Older Scenarios and Pathfinder Unchained


GM Discussion

3/5

I'm not sure if this has been covered or not in the recent Pathfinder unchained discussion.

If there is a printed scenario that has either a Rogue, Barbarian, Summoner, or Monk do we rebuild them as the Unchained versions or do we play them as printed?

Grand Lodge 4/5 ** Venture-Agent, Colorado—Denver

Play as printed, of course. Just like how you can't change other things. Run as Written.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 *** Venture-Captain, Michigan—Mt. Pleasant

Yeah, just because it's illegal for PCs, doesn't mean it's illegal for NPCs. ;) Quite a few NPCs have item creation feats and other illegal (for PCs) options. This is no different.

Sovereign Court 1/5

If you were forced to rebuild NPCs, a significant amount of GMs would actively avoid running those games.

"Ain't nobody got time for that!"

Grand Lodge 4/5

10 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber

Run the characters as written. You don't want GMs rewriting encounters, lest ye enter SHAX'S HOUSE OF PAIN.

Silver Crusade 5/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
Run the characters as written. You don't want GMs rewriting encounters, lest ye enter SHAX'S HOUSE OF PAIN.

Ironically, if you actually ever do play Shax's House of Pain, you would probably do better if the GM rewrote the encounters.

Scarab Sages 4/5

Eric Clingenpeel wrote:
Yeah, just because it's illegal for PCs, doesn't mean it's illegal for NPCs. ;) Quite a few NPCs have item creation feats and other illegal (for PCs) options. This is no different.

None of those things are actually illegal for PCs. PC Summoners from the APG still exist, and I think any Summoner that appears as an NPC in an earlier scenario can just be considered grandfathered in with the rest of them.

You wouldn't change them regardless of whether they were illegal for PCs or not, but in this case they just happen to not be illegal, so there definitely shouldn't be a need to change/update anything.

5/5

Heck, we may still see more APG Summoners get printed, just as we might see an Undead Lord or some such.

Liberty's Edge 5/5

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Starfinder Superscriber

SHAX'S HOUSE OF APG SUMMONERS

Grand Lodge 4/5

Quadstriker wrote:

If you were forced to rebuild NPCs, a significant amount of GMs would actively avoid running those games.

"Ain't nobody got time for that!"

And most of Season 0, into the bargain...

So, now we have 3.5 Barbarians, Rogues, and Monks
Pathfinder Barbarians, Rogues and Monks
And Unchained Barbarians, Rogues and Monks.

And, really, does your Cleric have Channel Energy? Not if he is an NPC in Season 0...

The Exchange 5/5

kinevon wrote:
Quadstriker wrote:

If you were forced to rebuild NPCs, a significant amount of GMs would actively avoid running those games.

"Ain't nobody got time for that!"

And most of Season 0, into the bargain...

So, now we have 3.5 Barbarians, Rogues, and Monks
Pathfinder Barbarians, Rogues and Monks
And Unchained Barbarians, Rogues and Monks.

And, really, does your Cleric have Channel Energy? Not if he is an NPC in Season 0...

no Channel Energy - but he does get Heavy Armor! (not sure if it's a good swap though)

Grand Lodge

nosig wrote:
kinevon wrote:
Quadstriker wrote:

If you were forced to rebuild NPCs, a significant amount of GMs would actively avoid running those games.

"Ain't nobody got time for that!"

And most of Season 0, into the bargain...

So, now we have 3.5 Barbarians, Rogues, and Monks
Pathfinder Barbarians, Rogues and Monks
And Unchained Barbarians, Rogues and Monks.

And, really, does your Cleric have Channel Energy? Not if he is an NPC in Season 0...

no Channel Energy - but he does get Heavy Armor! (not sure if it's a good swap though)

Nix both dexterity and Charisma as things for a cleric to need? Helps with the MAD issue at least.

The Exchange 5/5

Ms. Pleiades wrote:
nosig wrote:
kinevon wrote:
Quadstriker wrote:

If you were forced to rebuild NPCs, a significant amount of GMs would actively avoid running those games.

"Ain't nobody got time for that!"

And most of Season 0, into the bargain...

So, now we have 3.5 Barbarians, Rogues, and Monks
Pathfinder Barbarians, Rogues and Monks
And Unchained Barbarians, Rogues and Monks.

And, really, does your Cleric have Channel Energy? Not if he is an NPC in Season 0...

no Channel Energy - but he does get Heavy Armor! (not sure if it's a good swap though)
Nix both dexterity and Charisma as things for a cleric to need? Helps with the MAD issue at least.

in 3.5 Clerics didn't need more than a 12 in DX, and I saw many with a CH 8 (or even 6)

Grand Lodge

To be fair, I still see CHA 8 and 7 on clerics, rather than 7 INT because of all the duties people expect clerics to pull skills-wise.

The Exchange 5/5

Ms. Pleiades wrote:
To be fair, I still see CHA 8 and 7 on clerics, rather than 7 INT because of all the duties people expect clerics to pull skills-wise.

lol!

I have to laugh on this - it's very true!
but I do have 2 Clerics with 7s for INT...

Grand Lodge 4/5

nosig wrote:
Ms. Pleiades wrote:
To be fair, I still see CHA 8 and 7 on clerics, rather than 7 INT because of all the duties people expect clerics to pull skills-wise.

lol!

I have to laugh on this - it's very true!
but I do have 2 Clerics with 7s for INT...

Heh. I have seen at least one Cleric with a Cha 5. And he was a primary cleric. (Dwarf, of course)

I have a PC who grabbed one or two levels of Cleric for the side benefits (spell list, Desna, Travel & Liberation domains), he is primarily a fighter, whose Cha, until he hit 12th level, was a 7, as well.

Grand Lodge

Heaviest dump stating I've seen was on a monk though. 7 INT, 7 CHA, ugliest, stupidest half-orc, and by far one of the most memorable PFS characters I've seen to date because of how well the player Role-played him.

Sovereign Court 1/5

Ms. Pleiades wrote:
Heaviest dump stating I've seen was on a monk though. 7 INT, 7 CHA, ugliest, stupidest half-orc, and by far one of the most memorable PFS characters I've seen to date because of how well the player Role-played him.

Once three friends showed up with identical monks with 7 str, 7 con, and 7 int to play together at the same table.

They were politely informed that nobody wanted to play with their joke characters and the idea was abandoned.

The Exchange 5/5

Ms. Pleiades wrote:
Heaviest dump stating I've seen was on a monk though. 7 INT, 7 CHA, ugliest, stupidest half-orc, and by far one of the most memorable PFS characters I've seen to date because of how well the player Role-played him.

I regularly play with a friend of mine who has a PC with a 7 INT, CHA and WIS. She plays him pretty well (role play and roll play).

4/5

Ms. Pleiades wrote:
Heaviest dump stating I've seen was on a monk though. 7 INT, 7 CHA, ugliest, stupidest half-orc, and by far one of the most memorable PFS characters I've seen to date because of how well the player Role-played him.

I ran into a black blade magus with a tanked wisdom and charisma who role played it as the blade controlling his character.

I also ran into a 7 INT/7 WIS barbarian who played it as "Whoever is in the briefing room with me is trustworthy, and I will follow their instructions. And I will continue to follow the last instruction I was given until one of them thinks to give me a new instruction..." He was fun for me as the GM.

4/5

I have a STR 8 barbarian that seems to confuse folks. He has a 14 Dex, 16 con, 13 int, 12 wis and 17 CHA. (aasimar urban barbarian which is how he is actually fairly effective - only level 2 for now - just hit level 3 which may be when he adds a second class - skald or swashbuckler most likely). Definitely confuses people expecting the barbarian to not be the face type but to be a bundle of muscles...

Community / Forums / Organized Play / GM Discussion / Older Scenarios and Pathfinder Unchained All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in GM Discussion