|
Am I the only one who thinks that goblins should be automatically proficient with the dogslicer?
Or at least treat it like a shortsword, since it basically is?
This would mean that the Warchanter would have a free feat for "Weapon Finesse" or "Agile Maneuvers" for example.
At least, that's what I am gonna do...
I responded to your question HERE. Though, since it's your campaign, feel free to do what you wish!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I already did! ;)
And since "Weapon Finesse" is a "free feat" in my campaign too, those goblins can be REALLY nasty!
|
In the description of the Leng device, it states that there are 'numerous similarities between the stone ring at the center of the Leng Device and the much larger ringof stone located in the Varisian city of Magnimar" - surely this should be Riddleport instead, given what we know from Second Darkness and the illustrative similarity between here, the cover & the Cyphergate?
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Am I the only one who thinks that goblins should be automatically proficient with the dogslicer?
Or at least treat it like a shortsword, since it basically is?
This would mean that the Warchanter would have a free feat for "Weapon Finesse" or "Agile Maneuvers" for example.
At least, that's what I am gonna do...
That's a fine house rule, and one that I approve of.
But that said... the warchanter doesn't really need to get a tiny little powerup... those first goblins are supposed to be pushovers, remember? Rather than being particularly tough, they rely on numbers...
I would almost suggest that if you let the warchanter use the dogslicer for free that you give her some other sort of FUN feat rather than one specifically designed to bolster her stats significantly.
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In the description of the Leng device, it states that there are 'numerous similarities between the stone ring at the center of the Leng Device and the much larger ringof stone located in the Varisian city of Magnimar" - surely this should be Riddleport instead, given what we know from Second Darkness and the illustrative similarity between here, the cover & the Cyphergate?
Yup; that should be Riddleport and the Cypergate.
...Those first goblins are supposed to be pushovers, remember? Rather than being particularly tough, they rely on numbers...
Those first goblins (well, the group with the Warchanter actually) nearly lead to the death of the cleric in session one for us. Hideous laughter stopped the cleric in her tracks, and when a goblin jumped on top of her with a leaping charge attack from atop a building... Well let's just say critical hit dogslicer damage plus the damage of a goblin falling on top of you from 20 feet up isn't pretty for 1st level PCs. Thank goodness for them Father Zantus was able to come and get the cleric back on her feet.
|
Am I the only one who thinks that goblins should be automatically proficient with the dogslicer?That's a fine house rule, and one that I approve of.
I think Enlight_Bystand (in the other thread) raised a good point:
I much prefer the idea that Goblins aren't proficient with the dog slicer, purely because they're Goblins.
That's a fine house rule, and one that I approve of.
But that said... the warchanter doesn't really need to get a tiny little powerup... those first goblins are supposed to be pushovers, remember? Rather than being particularly tough, they rely on numbers...
I would almost suggest that if you let the warchanter use the dogslicer for free that you give her some other sort of FUN feat rather than one specifically designed to bolster her stats significantly.
First: Thank you very much for the reply!
Second: I thought about that too, but what "Fun feats" are there anyways?
I think "Agile Maneuvers" is funny (sort of) since it makes here pretty good at tripping the PCs with her whip.
Besides, If I am not mistaken, the Warchanter is also used in later encounters which are "for real".
...Those first goblins are supposed to be pushovers, remember? Rather than being particularly tough, they rely on numbers...Those first goblins (well, the group with the Warchanter actually) nearly lead to the death of the cleric in session one for us. Hideous laughter stopped the cleric in her tracks, and when a goblin jumped on top of her with a leaping charge attack from atop a building... Well let's just say critical hit dogslicer damage plus the damage of a goblin falling on top of you from 20 feet up isn't pretty for 1st level PCs. Thank goodness for them Father Zantus was able to come and get the cleric back on her feet.
Apologies for derailing the thread further, but I agree that those goblins can be scary. I've started running the AE with a new party and they ran into some serious trouble with that last encounter. A couple lucky critical hits and the Wizard nearly died to a random goblin arrow while the Fighter went down but stabilized from the Commando's Horsechopper. It actually made the first "mini-boss" battle of the campaign incredibly tense. It was great.
I assume lucrecia's wisdom drain is a typo, it reads (1d4 wisdom drain+10). not even 1d4+10, the +10 is tagged on at the end and not in line with the lamina matriarch entry in the bestiary 2 in any case. I wish I had noticed before I dealt 11 wis damage to a fighter tonight. can anyone confirm this for me?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I assume lucrecia's wisdom drain is a typo, it reads (1d4 wisdom drain+10). not even 1d4+10, the +10 is tagged on at the end and not in line with the lamina matriarch entry in the bestiary 2 in any case. I wish I had noticed before I dealt 11 wis damage to a fighter tonight. can anyone confirm this for me?
It is a typo. Lamia matriarchs have always drained 1d4 Wis on a Slam attack (no hit point damage) and 1 Wis on their first attack with a weapon. IIRC, I just ignored the +10 when I played her three weeks ago.
|
Creative Director
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
That's a fine house rule, and one that I approve of.
But that said... the warchanter doesn't really need to get a tiny little powerup... those first goblins are supposed to be pushovers, remember? Rather than being particularly tough, they rely on numbers...
I would almost suggest that if you let the warchanter use the dogslicer for free that you give her some other sort of FUN feat rather than one specifically designed to bolster her stats significantly.
First: Thank you very much for the reply!
Second: I thought about that too, but what "Fun feats" are there anyways?
I think "Agile Maneuvers" is funny (sort of) since it makes here pretty good at tripping the PCs with her whip.Besides, If I am not mistaken, the Warchanter is also used in later encounters which are "for real".
The first encounter is "for real" as well. It's danger stems from the numbers of foes involved, not their individual power or skill.
And the point of re-using the warchanter isn't only to bolster that next encounter with bard stuff (although that's PART of the reason)... but also to let the PCs fight something they first encountered in the first set of encounters again. It's fun to face things later in your career that may have been scary or tougher when you first encountered them, but now you can push around with ease. A classic way we do this is to take a monster that was a "boss" of an earlier encounter and then use them as a minion in a later encounter. That type of thing helps the players feel like they're getting more powerful.
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I assume lucrecia's wisdom drain is a typo, it reads (1d4 wisdom drain+10). not even 1d4+10, the +10 is tagged on at the end and not in line with the lamina matriarch entry in the bestiary 2 in any case. I wish I had noticed before I dealt 11 wis damage to a fighter tonight. can anyone confirm this for me?
That is indeed a typo. Hopefully one that's so obviously a typo that no one DOES go and do 1d4+10 Wisdom damage. Because not only is that line not formatted right for something that does 1d4+10 of anything... but we've never even published a monster that does that much Wisdom damage, and we've published things up to CR 25 for Pathfinder.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Do i get half credit for noticing 1 round after the fact?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Shouldn't the Skinsaw Man be CE, not CN?
It's important because we have a paladin who's going to want to go all Smitey on him, and it's hard to believe that a psychotic undead murderer qualifies as CN.
|
|
I thought I read somewhere that CN is the "crazy" alignment. With the SM's multiple personalities, he would certainly be considered crazy. Besides, there is nothing wrong with throwing a curve ball every once in a while. Though, to be fair, the original SM was CE so I don't know if this change is accidental or intentional.
Well, 2 of the 3 personalities are sadistic and violent, so he's "majority evil", not to mention undead... ;-)
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ghlorofaex's Hit Points are listed as 149 in the header, but 275 in the stat block. I assume the 275 number is correct, since otherwise each of his 22d12 Hit Dice would only be granting 0.77 HP!
In cases like this, the hit points in the actual stat block are 99.99999943% of the time correct. As in this case.
The DC 43 knowledge check for Runeforge Lore on page 248 is actually just a copy and paste of the DC 40 knowledge check for Xin-Shalast lore found on page 233. Looking back at the original, it doesn't appear to have any extra information; its DC 43 check became the DC 50 check in the new edition.
James, if you are still monitoring this thread, any ideas for replacement knowledge? Or would it be best to knock the DC 50 check back down to DC 43 and simply not have a fifth piece of information?
Side note: loving this book!
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The DC 43 knowledge check for Runeforge Lore on page 248 is actually just a copy and paste of the DC 40 knowledge check for Xin-Shalast lore found on page 233. Looking back at the original, it doesn't appear to have any extra information; its DC 43 check became the DC 50 check in the new edition.
James, if you are still monitoring this thread, any ideas for replacement knowledge? Or would it be best to knock the DC 50 check back down to DC 43 and simply not have a fifth piece of information?
Side note: loving this book!
The DC 43 check is likely a layout type error when the formatting of a table was copied. There should be no DC 43 result for the table on page 248—just cross that out and it's good to go.
Warchief Ripnugget (p49) His short sword attack bonus is normally +9 (+5 BAB, +1 STR, +1 size, +1 magic weapon, +1 weapon focus) not +10 as stated, with damage of 1d4+4 (+1 STR, +1 magic weapon, +2 weapon spec) not 1d4+5 as stated. Of course Inspire Courage would account for the extra +1 to attack and damage, but this is not indicated as already being included in the stat block. This is not an errata per se, but the During Combat section could at least mention that her bardic perfomance enhancements were already included in Ripnugget's stat block.
You forgot to include his Weapon Training (Blades, Light). He is, after all, a 5th level fighter.
In Shalelu's statblock (pg.26), her immunity to sleep has been omitted.
In the tactics section is stated that Malfeshnekor will cast rage on the first round. The strange thing is that greater barghest does not have rage as spell-like ability
http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/monsters/barghest.html#_barghest
Also, has anyone noticed Nualia wears a breastplate but is listed at 30 ft. speed? Shouldn't it be reduced to 20 ft while earing it?
Also, has anyone noticed Nualia wears a breastplate but is listed at 30 ft. speed? Shouldn't it be reduced to 20 ft while earing it?
Perhaps she was intended to have a 3rd fighter level for armor training.
In the tactics section is stated that Malfeshnekor will cast rage on the first round. The strange thing is that greater barghest does not have rage as spell-like ability
http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/monsters/barghest.html#_barghest
You're right! Barghests had a rage spell-like ability in 3.5:
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/barghest.htm.
Update on Jaagrath Kreeg from the previous page - HangarFlying's calculation seems to be missing the +1 CON from level 4. Base Ogre stats are 21,8,15,6,10,7. Adding the boosts for monsters with class levels, it appears to go +4,+2,+4,0,+2,-2 (or should go, as that -2 is missing in the entry as HangarFlying correctly points out). Then we'll add in +1 CON for his 4th class level, +2 STR for the magic belt, and +4 STR and +4 CON for the rage, which technically doesn't increase stats, but that's how the stats are listed, so the totals then are: 31 (21+4+2+4) STR, 10 (8+2) DEX, 24 (15+4+1+4) CON, 6 (6+0) INT, 5 (7-2) CHA.
But officially, his stats are 27, 10, 20, 6, 12, 5.
The saves in the stat block are correct.
6/0/3: ogre (incl. Iron Will)
2/1/1: add class levels (+4 CON, +2 DEX, +2 WIS)
5/2/2: barbarian 7
1/0/0: level 4 increase to CON (15 to 16)
2/0/2: rage
------
16/3/8: total
The renewed vigor power grants 1d8+5 HP (20 CON, rage CON probably does not apply).
Rounds of rage = 4 + 5<CON mod> + 2*6(barbarian levels 2-7) = 21 rd/day.
Edit: His attack line seems not to include the fact he's using a +1 weapon. Edit again: well, the ranged attacks seem down by 1 as well -- is there a -1 somewhere, or am I making a math error?
HangarFlying has it right in all the other parts.
In any case, he's probably totally fine being run as written. I've been in a reverse engineering mood lately, though. Learned a few things!
Page 220: Morale block for the lamia clerics indicates they cast Sending to warn Mokmurian before fleeing to another room. Sending has a casting time of 10 minutes, so this is not a feasible tactic.
Also, it seems Karzoug should have 18 WIS, not 15, and a Will save of 21, not 19. I've already written too much high detail in my posts this thread, so suffice it to say, I think his point buy is 12 12 16 15 11 13, he gets +2 to all stats due to being Azlanti, put all 5 level bonuses into INT, and go from there.
Edit: His attack line seems not to include the fact he's using a +1 weapon. Edit again: well, the ranged attacks seem down by 1 as well -- is there a -1 somewhere, or am I making a math error?
He's Large, so he has a -1 size penalty to all attacks.
D'oh! I knew it'd be something simple. Thanks.
|
|
This isn't necessarily RotR specific (it's also in Bestiary 2), but does anyone know why sinspawn get an attack with ranseur (reach) and bite (non-reach)?
It seems like if it could attack with the ranseur, it couldn't with its bite and visa versa. Am I missing something?
Cheers!
Landon
This isn't necessarily RotR specific (it's also in Bestiary 2), but does anyone know why sinspawn get an attack with ranseur (reach) and bite (non-reach)?
It seems like if it could attack with the ranseur, it couldn't with its bite and visa versa. Am I missing something?
It's not necessary to attack the same opponent with both ranseur and bite. The sinspawn could attack an opponent 10 ft away with the ranseur, and an adjacent opponent with the bite.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This isn't necessarily RotR specific (it's also in Bestiary 2), but does anyone know why sinspawn get an attack with ranseur (reach) and bite (non-reach)?
It seems like if it could attack with the ranseur, it couldn't with its bite and visa versa. Am I missing something?
Cheers!
Landon
They can do both if
A) attacking a Large or larger target
B) attacking different targets
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This isn't necessarily RotR specific (it's also in Bestiary 2), but does anyone know why sinspawn get an attack with ranseur (reach) and bite (non-reach)
Plus, no one is stopping it from attacking with the ranseur, taking a five-foot-step, then continuing its full attack pattern with a bite, if it desired to do so.
Pages 269-270, Ordikon is listed as having quickened mirror image, and using it in his tactics, but as a Thassilonian transmission specialist (I assume), the illusion school is banned for him, so he just can't do it.
I'm having trouble with Azaven's hit points on page 264. It has his bonus hp at +128, but I calculate +100 (+56 for Cha, +14 for desecrate, +16 for false life, and +14 for Toughness). Is there something I'm missing here that gives him an extra 2 hp per level?
You appear to be missing the favored class bonus, but still that leaves a mystery 14.
You appear to be missing the favored class bonus, but still that leaves a mystery 14.
I had considered the favored class bonus, but that is only available to PCs, isn't it?
Nope, all characters. (Edit: although, looking back, the larger section within which this paragraph is located starts with, "as player characters overcome challenges", so maybe not, if you consider that to set up the context for the section as a whole, so I'd need to look at the actual book for context, and perhaps some enemy stat blocks that show evidence of favored classes being used -- but I'm pretty sure it's all characters).
Perhaps one could consider that there is a special shrine that grants the boosted desecrate effect in the place where the PCs are expected to encounter Azaven? It doesn't say there is, but if one wants to keep his HP the same without figuring out whether it's supposed to be 14 points lower, that's one method.
Nualia (pp61-62) The during combat section states that Fury of the Abyss, Divine Favour, Cat's Grace, Bull's Strength, and Shield of Faith bonuses are all included in her stat block. I disagree.Her bastard sword when used two-handed has an attack bonus of +11 (+5 BAB, +3 STR, +1 magic weapon, +1 luck divine favour, +1 weapon focus). Her stat block states +10.
Okay, just about to run Nualia myself tonight and was surprised at her stat blocks as well. Though I think yours maybe too low as well.
Ok on the first round of combat she casts Divine Favor for +1 luck to atk and dmg
Fury of the Abyss is +2 enhancement bonus (stack with weapon?) to atk and dmg (swift action usable for 6 rounds)
Ferocious Strike is +2 damage to a successful attack, usable 6 times.
So with that we have BAB 5 + STR 3 + DF 1 + FotA 2 + Weapon 1 + WF 1 for a +13 to hit
and
STR 3 + Weapon 1 + FotA 2 + DF 1 + FS 2 = 9 Damage
Bastard Sword +13 (1d10+9/19-20)
Now her claw can be used in the same round on a full-round attack since those stats were for her using her bastard sword one handed as she has exotic weapon proficiency.
So claw when used with a manufactured weapon becomes secondary for -5 atk and half-strength
So BAB 5 - Secondary 5 + STR 3 + DF 1 + FotA 2 for an atk bonus of +6
And damage is STR 1 + FotA 2 + DF 1 + FS 2 for a total of +6
So finally, using all available buffs her stats should be:
Bastard Sword +13 (1d10+9/19-20) // (Claw +6 1d6+6)
So discounting anything I got wrong, which is entirely likely, she is a scary mofo.
Shouldn't the wardens of runes have +3 to all their saves because of the sihedron ring?
