Kinda wondering how I should send them to you. (I'm for now gonna do just those two as demonstration so you can figure out if they are what you are looking for)

Sidenote, there are few characters on that list which if players aren't in final book have bit of question mark on their future status. Like has Laori Vaos changed religion? Has Vencarlo retired his vigilante identity because he found successor(whether after campaign or to pc)? Latter is pretty big on deciding whether he would have retrained away from vigilante stuff by this one.

(either way, if you are including Vencarlo and Trinia in party, I think having one of two clerics around would be appropriate party balance wise, especially since Vencarlo and Trinia (if we try to stay as close to 1e statblock as possible) have low wisdom. Krojun, Marcus or Grau class wise make sense for fourth one to round out the balance as a bit more tanky character/additional martial damage dealer since skills should be alright with this party anyway.)

roysier wrote:

CorvusMask wrote:

roysier wrote:

CorvusMask wrote:

I mean, if you want the players to play NPCs from crimson throne as pcs in this adventure, just create them with PC rules.

Yep, but creating characters in PF2 is not easy, it's not intuitive. Now make them level 11 with almost no game knowledge and have them reflect the similar them as a character from PF1. No thanks, creating a level 1 character is a hard enough. For me it would be easier to convert the entire module to PF1.

I'm hoping someone else with PF2 game experience has done this. I can't possibly be the first one to think of doing this.

I mean, if you want, I can create PCs for you?

(I made entire Jade Regent 1e npc cast into 2e pc stats x'D )

Thing is, NPCs in 2e have less versatile abilities than PC do, but have higher stats than PCs do as well. So having players play with four NPC statblocks would skew balance in weird ways

Thanks, I didn't know there was a big difference between PC's and NPCs. In PF1 the differences can be adjusted. NPC's have 1 level lower in gear and our built on 15 point buys instead of 20. So bumping an NPC is having a player up the stats to a 20 point buy and upping their gear 1 level.

With this being the case I would be looking for example to make Trinia Sabor a Player character with as many similar choices as possible at the startin level 11. Is that something you could help with? She's a level 9 Bard in CofCT. Vencarlo is a level 10 Vigilante in Curse and he would make a good choice also. I'd have to think about who to add as a 3rd and a 4th. But having those 2 would be greatly appreciated.

Are you running this game live or on roll20 btw? Kinda wondering how I should send them to you. (I'm for now gonna do just those two as demonstration so you can figure out if they are what you are looking for)

It would be on roll20.

Sidenote, there are few characters on that list which if players aren't in final book have bit of question mark on their future status. Like has Laori Vaos changed religion? Has Vencarlo retired his vigilante identity because he found successor(whether after campaign or to pc)? Latter is pretty big on deciding whether he would have retrained away from vigilante stuff by this one.

(either way, if you are including Vencarlo and Trinia in party, I think having one of two clerics around would be appropriate party balance wise, especially since Vencarlo and Trinia (if we try to stay as close to 1e statblock as possible) have low wisdom. Krojun, Marcus or Grau class wise make sense for fourth one to round out the balance as a bit more tanky character/additional martial damage dealer since skills should be alright with this party anyway.)

Laori is risky for a choice, we just started book 5. I'm not sure if she is going to survive and if she does what her religion would be.

Marcus and Krojun would not work due to they are already past level 11.

So "Grau Soldado" returning to Korvosa would probably be best for a tank.

For a Cleric Ishani Dharti would probably be best.

So a 4 party pegen party would be best as -

Trinia adjusted to a Bard that works well as a PF2 character.

Vencarlo - his future is unwritten in my campaign, he hadn't retired nor has a party remember taken his role. so 10 years later retiring and staying a fencing school instructor would work fine.

Than the easy ones would be Grau as a tank and Ishani as a cleric of Abadar.

Thanks so much.

CorvusMask wrote:

roysier wrote:

CorvusMask wrote:

roysier wrote:

CorvusMask wrote:

I mean, if you want the players to play NPCs from crimson throne as pcs in this adventure, just create them with PC rules.

Yep, but creating characters in PF2 is not easy, it's not intuitive. Now make them level 11 with almost no game knowledge and have them reflect the similar them as a character from PF1. No thanks, creating a level 1 character is a hard enough. For me it would be easier to convert the entire module to PF1.

I'm hoping someone else with PF2 game experience has done this. I can't possibly be the first one to think of doing this.

I mean, if you want, I can create PCs for you?

(I made entire Jade Regent 1e npc cast into 2e pc stats x'D )

Thing is, NPCs in 2e have less versatile abilities than PC do, but have higher stats than PCs do as well. So having players play with four NPC statblocks would skew balance in weird ways

Thanks, I didn't know there was a big difference between PC's and NPCs. In PF1 the differences can be adjusted. NPC's have 1 level lower in gear and our built on 15 point buys instead of 20. So bumping an NPC is having a player up the stats to a 20 point buy and upping their gear 1 level.

With this being the case I would be looking for example to make Trinia Sabor a Player character with as many similar choices as possible at the startin level 11. Is that something you could help with? She's a level 9 Bard in CofCT. Vencarlo is a level 10 Vigilante in Curse and he would make a good choice also. I'd have to think about who to add as a 3rd and a 4th. But having those 2 would be greatly appreciated.

Are you running this game live or on roll20 btw? Kinda wondering how I should send them to you. (I'm for now gonna do just those two as demonstration so you can figure out if they are what you are looking for)

It would be on roll20.

Oki, I'll be sending you link where I've been working on these

CorvusMask wrote:

Sidenote, there are few characters on that list which if players aren't in final book have bit of question mark on their future status. Like has Laori Vaos changed religion? Has Vencarlo retired his vigilante identity because he found successor(whether after campaign or to pc)? Latter is pretty big on deciding whether he would have retrained away from vigilante stuff by this one.

(either way, if you are including Vencarlo and Trinia in party, I think having one of two clerics around would be appropriate party balance wise, especially since Vencarlo and Trinia (if we try to stay as close to 1e statblock as possible) have low wisdom. Krojun, Marcus or Grau class wise make sense for fourth one to round out the balance as a bit more tanky character/additional martial damage dealer since skills should be alright with this party anyway.)

Laori is risky for a choice, we just started book 5. I'm not sure if she is going to survive and if she does what her religion would be.

Marcus and Krojun would not work due to they are already past level 11.

So "Grau Soldado" returning to Korvosa would probably be best for a tank.

For a Cleric Ishani Dharti would probably be best.

So a 4 party pegen party would be best as -

Trinia adjusted to a Bard that works well as a PF2 character.

Vencarlo - his future is unwritten in my campaign, he hadn't retired nor has a party remember taken his role. so 10 years later retiring and staying a fencing school instructor would work fine.

Than the easy ones would be Grau as a tank and Ishani as a cleric of Abadar.

Thanks so much.

Sent the pm, realized that I'm not sure if pms are easy to notice these days. Remembered that Ishani Dharti had small part in book six, but I'll guess by that point its very unlikely he gets permanently written off.

Realized also that Jasan Adriel does have potential because he is ex adventurer, but his class is never specified, so he can be quite interesting wild card in that sense. I kinda read him as fighter myself, so either way seems like fourth character statted is a fighter.

But yeah, I'll stat Vencarlo assuming he has retired from vigilante career(and thus doesn't use his blackjack outfit equipment), but has some equipment that evoke similar abilities, maybe as sort of nostalgia thing.

I am in the middle of prepping this at the moment. Various different creature effects impose the slowed condition in the scenario but they often fail to provide a duration. I assume that it would be 1 round as a permanent slow effect is utterly crippling and there are few, if any, ways of getting rid of it.

In 2nd edition, the slowed condition (unless otherwise specified in text) decreases by 1 each turn (Core Rulebook 622).

In 2nd edition, the slowed condition (unless otherwise specified in text) decreases by 1 each turn (Core Rulebook 622).

I'm looking at the slowed condition in my crb right now and am not seeing this ruling? Does not appear to be on aon either, am I missing something?

Conditions are effects, thus the Duration rules on page 455 apply.

Link.

Conditions are effects, thus the Duration rules on page 455 apply.

I could buy that if effects and conditions weren't explicitly separated on the page before and if conditions didn't have their own text about durations, specific beats general.

"Conditions are persistent. Whenever you're affected by a condition, it's effects last until the condition's stated duration ends, the condition is removed, or terms dictated in the condition itself cause it to end."

Good luck selling that to your GM then.

Edit: Glossary 630: "condition An ongoing effect that changes how a character can act or alters some of their statistics."

Good luck selling that to your GM then.

Edit: Glossary 630: "condition An ongoing effect that changes how a character can act or alters some of their statistics."

I am a GM haha

Whatever you say. No one is getting durationless slowed in my games.

Whatever you say. No one is getting durationless slowed in my games.

I'm not saying they should be!

I think the rules are ambiguous. Consider the "slow" spell. First, it has a duration of one minute. Second, it requires a Fortitude save, with these results:

Critical Success: The target is unaffected.
Success: The target is slowed 1 for 1 round.
Failure: The target is slowed 1 for 1 minute.
Critical Failure: The target is slowed 2 for 1 minute

So, crit success, nothing happens. Success, slowed 1 for 1 round. Presumably this means that after that round the target is not slowed, or you could call it slowed 0 (1 less than 1). Failure, the target is slowed for 1 minute. This, I think, is why the duration of the spell is 1 minute. Crit failure, slowed 2 for 1 minute.

Two things: I think after a minute of being slowed either 1 or 2, the target is no long slowed, because the spell has expired. So I don't think the target, have rolled a crit fail, is slowed 2 for 1 minute and then slowed 1 for... a while. Also, while after a success or crit success on the saving throw the target is only slowed 1 for max 1 round (or not at all), that doesn't mean that he has to keep rolling saving throws on every turn until the slow spell's duration expires, or that he is automatically slowed 1 on his next turn, with no saving throw. I haven't searched the CRB on that last point though, so I might be wrong.

This doesn't answer the general question "how long does 'slowed' last?" I think what James Jacobs is saying is that when you're slowed, that's a one time thing unless whatever gives you the slowed condition says otherwise, but if you're slowed more than 1, then you would still be slowed in your next turn, reducing the slowed condition by one each turn until you get back to slowed zero. A gradual return to full speed after being slowed does make sense, but I don't see that RAW say it's so. OTOH, he's been immersed in PF2E a lot more deeply than I have, so maybe he's right.

But he's not wrong?

It does occur to me that if a gradual return to full speed is the rule when slowed more than 1, is a gradual return to normal speed also the rule when hastened more than 1?

I think James might be confusing slowed and stunned perhaps?

If the slowed value would automatically decrease every round (like, for example, for frightened), a spell like slow would be dramatically less effective, as it would only rob a target of a single action (or 3 on a critical failure), and it would not make any sense to note the effect lasts for a minute, because it never could.

In 2nd edition, the slowed condition (unless otherwise specified in text) decreases by 1 each turn (Core Rulebook 622).

As others have pointed out unfortunately for slow it does not which is why other instances of it specify a duration. It's not a big issue, I assume most would just set it at lasting a round.

Then those effects last 1 round. My mistake. (I suspect I was indeed confusing slowed and stunned during development.)

I'm always ready to admit mistakes I make, but keep in mind that sometimes time will pass between me making a mistake and me coming back online to admit it or correct it.

Hopefully in that time no one's PCs got permanently slowed.

It's something that has cropped up in other adventures as well. There often seems to be an assumption about slowed that it decreases over time.

Indeed, thanks for that.

I am nearly finished prepping this and am very impressed, it is an excellent adventure.

I am finding a bit of an issue with the map for Area C. The description of C3 does not match with what we have on the map. It talks about doors in the north, west and south but there is only one in the south. The room seems to be open to area C4 which I am not sure is intentional. There is no reference to it in the text. C4 does have a door to the west and north, is it referring to those doors?

Alternatively is there supposed to be a wall between C3 and C4?

The map shows a connecting tunnel between C1 and C9 but there is no reference to this in the text. C8 boxed text (C9 on the map) makes a passing reference to tunnel to the south but there is nothing about it in C1.

On the map C4 has a big circular thing in the middle of the room but no reference in the text.

The Paragon Engine is marked as being in C5 but on the map it looks like this should be C7. It looks like the labels for C5 and C7 have been switched around on the map.

The description of the Progenitor room, C6, doesnt match the map location. It does match the description of C7. This leaves the corridor at C6 as an empty location.

Aliriels crypt (C7) looks like it should be C8.

C8 is supposed to be the waste room, it is C9 on the map.

C10 on the map should be Location C9.

C11 on the map should be C10 in the adventure.

The map has lots of little rivulets of connecting blood passages but there isnt really any mention of them or what use might be made of them.

Also, if you are going to put secret door markers on maps please give us a way to turn them off. We get that in AP volumes, please do the same for adventures.

Overall that is a lot of errors which I am quite surprised at. It looks like something was taken out during development and then the map was not updated. It is still a cracking adventure and absolutely deserves the 5 star rating.

Lastly, to end on a positive note, I love what this scenario does with rituals. This feels like it has been a little lacking in other adventures to date (although Night of Gray Death used some and I have only just started Strength of Thousands). It is a very nice touch for a rather under utilised part of the game.

Bleh... that's a mess. Double checking the developed text and the map turnover, I think what happened is that an early, out-of-date map tag file got referenced when putting the encounter locations down on the final map on the inside back cover. All of the locations in the text are correct, it's just the location tags on the map itself that are wrong (note also there's no C7 tag on the map at all).

Here's the corrections; sorry about the mix-up.

Area C1, C2, and C3 are fine as-is. Note that area C3 encompasses the entire room—the west half is down a few steps but is still part of the same area.

The C4 tag on the map should go away entirely. This is the blood elevator mentioned on page 43, but should not have its own map tag.

The C6 tag on the map should turn into C4.

The C7 tag on the map should turn into C5.

The C5 tag on the map should turn into C6.

The C8 tag on the map should turn into C7.

The C9 tag on the map should turn into C8.

The C10 tag on the map should turn into C9 (and should probably move a few squares south so it's obviously tagging the whole room, not the central wall).

The C11 tag on the map should turn into C10

As for the rivulets of "blood passages," those are tubes that draw blood from the Blood Machinery into other parts of the dungeon.

I appreciate the clarification James! Wasn't sure if I'd missed a ruling somewhere haha

Thanks for those James, they are really useful.

Is the tunnel on the map between C1 and the Waste room supposed to be there? It isnt mentioned in the text for C1.