I agree, wraith. And even though no one has asked in the last 3 years, Im going to answer anyway.
In my campaign, I made it clear that although Zeech is evil, He is helping to stem the tide of Reyhu orcs to the north. If he is deposed, who would be powerful enough to take his place? The pcs?
Here's my two-step plan for dealing with whatever stupid orc horde can be nearby, and which Zeech's losers can conceivably hold off:
1. Cast Greater Planar Binding. Summon something like a trumpet archon, who will be naturally inclined to smite a chaotic evil horde. Ask him to smite a chaotic evil horde. If it disagrees, dismiss it without stirring any trouble and just summon a more sensible one.
2. Learn, sometime after the adventure, that Reyhu orcs were crushed, and congratulate youself.Here's what my current players probably would do in such situation:
1. Teleport (or otherwise travel) to the orcs' greatest chief hideout.
2. Explain to him that his alternatives are becoming their vassal or horrible death. If the later is chosen, present the same alternatives to his successor. Repeat until this process of natural selection puts someone sensible on the top.
3. After this basic point is driven home, establish a mutually profitable agreement - like, if he's going to deal with lesser orc tribes who are up to no good, he's going to get various cool stuff in return. And their backing as the true orc king of whatever, of course.
4. Get back to the main plot, on the same day or the next day, bask in their glory.
I dont think this is very viable as eventually the driving force behind the horde is Iuz, himself. (Greyhawk)
Edit: The Bandit Kingdoms, being a buffer area between Iuz's forces/remnants of the Horned Society and Greyhawk/Hardby are a very bad place in the greyhawk setting.
Here's my two-step plan for dealing with whatever stupid orc horde can be nearby, and which Zeech's losers can conceivably hold off:
1. Cast Greater Planar Binding. Summon something like a trumpet archon, who will be naturally inclined to smite a chaotic evil horde. Ask him to smite a chaotic evil horde. If it disagrees, dismiss it without stirring any trouble and just summon a more sensible one.
2. Learn, sometime after the adventure, that Reyhu orcs were crushed, and congratulate youself.Here's what my current players probably would do in such situation:
1. Teleport (or otherwise travel) to the orcs' greatest chief hideout.
2. Explain to him that his alternatives are becoming their vassal or horrible death. If the later is chosen, present the same alternatives to his successor. Repeat until this process of natural selection puts someone sensible on the top.
3. After this basic point is driven home, establish a mutually profitable agreement - like, if he's going to deal with lesser orc tribes who are up to no good, he's going to get various cool stuff in return. And their backing as the true orc king of whatever, of course.
4. Get back to the main plot, on the same day or the next day, bask in their glory.
Speaking about beating dead horses... First, are you aware you are answering four year old posts?
<inserting tongue in cheek> Second, do you work for the Pentagon? Something about your battle plan sounds familiar... Maybe the trust you place in the use of massive force to quickly solve geopolitical conundrums.
As we are all learning nowadays, superior firepower doesn't equate with the ability to efficiently control a vast country of people (orcs, talibans, whatever) who fundamentally disagree with you.
If you kill an orc chieftain and bully another into obeying you, the end result is that the new chief wouldn't have any legitimity, and that his people would ignore him and choose a new leader (or more probably, a whole bunch of new leaders).
You will get the same result, but more slowly, if you try to control said leader from behind the scene and try to get him to order to make friends with humans and elves. Orcs are notoriously prone to respect strong leaders, not peaceloving wimps.
Of course, given time (that is, months if not years) and a genocidal approach (that is, kill everyone on sight), your PCs could try to solve by themselves the Reyhu threat. But, 1) precisely, they don't have the time; 2) orcs would react as any population threatened by genocide and flee the country, triggering invasions right and left. The neighbouring countries would be pleased. General mayhem ensues. Fun for everybody.
That said, I agree that the PCs could kill Zeech if they really wanted to (if not during the ball, because they wouldn't be allowed to be in his presence with weapons openly displayed, at some other later time). I wouldn't pull any punch as a DM (because I like to make the players take full responsability for their decisions), but with a little planning it's quite feasible.
Even if he is "soul killed" (you don't have good aligned PCs, do you?), along with Lashonna, I suppose an avoloakia (master of illusion) could step in once the PCs are away to proceed with their master plan and the ziggurat edification. From a campaign continuity point of view, it's of no consequence. I guess it would even be fun to make the PCs scratch their collective head upon learning that "Zeech" is back to business.
<inserting tongue in cheek> Second, do you work for the Pentagon? Something about your battle plan sounds familiar... Maybe the trust you place in the use of massive force to quickly solve geopolitical conundrums.
In DnD, where PCs are fully expected to solve 90% to 100% of the problems through extreme violence, if the massive force does not solve your geopolitical conundrums, you aren't using enough.
As we are all learning nowadays, superior firepower doesn't equate with the ability to efficiently control a vast country of people (orcs, talibans, whatever) who fundamentally disagree with you.
It is technically trivial for US forces to not simply subjugate, but even exterminate the population of Afghanistan to the point that survivors are not a factor. Similarly, it is also rather trivial for a 15th-level party to wipe out any sort of orc tribes that actually can be held back by Zeech and his losers (who is backing them is immaterial, since they still can be held back by Zeech and his losers). And, as PCs probably don't care that much about the internal affairs of some people from a relatively minor sidequest, at least at the moment, forced subjugation is only marginally harder. Control by terror (alternatively, mindscrew) is actually quite efficient even when executed by a bunch of guys with swords (as opposed to demigods), as the history demonstrates, and while it is currently ethically unacceptable in our world, in DnD it is a more humane alternative to the default solution proposed by the game.
If you kill an orc chieftain and bully another into obeying you, the end result is that the new chief wouldn't have any legitimity,
Orcs are chaotic and evil. The only source of legitimacy in their society is the ability to smack down those who doubt it. Or, as it is the case, having the backers who might do so.
and that his people would ignore him and choose a new leader (or more probably, a whole bunch of new leaders).
Orcs do have long-term memory, though.
Of course, given time (that is, months if not years) and a genocidal approach (that is, kill everyone on sight), your PCs could try to solve by themselves the Reyhu threat. But, 1) precisely, they don't have the time;
Already adressed. Try to read before you answer.
2) orcs would react as any population threatened by genocide and flee the country, triggering invasions right and left.
Orcs are chaotic and evil. They already attack whomever they can overpower. If there is suddenly becoming less of them, the threat just got lesser.
Even if he is "soul killed" (you don't have good aligned PCs, do you?),
Actually almost all of my PCs are good. That's why they (unless it is established, that orcs in this world are like most of Golarion's evil humanoids, i.e., irreedemable) will try to solve the orcs' problem with the minimal necessary amount of killing, even though mass murder requires less effort at 15th level. But soul-killing is irrelevant to their alignment. If it is moral to kill bad guys (and DnD is built on the assumption that it IS), it is, if anything, even more moral to kill their souls, thus sparing them the eternity of torment and hopefully depriving Lower Planes of power. Never mind that it is the only real way to stop them permanently at high levels.
stuff
Which doesn't address that Iuz himself is whats driving the orc horde forward. I mean, the OP asked(4 years ago) what reason to give the pcs to not just take out prince Zeech, and he got one. sorry it doesnt work for you.
First, let's keep that civil. Repeating yourself forcefully isn't helping.
In DnD, where PCs are fully expected to solve 90% to 100% of the problems through extreme violence, if the massive force does not solve your geopolitical conundrums, you aren't using enough
.
Well, if it's your style of play, so be it. But know that there is others out there. Not everybody equates "D&D" with "bloodbath".
It is technically trivial for US forces to not simply subjugate, but even exterminate the population of Afghanistan to the point that survivors are not a factor. Similarly, it is also rather trivial for a 15th-level party to wipe out any sort of orc tribes that actually can be held back by Zeech and his losers (who is backing them is immaterial, since they still can be held back by Zeech and his losers). And, as PCs probably don't care that much about the internal affairs of some people from a relatively minor sidequest, at least at the moment, forced subjugation is only marginally harder. Control by terror (alternatively, mindscrew) is actually quite efficient even when executed by a bunch of guys with swords (as opposed to demigods), as the history demonstrates, and while it is currently ethically unacceptable in our world, in DnD it is a more humane alternative to the default solution proposed by the game.
Agreed that it's easier to kill someone that to convince him of the rightness of your point of view... <part tongue in cheek, again>. Agreed that genocide is a workable solution in D&D (and only there, thanks God), thanks to the alignment system.
But you were saying that subjugating the orcs would be cakewalk, and I answered you on that, and only that.
Orcs are chaotic and evil. The only source of legitimacy in their society is the ability to smack down those who doubt it. Or, as it is the case, having the backers who might do so.
Once upon a time, they were lawful evil, but that's not the point. Orcs aren't beasts. They have got a working society, with religious values based on their "glorious destiny" to rule the world and crush all other races. They WOULD mind an non-orc overlord, or one asking them to make friends with other races. You CAN rule them at the point of your sword, but only as long as you stay among them and as far as your swordarm can reach. As soon as you depart, your puppet ruler will get quartered as an elf-loving heretic.
So, in my opinion, it would be a time consuming project, that could only work with a tribe, but not with a whole nation of orcs.
You were saying that time isn't an issue (because in your opinion that task would be easy). Just because you answered this point before doesn't mean that everyone has to agree with you on this. I don't. So?
Triggering anarchy in a nation (even an orcish one) always increase regional instability. Even an orcish nation plans ahead: it doesn't atacks everybody and all the time. On the other hand, swarms of orcs fleeing for their lives would.
Anyway, if your players want to annihilate Zeech, let them. It will most certainly foster unrest in Redhand. It will probably trigger quite soon an orcish invasion, that your PCs (if they do care and are still there) will most probbably crush. If it's what they want to do, just go ahead. It could make a nice (and very very bloody hack, slash and burn sidetrek in the campaign); according to your style, you could play it whole or just a little part to get them in the mood before switching to storytelling mode.
And, in the case of Reyhu (I was thinking on a more general level), TheWhiteKnife has definitively a point: Iuz may (or may not) react.
Orcs would be easy to smash by definition. Because Zeech and his sorry bunch can hold them back. And this is supposed to be the reason why you can't kill Zeech and take his stuff. But as they can't kill Zeech and take his stuff, this means they are on the same level at most, therefore an absolutely trivial threat for a 15th level party. So this reason is not valid and can't be valid by its very nature. Any difficulty in dealing them would be self-imposed one (relevant only for Good parties, really), and even then, still not really serious, assuming they are sentient beings, with long-term memory (so, capable of advanced feats of logic like "these demigods who just wiped out our best and toughest with no effort at all might bother to return and dispense more smackdown if we defy their will (and magicked-up bodyguards they gave to their chosen ruler probably are no slouches too)" - something that orcs are explicitly capable of in DnD canon, as that's how various evil overlords command them) and sense of self-preservation greater than desire to hurt others. If they aren't such beings, just kill them all like rabid animals they are then.
Assumption that upsetting status quo in any established campaign setting by reducing the number of active evildoers is somehow bad makes no sense. The status quo is horrible and grimdark, and the world literally teeters on the brink of being overrun by forces of evil. It won't change unless you (yes, you) go forth and smite tyrants and monsters. In fact, that's what you are supposed to do*. Yes setting-independent published adventures, like AoW, by their nature, can't really deal with changing the setting, and so restict the smiting to those who want change for the worse. This does not mean that individual GMs should follow the same policy. Particularly because battling against an unrelenting tide of darkness that can't ever be pushed back but only prevented from flooding everything completely is completely genre-inappropriate for heroic fantasy. In fact, even if PCs don't care about bettering the world, but just want to smite people they don't like, thinking they can't do so (or that doing so should be extra difficult beyond what honest comparion of abilities suggests) because one of their targets happened to not be on the list of targets provided by the plot, is bad, and anyone who thinks so should feel bad. I have enough "Sorry you can't try to kill or boot from the party this obviously evil and treacherous NPC because fighting the BBEG before leaving the first dungeon will derail the plot" or "We know, this guy has "BBEG" stamped on his forehead, but the plot say you must cooperate with him" in computer games.
*I loled at "Not everybody equates "D&D" with "bloodbath"." Why these people play published APs from Paizo, which assume that the party will kill the vast majority of people they come into conflict with and ascend to their ultimate goal by stepping on literally hundreds of enemy corpses? Note, that when a conflict in said APs is not supposed to be solved by violence, that's often because the villains are so powerful, that PCs must kiss their asses. Zeech apparently was intended to be this. Except, he is not really so powerful, and this is quite obvious to the players.
So, lemme get this straight. 4 years ago, someone asked for advice for a reason to give to his or her players why they shouldnt take out Zeech. A way to railroad his or her players without them feeling railroaded. This DM solicited advice that we collectively provided from our experiences at our own tables. And we are somehow wrong for doing that?
Dear OP, Dont bother. Your PC's have already won DnD. If they are not currently ruling the world, they are wrong. Sheesh.
You are not getting my point, FaTR. I don't know if it's you don't understand or don't want to, but it's irrelevant.
Well, if you are comfortable with a campaign where your PCs are effectively all-powerful demigods and can solve any problem by using violence (that is, by a bloodbath) without any need to think ahead, more power to you. But you should know that there are other approaches out there, and that some (most?) people past teenage years would be bored to death by such a not-quite-subtle campaign.
Let's just say that I side with Dennis and TheWhiteKnife about the orc nation topic. Their reasoning makes a lot more sense that yours ("Zeech is a wimp, so his neighbours orc must be". Wow!).
There is a thousand reasons that could explain the statu quo between Redhand and Reyhu. The Greyhawk canon one is that Reyhu is part of the Empire of Iuz, and that Redhand is loosely allied with Iuz. So Redhand is off limits. Boost Zeech or let your players kill him, period.
Last thing, before I am done with you: the whole point of Paizo boards is to share experiences and points of view between DMs, to let them build better campaigns. If you are so set in your views that you don't want to discuss them with a modicum of politeness, what are you doing here? Trolling around?
I would also like to add that Zeech is never really statted up anywhere. All that was ever really written about him stat wise is that hes 16th level (IIRC) with fallen paladin/blackguard levels (8/8. again, IIRC)and incredibly, fantastically rich. (As in, probably has access to alot more gear than his level would indicate.)
You are not getting my point, FaTR. I don't know if it's you don't understand or don't want to, but it's irrelevant.
Well, if you are comfortable with a campaign where your PCs are effectively all-powerful demigods and can solve any problem by using violence (that is, by a bloodbath) without any need to think ahead, more power to you.
Any problem in AoW is either expected to be solved by a bloodbath (90% of them) or can be just as or more effectively solved by a bloodbath. In this particular module, killing both Zeech and, if she intervenes, Lashonna (who is weak for her CR) is the most effective course of action towards preventing Age of Worms PCs can possibly undertake. This is true for most of the Paizo APs. Major conflict where non-violent solutions are even possible are, as written, exceptional. The only situations when they are mandated by the plot are when villains are so overpowered, that PCs are supposed to be way out of their league. It's completely illogical to assume that the PCs who are expected to walk the path of carnage for 16 levels and be richly rewarded for that, should suddenly be treated otherwise if the trajectory of said path diverges from the pre-written railroad.
Your strawman about "all-powerful demigods" (although 16th-level PCs are demigods, who aren't all-powerful only because they fight other demigods) is completely irrelevant to that.But you should know that there are other approaches out there, and that some (most?) people past teenage years would be bored to death by such a not-quite-subtle campaign.
And that's why you are advocating strict railroading with no deviations or ability to make meaningful decisions on the part of players?
Let's just say that I side with Dennis and TheWhiteKnife about the orc nation topic. Their reasoning makes a lot more sense that yours ("Zeech is a wimp, so his neighbours orc must be". Wow!).
There is a thousand reasons that could explain the statu quo between Redhand and Reyhu.
And all of them, besides "orcs are not more powerful than Zeech" are either automatically invalid or assume that orcs are not, in fact, held back by Zeech...
The Greyhawk canon one is that Reyhu is part of the Empire of Iuz, and that Redhand is loosely allied with Iuz. So Redhand is off limits. Boost Zeech or let your players kill him, period.
...like this one. Which still does not preclude orcs from being weak. Anyway, in Greyhawk, Iuz's head logically will be next on the chopping block (for Good parties, because he's Iuz, for Neutral/Evil parties because he's positioned to be their main competitor), so who cares about zapping his underlings?
Last thing, before I am done with you: the whole point of Paizo boards is to share experiences and points of view between DMs, to let them build better campaigns. If you are so set in your views that you don't want to discuss them with a modicum of politeness, what are you doing here? Trolling around?
You know what politeness is? Firs of all, reading your opponent's arguments and comprehending what they really are, before answering.
So, lemme get this straight. 4 years ago, someone asked for advice for a reason to give to his or her players why they shouldnt take out Zeech. A way to railroad his or her players without them feeling railroaded. This DM solicited advice that we collectively provided from our experiences at our own tables. And we are somehow wrong for doing that?
Giving bad advice is generally considered a wrong thing to do, last time I checked.
I would also like to add that Zeech is never really statted up anywhere. All that was ever really written about him stat wise is that hes 16th level (IIRC) with fallen paladin/blackguard levels (8/8. again, IIRC)and incredibly, fantastically rich. (As in, probably has access to alot more gear than his level would indicate.)
Yes, that's what the last adventure says. And you can give a paladin 8/blackguard 8 every piece of pre-epic non-artifact gear in existence that can be rammed into his item slots, as well as all 18s in starting stats, and that, at best (with carefully chosen gear), will make him a mildly dangerous enemy for his CR, instead of a mook.
If a group of 15th level PC's could so easily conquer entire nations of races (including the Orcs), why has Dragotha been sitting in a cave for thousands of years? Why don't he and his minions rule the world? It is because the world at large has checks and balances.
No, it's because the plot says so, and only because of that. Checks and balances do not, in fact, canonically work in any of DnD settings. Bad guys are going on rampages all the time, good guys are, sometimes, pushing back (when authors happen to remember, that heroic fantasy is not supposed to be soul-crushingly grimdark), major redrawings of the political map happen every few years, and the threat of one world-ending event or another is ever-present.
The only question is - where exactly to put the line at which PCs can easily conquer an average nation? And actually, it should be put below 15th level if you want your setting to make any sense and still be somewhat pseudo-medieval, both because spells of 7th level and above do things that are crazy, and because being a low-level character in the land divided between warring super-entities whose abilities can easily devastate entire cities, and balance of power between which can shift very rapidly, is not fun (in fact, even with magic limited by plot fiat life in most places of the Forgotten Realms sucks hardcore for exactly this reason; I'm less familiar with Greyhawk, but looks like things are generally the same). So, I strongly prefer for characters of 15th level and above to be really rare, and of 17th level in above to be counted on one hand for the entire planet.
Relatively to AoW this means, for example, that Dragotha is not sitting in a cave. He's sitting in an Imprisonment bubble, and much of behind-the-scene plotting is related to getting a scroll of Freedom for him. This means that Thessalar and Zulshin aren't simply bored people sitting on his doorstep, but have their own agendas, influencing many of the earlier adventures. This means that Zeech is not a petty tyrant of Unimportania, but an overlord of a powerful dark empire, that actually can make stuff, like contruction of a titanic spire because of the ruler's fancy, happen. (PCs still can gank him, of course. If you can't overthrow an evil overlord at 15th level, then when, considering that the game is generally supposed to end at 20th level, and there are still evil gods and overfiends to deal with?) And so on.
Sure they can always take him out. But then the players have to make a choice: A)deal with an Orc horde that is being driven south by Iuz or
B) deal with the apocalypse that is the Age of Worms.
You know, like I said 4 months ago. If one were to read the backdrop article that are handily provided in the very same issue where the very much unstatted out Zeech (it bugs me that everyone assumes he would be a cakewalk to 15th level parties, when he in fact has no stats whatsoever)is introduced, one would know that Alhaster is far far from Unimportania. It is, in fact, an important buffer kingdom between the Lands of Iuz and the Free City. Any PC that treats the entire game world as nothing more as an abbatoir for them to run roughshod over, slaying everything that they can get away with, SHOULD, in my opinion, get whats coming to them.(in this case, the end of the world)
Actually I think FatR and I might be having some communication problems. If my PCs were dead set on taking out Zeech, I would most definitly let them. But I would ask them to roll knowledge checks to know WHY he is the ruler of Alhaster, WHY neighboring kingdoms suffer to let him remain ruler, as well as WHAT repercussions would be expected from either a power vacuum and/or the time wasted in not preventing the Age of Worms, beforehand.