|
Ok so I've been reading my materials in anticipation of Gencon and
|
|
Ok so I've been reading my materials in anticipation of Gencon and
** spoiler omitted **
Opposed is an old term carried over. Follow the table in the core rules for starting attitudes and go from there as written in the core rules.
If you run the high tier, that first encounter is amazingly fun from a tacticle point of view. I've run it three times, and each time there are at least several players who start out on top of buildings.
If you want further advice/discussion feel free to email me at my first name dot last name at gmail dot com.
p.s. I'm quite jealous that I get to run parts 2 and 4 at Gen Con but not 3 which has been my favorite of the series. Gnomes FTW!
|
Ok so I've been reading my materials in anticipation of Gencon and
** spoiler omitted **
Arg. Post moster struck again.
OK First here are the rules on Diplomacy.
You can use this skill to persuade others to agree with your arguments, to resolve differences, and to gather valuable information or rumors from people. This skill is also used to negotiate conflicts by using the proper etiquette and manners suitable to the problem.
Check[b]
You can change the initial attitudes of nonplayer characters with a successful check. The DC of this check depends on the creature’s starting attitude toward you, adjusted by its Charisma modifier.
Succeed - If you succeed, the character’s attitude toward you is improved by one step. For every 5 by which your check result exceeds the DC, the character’s attitude toward you increases by one additional step. A creature’s attitude cannot be shifted more than two steps up in this way, although the GM can override this rule in some situations.
Fail - If you fail the check by 4 or less, the character’s attitude toward you is unchanged. If you fail by 5 or more, the character’s attitude toward you is decreased by one step.
You cannot use Diplomacy against a creature that does not understand you or has an Intelligence of 3 or less. Diplomacy is generally ineffective in combat and against creatures that intend to harm you or your allies in the immediate future. Any attitude shift caused through Diplomacy generally lasts for 1d4 hours but can last much longer or shorter depending upon the situation (GM discretion).
If a creature’s attitude toward you is at least indifferent, you can make requests of the creature. This is an additional Diplomacy check, using the creature’s current attitude to determine the base DC, with one of the following modifiers. Once a creature’s attitude has shifted to helpful, the creature gives in to most requests without a check, unless the request is against its nature or puts it in serious peril. Some requests automatically fail if the request goes against the creature’s values or its nature, subject to GM discretion.
<snip>
[b]Make Request - Making a request of a creature takes 1 or more rounds of interaction, depending upon the complexity of the request.
Try Again
You cannot use Diplomacy to influence a given creature’s attitude more than once in a 24 hour period. If a request is refused, the result does not change with additional checks, although other requests might be made. You can retry Diplomacy checks made to gather information.
Starting Attitude Diplomacy DC
Hostile 25 + creature's Cha Modifier
Unfriendly 20 + creature's Cha Modifier
Indifferent 15 + creature's Cha Modifier
Friendly 10 + creature's Cha Modifier
Helpful 0 + creature's Cha Modifier
The inclution of opposed is IMHO misleading. I would just drop it. Otherwise everthing else you know applies. here is how I see the faction goal working.
There are two arguments to be won.
1. Become a trading partner of Andoran, (indifferant) DC:17.
2. Drop Cheliax as a trading partner, (unfriendly) DC:22.
These are two requests and require two checks. A character can make one specific request once day so if they are unsuccessful they can come back again and try again. This event can be attempted by multiple characters. So if player one doesn't succeed, player two can step up.
It is conceviable that a player will succeed in one but not the other, so they might want to comeback another day to succeed in the other half of the goal, or tag team with someone else.
|
|
...
Okay, so I ran this scenario this weekend and it is a real killer even after all this time and with much more power creep.
The first encounter in the market with the undead was a near tpk. First let me say that (1) the party was barely 10-11 tier (6 players with 52 levels, only one 10+, APL 8.7, rounded to 9 plus 1 for the 6th player), (2) there was no cleric or traditional arcane caster. We had a paladin, magus/rogue, fighter, rogue, rogue/pathfinder delver, & summoner.
My first observation is that Mohrgs are brutal.
- unusually high AC for an undead
- lots of HP
- an incapacitating attack (paralysis) with a high DC(21) delivered with a melee touch
- strong primary attacks with good damage
- grab
- Intelligent
- spring attack
- create spawn with an immediate onset
The last point is the one I'm most concerned with. I have heard a lot of talk about performing coups de graces against "fallen" PC by the NPCs, but I wonder if I went too far this time. In the surprise round, one of the mohrgs was able to charge the fighter who had not acted. It used its paralyzing touch attack which seems logical. An intelligent created with a "save or suck" ability would almost always use it to neutralize an enemy, unless of course the tactics indicate otherwise. So, the fighter was hit, failed the save, and was paralyzed for minutes. Fortunately for the mohrg's, they also rolled a high initiative and were able to take the full-round actions before anyone could do anything to help the fighter. There were no other PCs in the immediate area, so the mohrg decided to coups de grace the fighter. The logical was, (1) it is intelligent, (2) it knows that it can create an immediate minion, and (3) it is under no immediate threat. Needless to say, the fighter failed the death save, died, and immediately became a fast zombie under the control of the mohrg. Not only did the PCs lose one of their two tanks, but he joined the enemies against them.
In the end, with two PCs having become minions and another taken to negatives, they withdrew and abandoned the scenario. It cost the fighter a resurrection to recover and the paladin had to do the same, but also pay to have his body recovered.
Did I go too far? I have thought very carefully about coup de graces and can only come up with a few times when it seems to make sense. One of those times is when you can immediately (or nearly) raise the dead PC as a minion, such as mohrgs and shadows. Would I have done it to a brand-new player or at a low-tier table? NO, but we are talking about 7+ level characters of players with multiple PCs.
Do I feel I "cheated" or did anything wrong? No, I feel I made a common sense decision based on the situation. Do I like to see dead PCs at my table? Again, no. Do I feel it was a fun session? No, but the players indicated they had fun and seemed okay with the results because it was a tier 10-11 tier and "is supposed to be deadly." I am not confident hat the players were sincere and just didn't want to chastise me for providing them a poor gaming experience. I owe it to my players to illicit outside opinions so I can decide if I would do it again should similar conditions arise.
|
|
I do not think so Bob, I have ran this scenario multiple times and played it once. I also think it is a good scenario the best of the series.
The Morhg can be very very tough. Plus he is the undead of the most evil sort. That would of course be a realistic decision for him.
Last week I killed a character before he had a chance to act. Surprise round sneak attack and followed up with a high initiave. With 3 attacks each doing sneak attacks 2 hit one crit. This was in the first combat encounter of an all day module.
Killed a player today with a series of crits, player had a con of 8 rushed forward from the party, as well as being a cleric, leather armor no shield. Almost killed another player prone with a single crit in the same game.
Yesterday, I ran a session. This scenario is one of the easiest out there. Due to party make up, what I thought was going to be a short session based on running and playing it ended up pushing 6 hours. With a outcome of 3 PA total for the 6 player group finishing scenario.
So what to take away from all this. Group composition can really matter. For my last example lacking a single skill cost the party allot in the long run.
I hate killing a PC before they have had a chance to act. Sometimes players will walk into a perfect storm of events that simply equal bad luck. Shirt rerolls can also help.
I personally think I have a low pc death ratio, I would say about 95% of the characters I have killed have been away from the party, or completly surrounded by enemies when they get killed, most but not all of my pc these kills the character had a con of 8 or 10.
Keep the game fun and challenging, more challenging in the higher teir games.
