Delirium's Tangle

[Arnim Thayer]

Not to nit-pick, but the map on page 11 is listed as being from Map Packs: Lairs, but it is actually from map Packs: Extra-dimensional Spaces.
I bought Lairs thinking it would be everything I need for an upcoming session of scenario #45... with the exception of my Basic Flip-Mat. Luckily, I still have time to get the other Map-Pack in before I run it.

[Joshua J. Frost]

I was going to update the PDF today, so now I have another thing to update as well.

Spoiler:

D'oh!

[Arnim Thayer]

To clarify... not a complaint, just making sure that it is accurate for others using the Map Packs.

[Frederick Lux]

I'm going to run this tomorrow, this just occurred to me: In the "Price of Failure" section, the scenario says this:

Scenario spoiler:

"Anytime the Leader fails her skill check by 5 or more, the group encounters one of the following dangers at random. Single-target hazards affect one member of the group at random."

So, if they fail, should I have them roll a Perception check, or just let them suffer the consequences? I'm inclined to do the first, but a case could be made for the latter, IMHO.

[joe kirner]

I had the random pc roll a perception check to notice the trap. Did not think it fair to have it automatically happen as their is a perception check on all traps to give pc a chance.

[Frederick Lux]

Yes, that's what I thought, but having all people check means that probably no one will fall in the trap, because from my experience if there's something to be spotted by Perception, on average, someone will see it. One check seems fair.

[Kess, Humble Servant of Abadar]

I was of the impression that if you are not actively looking for a trap (or unless you have the Trapfinder ability) you do not get a perception check for traps. The perception check is listed for those actively looking for traps (as in statign that they are searching an area for a trap).

I'm running it this weekend and unless the PCs are actively looking for traps (which is unlikely) they will be subject to the trap.

[Ascalaphus]

Dave Baker wrote:

I was of the impression that if you are not actively looking for a trap (or unless you have the Trapfinder ability) you do not get a perception check for traps. The perception check is listed for those actively looking for traps (as in statign that they are searching an area for a trap).

I'm running it this weekend and unless the PCs are actively looking for traps (which is unlikely) they will be subject to the trap.

This is actually a pretty unclear issue. In the section of the CRB environment chapter detailing traps, nothing is said one way or the other; it only talks about the results of Perception checks, not when you're making them.

In Skills->Perception, the only relevant part is this:

Quote:

Action: Most Perception checks are reactive, made in response to observable stimulus. Intentionally searching for stimulus is a move action.

Is a pressure plate or tripwire an observable stimulus? I'd say yes. So a reactive check seems in order.

However, many people believe that you must spend the Move action to search, perhaps because they're just used to people saying "I search for traps", assuming that they wouldn't be doing that if it wasn't necessary. A sort of self-fulfilling prophecy.

Another argument for the need to search actively is the existence of a couple of abilities that give you a Perception check anytime you come close to a trap;

Quote:

Stonecunning: Dwarves receive a +2 bonus on Perception checks to potentially notice unusual stonework, such as traps and hidden doors located in stone walls or floors. They receive a check to notice such features whenever they pass within 10 feet of them, whether or not they are actively looking.

Quote:

Trap Spotter (Ex): Whenever a rogue with this talent comes within 10 feet of a trap, she receives an immediate Perception skill check to notice the trap. This check should be made in secret by the GM.

Some people believe that the existence of these abilities implies that without them, you have to search actively. I'm not so sure of that; they could also mean that you get a second chance to spot traps.

I personally think it makes sense to grant a Perception check even if not actively searching, because there's a chance people will spot a trap just because it's visible in the direction they're looking at. It's an observable stimulus. However, if not actively searching, it'd be fair to apply a penalty to the DC, the "Creature making the check is distracted: +5DC" line shown in the Perception skill.

Actively searching will definitely avoid that penalty, and also allow you to Take 20. (Note that since the Perception check takes only 1 Move, it takes only 1 minute to Take 20 on a look for traps, not nearly as long as some people think it does.)

---

Back to this scenario. Even if you decide that searching for traps requires an action, they can still choose to do that. Move; check; track; move; check; track and so on ad nauseam. It means they'll be going slower, but I've played that scenario, and those traps can really wear you down.

[Scott Yauger]

Any decent trap would not have observable stimuli. That's what makes it a trap. Granting a 'free' perception check would negate the need to ever take Trap spotter. I don't think granting a second chance to spot traps would be considered RAW either.

[Ascalaphus]

Scott Yauger wrote:

Any decent trap would not have observable stimuli. That's what makes it a trap.

In that case there is NO way to detect it other than doing stuff that might trigger it.

Most traps are hard to spot; that's why the spot DC tends to start at 20.

Consider the tripwire trap. If you're actively looking for traps, you can spot it. But it's possible you'll spot it just because you happen to look that way and have sharp eyes.

If it's not possible to spot it passively, why could you even spot it actively? That doesn't make sense.

Scott Yauger wrote:

Granting a 'free' perception check would negate the need to ever take Trap spotter. I don't think granting a second chance to spot traps would be considered RAW either.

It doesn't negate the need, although it makes it less useful. It turns it from "roll at all" to "roll twice and take the best result".

Also, you can even have three chances to spot it: passively, then with Trap Spotter, and again with Stonecunning if the trap happens to involve stonework.

---

Anyway, your post proves precisely what I said earlier: that because Trap Spotter exists, people believe that without it you can't spot traps passively.

But the Perception and Trap rules don't say that - they don't say anything one way or the other. So maybe you have to actively search, or maybe Trap Spotter gives you a second chance. With the rules as they are, both interpretations are entirely possible.

So people often say that you have to search actively "because otherwise it'd be too easy". But that's not really a RAW argument, is it?

[Frederick Lux]

In the end, it didn't matter for me. They only failed one check, and that one happened to result in a combat, rather than a trap.

Overall, as a GM, I liked it, but you really need to add fluff to it to make it work thematically. Also, they really trampled over all the combats, final boss didn't even get his spell off (rolled a 1 on initiative, then had to cast a full-round spell. A player noted that the higher level tier strategy made much more sense for him). No real problems to speak of, other than that it just doesn't seem quite there yet.

[IQuarent]

I have run Delirium's Tangle 2-3 times in PFS and I feel I should comment on the fact that some players find parts of it very frustrating;

Spoiler:

the two parts I'm thinking of are the Clever Door and ESPECIALLY the skill checks. Making 10 skill checks in a row with ridiculously high DCs was tedious at the best of times. Seriously, 4/5 of the DCs are 25 at tier 1-2. That's insane. What I did for this part was lower the DCs of the 25 DC checks by 3 for every failure and increase the DC by 1 for every success. It worked great.

The Clever door was annoying because it gave most of the party nothing to do. One person makes an Int. check each round and that's it. Luckily the encounter provides other options under a sub category labeled "My Party Lacks Intelligence", but I had to compensate by making the door able to take more hits. This was due to the fact that it took 4 or more checks against it every round if I went this route. I also increased the strength check DC from 15 to 21. When the encounter starts it gives all the PCs the option to flee before the doors close and trap them inside, but I'm not sure why because if they all choose to leave then the module won't progress until they decide to face the door anyway... After encountering that problem the first 2 times I decided to just skip the option to let them leave.

As for the Void Whisper, I must admit that the Giant Leech is a pathetic monster. It should be DC 1/2, not 2. The PCs would kill it in 1-2 rounds every time. If the Venture Captain in your area is okay with it, I recommend changing it to something much more difficult. I recommend this especially, considering the fact that you can have a TPK in this encounter and it won't even matter because win or lose it doesn't kill them; it just teleports them back to the maze.

As Lux said, adding some fluff is ideal to make this module better, and the last encounter is not very difficult(hence even more reason to compensate with the Void Whisper). What I did for the last encounter was relied on Abysiel's movement action options far more than spells. More than once in the encounter I took two move actions instead of move-standard and did two pendulums or two chains or one of each. Surprisingly, it was far more effective.

I wrote all this in a review for this module, but it deleted the 7-8 paragraphs of text before it posted, so I guess I'll just put these suggestions here until I get around to writing the whole thing again...

I actually didn't notice the map mix up because I drew everything myself ahead of time. The map on page 6 is really annoying to draw, so I personally would prepare for that more than worrying having the wrong pre-made map... Honestly this is a module that requires a good amount of preparation, but as I said has a lot of potential.

[Silverhand]

I'll be running this scenario in a few days.

I have a question about the Optional Encounter regarding NPC and PC Placement:

Spoiler:

The optional encounter takes place 9 islands floating in extra-dimensional space. Placing the Monster and the PCs on the same island will make things waaaay too easy for the PCs.

There are 9 islands (including the central island) on the map. Should I number the islands then roll a d10 to determine where the PCs begin the optional encounter?

There are risks in this for sure. I'd love to hear other GMs POV on this.

[Silverhand]

Actually...the more I think about that optional encounter, the stranger it appears. Please consider this text:

spoiler:

The encounter's development section says the following: "Any PCs who died during the encounter find themselves lying on the floor in front of the bronze door with an enormous, skull-pounding headache. this headache imposes a –1 on all further attack rolls, damage rolls, and skill checks made while inside the Tangle."

If someone dies in the extra-dimensional space, are they really "dead"? If they die in there, what shape are they in when they are transported back to area A2? Are they at negative hit points? Staggered? Or is it as if nothing ever happened, save the -1 penalty as described above?

If anyone can clarify, that would be lovely.

[joe kirner]

I did it as they are back in front of the door as if nothing happened.
Just a -1 to those that died. also minus the spells and items used during the encounter.

I had the monster (gib Mouther - high tier) appear on the central island and had the party all appear on a rock in the upper left corner.
I had the extra dim. spaces map pack which helped a lot.

[Silverhand]

joe kirner wrote:

I did it as they are back in front of the door as if nothing happened.

Just a -1 to those that died. also minus the spells and items used during the encounter.

I had the monster (gib Mouther - high tier) appear on the central island and had the party all appear on a rock in the upper left corner.
I had the extra dim. spaces map pack which helped a lot.

That sounds like a good solution.

Only two questions about "fairness".

spoiler:

1) Suppose a character fails a jump check, falls off an island or gets bull-rushed etc. Since it's a bottomless pit, that PC theoretically falls to their "death".

That PC is very lucky! They waste no resources during the optional encounter and just end up back in the dungeon with the -1 penalty.

2) It seems unfair that only spell-casters end up having to lose resources for this encounter. A frontline melee fighter may lose a lot of HP fighting a leech or mouther...but once they 'die' they end up back at their previous level of HP with only a -1 penalty whereas the casters wake up, their spells expended.

Something just doesn't feel right about this optional encounter...

Any additional insights are greatly appreciated.

[joe kirner]

Perhaps just best to skip it since it is optional.

My feeling is that your given a "freebie death" in case.
all spells, items, hp, etc.... are stil used and lost.

you could play it as all players get everything back after the encounter.

[Le Petite Mort]

I'm running this on Monday, and I'm a bit confused by the final fight. Specifically, I'm not sure how to handle the chains. I'll quote their text here:

Delirium's Tangle page 14 wrote:

Abysiel animates the workshop's many chains to grapple a single target, as if using the animate rope spell, with the exceptions that the chains can reach any opponent in the workshop.

This is only confusing after reading animate rope. I'll quote the relevant text here:

PRD wrote:

The rope can enwrap only a creature or an object within 1 foot of it—it does not snake outward—so it must be thrown near the intended target. Doing so requires a successful ranged touch attack roll (range increment 10 feet). A typical 1-inch-diameter hemp rope has 2 hit points, AC 10, and requires a DC 23 Strength check to burst it. The rope does not deal damage, but it can be used as a trip line or to cause a single opponent that fails a Reflex saving throw to become entangled. A creature capable of spell-casting that is bound by this spell must make a concentration check with a DC of 15 + the spell's level to cast a spell. An entangled creature can slip free with a DC 20 Escape Artist check.

I'm assuming that the 'only a creature or an object within 1 foot' is the part that is there is an exception to, I don't need to worry about enemy positioning. The parts that I'm not sure about:

Do I need to make a ranged attack roll? Would this be with Abysiel's ranged attack modifier?

Do the PCs get a Reflex save against the entangled condition? What is the save DC?

Do they become grappled, or entangled? The scenario says grappled, the spell says entangled.

Love the scenario as a whole, thought it packed a lot of content in 12 pages of adventure. I suspect that this ability made sense with 3.5 rules, which I believe PFS was still running in at time of publication. Still, don't know what to do now.

[Woran]

I cant remember what I had in mind when I ran it. It never came up as Abysiel lost initiative and was dead before he had a chance to act :(

[Quentin Coldwater]

Le Petite Mort wrote:

I'm running this on Monday, and I'm a bit confused by the final fight. Specifically, I'm not sure how to handle the chains. I'll quote their text here:

Delirium's Tangle page 14 wrote:

Abysiel animates the workshop's many chains to grapple a single target, as if using the animate rope spell, with the exceptions that the chains can reach any opponent in the workshop.

This is only confusing after reading animate rope. I'll quote the relevant text here:

PRD wrote:

The rope can enwrap only a creature or an object within 1 foot of it—it does not snake outward—so it must be thrown near the intended target. Doing so requires a successful ranged touch attack roll (range increment 10 feet). A typical 1-inch-diameter hemp rope has 2 hit points, AC 10, and requires a DC 23 Strength check to burst it. The rope does not deal damage, but it can be used as a trip line or to cause a single opponent that fails a Reflex saving throw to become entangled. A creature capable of spell-casting that is bound by this spell must make a concentration check with a DC of 15 + the spell's level to cast a spell. An entangled creature can slip free with a DC 20 Escape Artist check.

I'm assuming that the 'only a creature or an object within 1 foot' is the part that is there is an exception to, I don't need to worry about enemy positioning. The parts that I'm not sure about:

Do I need to make a ranged attack roll? Would this be with Abysiel's ranged attack modifier?

Do the PCs get a Reflex save against the entangled condition? What is the save DC?

Do they become grappled, or entangled? The scenario says grappled, the spell says entangled.

Love the scenario as a whole, thought it packed a lot of content in 12 pages of adventure. I suspect that this ability made sense with 3.5 rules, which I believe PFS was still running in at time of publication. Still, don't know what to do now.

I had the same as Tineke, Abysiel was dead before he could act. Still, I think I can figure stuff out:

You need a ranged attack roll. The rope can enwrap only a creature or an object within 1 foot of it - it does not snake outward - so it must be thrown near the intended target. Doing so requires a successful ranged touch attack roll (range increment 10 feet)
At tier 1-2, that's a to-hit of +3 (+1 BAB, +2 DEX). I don't know against what, though. I'd say either touch AC, or CMD, but if it's the latter, a CMB check would make more sense (that's a +0).

I'd say the DC is as if he'd cast Animate Rope, so that's DC 13: 10 + spell level (1) + CHA mod (2). If it's treated as a spell-like ability, it's slightly higher, but I wouldn't worry about that.

Tactics specifically call out grappled, I'd rule that overrules spell description. It's a weird creature with unique powers.

Do note that the DCs noted are to break rope. Breaking iron is a lot harder. My GM screen says hardness 10, 5 HP, Break DC 26.

Also, random piece of advice: ask your players if you're allowed to make things slightly harder. It's frowned upon, but the combats are a piece of cake otherwise, especially on low tier. A single Morlock against a full party isn't a challenge, just a waste of time. Act 3 and 4 are decent challenges, but the mining beetles and Morlocks might be a little disappointing.

[Woran]

Quentin Coldwater wrote:

Le Petite Mort wrote:

I'm running this on Monday, and I'm a bit confused by the final fight. Specifically, I'm not sure how to handle the chains. I'll quote their text here:

Delirium's Tangle page 14 wrote:

Abysiel animates the workshop's many chains to grapple a single target, as if using the animate rope spell, with the exceptions that the chains can reach any opponent in the workshop.

This is only confusing after reading animate rope. I'll quote the relevant text here:

PRD wrote:

The rope can enwrap only a creature or an object within 1 foot of it—it does not snake outward—so it must be thrown near the intended target. Doing so requires a successful ranged touch attack roll (range increment 10 feet). A typical 1-inch-diameter hemp rope has 2 hit points, AC 10, and requires a DC 23 Strength check to burst it. The rope does not deal damage, but it can be used as a trip line or to cause a single opponent that fails a Reflex saving throw to become entangled. A creature capable of spell-casting that is bound by this spell must make a concentration check with a DC of 15 + the spell's level to cast a spell. An entangled creature can slip free with a DC 20 Escape Artist check.

I'm assuming that the 'only a creature or an object within 1 foot' is the part that is there is an exception to, I don't need to worry about enemy positioning. The parts that I'm not sure about:

Do I need to make a ranged attack roll? Would this be with Abysiel's ranged attack modifier?

Do the PCs get a Reflex save against the entangled condition? What is the save DC?

Do they become grappled, or entangled? The scenario says grappled, the spell says entangled.

Love the scenario as a whole, thought it packed a lot of content in 12 pages of adventure. I suspect that this ability made sense with 3.5 rules, which I believe PFS was still running in at time of publication. Still, don't know what to do now.

I had the same as Tineke, Abysiel was dead before he could act. Still, I...

Quentin. Remember when I ran it... the MUSHROOMS :D :D :D :D

[Le Petite Mort]

Just got done running. The combats may have been easy, but I had a party of 3 new players and myself running Seelah. They actually struggled a lot against Abysiel, largely due to no one having a decent ranged option.