|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And since when did anyone grant XP for running away from something?
Only since always. You get XP for the (intentionaly!) ambigous achievement of "overcoming the challange". That means that, for example, even if you fail to detect a trap and spring it, you still get XP for it if you are still alive after the trap is done soing it's dirty work. Same goes for haunts and creatures - doesn't matter how you bypassed them. Intimidating the goblins at the entrance of the dungeon to flee away from the dungeon awards same XP as defeating them in combat, sneaking past them, or any other way to get through them.
If you triggered a haunt and survived, then yes, you get the XP.
It's not just the editing that has problems. It's the fact that this adventure is NOT mini friendly. To give you an example, to destroy a Haunt, one of the PC's was supposed to carry some heated bones and toss them into the pond water that was nearby. They didn't realize this, in part because there was no combat map of the battleground they had with the possessed furnace/cremator. No maps of each battle, and that's the sort of thing that is STANDARD for almost every published adventure I have ever read. Only other time I've seen this bad of an editing job is anything by Palladium.
Not everyone needs to use minis - this game is supposed to be about imagination, afterall :)
It's not as if a 50% effective longsword is going to be the only damage the party is doing in that fight, right? And if they do put all their eggs in one basket like that, someone will try to heal him?
Do you know of many PC groups with more than one enchanted weapon at 2nd level? I don't know of any that have one, let alone two!
I understand about the realism of arrows breaking when used as daggers. Personally, when I use magic arrows to stab people in real life, they break all the time. It's very annoying. Especially when the people I'm stabbing are ghosts.
Snide remarks are not welcome. As DM, I would rule that arrows can't be used as daggers more than once, as they would break. This is not some idiot videogame we are talking about; I happen to be a thinking human being.
Again, I'm sorry Piccolo, but 250g per person is plenty. Especially if the party works together to manage their finances. I'm confused about the line " 1005.6gp (including remaining group money)". If that is not their savings, then they've already spent it, and they do not have 1005.6 gp? They only have 31 gp?
They only have 31gp left over from character generation as a group, the rest is from Harrowstone itself. They have only just managed to mostly clear the first level, but can't resolve more than a single Haunt. They are 2nd level, and 250gp each isn't enough to upgrade any of their gear.
Because if I understand you correctly, I agree, a module should award a party way more than 31 gp by the time they're halfway through. Having played through Harrowstone, fortunately, I'm very sure that it does. So assuming that they have more than 31gp to their names, it's very provident that the wizard can scribe scrolls for only 12.5 gold each, and it doesn't even take more than a few hours per scroll.
Unfortunately, those scrolls get used up right fast when you can only whip out a 2nd level caster Magic Missile per scroll. 1d4+1 damage isn't enough to make much of a difference.
Again, I will respectfully disagree as to its suckiness, as it's one of my favorite modules of all time, and one of the few I didn't blow through (let's be honest, Tomb of Horrors doesn't really count).
Uhmmmmm, no. WAY too many errors just in typos (with very important information missing, like say the attack roll for a flaming skull. Lots of new ideas, but the execution is lacking. If this is award winning, I'd hate to see what was the runners-up.
If this don't find this brand of horror to be horrific enough, maybe you could try another game, or if you mention other modules you found horrible enough, I could try and think of similar ones. Personally, I think there's a lot of horror in Harrowstone, but horror is subjective.
I happen to be a horror movie buff, and none of this spooked me or my players. :p
If 2 zombies almost killed a paladin, the players weren't taking it seriously, or the zombies got lucky. That can happen with any encounter.
They were standing at the door of Kendra's home, and the Paladin got dropped in a single round by a pair of zombies. Yet a CR4 got wiped out without even breaking a sweat. Those construct rules really really need work! All the constructs had was a decent defense and no offense.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also +1 for using the ghost touch arrows as daggers.
I'm pretty sure my GM would not have allowed that. And on top for even trying I'd received a snarky remark about powergaming from one of the other players.
As long as firing arrows breaks them and uses up their magic (stated somewhere about durable arrows) the same will happen when used in melee.disclaimer: I know that arrows don't break 100% of the time when fired. And you should know what I meant. But to be on the save side...
Not everyone needs to use minis - this game is supposed to be about imagination, afterall :)
It's not just the editing that has problems. It's the fact that this adventure is NOT mini friendly. To give you an example, to destroy a Haunt, one of the PC's was supposed to carry some heated bones and toss them into the pond water that was nearby. They didn't realize this, in part because there was no combat map of the battleground they had with the possessed furnace/cremator. No maps of each battle, and that's the sort of thing that is STANDARD for almost every published adventure I have ever read. Only other time I've seen this bad of an editing job is anything by Palladium.
Nice, but when it comes to running combats, it helps tremendously to use minis to keep track of all the beasties and where the PC's are in relation to the monsters.
Also, how would one keep track of "attacks of opportunity" if not for minis? Or ensure that ranged weapons really ARE useful? Using minis also keeps the players from arguing with the DM, and ensures that the DM keeps everything coherent. Too useful of a tool to ignore.
And since when did anyone grant XP for running away from something?
Only since always. You get XP for the (intentionaly!) ambigous achievement of "overcoming the challange". That means that, for example, even if you fail to detect a trap and spring it, you still get XP for it if you are still alive after the trap is done soing it's dirty work. Same goes for haunts and creatures - doesn't matter how you bypassed them. Intimidating the goblins at the entrance of the dungeon to flee away from the dungeon awards same XP as defeating them in combat, sneaking past them, or any other way to get through them.
If you triggered a haunt and survived, then yes, you get the XP.
No way. I grant xp for challenges faced and defeated permanently, not for running like a pack of preschoolers. If they run, and return after having prepared, then I will grant xp only for resolving the "haunt", but not before.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, i'm done trying to help this piccolo fellow, he just wants to complain about everything without taking ANY of the more then helpful suggestions offered. frankly, you are on your own, run it if you want or how you want or not at all. it's your money, if you want to spend $20 (or however much it is on Amazon these days) so you have something to complain about on the message boards, then money well spent. i for one will never offer another piece of advice to you. good luck to your player's, they will certainly need it with you;)
S'funny, but they are quite happy with me, in fact, one of them said it was great that I was considering just flat out handing them the difference in gp if they made it to level 3 without getting enough treasure to function. As in, I intend to maintain the wealth by level guidelines.
Yes, in fact I have already taken some of the advice presented both here and in private messages, and am about to implement it.
Try not to assume what sort of personality I have. Can't read someone online, it just never works.
Not everyone needs to use minis - this game is supposed to be about imagination, afterall :)
It's not just the editing that has problems. It's the fact that this adventure is NOT mini friendly. To give you an example, to destroy a Haunt, one of the PC's was supposed to carry some heated bones and toss them into the pond water that was nearby. They didn't realize this, in part because there was no combat map of the battleground they had with the possessed furnace/cremator. No maps of each battle, and that's the sort of thing that is STANDARD for almost every published adventure I have ever read. Only other time I've seen this bad of an editing job is anything by Palladium.Nice, but when it comes to running combats, it helps tremendously to use minis to keep track of all the beasties and where the PC's are in relation to the monsters.
Also, how would one keep track of "attacks of opportunity" if not for minis? Or ensure that ranged weapons really ARE useful? Using minis also keeps the players from arguing with the DM, and ensures that the DM keeps everything coherent. Too useful of a tool to ignore.
What I meant was if the PC is running over to the pond with the bones, did you really make them move their mini several times to their range of movement? That seems videogamy to me, and you've already said you don't want this to be a videogame.
I wouldn't need minis for my PC to do that; they would tell me that they're running with the bones, and if I didn't spring a trap, haunt, or monster at them, I would just wave it and say "you made it to the pond without issue".
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I wasn't being snide; please don't try and assume what kind of person I am from reading things I write on the internet, it is impossible. I was being facetious. Umbranus makes a good point that the magic is still used up in one stab, but Umbranus, why would your DM snark at you for attempting what is a clearly legitimate maneuver of desperation? This isn't one of those powergamey legalistic interpretations of the rules; the developers clearly wanted people to be able to stab things with arrows, but they also wanted it not to be as good as a real weapon. That's why they made rules for using arrows as melee weapons. That's also why there's an elven feat for stabbing people with arrows in the APG.
How many parties do I know with more than one enchanted weapon at level 2? All of them that bought scrolls of Magic Weapon so they can do 50% damage to ghosts, of course. I think you may be forgetting the context of this discussion. PCs don't need magic weapons at level 2 or 3 except for a very few certain things like ghosts, which is what you were having the issue with. That's why I suggested a means to temporarily enchant the weapons and that's why we're talking about 50% damage to begin with.
Okay, so, with 1000 gp in savings, they have a lot of money to get scrolls or holy water or everything they need to fight incorporeals, swarms, and everything else that tends to give PCs issues. I am glad; I thought your players only had 31gp as a party and then they'd have to sell more of their expendables.
I'm glad your players are having fun with the way that you houserule arrows and xp for overcoming encounters, some players might not. You are a good match.
The scrolls are not for everyday killing of things, they are so the wizard can help kill incorporeals without running dry 2 rounds into combat. Also, since Magic Missile doesn't get any better at level 2, you should advise him he can make the scrolls at CL1 to save money. The corporeal undead should be able to be overcome without too many special preparations.
I would still like to know what modules you found to be good and horrific, I like horror movies too, and if there's an even better horror module out there, I'd like to play it.
Also, please stop disparaging video games. I like Pathfinder, and I like video games, and they're about as different as two things can be, but I still find value in them. Nobody ever complains soccer is a dumb game because you can't construct a brick wall in front of your goal or use other creative solutions, instead being limited to just kicking a ball by the rules of the game.
What I meant was if the PC is running over to the pond with the bones, did you really make them move their mini several times to their range of movement? That seems videogamy to me, and you've already said you don't want this to be a videogame.I wouldn't need minis for my PC to do that; they would tell me that they're running with the bones, and if I didn't spring a trap, haunt, or monster at them, I would just wave it and say "you made it to the pond without issue".
Oh no, I just figured that seeing the pond on the map would remind them that there's a source of cool water to chill the haunted bones down.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Umbranus makes a good point that the magic is still used up in one stab, but Umbranus, why would your DM snark at you for attempting what is a clearly legitimate maneuver of desperation? This isn't one of those powergamey legalistic interpretations of the rules; the developers clearly wanted people to be able to stab things with arrows, but they also wanted it not to be as good as a real weapon. That's why they made rules for using arrows as melee weapons. That's also why there's an elven feat for stabbing people with arrows in the APG.
Well, why not delete the various arrows, and just make a dagger or two? Nobody really likes daggers anyway, since they only do a d4.
Here's a pertinent question: why weren't scrolls of magic weapon provided in the adventure, if enchanted weapons are so important? Logically, the PC's need a way to damage incorporeal enemies.
Well, whatever argument they make, it should be logical. If it seems reasonable, I am just fine with whatever they want. For the most part, I am actually a pretty easygoing DM, believe it or not.
I thought that the remake of Ravenloft, Expedition to Castle Ravenloft for 3.5 was really good, as was two DCC Rat King adventures. I can give you a link for the Rat King adventures in particular, as they are hard to find info on compared to Ravenloft.
The problem I have with video games is that most so-called gamers insist on having the game and all the obstacles handed to them on a silver platter, without having to work for it or think things through. They don't give a damn about other players, they just care about getting their points/gear. Plus, since most videogames tend to feature nearly indestructible characters, they think they can rush headlong into any situation and come out fine without having to think of tactics. They aren't used to enemies that actually THINK and respond in ways to save their own hide and screw over the PC group.
For example, say some guy escapes an ambush set up by the PC's. In a videogame, nothing special happens and the encounters end up as planned by the programmer. But in a tabletop rpg, if that happened the NPC's would muster their troops and pound the heck out of the PC's.
What I meant was if the PC is running over to the pond with the bones, did you really make them move their mini several times to their range of movement? That seems videogamy to me, and you've already said you don't want this to be a videogame.I wouldn't need minis for my PC to do that; they would tell me that they're running with the bones, and if I didn't spring a trap, haunt, or monster at them, I would just wave it and say "you made it to the pond without issue".
Oh no, I just figured that seeing the pond on the map would remind them that there's a source of cool water to chill the haunted bones down.
It should be the GM's job to let them know that there's a pond there in the first place when you describe the PCs surroundings to them, not the map's job.
I did tell them, but it was only in passing. Having a map in front of them would have been far more effective in getting them to make the connection.
I did tell them, but it was only in passing. Having a map in front of them would have been far more effective in getting them to make the connection.
If you don't want this to be videogamy, why shouldn't you let them punish themselves for not paying attention to their surroundings? If you know its important (or that it is a sizable body of water), you should do more than mention it in passing, and they should pay closer attention to what you have to say.
Videogames put the map in front of the heroes; I think that you're countering your own statements. After all, didn't you say:
The problem I have with video games is that most so-called gamers insist on having the game and all the obstacles handed to them on a silver platter, without having to work for it or think things through.
If you really feel that way, why would you want a map at all? Isn't that "handing the obstacles to them on a silver platter"? Don't you want them to "work for it" and "think things through"? Seems to me that remembering that there is a lake there is thinking things through.
You also said:
Well, why not delete the various arrows, and just make a dagger or two? Nobody really likes daggers anyway, since they only do a d4.
Only to go on to say in the same post:
They don't give a damn about other players, they just care about getting their points/gear.
So which is it? Do you want your players to care about their surroundings and make tactical decisions like thinking of using an arrow as a dagger, or do you want them to disregard daggers because they aren't powerful enough?
You keep making points about why you hate the module, and in the same breath you sabotage your own point with a counter-complaint against your first complaint.
To you and the mods: This post is honestly not meant to be a personal attack or a snipe against anyone; I'm genuinely confused by the points and counter-points you keep making against yourself.
That's interesting. I also liked Expedition to Castle Ravenloft, but more the way that I like They Live than Seven. Maybe it's because I liked it more the first time when it was just Ravenloft. Any attempt at bringing it forward into 3E just feels like New Star Wars. I'm not very familiar with the Rat King line; I'll have to con my DM into thumbing through them so I know if I'm missing out.
I think having treasure make sense is more important than tailoring the treasure to the adventure. It makes sense that a hidden cache of Pharasman supplies will include more expendables than scrolls and magic weapons; weapons would be worth too much, and the lowliest initiate should be casting their own Magic Weapon spells. Your players obviously have the resources to obtain ways to combat ghosts, albeit temporary ones, if they just use their heads and work together to make a plan. If I wanted all the right tools handed to me as I progressed through a semi-linear dangerous area, I would just play a video game.
For the record, you never hear of video game players complaining about roleplayers because the guy they play Pathfinder with just wants to talk to the terrorists in Call of Duty and practice making fires (a very important but overlooked survival skill) instead of shooting the other team. If a person either naively or stubbornly takes a mindset from one context and inappropriately applies it to an entirely different context, that's on the person, not the hobby involved. But I know it's fashionable to hate on video game players so I try not to let it get under my skin.
Umbranus makes a good point that the magic is still used up in one stab, but Umbranus, why would your DM snark at you for attempting what is a clearly legitimate maneuver of desperation? This isn't one of those powergamey legalistic interpretations of the rules; the developers clearly wanted people to be able to stab things with arrows, but they also wanted it not to be as good as a real weapon. That's why they made rules for using arrows as melee weapons. That's also why there's an elven feat for stabbing people with arrows in the APG
Most people on these forums seem to implicate that using an arrow as melee weapon doesn't use up its magic.
And trying that was what I said would have been met with, as you call it, a snarky remark. But not from the gm (who would just have said no) but from another player who sees nearly everything that is not explicitly wanted (and even a lot of things that are) as powergaming and makes comments to let you know it.
At the time, I could see their frustration at not being able to finish off the Haunts, and I was personally tired of running the same encounter over and over each time they passed through. So, I said, screw it, and tried hinting "what do you do with something that's too hot?" but they didn't figure out that they had to dunk the bones in the lake, being already frustrated from previous repetitive Haunts.
I wanted a map so that I could copy it out on my wet erase mat and thus handle it like I did every combat encounter. Tends to save on confusion and arguments when everyone knows precisely where they are.
That, "they don't give a damn" applies to college kids who only play videogames and are used to such. You misunderstood.
I seriously doubt anyone would include one shot items meant to be used against ghosts into an emergency ghost fighting stash when ghosts tend to reconstruct themselves every so often; they COULD just save money and effort by just making a ghost touch dagger instead of dozens of arrows.
Methinks I shall just replace the arrows via DM "Cause I said so" fiat with a dagger or two. It's less of a pain in the butt in the long run. Now, since the dagger is owned by the Temple, the PC's won't be able to keep/sell it after Harrowstone is done. That solves the problem of WbL.
Try taking on Ravenloft when Strahd has as a side plot the making of an (immune to sunlight) vampire army by trying to convert the PC's. Makes the players damned paranoid about splitting up or spending the night in the castle!
Those tools you mention? Problem. The PC's dont have the resources to make them on their own, or even BUY them. That's because of WbL, and the fact that whoever wrote this adventure was damned stingy about just including moolah instead of consumable supplies. Didn't you notice that haul I wrote out? Almost all of it was consumable, and specific to the adventure.
Actually, the reason you never hear of videogame players complaining about actual rpgers is the simple fact that programmers haven't succeeded in creating an actual AI, and thus are very limited in what they CAN and CANNOT do. There's no "invisible walls" in tabletop rpgs.
Again, the reason why I complain about videogame players (those that identify themselves as "gamers") is that pure and simple, most are idiots. I can go on into chapter and verse about their stupidity and laziness, but that would get tiresome. It has nothing to do with being fashionable or not. If I encounter a gamer that LIKES thinking for a living, one that engages in actual critical thinking skills, I will (and have already) welcome them with open arms!
I honestly love it when I don't have to prompt players to think before they leap. Nothing makes me happier than watching them scheme and plan their way around my obstacles, so when they get inventive and bypass my carefully laid out evil DM plots, I reward them with extra xp and goodies. By the same token, I will also nail them for not paying attention or doing something spectacularly stupid. I could SO tell you stories....
You were flexible with letting the players figure out how to destroy them permanently, right? I mean telling them the bones are too hot works but usually it's better to let them figure it out through knowledge or the spirit planchette or turning it into a rapping spirit and communicating with it. And if they can't figure it out on the spot, they should try researching it at the library before returning; access to books about hauntings justifies a reroll with the library's bonus.
I don't understand how the PCs can't afford 100gp worth of scrolls and 100gp of holy water to supplement their daily allotment of powers when they have 1000gp. I'd have a bigger issue with a church just hiding and forgetting about a dagger worth years and years of tithes. But you have to do what it takes to make your players happy.
I think maybe you're taking me too literally. The Pharasmans didn't set that cache up specifically to kill ghosts. In fact, the only ghost in Harrowstone is good. But even if it were, why would the church of Pharasma, whose thing is destroying undead, settle for merely disrupting a ghost when they could put it to rest for good? 2d4 days is a lot of time to figure out how to effect the ghost's final death. Whether I'm an adventurer or a cleric of Pharasma, I'd rather only deal with the ghost once and for good, because I value my life and don't risk it needlessly. And OOC, I prefer thinking and problemsolving to repetitive combat. On the other hand, If you're referring to haunts, a dagger wouldn't help at all. At least the haunt siphons can damage them and even drastically reduces their next caster level check to reform.
Not to continue being too horridly offtopic, but I'm very disappointed you keep airing your prejudices against video game players. I've had the pleasure of introducing a lot of people to the hobby over the years, and almost all of them did a very good job acting like their characters and interacting with the world. The few who didn't we thanked them for trying for the evening and continued being friends just without the dicerolling. Maybe it's just a difference between our playgroups. But either way, you shouldn't call an entire group of people lazy and stupid, and then concede that if one should first prove to you to be okay as an individual you will deign to judge them on their own merits instead of tarring them with the same brush. That just isn't right, and I had hoped that roleplayers, as a group, were generally better than that.
They are about to research the various 1st level haunts with the Ouija board soon. Apparently you can only use it once per day.
As a side note, will there be upgraded versions of the planchette available later on in the Carrion Crown series? This bronze one isn't all that reliable.
They haven't gone shopping just yet, they are camping out in the ex-warden's office right now. I am hoping that the Paladin will grab a masterwork breastplate to replace his chainmail with his share. And, I want to replace most of the arrows with an enchanted dagger or two. Plus, dumber things have happened in real life than misplacing something highly valuable, so this isn't too out of the pale.
Yes, I plan on the guys hopefully finding more haunt siphons as well. 4 isn't really enough when you think about the average damage they dish out.
2-8 days is actually a pretty brief time to figure out how to destroy a haunt, when you consider how many people wouldn't have good enough rolls to figure it out, but that's IMO.
I have noticed that most so-called "rpgs" on videogames tend to encourage a lot of lazy thinking. And until I start encountering "gamers" that aren't spectacularly foolish tactically speaking the first time they start playing tabletop, I will not change my evaluation. The old school games were a hell of a lot harder than the modern ones, partially because they didn't have any competition (though the AI was a lot dumber as well). Most games these days include a nearly infinite amount of ammo and feature nearly invulnerable main characters simply because it's easier to play.
If you reread my last post, you'll notice that I didn't call ALL "gamers" lazy and stupid. I just said that most of the ones I have encountered *were*, (relatively speaking) compared to tabletop veterans. Plus, I've noticed that when a tabletop veteran plays videogames, they tend to be devastatingly effective, particularly with "survival" games.
Personally, I hate it when I hear of videogame players refer to themselves as "gamers", or worse yet, rpgers. They are, in my experience, decidedly inferior intellectually to tabletop players, especially tactically. IMHO, videogames are something to do when you don't have friends over and have nothing better to do.
Enough insulting videogamers. It's not appropriate or acceptable behavior here.
I like video games:)
I like video games:)
That's fine, I play them a lot as well, but I only play when I don't have more social things to do. Somehow, computer/console games aren't as satisfying as playing with someone face to face. The communication is so very much better, and there's more analytical and creative thought put into tabletop games, at least based on previous experience. Plus, players are a lot more cooperative when you can directly show them in person what happens when somebody cheats or upsets game balance.
Just because I don't like the effects of videogames on people's thought processes doesn't mean I dislike those who play them. It DOES mean that I am very cautious with "gamers" initially because of the overwhelming tendency to munchkinize.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, i don't play games online, or on my computer, and for only about an hour or two a week (less so during the summer spring months, haven't played a game since april in fact)
i understand what you are saying however how you say things make you seem a bit bigoted and close minded, have you tried toning it down.
can we please STOP using words like munchkinize (which isn't even a word, by the way) what does it mean anyway?
anyway its a forum for seeking advice, not to bag on a (rather large) particular segment of the population
what further advice do you need, otherwise i recommend shutting this thread down as it has served its purpose and is just making people mad at you (the purpose of the thread maybe?)
i understand what you are saying however how you say things make you seem a bit bigoted and close minded, have you tried toning it down or thinking before spewing forth onto your computer
what further advice do you need, otherwise i recommend shutting this thread down as it has served its purpose and is just making people mad at you (the purpose of the thread maybe?)
These sound like potshots. If you want to talk with me about personal items, then do so privately, but not on a thread. That's according to the TOU, y'know.
Well, right now I am wondering how the PC's are going to research the 5 items they found against the prisoners, since the planchette only functions once per day. They can go a lot faster while exploring if they don't have to do this. Wouldn't it have been smarter to upgrade this to a better version of the planchette?
Just wondering how my PC's are going to make it past some of the stranger bits of the Harrowstone module.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I allowed the PCs to figure out the items (but not necessarily the drawbacks) with detect magic.
Also... Dammit. I was about to say "haunts are not unheard of on Golarian [IIRC, they've been around since Pathfinder #2] and you can just roll Knowledge (Religion) checks on the things, with the DC scaling up for more unique haunts like the furnace, or lower for haunts that happen to occur all over the world, like the Cold Spot." However, you may be going with "Renchurch, Harrowstone, and Gallowspire are the only places in Faerun that have haunts, so no one really knows what the hell to do with any of these." So I guess however you want to run that.
IIRC, the poltergeist, Lady Vesorianna, the Lopper, and the Splatter Man are the only incorporeal creatures in Harrowstone. The poltergeist is fragile enough that it can be killed by just using positive energy a couple times, the party shouldn't fight Lady V, and the Lopper's axe is a ghost-touch weapon vs. the Lopper. An undead scourge paladin with the Lopper's axe should school the Lopper hard. The Splatter Man is the one major nuisance.
Okay, you have a cleric AND a paladin, and you gave them a wizard. If they're both at least level 2, they really shouldn't be struggling so much with these things - nearly everything in the prison (even the haunted constructs!) can be killed with cure spells, lay on hands, channel positive energy, and disrupt undead. The cleric might also have ghost bane dirge, a 2nd level cleric spell, by the time the party meets the Lopper or Splatterman; successful use of that would trivialize either battle.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
