|
Points of Clarifications:
Part B - Escape from Bhopan. Where does the Manifestation start in the chase? Gamemastery guide suggests one obstacle behind for the pursuer, but its starting position isn't explicitly stated, just that in round 1 the Avatar does nothing, which effectively does the same thing. This should be made clear.
Part C - To Challenge a Namesake.
Should we assume the cannons can shoot up, or even at something on the deck? Or are they only the ones below deck?
The Thorned Cocoon's Hypnotic Thrum appears to be a bit of a mess, I'll quote the text to discuss it in turn.
(enchantment, mental) The thorned cocoon relays Qxal’s telepathic coercions in either a 30-foot line or a 15-foot cone. Each creature in the emanation must attempt a DC 21 Will save. Once a creature succeeds at any save against Hypnotic Thrum, it becomes temporarily immune for 24 hours.
Is this immunity against that Cocoon or from the ability more generally? And to be nitpicky, immune to what? (I know it's probably the ability, but it doesn't specify)
Failure The creature is fascinated. For as long as it is fascinated, it must spend each of its actions to move closer to the thorned cocoon as expediently as possible, while avoiding obvious dangers. If the creature is adjacent to the thorned cocoon, it stays still and doesn’t act.
It's an assumption on my part that this should read "Gains the fascinated condition" and is not descriptive of what occurs, given what is also said in the Crit Failure section (see below), but that appears to be muddled itself during writing/editing.
Critical Failure As failure, but the condition doesn’t end automatically. The creature can attempt a new save at the end of each of its turns. On a success, the fascinated condition ends.
So wait, it ends automatically on a failure after 1 round? Did this get edited out somewhere?
Venture-Captain, Washington—Seattle
|
Should we assume the cannons can shoot up, or even at something on the deck? Or are they only the ones below deck?
It makes sense to me that cannons shouldn't be used them in a way that makes it likely they would damage their own ship. Logically, this would also suggest that the BBEG should stay above the ship as much as possible to thwart the cannon-firing, but maybe it's not that smart about naval affairs.
Critical Failure As failure, but the condition doesn’t end automatically. The creature can attempt a new save at the end of each of its turns. On a success, the fascinated condition ends.So wait, it ends automatically on a failure after 1 round? Did this get edited out somewhere?
The Will save at the end of each turn is probably intended to be the same for both Failure and Crit Failure. My best guess is that the "ends automatically" refers to the Fascinated condition ending if the target is attacked.
You are compelled to focus your attention on something, distracting you from whatever else is going on around you. You take a –2 status penalty to Perception and skill checks [...] This condition ends if a creature uses hostile actions against you or any of your allies.
|
I didn't know whether to put this in the product thread or the GM thread, but decided since it needs a lot of spoilers to put it here.
I really like both parts of this two-parter, but I feel like both parts having such a similar structure makes the second one feel a little repetitive. (Only prepped part 2, running it tomorrow, perhaps the epicness will overwhelm that aspect. perhaps the structural callback will reinforce the story)
3 skill checks to avoid damage/long lasting conditions
combat
combat
long skill portion
combat
Yes the infiltration/impression versus chase are a different feel (so maybe the structure only feels the same to the GM). Part 1 had a bit more role play moments and more of a 'slowly discover the history', while part 2 has more 'story is told to you'.
Do GMs have thoughts/tips on how best leverage the structural similarities while still making sure everything feels fresh?
Also after prepping part 2, some thoughts for part 1:
I feel like developing a few more NPCS (not Lelzhein/Webhgkiz (sp)) to help establish sympathy for the Bhopanese, would help with the evacuation/rescuing/returning treasures aspect. The abstract people in the garden/resturant/dance would be good candidates.
And on the infamy condition, this one feels a little odd for how to run it. Most opponents don't use dying conditions, and only last hit matters for lethal versus non-lethal, and no surrender condition.
Are we meant to warn the PC about infamy every time they attack lethally once the king's HP is low enough that a potential hit could kill? Just give the warning at the start of combat? Run the king with PC death/dying rules? Have the king autostabilize at 0 and give the PCs a choice?
|
|
I really like the epic-ness too; they really aimed high with this pair of scenarios. My guess is the structural similarities aren't going to be a noticeable problem for most players.
Also after prepping part 2, some thoughts for part 1:
I feel like developing a few more NPCS (not Lelzhein/Webhgkiz (sp)) to help establish sympathy for the Bhopanese, would help with the evacuation/rescuing/returning treasures aspect. The abstract people in the garden/resturant/dance would be good candidates.
I think Khoumrock could come in useful here as the conscience of the party. He could easily say a few things about the Society's moral obligations and the plight of the people, and that would be in keeping with his actions during the scenario.
And on the infamy condition, this one feels a little odd for how to run it. Most opponents don't use dying conditions, and only last hit matters for lethal versus non-lethal, and no surrender condition.
Are we meant to warn the PC about infamy every time they attack lethally once the king's HP is low enough that a potential hit could kill? Just give the warning at the start of combat? Run the king with PC death/dying rules? Have the king autostabilize at 0 and give the PCs a choice?
Yeah, it's a bit tricky. I'd suggest adding a plea from Audho (after her boxed text at the start of the encounter) asking the PCs not to kill him (because he's under the influence of the BBEG). As far as the official infamy warning, I'd say that one time is enough. Being descriptive about the king's current condition might be helpful. There are plenty of nonlethal options so I don't think anyone could reasonably object if you enforce "instant death at 0 HP". But personally I'd also allow PCs to intentionally plan to save him immediately after delivering what would otherwise be a killing blow, e.g. ready a Battle Medicine (with Assurance and a high enough modifier that it's guaranteed to succeed) or a 1-action Heal.
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
I don't think my current table will do it, but I know people who will.
What happens if the PCs decide that their best chance is to fight the manifestation when it first appears? It seems like it would be a hard, but not hopeless fight. (20 regen is tough, but at least half the casters at my table dish out fire damage. And that 20 regent is going to go real fast with the weakness fire 10. It should be possible to get her down to 0, burn the body to ash, and spread the ash on the ocean.
Do we just rework the "cannons" to be the Bhopanese Guards, either firing barrages of heavy crossbows, Or firing siege engines with heavy chains? (And again, more effective if they are rallied by a PC)
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
?
6. Secondary Success Conditions - The option to offer all the treasure bundles to the people of Bhopal is never mentioned in the adventure before this point. Should the GM suggest doing so? Even if it doesn't change anything for the...
It actually is mentioned in one of the treasure bundles that the treasures are worth the same no matter weather the PCs are paid by the Society, or by grateful Bhopanese survivors. And a previous one notes that they still get the value of the treasure bundle, even if they decide that they should leave it behind and not loot it.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The number of successes the PCs earn determines their result. If they earn a number of successes equal to half the number of PCs (rounded up) or fewer, the PCs fail their attempt to bypass the obstacle, experiencing the failure effect listed in the obstacle before eventually slogging through.
This is REALLY harsh in a 4-person party, as it requires 3/4 characters to pass the check and 1 crit fail can tank the whole effort. 2/4 people passing the check should pass in a 4-person party.
|
I also find 9 treasure bundles, yea.
And my VOs and I think you do start with full spells and etc.
As for killing the king, I found this on p.459 of the Core:
Player characters, their companions, and other significant characters and creatures don’t automatically die when they reach 0 Hit Points. Instead, they are knocked out and are at risk of death. At the GM’s discretion, villains, powerful monsters, special NPCs, and enemies with special abilities that are likely to bring them back to the fight (like ferocity, regeneration, or healing magic) can use these rules as well.
So for me, I think if anyone in the party makes an effort to take the king alive, I'll do that. The more effort they make, the higher the dying conditions the king will benefit from (in case they don't do the final blow with nonlethal damage like our party did when playing it - so many crit fails vs daze, heh).
Fighting before the chase I think the scenario says no on that. On the shore? Eh, yea, regeneration but that's the PCs' call I guess. I'd still have the fire support be the cannons, maybe just off-shore firing at the PCs' command.
I really liked playing this series and am looking forward to GMing it next week!
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"It should be made obvious that the PCs will certainly die
if they attempt to confront the Thorned Monarch here,
and should any among them consider standing before the
manifestation, Audho implores the PCs to leave quickly,
noting that Qxal’s accumulated power stored within the
island gives the manifestation a regenerative ability that
makes their manifestation all but indestructible."
I mean, that's not exactly saying No they can't do it...
Just that they are probably going to die if they do.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The number of successes the PCs earn determines their result. If they earn a number of successes equal to half the number of PCs (rounded up) or fewer, the PCs fail their attempt to bypass the obstacle, experiencing the failure effect listed in the obstacle before eventually slogging through.This is REALLY harsh in a 4-person party, as it requires 3/4 characters to pass the check and 1 crit fail can tank the whole effort. 2/4 people passing the check should pass in a 4-person party.
Actually it's really tough no matter what. For example, with a group of five, four players 4 must succeed. Basically this designed to remove treasure bundles. I don't expect 10 every time but this set of challenges seems overly harsh.
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
Wouldn't it be at the standard "half [character] level rounded up"?
It would, if it was a cantrip.
Innate cantrips are cast at will and automatically heightened as normal for cantrips (see Cantrips on page 300) unless otherwise specified.
But it is a first level spell
You can’t use your spell slots to cast your innate spells, but you might have an innate spell and also be able to prepare or cast the same spell through your class. You also can’t heighten innate spells, but some abilities that grant innate spells might give you the spell at a higher level than its base level or change the level at which you cast the spell.
Presumably, since it doesn't say what level it is heightened to, it would be level 1.
Example:
The blood of the Dragon Kings runs strong in your veins. Your draconic heritage is clearly visible, with hair that is almost entirely crimson, azure, or the like, and that shines like a dragon’s scales. You can cast the dragon breath sorcerer bloodline spell as an innate arcane spell once per day, but you can use only the dragon breath that is associated with your heritage and that matches the energy type of your Dragon Spit feat. At 12th level and every 3 levels thereafter, the spell is heightened by an additional spell level.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I drew a chase map of the island as I imagine it.
I’ve run this twice now and players seem to enjoy it; it might be useful for others’ digital games. It’s on pfsprep too but I’m not sure how many GMs are going there for 2e scenario prep materials.
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/4doivgdn8am3f5b/AAC4_YsZ-BU0IjESladXNYYNa?dl=0
|
Contributor
|
Minor nitpick.
Where did Blackthorne get an entire bank of Alkenstar Cannons? Those are supposed to be super, super rare?
It should be alternating Harpoons and Balista Bolts.
Future story! :D (If the PFS crew wants to tell it, that is.)
He *was* instated as a Venture-Captain five times prior to the scenario, and the Pathfinder Society *does* pay out a small nation's worth of gold to its highest-level seekers. The better question might be, "Where does the Pathfinder Society get its money?"
|
Contributor
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I drew a chase map of the island as I imagine it.
I’ve run this twice now and players seem to enjoy it; it might be useful for others’ digital games. It’s on pfsprep too but I’m not sure how many GMs are going there for 2e scenario prep materials.
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/4doivgdn8am3f5b/AAC4_YsZ-BU0IjESladXNYYNa?dl=0
Lovely! I just drew some boxes on Roll20. XD
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I had a PFS 1 Gunslinger / Shield Marshal whose entire reason for belonging to the Pathfinder society was to figure out how the Pathfinder Society was getting so dang many guns, given that Alkenstar keeps a strict reign on exports.
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
4 enemies with reach and AoOs in a small room with the ability to close in on the party before the party could disperse had my players tearing their hair out.
Especially since they had clustered up on the cleric to get the benefit of her bless, and so the guards were able to pen them in so that the kind could blast them all with lightning.
In got 3 of them with lightning the first turn, and due to their own wriggling trying to avoid AoOs, I got *5* PCs with lightning the second turn.
If he had 1 more lightning, it would have been a TPK.
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
What is the action used to grab a redcap's hat? My players made the knowledge check to identify, got the knowledge that redcaps draw their power from their bloodstained caps, and were like "Well, simple solution then," It also had the advantage of focusing the redcap's attention firmly on whoever had the hat, shielding more vulnerable members who could have been badly hurt.
I'm a little sorry they didn't play "pass the hat"
I went with disarm for lack of anything better.
|
|
I ran this tonight and it is ridiculously brutal. I could very easily have TPK'd the party if I had chosen to the play the Monarch to its full potential. Writers really need to get away from the idea of needing to have an over levelled big bad boss in scenarios, especially when you have a group of mixed levels. With a 3,4,4,5,6,6 we were 24 challenge points but with three players who significantly struggled to do much against a level 8 boss monster.
I don't disagree that the NPC is a serious threat if all they do is attack. They start 120 feet away so it's all three actions to even get to the edge of the ship. They should flutter on the last action so they spread their dust and "flies". The overall monster design in the scenario doesn't follow the style guide on abilities. Presumably this means they can take the fly action.
I myself offer the part the option to have him "show off" all his powers as Fey are want to do, or to just straight up try and murder them all. More guidance in the appendix on his tactics would've been helpful. Otherwise he's best off just pelting them from range. Which would likely be a TPK, if not for the harpoons.
Really the combat is balanced on the cannons which add a serious boost to the party. In the three combats I've run so far half of his health was nuked by the cannons. Your level doesn't matter for those, so parties have quickly had the lowest levels use them.
Overall, if you ignore all the special abilities and just focus on attacks, it's a brutal fight, that a GM could use to try and TPK fish if they wanted to. Qxal will crit often if given the chance.
The mechanics of the chase scene are also extremely punishing, even if it lacks any scaling. It is very easy for the Monarch to catch up because too often the number of available skills to bypass any one challege is very limited. The mechanics really push everyone to have a go, even where their is a decent chance of a crit fail, just because you have to keep ahead of him. The inability to treat wound between the fey encounter and the chase adds to the sheer lethality this involves.
Chase mechanics dictate that everyone must roll each round. You cannot pass a whole round without rolling. GMG Pg 156. If they fail to act they automatically lose 1 chase point for the party.
I think I worked it out at one point. The party has five rounds to get to the end of the chase to get the treasure bundles. They have to accumulate Party Size*6 successes in that time. Meaning that everyone has to crit succeed once, and offset crit fails with crit successes. Since there is no Tier adjustment the higher tier's are more likely to succeed here. Lower tier are SOL as they'll suffer a 10% higher fail chance. I think better design from a treasure bundle perspective would be to have 1 tied to the Bloody Mire, and the other to the Grasping dunes, and you know have the DCs vary by Tier. It's incredibly easy to lose both treasure bundles here, and the obstacles in Part A have seen many parties walk away with only 7 bundles (don't forget to remind GA players of their Meticulous Appraisal boon availability).
Only a very unlucky party won't make it through, and unless someone was really banged up from the Evil Fey fight they won't go down as the Monarch stops for a round every time it catches them.
Venture-Captain, Australia—NSW—Greater West
|
I have a further query about this one. I just played part 1, but will be running this one. In part one, the party left their animal companions behind when they went to the party, which means that they do not have them for part 2?
I was going to use the sidebar for bringing in new characters to bring them downstairs before the roof caves in.
There was one player who was having kittens about not being able to have her companion, and being low on spells etc going into part 2.
The crown may just have a magical "once per scenario" ability to allow a 10 minute rest and get everything back, as if you are resting overnight....just to make the fact they have all spells and HP back make sense.
|
If you're running this for PFS, Part 1 and 2 are different scenarios. Even if they're linked by narrative.
The players start this scenario as how they would start any other. Fully refreshed, they got downtime, and they'll be able to make downtime purchases. You have to suspend your disbelief for the sake of mechanics.
Especially since neither part is designed with the intention of them being run as a continuous adventure. You're really going to ruin the fun of anyone with limited daily resources (like a caster) otherwise by denying them the ability to use a lot of class features.
|
Venture-Captain, Australia—NSW—Greater West
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeh, I know they start it like any other, but the nature of the end of Part 1 is very unusual, so I was thinking through what would make sense narratively.
It would have been nice for the one of the scenarios to address this. I am not the only one, as there is a couple of people asking the same question in this very thread.
|
|
I assume they felt like it wasn't necessary and were trying to cut down on word count. Just go by how PFS and their scenarios have always worked, even in previously linked stories.
Every new scenario is its own encapsulated bubble. Yes, it makes no sense narratively, but you just have to roll with it and move on. It's not the first time in PFS it's happened.
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Nebraska—Bellevue
|
"It should be made obvious that the PCs will certainly die
if they attempt to confront the Thorned Monarch here,
and should any among them consider standing before the
manifestation, Audho implores the PCs to leave quickly,
noting that Qxal’s accumulated power stored within the
island gives the manifestation a regenerative ability that
makes their manifestation all but indestructible."I mean, that's not exactly saying No they can't do it...
Just that they are probably going to die if they do.
My plan is simple. Blackthorne is on his way to the boat and is bugging out. If the players stay to fight, they miss their ride. He's not waiting.
Oh, and that's "a" manifestation of Qxal. It may not be the only manifestation of Qxal.
If the PCs miss the boat, the end notes are suitable for that situation. That said, I doubt the PCs will stay to fight if they know they will lose their ride home.
|
|
Yeh, I know they start it like any other, but the nature of the end of Part 1 is very unusual, so I was thinking through what would make sense narratively.
It would have been nice for the one of the scenarios to address this. I am not the only one, as there is a couple of people asking the same question in this very thread.
Narratively, the crown can act as a lampshade for how things are different. 1-16 ends with things fading sort of to black with the shattering mirrors. If you know you're playing with the same people, you can mention how their animal companions appear in the mirrors just before they crack. For my groups I had the crown "expend" some power to heal them and restore spell slots.
|
|
Random question: How does one pronounce "Qxal?" My initial thought is to pronounce "Q" as a "Kh" sound (as in Quetzalcoatl) and the "x" as a "sh". So "KHE-shal"?
I'll be rolling with "kih(as in "kick")-shall" when I run it in two weeks.
Speaking of running it in two weeks, I came here to confirm whether or not the scenario's 9 treasure bundles was intentional or a publication error. This is my first time running into a scenario that only has 9 listed, and the GM Basics section on the organized play guide specifically states that scenarios are intended to have 10 Treasure Bundles apiece. Should I just assume the party gets one automatically here to make 10? (And potentially make up for the difficulty of the chase sequence treasure bundles, I suppose?
In either case, I'm glad I was excited by the boss on initial readthrough and managed to catch this as early as I did so I could get this question asked. Looks like it'll be a fun scenario, especially since I think it might be our local group's first 5-6 subtier. I'm sure it'll go impeccably fine considering part 1 with the same group ended with two/four players on the floor and the level 6 Barbarian playing down being at 25% hp.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
From the Organized Play Online Discord's clarification section:
Scenario 1-17 The Thorned Monarch only list 9 potential Treasure Bundles.
Known error, subtract missed bundles from 10 to get how many the players recover (Reference VO discord)
So just do that instead and even if they screw up on the bundles badly they get a door prize!
Venture-Captain, Nebraska—Omaha
|
There is another adventure where only 9 are listed. In that thread it was stated to award 10 bundles if the party found all 9, otherwise reduce by the number of bundles not found from 10.
From my reading of multiple sources, including a discussion on the GM channel on the PaizoCon Discord (Now Organized Play Discord I think), there was a lot of discussion on what to about players not keep the loot they "find".
Very confusing to have two different places talking about a topic. I think it should have been had here. Even commented on it but I am sure it got lost.
Venture-Agent, California—Silicon Valley
|
There is another adventure where only 9 are listed. In that thread it was stated to award 10 bundles if the party found all 9, otherwise reduce by the number of bundles not found from 10.
From my reading of multiple sources, including a discussion on the GM channel on the PaizoCon Discord (Now Organized Play Discord I think), there was a lot of discussion on what to about players not keep the loot they "find".
Very confusing to have two different places talking about a topic. I think it should have been had here. Even commented on it but I am sure it got lost.
This is the question I would like to know. There is only one mention of getting treasure bundles, even if you don't take them, and that's after the fight with the king. I believe that's explicitly tied to those treasure bundles, and not all the bundles you could get.
If they need to offer the money back, but get no penalty for doing so, what's the point in having a "two of three" requirement for the secondary? Why not just say "They need to do one of these two" and be done with it?
|
Venture-Captain, Nebraska—Omaha
|
Actually, there are 4 different mentions on treasure bundles.
The first is on page 5 when the party can earn one from finding a mambele. They can earn a second if they clear two obstacles. And a third if they clear all three obstacles.
The second mention is on page 6 where the party can collect the "personal affects" that can be found amid the wreckage. That earns two bundles.
The third mention is on page 8 when the party defend the town folks from the jinkin or redcaps. The bundle is from citizens slain during the fight. That earns two bundles.
The fourth mention is on 11 after the chase. If the party gets there before the monarch, they have time to gather a "cache of Bhopanses art objects" that are worth two bundles. These bundles are not subject to the returning of plunder to the survivors.
The odd, hard part, of this adventure is that there is no real place for the players to get the idea of returning the plunder. The GM has to make an effort to let the players know they may have stuff that people who alive may own.
The third point is way to still get the secondary objectives if they missed one of the first two.
I think the party can choose to forgo 7 treasure bundles in total to get that second objective. Is it worth giving up that much gold for XP and reputation? I don't know.
|
|
Note that the secondary objective is for offering to return all treasure bundles. Not for actually doing it.
I think the PCs are expected to keep all the bundles they get, even if they offer them for the rebuilding of Bhopan.
But really :
- It should have been explicitly noted that PCs start this scenario just as they would any scenario, even if they do it just after 1-16. GMs who miss this wil get the party to spend more resources than expected and risks of PC death and even TPKs get higher.
- That PCs get to keep the bundles should have been explicitly noted, or if such is not intended and they are supposed to get 0gp, it should be explicitly noted too.
- Using the names of existing conditions, ie, Sickened and Fascinated, for effects that do not follow the rules of said conditions is really misleading and opens unneeded arguments between GM and players.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Random question: How does one pronounce "Qxal?" My initial thought is to pronounce "Q" as a "Kh" sound (as in Quetzalcoatl) and the "x" as a "sh". So "KHE-shal"?
It was clarified to be pronounced like 'kicks-all' during Gen Con, like oh pronk! They kicks all our butts!
|
Note that the secondary objective is for offering to return all treasure bundles. Not for actually doing it.
I think the PCs are expected to keep all the bundles they get, even if they offer them for the rebuilding of Bhopan.
But really :
- It should have been explicitly noted that PCs start this scenario just as they would any scenario, even if they do it just after 1-16. GMs who miss this wil get the party to spend more resources than expected and risks of PC death and even TPKs get higher.
It is explicitly noted.
- That PCs get to keep the bundles should have been explicitly noted, or if such is not intended and they are supposed to get 0gp, it should be explicitly noted too.
That is noted in the scenario too. They get the same gold if they keep the stuff, return the stuff, or just leave it lying where they found it and tell someone where it is.
- Using the names of existing conditions, ie, Sickened and Fascinated, for effects that do not follow the rules of said conditions is really misleading and opens unneeded arguments between GM and players.
The only thing that they change is the removal condition, and it is not uncommon for an effect to specify a longer duration or removal condition.