PFS 1-24: Lightning Strikes, Stars Fall

[HammerJack]

Yes, I believe the time travel application that I complained about at the start if this thread is the correct one. Otherwise, a group traveling at 25 and not getting up to 5 exploration points would have some real problems.

I do wonder if my group was out if the ordinary, though. When the briefing made clear that arriving on time was their mission, no one even considered traveling at their walking pace for a second. Warnings about how dangerous the trip might be for horses only made people consider whether to buy extras, and ask if the caravan would be able to bring the extras, just in case.

[Gary Bush]

andreww wrote:

I think you may have misuderstood how the travel segment works. You roll once per segment, the most exploration points you can get in each segment is 2 if you get a crit. Only one PC rolls per attempt, other PCs can aid.

I didn't read the travel segment in this way. It is crazy to to do just 4 rolls and then determine how long it takes to get to Gorum Pots. How is the party going to know where they are at? How can they make a judgement to stay a day to Torch or not?

Mechanically, I feel I did it correctly (short of messing up the total miles involved).

[HammerJack]

I believe that's what the note to "check the party's exploration point total and let them know if they're on track to make good time to Gorum Pots" is for.

Unfortunately, as mentioned before, applying the effects of exploration points on a leg-by-leg basis also results in a silly situation where the caravan is just constantly accelerating, instead of possibly making good time on the early parts if the journey. It's just not a well implemented mechanic.

[Gary Bush]

I don't see it as a problem that the caravan seems to accelerate as time passes. To me it makes sense. The party is getting familiar with the lay of the land so it makes it easier to find good paths. Thus an increase in EP.

Agree it is strange. This is not the first overland travel and it is different than the others. It is becoming the as chases were in 1e.

Oh man, overland travel. Hey have not done that before....

Just pick a method and stick to it. Or not do it for awhile.

[CanisDirus]

When I ran this, I put the travel speed chart as a handout on Roll 20 for all players to see prior to the adventure, to give them a hint that it might be something to think about. After the briefing, everyone who had a speed lower than 30 bought a horse (or near-equivalent, in the case of a goblin). The party had 3 clerics, one of whom was rather good at Nature checks. The warpriest among them prepared Show the Way every day, as well. I did note that the benefit from that spell only applied to the PCs and not the caravan, however.

Those simple preparations (plus taking extra care to keep the horses alive by leaving them tied up before dealing with the Krooths and sending them across with their most skillful party members at the steaming fields), meant that they were pretty much guaranteed at 18 miles a day. This put them in Torch before the end of day 6, and even with a day of rest and shopping, got them to the Gorum Pots before the end of day 10.

The way I handled Exploration Points in-game was to give the players a general sense of how they were doing, pace-wise, in finding shortcuts for the caravan at the end of each of the first three segments. I applied the EP speed boosts to the caravan's pace as well, since numerous points in the scenario stated that the whole point of the PCs mission was to trail-blaze for the caravan's route.

The party's lead-roller could only critically fail the task on a natural 1, so once they hit 2 EP I told them that they seemed to have increased their (and the caravan's) effective base speed (but I didn't tell them by how much) so long as they kept up this pace - i.e. so long as they didn't lose EP before the end of the scenario.

By the time they had reached Torch, the party had 4 EP (success, success, critical success), so once again without giving exact speeds, I told them that they had increased the effective speed of themselves and the caravan multiple times, and barring any incidents or side-treks, were on-pace to arrive at the Gorum Pots early, even if they took a day in Torch.

I think that's how best to work the EP mechanic into the scenario, short of pulling back the curtain entirely to the players. It certainly is a bit clunky, and was the only part of this otherwise really fun adventure that hurt my brain a little bit.

All that said, your mileage may vary.

...pun intended :P

[Doug Hahn]

My party also did well, thanks in part to similar hints and prep materials (travel speed handouts), and an understanding of what was at stake.

I am really starting to see a larger pattern in the 2e scene here. Some GMs are able to help their parties succeed by providing handouts and in-story hints about progress or what's at stake (e.g. when to spend hero points or how they’re doing on progress towards a mission goal). Such GMs often do this by doing more than just reading box text, and by giving the players context that helps them manage resources.

This scenario has awkward mechanics and a problematic statement from the VC that might lead players astray if the GM refuses to paraphrase, but a good GM should always try to provide their players with the tools to succeed. Sometimes that takes a little effort, but your players will appreciate it — and if they fail sometimes (which can and should happen), they won't feel cheated.

[Online Guide Team Lead - JTT]

Exton Land wrote:

cavernshark wrote:

Minor note, but it's not free anymore. It's 10% of the cost of the rune. So for a +1 breastplate it's 16 GP to move that +1 rune elsewhere. And the breastplate already has a +1 rune, so transferring it to the armor would do nothing.

It won't be free in the future (possibly)... It was mentioned by Sayre in the Paizocon Online AMA, but hasn't made it into a blog or update to the guide yet. And that's assuming nobody forgets or a quiet decision not to implement the change is made. Heck the whole AMA thread is gone now. Can't even link to it.

No one has forgotten, it is in the upcoming update, with a number of other clarifications. The "free" was only ever meant to cover the labor costs, not the materials cost.

[Reldan]

Doug Hahn wrote:

My party also did well, thanks in part to similar hints and prep materials (travel speed handouts), and an understanding of what was at stake.

I am really starting to see a larger pattern in the 2e scene here. Some GMs are able to help their parties succeed by providing handouts and in-story hints about progress or what's at stake (e.g. when to spend hero points or how they’re doing on progress towards a mission goal). Such GMs often do this by doing more than just reading box text, and by giving the players context that helps them manage resources.

This scenario has awkward mechanics and a problematic statement from the VC that might lead players astray if the GM refuses to paraphrase, but a good GM should always try to provide their players with the tools to succeed. Sometimes that takes a little effort, but your players will appreciate it — and if they fail sometimes (which can and should happen), they won't feel cheated.

Some GMs can simply make their party succeed, because they're the GM. I think that's most GMs for the scenario, because otherwise it can be a pretty negative experience and neither players nor GMs really want that.

Just as a note for the party mentioned above where only the <30 speed chars got mounts, they're not in the clear with just 2 successes. That's only a 5-ft increase which would mean 35-ft - only 140 miles in 10 days and not the 150 needed. When they reached Torch, they weren't ahead of schedule - they were at 40ft, which meant 16 miles a day or 160 miles in ten days. A loss of a day spent in Torch and they didn't actually make it unless they got up to 5+ successes afterwards. If they chose to not do the final Find a Shortcut and spent a day in Torch, then they took 11 days and technically failed in the scenario as written, despite 2 successes, a crit success, buying mounts, and then painstakingly planning how to keep those mounts alive the whole way. No GM is going to actually fail the entire scenario on them after all that, but that goes to the point of the scenario as written being fundamentally broken.

From a feedback standpoint, please let's never use this travel system again. There have been other ones already used that worked way better.

[CanisDirus]

David Nadler wrote:

Just as a note for the party mentioned above where only the <30 speed chars got mounts, they're not in the clear with just 2 successes. That's only a 5-ft increase which would mean 35-ft - only 140 miles in 10 days and not the 150 needed.

You may have missed the part of my post where I mentioned the "Show the Way" spell, which was linked further up-thread.

Show the Way wrote:

For the purpose of long-distance overland travel during exploration mode, traveling through difficult terrain reduces you to only three-quarters your travel Speed instead of half,

30 ft speed = 24 miles per day * 3/4 = 18 miles per day

35 ft speed = 28 miles per day * 3/4 = 21 miles per day

[NielsenE]

I feel it wasn't designed with Show the Way in mind, but it does solve a lot of the problems, at the expense of consuming a spell slot a day.

[NECR0G1ANT]

So 1 of my PC's rented rather tgan purchased a horse. How many days does it take to reach Starfall from Annihilation Canyon, then make the return trip to Hajoth Hakados?
Just a ballpark figure.

[Gary Bush]

Ballpark? 25 days. Or, since travel is common between the two towns, allow for a 1 way rental. That I what I offered, but no one took me up on the rental part.

[Ferious Thune]

I'm trying to sort out how to use the items on the chronicle. I can purchase the Numerian Breastplate directly, if I want. If I want the buckler or the shield, then I have to purchase whichever formula and the full 500gp worth of adamantine, then craft the item? An adamantine buckler only requires 50gp worth of adamantine and an adamantine shield only requires 55gp worth of adamantine. So will I just have a 450gp chunk of adamantine left over? Or can I purchase 50gp or 55gp of the 500 and only buy more later if I need it?

Also, how many Bequethal boons would I need to use if I wanted to send one formula and the 500gp chunk of adamantine to another character? 1 or 2? It seems like it will just be easier to GM the scenario to put the chronicle on the other character.

[Gary Bush]

Yes, you would have left over adamantine after making the either item. It could be used to something else later I guess.

I don't see you being able to buy smaller chunks thatn 500 gp. The boon only provides for 500 gp.

It would take 2 Bequethal boons, one for the formula and on3 for the chunk of sky metal.

Keep in mind we don't know what is happening to the Bequethal boon so you would likely need to do this soon.

Your right, it would easier to GM.

[Ferious Thune]

Thanks. Yeah, it sounds like GMing it will be easier. Getting trained in crafting and not wasting all of the materials will be the harder part...

[Gary Bush]

Just don't crit fail, right? That is the only way to lose half the material. I could be wrong, I have not played with the crafting rules at all.

[Ferious Thune]

I believe that is correct. But for a Champion with a 10 INT who will have to put a skill increase into Crafting just to get it to trained (and then retrain out of it later to put something at Expert), his chances of critfailing crafting an 8th level item will be pretty good. I guess I could put my 7th level increase in it to make it Master. And I haven't played him yet at 5th level, so I could take the +2 WIS I was going to give him and move that to +2 INT. Then get the Crafter's Eyepiece.

That's going to give him a... +16 vs a DC 24, I think. Or if I skip making it Master, then a +14, which would still only critfail on a 1 (but fails 45% of the time). Plus overspending 450gp on materials. Just to get a buckler that might survive for a second hit.

Aren't we supposed to have someone at the grand lodge we can pay to do these things for us? Oh, maybe I can get the Hireling boon. I could get an Expert Hireling, I think (thanks to some bonus Rep) before they go away. But that would only have a +12 at level 8 and have a 10% chance to crit fail. Hmm... Still might be less of a hassle than trying to get trained myself. I should probably hire him before the rules change, since I think I've only spent 2 fame on a wayfinder for that character.

But then that's assuming that the hireling can use the formula, which I think is possible?

[Pirate Rob]

If you want a tough shield adamantine is not the way to go.

If you want a shield to attack high level golems with and is better than nothing for blocking then go adamantine.

[Ferious Thune]

There aren’t any other options for a buckler. If a sturdy buckler was a thing, I’d get that. Adamantine buckler with a second ally shield ally at least gets to hardness 10 and 48 HPs/24 BT. Which is something. Just a lot of effort to get there.

[Niko Cailean]

does anybody else found the BLUE STREAK MAGE statblock from tier 7-8 kind of weird?

Bind undead? Stench of Decay? a bunch of necromancy spells?
IMHO that just don't fit to the scenario/numeria/tecnology/plasma setting of the scenario.

in tier 5-6 the BLUE STREAK MAGE is full of elemental/eletric spells and seens just fine in the setting.

[andreww]

Niko Cailean wrote:

does anybody else found the BLUE STREAK MAGE statblock from tier 7-8 kind of weird?

Bind undead? Stench of Decay? a bunch of necromancy spells?
IMHO that just don't fit to the scenario/numeria/tecnology/plasma setting of the scenario.

in tier 5-6 the BLUE STREAK MAGE is full of elemental/eletric spells and seens just fine in the setting.

One thing to be careful of with the high tier mage is that they have Vampiric Touch prepared. Vampiric Touch has the death trait meaning that if they down a PC with it that PC is dead, there is no mucking about with dying values or recovery checks.

[Derek Schubert]

The hazard in Encounter B (Spitting Acid "Bushes") is the first complex hazard like this that I've run in 2e.
Is this the right way to run it?:
A few PCs were Searching in exploration mode, and my secret Perception checks for them beat the hazard's Stealth check (DC 20 at subtier 5-6), so I tell them that the PCs are going into an area with a hazard.
The encounter begins and we roll initiative.
I already decided on the specific squares for the dangerous "bushes" on the map, according to the Challenge Points.
To the PCs who were Searching and beat the DC 20, I reveal the 1 dangerous square that is within 10 feet of a Searching PC as they arrive on the map.
(The rogue's Trap Spotter feat doesn't apply, because this hazard isn't a trap.)
I tell the players that it looks dangerous for their PCs to get close to that square -- i.e. it would trigger the hazard's reaction and activate the hazard -- but then they could try to disable a square while standing adjacent. (Is this the right amount of detail for a DC 20 success on the Search?)
I also explain that the hazard has more squares on the map that are dangerous, but I don't reveal them unless a PC takes a Seek action, and a dangerous square is in the 10-foot square that the PC chooses.
The PCs carefully plot their movement so they never go into a square adjacent to a dangerous hazard square. The hazard never takes its reaction, never activates, and never spits acid, even though the PCs are well within the 30ft range of the spitting.

[LeftHandShake]

I know this scenario has been out for a long time, but I just noticed that the primary objective is even more broken than discussed here. In short, if the party fails to find a path through the steaming fields or stops in Torch, they fail the primary objective *no matter what*.

The bottom of the right column of page 5 says, "The horse-drawn wagons in the caravan can move up to 32 miles in a day over standard terrain (base speed of 40 feet). However, the Numerian wastelands are difficult terrain, which halves their travel speed." The caravan can travel 160 miles in the ten allotted days. Just above that, the route is described as being 150 miles from Hajoth Hakados to Gorum Pots.

The rest of the paragraph discusses how the party is likely to slow the caravan down. Nothing in the text suggests that the caravan moves faster if the PCs do, but instead emphasizes that the PCs are the limiting factor for the caravan.

The right column of page 8 says that if the party travels around the steaming fields, it adds 20 miles to the route. The top left of page 9 says that the consequence of not attaining the required successes is that the party has to go around the fields.

150 miles base + 20 miles penalty is 170 miles, more than the caravan can travel in ten days. Likewise, if the party stops in Torch, then there are only 9 days of travel, and the caravan can only go 144 miles in the 10 allotted days.

I really think this scenario needs errata or official clarification.

[HammerJack]

I did apply the benefits from Exploration Points to the entire caravan, believing it to be intended since otherwise the stop in Torch become effectively impossible. Obviously, that's only my reading, of course.

[TwilightKnight]

Unrelated to the actual topic, when I originally read this title, I was expecting a sequel called "Stars Fall, You're all dead!" LoL

[mizinamo]

LeftHandShake wrote:

Nothing in the text suggests that the caravan moves faster if the PCs do

Well, there's the bit that says

Scenario wrote:

As scouts, the PCs are expected to search for safer and faster paths.

which one could interpret as meaning "If the PCs do a good job, they find routes that do not require the caravan to travel at half speed all the time".