|
Writing “because of trespassing” is just irreverent legelase at this point, they couldn’t write out “wanted for the death of whoever the f&%* that is that you sent to be sacrificed”.
The module author could easily have written "Andrea will issue a warrant for arrest based on evidence of MD's trespass or other crimes, if the PCs bring evidence to support it." But it didn't. Why not? Because trespass functions as a plot device.
This module has a bad structure. As others already noticed in this thread, most groups will short-circuit Parts 2 and 3 and go straight from Part 1 to Part 4. There's been an assault on their circus, the PCs have reason to suspect MD, so they'll go and confront her. The end. See above:
Chapters 2, 3 and 4 seem to be in a weird order to me. Given that the Celestial Menagerie has just tried to ruin one of there shows I'm pretty sure every group i've DM'd for would jump straight to trying to getting revenge on the Celestial Menagerie rather than going on a dungeon crawl beneath the city for nebulous reasons. There doesn't seem to be much reason for the players to prioritize that over revenge on the group who just attacked them.
To circumvent this structural problem, the author/editor came up with a plot device: have Andera request the PCs to go into the dungeon that's Parts 2-3 to investigate trespass. Page 20:
"If the heroes ask about Moonstone Hall, Andera explains that it’s an abandoned and buried temple to Aroden that the city wants to keep clear of smugglers or other criminals. She’s therefore posted guards at its only entrance in the Woodworkers District. Because the heroes showed some initiative in clearing the plot of land for their circus, Andera concludes that they could prove useful in making a full exploration of the site and clearing out any criminals or troublesome monsters that occupy the site."
See this? She's not requesting the PCs to go after MD or other criminals in town for any other crimes. No. Trespass. And that's why the module says, at the beginning of Part 4, that the PCs still "owe Andera a report." What report is that? Of the trespass on the temple site. All evidence of which requires the PCs to complete Parts 2 and 3. So no, invocation of "trespass" over and over in Part 4 is not irrelevant. Note further:
"Although the heroes might want to move against Mistress Dusklight directly without involving the law, they still owe a report to Andera."
Emphasis added. The bolded part is the straight-up vigilantism that all of us are ok with in a Paizo module - though that can't prevent player groups moving from Part 1 straight to Part 4.
But if the PCs want to "involve the law," then they have to go via Andera. And if they want to go via Andera, she insists that they have evidence of trespass - not the kind of evidence of other wrongdoings available to them early on in the module.
At this point, all of us have agreed that bottle-necking Part 4 by having it depend on the trespass investigation in Parts 2-3 is a poor plot device. It is problematic for all sorts of reasons. Not only is it structurally poor, the entire "PCs involving law enforcement" narrative is executed in bad taste. And it's not defensible as routine vigilantism when the module itself goes out of its way to distinguish a pre-meditated killing that "involves law enforcement" from one that doesn't.
But changing Andera's initial request, and both report scenes in the modules, requires rewriting the module, its structure, and the key actions of its central NPC in Parts 2 and 4. Some of these rewrites have already been suggested by several GMs in this thread.
I'm not clear why that wouldn't deserve to be in this thread, much less this sub-forum.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The module author could easily have written "Andrea will issue a warrant for arrest based on evidence of MD's trespass or other crimes, if the PCs bring evidence to support it." But it didn't. Why not? Because trespass functions as a plot device.
But that’s exactly what she does though.
And with writing it as an arrest for trespass rather than for murder it gives PCs the opportunity to peacefully and diplomatically (for most parts) entering and making their way through the CM and the workers, rather than just moving through and killing everything.
This module has a bad structure. As others already noticed in this thread, most groups will short-circuit Parts 2 and 3 and go straight from Part 1 to Part 4. There's been an assault on their circus, the PCs have reason to suspect MD, so they'll go and confront her. The end. See above:
Some might. Not all. After dealing with the hecklers and saboteurs on opening night they might go inform the guard, leading them to Andera, but I highly doubt most people will go on the warpath straight to the Celestial Menagerie.
Also you’re not going into Moonstone Hall for “nebulous reasons” as the other poster claimed, Moonstone Hall is the main reason you’re in Escadar: to look into the Aeon Orbs, which is the main plot of this adventure path.
"If the heroes ask about Moonstone Hall, Andera explains that it’s an abandoned and buried temple to Aroden that the city wants to keep clear of smugglers or other criminals. She’s therefore posted guards at its only entrance in the Woodworkers District. Because the heroes showed some initiative in clearing the plot of land for their circus, Andera concludes that they could prove useful in making a full exploration of the site and clearing out any criminals or troublesome monsters that occupy the site."
See this? She's not requesting the PCs to go after MD or other criminals in town for any other crimes. No. Trespass. And that's why the module says, at the beginning of Part 4, that the PCs still "owe Andera a report." What report is that? Of the trespass on the temple site. All evidence of which requires the PCs to complete Parts 2 and 3. So no, invocation of "trespass" over and over in Part 4 is not irrelevant. Note further:
"Although the heroes might want to move against Mistress Dusklight directly without involving the law, they still owe a report to Andera."
... you owe her a report because she asks you to investigate what you find in the ruins. You report back your findings.
And yes “trespass” on the warrant is indeed irrelevant legalese after presented with the evidence, with an arrest for “trespass” instead of “murder” or a kill on sight order the PCs are able to move through and explore/interact with the Celestial Menagerie rather than just going in and killing everyone non-Chaka the, which is what would happen with those other two as the workers would be more aggressive/fearful if they knew murder charges were coming for Mistress Dusklight rather than just something they think she could bribe her way out of.
Emphasis added. The bolded part is the straight-up vigilantism that all of us are ok with in a Paizo module - though that can't prevent player groups moving from Part 1 straight to Part 4.
But if the PCs want to "involve the law," then they have to go via Andera. And if they want to go via Andera, she insists that they have evidence of trespass - not the kind of evidence of other wrongdoings available to them early on in the module.
No she doesn’t, she asks for any evidence of wrongdoing from anyone, signing the writ for “trespass” is something that happens at the end when evidence has been presented, it’s not something specific she or the PCs are pushing for and waiting for a “gotcha”.
At this point, all of us have agreed that bottle-necking Part 4 by having it depend on the trespass investigation in Parts 2-3 is a poor plot device. It is problematic for all sorts of reasons. Not only is it structurally poor, the entire "PCs involving law enforcement" narrative is executed in bad taste. And it's not defensible as routine vigilantism when the module itself goes out of its way to distinguish a pre-meditated killing that "involves law enforcement" from one that doesn't.
It’s not a poor plot device, having the warrant allows the PCs to go after Mistress Dusklight without her calling on the corrupt guards or anyone else she has in her pocket.
But changing Andera's initial request, and both report scenes in the modules, requires rewriting the module, its structure, and the key actions of its central NPC in Parts 2 and 4. Some of these rewrites have already been suggested by several GMs in this thread.
I'm not clear why that wouldn't deserve to be in this thread, much less this sub-forum.
I may vehemently disagree with the tunnel visioning you’re employing regarding the warrant and the setup up of this AP and comparing it to a real life tragedy, but this would indeed be the thread to post it in. It’s GM Reference. Discussion and suggestions are what goes here, so you’re not “posting in the wrong subforum”.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Thanks, I appreciate that greatly, and all the civility throughout.
I also believe that, disagreements on the module text aside, you and I will likely run this module pretty much alike. It's become pretty obvious that neither of us thinks the module's iterated emphasis on trespass is all that useful, and is best ignored.
In light of our exchanges, I'll rewrite Part 3 so that the PCs have hard evidence of multiple murders by MD, not just second-hand, and not just abductions (for subsequent killings by other parties outside MD's direct control or agency).
I think obtaining a writ to expressly detain a murderer is a spectacular device for the PCs to have on hand as they head to MD's circus. Instead of going into the circus to kill everyone in plain view, the PCs can now go into the circus tent and heckle MD's circus show mid-stream. This is their big payback for Part 1 (all the more satisfying since they suffered similar disruptions to their own show in the previous adventure as well - they know the drill, and can pull out a couple of tricks). "Everybody cool, we have an arrest for the murders of [name abducted citizens]." Can you imagine the gasp of the crowd? Followed by a very public arrest? If there's a show-down now between the PCs and MD's crew, it's a spectacle, under the public limelight of resistance to an arrest.
So that's one thing I'd change. Also, and this is key: Andera insists on PCs using non-lethal force, and she insists that MD must be detained to get her to a trial at all cost. The arrest warrant/writ is not a license to kill. Big rewrite from the module, and gets rid of my biggest gripe 100%. (Also, and just pure aside to your post: an arrest warrant for murder does not amount to kill order. The crime for which you arrest does not license you to reciprocate that crime.)
Following the public arrest, the PCs get to participate as core witnesses in MD's high-publicity trial in town. The PCs get to present all their hard-won evidence, a quasit eye witness, and more - and can bring their circus performance skills to bear full weight at a showtime trial. If the players have little taste for that, this can be skipped or reduced to a quick narrative scene. But the sheer fact of having a trial gives the PCs a sense that their investigative work is paying off, big time, and makes them feel that they really brought a villain to justice under the law.
How are the town's villagers gonna react, before and after the interrupted circus show? The PCs are gonna get a lot of limelight in town, which helps drive up Anticipation for their own show. The PCs might recruit MD's past performers to help them with a couple of new circus acts, such as re-enacting "The Arrest of Mistress Murderess," or "A liberation from abuse," where two hill giant clowns transform before the audience's eyes from subdued victims into jocular jugglers. All thanks to the PCs.
Now that's a storyline I'd be happy to see unfold at my gaming table. Not that pre-meditated killing incident to (a dubiously) lawful arrest, on grounds that self-defense rendered lethal force necessary.
Being aware of what feels tone deaf at your table is a very sensible position to take and coming up with a work around that feels less so is perfectly acceptable. Change what you need to make things work best for your table.
My table is not the most respectful of the law to begin with, and from the way things are going in the first book, I am probably not going to have Andrea push the story along at all. The party will find out from their side show of information gatherers that Mistress Dusklight is up to no good beneath the city, go to investigate to find out what, and be horrified enough to want to confront her on their own. (they probably will try as soon as the y get to town and be beat down by the bouncers at the gate).
|
|
Edit. I appreciate your re-scripting of Part 4. End edit. I just don't buy your rationale why Part 1 to Part 4 can't happen.
Two level 8 bouncers is an extremely difficult combat for four level 5 heroes.
And? The module says the PCS will be level 6 by the time they finish part 1, not level 5.
A single level 8 creature is simply a moderate encounter at level 6. Two such creatures is harder, but by no means a TPK.
In fact, the only way to risk a TPK against two melee brutes is to engage them both at once and exclusively in melee. Which is spectacularly stupid, I give you that. But why would any players with five full levels of gameplay experience commit such a rookie mistake?
They are level 6 characters. They have recourse to a healthy amount of third-level spells. They have a modicum of strategic planning. They got a vast range of options, none of which require a full-on frontal assault. Enter the circus grounds by subterfuge (cast invisibility). Charm the giants from a safe distance (notice that weak will save?). Fireball them to death from a safe distance, if you must; in fact, the bouncers have no means to counter-attack, and this would work at the very least to draw them out while the rest of the PCs go through the front-gate. Any combination thereof.
Or simpler yet - infiltrate the vast circus grounds from any point other than the front gate, and bypass that scripted encounter altogether. Yes, there's shrubs and a high, well-lit iron fence surrounding the area. But it's not even magically defended. How's that an insurmountable obstacle for a party of level 6 heroes?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So glad you and your group enjoyed it! I had a great time thinking through the various whys of xulgath culture, so it's especially cool to hear you're using one of their cultural practices :)
I think the [i]whys[/] of Xulgath culture was what made RPing him immensely more easier as it gave me a loose idea of his psychological state of why he might turn his back on his own allies, what he might do during his general downtime and how to hopefully develop him (including the limits, like it's doubtful he'll ever be a scholar or good-aligned, but he might be a convert to Gorum or a very rudimentary Gozreh worshipper given the nudge and information). It turned what could have just been weird quirks like setting fires in enclosed areas into a reflection of his life for players to learn more about Xulgaths through. I'm not sure if later books do more to clue players into the culture, but currently Cavnakash has just been an excellent source of this rich information that risked being DM-only knowledge.
Thank you again for writing the chapter!
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I *have* considered tweaking the approach of Chapter 4:
Against the Celestial Menagerie.But that has nothing to do with vigilantism or misguided real world comparisons - my Golarion is a violent place, and adventure paths are little more than glorified stretches of hack and slash anyway: getting distraught over legal and moral implications is simply not applicable to a pretend game with heroes slaughtering hundreds of creatures on their path from zero to hero.
It has to do with avoiding the cliche of ungrateful/unhelpful NPCs.
It simply bugs me to feature Constable Paldreen as someone who asks the heroes to risk their lives while she herself puts zero skin in the game.
And yes, it makes no sense to me that she would not find the time to oversee the operation herself. Not because she's concerned the vigilante heroes might kill people getting in the way (that part is assumed), but because the module details her political ambitions - she even mentions she's up for reelection.
Killing off most of the city's very popular circus is one thing; but off-handedly allowing a bunch of nobodies to do it on their own?!?
Mistress Dusklight is level 11 for crissakes! To me that means she's not some bit player in the city's vice district. She's likely one of the most powerful (influential, rich, etc) kingpins of the Escadarian underworld!
Nailing her would likely be a major accomplishment with political reverberations in Escadaran society (not that we get any details).
I've had some time to reflect on this and I love it. I agree that your take on Andera Paldreen as a cold-blooded careerist opens up fascinating vistas that this module otherwise plays down.
You see, when I first read the module, I was put off by how it portrayed a powerful NPC as this ultimate 'holier than though, avenge corruption at all costs to self' person on pages 86-87, treating her as a shining beacon of law and order whose only worry is that she's ousted in the next elections by someone who's more ready to placate the criminal elements in town. Combine that with her attitude to treat the PCs as her lackeys from start to finish (bad flashbacks to Second Darkness), being at her beck and all, having to culture her grace and approval to get a circus license - from level 5 heroes no less. All this made me dislike this module quite a lot even before we get to her whole 'go and kill them' thing in Part 4 that licensed an entirely needless killing for reasons put forward as legally and morally kosher. Atrocious.
Your write up, on the other hand, changes the tune and we're a lot closer to L.A. Confidential. So much that I'm considering making her lawful evil, prioritizing her career over all else. Or, as you so aptly put it, ready to walk over corpses if it elevates her political career. LE in short.
To push that story, I'd change a couple of things. In Part 1, page 7, Paldreen knows that Darricus is getting paid by Mistress Dusklight. She also knows that Dusklight's ultimate plan is to have Darricus oust her, Paldreen, at the next elections. She's all too keenly aware that there's a fair chance that Darricus might win those elections, unless something drastic happens and intervenes. But Darricus winning is terrible: it would catapult Dusklight's hold on the police force even more, advance Darricus's political career (who's, if anything, just as career-driven as herself), and end her own. Note that so far, we're firmly within the write-up of pp. 86-87.
Now comes the Lawful Evil part along LA Confidential. Paldreen's goal is to eliminate Darricus from the next election, and to eliminate Dusklight as a presence. When the PCs arrive in town, she sees her chance: here are powerful individuals replete with sword, might, and magic, who might be manipulated into killing both folks at once - if only they can be manipulated into thinking they are just executing a just, lawful killing. Again, entirely within the write-up of pp. 44-45. It certainly helps that the PCs seem like the usual troupe of murder hobos who roam Golarion for coin and fame.
To go about her scheme, Paldreen puts in place a couple of things.
First, she sets up a series of tasks engineered to test the PC's supplication, their willingness to be treated as lackeys. The opening tasks - 'go, clear out this ditch' and 'go, kill those creatures' - test the limits of that, and will be repeated in Part 2 and 3 where Paldreen keeps asking the PCs to kill things on her behalf ("go down into the temple: kill all you see"). She's already offering to justify their killings ex ante, only to probe if the PCs are corruptible.
Second, across all tasks, Paldreen makes sure to ingratiate herself with the PCs, by giving them the feeling that all their actions are in the service of the law, help the betterment of town ('let's cleanse this den of thieves'), and that the PCs deserve to be showered with accolades, citizens' honor, and police badges. On that note, Paldreen takes the PCs on a drink, and tells them about the Juniper Winzel affair (p. 86) and how much it meant to her. So, when the PCs find Winzel's diary (p. 11), and bring it back to Paldreen, you have that ingratiating scene that the module scripts on page 21 (it had me throw up a little, it's done so well). At this point, Paldreen will start handing out favors and quasi-official privileges to the PCs that render them quasi-sheriffs. "I’m going to give your names to my staff; you’ll be able to reach me without an appointment any time you’d like.” (p.21)
By the time we hit Chapter 4, Paldreen's manipulations should be in full swing. She's the one who actually asks Darricus to be present at the Circus when the PCs go on their killing spree. And she's the one who actively incentivizes the PCs to go on that killing spree, giving them carte blanche to do so as the town's newly deputized sheriffs carrying out citizens arrests and killings.
Instead of being a morally and legally repugnant tale where a champion of law (if Lawful Neutral) tries to keep a town together, the module now climaxes in a moral challenge. Will the PCs be willing to just carry out an execution order on Paldreen's behalf? Will they be happy to be unwitting alleys and pawns as the town's political masterminds have their ultimate show-down in the Circus?
You wrote that you don't like the idea of an NPC having the PCs do all the dirty work without any 'skin in the game' to herself. I can hardly concur more. I think that's exactly how the module scripts things, from start ('obtain this circus license') to finish ('go kill those people for me'). This kind of manipulation should ring alarm bells among PCs who are either morally concerned or simply don't like being pushed around to do someone else's dirty work over, and over, and over. Yet that's how the module is scripted. Pretty appalling.
So, the module needs a couple of clues to give the PCs a chance to wisen up that Paldreen is not the "shining beacon of law" she proclaims to be, and that Darricus is caught in the middle of two very powerful individuals fighting for control over Escadar. If the PCs are thoroughly corrupted by Paldreen, there should be a chance for them to learn about this in due course. And there should be a chance to get a reckoning for being manipulated so heavily from start to finish.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Perhaps controversial but I feel like rather than fixing the problem you mention about how severely unlikable Paldreen is, you instead rendered every NPC in Escadar as hated. The Celestial Menagerie is disliked due to a sordid history and the current assaults/sabotages which have no reason to end even if you leave Escadar (as suggested in book 1 with some of the performers attacking you in Abberton). Darricus is disliked because he's on the take and corrupt. Then you're doubling down on what you despise in Paldreen to ensure the party hates her too.
I feel like at best it'd be a bummer ending, and at worst a collection of NPCs so detestable as to distract from the game and nullify any RP fun. That said, if your table enjoys it then that's what counts. I just get the vibe if I pulled a stunt like this at my table I'd bum my players out to the point of not wanting to continue to Book 3. It seems more preferable for me (and my table) to play her straight as a LN character who takes pragmatism to a cold (almost harsh) level to do something technically morally okay (i.e. decreasing corruption). It's definitely not good, but it's not evil (using Chelliax as the mental measuring stick of LE).
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I wrote too large post so decided to delete it and post small one :p
Anyway, here is my notes: it is written that she gives you arrest warrant for evidence on trespass OR Dusklight dealing with xulgaths, so its not JUST about the tresspass.
Second, I do think this is one of those "making small thing a huge deal" since as you've already noticed, its just RPG logic for "Why PCs don't go to this place early before they are correct level".
Third, I think changing sheriff to be LE isn't recommended since it risks derailing events further. Like the sheriff "understanding PCs killing the bad guy" isn't plot mechanic, its gameplay mechanic. Paizo writers never include "pcs MUST non lethal the evil bad guys trying to kill them or they lose" in any APs as far as I can tell, not for entire "dungeon" at least. In Dead Suns there is scene where if pcs kill evil gang members instead of KO'ing them for police to arrest, the Neutral questgiver(who wasn't police) is basically like "Well it would have been preferable for you to not kill them but they reap what they sow, just don't tell anybody you did that." I don't know if its because writers expect PCs to be murderhoboes or because they think penalty for forcing party to be non lethal all the time is too high mechanically.
Same way, she isn't written to come with PCs(or have constables come with PCs) for gameplay mechanics reasons: her doing that makes combat easier for PCs.(and possibly makes diplomacy harder)
I do agree its perfect valid choice to have sheriff insist they HAVE to arrest her alive for due process though. In case of my dead suns campaign, party had uplifted bear party member, so I pointed them out that if they without evidence of self defense attack the gang members, there is no real way for them to escape without witness reports. So as result, they did it hard way and took them out non lethally. However you might want to give them tools to make it easier without penalties if they don't already have saps and such.
Fourth: I agree it was in bad taste to compare arresting Mistress Dusklight to police brutality that happens to racial minorities in real life. (and part of why I think your original posts were making huge thing out of small problem) Besides PCs already knowing all of Celestial Menagerie members (since all of them have been at circus for some time and PCs recently left celestial menagerie) and thus could inform sheriff on how horrible she is, nothing in situation is anywhere close to racial profiling and such :P
|
|
This is a highly interesting and rewarding set of responses to read. Thank you all.
I’ve tried to understand how we’ve arrived at such different conclusions, and have come up with something. Obviously I’d be grateful if you think there’s better ways to map out the underlying disagreements in this thread—I believe that bringing those differences out is productive, for my GM’ing style and hopefully others’ too. That’s certainly how I’ve read your responses—as respectful and productive, and you have my thanks for that.
Why do GMs read a module like this so differently? I believe it’s because urban modules give GMs a wider range of gaming styles than wilderness or dungeon adventures.
Any urban module can be written to be GM’d in three ways:
Unadulterated Hack'n'Slash.The module makes no distinction between monsters and NPCs. That’s why DCC modules e.g. say on their covers: remember the good old days when NPCs where just there to be killed? Yep, you can kill anyone, monster or NPC, on sight and the game moves on.
2. Tempered Hack’n’Slash. The game world draws a distinction between monsters in the wild and NPCs. Killing monsters has no real in-world ramifications, whereas killing random NPCs in the street might. But it’s no biggie if it happens, that’s just noir escapism.
3. Urban Intrigue.The module goes out of its way to describe how the town’s law enforcement operates, and emphasizes that PCs can engage that environment either by circumventing the law or by involving the law—a real choice with real consequences. Not only does the module hammer that distinction home, but it iterates over and over the requirements for PCs to operate lawfully—the licenses and warrants they must acquire before they can act without impunity for their actions. Obviously, PCs still don’t need law enforcement license to kill monsters in the wild or the moustache-twirling evil magician who lives on Firetop Mountain. Monsters and comic-book villains in the wild are not akin to tax-paying (though potentially criminal) citizen NPCs. Urban intrigue comes with a legal perimeter, but it’s a perimeter the PCs have to be mindful of.
I do believe that mode #2 is a legit way to run this module if that’s your cup of tea. I run plenty of modules in that way myself, and am not critiquing fellow GMs for doing so. But it’s one thing to say ‘My default or preferred mode of GMing a module like this is (insert mode)’ and another to say ‘This module was plainly written to be exclusively run in GM mode (#).’ And I think it helps to be mindful of that difference.
For instance, if you run this module in Mode #2, your table defaults to PCs operating outside the law anyhow. Because there’s no inside or outside of the law as far as your PCs’ actions are concerned, huge swaths of this module become irrelevant window-dressing. That’s why some of you above wrote, in all sincerity, that the legalese in this module is “irrelevant.” It really is, if you run it in modus #2.
And I totally understand that absolutely nothing in Andera’s write-up is in the slightest problematic, morally or legally, if you engage the module in Modus #2. Her being up for re-election might drive her decisions to throw herself into combat or not—which is a purely mechanical choice that alters the XP budget and difficulty mode for that encounter, but says nothing whatsoever about Golarion at an in-world or verisimilitude perspective. It’s all just veneer and window-dressing, best ignored by the players and the GM. Move along to the next combat, and don’t impose a -2 modifier on their rolls.
In Modus #3, on the other hand, you do face a choice. You either take Andera’s actions in Part 4 as written, and bring the rest of the module in line. That’s the LA Confidential narrative. Or you alter her actions in Part 4 to bring them in line with her purist NPC write up and the earlier parts of the module. That’s the public show-trial narrative.
There’s likely many more ways to rewrite the module along either line. What’s confusing is that the module seems to want to engage GMs like myself who run Paizo—contrast DCC—modules in modus #3. This has always worked for us in the past, esp. if you think of Shackled City or Sheriff Hemlock in Sandpoint. Well, it’s not working here without rewriting the module. That could be for all sorts of reasons, but reading the responses in this thread, it appears that Paizo's modules may have stopped to cater to modus #3 to the extent they did 10-15 years ago, and which at the time set them apart from other publishers like Goodman Games (DCC) and WotC (who, recalll, at the time didn't put things out like Curse of Strahd but rather silly escapism trips like Keep on the Shadowfell or Pyramid of Shadows--both of which I enjoyed tremendously).
|
|
I do think making PCs adhere law more strictly IS valid method, but its kinda same deal as with how one AP has "In order to pass, one of PCs must die or else they must sacrifice a "NPC"(I say that in quotation marks to hide the spoiler :P)... But PC can be true resurrected afterward with no problem." The ap clearly wanted to have difficult choice, but didn't actually want to force PCs to sacrifice themselves(or "npc"), so they went half way. In that case it IS valid for GM to just remove resurrection choice if they think party is okay with it and it doesn't really change the story.
Like, only reason why module let's pcs get away with killing arrest target without repercussion from law is to not tell gm they must punish the pcs who ignore it. Its form of future proofing where GM doesn't have defense of "Hey, module told me to do this!" if they want to make it harder I guess? I dunno, some of modules do have sidebar of "If you want to make this more painful do this" so might just be writing style too.
But yeah, as Zapp said, the AP does in general discourage PCs being murderhoboes, it just avoids punishing them too hard if they decide to be so anyway. Fourth book has another example where PCs taking lethal approach to dealing with NPCs makes things harder than if they just non-lethaled them.
Like, society in Pathfinder does have lot of similar ethical values to modern society, but when it comes to dealing with criminals and such its pretty different to modern society and more closer to not so old good days. You can play that up or down as much as GM prefers.
(and yeah saying that Paizo as whole has changed their writing philosophy based on single book is exaggeration)
I believe I made them flee at about 20hp. It's still the 10 damage they're asking for to make them flee.
Well, my party learned a new respect for black puddings last game. Even with me allowing piercing and slashing damage to go through, it was very close to being a TPK. One mistake I made was making them a bit too scared of the water. As written it didn't seem like much of a hinderance, but I wanted to give them a warning about the potential for quick sand so I described the bottom of the swamp as being extremely soft when they poked it with a stick. That made them really hesitant to back away from the pudding, because they felt they were stuck between it and more quicksand.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So, my group had a wildly different experience with the Black Pudding.
Player: I cross the log.
Me: Okay, can I get a reflex save?
Player: Okay, I rolled badly. Can I hero point?
Me: Sure! ...Yep, that makes it. So you see the log break-apart to see a writhing black sludge undernea-
Player: I dive in.
Me: ...Wha-...What?
Player: Yeah, I'm going to dive in.
I had to fudge dying rules and equipment damage rules to make sure that the character survived (albeit with constant dying checks) and I didn't just break several hundred gold of equipment. I don't think even the player entirely knows why they literally dived into a Black Pudding.
I guess my question is, assuming he's able to gain this animal's trust, how do I do the wolf justice as a companion?
So, I'm going to be a bit general about my advise because I did this with Cavnakash (my party recruited the main boss of book one with a hell of a crit), but I'd say there's three things that would definitely help.
Mechanical pay off - So, this is the easiest. Give them a little something beyond the usual realms of the rules as a pat on the back. Making it a mature companion would work, but I'd go further. It's an alpha wolf, so maybe it's particularly good at intimidating wild-life or got a few points more in survival? It's been living near a barghest, so maybe it's particularly good at smelling fiends due to familiarity (and so has a bonus at smelling/tracking fiends)? Something really minor, but gives a bit of a hell-yeah. I did this in a bit of a weirder way. Cavnakash granted someone Xulgath lore after a lot of RP back and forth with the player, and helped in a particular fight after a manticore made its way to the circus so Cavnakash got on his bird, flew over, climbed on the manticore and pinned it to the floor so others could attack it. He hasn't helped much, but the times he has definitely stuck with the group.
Arc - Just doing it mechanically is good, but adding an RP element is even better. Describe the wolf as standoffish, instinctual and submissive. It has been dominated, but more as a "please don't kill me" rather than a companion. As they work through, they begin together and show kinship. Maybe at first it'll try to avoid the player, but will eat bits of food left out, but over time will gradually eat from their hand and even sleep in the same quarters as the player. Progress can be a constant reminder they are doing good work. Cavanakash has really gone from someone who solves things violently to, now, actually learning the drums from the bard and may potentially be a crude and dim worshipper of the bard's god (which is important to a ritual the bard wants to perform that will help them summon an angel to, I'm not joking, help play bass in this emerging rock band).
Personality - This will be harder for you as your alpha wolf is technically non-sentient, but making a wolf not just a wolf but a friend will definitely help. Is it cowardly? Protective? Does it only eat meat of its own kills or is it fine eating meat you provide? Towards the end of its arc, does it sleep next to the PC or by the door of the tent/quarters? How does it treat its own environment? I'd generally suggest looking to wolf/dog behaviour to help this along. This can make the wolf not only just a mechanical boon, but also a friendly source of RP. For me, I admit with everything Paizo wrote about xulgaths, it was a good deal of just rolling with what they wrote with a pang of doubt that wanton random violence is the way to go (after all, these humans seem to be doing well for themselves, and they don't just kill everyone, they keep some alive). Having the odd inbetween scene moment of the wolf doing something minor can go a long way I think.
I might be totally wrong, but these steps definitely worked for me I feel.
I definitely want him to RP the act of training the wolf, but I also want to wrap it in a mechanic that can be tracked. I also want to penalize attempts at further intimidation, so I think the mechanic from Age of Ashes needs to be modified with an upper bound. Say, 14 Nature successes gains to animals trust enough to be a companion. On the other hand, any use of demoralize through intimidation is an automatic success, but adds 2 days to the success number. If the number reaches 24 then the wolf will be broken. It won't rise up against the ranger, but it will be less than effective as a companion too.
So I'd be a little less punishing by not only reflecting via RP the wolf is more scared than much else, but also by increasing the DC to demoralize above what it'd take via Diplomacy or Nature to reflect you're breaking it but you're not actually befriending it or teaching it. Your way definitely could work too, but you may want to clearly indicate this.
I also like the track sensitivity to fiends. It should definitely retain something from the experience. I also wondered about it's ancestry HP. A regular wolf gets 6HP. The demon tainted wolf that can be taken as a companion from the first book was upped to 8HP. I'm thinking a fully trained and trusting dire wolf should be 10HP. If it is instead, broken by the training process because it was intimidated into submission, then it will be 8HP and the damage numbers will be nerfed.
I would actually stick to 8HP for ancestry and a 6HP if there's a blunder if you want to go that route. There's actually no animal companions with 10HP to my knowledge so you'd be above other animals' health. While wiggling between 8HP and 6HP might reflect higher or lower health depending if it is trained or just broken in.
In the previous book I recall someone pulled the Images from the covers and made posters of the performers with their checks and such. Has anyone already done this for this book already?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In the previous book I recall someone pulled the Images from the covers and made posters of the performers with their checks and such. Has anyone already done this for this book already?
Well i put in the work for my group so i figured i would share it. I took the images and rotated them and cleaned uo the overlaping borders a bit. These would have been really nice to have been included in the interactive maps PDF or something since they are clearly intended to be individual handouts but the cover format doesn't really make them suitable for printing that way
https://ibb.co/album/MkfvZD
Any clarification on what Ulthadar's ghostly hand should add to Strikes?
Makes sense to me, was mostly wondering if there had been any developer clarification.
Anyways, thanks for the advice.
Alrighty, thanks folks.
As another topic, it's interesting how useful getting multiple types of trick checks has been for running the circus performance rules from the first book. Sometimes the only way to get a critical success is by critically failing a check to reduce excitement appropriately, and seeing the party trying to critically fail with a +2 against a DC 23 or something was fun.
I was pretty skeptical that there was any use for that part of the rules outside of flavor, but I think it makes some sense after having run it a few times.
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Some maps for you all...
|
My group just hit the will o wisps. Pretty interesting. I rolled perceptions ahead of time to see who would spot the quicksand and set up the init.
Two of them just hit the number to spot it, the other two did not. they found the map that mentioned St. Alkitarem's eye and the invis potion and assumed something would be watching and they needed to be invisible. Sorcerer casts invis, monk drinks the potion. (Guess which two didn't suceed at noticing the QS?
Both go in the drink and the wisps move in to attack.
Taht's when I found the "Retreat at 40hp" even though they start at 30hp. I also noticed that they are visible when bright light is shined at them...and my group is definitely exploring these islands in the daytime...soo weak template, and they can't go invis? I think the party will be ok. Although the two at the bottom of the init fell waist deep and then went to neck deep before they even got a turn.
Two of my players here are also playing in my Slithering run so I suspect they will be able to handle the pudding when that comes. Assuming they don't try to tackle it right after this wisp fight...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Is there any reason for there to be Bogymen, Iridescent animals, and visitants in the backmatter? I can't figure out where they appear in the campaign.
My players seem willing to move on from Escadar instead of facing the Celestial Menagerie. They think Mistress Dusklight's crimes are a matter for local law enforcement.
Any suggestions on a good one-shot that might fit in and get them a level before moving onto the third book?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
After sitting down with this book last weekend, I like most of what's here, but I think I'll be redoing all of chapter 4.
This just doesn't evoke anything I wanted from the Celestial Menagerie. It feels very dungeon-y in the Heavenly Gallery Gauntlet, and I'm confident my players will just want to crash through the wall at the far side when they find out Dusklight is waiting at the end. But even if they don't, I don't think a variety hour funhouse dungeon crawl does the CM and Dusklight justice. My PC's are in Book 1 Chap 2, and she's already been built up as a big bad that imo needs a more cinematic fight.
The encounter with Evora and Gigi sets up to potentially deliver what I've been imagining, a showdown in the three rings. That's the battle I want for Dusklight. And I want an audience.
First two assumptions I'm throwing out:
1. The heroes arrive in the off hours - This should go down during the circus show. It's time to repay the favor.
2. The heroes are sent off alone - They're either working with the law or they aren't. I'm gonna have the professor advise them to get Paldreen, and then she will say something to the effect of "We should take care of this immediately, but all my men are occupied. Heroes, if you would be willing, I deputize you to assist me in this arrest. Bear in mind, Dusklight is not the only rotten apple in this bushel, be prepared for a fight from any number of her clowns."
After that I'll be making a new map that puts the Heavenly Gallery as a lead-in to the bigtop. Of course, it will be arranged for operating hours, not as a defensive murder maze. In the bigtop they fight Evora as normal. Paldreen splits off to keep Dusklight from escaping, but she has no desire to do so, she wants to stick around and taunt her foes. Off screen, Darricus and a bruiser get the better of Paldreen. The tent will have to be larger, and lighting will play a key roll. The spots will illuminate only Evora and the heroes in center ring until they defeat her. Then two spotlights peel off to reveal Dusklight in one side ring to deliver her villain monologue, supported by Mazael. In the other ring, Paldreen is cartoonishly suspended in chains, unconscious, over an escape artist's water tank, with Darricus ready with a lever to lower her in. Thus the final battle begins.
My goal with this is to make the fight more dramatic and vaudevillian. A basic 30x30 room just doesn't cut it for the evil *circus* villainess. Since I first read about the CM, I just saw the final showdown as a spectacle, something theatric. I would liken it to Phantom of the Opera or the anime Revue Starlight. I hope can manage something closer to what I imagined.