I just bought all the modules, and am contemplating running this campaign. I have the advice pdf, but it really doesn't help much.
What I would like to know are things like what sort of feats should PC's take, what class mix we should have, etc, to get the most out of Carrion Crown.
I have outlawed Summoner, Alchemist, Gunslinger, and am considering banning Samurai, Ninja, Magus, Monk because of thematic reasons for this campaign.
I'm always of the opinion that everyone at my table should play whatever they want to play if:
a) It's balanced.
b) Their characters back-story makes sense for the adventure at hand. And personally i think the players guides do a great job of providing inspiration to the players to explain how their character of race X and class Y can fit into the campaign. "If you can explain it, you can play it", is my idea.
I don't think in general it's a good idea to enforce your players to play something just because you think they might need a character of class X or class Y would be better for balance. It's always the quirky parties that are the most fun to have imo. And i find that in general players will find original ways to make their group composition work for them. And if they don't seem to cope, you as a dm can always provide them with some help by making some tweaks to the adventure (eg such as changing the loot tables to better suit their needs).
And if you confine them to certain classes, you should really allow them to fill in that class as they wish and select their own feats. Players need to feel invested in their character to make the most out of it. You can of course provide them with plenty of background information and hints to what they might face in the campaign. Such as eg. there will be a fair share of undead to aid them in their choices. It's better to gently nudge them towards a choice then to enforce it.;)
|
I just bought all the modules, and am contemplating running this campaign. I have the advice pdf, but it really doesn't help much.
What I would like to know are things like what sort of feats should PC's take, what class mix we should have, etc, to get the most out of Carrion Crown.
I have outlawed Summoner, Alchemist, Gunslinger, and am considering banning Samurai, Ninja, Magus, Monk because of thematic reasons for this campaign.
Actually all 3 of those classes can really fit into the campaign rather well. The alchemist is practically built for this ap and only gets more appropriate as you get into book 2 and if you go routes like chirugeon, reanimator, or vivisectionist. The summoner works well so long as they build something around the concepts presented within the ap like spirits, creepy outsiders, cthulhian entities (the alienist from the 3rd party supplement Beyond the void in particular is really compelling), and the like and to make sure they say within that guideline. As for the gunslinger you can end up with characters like those in dracula, using modern tech to defeat evil as well as budding werewolf and vampire hunters silver bullets packed to hunt the greatest predators. Magus also works very well since that martial knowledge paired with scholarly pursuits plays pretty well here.
As for the asian inspired ones they can be a challenge but not impossible, remember that Lorrimor (the instigator of the tale) traveled all over the world and met as well as employed a wide variety of people through his travels making it much easier to explain why a Tian samurai is now sitting in Ravengro.
That being said make sure your players READ THE PLAYERS GUIDE FOR CC and especially go over the campaign traits as this will help build a lot of their connective tissue to the plot. Also make sure to sit down with your players and help brainstorm their characters so that you are on top of how they are connected to these characters and this place as otherwise most of book one will fall flat.
Finally remember that this is a gothic horror game and will require a lot of rp from the players especially in the first book so your players need to be interested in that concept and should be a little experienced with heavy roleplay sessions. Again this is alleviated by making sure they really try to build a solid back story for their character with your involvement so that you can really ingrain those characters into this world. Also make sure to let them know that this is not the ap they will want to play if they just want to dungeon crawl.
Yeah, put me in the Alchemist is perfect for this campaign. It's powerful (but not TOO powerful) and fits thematically with the AP. There are even NPC Alchemists scattered through the AP, prominent ones in book 2.
The one that makes the bombs work better on Undead and Constructs is especially both useful and thematic.
You'll definitely want someone who can remove diseases, poisons, and any other way you can get ability damage (and later drain) because it comes up a LOT. Feats can really be anything but your class composition almost requires at least one Divine caster in the group.
I would recommend the following classes:
Paladin, Alchemist, magus (yes, that's two you don't want in there but they can prevent a TPK in early combats vs incorporeals), any full caster.
Depending on the build the bard can work well.
I would recommend against having more than one melee pc that's not of the above classes.
It's worth the few bucks to pick up the Gothic Heroes pregen characters from Legendary Games, as well. Even if none of your players want to play the *actual* characters, they are definitely worth using as inspiration for their characters (the amount of detail in the pregen backstories is amazing), or even as major NPCs.
From memory, there are:
A half-orc paladin
A changeling witch
A human cleric
An elf bard
A human alchemist
An aasimar summoner
A dhampir inquisitor
A half-elf ranger
For my campaign we have:
Izaark, a half-orc cavalier/oracle
Yeva, a human ranger
Skaarlia, a dhampir inquisitor
It's worked out pretty well, though I've made extensive use of an NPC cleric who has travelled with the characters, especially for the first adventure, where a lot of channeling was necessary due to the haunts.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Being almost at the end of this AP as its DM, i strongly encourage you to implement the Alchemist and the gunslinger, EXACTLY because both the AP and the classes are 1800-style. It would be a huge mistake disallowing them, because an alchemist will feel like home playing Carrion Crown. Heed to the advice given by the more experienced DM's for this amazing Adventure Path and give your players their freedom!
Isn't Disrupt Undead, holy water etc still subject to the 50% miss chance for incorporeals?
As far as I know disrupt undead should work fine because it is positive energy. At least that was our consensus when we started CC.
I think the same is true for holy water. The only issue is that you can't throw it at an incorporeal but instead you have to pour it over it. Or you can throw it at the incorporeal's square but then you only deal splash damage.** This would be an option for an alchemist with his high splash damage but seems irrelevant for your game.
|
|
Party #1 (Saturday group): Half-elf Oracle (of Pharasma), Cavelier, Ranger, Barbarian (somewhat re-skinned as a psychotic child with a big axe), Wizard (Necromancer, kind of like Dr Temperance Brennan), Magus, Sorcerer.
Party #2 (Thursday group): Cleric (of Shellyn, trying and failing to be a pacifist), Rogue, Fighter (half-giant with a BIG club), Monk, wizard (conjurer), wizard (transmuter).
It may look crazy, but it WORKS in practice, and we all have fun.
Lol nice how's the Bones character playing out? Does the group have a emotive foil to balance out that cold distant personality?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Lol nice how's the Bones character playing out? Does the group have a emotive foil to balance out that cold distant personality?Party #1 (Saturday group): Half-elf Oracle (of Pharasma), Cavelier, Ranger, Barbarian (somewhat re-skinned as a psychotic child with a big axe), Wizard (Necromancer, kind of like Dr Temperance Brennan), Magus, Sorcerer.
Party #2 (Thursday group): Cleric (of Shellyn, trying and failing to be a pacifist), Rogue, Fighter (half-giant with a BIG club), Monk, wizard (conjurer), wizard (transmuter).
It may look crazy, but it WORKS in practice, and we all have fun.
Very well! She's run by my daughter (she's fourteen), who wants to go on to study forensics at university; she's got Knowledge (thanatology) at humongous ranks and acted as 'expert witness' in module #2. And yes, we have a great diversity of characters in that group. The Cavelier is diplomatic, the magus is reckless, the sorcerer just plain cool, the barbarian is more emotionally withdrawn than the wizard...
I learned long ago that players get better immersion when they play that which they want to play. When you get that immersion, that's when the real fun starts, and it takes the game in very unexpected directions sometimes - more than once my players have hijacked the plot and made for Cuba, or come up with solutions I never even considered. Some DMs do not like this, but I thrive on it.
Isn't Disrupt Undead, holy water etc still subject to the 50% miss chance for incorporeals?
Nothing has a 50% miss chance for (visible) incorporeals. Ghostbane, positive energy and force spells like magic missile do full damage. Other magic effects do half damage. Non-magical attacks do nothing.
My party that completed Carrion Crown started out with a rogue, a fighter, a cleric and a wizard. The rogue and fighter died in book one (they are not very effective classes for this adventure; you can't sneak-attack a haunt, and you need good saves). The wizard died in book two.
The victorious final party was cleric (travel/liberation), paladin (undead scourge), alchemist and bard/dragon disciple. All were effective. An undead scourge paladin is a fairly overpowered class here.
Alchemist is portrayed as villainous in the campaign
I remember rescuing an alchemist...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I just bought all the modules, and am contemplating running this campaign. I have the advice pdf, but it really doesn't help much.
What I would like to know are things like what sort of feats should PC's take, what class mix we should have, etc, to get the most out of Carrion Crown.
I have outlawed Summoner, Alchemist, Gunslinger, and am considering banning Samurai, Ninja, Magus, Monk because of thematic reasons for this campaign.
I will be starting up my own Carrion Crown campaign this weekend. You can find the 'house rules' here. In a nutshell, the players are allowed CRB + APG and a smattering of things from UC. For a better fit with the themes of CC, by name ninja and samurai don't work - but by 're-skinning' them they work just fine. Change ninja to 'combat rogue' and 'samurai' to 'knight' and *pouf*, problem solved. Gunslingers are very Van Helsing movie-fitting. Gear-wise, add in the Adventurer's Armory and you have everything that is in Carrion Crown.
Retooling a villain or three as Summoners and you're good to go!
This seems a good place to ask, since we're on the subject of Classes in Carrion Crown. Just a quick Q for those familiar with later Carrion Crown. Is an intimidate build char any good in this module after book one is finished?
For the OP, Disrupt Undead saved my bacon as an inquisitor plenty of times in the first module. That and saving my "Judgment" for main bosses. Between me and the Summoner and Oracle, we were the only ones capable of doing any damage to these incorporeals.
This seems a good place to ask, since we're on the subject of Classes in Carrion Crown. Just a quick Q for those familiar with later Carrion Crown. Is an intimidate build char any good in this module after book one is finished?
From what I have seen and read, no. There are one or two points in #2 that it may come in handy, beyond that...not so much.
This seems a good place to ask, since we're on the subject of Classes in Carrion Crown. Just a quick Q for those familiar with later Carrion Crown. Is an intimidate build char any good in this module after book one is finished?From what I have seen and read, no. There are one or two points in #2 that it may come in handy, beyond that...not so much.
Thanks! I may build him down that path anyway since I already started down that road, perhaps just not as heavily. At least I'll know not to expect the world from it, and hopefully can avoid becoming a total one trick pony.
Having run the first module and about 1\4 of the second, I can say with certainty that early on, pure melee classes can feel frustrated because in some of the encounters they simply don't have a chance to hit the enemy.
Clerics, especially ones focused around doing channel damage (rather than healing) can really shine in a lot of encounters. It is an undead-centric path after all.
I have (had; he just had to drop out for real life reasons) a magus, and he was not unfit for the game. He was (at one point) a librarian at the University of Lepidstadt (which features heavily in the second module).
As it stands, our group consists\consisted of:
Human black-powder inquisitor
Half-orc cleric (generally disguises himself when in towns)
Vanaran zen archer monk (deceased)
Human barbarian
Half-elf sorcerer
Human rogue
Elf witch (no longer in the game)
Human magus (no longer in the game)
Thus far I haven't found any classes that are bad fits for the game. There are some that are thematically 'better', and some that are mechanically more fit, but I personally believe any class could 'fit'.
This thread probably belongs in the Carion Crown AP forum.
Re-dotting.
Being almost at the end of this AP as its DM, i strongly encourage you to implement the Alchemist and the gunslinger, EXACTLY because both the AP and the classes are 1800-style. It would be a huge mistake disallowing them, because an alchemist will feel like home playing Carrion Crown. Heed to the advice given by the more experienced DM's for this amazing Adventure Path and give your players their freedom!
No. And I have been running games for 20 years now. Drop it.
I thought that incorporeal ghosts and the like you miss half the time unless you have your weapon specially enchanted.
Since this seems to be an urban game, does that mean Rangers, Barbarians, and especially Druids are a bit hosed?
Also, since when is a Fighter screwed when fighting undead? They can grab Iron Will and Great Fortitude like everyone else.
I thought that incorporeal ghosts and the like you miss half the time unless you have your weapon specially enchanted.
Pathfinder changed it to 50% damage instead of 50% miss chance.
Since this seems to be an urban game, does that mean Rangers, Barbarians, and especially Druids are a bit hosed?
Also, since when is a Fighter screwed when fighting undead? They can grab Iron Will and Great Fortitude like everyone else.
You need to read through ALL the modules. There is only ONE module where the action is primarily urban in this whole series. Rangers have party-time if they have favoured enemy: undead. Barbarians do not lose out from not being in the wild anyway (one of my parties in this AP has one). Druids are strong anywhere, just stronger in the wild. There's also one module set in the wilds as well, giving wilderness characters a chance to really shine.
I agree, fighters are fine fighting undead. My two parties consist of:
Party #1 (Saturday group): Half-elf Oracle (of Pharasma, half Tian), Human Cavelier (great diplomat), Human Ranger (archer), Human Barbarian (somewhat re-skinned as a psychotic child with a big axe), Elf Wizard (Necromancer, kind of like Dr Temperance Brennan), Elf Magus (also known as Mr Recklessly-walking-off-from-the-party), Aasimar Sorcerer.
Party #2 (Thursday group): Half-Elf Cleric (of Shellyn, trying and failing to be a pacifist), Human Rogue (more of a con-man than a scout), Half-Giant Fighter (with a BIG club), Human Monk, Human (Tian) Wizard (conjurer; her family came over the top of the world in exile), Halfling Wizard (transmuter).
Both are doing fine and having great fun.
Since this seems to be an urban game, does that mean Rangers, Barbarians, and especially Druids are a bit hosed?
Book 2: City / dungeon.
Book 3: Mostly in forest.
Book 4: Village / dungeon.
Book 5: Urban / dungeon.
Book 6: Dungeon.
I don't think anyone is particularly disadvantaged by the amount of urban adventuring. (Most of the urban stuff doesn't involve too much fighting.)
A druid with an animal companion that they can't bring into town will be at a disadvantage some of the time.
Also, since when is a Fighter screwed when fighting undead? They can grab Iron Will and Great Fortitude like everyone else.
Fighters can do OK as long as they have some way to respond to (say) a flying ghost with ranged attacks.
I have outlawed Summoner, Alchemist, Gunslinger, and am considering banning Samurai, Ninja, Magus, Monk because of thematic reasons for this campaign.
I had a summoner PC in the first two chapters and she wasn't disruptive to the feel of the game at all.
Alchemists fit right in with the theme, especially for Chapter Two. I'd also allow Magus - in fact, the archvillain of the campaign belongs to this character class, which would make for a great contrast if a PC survives to the ends.
One of my villain NPCs that I custom designed for this game is a cleric of Urgathoa with the Amateur Gunslinger feat. Based on how she fits in, I think a full-fledged gunslinger will do fine, especially if you want to play up the Victorian elements with appropriate technological additions.
I also have a player running a monk, and I love her character and think she fits well into the story line. She's a Kellid who was adopted by a cleric of Irori in Jalmeray, but she is descended from the Kellids of Ustalav... which is going to make for some interesting times in Chapter Four. =D
I can't fault you for outlawing Samurai and Ninja. They're very off-flavor and you're gonna do a lot of work to explain what those PC types are doing in Ustalav. However, a good backstory and a conducive attitude can go a long way toward helping them fit in. It really all depends on the individual player. If what they want is Asian wire kung fu action and anime-steeped drama, though, they are probably in the wrong campaign for that.
I thought that incorporeal ghosts and the like you miss half the time unless you have your weapon specially enchanted.Pathfinder changed it to 50% damage instead of 50% miss chance.
Either way, it means most classes are hosed when it comes to fighting incorporeals. Is there ghost oil or something available in the campaign early on?
I looked, and it seems that most of the campaign is urban or dungeon orientated. Some villages. Thus, most of the abilities of say the Druid are going to be right out. So, I will recommend no Druids or Rogues (can't backstab the undead and no woodsy stuff until the 3rd book, and all the woodsy stuff is in the 3rd book).
Now, I banned Monk for the same reason I banned Samurai and Ninja, too Eastern. I banned Gunslinger since by the time firearms became that advanced, plate armor and the like were gone. I am a history student, as well as psych. Can't help being picky about my time periods.
I banned Alchemist because thematically, too many villains exist already for that class in this adventure series. They have that "mad scientist" vibe, and those are traditionally villains. Plus too 1800's.
I banned Summoner because it's poorly worded and thus confusing for newbies, and because it is simply too powerful compared to the other classes. That's the short and sweet of it, to go into detail would take paragraphs.
I banned Magus because I don't fully understand the class, and too many people who have little experience gaming are in my group.
My conclusions so far: Undead heavy, very urban, few if any traps...
Gonna recommend a Paladin, Cleric each in the group. Rangers might not get all they wanted out of being an undead hunter though. Barbarians are a mite risky, as they are fragile once one gets past the Fort save and hp. If a Rogue is willing to give up backstab for something else, fine, but they won't get much out of that option in this game. They would need an negotiator and an investigator type, so I shall recommend someone take the appropriate skills.
One thing: you do know Rogues can sneak attack ("backstab" as you put it) undead in Pathfinder, right? That's one of the big changes from earlier editions.
Unless you've houseruled otherwise, which is entirely fine, Rogues can be be just as effective against undead as other classes in Pathfinder.
My conclusions so far: Undead heavy, very urban, few if any traps...
Gonna recommend a Paladin, Cleric each in the group. Rangers might not get all they wanted out of being an undead hunter though. Barbarians are a mite risky, as they are fragile once one gets past the Fort save and hp. If a Rogue is willing to give up backstab for something else, fine, but they won't get much out of that option in this game. They would need an negotiator and an investigator type, so I shall recommend someone take the appropriate skills.
For Ranger, you could suggest the Urban Ranger variant. He can keep favored enemy for the undead, and pick Ustalav and the other communities as his favored communities (You'll have to help him pick communities). I think he could fit very well as an undead hunter type. Pick that varient, and there is little need for a rogue.. the urban ranger can do any trapfinding/disabling if need be.
Barbarians are just fine in any setting, but will struggle early. (ours died at level 2)
As far as Items:
We also found an axe that we detected as evil so we destroyed it, although apparently it was +1 magical.
So yes there are items that can help, but initially there will be struggles. If you feel it's too much, add in some one-shot items to help them out.
Seriously? Interesting. That's a fundamental aspect that really ups Rogues quite a bit.
Yep... Here's the link: Urban Ranger
Its from the Advanced Players Guide
Edit: I should point out that Favored Community is kind of lame.. A normal Ranger can just pick Favored Terrain (Urban), and it's much better. But if you want trapfinding and not be a rogue, this is one of the ways to do it.
Rangers don't have access to the sheer number of social abilities Rogues do, so I won't recommend them over Rogues. This campaign apparently needs an investigator and negotiator. I should make a list of the skills needed.
Diplomacy, Local knowl, Religion knowl, Bluff, Disguise, what else?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Rangers don't have access to the sheer number of social abilities Rogues do, so I won't recommend them over Rogues. This campaign apparently needs an investigator and negotiator. I should make a list of the skills needed.
Diplomacy, Local knowl, Religion knowl, Bluff, Disguise, what else?
Taken from the ranger's favored enemy ability,
He gains a +2 bonus on Bluff, Knowledge, Perception, Sense Motive, and Survival checks against creatures of his selected type. Likewise, he gets a +2 bonus on weapon attack and damage rolls against them. A ranger may make Knowledge skill checks untrained when attempting to identify these creatures.If your ranger takes favored enemy human or undead he can make all his knowledge checks involving them untrained and gets his enemy bonus.
As for your bans man I get the Summoner he really is a complicated class to those who've never played the game before.
As for firearms and plate the thing to remember is that Golarion isn't earth so tech can develop at differing speeds then those on earth. As for the whole plate and guns didn't exist at the same time shtick they actually did, firearms were an outgrowth of the arms race to build a weapon that could defeat the heavy armor of infantry on the battlefield and succeeded brilliantly. Because of firearms shear power and ease of training it eventually managed to do away with the heavy body armors of full-plate. Also as written gunslingers in golarion are incredibly rare as the tech for blackpowder is pretty rare at this time with most of them coming out of alkenstar where they were essential to their survival since magic doesn't work.
Up in ustalav a gunslinger would be an odd foreigner or an eccentric fascinated with that "weird science" from the south and an uncommon occurrence. So in essence the need to worry about suddenly meeting a million gun wielders and wrecking the prebuilt isn't much of an issue. Also considering the rules for firearms as written for them to actually be a serious worry the gunslinger has to risk being close enough to said plate wearer to get smacked anyways.
Now if you are saying that you are just uncomfortable with them yourself that's fine but they are pretty established in the world and aren't really something that would mechanically wreak the experience. Also they get a pretty sick undead based on them.
|
|
Lol nice how's the Bones character playing out? Does the group have a emotive foil to balance out that cold distant personality?Party #1 (Saturday group): Half-elf Oracle (of Pharasma), Cavelier, Ranger, Barbarian (somewhat re-skinned as a psychotic child with a big axe), Wizard (Necromancer, kind of like Dr Temperance Brennan), Magus, Sorcerer.
Party #2 (Thursday group): Cleric (of Shellyn, trying and failing to be a pacifist), Rogue, Fighter (half-giant with a BIG club), Monk, wizard (conjurer), wizard (transmuter).
It may look crazy, but it WORKS in practice, and we all have fun.
Very well! She's run by my daughter (she's fourteen), who wants to go on to study forensics at university; she's got Knowledge (thanatology) at humongous ranks and acted as 'expert witness' in module #2. And yes, we have a great diversity of characters in that group. The Cavelier is diplomatic, the magus is reckless, the sorcerer just plain cool, the barbarian is more emotionally withdrawn than the wizard...
I learned long ago that players get better immersion when they play that which they want to play. When you get that immersion, that's when the real fun starts, and it takes the game in very unexpected directions sometimes - more than once my players have hijacked the plot and made for Cuba, or come up with solutions I never even considered. Some DMs do not like this, but I thrive on it.
Totally agree man. Our barbarian is totally new to the group and has literally blindsided us from the minute she started playing and it's been an absolute blast. We literally started the funeral with her demanding that Kendra pay her old man debts and she totally nailed the rp. It's actually made me completely change some at of my approach to playing my character for this first part of the adventure as we've moved forward and I couldn't be happier. Later when we talked about game she realized that she might have made like the most in appropriate character and we've all told her that we don't care she's f#&$ing awesome, just keep playing her and being involved and she will never have to worry. Hell thanks to her we got to see my witch lift the barbarian off the ground and tell her to back down before we all get burned at the stake after she tried to shake intel out of the herbalist in town.
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'd read the Core Rulebook and Bestiary first. Rogues being able to sneak attack undead is one of major Pathfinder changes, and if you didn't know of it until this thread, there might be more surprises there for you, and you'd rather catch them before the game, not during.
That's me, speaking from my worthless 22 years of experience as a GM ;)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Either way, it means most classes are hosed when it comes to fighting incorporeals. Is there ghost oil or something available in the campaign early on?I thought that incorporeal ghosts and the like you miss half the time unless you have your weapon specially enchanted.Pathfinder changed it to 50% damage instead of 50% miss chance.
The 1st-level spell magic weapon allows any weapon to do 50% damage to incorporeal creatures. Given that incorporeal creatures tend to not be that tough, this is all they really need. Disrupt undead is a premium cantrip too.
There is a stash of undead-fighting equipment the party uncover right at the start, and it has everything they need. My Saturday group went through with no cleric and only one divine character and did just fine.
I looked, and it seems that most of the campaign is urban or dungeon orientated. Some villages. Thus, most of the abilities of say the Druid are going to be right out. So, I will recommend no Druids or Rogues (can't backstab the undead and no woodsy stuff until the 3rd book, and all the woodsy stuff is in the 3rd book).
There's a lot of wilderness in episode #2, episode #3 is almost all wilderness, and it comes into a lot of other adventures, especially as you are expected to be running through travel around Ustulav and giving the party random encounters (check out the Bestiary in the back of #2).
Now, I banned Monk for the same reason I banned Samurai and Ninja, too Eastern.
Even though there are Taldan monks, and Vudrani presence throughout the Inner Sea area? It's fantasy, not historical re-enactment. Also Ustulav is on the travel route from the top of the world to the Eastern nations on the other side.
I banned Gunslinger since by the time firearms became that advanced, plate armor and the like were gone. I am a history student, as well as psych. Can't help being picky about my time periods.
I don't blame you, but this is not Europe. It's a fantasy world with a slightly European flavour in areas. Everything can be bent to give the players the characters they want to play, and IMHO should be.
I banned Alchemist because thematically, too many villains exist already for that class in this adventure series. They have that "mad scientist" vibe, and those are traditionally villains. Plus too 1800's.
So are necromancers. My daughter wanted to play one, and worked a way to make her a hero. Honestly, if the class you wanted to ban was 'assassin' then I'd understand, but if someone wants to take a traditionally 'evil' concept class and make a good member of it, that's cool with me.
I banned Summoner because it's poorly worded and thus confusing for newbies, and because it is simply too powerful compared to the other classes. That's the short and sweet of it, to go into detail would take paragraphs.
Never played one, but I hear this a lot.
I banned Magus because I don't fully understand the class, and too many people who have little experience gaming are in my group.
I had a near-noob play one in Curse of the Crimson Throne. He rocked. Not broken, but pretty strong and had a lot of style and flavour. No harder to play than a wizard.
My conclusions so far: Undead heavy, very urban, few if any traps...
Gonna recommend a Paladin, Cleric each in the group. Rangers might not get all they wanted out of being an undead hunter though. Barbarians are a mite risky, as they are fragile once one gets past the Fort save and hp. If a Rogue is willing to give up backstab for something else, fine, but they won't get much out of that option in this game. They would need an negotiator and an investigator type, so I shall recommend someone take the appropriate skills.
In all honesty, all the players have to do is be aware that there is a lot of investigation in the game - if they all remember to invest in an investigative skill, they will do just fine. What characters they take is something that should be up to them, always. If a player wants to be an exiled samurai who fought his way over the top of the world and down into Ustulav to befriend a strange man called Lorrimor, let them play that concept. The game is best when the players are given a free hand, and wacky concepts can sometimes work brilliantly.
I've said before, the adventure is not all that urban - there is more wilderness than urban adventure, and a lot of 'dungeon crawls' dotted around. It's not all about undead either, although it's undead-heavy. I will say with my hand on my heart, any class will work in this campaign, provided party composition doesn't neglect the basics: a hitter, an arcane caster, a divine caster, a scout/diplomat. Of course, clerics and paladins will shine in this adventure, but they are not essential.
@doc the grey
Absolutely. Players coming from left-field can totally shed new light on the game. Some DMs hate this, and try to stifle it, and I think that's a mistake. Sure, some ideas do not work, but if it's a good idea and the designers and DM never thought of it, then maybe it should have a chance to work!
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
What characters they take is something that should be up to them, always. If a player wants to be an exiled samurai who fought his way over the top of the world and down into Ustulav to befriend a strange man called Lorrimor, let them play that concept. The game is best when the players are given a free hand, and wacky concepts can sometimes work brilliantly.
+1
I'd read the Core Rulebook and Bestiary first. Rogues being able to sneak attack undead is one of major Pathfinder changes, and if you didn't know of it until this thread, there might be more surprises there for you, and you'd rather catch them before the game, not during.
That's me, speaking from my worthless 22 years of experience as a GM ;)
I went over the whole thing a while ago, but understand that currently the most advanced campaign I have is at 3rd level. Since the players haven't gone up against much undead yet, being more inclined to orcs goblins and humans, I hadn't brushed up on my undead rules.
Drop the snark. It only serves to sabotage your purpose.
There's a lot of wilderness in episode #2, episode #3 is almost all wilderness, and it comes into a lot of other adventures, especially as you are expected to be running through travel around Ustulav and giving the party random encounters (check out the Bestiary in the back of #2).Even though there are Taldan monks, and Vudrani presence throughout the Inner Sea area? It's fantasy, not historical re-enactment. Also Ustulav is on the travel route from the top of the world to the Eastern nations on the other side.
I banned Gunslinger since by the time firearms became that advanced, plate armor and the like were gone. I am...
My game does not take place on Golarion or Europe. Thus your Taldan monks do not exist. It's my game, let me run it MY WAY. If all you came here to do is to tell me to run my games YOUR way, then you can get lost. If you came here to give me advice on useful skills, feats, and classes that I haven't banned, great.
Those random encounters won't be as difficult as regular ones, especially the boss types. Thus, being a woodsy characters doesn't really help.