Creative Director
|
Advanced HD and the Advanced Simple Template are not the same thing. Yog'oltha does NOT have the Advanced simple template; he just has advanced Hit Dice, and thus does not gain that +2 bonus to his natural armor that the Advanced Simple Template grants.It's not always obvious, when the statblock just says "advanced aboleth" which unfortunately can mean both.
Whenever we apply the advanced simple template, we do one of two things: we either simply use the short version of the stat block (since that's part of the point of a simple template—to allow us in print to increase a monster's CR by +1 without having to reprint its whole stat block), or we reprint the whole thing and add hit dice and/or class levels. In BOTH cases, if we use the advanced simple template, we'll note that in the monster's 3rd line, where we list the page numbers that the monster appeared on. If we used the Advanced simple template for a monster, you'll see us cite page 294 of the Pathfinder Bestiary.
That said, it can indeed mean both, but that doesn't change the stat blocks in any way and thus isn't an error. If you're going into the stats to reverse engineer things (either so you can tweak the stats to fit your game's needs or just because you like looking under the hood and tinkering), we try to provide a lot of tools for that (to the slight detriment of making the stat block more easy to use in actual play, alas), but when you do go "under the hood" you should do so with eyes open, knowing that sometimes things aren't all where you might expect them to be. Doesn't mean that the stat block won't work at all as written, of course.
|
Creative Director
|
thank you for taking the time to clarifyThis is a legitimate error, but hardly one that will impact game play at all or break encounters. My suggestion is to ignore the fact that he has one too many feats. Either that or just dump his Improved Lightning Reflexes feat entirely.Also Yog'oltha's feats, he's got 14HD so 7 feats but he has 8 listed.
I can't see where the extra feat comes from
No problem!
Not to be all negative and stuff, but what happened with the art in this book? It really took a plunge.
I mean, the cover is great, brilliant even. But some of the interior shots are quite bad IMO. I'm not going to cancel my subscription over it, but it was a disappointing experience to flip through.
Just some feedback is all. Let me know if this isn't the right place for that.
|
Creative Director
|
Not to be all negative and stuff, but what happened with the art in this book? It really took a plunge.
I mean, the cover is great, brilliant even. But some of the interior shots are quite bad IMO. I'm not going to cancel my subscription over it, but it was a disappointing experience to flip through.
Just some feedback is all. Let me know if this isn't the right place for that.
As any long-term subscriber can confirm, the art in any one particular volume of Pathfinder may or may not be any one person's favorite art. We use different artists all the time. While we do strive to maintain a solid theme for art in an adventure path, the simple fact is that artist schedules vary.
As any long-term subscriber can confirm, the art in any one particular volume of Pathfinder may or may not be any one person's favorite art.
I must say, some of the interior art isn't my favorite art.
To be precise, it's the interior art depicting "scenes" (as opposed to the "NPC" art and "object" art, which I like).Unfortunately this is true for me for the two previous volumes of this AP too.
|
Creative Director
|
While we're on the subject of art critiquing... it's not very useful to us for someone to say, "I don't like the art in volume #39" or "I don't like the half-page illos." That doesn't really help us examine our choices. What WOULD help is something more akin to, "I don't like art that uses too many bright colors" or "I don't like anime-influenced art" or "I don't like green and gray goblins."
Just saying "I don't like art" doesn't really help us determine if there's actually a problem is what I'm saying, and it only makes us feel sad. Constructive criticism does not, though, which is why I'm asking for more details.
|
Well I did not want to criticise (since preference is a matter of taste) but since it has been brought up I cant say I've liked the art in the last few pathfinders either. Specificly the type of art that began to be used since the first issue of Kingmaker (Lini fighting the bogard in the first issue for example or Mersrial being attacked by the froghemoth in City of spears for another). It just isn't the kind of style of art I like.
On a side note it may be my imagination but is there less of the scene type art going into pathfinder? (ie art depicting the Iconics fighting and/or doing things) because side from the given style examples that is normally my favourite art.
|
Creative Director
|
On a side note it may be my imagination but is there less of the scene type art going into pathfinder? (ie art depicting the Iconics fighting and/or doing things) because side from the given style examples that is normally my favourite art.
As a matter of fact, yes. We've moved away from doing more half-page illustrations and toward providing more character illustrations in Pathfinder, basically for six reasons.
1) Character illustrations are much more useful for a GM in play than half-page scenes. With character illos, you can say "You see this guy!" and show off the picture. For scenes, since those often have iconic adventurers in them, it's harder to say "This happens!" not only because every encounter plays out differently in every game, but because chances are great that your PCs don't look like our Iconics.
2) Scene art is a LOT harder to pull off, not only because it's more complex, but because making the scene match what's in the text can be really tough. Especially since we often have to order the scenes before the adventures are done being written or the author's maps are hard to read or aren't done (this is the primary reason we get worked up and sad if an adventure writer is late on a deadline—because we have to order art anyway and that often means we have to make guesses).
3) The overall style in many of our books is to open a chapter with a half-page piece of art and then illustrate the rest of that chapter with character illustrations, so that you have a visual cue where chapters or sections of large chapters start. Since the adventures are generally the LONGEST single chapter elements of things we print (generally 50 pages long—only some chapters in our rulebooks are longer), we decided to keep a few half-page illos in there for variety's sake.
4) Maps are technically art as well. And while the number of maps we print in an adventure varies wildly... there's usually about 3 pages of them. Every map we print in an adventure therefore takes up room that art could have taken up, and thus when we have map-heavy adventures (which happens more often than it doesn't) that means we order less art.
5) Character illustrations are more dynamic and can alter the shape of the word flow on the page in more interesting ways, making the layout more exciting than a static rectangle does.
6) Character illustrations are less expensive than half-page illustrations, and therefore we can order a lot more character illustrations. If we ordered more half page illustrations, we would have to order far fewer character illustrations, and the result would look overall like it had LESS art. The art/text balance in Pathfinder seems just about spot on to me (rarely is there more than 3 pages without some sort of art element—be it sidebars, maps, or actual art).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
1) Character illustrations are much more useful for a GM in play than half-page scenes. With character illos, you can say "You see this guy!" and show off the picture. For scenes, since those often have iconic adventurers in them, it's harder to say "This happens!" not only because every encounter plays out differently in every game, but because chances are great that your PCs don't look like our Iconics.
This makes me happy - art of NPCs is indeed much more valuable to this DM, at least.
And those annoying iconics really do just get in the damn way of cooler art in the background (the scene). My players sure as hell don't want to see them.
2) Scene art is a LOT harder to pull off, not only because it's more complex, but because making the scene match what's in the text can be really tough. Especially since we often have to order the scenes before the adventures are done being written or the author's maps are hard to read or aren't done (this is the primary reason we get worked up and sad if an adventure writer is late on a deadline—because we have to order art anyway and that often means we have to make guesses).
This makes me sad, though, because scene art really helps show the players what their characters are seeing - help spur their imaginations. Particularly when I could have the opportunity to show a cool set of jungle ruins *ahem*. As noted above, too bad those annoying iconics get in the way! :D
|
I think Ugimmo, p. 28, is missing a feat
he is oracle 7 so 4 feats
A normal 3HD boggard according to the bestiary has 2 feats
Ugimmo has 10 HD, so 7 oracle levels + 3 "boggard" levels and we should have 6 feats.
The Stat Block has only 5.
Am I missing something?thanks
The feats do not add up quite like that.
An Oracle 7 (by itself) has 7 HD and does get 4 feats. 1, 3, 5, 7.
A boggard (by itself) has 3 HD and does get 2 feats. 1, 3.
Combining the two gets 10 HD, but only 5 feats. 1, 3, 5, 7, 9.
If you think about it another way, take the oracle 7. Then add on the 3 HD to the end, and you'd have 8, 9, and 10 HD. You only get a feat at one of those, so those 3 HD just add a single feat.
James,
Not to derail the discussion of the AP Chapter, but I wanted to give feedback on having more character illustrations. Basically I want to say I agree with your decision, but offer an additional reason why. One that might not have occurred to you.
I do a lot of Virtual Tabletop stuff with Paizo APs (MapTools specifically). So do a lot of other folks around here.
While I can show my players scene art to capture the mood, that lasts for a few seconds. They glance at it, go 'huh', and then move on.
However, if you give me a character portrait, I will use that art to represent that character in my online game for the ENTIRE chapter. I get sooo much more practical use from it, especially if it is a significant NPC.
This is just another reason to add to your list. :)
how about we flip it
well the boggard starts of as just a 3HD boggard so 2 feats
as he works his way up the oracle levels how would he loose out on the other 4 feats?
he is a boggard 1st and then got class levels not the other way around.
Actually Karui Kage had it right. You have to consider his three racial hit dice as three levels of humanoid, and he has multi-classed into oracle.
well the boggard starts of as just a 3HD boggard so 2 feats
as he works his way up the oracle levels how would he loose out on the other 4 feats?
he is a boggard 1st and then got class levels not the other way around.
Feats are based on total hit dice (10 HD = 5 feats); there isn't a separate pool of feats for class hit dice and a separate pool of feats for racial hit dice.
|
|
Yeah, what matters isn't the order, but the total HD. 10 HD = 5 feats. Simply put. If you do it the other way, as you suggested, then you have this:
Boggard: 1 HD (Feat), 2 HD (No Feat) 3 HD (Feat).
Oracle: 4 HD (No Feat), 5 HD (Feat), 6 HD (No Feat), 7 HD (Feat), 8 HD (No Feat), 9 HD (Feat), 10 HD (No Feat).
Either way, it's 5 feats.
|
Creative Director
|
James,
Not to derail the discussion of the AP Chapter, but I wanted to give feedback on having more character illustrations. Basically I want to say I agree with your decision, but offer an additional reason why. One that might not have occurred to you.
I do a lot of Virtual Tabletop stuff with Paizo APs (MapTools specifically). So do a lot of other folks around here.
While I can show my players scene art to capture the mood, that lasts for a few seconds. They glance at it, go 'huh', and then move on.
However, if you give me a character portrait, I will use that art to represent that character in my online game for the ENTIRE chapter. I get sooo much more practical use from it, especially if it is a significant NPC.
This is just another reason to add to your list. :)
Yet another reason why character portraits are useful.
That said... you can still make character portraits from scenes as well, yes? It just requires a bit more work at the cropping stage...
|
Creative Director
|
I certainly hope you keep the half page Illos there one of the main things that keep me buying the Ap even if I don't use all of them.we decided to keep a few half-page illos in there for variety's sake.
The current mix of 3 half-page illos, 12 full character illos, and 3 head illos/spot illos is pretty much the formula we've been using for Adventure Path adventure art for well over a year now. It's unlikely to chagne in the future, because we're really quite happy with:
a) How that mix ends up looking in print, and
b) How that mix more or less fits exactly into the art budget for Pathfinder APs.
Yet another reason why character portraits are useful.
That said... you can still make character portraits from scenes as well, yes? It just requires a bit more work at the cropping stage...
Yes and no.. you're quite right in that you can crop them. However they're usually iconics and monsters. Unless the PCs are playing iconics, they're not that useful.
Well..... And yes they are! The monsters are useful in those action scenes! Especially if they are different in some way from the standard Bestiary version. I use those for tokens a lot. (And just crop the iconics out, not that they're not cool)
Like you said, I would not eliminate those action half page pictures entirely. I just support the shift you've taken.
Recommendation: when you do order a half-page action art scene, target unusual creatures as one of the subjects. Actually I think you do this already, but I'm saying it just in case.
I have no comment on the mix of halfpagers vs character-shots. (Other than to say that my players would like seeing "action shots" more if they didn't have the iconic standing in the way.)
But if you want more specific feedback:
The picture at the front of the bestiary (of the Sorceress pulling Harsk out of the snake pit) has the proportions looking very strange (look at their limbs). I wouldn't say I dislike the "style" so much as it's bad art.
Similarly, the picture of the Froghemoth attacking the Rogue is almost laughable. Maybe it's the fact that the picture is very "simple." There doesn't seem to be a lot of shading going on, but lots of pure colors. And seems a bit cartoony and foolish. More "slapstick" than "exciting."
All of the portraits in the "five factions" chapter seem a bit cartoony. They all look like they're trying to avoid laughing. The seem very soft, almost watery.
Also, the picture of the Cleric channeling energy (near the "magic items" section). This was the least offensive of the four that I'm complaining about, but it still rubbed me the wrong way. I guess I dislike "founts of power" issueing from character's hands. Honestly, it looks like she's doing a Dragonball-Z power-up maneuver. It seems video-gamey to me. And I dislike any anime-influence in my western RPGs. And I'm a low-magic guy. *shrug*
I guess what's artistically in common with all the pictures I'm complaining about is:
- very thick bounding lines
- lack of shading
- comic-style influence
- looks like it was "painted" more than "drawn"
I dislike being so negative. So in an effort to end this post on positive note, I'll mention what I like about the last few covers:
- fine bounding lines
- lots of details and texture
- attention paid to the background/scenary
- the iconics have their backs turned away
- very high artistic skill
- realistic porportions, and otherwise "western-style"
|
Creative Director
|
Recommendation: when you do order a half-page action art scene, target unusual creatures as one of the subjects. Actually I think you do this already, but I'm saying it just in case.
We do generally aim to have unusual creatures or non-key foes in the half-page illustrations. That's more because coordinating similar appearances between a half-page illustration and a character illustration is a harrowing stunt that we generally don't want to do, though; it's one thing for those iconics since we can send that art to the half-pager artist to use as a reference, but in a case where we have one artist building the half-pager and a second artist building the character illustrations simultaneously... it's a recipe for disaster.
|
|
While we're on the subject of art critiquing... it's not very useful to us for someone to say, "I don't like the art in volume #39" or "I don't like the half-page illos." That doesn't really help us examine our choices. What WOULD help is something more akin to, "I don't like art that uses too many bright colors" or "I don't like anime-influenced art" or "I don't like green and gray goblins."
Just saying "I don't like art" doesn't really help us determine if there's actually a problem is what I'm saying, and it only makes us feel sad. Constructive criticism does not, though, which is why I'm asking for more details.
Well, I was personally disappointed with the three portraits of the factions leaders. I really like the cover art for these leaders, however, the portraits don't look like the same person. It would have been nice to either have the same person do these portraits or clip the faces from the cover, instead.
On a side note, I would like to have pictures of all 5 faction heads and their thugs. I understand that space was a limiting factor. Maybe you can do a web release of this?
I also did not care for the art at the opening of the "Expedition of Saventh-Yhi." It felt too generic with nothing going on.
Finally, the maps are excellent, as is the cover. I also like the pictures of the NPCs in the adventure (Nareem, Sozothala, etc).
That said, I would like more of the maps, though I would not want to sacrifice the art. Again, I know space is limited. A blog post or a free web supplement would be nice.
Another Stat Block Question, Kliboolya, p.33, on Fort save value.
She's a rogue 6 +2, Con 20 +5 and base vegepygmy of +3 which gives me +10, but the SB says +9.
Where an I missing something?
Base vegepygmy of +3 includes the +1 for the standard Con of 12.
|
Creative Director
|
Osond, p. 38, has this under druid spells prepared
3rd—call lightningD (DC 17), remove disease (4; already cast)does this mean he has cast one remove disease out of 4 or has he cast all 4?
or was supposed to be applied to barkskin since that spell is supposed to be cast "Before Combat"?
He's cast all four of them already; spells that are cast "Before combat" are generally NOT labeled "Already cast." We save that label for special cases, as in this one, where a spellcaster's using spells to maintain something unusual.
Lessikal, p.48, I'm not seeing how he got a +3 deflection bonus.
potion of shield of faith only gives +2 (1st level spell so CL of 1 for potion)
Barkskin is natural bonus
magic vestment is armor bonusCan anyone see where the other +1 comes from?
thanks
Because under gear it specifically says "potions of shield of faith +3" So it's obviously not a CL of 1
As to the armor of the Jungle Mantis, I'm not sure but if you look at the last paragraph on page 295 it says "These values are not absolute." I believe Table 2.1 is suppose to be a guideline, not a formula per say.
Lessikal, p.48, I'm not seeing how he got a +3 deflection bonus.
potion of shield of faith only gives +2 (1st level spell so CL of 1 for potion)
It's listed as a potion of shield of faith +3 ... so I think you can guess.
edit: ninja'd
|
The Radiant Muse, p.39, has a CR of 13 but only XP of 9,600.
For CR 13 it should be 25,600
That's something that got missed in editing, unfortunately. She is CR 13, so she should be worth 25,600 XP.
Jungle Mantises, p.48, has a natural armor bonus of +10.
With base giant mantis natural bonus of +5 , size change from Large to Huge +3 and CR change from 3 to 6 +4. I get +12.
Whenever we do an "advanced" monster, we're essentially creating a new monster. The guidelines in the back of the Bestiary are there to help GMs advance their own creatures, but they are not hard and fast rules. Jungle mantises are basically new monsters, and their stats were designed to reflect their CR.
Lessikal, p.48, I'm not seeing how he got a +3 deflection bonus. potion of shield of faith only gives +2 (1st level spell so CL of 1 for potion) Barkskin is natural bonus magic vestment is armor bonus. Can anyone see where the other +1 comes from?
As others have stated, the potions are +3, so they have a higher CL than 1.
Since this has turned into stat-block foo, I'll ask this question:
How do you advance monsters that have class levels baked into them? For example, the Radiant Muse in this module is only "Bard 6" but can cast spells at much higher level.
This also happened in KM:
Both Bard and Druid give "other" powers too, like BardSong and WildShape. Do we just look at the spell progression as "+1 existing" like a PrC would, and give the other abilities normally (so you can have magic that outstrips your 'others'), or do they come pegged in at a certain level, and everything advances in unison?
|
Thought this was funny....
Normally, the troglodyte high priests use the blade to
“judge” hopeful troglodytes who seek to become clerics
of the Mantis God. If a would-be cleric is chaotic evil, the
blade imparts its negative level from its axiomatic power,
revealing the truth that the aspirant would not take to
training for a class that requires, at best, a neutral evil
alignment.Here's the problem:
The Mantis Blade is lawful evil.
+
If you're not the alignment of the intelligent item you wield, you gain a negative level=
It having axiomatic is redundant-- all creatures who aren't lawful evil gain a negative level if they wield this item. I guess a lot of the neutral evil would be clerics who sign up for the test get killed too!
Look under Use Magical Device you can use that skill at a high difficulty to use magical items that are not of your alignment meaning a Chaotic Good character using that skill can use a Lawful Evil Item without taking a negative level penalty. Its an often overlooked part of the skill. (Thats how my Sorceror is walking around in Black Robes of the Archmagi.) How ever you can only do this with a single fake alignment. You would of course have to deal with the Item's intelligence.
|
|
Since this has turned into stat-block foo, I'll ask this question:
How do you advance monsters that have class levels baked into them? For example, the Radiant Muse in this module is only "Bard 6" but can cast spells at much higher level.
This also happened in KM: ** spoiler omitted **
Both Bard and Druid give "other" powers too, like BardSong and WildShape. Do we just look at the spell progression as "+1 existing" like a PrC would, and give the other abilities normally (so you can have magic that outstrips your 'others'), or do they come pegged in at a certain level, and everything advances in unison?
A lillend already casts spells as a 7th-level bard. Add actual bard levels and the spellcasting stacks, enabling a lillend bard 6 to cast spells as a 13th-level bard. A lillend does not have any other bard abilities, so she doesn't get the class abilities of a 13th-level bard, just the spells.
But if you were to give a lillend 6 sorcerer levels, it wouldn't change her spellcasting progression - she wouold still cast spells as a 7th-level bard and as a 6th-level sorcerer, since bard and sorcerer levels do not stack.
I don't think it's listed but does anyone know the width of the spears?
Thanks! I pre-make maps on giant graph paper to use for minis so I'll need the info once we do get to this adventure.
Am I missing some chart or description on the awarding of Discovery points for the factions? I see it described but not how to award for what.
Our Free Captains aligned party has already attacked and taken down the Aspis Consortium. (Etters taunted them in his 'Alan Rickman/DieHard' way. cannot blame them.
luckily I built him with a Contingency Spell from his superiors and he will return.)
And they will probably team up / merge with the Pathfinders since the Pathfinders have lost up to 1/2 their party.
Just wondering if there is a chart/more info i should be using for 'discovery points' or is it GM discretion?
thanks
|
|
Am I missing some chart or description on the awarding of Discovery points for the factions? I see it described but not how to award for what.
Our Free Captains aligned party has already attacked and taken down the Aspis Consortium. (Etters taunted them in his 'Alan Rickman/DieHard' way. cannot blame them.
luckily I built him with a Contingency Spell from his superiors and he will return.)And they will probably team up / merge with the Pathfinders since the Pathfinders have lost up to 1/2 their party.
Just wondering if there is a chart/more info i should be using for 'discovery points' or is it GM discretion?
thanks
Factions earn discovery points just by making Exploration checks, as described on page 59. It's not more detailed than that, as it's only information the GM should need to run things in the background.
For the PCs, they also earn Discovery points when they make actual discoveries about the history of the city, as described on page 10.
Factions earn discovery points just by making Exploration checks, as described on page 59. It's not more detailed than that, as it's only information the GM should need to run things in the background.For the PCs, they also earn Discovery points when they make actual discoveries about the history of the city, as described on page 10.
thanks!
Is the orientation of the map of the city on p.9 correct or is it suppose to be switched North and South? I ask because the current natural entrance to the city and the one that the adventure assumes to use is on the North side of the city, but Tazion is to the south meaning the PCs will be approaching from the bottom of the map. I don't think my PCs are going to think of traveling miles out of the way through dense jungle to check to see if there's an easier way into the city from the opposite side of where they are. Was there a reason for the north entrance or just the two adventures not synching up that way?
|
|
Is the orientation of the map of the city on p.9 correct or is it suppose to be switched North and South? I ask because the current natural entrance to the city and the one that the adventure assumes to use is on the North side of the city, but Tazion is to the south meaning the PCs will be approaching from the bottom of the map. I don't think my PCs are going to think of traveling miles out of the way through dense jungle to check to see if there's an easier way into the city from the opposite side of where they are. Was there a reason for the north entrance or just the two adventures not synching up that way?
The map is correct. The description of the waterfall (area A) on page 13 explains that following the clues from Tazion, the PCs arrive here. Just because they're coming from the south doesn't mean that they'll stumble upon the city from that direction. Remember that Saventh-Yhi is protected by magical wards preventing it from being accidentally discovered, so they have to follow the clues to areas A or they will be wandering miles out of the way in search of something they can't see.
The journey from Tazion is hand-waved to a certain extent. It's probably best just to assume that they hit the river at some point to the west, and then follow it upstream to the southeast to area A.
Ah, good point, thanks. I was filling in some of that hand waving from Tazion with some extra notes from myself and sort of had them coming right up on it from the south but I'll abstract that last part of the trip to bend them around the "right" way. (: