Pathfinder Society Scenario #4-09: Killer in the Golden Mask

I have run this scenario 4 times, all high tier (32, 28, 27 and 23 CPs).
I have enjoyed running it, much more than I have any other Season 4 scenarios (not my favourite, in all fairness).
The combats can be really challenging, depending on party composition. It did not end well for a couple of characters (28 CPs) and could have been much worse. But Pathfinders can't always win, or even survive, can they?
Combats can last a bit especially at higher CP adjustments. I have been just above 5h running time each time.
Skills checks have no particular flavour, they can be expedited if preferred.
It is the first time I see players replay a scenario (maybe linked to the addition of replay boxes in the reporting). They must have enjoyed it and I take it as signal that I am not the only one liking this scenario.
All in all, nice adventure, challenging enough.

Disclaimer: played in LT with an L8 magus in the party

The scenario has an interesting setting and the mystery is set quite well.

The encounters went pretty smooth, especially the 2nd one since our rogue disabled all traps and gave casters a bunch of fireball scrolls.

First encounter took everyone by surprise. For the last one everyone buffed up prior to it so it went pretty smooth as well. I suppose we could have just been lucky with party composition but generally it was fun.

Ran this twice, once at high tier and once at low tier.

High-tier game for 6 PCs (3 L8s and 3 L7s), online:
- Runtime was 4 hours.
- The party succeeded in the skill check section and faction mission.
- All of the 3 combats presented significant peril to the party; they managed to pull through with good teamwork to save one of the PCs who was at some risk of permadeath.
- Hazards were easily detected and did zero harm to the party.
- Overall, this felt like the right amount of challenge for the higher tier of a L5-8.

Low-tier game for 5 PCs (4 L5s, including 2 pregens, and a L7), in-person:
- Runtime was slightly under 3 hours.
- The party failed the skill check section, but failing this has little impact to success conditions; in fact, it makes it slightly easier to achieve the faction mission, which they did.
- No real difficulty was encountered in any of the 3 combats.
- Hazards were easily detected and did zero harm to the party.
- Overall, I would say that this was less of a challenge than I would expect for even the low tier of a L5-8.

As another reviewer has pointed out, the combat could be quite swingy depending on the party composition. The special abilities of the higher CR foes are a big difference-maker and gave the high tier game much more mechanical interest.

Plot-wise, the continuing story of the Razmiran lodge is likely to be attractive to those who enjoyed #1-18 or who have an interest in the tension between the Razmiri priesthood and the Society. There are a couple of good opportunities to showcase some nuanced character aspects of Narsen, and some hints about the past, but no dramatic revelations.

GMs should read the GM discussion thread in the Org Play forum here.

The premise of the scenario feels good, and the actual flow works, but after playing it I'm feeling like the encounter design is problematic.

In particular, the second encounter feels especially nasty.

The other encounters have some unpleasant aspects to them, but it's the second encounter that was particularly frustrating as a player, and having that added to them compounds it?

From the River Kingdoms I "only" know the part from Kingmaker. Used to be nice exploring Razmiran. Of course, I read up on the region a bit first (Lost Omens) and was looking forward to this scenario.
I ran the scenario in the low tier with 12 challenge points.
Story: The controversy that the newest Pathfinder Lodge is in Razmiran is tried to be absorbed a little. This has partly been successful. Of course, capturing the flair and controversy in a 5-hour scenario is a difficult endeavor. But you do get the feeling that not everything is alright with the lodge, is it? Very mysterious. I would love to learn more about this region.

In any case, the hunt for the vampire and the bonus order by the Envoys Alliance have been implemented quite well. However, if you meet the bonus goal, it loses its meaning almost immediately. I think that's a pity. In "4-08 Battle for Star's Fate" the interaction with NPCs was implemented much better here! But now in 4-09, fulfilling the bonus objective quickly loses its meaning (at least until it is evaluated on the Chronicle).

There are a few skill tests again. The focus here is clearly far from something else, but it's just part of it. Perhaps it could have been implemented a little better, but well, it's kind of part of it. You don't want to do without this type of skill test entirely.

There are 3, Optional 4 fights. The optional 4th fight is well designed and a nice example of giving the players at the table the opportunity to have fun and be successful with great role-playing and skilled social skills. Battle 1 is just meant to warm you up and I think it's totally fine that you build such an encounter into the game that advances the story but isn't too difficult a challenge.
Battle 2 are well designed enemy types, but they don't really make sense to the story. Well, maybe a little bit. We are in the Exalted Forest. From the point of view of the game master, the "obstacles" are rather annoying obstacles that have to be worked through. But the fight itself is okay.
I personally really liked the finale. The opponent is a final boss that you won't soon forget. I would have liked to know a little more about the background of the gold-masked opponent.
As a GM, I would have wished that you could get a clue as to what kind of weapons you're aware of. Yes, it just magically stands and the material. But how magical? +1? +1 of damage? Which rune(s) are engraved? Because this has a meaning in this scenario.

Conclusion: On the whole we had our fun. But basically I found the scenario really nice, but somehow the finishing touches were missing in many situations. I would like to give it a 3.5 star rating. I'm counting on the fact that most of the ratings will be more in the 3-star direction, which is why I rate it as 4. In case of doubt for the accused, or how do you say?