#5-05 The elven entanglement gm discussion [spoilers]


GM Discussion

101 to 150 of 255 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
5/5

Indeed - for any other 3.5 grognards, the holy word variants *are* stopped by silence, except for the banishment effect.

3/5

Ryan Costello wrote:
maybe alternating between different effects that call for a mix of Fortitude, Reflex, and Will saves.

Ah, if the scenario ever gets an edit, I'd say yes, call for one save every two hours and then have a list of like 8 things that happen in order. "Push through a dense thicket of thornbushes, turn out to be poisoned, Fort save", "walk through a charred section of forest and find out why, trees above have exploding fire sacs they drop when they sense vibration, hoping to feed on your decaying corpse, Ref save vs 12d6 fireball", "walk through a placid glade, will save vs disorientation, slow, sleep, etc. as you inhale hallucinogenic pollen", "wade through a bog, fort save vs disease or sickened as fetid water soaks into the numerous scratches you have accumulated."

Liberty's Edge 3/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Adam Mogyorodi wrote:
Note: If the centipede actually trampled on the surprise round, everyone needs to reread the trample rules. It's explicitly a full-round action to perform.

Also, why would the centipede get a surprise round? Two of the scenario's reviews mention that the first encounter is broken because the party is half dead after the surprise round. If you are planning on GMing this scenario, the centipede does not get the drop on the PCs. It is the size of a bullet train standing upright, and should be as surprised by the spontaneous appearance of a PC buffet as the PCs are landing in the path of a hundred-legged juggernaut.

3/5

Yeah, I didn't see anything that screamed "surprise!" when I ran it, so I just rolled for initiative and went from there.

5/5 ⦵⦵⦵

Were the elves at the end in the cocoon the same ones as at the beginning? Or do you just add the two together to get the victory conditions

Grand Lodge 3/5

BigNorseWolf wrote:
Were the elves at the end in the cocoon the same ones as at the beginning? Or do you just add the two together to get the victory conditions

You add them together.

Liberty's Edge 3/5

Jacob is correct.

Scarab Sages 2/5

Yeah, but remember, if the party choose to bolt by fear of the centipede, and do not save the first batch of elves, they failed their primary mission. There are 6 in Part A, 4 in Part F, and the Primary Mission needs at least 7 saved. My party chose to only save the main person in A and let the rest of the Uprooters fend for themselves as they flew off.

Grand Lodge 5/5 Venture-Captain, Arizona—Phoenix aka TriOmegaZero

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Played today, centipede killed our cleric of Nethys with a critical bite, and the hezrou finished the remaining three characters with blasphemy. Even misreading the spell as paralyzing those with 8-11 HD, it was a foregone conclusion as the fighter archer, paladin, and holy vindicator were tapped on spells and equipment.

Sovereign Court 1/5

I had a question on Deepsheen. There are two items that are PFS legal and are called Silversheen. One is a Wondrous Item consumable that makes a weapon strike as silver when applied, and the other is a weapon special material that doesn't carry the penalties of Silver. The Cold Iron equivalent of which is granted by this Scenario?

I have to believe its the former as the Silversheen weapon property is 750GP and includes the Masterwork cost. As currently priced Deepsheen would give the Masterwork quality for less than normal.

As a sidebar, it would be really nice if it were the latter, but with a more appropriate price. That would be a very cool item to receive on a chronicle. As it is, at this level, an oil of bless weapon is almost always a better consumable for application to a weapon.

Grand Lodge 5/5 Venture-Captain, Arizona—Phoenix aka TriOmegaZero

Elven Entanglement pg12 wrote:
In both subtiers there are six flasks of deepsheen, a dull, metallic paste that behaves in all ways like silversheen except that it grants the affected weapon the properties of cold iron instead of silver.

It is a wondrous item, not a special material.

Sovereign Court 1/5

Ah, I see it is clear in the scenario. I only played it.

Paizo Employee 5/5 Developer

Whenever we cite a spell or item from the Core Rulebook, we include a reference, so if you see an item or spell that has no reference, it's typically safe to assume that it's from the Core Rulebook.

Grand Lodge 2/5 RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

I think you forgot a "not" in there somewhere, John.

Paizo Employee 5/5 Developer

Jiggy wrote:
I think you forgot a "not" in there somewhere, John.

You know, I think I did.

"Whenever we cite a spell or item not from the Core Rulebook, we..."

Silver Crusade 1/5

In the finial encounter I have a question on how one of the BBG abilities work

:
Aura stench (dc 22)( no Range given for the Stench Aura) does it follow the Nausea (DC 22) (Ex) The noxious vapors and foul fluids that constantly weep and seethe from a hezrou's body are particularly heinous to those the creature grapples.

Each round a creature is grappled by a hezrou, the grappled foe must make a DC 24

Fortitude save to avoid becoming nauseated. Creatures nauseated need to suceed at

save or wait 1 minute after not grappled. Does it have a range or use the Nausea rule?

Grand Lodge 5/5 Venture-Captain, Arizona—Phoenix aka TriOmegaZero

Stench wrote:

(Ex) A creature with the stench special ability secretes an oily chemical that nearly every other creature finds offensive. All living creatures (except those with the stench special ability) within 30 feet must succeed on a Fortitude save (DC 10 + 1/2 stench creature's racial HD + stench creature's Con modifier; the exact DC is given in the creature's descriptive text) or be sickened. The duration of the sickened condition is given in the creature's descriptive text. Creatures that successfully save cannot be affected by the same creature's stench for 24 hours. A delay poison or neutralize poison spell removes the effect from the sickened creature. Creatures with immunity to poison are unaffected, and creatures resistant to poison receive their normal bonus on their saving throws.

Format: stench (DC 15, 10 rounds); Location: Aura.

Silver Crusade 1/5

I have a question on the centipede.

:
How does the centipede gain a smite good attack. It has always been my understanding the Smite attacks that target alignment had to be done by alignments that were apposed. The Centipede is neutral this seems to violate the rule.

Grand Lodge 2/5 RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Where's that rule?

Grand Lodge 5/5 Venture-Captain, Arizona—Phoenix aka TriOmegaZero

I assume the centipede was advanced with the fiendish template, which grants smite good 1/day but does not change the creatures alignment so far as I can tell.

3/5 RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16

It wasn't listed as having the fiendish template, but it seemed to have gained a lot of those abilities. I guess it's just fiendish-lite.

Grand Lodge 5/5 Venture-Captain, Arizona—Phoenix aka TriOmegaZero

If you have all the stats there, do you need to call out the templates applied?

Silver Crusade 1/5

Jiggy, Normally Good can smite evil and law vs.chaos and vis a versa.
Neutral normally can not smite. as they are like neutral. There is a unique smite ability in the neutral book but I cannot remember what it is called.

With the centipede if has the fiendish template would it not be neutral evil? Thus a Paladin could smite it?

Paizo Employee 5/5 Developer

Lou Diamond wrote:

Jiggy, Normally Good can smite evil and law vs.chaos and vis a versa.

Neutral normally can not smite. as they are like neutral. There is a unique smite ability in the neutral book but I cannot remember what it is called.

With the centipede if has the fiendish template would it not be neutral evil? Thus a Paladin could smite it?

Actually, no. Take a closer look at the simple template's entry in the Bestiary. While conceptually it might make sense to make a fiendish creature evil, it's not actually a part of the rebuild rules.

Grand Lodge 5/5 Venture-Captain, Arizona—Phoenix aka TriOmegaZero

Lou Diamond wrote:
Jiggy, Normally Good can smite evil and law vs.chaos and vis a versa.

The Smite class feature/racial ability is not dependent on the alignment of the creature using it.

Grand Lodge 2/5

I am running this scenario tomorrow night and I wanted to run some questions by the more experienced. I normally run 1-5 scenarios up to this point and so going into 7-11, things are getting a little more complicated. I swear I looked the rules up, but I still have questions.

a. WISC had 8 tentacle attacks,can you grab more than 1 person with these attacks?

b. If you hit with the tentacle, it does its dmg, then you make your free action grab. Do you immediately get to constrict if the grab lands?

c. Can 1 player be grabbed/constricted more than once?

d. text says "Eukalia strikes through her sporepods and with
magic" Is she able to cast through the sporepod onto the party?

Thanks!

Grand Lodge 5/5 Venture-Captain, Arizona—Phoenix aka TriOmegaZero

A. Yes, absolutely.

b. Yes, constrict happens whenever the creature has a creature grappled, even on the initial grab. FAQ link.

c. I believe that sporepods are not able to be used to cast spells or SLAs through. The 'and with magic' is separate from the note about her sporepods. Since her spells have more than enough range for the encounter it is a moot point either way.

Silver Crusade 2/5

To grab more than one PC, doesn't the NPC have to take the -20 grapple check to only use one body party? Otherwise, the abstraction is all tentacles grabbing one person.

Grand Lodge 5/5 Venture-Captain, Arizona—Phoenix aka TriOmegaZero

Hmm, tough to say. I think it can only grapple two creatures at the same time, thanks to it's Greater Grapple feat. However, it can't make attacks on anyone else at that point due to having to use both move actions to maintain grapples. Even using the -20 option to hold, it still has to take the action to maintain the grapple or let go.

Which means grappling reduces its offense.

Grand Lodge 5/5

if it wants to grapple and maintain the hold on multiple targets, it needs to take the -20 to all of its grapple checks, yes. However, with its grab ability, it can do the following;

'hit target with tentacle, deal damage, grapple (with free grapple check from grab), squeeze like an empty Coke can (i.e. constrict), release (as a free action), take next attack'

multiple times in the same round, to one or more opponents.

Silver Crusade 5/5 ⦵⦵⦵ RPG Superstar 2013 Top 8 aka GreySector

Don't forget that as soon as it succeeds on a grapple check it moves the creature that it is grappling to an open adjacent sware (and if it can't then the grapple fails).

Silver Crusade 2/5

So many GMs do the -20 thing wrong. So many.

Grand Lodge 5/5 Venture-Captain, Arizona—Phoenix aka TriOmegaZero

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pete Pollard wrote:
if it wants to grapple and maintain the hold on multiple targets, it needs to take the -20 to all of its grapple checks, yes.

The -20 is only to avoid gaining the grappled condition. The grappled condition does not prevent you from grappling another target. Lack of hands to grapple additional targets prevents that, which the monster overcomes by having eight limbs.

1/5

Wait, once the creature has taken an attack, grab-grappled the PC, inflicted damage and inflicted a constrict...can it continue to inflict seven more attacks and constricts on that PC, that round?

I got confused above, TOZ, when you answered D as C and skipped C.

Grand Lodge 5/5 Venture-Captain, Arizona—Phoenix aka TriOmegaZero

I think I got ninja-edited.

I think I read something to that effect, but I don't remember. Constrict can be deadly.

Grand Lodge 2/5 RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Lamontius wrote:
Wait, once the creature has taken an attack, grab-grappled the PC, inflicted damage and inflicted a constrict...can it continue to inflict seven more attacks and constricts on that PC, that round?

Any creature with the grappled condition can continue to take actions so long as they don't do anything that requires both (or rather, "all") their arms/hands/whatever to perform.

Grand Lodge 5/5 Venture-Captain, Arizona—Phoenix aka TriOmegaZero

And only humanoid creatures take the -4 to grapples with only one limb.

Silver Crusade 2/5

TriOmegaZero wrote:
Pete Pollard wrote:
if it wants to grapple and maintain the hold on multiple targets, it needs to take the -20 to all of its grapple checks, yes.
The -20 is only to avoid gaining the grappled condition. The grappled condition does not prevent you from grappling another target. Lack of hands to grapple additional targets prevents that, which the monster overcomes by having eight limbs.

Okay I guess this is way more important for NPCs that want to move while grappling.

Grand Lodge 5/5 Venture-Captain, Arizona—Phoenix aka TriOmegaZero

I think it made more sense in 3.5 when you were considered flatfooted. It's nice to be able to avoid taking the attack and AC penalties in PF by avoiding the grappled condition, especially when the creature has such a huge CMB for grapples.

Grand Lodge 4/5

I know when I was running this, I was pretty confused by the eight-limbed creature being limited to grappling only two opponents (effectively). Luckily only one PC came within reach. Definitely an area I need to bone up on.

5/5 ⦵⦵⦵

Andrei Buters wrote:
I know when I was running this, I was pretty confused by the eight-limbed creature being limited to grappling only two opponents (effectively). Luckily only one PC came within reach. Definitely an area I need to bone up on.

That encounter definitely gets a lot more deadly if the DM decides "huh.. grappling sucks" for this thing, drops the party member and just attacks them again.

1/5

Jiggy wrote:
Lamontius wrote:
Wait, once the creature has taken an attack, grab-grappled the PC, inflicted damage and inflicted a constrict...can it continue to inflict seven more attacks and constricts on that PC, that round?
Any creature with the grappled condition can continue to take actions so long as they don't do anything that requires both (or rather, "all") their arms/hands/whatever to perform.

I understand that, but I'm asking for a more specific answer.

When I played this:

Spoiler:

Our party's monk ran up to the "gnome" (Wolf-in-Sheep's-Clothing) and -surprise- was attacked by it. It made its first attack, succeeded and initiated a Grab which also succeeded with the GM applying Constrict damage on top of the attack. The GM then rolled all the creature's additional attacks against the monk, inflicting damage and constrict damage with each one.

Within seconds, our monk was super super dead. Totally dead as could be. Basically dead like two or three times over.

We all were confused, as well as the GM, who was unsure if they had performed that correctly. (GM did a great job otherwise, really on top of all the other stuff in the scenario, my tophat's off to him).

Eventually, in the interest of time and still not having a real clear example, we agreed that it could only constrict ONCE, but still got all the rest of the attack damage it had inflicted.

So, the monk was NEAR death, but survived when the W-i-S's-C was slain before it could attack again.

So...yes or no on all the constricts, during the W-i-S's-C full-round action? My vote was no, since it requires maintaining the grapple and you can only maintain once per round, right? Right? Bueller?

5/5

Lamontius wrote:
Jiggy wrote:
Lamontius wrote:
Wait, once the creature has taken an attack, grab-grappled the PC, inflicted damage and inflicted a constrict...can it continue to inflict seven more attacks and constricts on that PC, that round?
Any creature with the grappled condition can continue to take actions so long as they don't do anything that requires both (or rather, "all") their arms/hands/whatever to perform.

I understand that, but I'm asking for a more specific answer.

When I played this:

** spoiler omitted **

No, it's vicious. Constrict applies as soon as you apply the grappled per attack. So, the creature would have to hit with each and also succeed on the grapple attempt per tentacle, but would get the normal attack and constrict damage on each.

Most critters don't have near as many grab/constrict attacks, as when they do spike they can do tons of damage.

5/5 ⦵⦵⦵

Constrict (Ex) A creature with this special attack can crush an opponent, dealing bludgeoning damage, when it makes a successful grapple check (in addition to any other effects caused by a successful check, including additional damage). The amount of damage is given in the creature's entry and is typically equal to the amount of damage caused by the creature's melee attack.

Grab (Ex) If a creature with this special attack hits with the indicated attack (usually a claw or bite attack), it deals normal damage and attempts to start a grapple as a free action without provoking an attack of opportunity.

The way I read it was that you could only constrict once, since grappling someone you've already grappled is like tripping someone thats always on the ground. (would have needed a spatula for the paladin otherwise...)

Grand Lodge 5/5 Venture-Captain, Arizona—Phoenix aka TriOmegaZero

Reading James Jacobs here and elsewhere it seems he expects each successful CMB check to inflict constrict damage, which makes this creature seriously deadly. Some more developer clarification would be helpful.

5/5 ⦵⦵⦵

TriOmegaZero wrote:
Reading James Jacobs here and elsewhere it seems he expects each successful CMB check to inflict constrict damage, which makes this creature seriously deadly. Some more developer clarification would be helpful.

That's more of a when then a "how often"

5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Reading James Jacobs here and elsewhere it seems he expects each successful CMB check to inflict constrict damage, which makes this creature seriously deadly. Some more developer clarification would be helpful.

Constrict FAQ

3/5 RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16

Sniggevert wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Reading James Jacobs here and elsewhere it seems he expects each successful CMB check to inflict constrict damage, which makes this creature seriously deadly. Some more developer clarification would be helpful.
Constrict FAQ

I don't think anyone was disputing that you do the constrict damage on the initial grab. The question is whether you can use the Grab special attack to make a grapple check against someone you're already grappling.

Shadow Lodge 5/5

What the ninja said. The FAQ doesn't speak about multiple grapples on the same creature.

The monk Lamontius mentioned should probably have been dead.

5/5

RainyDayNinja wrote:
Sniggevert wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Reading James Jacobs here and elsewhere it seems he expects each successful CMB check to inflict constrict damage, which makes this creature seriously deadly. Some more developer clarification would be helpful.
Constrict FAQ
I don't think anyone was disputing that you do the constrict damage on the initial grab. The question is whether you can use the Grab special attack to make a grapple check against someone you're already grappling.

So, attack, grab, constrict, free action drop, rinse, repeat.

I wouldn't see an issue with just doing it straight as grappling 8 times, as it works out the same for the most part. You're still only grappled once and need 1 check to break out (if you survive), and there's an easy way to get the same damage potential.

101 to 150 of 255 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / GM Discussion / #5-05 The elven entanglement gm discussion [spoilers] All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.