Let me start with the setup. I am running Kingmaker with 3 of my friends, and we've just started RRR. One of them couldn't make it to the last session, and the other two decided to explore a hex or two while he was gone. They ended up exploring the mud hut hex with the Old Beldame.
Party makeup: Wizard/Monk 4, Fighter 4, Mikmek (npc ranger 2) and a captured Mite (No class levels)
When they approached the fence, they refused to ring the bell. The Monk had almost died during the nettles crossing encounter. Instead, he cast Detect Magic, revealing the Scarecrow to be magical. The Monk walked all the way around the fence line to the back side of the house, and hopped the fence. Then they all rolled initiative.
The Fighter got fascinated, and so the whole party had a hard time defeating the golem. They were all in bad shape when it finally went down.
Then they went in the house, to wait for whoever lived there.
The Old Beldame returned after a few hours with an attitude of Unfriendly. She demanded an answer for what may have happened. The Monk (Charisma mod of -1 and no ranks in diplomacy) Rolled a natural one, giving him a persuasion roll of 0. She turned hostile.
To be nice, I gave them a round to run like heck. The Monk cast Color Spray to try and buy everyone some time, but she made her save. Everyone ran after that, but the Monk had to wait for the next round before he could run. Unfortunately, he had a lower initiative roll and got blasted with a Burning Hands, taking him down.
We ended the session with the party running to try and get some help, and watching the Old Beldame drag the unconscious wiz/monk back into her house.
What would the Old Beldame do with him?
|
Well she's not evil so I doubt she would murder him in cold blood. It depends what you want to do with her. In my game she became a major character in the kingdom and I presented a lot of the stuff from the sixth book through her.
It depends what you want her to do in your campaign. Now I expect her to be angry but she's no fool. I'd do a bit with your captured player. Have the Old Beldame talk to him and play up her weirdness, the fact that she's just a little off. Then it all depends on your players if they come back all guns blazing then she will respond in kind. However if they realise that she's not actually their enemy I think she'd let them off (assuming they make a grovelling apology and pay for her destroyed scarecrow.)
All in all the players have a chance to make a powerful ally or worse a powerful enemy.
Would she hold him for ransom?
The player has another character he wouldn't mind playing... so I was kind of leaning towards skinning him for a new scarecrow because it won't cause any OOC grief. I think I'd allow there to be enough original parts for a resurrection spell in the future if wanted.
Creating a golem takes a lot of time, and the party will be back next session to try and negotiate for his return. Maybe she'll bury his corpse in the floor of her hut and pretend like she doesn't know what the party is talking about. She could potentially repel them in battle a second time, fleeing if necessary. She'll return to reclaim her land after a few months, when the heat has died down.
I guess it really depends on how the PC encounter goes...
And there is my hold up. What would she do? Nurse him back to health from -7 hp? Leave him outside for the wolves? He rolled a 0 to improve her attitude. She really really hates this guy.
Well it's not hard to swap her alignment to evil, if you want to go that route. She's one of the few non evil, non fey (only?) encounters in that region. She is nice to have as an object lesson that not everything ugly is bad and not everything attractive is good. We too had her turn into an important NPC as the campaign progressed, though a cantankerous and crabby one. She really makes for an interesting neighbor in that she is a human and has lived there for a long time. She's also kinda weird, which I personally like in an NPC.
One option you could take without an alignment swap or an evil act is to either hide or destroy the player's spellbook. Since he is a multiclassed character this is out of the "grossly unfair" realm while really punishing him at some level. You are likely not far enough along in the campaign where a spellbook can be replaced without a 2 month trip back to Restov. So now the player will have to do some really heavy lifting for her to get it back. She's not an unbeatable encounter but one that provides almost no benefit other than clearing a hex.
Actually since he is a Monk you could take ALL of his gear, even his clothes and hold it hostage so that the PCs will have to bounce all over the Stolen Lands running her errands.
I played the Old Beldame as the last and only survivor of Gyronna's monastery at the Stag Fort. She'd completely soured on the Hag Queen's faith before middle age and stuck around just to spite the wandering Gyronna cults. She would be well versed in nasty surprises for the players.
|
Well it's not hard to swap her alignment to evil, if you want to go that route. She's one of the few non evil, non fey (only?) encounters in that region. She is nice to have as an object lesson that not everything ugly is bad and not everything attractive is good. We too had her turn into an important NPC as the campaign progressed, though a cantankerous and crabby one. She really makes for an interesting neighbor in that she is a human and has lived there for a long time. She's also kinda weird, which I personally like in an NPC.
One option you could take without an alignment swap or an evil act is to either hide or destroy the player's spellbook. Since he is a multiclassed character this is out of the "grossly unfair" realm while really punishing him at some level. You are likely not far enough along in the campaign where a spellbook can be replaced without a 2 month trip back to Restov. So now the player will have to do some really heavy lifting for her to get it back. She's not an unbeatable encounter but one that provides almost no benefit other than clearing a hex.
Actually since he is a Monk you could take ALL of his gear, even his clothes and hold it hostage so that the PCs will have to bounce all over the Stolen Lands running her errands.
I played the Old Beldame as the last and only survivor of Gyronna's monastery at the Stag Fort. She'd completely soured on the Hag Queen's faith before middle age and stuck around just to spite the wandering Gyronna cults. She would be well versed in nasty surprises for the players.
Zag, I love your background idea about her consider it borrowed. I too like to give my pcs the chance to talk and find out if someone really needs to be 'taken out'. There seems to be such a disconnect on how cheap life is. Of course life is cheap.
You're welcome.
My players have figured out long ago that leaving a trail of dead bodies in their wake can be just as dangerous or even moreso than leaving no living antagonists.
Greetings, fellow travellers.
Thanks for raising that particular question, Facet.
My group will likely encounter her soon and I fear it will go similar to what you described.
I agree to what Camelot wrote. She's old, cantankerous, irritable and weird, but not evil. Would stripping him off his clothes (hm, beatiful male specimen, haven't seen one for a looong while...),
cast charm person on him and keep him as a servant or you could have her build a small hut and keep him on a leech outside, taking over the duty of the Scarecrow and announce guests.
The PCs should definitely charged with making up for the destruction of the Scarecrow and then something.
She has already one quest attached to her person - getting her the mushrooms. Make them do it without getting a reward (XP yes, no money) and shift some of the other quests to her as well (turtle, forest hunt, shamblesap), again with no rewards except XP.
If you really want to make them "pay", have them travel to Restov to buy a new Construct and have them have to withdraw the funds from their treasury (and make them deal with the unrest/other consequences) - should lead to some nice roleplaying, too!
Also, make the bard pick up what happened and let him use it against the PCs!
Ruyan.
|
From her viewpoint the PCs broke into her house with intent to rob her. Normally as such she would have turned her captive over to the authorities to pay for his crime. However there are no authorities about. As stated she generally isn't one to do evil, but she hates this "thief" that tired to steal from her, and destroyed her property. Who is to say that there isnt a baneful polymorph scroll somewhere in her possession, and she just happens to now have a reason to use it. The PC is unconscious, and as such will auto fail the DC check to prevent the transformation. Who knows... The Old Beldame might fancy having a goat or sheep in her yard to eat away the vegetation outside her hut. He would be serving for his crimes, while keeping her somewhat company.
|
|
From her viewpoint the PCs broke into her house with intent to rob her. Normally as such she would have turned her captive over to the authorities to pay for his crime. However there are no authorities about. As stated she generally isn't one to do evil, but she hates this "thief" that tired to steal from her, and destroyed her property. Who is to say that there isnt a baneful polymorph scroll somewhere in her possession, and she just happens to now have a reason to use it. The PC is unconscious, and as such will auto fail the DC check to prevent the transformation. Who knows... The Old Beldame might fancy having a goat or sheep in her yard to eat away the vegetation outside her hut. He would be serving for his crimes, while keeping her somewhat company.
I like the Baleful Polymorph idea.
|
As stated in these boards several times, an evil act don't make you evil.
The Beldame has lost a powerful defence and a lot of gold (Price 15,500 gp), maybe a impaled corpse will substitute it for a time.
Less brutal? take all his stuff and sell it, ask for ransom for the damages.
Just for the record: a construct is a creature, not a magical object. It is doubtful if it will register as magical to a Detect magic.
|
|
As stated in these boards several times, an evil act don't make you evil.
The Beldame has lost a powerful defence and a lot of gold (Price 15,500 gp), maybe a impaled corpse will substitute it for a time.Less brutal? take all his stuff and sell it, ask for ransom for the damages.
Just for the record: a construct is a creature, not a magical object. It is doubtful if it will register as magical to a Detect magic.
I believe constructs detect as magic.
|
Off-Topic: I'm just tickled-pink whenever someone has MikMek tag along.
He is currently a Rogue5.Cavalier 5 (Riding one of the Medium-variant Thylacene) in my Campaign...someone's Cohort.
On-Topic:
Send the offending PC in some sort of Quest to make amends.
Surely she needs some magical this or that from somewhere (Great way to get them to explore an out of the way Site as well...).
Uriel
Well if the monk has destroyed the scarecrow, then he has to do the scarecrow's job !!
So she could heal him just enough to put him on positive HP, then order the monk to scare all that damned birds. Using spells like Geas could be a way t oshow how serious she is !!
|
|
I believe constructs detect as magic.As stated in these boards several times, an evil act don't make you evil.
The Beldame has lost a powerful defence and a lot of gold (Price 15,500 gp), maybe a impaled corpse will substitute it for a time.Less brutal? take all his stuff and sell it, ask for ransom for the damages.
Just for the record: a construct is a creature, not a magical object. It is doubtful if it will register as magical to a Detect magic.
Assuming you're asking "Do constructs radiate magic?" then no, they do not. Neither do undead.A construct detect as magic?
From what I get, no creature radiate magic unless it has a spell cast on it or it is wearing a magic item.
|
|
Normally I would say that yes they do, but one needs to read the last section of detect magic on pg 268 talking about Outsiders and Elementals which do not radiant magic by themselves, but the conjuration spell bringing them into being does detect.
Since golems are infused with the spirit of an elemental they too would have a lingering conjuration aura. (Pg. 158; Bestiary).
Now here is the actual reason as to why they do not detect. It has nothing to do with the perceived notion of them being a creature type. Back to the spell description of Detect Magic the second to last sentence says as such:
"The spell can penetrate barriers, but 1 ft of stone, 1 inch of common metal, a thin sheet of lead, or 3 feet of wood or dirt blocks it."
The reason for this is the material in question interferes and inhibits the detection. Iron Golems then will never detect. The majority of Stone Golems will also never detect. Clay and Wood Golems are iffy pending on their size. Ice and Flesh Golems will always detect, but the aura is faint conjuration.
The same holds true with Undead who have been conjured into creation, like skeletons and zombies, but would radiate a very faint necromatic aura.
|
|
Interesting rationalization , but if the golem is magic its surface will detect as magic.
On the other hand:
Summoned creatures of any type wink out if they enter an antimagic field. They reappear in the same spot once the field goes away. Time spent winked out counts normally against the duration of the conjuration that is maintaining the creature. If you cast antimagic field in an area occupied by a summoned creature that has spell resistance, you must make a caster level check (1d20 + caster level) against the creature's spell resistance to make it wink out. (The effects of instantaneous conjurations are not affected by an antimagic field because the conjuration itself is no longer in effect, only its result.)A normal creature can enter the area, as can normal missiles. Furthermore, while a magic sword does not function magically within the area, it is still a sword (and a masterwork sword at that). [b]The spell has no effect on golems and other constructs that are imbued with magic during their creation process and are thereafter self-supporting (unless they have been summoned, in which case they are treated like any other summoned creatures). Elementals, undead, and outsiders are likewise unaffected unless summoned.[b] These creatures' spell-like or supernatural abilities may be temporarily nullified by the field. Dispel magic does not remove the field.
The point it is that once it is created, a golem or a undead is a creature, not a magic item.
|
|
Well there I have to disagree with you. I cannot find anything that actually supports your position other than a golem is a creature. One that has been created directly through magical means. Golems are created, just like a magic item is created. Each require roughly a similar process to be made (a Craft Feat(s), certain spells cast during the time of creation, a skill proficiency to make the item, etc). As such both should have a magic signature of some kind. What about a Figurine of Wondrous Power? For all intent and purposes they are simply portable golems with transmutation magic. Regardless of what mode they are in they are still going to radiate some aspect of magic (moderate is statuette mode, faint for beast mode).
Please reference some source to back up your position to change my mind; I welcome learning something new. Otherwise from what I have read so far in both pro/con has lead me to believe that your point is moot.
|
|
Also to address the issue of the anti-magic field. When said sword is in the field the sword cannot detect magic simply because the field disrupts it. The field does not remove the powers of that sword once it has left the field. The same will hold true with the golem, which ironically points out that the golem is imbued with magic.
|
|
Also to address the issue of the anti-magic field. When said sword is in the field the sword cannot detect magic simply because the field disrupts it. The field does not remove the powers of that sword once it has left the field. The same will hold true with the golem, which ironically points out that the golem is imbued with magic.
Good reasoning Dusk. I kinda like how you broke it down with detect magic and thickness of materials.
|
|
Also to address the issue of the anti-magic field. When said sword is in the field the sword cannot detect magic simply because the field disrupts it. The field does not remove the powers of that sword once it has left the field. The same will hold true with the golem, which ironically points out that the golem is imbued with magic.
So, by your reasoning the scare crow would have detected conjuration magic.
|
|
I agree with some of the others that she would use a spell, geas maybe even baleful polymorph to make him do his scarecrows job. No matter what happens though the bard must find out about it and throw it in the PC's faces. Simple go get this and that and no gold or simple errands are no justice for the severity of the "crime" and the situation.
|
|
PJ I would say that yes it does detect conjuration magic, but faint.
Philip - My reasoning is due to the process to put the spirit in, and then the residue magic that is in place to keep the spirit there. That is why there is a faint aura. I agree that the spirit itself does not detect for magic, just the energies that are binding it in place, very much like an intelligent magic item.
|
|
PJ I would say that yes it does detect conjuration magic, but faint.
Philip - My reasoning is due to the process to put the spirit in, and then the residue magic that is in place to keep the spirit there. That is why there is a faint aura. I agree that the spirit itself does not detect for magic, just the energies that are binding it in place, very much like an intelligent magic item.
I think I'm going to make that canon for my games from now on.
|
|
Well there I have to disagree with you. I cannot find anything that actually supports your position other than a golem is a creature. One that has been created directly through magical means. Golems are created, just like a magic item is created. Each require roughly a similar process to be made (a Craft Feat(s), certain spells cast during the time of creation, a skill proficiency to make the item, etc). As such both should have a magic signature of some kind. What about a Figurine of Wondrous Power? For all intent and purposes they are simply portable golems with transmutation magic. Regardless of what mode they are in they are still going to radiate some aspect of magic (moderate is statuette mode, faint for beast mode).
Please reference some source to back up your position to change my mind; I welcome learning something new. Otherwise from what I have read so far in both pro/con has lead me to believe that your point is moot.
Beside one of the game developers words?
You can start with Detect magic itself: what it detect?
- Functioning spell (spell level)
- Magic item (caster level)
- lingering auras of the same
nothing more (from the table at the bottom of the spell).
For something to have a magic aura discernible with detect magic it should fall in one of the two class above.
You can go to the more powerful version of detect magic, like arcane sight: it is limited to detecting the same auras, magic items and functioning spells, plus it get the ability to detect spellcasting ability.
So unless you are claiming that construct and undead are magic items or functioning spells, and so subject to dispelling, anti magic shell and disjunction, you have no basis on claiming that they have a magic aura.
If you consider them magic items the best spell against a lich is dispel magic. A good caster level check (and there are way to increase them) and the lich is out for 1d4 rounds. No save, no spell resistance, nothing. Same thing for the golems.
|
|
Also to address the issue of the anti-magic field. When said sword is in the field the sword cannot detect magic simply because the field disrupts it. The field does not remove the powers of that sword once it has left the field. The same will hold true with the golem, which ironically points out that the golem is imbued with magic.
maybe you should re-read this:
"The spell has no effect on golems and other constructs that are imbued with magic during their creation process and are thereafter self-supporting (unless they have been summoned, in which case they are treated like any other summoned creatures)."It do the exact opposite of what you say: the golem is not affected while in the anti-magic, beside losing access to his spell like and supernatural powers, like all other critters.
Edit: maybe I have got what you are saying. You have fixated on a secondary comment about the magi auras and decided that the Anti-magic comment was about magic auras.
No, the point is about the fact that golems are unaffected by a anti-magic field. They aren't a spell or a magic item that is deactivated by the AM field.
|
|
First there is a Craft Construct Feat (pg. 314, Bestiary). It lists this feat type as an Item Creation. There isn’t a Craft Undead Feat. Golems and Undead are in two separate classifications, and as such do not work the same.
Now we look in the Core book (pg. 112) under Item Creation Feats.
An item creation feat lets a character create a magic item of a certain type.
Using the words of the game developers . Golems detect.
|
|
Sigh.
Dispel magic has no spell resistance, so immunity to magic do nothing.
From another developer of the game:
Golems are creatures, not items, thus dispel magic has no effect on them.
And again by JJ:
I had a few questions concerning golems. First, if my PCs cast detect magic at say a Stone Golem, does it radiate magic?
And second, can a golem be blinded? One of my players tried this last game using Glitterdust(a will save) and I could not find anything that disproved this would work, but it just didn't feel right. This same question in regards to undead too.
Golems (and ANYthing that's magically created, like many undead, or even certain magical beasts) do not radiate magic on their own. The effects that created them don't have durations, after all (not even permanent ones), so they can't be put down with dispel magic either. The best analogy is to think of the effects that create golems and the like as instantaneous effects, like fireball or cure light wounds or flesh to stone; once the effect does its thing (in this case, granting life), the effect fades and the result (in this case, a living or animated creature) does not have an unusual magic aura.
As for blindness... yes, constructs can be blinded. They use the same basic senses humans do, for the most part, and overwhelming light or the destruction of its "eyes" can blind them. Finding an effect that can cause blindness, though, is tough, since constructs are immune to effects that require Fort saves that don't affect objects. As written, glitterdust works on constructs, but if there's a problem there, it's that glitterdust PROBABLY should have a Fortitude save, I think, rather than a Will save... but that's an argument I lost during the game's creation, alas.
|
|
Dispel magic has no spell resistance, so immunity to magic do nothing.
I made an err and stand corrected on immunity to magic doing nothing.
Could you please link the thread where you received the quote from JJ? This is what I have been requesting. I would like to read it in full.
The one from Sean means nothing to me.
Also in your opinion how would you detect for a golem? What would you use?
|
|
To detect a golem: Scarab golembane or Knowledge Arcana to recognize it.
There is no specific spell to detect it.
For the last JJ citation: this thread.
For SKR and another JJ post, here.