PbP Community MTS II - Blood under Absalom GM Discussion Thread [spoilers]

[Shifty]

N N 959 wrote:

Plopping down a map and asking, "Where is everyone sleeping?" There's got to be a better way of handling that.

Indeed - somewhat inelegant! :)

At least it is very infrequently done.

[The Man Behind the Curtain]

I think my main issue is just at a raw numbers level. A shortsword vs a flat-footed character at tier 1-2 will be doing 2d6+2 plus Con poison. A level 1 character is most likely going to be KO'd by that, and a level 2 can quite easily fall to that as well. At tier 10-11 a surprise round shortsword shank will be doing 6d6+3 + Str poison, which for someone with 10 HD will be a minor annoyance, not much worse then passing a saving throw against a fireball. Normally I'd expect a scenario to scale things the other way, where seasoned veterans will face the dangerous encounters since they are expected to have the foresight to set watch and create contingency plans, whereas a tier 1-2 table would be more forgiving.

[N N 959]

The Man Behind the Curtain wrote:

I think my main issue is just at a raw numbers level. A shortsword vs a flat-footed character at tier 1-2 will be doing 2d6+2 plus Con poison. A level 1 character is most likely going to be KO'd by that, and a level 2 can quite easily fall to that as well.

And the encounter can be worse than that. If the character is in bed, which clearly seems to be suggested by the scenario, the PCs are at AC 10 with a whopping -4 for being prone. Even if you survive the initial attack (assuming your GM hasn't tried to CDG you in your sleep) you're not likely to survive getting up and triggering an AoO. Let's say you get up...then what? Unless you've got unarmed combat every attack is triggering an AoO. And let's not forget, this encounter takes place before the PC's have a chance to restore spells/abilities.

Let's take a look at the actual scenario instructions:

Assassin Tactics wrote:

he assassins stealthily approach behind

opponents, attempting to poison them with darts before
entering melee.

So the encounter instructions make it clear that the characters are suppose to be attacked from range first. This would give PCs a chance to at least stand-up and grab a weapon. But you can hardly blame a GM for starting the encounter in melee given the size of the rooms. So while the text is telling the GMs one thing, the map layout is compelling another, more deadly set-up.

Again, I think it would help the overall fairness of a Special if situations like this were provided with stronger guidelines to try and provide a more consistent encounter experience. For example, make the attacks occur when PCs get up to use the latrine, or before anyone actually falls a sleep. Or the moment they are all return to the inn. Yes, PC actions can undermine that, but that's why they'd only be guidelines.

Quote:

Normally I'd expect a scenario to scale things the other way, where seasoned veterans will face the dangerous encounters since they are expected to have the foresight to set watch and create contingency plans, whereas a tier 1-2 table would be more forgiving.

Yeah, this a common problem with scenarios and Pathfinder in general. Things don't scale linearly. At tier 5-6, the assassin's only have 2d6 sneak attack, but the characters have 3-4 times more hit points than they did at 1st level. On the bright side, at least the low tier assassins aren't using the Young template. ;-)

[GM Aerondor]

Well, after my initial claims of not being worried, I almost one shotted a mage in the bath. Luckily all of the other bathers made perception checks against the assassins stealth, and then won initiative.

[Shifty]

Its like the old days when there were random encounters against a party camping in the wilds. But preplanned, and really ugly.

[The Man Behind the Curtain]

N N 959 wrote:

Yeah, this a common problem with scenarios and Pathfinder in general. Things don't scale linearly. At tier 5-6, the assassin's only have 2d6 sneak attack, but the characters have 3-4 times more hit points than they did at 1st level. On the bright side, at least the low tier assassins aren't using the Young template. ;-)

Oh god... the young template... Sure, we'll drop the HP and attack bonuses but leave the SLAs that you can't possibly have answers for intact. We'll drop the save DC a bit though. It's balanced now right?

I guess I would have just expected a little more lenience at the lowest tier, especially for new players. Like using experts or warriors for the assassins instead of rogues, and having the watch run in earlier. Probably even put some degree of explicit incompetence in their stat block. On the flip side, for the high tier table I'd expect some actual death attacking assassins... My group has killed one of the assassin, has another at -9 and dying, and the last at less than 12 HP, cornered, and ready to attempt suicide. Sounds like I'll have a few days for role-play banter. A few members of the party are certainly optimized, but even the ones far off of the optimization path are chilling and happily beating down the poor assassins. Maybe Shifty needs to show up in person and show them what a real venture-ninja-captain can do...

[GM Aerondor]

After an initial burst of enthusiasm my level one assassins have shown their incompetence. The one with the mage on deaths door went goggle eyed at a colour spray, one of the others decided to roll at one when attacking a naked PC in their bath. Darn that soap someone left carelessly on the floor. The third has managed to (just) hit the (also naked) druid. I can't see it going past round three though.

[GM Batpony]

My tier 3-4 swept the floor, I have two 5 stars GM in my group, and lead the group to decide it's unsafe for anything throughout the night! So they pretty much went to slept wearing light armor and kept weapons nearby. Double with the highest AC player standing guard and my low rolls for all surprise attacks, they barely felt anything.

Also funnily enough, the two players left alive on Tyrannius table are myself and DMIng in your closet. Even with two GM's in that table, both decided to go to sleep not prepared for anything!

[Shifty]

GMBP - Mileage sure can vary :)

***

On a side note, I have extended this section out by two days to allow some of the other groups to get back up to speed. So that means next update is Friday am my time.

[GM Hmm]

Shifty -- Good to know. I'll stretch out the post-assassination investigative period.

***

When I played this game, the GM attacked us in our sleep. It was really deadly. We were saved only by the presence of my very light-sleeping tiger, Pumpkin. Since then, those characters bought bells and all sorts of other anti-intruder measures that we lay out EVERY time we go to sleep in a scenario. Blood Under Absalom made Zahra and Omar very paranoid!

Batpony.... Did you say that there were only two PCs left alive on Tyrranius's table? Is everyone else dead-dead?

Hmm

[The Man Behind the Curtain]

Shifty, Is your Friday update going to signal us to bring in the guards or are we supposed to have completely finished the act by Friday?

[N N 959]

The Man Behind the Curtain wrote:

I guess I would have just expected a little more lenience at the lowest tier, especially for new players.

The truth is, you can kill just about anyone if the GM used a coup de grace. While we know that NPCs are not supposed to use that without explicit instructions, that info came in the form of a FAQ, it's not a Pathfinder rule. Even outside of CDG, put a level 5-10 naked, prone, between two flanking assassins and you're probably going to kill anyone who doesn't have Uncanny Dodge. So the lethality of this scenario is entirely dependent on how hard the GM is willing to screw over the players. Conversely, that GM discretion can also be used to dramatically reduce the lethality.

For example, those bedrooms would all have standard door locks. I haven't seen anyone here talk about the assassins having to pick door locks. Forcing the assassin to either break down the door or wait until the PCs were out of their rooms would significantly change the lethality. Of course the players don't know that the assassins don't have Disable Device, so they won't think to raise the issue.

[Tyranius]

Hmmm wrote:

Batpony.... Did you say that there were only two PCs left alive on Tyrranius's table? Is everyone else dead-dead?

Nah not dead dead. I am not that mean. They are unconscious and all stable, though a lot of them failed multiple poison saves and took a good chunk of Con and Wisdom damage.

No coupe de grace here, even though I have had plenty of opportunities. One as book didn't call for it and two this encounter is already incredibly lethal without systematically killing them one at a time. If it does hit a TPK though that is a different story. I am trying to make the fight as fair as possible considering what it is.

I think they got this between the two of them though, but we will see.

[GM Hmm]

Locks are good.

I used the bathtub idea because it was something already planted to be brought into people's rooms, and it was slightly less lethal to attack a naked and awake party than one sound asleep. Besides... soap suds and ninjas. They go together like peanut butter and chocolate.

[GM Batpony]

The Man Behind the Curtain wrote:

Shifty, Is your Friday update going to signal us to bring in the guards or are we supposed to have completely finished the act by Friday?

Also.. For those who finish much earlier, just wait it out?

[Shifty]

Originally this section would have the guard arrive tomorrow morning, however adding two days will have the guards arrive Friday morning, and then Saturday morning we will move to the semi finals for 8 days.

[The Man Behind the Curtain]

I'll string my party along with an investigation for the next few days then. When you say Saturday morning, I presume that's 'straya time? I'll be out at Strategicon Saturday and Sunday, but if the post goes out Friday night pacific time which roughly equals Saturday morning your time, I can probably put out a big post describing the opera and give them time to pick their costumes while I'm off at the con. I look forward to tormenting the ragepounce barbarian with a fancy costume.

[N N 959]

Shifty wrote:

N N 959 wrote:

Plopping down a map and asking, "Where is everyone sleeping?" There's got to be a better way of handling that.

Indeed - somewhat inelegant! :)

At least it is very infrequently done.

It's too bad we aren't play testing this because a simple solution would be requiring the PCs to determine their sleeping location after the first night....and asking them if they take any specific precautions. After the first night of nothing happening, or after a day of being fatigued for sleeping in armor, they might let their guard down. At least that way the players feel like it was on them.

[Shifty]

Yep Saturday morning 'Straya time.

NN, I think the playtesting is s bit shady for the specials, and I don't think they go back and reedit them. I have to say that whilst they can be fun, some of the recent ones are a nightmare to prep and run. Too much being shoved in.

I hope the S9 breaks the recent trends.

[nightdeath]

Man has everybody gone to the Night's encounter?

[GM kuey]

GM Hmm wrote:

I used the bathtub idea because it was something already planted to be brought into people's rooms, and it was slightly less lethal to attack a naked and awake party than one sound asleep. Besides... soap suds and ninjas. They go together like peanut butter and chocolate.

GM Hmm, I must admit that I blatantly stole your idea. Have them attacked by ninjas jumping out from their baths. With the breathing reeds and all! :)

Threw in a barmaid who was flirting (quite successfully) with one of the players, only for her to turn up dead under the bed when the combat is over would hopefully fuel the players hatred against the Aspis. :)

[GM Hmm]

I like the idea of the murdered barmaid. I also liked the names of the barmaids and the RP you gave that scene.

My group found the staff knocked out, poisoned and still tied up, uniforms missing and stuffed into a supply closet, but still alive. I was figuring... professional hit. Don't kill anyone that you're not paid to kill.

Hmm

[The Man Behind the Curtain]

Mine drugged a couple of the crewmen. I decided that they found the crew of the boat the party is on, used their ability to convert poison from injury to injested, and slipped some in their drink. Party found an apparently passed out crewman with no apparent injuries and was supposed to assume they were drunk. But then Wei Ji just HAD to roll a nat 20 on perception and wonder why an invisible ninja was in the trying to follow him into the crew quarters.

Two of them are currently bound, one of which is being interrogated. He's trying really hard to get himself killed.

[Shifty]

With regards the need to pick locks or smash doors, I suppose a bunch of skilled or semi skilled bad guys could probably just get a hold of the keys (or spares) off the innkeeper by hook or by crook (or gold).

What a shame we aren't the playtesters, we'd be able to add so much

On a side note, there were a few 'semi official' rewrites of this mod, we are stuck with as published though :)

[N N 959]

Shifty wrote:

With regards the need to pick locks or smash doors, I suppose a bunch of skilled or semi skilled bad guys could probably just get a hold of the keys (or spares) off the innkeeper by hook or by crook (or gold).)

The NPC codex lists the Barkeep NPC as having a Perception of +10 and a Sense Motive of +10. It's not trivial thing taking keys off of him. You need to hit DC 20 to steal something. Tier 5-6 rogues have +11 Sleight of Hand, so they certainly have an option, but below that, you'd have to roll it. But I doubt GMs are even looking at that.

I could be completely wrong, but based on what people have posted, seems like there's a lot of hand waiving that went on to set up the Act. When it comes to PFS, I've always been of the mentality that the NPCs are still bound by the same rules as the PCs, so regardless of what the scenario wants to have happen, the NPCs have to be able to legitimately accomplish it using the skills/abilities/resources listed. If they can't, then the scenario plays out accordingly.

I'd really like to hear from the PFS heads of state on scenarios that do stuff like this. If anyone has seen dialogue from John Compton et al on this type of stuff, please post a link.

[N N 959]

Changing gears, I could use some help from this section in Act 4

Quote:

Development: If PCs positively identify any of the would-be assassins as associates of rival contestants, the fingered individuals are disqualified. A DC 18 Perception check to search the bodies turns up a small brass coin hidden in the folds of one of the assassins robes. The coin’s face is marked with a coiled asp and its tail carved with the letters P.O.D. The presence of the coin implies that at least one member of the Aspis Consortium had a contract with the assassins. If the PCs thus identify the Aspis Consortium as the party behind their attempted assassination, they gain a +1 morale bonus against all Aspis agents or allies of the Consortium until the end of the event.

1. How do the PCs identify the assassins as associates, by simply finding the coin? Which individuals are disqualified?

2. What does the +1 moral bonus apply to, any and all rolls against Aspis, or just d20 or just attack and damage? If it's all rolls, does that include initiative?

[Shifty]

Barmaid is L0 with 4 Perception and 0 SM, steal from the barmaid, especially when she's distracted.

NPC's seem to run on what the story dictates rather than the restrictions that bind the players, indeed, they can access content the players can't. The Barkeeep you mention is a an Expert 4/Fighter 1 - even his class isn't PFS legal, let alone his Commoner barmaid.

It can get a bit annoying and leave the players feeling jibbed though, look at the 'chase' mechanics, they can have a person with a fantastic move speed being outrun by a snail with a heavy limp because of a set of narratively appropriate die rolls. Makes 0 sense, and has left players fuming (I was one of them).

In YotSL the Dragon has funky 'secret squirrel' mechanics and magical plot armour.

***

1. This is another poorly written piece, and unclear how this is supposed to work in game. There is also no mechanical meaning to a group being disqualified. I suppose it is intended to be a RP moment.

2. The +1 morale bonus is equally vague, and I take it to act similar to the bardic inspire courage. +1 morale bonus on saving throws against charm and fear effects and a +1 competence bonus on attack and weapon damage rolls.

***

What I am really seeing is the value of PbP play for playtesting. This scenario must have been run a large number of times by now, but in a face to face environment there is so much going on that finer details (and some big ones!) slip through as the games play out and people are under the pump to hit the deadlines. Here in PbP we have literally days and days to ponder any particular piece, and enough GM's that just about every part of the scenario will be looked at in depth by several sets of eyes.

There are a lot of holes.

YotSL had a few, this one has more.

[GM Ilmakis]

Are the players able to get back their spells ? (ie for Arcane spellcaster, having 8h of non interrupted rest ?)

[GM Hmm]

Yep. There's enough time for them to get sleep. Just ambush them early and let them sleep in the next morning before going to the theater.

Hmm

[EvilMinion]

It doesn't need to be 8 hours of uninterrupted rest. A break in the middle just adds an hour to the time.
So 5 before, 4 after, works fine too (or combination thereof)

And that's just for wizard types, clerics don't even need the rest, just the predesignated prayer time.

[N N 959]

Shifty wrote:

Barmaid is L0 with 4 Perception and 0 SM, steal from the barmaid, especially when she's distracted.

Which is why the barmaid would clearly not be trusted with the keys.

Quote:

The Barkeeep you mention is a an Expert 4/Fighter 1 - even his class isn't PFS legal, let alone his Commoner barmaid.

Why are they not PFS legal?

Quote:

It can get a bit annoying and leave the players feeling jibbed though, look at the 'chase' mechanics

It's my understanding that chase mechanics are applied to NPCS and PCs equally. NPCs don't get to ignore them.

Quote:

In YotSL the Dragon has funky 'secret squirrel' mechanics and magical plot armour.

If the scenario specifically says, X is hanging from the rafters to start the encounter, and X has no apparent climb skill, while that is annoying, everybody is subject to the same encounter conditions. My concern is where the scenario does not give specifics and the players get a huge variation in how the encounter starts because some GMs hand waive and some don't. For PFS in general, and Specials specifically, fairness has to be a cornerstone of the experience. Undoubtedly why the PFS guide doesn't let GMs modify monsters or encounter rules. Obviously we don't want everyone to have the exact same experience, but I am in favor of efforts to make sure that the range is a bit narrower. If two characters make the same decisions and have the same skills, one should not be naked and prone and alone, and the other armored and amongst friends.

Again, this Act is in the past, I'm speaking on how we can improve this type of encounter in the future..

Quote:

2. The +1 morale bonus is equally vague, and I take it to act similar to the bardic inspire courage. +1 morale bonus on saving throws against charm and fear effects and a +1 competence bonus on attack and weapon damage rolls.

Okay, I'll go with that.

Quote:

Here in PbP we have literally days and days to ponder any particular piece, and enough GM's that just about every part of the scenario will be looked at in depth by several sets of eyes.

The only caveat is that all the spoiler info would be out in cyberspace before the Special became official. Don't know how PFS/Paizo would feel about that.

[Shifty]

The barkeeper and the barmaid are classes that are not PFS compliant. If the players and NPC are bound by the same conditions and rules then they couldn't be experts or commoners.

I guess at the end of the day they are trying to tell a fun and enjoyable story without being overly prescriptive and allowing for some wiggle room for GM's to add spice, and then have to contend with word count restrictions as well as the writer having their work edited by a third party who may or may not have played through the scenario. I'd point at the Sharrowsmiths Trail series for an example of where this has lead to undesirable outcomes.

My beef with the chase mechanics is that our very first encounter with them, we had 50' move characters got outrun by 30' move creatures based on some poor dice rolls. Given that the situation had them kick off from the same start line there is no way the slower moving creatures would have outrun us. It took away the RAW capabilities of our characters and instead put them through some other random mechanic - as if we just told the fighter that melee would now be resolved via interpretive dance rather than via his combat skills. At least they have improved them since then, the ones in Sharrowsmith were half decent.

Anyhow, I suppose we will all get a fine appreciation of the Specials (and their glorious flaws) as we move through them all. This really is an interesting way to get through them and give them a really detailed and granular examination.

[Shifty]

Guards arrive in ~22 hours.

[N N 959]

Shifty wrote:

The barkeeper and the barmaid are classes that are not PFS compliant. If the players and NPC are bound by the same conditions and rules then they couldn't be experts or commoners.

PFS came out and said that NPC classes are not allowed for PCs, but they are perfectly legal for NPCs.

Quote:

Given that the situation had them kick off from the same start line there is no way the slower moving creatures would have outrun us.

My understanding is that the Chase mechanics are specifically designed to simulate the challenges of chasing someone through an environment with obstacles to that need to be negotiated. It's not mean to be a contest of straight-line movement, but a vehicle for letting skilled characters show their stuff. It works to add value to a barbarian or ranger's extra skill points over a fighters, or a bard over a monk.

That, and I think it's obvious that if there are no rolls or other mechanics, chasing something lacks any dynamism.

[The Man Behind the Curtain]

Kuey, the blood of that barmaid is on your hands and will haunt you now and forevermore. It is your job to make a spiritualist with her as the spirit.

[GM Hmm]

Development: If PCs positively identify any of the would-be assassins as associates of rival contestants, the fingered individuals are disqualified. A DC 18 Perception check to search the bodies turns up a small brass coin hidden in the folds of one of the assassins robes. The coin's face is marked with a coiled asp and its tail carved with the letters P.O.D. The presence of the coin implies that at least one member of the Aspis Consortium had a contract with the assassins. If the PCs thus identify the Aspis Consortium as the party behind their attempted assassination, they gain a +1 morale bonus against all Aspis agents or allies of the Consortium until the end of the event.

___

Shifty:

So my group made the DC Perception Check to find the coin. Is this +1 morale bonus triggered now, or do they have to identify their assassins as Aspis to the guards for this condition to trigger?

Hmm

[Shifty]

Bua wrote:

The coin’s face is marked with a coiled asp and its tail carved with the letters P.O.D. The presence of the coin implies that at least one member of the Aspis Consortium had a contract with the assassins. If the PCs thus identify the Aspis Consortium as the party behind their attempted assassination, they gain a +1 morale bonus against all Aspis agents or allies of the Consortium until the end of the event.

I take it that the Assassins are not Aspis themselves, they are contract killers from Qadira in the employ of the Consortium, which I know is splitting hairs, but the coin being located (and the big obvious clue) is enough to tell them this was an Aspis job, and thus the condition is triggered.

[GM Aerondor]

Shifty wrote:

if we just told the fighter that melee would now be resolved via interpretive dance rather than via his combat skills.

Hey, no spoilers for Act 5.

[N N 959]

Just to verify, if the group did not do the Ronin encounter, the Aspis still get another fighter?

[Shifty]

Looks to be the case, as the Ronin stat block firmly appears later. The party just won't connect it is all.

[Yours is mined]

Shifty wrote:

If we just told the fighter that melee would now be resolved via interpretive dance rather than via his combat skills.

GM Aerondor wrote:

Hey, no spoilers for Act 5.

Oh, I am so using this!

Serious question: If they've befriended the ronin, do they face 4 Aspis or 5 at the opera?

[Shifty]

There appears to be 5 statblocks, so five it is.

[Tyranius]

GM Hmm wrote:

Development: If PCs positively identify any of the would-be assassins as associates of rival contestants, the fingered individuals are disqualified. A DC 18 Perception check to search the bodies turns up a small brass coin hidden in the folds of one of the assassins robes. The coin's face is marked with a coiled asp and its tail carved with the letters P.O.D. The presence of the coin implies that at least one member of the Aspis Consortium had a contract with the assassins. If the PCs thus identify the Aspis Consortium as the party behind their attempted assassination, they gain a +1 morale bonus against all Aspis agents or allies of the Consortium until the end of the event.

___

Shifty:

So my group made the DC Perception Check to find the coin. Is this +1 morale bonus triggered now, or do they have to identify their assassins as Aspis to the guards for this condition to trigger?

Hmm

Is this +1 Morale bonus on all rolls to include damage rolls?Or just D20's?

[GM kuey]

Ahh! My table had one player searching the bodies, failing the perception roll. And no one else tried after that!!! And after I had already described how many secret pockets the assassins had. And I gave them a couple of days to do it! Aaahh!!! :)

[I'm DMing In Your Closet]

Tyranius wrote:

Is this +1 Morale bonus on all rolls to include damage rolls?Or just D20's?

I second this question.

I also have another question, since we have a whole bunch of experienced Society DMs paying attention here:

Can you grant folio/T-shirt rerolls to other players? I seem to see mixed responses to that. I'm actually asking that because of an adventure I'm in that has nothing to do with this Scenario, but in that adventure...boy do we need every advantage we can get now.

Also, how many folio rerolls can you have/use per adventure? Does the folio have to be tied to the individual character, or can it be across characters?

[GM Hmm]

Each PC can make use of 1 folio / bag / t-shirt reroll per adventure.

In Face to Face:
As a GM or a player you can loan your shirt, bag or folio to a player who does not have one. If you loan out your only reroll item as a player, you do not have it available for your own reroll. I have seen players who have stacks of folios that they loan out to newbies at conventions.

As a GM, you cannot loan your stars to go with that reroll unless you have a Campaign Service Coin.

The folio can be across characters. Same deal with the shirt or bag. I consider it honor system to ask someone "Do you have a reroll folio, bag or shirt?" Some GMs want a photo of the player with their reroll item.

Hmm

[Shifty]

The +1 morale bonus is vague, and I take it to act similar to the bardic inspire courage. +1 morale bonus on saving throws against charm and fear effects and a +1 competence bonus on attack and weapon damage rolls.

[I'm DMing In Your Closet]

Shifty wrote:

The +1 morale bonus is vague, and I take it to act similar to the bardic inspire courage. +1 morale bonus on saving throws against charm and fear effects and a +1 competence bonus on attack and weapon damage rolls.

Is that official? I already told my group that it applied to ALL rolls made versus those enemies (though I wasn't sure about non-d20 rolls).

[Shifty]

It's the best interpretation I have of a really bad guesstimate due to a poorly written effect.

[N N 959]

@Note to all GMs -

In anticipation of the upcoming Act, I sent an email to our online Venture Officer regarding non-lethal and animal companions and got the following answer:

Can an animal with a 3+ INT be pushed to do non-lethal damage. The response was, "Yes."

Of course the animal takes the same penalty that a person would for doing nonlethal with a lethal attack.