Demon's Heresy (GM Reference)

[Lochar]

Actually, this harkens back to the earlier discussion because it just struck me.

Can you counterspell something from the Staff of Conjuration?

[The Pete]

Lord Snow wrote:

Actually, Read Magic is a spell all wizards, starting from level 1 and regardless of their chosen school, can cast from memory (that is, they don't even have to prepare it in advance). So the stat block is correct as it is.

Where do you get this from? The closest I can find is this:

SRD wrote:

"A wizard must study his spellbook each day to prepare his spells. He cannot prepare any spell not recorded in his spellbook, except for read magic, which all wizards can prepare from memory."

But that just says that he can prepare the spell from memory, not that he can cast it. In fact, there is an implication that wizards sometimes do prepare read magic, which would be really silly if they could cast it without preparing it. Otherwise, I think that what is stated about cantrips from opposition schools taking up two slots fits. I think that including this in stat blocks when divination is a dump school is a pretty common mistake, since Read Magic is such a bread and butter cantrip that even people with divination as an opposition school know it from "birth".

All said, as I noted above, whether or not he can cast read magic is a rather silly thing to worry about in the stat block since Vang is unlikely to be making much use of cantrips on screen, let alone enough of them that it might matter how many cantrip slots he actually has. This isn't a good use of your time as a GM preping to run the game. But I really am interested in the rules question for Lord Snow regarding wizards not needing to even memorize Read Magic - it will certainly alter the daily spell preps for my wizard characters.

For Lochar:
That's a good question.

SRD wrote:

How Counterspells Work

To use a counterspell, you must select an opponent as the target of the counterspell. You do this by choosing to ready an action. In doing so, you elect to wait to complete your action until your opponent tries to cast a spell. You may still move at your normal speed, since ready is a standard action.

If the target of your counterspell tries to cast a spell, make a Spellcraft check (DC 15 + the spell's level). This check is a free action. If the check succeeds, you correctly identify the opponent's spell and can attempt to counter it. If the check fails, you can't do either of these things.

My gut says that, no you can't counter it. You hold an action to counterspell the opponent, but at no point does the opponent "try to cast a spell". Instead, the opponent activates a spell trigger item.

However, the SRD also says,

SRD wrote:

Staves use the spell trigger activation method, so casting a spell from a staff is usually a standard action that doesn't provoke attacks of opportunity.

This is only one of many references to "casting" a spell from a staff. That makes it sound as though what one does with a staff counts as "trying to cast a spell". If that's the case, then it's clear cut that you can counterspell the activation of the staff.

[Aldarionn]

As a side note: The stat block includes the spell Detect Magic, NOT Read Magic. The cantrips on the stat block came from the original Paizo stat block in the module and I did notice it was from his opposition school. I did not bother to change it though because if Detect Magic makes or breaks him in the fight against my PC's I will have screwed something up spectacularly. Just thought I would point that out because this discussion is basically moot.

On to more interesting issues.....

The question about the staff is actually a pretty good one. Staves do a number of things differently than other spell trigger activation items.

First of all, the staff allows the wielder to use their stats/caster level when using the staff to cast a spell which suggests that the wielder is at least partially involved in the actual casting of the spell. Second, they can be recharged by expending spell slots each day which indicates that the staff uses the wielders own magical abilities to cast the spells it stores rather than just casting completely on its own.

It is in no way clear. The fact that staves use Spell Trigger Activation suggests you simply speak a word and the staff does all the work, but the way staves are worded suggests the staff, upon speaking the word, draws power from the wielder in order to fully cast the spell.

By RAW I would say no, a Spell Trigger Activation item cannot be counterspelled since the wielder is not actually casting a spell, he is triggering a stave which casts the spell. Other mechanics don't factor into this since none of them specifically state that you may counterspell a staff, or that a staff is mechanically any different than a wand when it comes to counterspelling.

That said I might be inclined to house-rule counterspelling against a stave since they are more powerful than any other item that casts spells. Basically since the stave draws power from the caster you are able to interrupt the source causing the spell to fail. There might be an increased DC to identify the spell cast by the staff or some other mechanic that makes it harder. I'll have to talk it over with my group.

[Lochar]

It's a point for the insta-gib Counterspelling path ability of the Archmage, so that Vang isn't useless against that.

[zimmerwald1915]

Lord Snow wrote:

(that is, they don't even have to prepare it in advance)

Sure they do. Here's the text:

PRD wrote:

Spellbooks: A wizard must study his spellbook each day to prepare his spells. He cannot prepare any spell not recorded in his spellbook, except for read magic, which all wizards can prepare from memory.

No wizard can simply cast read magic without preparing it as a cantrip. Wizards who ban divination cannot record read magic in their spellbooks. It's just that, even without having it in their spellbooks, wizards who ban divination can prepare read magic by using two cantrip slots.

[Aldarionn]

Just took an in depth spin through the counterspelling rules and there is nothing preventing their use against spell trigger activation. Seems the staff could be counterspelled.

Also I feel I need to reiterate - the spell in question is DETECT MAGIC. Not Read Magic. So the discussion is entirely moot.

[Tempestorm]

zimmerwald1915 wrote:

Lord Snow wrote:

(that is, they don't even have to prepare it in advance)

Sure they do. Here's the text:

PRD wrote:

Spellbooks: A wizard must study his spellbook each day to prepare his spells. He cannot prepare any spell not recorded in his spellbook, except for read magic, which all wizards can prepare from memory.

No wizard can simply cast read magic without preparing it as a cantrip. Wizards who ban divination cannot record read magic in their spellbooks. It's just that, even without having it in their spellbooks, wizards who ban divination can prepare read magic by using two cantrip slots.

Specialist Wizards are NOT barred from learning or preparing spells of their opposed schools.

Pathfinder does not have BANNED schools, only opposed.

CRB, Pg 79: A wizard who prepares spells from his opposition school must expend use two spell slots of that level to prepare the spell.

[Thanis Kartaleon]

However, specialist wizards begin play without cantrips from their opposed schools in their spellbooks.

[The Pete]

Aldarionn wrote:

Just took an in depth spin through the counterspelling rules and there is nothing preventing their use against spell trigger activation. Seems the staff could be counterspelled.

Also I feel I need to reiterate - the spell in question is DETECT MAGIC. Not Read Magic. So the discussion is entirely moot.

Yeah, the bit about Read Magic is no longer about the stat block and more about Lord Snow's claim that wizards can cast that cantrip without memorizing it. I think the answer is that he just made a minor mistake with the special status of that cantrip.

As for the counterspell bit - you said you think you can counterspell the staff. Can you please explain a little more why you think this works?

If I'm trying to lock down Vang, I will declare that I ready an action to counterspell Vang. That is, I ready an action with an activation trigger that goes off if Vang "tries to cast a spell". Then, during his turn, Vang spends a standard action to attempt to activate a spell trigger item. My instinct is to say, since Vang has not satisfied the condition "tries to cast a spell", the readied action isn't triggered and thus things continue as normal with the staff activating and a spell effect manifesting. Meanwhile my readied action is still waiting and might trigger if, say, Vang then tries to cast a quickened spell later in the round.

I'm guessing that you believe activating a spell trigger item in fact satisfies the condition "tries to cast a spell" but it's not clear why you believe that - can you explain?

[Lochar]

Pete, it's more if Flexible Counterspell is going to shut him down completely or not.

Quote:

Flexible Counterspell (Su): Your mythic power enhances your ability to counter others' spells. As an immediate action, you can expend one use of mythic power to attempt to counter a spell. This ability otherwise works like readying an action to counter a spell, except instead of using the exact spell or dispel magic, you can instead expend a spell or spell slot of a level equal to or higher than the target spell.

[Aldarionn]

The Pete wrote:

Aldarionn wrote:

Just took an in depth spin through the counterspelling rules and there is nothing preventing their use against spell trigger activation. Seems the staff could be counterspelled.

Also I feel I need to reiterate - the spell in question is DETECT MAGIC. Not Read Magic. So the discussion is entirely moot.

Yeah, the bit about Read Magic is no longer about the stat block and more about Lord Snow's claim that wizards can cast that cantrip without memorizing it. I think the answer is that he just made a minor mistake with the special status of that cantrip.

As for the counterspell bit - you said you think you can counterspell the staff. Can you please explain a little more why you think this works?

If I'm trying to lock down Vang, I will declare that I ready an action to counterspell Vang. That is, I ready an action with an activation trigger that goes off if Vang "tries to cast a spell". Then, during his turn, Vang spends a standard action to attempt to activate a spell trigger item. My instinct is to say, since Vang has not satisfied the condition "tries to cast a spell", the readied action isn't triggered and thus things continue as normal with the staff activating and a spell effect manifesting. Meanwhile my readied action is still waiting and might trigger if, say, Vang then tries to cast a quickened spell later in the round.

I'm guessing that you believe activating a spell trigger item in fact satisfies the condition "tries to cast a spell" but it's not clear why you believe that - can you explain?

From the Staff rules:

"Activation: Staves use the spell trigger activation method, so casting a spell from a staff is usually a standard action that doesn't provoke attacks of opportunity. If the spell being cast has a longer casting time than 1 standard action, however, it takes the full casting time to cast the spell from a staff. To activate a staff, a character must hold it forth in at least one hand (or whatever passes for a hand, for nonhumanoid creatures)."

Emphasis mine. As you mentioned, the qualifier is that the target cast a spell. Under the activation rules it makes mention of using Spell Trigger Activation to cast a spell from a staff. This to me seems to indicate that casting a spell from a staff is exactly the same as casting a normal spell, except it uses the charge(s) from the staff instead of requiring you to expend a prepared spell or spell slot.

At least that is how I read it. I would love to hear a dev's interpretation of the rules here to be honest because i do not necessarily agree with that interpretation. I just think it is correct by the RAW.

[The Pete]

Aldarionn wrote:

From the Staff rules:

"Activation: Staves use the spell trigger activation method, so casting a spell from a staff is usually a standard action that doesn't provoke attacks of opportunity. If the spell being cast has a longer casting time than 1 standard action, however, it takes the full casting time to cast the spell from a staff. To activate a staff, a character must hold it forth in at least one hand (or...

Yeah, that's the part I was keying on too in my first post responding to Lochar above. Could it be that the standard action is both activating a spell trigger item and casting a spell? I've been operating under the assumption that those two actions are mutually exclusive.

In any case, I'd be really interested to hear a more official clarification of how the staff is intended to work. It seems here to make a great deal of difference to just how powerful an item a staff (and potentially even a wand - depending on the ruling) is.

[Aldarionn]

I created a thread here:

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qf59?Counerspelling-objects-that-use-Spell-Tri gger#1

Hopefully we will get some feedback.

[Derfmancher]

James Jacobs wrote:

And that's exactly what I meant. A "teaching adventure" would provide advice not to the GM on how to run the game for the players (that'd be a teaching adventure for players, not the GM), but advice on how to adjust and adapt the adventure for his/her own group.

In any event, in the lack of such an adventure... that's kind of the whole point of our messageboards here. They provide a great place for GMs to share their tricks and advice.

This struck a pretty great cord with me. Several in my group are very excited to start GMing. (We have 8 people that play in 3 different games at the moment.) The Golem sale saw the group pick up the books to run not one but *three* adventure paths that we will surely run sooner rather than later.

That said, I would imagine this 'teaching AP' as a natural extension/combination of the AP concept and the Beginner Box concept. A Beginner Box Adventure Path if you will. A classic adventure to the hilt, with a fair bit of tips and tricks for GMs and players scattered through the entire thing. A product to bridge the gap between beginner player and a GM that buys adventure paths by the 30lb box like my group just did.

Regards,
Derfmancher

[Aldarionn]

Regarding the counterspelling issue, a friend of mine brings up an interesting point. If the wielder of the Staff/Wand is not casting the spell, who is directing the attack for spells that require it? The inanimate object he is carrying? How does it see to direct the attack? It doesn't have eyes, or sentience. How can it target anything?

Similarly, when a person makes an attack with a weapon, does the weapon make the attack roll? Is the weapon considered to have attacked, not the wielder? Do effects that trigger when one type of creature makes an attack against another type of creature (like favored enemy or smite evil) not trigger because the weapon made the attack?

At least, that is the argument that he is making. I kinda see his point even if I think he is being pedantic.

[zimmerwald1915]

At one point during Part 4, the PCs come upon the following:

Quote:

A second treasure sits upon the northern shelf—but this treasure should be customized to be a specific magical treasure of use to a PC who has the Riftwarden Orphan campaign trait. This item is a special heirloom—an object once owned by that PC's father or mother. It should be a relatively minor item worth no more than 9,000 gp; its true value lies in helping that PC close a chapter of her life and accomplish a mythic trial. If the PC in question is a wizard, the heirloom should be his parent's spellbook, filled with spells of your choice.

I was thinking of making this the spellbook of an abjurer 7/riftwarden 3, populating it with spells up to level 5 with a focus on abjuration, divination, enchantment, and a few spells that can also be found in Vang's spellbooks (cause he had to learn them from somewhere), and adding a preparation ritual that mimics the Riftwarden's planar channel ability, say, once per day. But I'm curious as to how many spells, of which levels, other GMs have used to populate this spellbook? About how valuable would you consider such a preparation ritual? Would you consider a different preparation ritual more appropriate?

[Mal_Luck]

Since she is Trickster 3, shouldn't Arueshalae have more Path Abilities?

Looking at her stat block I see only Path Dabbling (Aura of Perseverance) and Deadly Dodge. What is her last Path ability?

[Brainiac]

Mal_Luck wrote:

Since she is Trickster 3, shouldn't Arueshalae have more Path Abilities?

Looking at her stat block I see only Path Dabbling (Aura of Perseverance) and Deadly Dodge. What is her last Path ability?

Her third ability is Commune with Power.

[James Jacobs]

Brainiac wrote:

Mal_Luck wrote:

Since she is Trickster 3, shouldn't Arueshalae have more Path Abilities?

Looking at her stat block I see only Path Dabbling (Aura of Perseverance) and Deadly Dodge. What is her last Path ability?

Her third ability is Commune with Power.

Correct. This is how she contacts (or is contacted by) Desna, mostly via dreams.

[Mal_Luck]

Thank you! I overlooked Commune With Power, I'm not as familiar with the Universe Path Abilities. >.>

Another Arueshalae question: Should she complete mythic trials / gain tiers if she's with the party when they complete trials? Will the future books give level up suggestions for her like Midnight Isles gives the rest of the allied NPCs?

[James Jacobs]

Mal_Luck wrote:

Thank you! I overlooked Commune With Power, I'm not as familiar with the Universe Path Abilities. >.>

Another Arueshalae question: Should she complete mythic trials / gain tiers if she's with the party when they complete trials? Will the future books give level up suggestions for her like Midnight Isles gives the rest of the allied NPCs?

The inside front covers will talk about how the NPCs should gain levels and tiers, but you should feel free to adjust those to fit your game's needs.

[Danit]

im looking for what actually happens to the Child of the crusades parents did i miss it anywhere or is it up to me.

[Aleron]

Anyone started with the downtime stuff (and if so how did you run it)? I have a couple weeks before we start this book but there is so much to know. Any hints/tips on it? Feeling a bit overwhelmed by it.

[Aldarionn]

Aleron wrote:

Anyone started with the downtime stuff (and if so how did you run it)? I have a couple weeks before we start this book but there is so much to know. Any hints/tips on it? Feeling a bit overwhelmed by it.

My group should be starting on this portion sometime in the next couple of weeks as well. Fortunately we are also running Kingmaker right now, and the rules are similar in WotR. If I run into any snags I will let you know.

[j b 200]

I don't think that I am going to do the downtime section. Most of my players are unlikely to have to time to really learn the rules and I think they may quickly get bored with it. Any suggestions on expanding part 2 or adding additional action to beef up the first part of the adventure?

[Seannoss]

I was curious about downtime ideas as well. I was thinking of making a list of buildings that would be there but are partially destroyed so they are easier to rebuild, as it seems to imply people are rebuilding and not building anew.
And then possibly have my PCs set up a building queue like strategy games have.

[Lochar]

So, in an effort to pull myself out of the Herald thread, I come here.

My players just finished Book 2 a couple of days ago and we'll be starting Book 3 this Saturday.

Any help on running Downtime?

[j b 200]

After looking at the Adventure as a whole, I don't think you really need to do anything to replace the Downtime. It's worth so little XP, throwing in one extra encounter, or beefing up one or two would make up for it.

[Lochar]

I'm not trying to replace the Downtime system. I'm looking for help on actually running it. It's basically a massive mini-game that I'm still trying to get a handle on the rules for.

[Seannoss]

I have made a list of 30-40 buildings or enhancements to the city of Drezen using the building ideas from Ultimate Campaign. I'm encouraging my PCs to set them up in a building queue like in a RTS and I'll have the NPCs take it from there. I gave the buildings special abilities or stats like adding to craft (or Econ, increasing base limit and/or base value. some I made into resource generators. I tried to balance it out so the completed set of buildings raises ruined Drezen into a small city.
It seems to have worked as one of my PCs is talking about a new building that he wants built, one that I didn't include. And another is looking into the organizations.

[Lochar]

you wouldn't happen to want to share that list, would you? ;)

[Seannoss]

Sure, or once I get home. Its not perfect or anything but its a starting point.

[Seannoss]

Okay: buildings and benefits. I'm going to post this here in case it sparks anyone else's creative spark as I wasn't sure what to do about this part either.
My basic thoughts were that I wanted to raise Drezen from a ruined large town up to a small city. I looked at the community differences as inspiration and wanted to throw in some low benefit freebies to my PCs.
Will spoiler this (hopefully) to avoid excess clutter.

Buildings:

Magical Streetlamps: +1 Law, Base Value +110gp
Bridge (2) : generates 1 Goods or Labor per day, chosen at creation
Mill: +1 Goods per day
Shrine (2) : potion (1)
Trade Shop: +1 Economy(craft skills), Base Value +110gp
Shop (2) : Base Value +110gp
Library: +1 Lore, Scroll (1)
Paved Roads: Base Value +110gp, Base Limit +1000gp
Inn: +1 Labor per day, Base Value +110gp
Smithy: +1 Economy, Base Limit +1000gp
Temple: Potion (1), +1 Minor Magic, Scroll (1)
Luxury Store: Base Value +110gp, Base Limit +1000gp, +1 Minor Magic
Stable: +1 Goods per day, Base Limit +1000gp
Dance Hall: +1 Labor per day, Base Limit +1000gp
Exotic Artisan: Base Limit +2000gp, Base Value +110gp, +1 Economy,
+1 Medium Magic
Magic Shop: Base Value +110gp, Base Limit +1000gp, +1 Medium Magic,
+1 Major Magic
Alchemist: Potion (1), Base Limit +1000gp, Base Value +220gp
Herbalist: Potion (2), Base Value +220gp,Base Limit +1000gp, +1 Economy
Marketplace: Base Value +330gp, Base Limit +1000gp, +1 Medium Magic
Barracks: +2 Law, Base Limit +1000gp, +1 Economy
Cathedral: +1 Lore, Potion (2), Limit +2000gp, Scroll (1),
+1 City Caster Level
Caser's Tower: +2 Economy, +1 Lore, +1 Major Magic, Scroll (1),
+1 City Caster Level, Base Value +110gp
Academy: +2 Lore, +1 Economy, Scroll (2), +1 City Caster Level,
Base Limit +1000gp
Castle: Law +1, Base Limit +1000gp, +1 Medium Magic, +1 Major Magic
Bank: Base Value +220gp, Base Limit +20000gp

My idea behind potions and scrolls is free benefits in spell levels equal to that rating. I also added extra resource generators. Those probably aren't needed as there is an excess of Influence and Magic resource types. The other stats are based around city building in UC and GMG.
I'm also experimenting with lowering resource production on days that structures are being built. Using this my PCs have generated 26 Resource Points in 31 days, which seems like a believable pace.
I also had some of these buildings listed as destroyed (like the bridges, shops, inn and castle) which means they would take half as many resources to complete.

[Lochar]

Thanks!

[Lochar]

Hey James, is Jesker's redemption another 'whoops' with regards to Atonement? Beyond Atonement having a one hour casting time and the PCs only having 1 minute to cast it, it's also target: living creature touched.

...

Hmm, that also rules out Atoning Alderpash, as he's a lich...

[Tangent101]

I think Alderpash's redemption isn't so much the "cast Atonement to make me Good" as "get me out of here and I will start working on becoming a decent person because to be honest, it sucks being here."

And to be honest, the easiest method of getting Alderpash out of there is to use a Miracle to restore him to life. At which point Atonement would be viable (but again, wouldn't be what's needed - he needs far more than just a goddess patting him on the head).

[Alex McGuire]

So, ummm.... there's a wand in this one that is just beyond broken when combined with the Riftwarden trait. Wands that effectively never run out of charges have been pretty nice thus far, but the wand of stoneskin is a bit over the top.

[j b 200]

Alex McGuire wrote:

So, ummm.... there's a wand in this one that is just beyond broken when combined with the Riftwarden trait. Wands that effectively never run out of charges have been pretty nice thus far, but the wand of stoneskin is a bit over the top.

Chalk it up to the rule of unintended conesquences.

On another note, how have folks dealt with the exploration component? Did you have any trouble with your players getting bored with randomly wondering the area?

[Seannoss]

@JB 200 I'm working on that right now, my PCs have explored about 10 hexes so far so the experiment is still in its early stages.
I'm using the ideas from Ultimate Campaign that there should be something in each hex to distinguish it. I've been rolling on the scenic spots and things along a roadside charts in the GMG for ideas. I've expanded on some of those when I know there's going to be a random encounter: like I had a crystalline forest in a hex when they encountered a carnivorous crystal.
In another hex I had them discover an ancient tree covered with old carvings from poor Sarkoris so I could give them some extra history about the former country and give them hints about the barbarians to the south.
Its working so far, but who knows in another few weeks.

[James Jacobs]

Lochar wrote:

Hey James, is Jesker's redemption another 'whoops' with regards to Atonement? Beyond Atonement having a one hour casting time and the PCs only having 1 minute to cast it, it's also target: living creature touched.

...

Hmm, that also rules out Atoning Alderpash, as he's a lich...

Yeah. Atonement tricked me by not working the way I thought it should.

[Seannoss]

As a note; Marhevok is missing two rage powers but filling out the fiend totem powers fits perfectly. And was probably intended given his spiny description.

[Seannoss]

Given worm's defenses would Xanthir Vang be immune to a paladin's smite as that targets an individual?

[Lochar]

I think I'm going with that, regardless. "I smite him!" "Alright, which particular worm are you smiting?"

Then again, the paladin of my party is the one with the swarmbane clasp. Damn.

[Seannoss]

Huh....hadn't heard of that item, an interesting one for this campaign. Although, nowhere in it's description does it mention spells or abilities effecting swarms better.

[Lochar]

True, true.

[Lochar]

Well, that was interesting.

My first case as a GM of seeing scry and die tactics in action.

Scenario: PCs are coming back from killing the woundwyrm and find that retrievers have taken Irabeth.

Group runs around for a few minutes, collecting materials and casts Scrying on Irabeth, assuming that if she's still alive she'd fail the save with all the bonuses they have against her.

They scry her at the vrock lava pits.

They buff the hell up, teleport in, grab Irabeth and Teleport out.

I ran a scene afterwards because Irabeth had almost hit her 24 hours and they had to do some hoop jumping to Atone her soul and whatnot, but still.

While none of the players has the Stolen Fury campaign trait, it was still sad to see the PCs get in and out in seconds. So now there's going to be a Vrock army storming Drezen in a few days.

[magnuskn]

Yeah, well. I think the whole "kidnap an ally" concept is ill-advised in the first place, at least until the party is about to storm Xantis Vangs HQ, anyway. It has the potential of diverting the party from going for Arueshalae and that could potentially derail a lot.

BTW, why did they have to atone Irabeth?

[Seannoss]

There's a big thread going on (again I assume) about why scry and fry wouldn't work if you're interested in slowing that down in the future.

[Lochar]

magnus: Because I ruled by the time they got the scrying done and Teleport scrolls found, Irabeth had been under the ritual for 20+ hours, so she'd been exposed to a lot of Abyssal energy that was invading her soul.

And mainly because the party cleric didn't think to try Dispel Evil, which would have worked as well.

Sean: I doubt it's going to be a big thing with this party. This one worked so well because they had personal effects of Irabeth and knew her well, dropping her saves to nothing.

[magnuskn]

Lochar wrote:

magnus: Because I ruled by the time they got the scrying done and Teleport scrolls found, Irabeth had been under the ritual for 20+ hours, so she'd been exposed to a lot of Abyssal energy that was invading her soul.

And mainly because the party cleric didn't think to try Dispel Evil, which would have worked as well.

Well, I'm not sure if "abyssal energies" is enough cause to necessitate an atonement spell, but that's your campaign and however you rule it is fine.