#7-04 The Ironbound Schism (contains spoilers)

[GreyYeti]

I am preparing this scenario and i have a few questions:

The runeslave curse on Pahg-Vahr:
Since you need at least a limited wish to remove the curse and limited wish is not available to cast or buy as spellcasting service or scroll for characters below lvl 12, it seems more or less impossible for a party to remove it. Is that correct or am i missing something here?

The inverted ogre/giants:
They burst forth from the mountain in round two. Do they immediately attack in that round or do they spend the round bursting?
Also they have the ability fear aura but no further description what it does.
The generic universal monster ability references the fear spell, but this seems quite broken in subtier 10-11, where you have to 2 auras and everone who even succeeds on both saves gets frightened. (The fear spell makes you shaken even on a successfull save and applying the shaken condition to an already shaken creature makes it frightened). Also there is no entry about creatures being immune to the aura after a successfull save, so all creatures that are not immune to fear are frightend for as long as they are in both 60ft auras.

The Spellwarding Trap:
What is the caster level of the trap? It might be needed if people try to suppress it with dispel magic. Or is the trap immune to dispel magic/greater dispel magic?

Scarab Sages faction reward
Can GMs also check two boxes in their faction journal, or is that a reward only available as a player? (I guess it is player only, but i want to be sure)

[UndeadMitch]

Re: Spellwarding Trap

"Any spells of the abjuration school cast on the barrier rebound upon the caster—for example, a caster who attempts to remove the barrier with dispel magic automatically fails, and is instead the target of her own dispel magic spell." (Pg. 21, end of first paragraph of part D.)

So, not only will attempts to suppress the spellwarding trap with dispel magic not be successful, they will be subject to the dispel magic themselves.

Inverted dudes:

Not sure about the fear aura, I'll do some more looking. As for the details of their entance, I would say to use your best judgment since it isn't all that clear. If the party hasn't had any real difficulties, have them attack immediately on the second round, otherwise have them take the round smashing their way out.

Scarab Sages faction reward:

Looks like it is only going to apply to the PC's, since the GM can only check off the box for GM'ing the scenario.

Pahg-Vahr:
I think the last bit about freeing Pahg-Vahr is there just in case the PC's have some sort of thing that would let them free her from the curse. It seems like most parties will be unable to free her, but just in case they are able to, this is what happens if they succeed. So no, I don't think you're missing anything there.

[John Compton]

A few answers at a glance:

Runeslave Curse: There is a scroll of limited wish on two different Chronicle sheets that I know of. The description about what happens if you remove the curse is to accommodate those or the very unlikely situation in which a PC has a wish-granting magic item like a luckblade.

Inverted Giants: Typically, two status-granting effects that are effectively the same source do not stack. For example, I do not believe that casting cause fear on a target twice would automatically make it frightened, for it's from the same source. I know the Intimidate skill states this explicitly for the skill. Barring my getting further clarification from the design team, this is how I'd run it.

Scarab Sages award: A GM is only able to check the last reward for a Faction Journal Card. GMing this adventure does not grant the GM the ability to check off two such boxes, so that would make this reward relevant to the players only. That's an oversight on my part.

[grandpoobah]

Running this on Friday...
Questions/Comments on some encounters:

War Council:

It's a little unclear to me how many checks are getting made. My initial read was three phases, each PC makes one check per phase - no PC can succeed with the same skill more than once (but could make an undefined number of attempts).

Questions:
- How many attempts does each PC get (per phase and total)?
- Can PCs assist each other on a skill?
- I assume PCs can Take 10, but cannot Take 20.
- What should the scaling be for 4-player tables (4 PCs have significantly less skills available than 6, and will have a harder time getting the 11 Influence points needed for the Secondary Success Criteria).

My current opinion is:
- Each PC gets one attempt per phase (three attempts total)
- No assisting
- For tables of 4, the PCs only need 8 or 9 Influence (or give them +2 bonus Influence to start with because of reasons).

Dam Encounter A::

Why are the NPC half-orcs there? I would imagine most parties (especially those keen on protecting Half-Orcs) would not want a bunch of low level humanoids participating in on a Tier 10-11 (or even tier 7-8) combat. This is the level of Empowered Fireballs and 4d6+30 Power Attacks - that stuff will wipe out squads half-orcs without even trying. The mechanics presented are nice, but I can foresee many parties telling the half-orcs to just "sit this one out" and wait 500 feet away while they handle it.

Especially given the extremely narrow approach to the dam, the half-orcs do not appear to offer any obvious tactical advantage. this is essentially a bad escort mission from a 90's video game. You are forced to take a very fragile (and likely useless) NPC with you for no obvious reason. Assuming the PCs leave the Half orcs behind, I am inclined to grant the secondary success point and the Scarab Sages point.

I could maybe make an argument for Tier 7-8 half-orcs with bows providing useful ranged support from >200' away, but PCs should know giants have rock throwing, and can assume that half-orcs will die in that situation.
(and all of that assumes the giants have no other ranged abilities - which is a dangerous assumption)

Any other thoughts on that?

Winter Lodge:

Is there an obvious reason to go to the Winter Lodge? Nervous PCs might decide to avoid it entirely and scout for the Dig site on their own. From the briefing in Averak, they know the dig site is "in the area", and don't have any reason to believe better information is in the Winter Lodge.

The most prudent move would be to search for the ruins on their own, using Tier 7-11 skills and magic. If anything, they'd be looking around for signs of the missing scout Hagal (there's no reason to believe that Hagal is INSIDE the winter lodge AND still alive, because TROLLS).

In this case, I suppose I can just rely on the murder-hobo instinct to get loot from whatever is inside the Winter Lodge (which probably precludes any conversation with the trolls).

[grandpoobah]

John Compton wrote:

A few answers at a glance:

Inverted Giants: Typically, two status-granting effects that are effectively the same source do not stack. For example, I do not believe that casting cause fear on a target twice would automatically make it frightened, for it's from the same source. I know the Intimidate skill states this explicitly for the skill. Barring my getting further clarification from the design team, this is how I'd run it.

In this case, I'd argue that if you experienced both auras in succession, the second aura (if you made the save) would extend the duration of the Shaken condition to one round from when it hit you.

In the case of getting hit with both auras at once (such as when the entrance to the cave opens), I'd argue it's like getting hit with two doses of poison: only make a single save, but the DC is +2. (I've seen encounters with 6 mummies before, and ruled it was one hard save instead of 6 chances to roll a 1)

I'm not sure how supported by the rules either options are, but they're way better GM rulings than "Hope you're a Paladin, otherwise everyone is Auto-Frightened for the first round"

I was trying to find a rule (but I think it's from 4e) that monster auras don't stack at all, you only ever make one save - you treat it as one giant (pun kind of intended) aura. But that does not appear to be a Pathfinder rule.

[Ragoz]

Encounter A

I guess Tulgra could have not prepared spells but does she still have the aura or domain class features? Can she still spontaneously cast inflict spells?

Chronicle

Do the players have to purchase the book resource to use the spell?

[UndeadMitch]

Ragoz wrote:

Chronicle

Do the players have to purchase the book resource to use the spell?

No, the spell has been reproduced in it's entirety on the chronicle, so owning the book is not necessary in this case.

[Ragoz]

Thought that was the case. Just checking. Thanks.

[GreyYeti]

John Compton wrote:

Inverted Giants: Typically, two status-granting effects that are effectively the same source do not stack. For example, I do not believe that casting cause fear on a target twice would automatically make it frightened, for it's from the same source. I know the Intimidate skill states this explicitly for the skill. Barring my getting further clarification from the design team, this is how I'd run it.

Normally status-inducing effects don't stack, but fear effects are an exemption:

CRB p563 wrote:

Becoming Even More Fearful: Fear effects are cumulative.
A shaken character who is made shaken again becomes
frightened, and a shaken character who is made frightened
becomes panicked instead. A frightened character who is
made shaken or frightened becomes panicked instead.

So, unless the fear-inducing effect explicitly tells that it does not stack (like the intimidate skill) they might stack (because they put the shaken condition on a shaken target) or they might not (because they come from the same source).

[andreww]

Nils Janson wrote:

So, unless the fear-inducing effect explicitly tells that it does not stack (like the intimidate skill) they might stack (because they put the shaken condition on a shaken target) or they might not (because they come from the same source).

On the plus side, if they do stack anyone who makes both saves is still only looking at 1 round of fear. Anyone who fails either it doesn't really matter for, they are off and feared regardless. It also requires your whole party to be within 60' of both creatures when they emerge.

[UndeadMitch]

I'm finally getting to run this tomorrow, I'm pretty excited! John, Linda, the scenario looks like a ton of fun. I wanted to be clear on the aid that Dhiara provides if the PC's secure her aid in the dam battle. She provides a total of two rerolls for the entire encounter, correct? Not two per PC, right? It seemed pretty obvious that it was two for the entire party, but just wanted to double check.

[grandpoobah]

@Undead Mitch: I ended up giving the party one reroll per round with Dhiara.

Comments from running it last week:

Had a great time, adventure ended up going well. We had one death and failed the secondary criteria (by failing the battle-plan skill checks). Biggest contributing factor was having a table of five averaging 9.4 and playing up with the 4-player adjustment. I think that made the skill DCs in the Battle Plan too hard.

Recommendations:

- For the battle plan, I think it's crucial to be transparent what skills are possible. The DCs are hard enough, and the PCs need to succeed a LOT to make the secondary success. We had five players, so they got +2 successes for free, and +1 success for good diplomacy and RP prior to the meeting. They still (in 15 attempts) only got six successes. On round one, I had them "guess", but since they had zero success doing that (the non-diplomacy characters didn't know what to try), in round 2 and round 3 I told them explicitly what to do (and they got all their successes then - six out of ten possible).

The bridge fight was really hard to not lose allies. The party I had spend three rounds moving into melee range, while one spellcaster tried to tie down the four hill giants that were killing half orcs and/or smashing the bridge. Without range (and the half-orc allies are totally useless unless you get the 11+ successes in part one) this fight goes slowly and badly for the half orc allies.

My table wanted the half orcs to shoot the Rocs (which I allowed), since the party had minimal ranged. I think if they knew the half-orcs were doing THREE damage (to 100+ hit point monsters) they would have left the half orcs at home. Dhiara's re-roll was the only useful effect, and my party used it to re-roll missed attacks and (in one case) a critical confirmation roll.

Almost had a death in this fight, as the boss-hill giant at Tier 10-11 does a lot of damage, and the party melee types were engaging him one at a time (bad tactics on their part).

The troll fight was straight-forward. My party had no desire to talk to them (their logic was "chaotic evil trolls - lets just kill them"). Similarly with the Ettin/Ogres - they were not interested in talking to these monsters.

The fear aura's were rough -because enough people failed them. I had one PC death here (the only PC that MADE the save). Everyone else ran away, regrouped, and came back and won the fight. I ruled that once they failed the save once, they didn't need to worry again (otherwise they'd just keep running in and out until they all made it, and the game was running late).

Overall good - I'd just advise to be more transparent on the battle plan skill checks, and probably encourage Tier 10-11 parties to leave the half-orcs "at home".

[Ragoz]

When I ran it I also told them explicitly what skill checks were needed for the plan. I don't think it would be possible otherwise.

The combats were done pretty easily in high tier 4 person adjustment. The party was fairly high powered. They also were able to avoid the combat with the trolls exactly meeting the DC on a 20.

[UndeadMitch]

So, I ran this last night, everyone had a pretty good time. The party was;

Chelaxian Diva bard 11
Fighter 9 / Investigator 1
Rogue 9
Life Oracle 7
Crowe 7

Putting APL at 8.8, round to nine with five people means high tier adjusted. The party made it to the council (I got to make one of the people jump when I slammed the table like Kalla, which was fun). They did their thing, just barely getting to 11 influence thanks to the adjustment, which helped a lot during the dam battle.

When they got to the dam. Crowe charged forward to go after the giants hocking rocks at people, and got mauled by a roc. Tulgra air walked across the gap to mix it up with the party's back ranks, the bard got off a lucky sound burst and Tulgra was stunned and dropped her greatclub into the water. She then proceeded to mangle the life oracle and bard, passing her curse on to the bard. Crowe got a good round on his roc, and the fighter put the hurt on the other one, the damage from the Averakans pushed the rocs into their morale. Once the giants started hitting the damn the party's life oracle started tossing Hold Persons at the hill giants who had mixed success at their will saves, which helped Crowe and the rogue do work on them. The fighter went to join them, and got caught in the zone of the dam collapse. A bad reflex save followed by a worse reroll from Dhiara meant that he took a long swim. Life Oracle healed some people, and Tulgra decided to put and end to that, putting the Life Oracle to -16, giving the Life oracle two chances to stabilize before hitting neg con. This gave the Bard her chance to finish casting a one round spell, and a biffed will save meant that the party had a new ally for the rest of the scenario as Tulgra got dominated by the Chelish Diva.

The winter lodge was uneventful, they were able to diplomacize with the trolls, who were confused by the presence of Tulgra, but the bard's ability to bluff kept the situation under control.

The fight with Pahg (Vahr sat this one out due to the bard maxing out her bluff roll) was brutal. Tulgra moved up to deal with a pair of the ogres with the rogue following. Vahr and the other ogre moved up. Round two some pants were soiled as the inverted giant and inverted ogre busted through the side of the mountain and moved towards the party. The rogue tried to sneak around the inverted ogre while invisible, and got bit for his efforts from an AoO, and swallowed on its turn. He then proceed to hack his way out of the it as Tulgra mauled it to death. Vahr and the basic ogres folded like origami to the party. The inverted giant got slowed, but still manged to swallow Crowe, and in a first in Pathfinder a manged to successfully cleave with it. Critically biting the life oracle, knocking him out, and cleaving into the fighter. The giant followed up with a vital strike on the fighter. On the following round Tulgra joind the fight and between the fighter, the bard, and Tulgra they managed to take the freak out before it could go again and possibly murder someone.

The party manged to avoid the curse at the end, except for the fighter. Everyone at the table had a good time, the scenario was pretty intense and everyone played an important role. The Chelish Diva hit level twelve with this scenario, so she decided to retire, running off as a totally badass werebear bard. I was pretty glad that the Diva managed to dominate Tulgra, as I'm not sure if the party would have survived without her. I liked how the secondary success was difficult to achieve, but attainable if the party is successful in either interacting during the war council or looking out for the half-orcs. The party should have to earn the extra prestige, and it feels to me that the a lot of the secondaries aren't all that difficult or extraordinary (thought that belongs in a different thread).

Awesome scenario! I'll be sure to post a review soon!

Edit: I also got to describe Crowe using intimidate to impress Kalla as going full-on Shoanti, which the table thought was pretty funny.

[UndeadMitch]

Regarding other people's comments about the war council, some of the knowledge check involved didn't really seem altogether intuitive to me. I let the PC's know what their options were, which I think is clearly intended, but I also let them do the standard swapping it out with a another skill (as long as it makes sense and the PC can explain it) with a higher DC.

[andreww]

The war council section is pretty bad.. There is little indication as to what the PC's should be doing or why and he idea that a high tier group especially would want to bring along a group of low level warriors to get chewed up by the sorts of things high levels groups face is rather farcical.

It is also entirely unclear how the presence of the NPC's interacts with party AOE. It is clear that at least some of them are mixing it up in melee with the giants, what happens when you drop a black tentacles or an empowered fireball into the mix? Who knows, the scenario doesn't address it despite it being extremely common at this level.

[GM Lari]

Played this today, I look forward to reading it (at which point I'll likely review). This was a lot more challenging than I expected it to be. I liked the War Council influence bit, though I would say the warriors ended up feeling more like a liability than a resource.

I also wanted to let Linda know she's now had a hand in both of my (non pregen) permanently dead characters (she previously fried my Inquisitor when GMing Glass River Rescue), but they were both a lot of fun, and this perma-death was voluntary, much like the Diva above.

My Tengu investigator got lycanthrophy from the werebear, then got killed by the Ettin. Ultimately, I ended up shelling out the prestige for a raise dead, but not curing the lycanthropy (and thus being marked as dead), because I figured being a Dervish Dancing Tengu Werebear Gunslinger Pirate was a better way to go out than anything a few more 7-11s would throw at me. We also decided Tengu Werebear is basically the best way to play an Owlbear.

[Linda Zayas-Palmer]

GM Lari wrote:

I also wanted to let Linda know she's now had a hand in both of my (non pregen) permanently dead characters (she previously fried my Inquisitor when GMing Glass River Rescue), but they were both a lot of fun, and this perma-death was voluntary, much like the Diva above.

My Tengu investigator got lycanthrophy from the werebear, then got killed by the Ettin. Ultimately, I ended up shelling out the prestige for a raise dead, but not curing the lycanthropy (and thus being marked as dead), because I figured being a Dervish Dancing Tengu Werebear Gunslinger Pirate was a better way to go out than anything a few more 7-11s would throw at me. We also decided Tengu Werebear is basically the best way to play an Owlbear.

Hi Dan,

Glad to hear that you enjoyed Glass River, despite your character's fate. I had a great time running remote games at the Garage. I'm hoping my schedule will clear up enough again soon that Ray and I can plan another remote game.

About the retirement: awesome! Also, terrifying (to your foes, at the very least). Owlbears are ferocious enough without a combination of graceful moves and bullets.
Did your GM mention that you are a dire werebear, with a dire bear animal form and a particularly strong hybrid? In case you were wondering why the one who afflicted you seemed so nasty :)

[Leathert]

andreww wrote:

The war council section is pretty bad.. There is little indication as to what the PC's should be doing or why and he idea that a high tier group especially would want to bring along a group of low level warriors to get chewed up by the sorts of things high levels groups face is rather farcical.

I had this problem when I ran the scenario "You realize you will be sent to deal with the dam alone" "Pfft, who cares". I managed to get them involved with this angle: "The society will need to continue investigating/excavating this ruin you're looking for, better make a good impression on the locals". They still do the same things during this section, their motivation is just a little different.

[Dr. Ilham Bahat, PhD]

Lisa didn't mention the Dire part. Even better! I think this character may make an appearance as a villain in our campaign mode Runelords at some point, so that's good to know!

And it would be great to have you (virtually) back with us sometime!

[Hmm]

Hey, I'm prepping this one for a PbP. I have a question about the War Council and maintaining story immersion with the influence mechanic.

I'm assuming that the GM should post something like this OOC. Does this work?

At this War Council, you have an opportunity to impress or influence the various councillors and other dignitaries.

• We'll be breaking this council into three phases.
• During any given phase you may either attempt to impress a councillor or improve the battle plan.
• During this council, each PC may each roll on any given skill only ONCE. Multiple PCs can attempt the same skill.
• Each Councillor and the Battle Plan have specific skills that you can try. Check out the spoilers for each below.
• Since this is PbP, and we have a bit more time for the scenario, I'd like you to accompany each die roll with appropriate roleplay.

Do you think this makes the mechanic clear without breaking the story too much?

[Ragoz]

Quote:

During this council, each PC may each roll on any given skill only ONCE. Multiple PCs can attempt the same skill.

Small correction. They can only gain influence (succeed) with that skill once. They can keep attempting it until it works with that skill.

I think it's fine for explaining the encounter.

[Hmm]

That's a great clarification, thanks!

There's also a lot of flavor background on each councillor. Do I assume that this is information that they would have gotten from their briefing, or do I make the PCs roll Knowledge Local for it before arriving?

EDITED to ADD: Never mind, I'll just roleplay the information coming out in the introductions at the Council. Duh.

[BartonOliver]

Played this in the high tier and have glanced through the scenario (after), though I haven't had a chance to run it yet.

Even figuring out what to roll with which councilor is kind of rough. Then the DCs are high enough to make it hard even with the correct character doing it. But I liked this section despite that.

Dam - GM ruled a Gnome Illusionist sorcerer with CL 10 Major Illusion could cover enough of the army to look like surrounding terrain that basically we started combat from across the dam. Super helpful - creative solutions here definitely a plus. Some tough combat but overall pretty cool (having one of the Roc's fall to a PK in round 2 also helpful) - Still can be a time consuming fight.

Winter Lodge - group prepped for combat, but ended up negotiating - looking at it I'd guess either method could easily take about the same amount of time. (We already knew we needed to rush to finish at this point)

Final combat - actually not too bad - though a bit rushed - definitely an easy scenario to run beyond 4 hours.

[Hmm]

Hey Joe --

Can I hit you up for advice from time to time if I have questions as I'm going through this scenario? I'm doing it as a player request for a great group of players, and I want to make sure that I give them a great time.

Hmm

[BartonOliver]

Of course.

[Keith Apperson]

Hmm, I also ran it twice at SkalCon, so you can ask me locally too.

[Unklbuck]

hey Keith...Dwarves Rule!!!!!!

[Keith Apperson]

Unklbuck wrote:

hey Keith...Dwarves Rule!!!!!!

Dwarves are questionable and confusing.

To add to this thread:
I GM'd for Dwarven Artillery, a set of three dwarves handing off ammo and special orders to tailor them to certain scenarios. Their tactics involved firing a gun (say, a rifle) reloading it, dropping it, and moving forward while pulling a closer range weapon. The next would fire, move up. Next turn, pick up the loaded gun and fire it... on and on and on. Oh, they also had the feat that allows for the free attacks when someone else attacks. Combined with the double barreled guns to avoid reloading between rounds, they were anti-aircraft, literally, at 10-11. I knew these three were coming... but then more...

Then sits in the VL from Iowa. Dwarf tower shield fighter. Never hitting that guy...

Then the wizard. The wizard! That would be fine. I end up pelting him with rocks repeatedly. Did it matter though? No, not with 20 CON.

A human barbarian pouncing rounded off the party for a very enjoyable (if too easy) run during our convention.

[Hmm]

Oh that sounds hilarious, Keith. I may hit you up with questions too!

[Ferious Thune]

I'm a bit late coming to this, so sorry about the minor thread necro. I played this scenario last weekend, and I enjoyed it. I do have some questions about the Scarab Sages faction mission, or rather the reward.

I think that being allowed to mark two checkboxes off is a cool alternative to the usual one off minor boon on the chronicle. I'm having difficulty seeing how this particular scenario can offer two opportunities for a Scarab Sages character to mark off a checkbox. It would have to be convincing one of the council to join the Scarab Sages (maybe the priest?) and having four ranks in a skill, right?

You don't actually explore the ruins, so you can't mark off that checkbox.

There is no institution to which you can donate gold within the scenario.

I might have missed a gem in the treasure, or as often happens, the GM might have glossed over the treasure in the interest of time.

While the faction mission involves someone the sages are interested in as a potential candidate, you don't actually convince her to join. You just convince her to talk to them, right? And there's no indication that she's actually attuned to one of the stones.

The adventure does not take place in Ancient Osirion.

At least in the low tier, we didn't encounter any possession effects or haunts.

I was still working off the season 6 faction card, so I think the only thing that qualified there was the ranks in a skill.

Would someone be allowed to mark off one checkbox on both cards? So, for example, mark off possess 4 ranks on both the season 6 and 7 card?

Anyway, if a reward like this shows up again, which I think it should, the scenario should also offer more situations than normal that could satisfy the faction card goals.

[Linda Zayas-Palmer]

For the scarab sages faction journal card:

Goal 1) You explore an area of the ruin that is sufficiently large for the first checkbox.
Goal 2) The NPC that the sages are interested in counts. In fact, after discussing this special case with John, if you recruit her as a part of the scenario (which you must do to get the ability to check off two boxes in the first place), you can check off one of the boxes for goal 2 automatically without having to roll a skill check.
Goal 7) As you pointed out, you can mark off the 4 ranks checkbox.

Alternatively, you can mark off one box on each of your cards for seasons 6 and 7.

[sowhereaminow]

Linda Zayas-Palmer wrote:

For the scarab sages faction journal card:

Goal 1) You explore an area of the ruin that is sufficiently large for the first checkbox.

Glad you clarified this. We had a long discussion on this after the game since it appears you don't actually explore the ruin as much as simply uncover the entrance. GM's call of close enough was the right one. :-)

[roysier]

I ran this last night with 6 players playing up.

Had a Paladin go down in the first combat to near death.

For the war council, I allowed the players to make Sense motive checks on the Councilors to gleam what they were looking for and if they made the rolls I gave them the skills. They made all 3 of the main Sense motive checks but missed the Elf Monk. The Scarab Sage player guessed 2 of hers however. (Diplomacy, Kn. Religion). They were a pretty skill heavy party and ended up with 15 influence points which is huge considering they had 19 rolls. 14 of 18 plus the bonus point for the pre-roll.

Overall I liked this scenario; it was pretty straight forward without a lot of plot twists. It was a welcome relief from the overtly complex plots that have been coming out lately.

[Ferious Thune]

Linda,

Thank you very much for the clarification! I'll tick another box off my card, and I'll make sure to use those guidelines when I get around to running it. I just want to say again that I think it was a very cool way to handle the faction boon for the scenario. It was just confusing when we looked and couldn't figure out what counted for what.

@Brett: Funny, after the table I played at, GM's call went the other direction on exploring the ruins. But now it's cleared up!

[Hmm]

Thanks for the clarifications, Linda!

[Hmm]

Okay gang, I am confused and wish clarification regarding the final Spell Warding Trap.

Optional Encounters wrote:

OPTIONAL ENCOUNTER

The trap in the ruins entrance is optional. If there are fewer than 20 minutes remaining in which to complete the scenario, quickly summarize what the PCs find in the room, including the staff of Edasseril’s denial, and continue to the Conclusion of the scenario. Do not include the spellwarding trap.

Seems clear enough, right? The trap is optional. I saw one game where the GM decided to skip this optional encounter.

But then I get to the Primary Success conditions:

Primary Success Conditions wrote:

PRIMARY SUCCESS CONDITIONS

The PCs complete their primary mission if they secure and explore the Thassilonian ruins in area D. Doing sorequires sufficient investigation to trigger or disable the optional trap. Doing so earns each PC 1 Prestige Point.

So... How can the trap be optional, when dealing with it is the primary success condition of the module?

I am very, very confused.

Hmm

[Jayson MF Kip]

Hmm wrote:

Okay gang, I am confused and wish clarification regarding the final Spell Warding Trap.

Optional Encounters wrote:

OPTIONAL ENCOUNTER

The trap in the ruins entrance is optional. If there are fewer than 20 minutes remaining in which to complete the scenario, quickly summarize what the PCs find in the room, including the staff of Edasseril’s denial, and continue to the Conclusion of the scenario. Do not include the spellwarding trap.

Seems clear enough, right? The trap is optional. I saw one game where the GM decided to skip this optional encounter.

But then I get to the Primary Success conditions:

Primary Success Conditions wrote:

PRIMARY SUCCESS CONDITIONS

The PCs complete their primary mission if they secure and explore the Thassilonian ruins in area D. Doing sorequires sufficient investigation to trigger or disable the optional trap. Doing so earns each PC 1 Prestige Point.

So... How can the trap be optional, when dealing with it is the primary success condition of the module?

I am very, very confused.

Hmm

If the PCs obtain the staff/other treasure (which you normally can't do without disabling or triggering the trap) you can assume they 'secured and explored' the ruins.

[Alan Kaekel]

Because the Curse of Belimarius is casted at the very end, and not necessarily an obvious effect:

Trap description wrote:

If the PCs trigger the trap, there are no signs that the trap triggered. Instead, each PC rolls her saving throw against the curse when she exits the cavern.

This leaves me with the question of can the player opt to keep the curse and not be forced to be reported as dead from not resolving a status effect?

[UndeadMitch]

Alan Kaekel wrote:

Because the Curse of Belimarius is casted at the very end, and not necessarily an obvious effect:

Trap description wrote:

If the PCs trigger the trap, there are no signs that the trap triggered. Instead, each PC rolls her saving throw against the curse when she exits the cavern.

This leaves me with the question of can the player opt to keep the curse and not be forced to be reported as dead from not resolving a status effect?

Since it actually appears on the chronicle sheet, I would say so.

[Linda Zayas-Palmer]

Jayson MF Kip wrote:

If the PCs obtain the staff/other treasure (which you normally can't do without disabling or triggering the trap) you can assume they 'secured and explored' the ruins.

Undead Mitch wrote:

Since it actually appears on the chronicle sheet, I would say so.

Jayson and UndeadMitch are correct.

[Terminalmancer]

Question about the reporting:

My players used silence to sneak up to the giant's lodge; opened up the door; threw down a 130-damage fireball spell on the first three trolls, nuking them; killed the peryton; and then Dominate Person'd Shrakas. (As well as Pahg, interestingly enough. That note was good for more than just Limited Wish.) The wizard intends to keep Shrakas as a harmless thrall serving the PFS's ongoing excavations. Is that more Box A, or Box B? It sounds more Box A (killed Shrakas) to me, but I'd like to make sure I'm reporting properly.

[Linda Zayas-Palmer]

Terminalmancer wrote:

** spoiler omitted **

As you were thinking, go with Box A.

[Terminalmancer]

Thanks!

[Ascalaphus]

If you have the boon opening up Averaka Arbiters, is that limited to half-orcs only?

[TwilightKnight]

Ascalaphus wrote:

If you have the boon opening up Averaka Arbiters, is that limited to half-orcs only?

AFAIK, the boon does not read as such and reviewing the archetype, I don't see anything restricting it to half-orcs. It would seem that any race bard could take it, but only a half-orc bard can get the free retain.

[Ascalaphus]

Bob Jonquet wrote:

Ascalaphus wrote:

If you have the boon opening up Averaka Arbiters, is that limited to half-orcs only?

AFAIK, the boon does not read as such and reviewing the archetype, I don't see anything restricting it to half-orcs. It would seem that any race bard could take it, but only a half-or bard can get the free retain.

That was my thinking as well. It might be nice for a tiefling I have lying around..

[Trent Varva]

Hi all,

I ran into this situation this past weekend running this at a small con.

If a character with spell resistance triggers the trap, how should you go about resolving penetration. Another GM worked out the rough caster level of the spell to be level 11. So the trap would roll 1d20+11 to overcome the SR of the character who triggered it?

[Iammars]

Yup, CL 11 sounds right. That seems like a reasonable inference.

(For those of you wondering where that came from - Perception/Disable DCs of a magic trap are 25+spell level, meaning that this is a 6th level spell equivalent. Min CL for a 6th level spell is 11.)

[andreww]

Is there anything in the rules which makes the CL of a magical trap clear if it isn't specified? I had this come up recently in a scenario where there was a Forbiddance spell in effect. One of the players tried to dispel it but Forbiddance cannot be dispelled by someone of lower caster level than the spell.

The trap didn't specify caster level but Forbiddance has a minimum of 11 so I went with that.