RPG Superstar 2012 Top 8
|
If the PCs use violence to capture Asvika, but then heal and release her later, should I still check box D when reporting? Is it meant to indicate whether she survives, whether she runs away with some of the treasure, or whether the PCs successfully avoided a fight by using social skills?
|
|
I can't speak for the author, but the PFS guide to organized play has this to say.
Sometimes during the course of a scenario, your players might surprise you with a creative solution to an encounter (or the entire scenario) that you didn’t see coming and that isn’t expressly covered in the scenario. If, for example, your players manage to roleplay their way through a combat and successfully accomplish the goal of that encounter without killing the antagonist, give the PCs the same reward they would have gained had they defeated their opponent in combat.
The specific encounter specifies that the pathfinders are supposed to stop her from walking away with the temple's precious artefacts, so as long as they took it off her before releasing her / letting her leave, I don't see why they wouldn't get full awards. As for checking box D (for dealing with Asvika nonviolently), if they pummeled her into submission... well, I'd say don't check the box. Most encounter success conditions don't rely on specifically killing the creature involved unless specifically stated. Usually it's "defeated".
Hope that helps for this, and other situations where your players are too creative for their own good. ;-)
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
Hi, I'm Ben Bruck. I wrote this scenario. Thanks for the feedback guys!
As Steven points out, Trophy Hunter gives you Firearm proficiency. It looks like I accidentally dropped it from the baron's feat list. Mea Culpa :)
As to the OP's question, I didn't write the reporting instructions so I can't give you an authoritative answer. That said, my instinct would be to stick to the letter of the law in this case and not check box D. Even though your party let Asvika go, they still used violence to deal with her.
|
|
Just GM'd this and fun was had! Baron got his kill and the 'tiger' got interrogated by the PC's. :)
I forgot to add the helpful monkeys in the last encounter but the PC's didn't have problems with the Asuras, thanks to some cold iron arrows. Player's liked that they were able to use different kinds of skills to avoid combat.
Were the monkeys supposed to aid the PC's in another way on tier 1-2? The Tripurasuras don't have weapons to disarm.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The Tripurasuras have bows at tier 1-2 don't they? Either that or I GMed it wrong. And it's too bad you forgot about the helpful monkeys. The first round of combat where the PCs hear the roar of angry monkeys approaching terrified my players. It was pretty funny watching them brace for the monkey onslaught only to have the little critters come and help the next turn.
One of the players ended up leaving some of his gold as an offering in the temple to show his appreciation. Possibly one the best moments in the scenario.
|
The tripurasuras have longbows.
I'm devising a long list of things I spotted while reviewing the scenario, but one thing was particularly alarming. In encounter B1, against the leucrotta, the Scaled encounter for subtier 4-5 is actually worse! The Jalmeri Leucrotta has only 2 HD more than a standard leucrotta, whereas the scaled leucrotta has the advanced template. The only thing where the variant is better than a standard one with the simple advanced template is the number of hitpoints. Otherwise the advanced leucrotta is deadlier.
AC 19, touch 10, flat-footed 18 (+1 Dex, +9 natural, –1 size)
hp 84 (8d10+40)
Fort +10, Ref +7, Will +4
Melee bite +12 (2d6+7/19–20), 2 hooves +7 (1d6+2)
Special Attacks lure (DC 17)
Str 21, Dex 12, Con 18, Int 11, Wis 14, Cha 17
Base Atk +8; CMB +14; CMD 25 (29 vs. trip)
AC 22, touch 12, flat-footed 19 (+3 Dex, +10 natural, –1 size)
hp 69 (6d10+36)
Fort +11, Ref +8, Will +6
Melee bite +12 (2d6+10/19–20), 2 hooves +7 (1d6+3)
Special Attacks lure (DC 18)
Str 25, Dex 16, Con 22, Int 15, Wis 18, Cha 21
Base Atk +6; CMB +14; CMD 27 (31 vs. trip)
Was the subtier 4-5 Jalmeri leucrotta meant to be advanced as well? (I also noticed it doesn't have it's 8th HD stat increase put anywhere)
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I worked hours on making all the stat blocks into single pdf files, you can find them here. If you find errors in them, please let me know.
As for some things I've noticed while reviewing and preparing this scenario. Some of these are legitimate questions, and some are neeldess nitpicks (editorial issues). In page order:
Page 5: Ambrus Valsin states the wrong year. He says 2690 AR. while he means 4690 AR.
Page 6: This has been addressed already. The Trophy Hunter archetype does grant the Exotic Weapon Proficiency (firearms). And as a horrible nitpicker, I calculated the baron's encumbrance and noticed he goes into medium load with his current gear. This, however, doesn't really affect him as he can always ditch the survival kit to the porters or so, and it is easily handwaved.
Page 8: Unsure if this is intentional, but Matsanda should say "what if it’s venomous?" instead of poisonous. Again, a very very minor thing. Really.
Page 11: The viper familiar is stated to be from Bestiary 2, while it is from Bestiary 1. The page number is correct.
Page 13: As I posted above, the subtier 4-5 scaled encounter features a creature far worse. The variant Jalmeri leucrotta has only 2 HD more than the ordinary leucrotta whereas the scaled "down" version has the simple advanced template, which is better.
Page 18: Tripurasuras have longbows, but their attack bonus is +8. After looking at it I can't figure out where that additional +1 is coming from. Maybe they were supposed to be masterwork (I didn't feel like reversing treasure calculations to check...)
Despite my extensive review I'm liking this scenario now. I'm a bit concerned, however, how easy it is to forget the darkness' effects in encounter B1 (against the leucrotta, that is).
|
|
Despite my extensive review I'm liking this scenario now. I'm a bit concerned, however, how easy it is to forget the darkness' effects in encounter B1 (against the leucrotta, that is).
It also states that there's dim light from the moon in the clearing after it states that the night is completely black. I found this a bit confusing.
|
Page 8: Unsure if this is intentional, but Matsanda should say "what if it’s venomous?" instead of poisonous. Again, a very very minor thing. Really.
A peculiarity of pathfinder is that the clothes you wear way nothing (mostly to avoid PCs ditching clothes for encumberance iirc)
I am not aware of a technical difference between poisonous and venomous and I am pretty sure Matsanda doesn't either. If it bothers you have the Baron explain the difference afterwards
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
The tripurasuras have longbows.
I'm devising a long list of things I spotted while reviewing the scenario, but one thing was particularly alarming. In encounter B1, against the leucrotta, the Scaled encounter for subtier 4-5 is actually worse! The Jalmeri Leucrotta has only 2 HD more than a standard leucrotta, whereas the scaled leucrotta has the advanced template. The only thing where the variant is better than a standard one with the simple advanced template is the number of hitpoints. Otherwise the advanced leucrotta is deadlier.
** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted **
Was the subtier 4-5 Jalmeri leucrotta meant to be advanced as well? (I also noticed it doesn't have it's 8th HD stat increase put anywhere)
:/ Yeah, that was something I caught after making my turnover, and it was too late to change it. The leucrotta encounter went through a couple of iterations while I was building it, which is where that mistake came in.
Ultimately, this just means that the 6-player encounter is a little weaker than it should be, but I still think it's a fairly nasty encounter. The real threat is that the Baron bites it, and the Jalmeri leucrotta is plenty-beefy to chew up the nobleman.
|
A peculiarity of pathfinder is that the clothes you wear way nothing (mostly to avoid PCs ditching clothes for encumberance iirc)
This is incorrect. That was true in 3.5, but it's not true in Pathfinder. In fact, you do need to account for the encumberance of your clothes. (This really sucks for low-STR characters, as their outfit can be a substantial chunk of the gear they can cover.)
Reference: This post from Jason Buhlman. Also, simply the fact that nowhere in the Core Rulebook does it say that any set of clothes doesn't count for encumbrance. As far as I know, it has never been revisited since that 2009 post. Or, they revisited it, and decided to say nothing further about it.
|
|
Now that I've run this, I must say it felt like a very dragging scenario. It took us five-and-a-half hours to finish, and we were exhausted. Players liked the first part, but disliked the second part. Overall, this seemes like a two-part scenario pushed into the covers of one; too much for one sitting.
I did notice that the Adhukait asura was a real pain in the buttocks for the team. With DR 5/good *AND* regeneration 5 (good, good spells), it would be near impossible to keep the asura down. Furthermore, the monkeys did a disservice by disarming the asura of its kukris... without the kukris the attack routine is +14/+14/+14/+14 1d4+5, which on tier 4-5 is brutal. With the kukris the attack bonuses are +15/+10/+9/+9 while the damage stays the same.
It's just confusing, I thought the monkeys were there to help.
By the way I forgot to mention the Baron Bomande Rudyahm was missing his favored enemy. I suspect it to be animal.
Because of the last encounter I feel this scenario screams to include a paladin in the team. At least there should be a cache of oils of bless weapon somewhere. What happens if a team completely lacks align weapon or the sorts?
3/5. Hunting was 4/5, temple was 2/5.
|
|
Now that I've run this, I must say it felt like a very dragging scenario. It took us five-and-a-half hours to finish, and we were exhausted. Players liked the first part, but disliked the second part. Overall, this seemes like a two-part scenario pushed into the covers of one; too much for one sitting.
I did notice that the Adhukait asura was a real pain in the buttocks for the team. With DR 5/good *AND* regeneration 5 (good, good spells), it would be near impossible to keep the asura down. Furthermore, the monkeys did a disservice by disarming the asura of its kukris... without the kukris the attack routine is +14/+14/+14/+14 1d4+5, which on tier 4-5 is brutal. With the kukris the attack bonuses are +15/+10/+9/+9 while the damage stays the same.
It's just confusing, I thought the monkeys were there to help.
That probably would have made things even worse for the party I ran for yesterday. I forgot to prep the alternate attack routine (since the Thursday night group attacked the monkeys I didn't even have to think about it) and just went with four +9 1d4+2 attacks instead. Really it was the crit range that was punishing the party at that point, as I was rolling serious 18 to 20s.
One very good thing was the slayer picking up an oil of bless weapon before leaving Absalom. So they managed to have a way to stop the regeneration through good consumable purchases.
|
|
Full attack listed in Bestiary 3: 2 mwk kukuris +15/+10 (1d4+5/18-20), 2 claws +9 (1d4+2)
Am I missing something or does the big bad only have 1 kukuri based on the attack stats listed?
If he had two kukuris and TWF the attack would be +13/13/8(iterative) from weapons then +7/7 from claws, iTWF would add another +8 kukuri attack. A monster using a mix of weapons and natural attacks needs the TWF feats to avoid huge penalties right?
This is confusing because the Bestiary description describes "their twin curved blades" and there are two MWK Kukuris listed as treasure. The description of Dance of Disaster references "its four attacks" in reference to the single kukuri attack chain listed..
So yeah, as far as I can tell it is attacking with a single kukuri and 2 secondary claws, presumably with a second kukuri in its off hand for flavor? It's weird..
|
|
Despite looking like two creatures, it is only one, and thus has to use iteratives with it's kukris. So it attacks with two attacks thanks to +9 BAB (not TWF) and then uses claws as secondary natural attacks at -5.
See this FAQ on multiple attacks and multiple weapons for more explanation.
|
|
Ahh I see, so he can use the second kukuri for the iterative and it'll look like he's TWFing for flavor purposes.
And should a PC use a Disarm maneuver on him, his full attack does not change as the single kukuri can also be used for the iterative.
I posed this question because a GM thought that he was supposed to get more attacks than were listed.
|
|
Using TWF would give an attack routine of kukri +11/+6, kurki +11, 2 claws +9 if I understand it right. The creature does not have the TWF feat to reduce the penalties but does not suffer the penalty on its secondary attacks, as natural attacks become secondary attacks when used alongside weapons but suffer no other penalties.
Creatures with natural attacks and attacks made with weapons can use both as part of a full attack action (although often a creature must forgo one natural attack for each weapon clutched in that limb, be it a claw, tentacle, or slam). Such creatures attack with their weapons normally but treat all of their natural attacks as secondary attacks during that attack, regardless of the attack's original type.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
Shouldn't the Baron have a favored enemy? Animals maybe if he's a big game hunter? He wants vengeance against a magical beast, but my impression was that he thinks it was an animal.
Good catch--This appears to be a stat-block error. In my notes, the Baron does indeed have favored enemy (animals)
|
Hi, Benchak
I might need your help: I'm running this as a PbP game for 5 first-level characters. They reached the asuras hall and fight started. They tend to keep their angst against the magic users, and they brought a summoner down in surprise (double crit with longbows), than swarmed over magus and bite him to unconscious.
Main thing is there is only one fighter in a party that can damage them and others are more melee or hit focused characters without much help. They managed to get one beast down to -3, but because of fast healing it returned back to life.
We are currently in round 11, and I believe this might be a tickling championship for another month or two (played over PbP combat takes time, even if we agree for players to post daily).
According to bestiary and scenario description, asuras main target is desecration of this temple. Why not let the Pathfinders do this job?
So, my question is:
* are tiny beasts determined to kill each and everyone, or are they willing to negotiate?
* might they want to withdraw and wait until party leaves temple?
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
Hey DM Tiaburn, sorry I didn't catch your post sooner!
First off, a disclaimer: if this is for a PFS game, you're sort of stuck following the monster's tactics as written (in this case, fight to the death). As far as I understand it, deviating from the listed tactics is only permissible if they don't seem to be working as intended (and given that they've taken out two of your players, it seems like their tactics are working). Someone else with more experience GMing PFS may be able to give you better advice about what is/is not allowed.
That said, here's my take on it. The asuras in this area attack the PCs because A. the PCs have invaded their home and B. asuras are malevolent little monsters that like to murder people. Negotiation might be possible, but it would be a hard check, and the PCs would likely need to do more than just apologize to gain the asuras favor. Plus, since your players entrance was accompanied by a rush of monkeys, the asuras likely see them as servants or emissaries of Ragdya, and thus hated enemies.
As to retreat, I can see the more wounded asura retreating temporarily to use its fast healing, but not both asuras, and having just the one flee to heal is likely to prolong the fight, not shorten it.
That said, from a brief scan of your PbP, it looks like the main problem is that your fighter has had an atrocious run of luck! Most of his rounds he's been rolling 6s or 7s. All he needs to turn this fight around is a bit of luck.
The rest of your party might consider using the aid another action to boost up his attack roll. If you combine it with flanking, that's an easy +4 to attack. It also might be worth pointing out that as tiny creatures, the asuras don't have reach. This means that a small or medium creature in an adjacent square can attempt combat maneuvers against the tiny creature without provoking an attack of opportunity--so grabbing and pinning an asura to make it easier to beat up, or even tying it up and taking it prisoner, might be an option worth exploring.
|
Minor thing (and unlikely because the temple is quite narrow), but is Asvika or one of her looter friends supposed to be carrying the sack of loot? Or is the sack inside a backpack (which would make little sense to me)?
Theoretically it's possible for the three to sidestep the PCs and withdraw from combat, taking the loot with them. But all three need both hands to effectivly fight (the looters with their shields, Asvika with her dagger + her casting hand), so...they refuse to give up their loot, start combat, drop the sack and try to get out of there without their loot? Makes even less sense to me.
I mean, there are sacks with backpack straps, but I imagine this is not meant here.
|
|
So my group kicked this adventure's butt. We only had 4 PCs, and they were well optimized for the combats... including the monkey swarm. So the porters didn't like them very much after they started that fight.
The most memorable part of the adventure was the tiger hunt. They didn't see it coming, but the Baron made his save to avoid being lured out of the tree. So it managed to climb up in the tree to go after him. One of the other party members told him to climb down out of the tree, to give them all more room to fight it. So the Baron fires a shot, and climbs down the ladder as requested.
On its turn, the beast follows him down. The other guy hiding in the same tree with the Baron follows by JUMPING down, going for a flying tackle on the creature. One acrobatics and grapple check later, and he's riding the thing's back. The group managed to finish it off pretty quickly after that, but the flying attack was an epic moment, especially from a PC that's really not built for that sort of thing.