Venture-Agent, California—Silicon Valley
|
Hello all, I have some initial questions about this scenario.
1. What happens to incorporeal creatures with only a fly speed if they don't Fly on their turn?
2. Is the boss supposed to not have 1st level spells?
3. Is the spell attack mod for the Invidiak +16? It's not listed anywhere.
|
|
The flying issue was discussed a few times and there's no official clarification. I doubt the creature is meant to be effectively slowed 1 and unless I hear otherwise will allow them to stay afloat without spending actions if they're not "airborne."
The only spell with an attack roll the invidiak can do is Telekinetic projectile and it's missing from the bestiary as well and not in the errata. 16 seems right to me.
Definitely seems like the boss statblock is missing a level's worth of spells.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For what it’s worth, I wrote the final fight with the assumption that the incorporeal boss would be unaffected by wind on the Material Plane.
The Gamemastery Guide says about spellcasting creatures:
Because creatures tend to be “on stage” for only a short time, you usually don’t need to fill every spell slot. You can often fill just the top three levels of spells, pick cantrips, and slot in a few thematic backup spells in the fourth level down.
I didn’t include 1st level spells in order to save word count. Since it’s unlikely the final boss will survive long enough to expend it’s more valuable high-leave spells, it shouldn’t need any 1st level spells.
Doug Hahn got my response about the invidiak perfectly
|
Venture-Agent, California—Silicon Valley
|
So uh, here's an issue with the Incorporeal resistance that I just came across (which also applies to the invidiak but I know you can't fix those).
Your strike does 1 good damage
The boss's weakness triggers, making it 11 good damage
The boss's resistance triggers, reducing that Good damage back to 1.
I think this could be fixed if the boss were weak to Positive, and the extra damage was 1 Positive damage, or by adding for this creature specifically that the resistance doesn't apply to Good damage.
Changing it from Good to Positive is also in line with the whole Weakness to Negative you can get from the Ritual. Yea it won't help on the invidiak, and it would eliminate an easy way to win the first fight, but as it is now, it's only useful on the first fight and useless anywhere else, which players wouldn't understand and waste their point on the boss thinking it would be useful.
|
Venture-Agent, California—Silicon Valley
|
Further research has revealed these creatures to use as examples: Ioton and Seething Spirit.
Both have a weakness to Mental damage, and allow Mental damage to bypass the Resistance.
Further research has revealed these creatures to use as examples: Ioton and Seething Spirit.
Both have a weakness to Mental damage, and allow Mental damage to bypass the Resistance.
Thanks for this reference, it's definitely what I was shooting for when I wrote the final boss. I didn't know about the formatting for these creatures at the time of writing, so I appreciate the heads-up should I design something similar in the future. Chalk it up to first-time PF2E-writer rookie mistakes.
Though honestly, I'm not too broken up about the error. In my playtest the PCs piled on the Disciple of Urxehl while trying to leave Dreng mostly unharmed, and the outcome was a pretty swift victory. Since the Disciple is a spellcaster, having a bit more staying power may make the encounter more interesting, and mathematically spending an Aspiration Point to auto-negate the spirit's resistance still seems like a decent investment to me.
|
Venture-Agent, California—Silicon Valley
|
Further research has revealed these creatures to use as examples: Ioton and Seething Spirit.
Both have a weakness to Mental damage, and allow Mental damage to bypass the Resistance.Thanks for this reference, it's definitely what I was shooting for when I wrote the final boss. I didn't know about the formatting for these creatures at the time of writing, so I appreciate the heads-up should I design something similar in the future. Chalk it up to first-time PF2E-writer rookie mistakes.
Though honestly, I'm not too broken up about the error. In my playtest the PCs piled on the Disciple of Urxehl while trying to leave Dreng mostly unharmed, and the outcome was a pretty swift victory. Since the Disciple is a spellcaster, having a bit more staying power may make the encounter more interesting, and mathematically spending an Aspiration Point to auto-negate the spirit's resistance still seems like a decent investment to me.
I figured that was the intent. I'm going to run it as if Good damage bypasses the resistance. With only 6 points that gives the party 1 luxury point if they intend on having the easiest time with the boss. If the Good damage is just negated anyway, it's a no-brainer to just not use it.
|
|
A stygira, a type of earth-attuned fey, has melded into the statue’s masonry. It emerges to attack any PCs attempting to climb to the upper exit.
The Stigiras have no ability that merges them with stone as far as I can tell. Is this just something given to them by the plot or nature of their attunement to the site?
I am not 100% sure how to run this encounter. Right now I am going to have them all pop out of the walls; the incorporeal will be slowed 1 and the Stigiras will need to spend an action to "unmerge" from the stone.
If something else is intended (for example, the Stigiras using Shape Stone to give themselves cover for Avoiding Notice) please let me know. (Shape stone is fun and seems intended for use on the ramp as a means to knock PCs down).
|
|
This ran well last night on low tier 17 ChP, it felt like the right level of challenge. The boss really scared a couple of players but they did good and as a GM I wasn't too worried for them (best case IMO).
They spider climbed and used climbing kits to get past the inside of the statue and I allowed that to happen but had the fey jump them outside while the Invidiaks stayed inside. It felt appropriate to reward them for clever thinking and prep, but not bypass a whole encounter (the fey want to stop them at all costs and heard them hammering pitons into the statue). That's Odd keyed them off to all the Drandlesticks :(
The Darkness and Heightened Darkness are important checks for basic player prep; GMs may want to review how Hidden and Imprecise sense work in regards to PCs' senses and being flat-footed.
|
|
As written the ritual requires a PC to critically succeed and for no-one to fail. If anyone fails and no-one critically passes the ritual fails. If PCs only succeed the ritual fails. I think this was written with the assumption that success gave a benefit and fail didnt give a penalty but that isnt the case. Alternatively, the primary DC may have been mislabelled.
--
Yeah. I adjudicated this based on the "possible results" written on page 5; I understood them to supersede the normal ritual rules. That's how I ran it, at least:
If a PC critically succeeds and no PCs fail, the ritual’s result is a critical success. If a PC critically fails and no PC critically succeeds, the ritual is failure. All other outcomes result in a success.
With no chance to use Hero Points on the ritual, this doesn't seem like the best moment to go beyond what the scenario itself presents.
|
Venture-Agent, California—Silicon Valley
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For the ritual it's probably just Dolok's result that's incorrect. If Dolok gets a 40/42 on his roll:
If a PC critically succeeds and no PCs fail, the ritual’s result is a critical success.
A +2 will push it to a crit success and a -4 will pull it back down to a success.
If a PC critically fails and no PC critically succeeds, the ritual is failure.
A crit fail would pull it down -4, which is a success, and then lower it by one to make it a fail. The only problem is that a Crit Success wouldn't save it. Guess this is just a bone thrown to the party to reward crit succeeding.
All other outcomes result in a success.
A -4 isn't enough to cause a 40 to fail a DC 32 check, so this works out cleanly too.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
For the ritual it's probably just Dolok's result that's incorrect. If Dolok gets a 40/42 on his roll:
If a PC critically succeeds and no PCs fail, the ritual’s result is a critical success.A +2 will push it to a crit success and a -4 will pull it back down to a success.
If a PC critically fails and no PC critically succeeds, the ritual is failure.A crit fail would pull it down -4, which is a success, and then lower it by one to make it a fail. The only problem is that a Crit Success wouldn't save it. Guess this is just a bone thrown to the party to reward crit succeeding.
All other outcomes result in a success.A -4 isn't enough to cause a 40 to fail a DC 32 check, so this works out cleanly too.
This is correct. A couple different versions of this ritual were bounced around between playtesting and development, and the outcomes Cordell Kintner describes were the ones I targeted for this skill encounter. Clearly some of the numbers got incorrectly carried over between drafts, and resulted in an apparently unachievable challenge. I take full responsibility for that.
Luckily, the development team put in "override" language that explicitly states the success conditions of the ritual as they were originally intended, which provided a failsafe for the mathematical typo.
|
|
How are the secondary checks supposed to be handled? The PDF indicates to follow CRB 408
There are two issues I'm seeing with Aspirational State ritual's secondary checks
1. the secondary checks are listed as
Secondary Checks DC 24/27 Arcana, Athletics, Nature, Occultism, Performance, Religion, or Society
And the rules for Secondary checks indicate
A different secondary caster must attempt each secondary check. If there are more secondary casters than checks, the others don’t attempt any
In this case our secondary check is a list with 'OR' which in other rituals suggests that only one secondary check is made and then the other secondary casters do not attempt a check. Contrast to another ritual like Ward Domain which uses a list but no 'OR'
This seems contrary to the text which makes mention of 'no PCs fail' (plural). My understanding from this is that each secondary caster should attempt a check (which is different from CRB 408).
2. Separately, In a normal ritual there are not extra skills and it is clear that each secondary caster is doing a different skill. Whereas with this list there is an 'OR' which brings a different question. Can PC's double up on skills or do they need to do different skills? My understanding in general these should be different skills but I am unsure what the intent is here.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My notes on why rituals should not be used as challenges in PFS scenarios.
Ayup. Just played this today (high tier, 5 level 9 and one level 10) and it was a fun, tough adventure AFTER we succeeded at the ritual.
It certainly felt to me that failing the ritual would result in failure in the scenario unless the GM soft balled things. At the least, I'm pretty sure that we
Would have had to kill Sapphire in order to succeed
That really just isn't fun. 3 people get to roll dice with absolutely no player input or decisions except to decide who rolls what. With a quite large impact for a small number of bad rolls.
|
Venture-Agent, Online—VTT
|
I have been pondering the same thing. Narratively, it feels like there aren't a lot of safe times to stop for a breather, but the time pressure can't actually be quite as tense as seems natural, when the first section after the ritual tells us that the PCs can run back to buy climbing supplies with no problem other than some awkward conversations. With that in mind, it seems like they're probably supposed to be able to take a short 10 minute breather inside the colossus (after the enemies are dealt with of course), while they have some shelter from the raining fire, at an absolute minimum.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I ran this last night, and we had fun. I allowed a 10-minute rest after each fight, but the benefits of spending an Aspiration Point inside the head made me second guess that.
How quickly are the PCs expected to move through this scenario?
James is correct, the intention was to finish at least the first two fights before resting. In my mind the players also climb the Colossus and get to the head before resting, since the head is designed to be a rest stop before the boss. However, a rest inside the Colossus after the second fight makes perfect sense as well.
How are the secondary checks supposed to be handled?
My original intent was to offer a number of skills that each PC could attempt to contribute as a secondary caster. PCs could double-up on skills if more than one PC was strong in a certain skill. I had hoped to provide a wide array of options PCs could use to improve their chances of success. I did not fully appreciate the shortcomings of the ritual rules for this purpose, as outlined by Robert Hetherington. It's something I'll definitely reconsider before using them again in a PFS scenario.
|
Venture-Agent, California—Silicon Valley
|
As for resting:
The scenario states it takes about 5 minutes to get to the site after the ritual starts. It then mentions that if you do not have climbing gear you are free to return to camp. So this leads me to believe that while there's a time crunch for stopping the ritual, taking a couple 10 minute rests won't cause an issue for you. Though resting outside is probably not a good idea with the storm, so encouraging your players to get inside first is probably a good idea. Say something like "Even though you have disabled the storm for now, it looks like it might start up again soon. It may not be a good idea to rest here."
|
|
wrt resting, don't forget that the original plan was to go rushing across the wilderness for several days to the ritual site.
So, at least at the start, the timeline was "several days". Not at all clear to me (as a player, haven't read the scenario) why that would suddenly change to "rush, rush, rush" just because the location was close by
|
Getting ready to run this scenario, and came across something I needed to ask. For the Drandlesticks, there is a chance that the target will drop their weapons and equipment 100'. Should I just be trusting that the players won't turbobotch the Acrobatics check, the Will Save, and the 50% chance the wind carries the weapons off? Currently, if it carries the weapons off the cliff, as written, those items are Destroyed. The only items I can think of offhand that could feasibly survive 50 falling damage are Sturdy Shields. Every other item I can think of, including the hypothetical Level 10 player's +2 Striking Flaming Serrating Greatsword, is gone after a fall like that. Is this intended?
As is, I'm kinda just hoping that the Monk chooses to be the point man for the run we're about to have locally.
|
Venture-Agent, California—Silicon Valley
|
Getting ready to run this scenario, and came across something I needed to ask. For the Drandlesticks, there is a chance that the target will drop their weapons and equipment 100'. Should I just be trusting that the players won't turbobotch the Acrobatics check, the Will Save, and the 50% chance the wind carries the weapons off? Currently, if it carries the weapons off the cliff, as written, those items are Destroyed. The only items I can think of offhand that could feasibly survive 50 falling damage are Sturdy Shields. Every other item I can think of, including the hypothetical Level 10 player's +2 Striking Flaming Serrating Greatsword, is gone after a fall like that. Is this intended?
As is, I'm kinda just hoping that the Monk chooses to be the point man for the run we're about to have locally.
When I ran, the Rogue missed the Perception check by 1, the Redeemer failed the acrobatics check, and then only succeeded on the Will Save on the reroll.
I wouldn't have the weapons take damage from the fall. Items, especially smaller ones, shouldn't follow the same falling damage rules as creatures. This should just an inconvenience to them, where they now have to climb back down to get their stuff, or just continue without it.
|
Venture-Agent, California—Silicon Valley
|
Other than a big slap in the face to tenth level characters who cam finally cast dim door (or maybe spent 20ACP and 980 gold to buy a cape of the montebanc) what purpose is served by having teleport effects specifically called out as not working on this module? (And 2-24)?
First off, 9th level PCc can use 5th level spells too. Second, what would be the point of the adventure if you could just teleport straight to the boss?
|
Venture-Agent, Online—VTT
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In this specific scenario, there is a giant pillar of light, visible for miles, marking the spot. And your wayfinders point straight at it. And all if the PCs know that Sapphire is at the beacon. In this specific scenario, there's never a point, after the ritual, of not knowing where to go.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As long as there is a reasonable justification for teleportation magic not to work, I'm fine with it. There are times when that is necessary to tell the story. OTOH, it needs to be used sparingly. Anytime you deny players the ability to use their limited resources, especially expensive or highly limited ones, they get a little surly.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Getting ready to run this scenario, and came across something I needed to ask. For the Drandlesticks, there is a chance that the target will drop their weapons and equipment 100'. Should I just be trusting that the players won't turbobotch the Acrobatics check, the Will Save, and the 50% chance the wind carries the weapons off? Currently, if it carries the weapons off the cliff, as written, those items are Destroyed. The only items I can think of offhand that could feasibly survive 50 falling damage are Sturdy Shields. Every other item I can think of, including the hypothetical Level 10 player's +2 Striking Flaming Serrating Greatsword, is gone after a fall like that. Is this intended?
As is, I'm kinda just hoping that the Monk chooses to be the point man for the run we're about to have locally.
When I ran, the Rogue missed the Perception check by 1, the Redeemer failed the acrobatics check, and then only succeeded on the Will Save on the reroll.
I wouldn't have the weapons take damage from the fall. Items, especially smaller ones, shouldn't follow the same falling damage rules as creatures. This should just an inconvenience to them, where they now have to climb back down to get their stuff, or just continue without it.
Cordell's interpretation is how I had intended it to be run. I'm not super familiar with the falling damage rules in 2E yet, but in my head a sword (or even a wooden weapon like a bow) that is dropped from the statue would be blown around by the stormy wind, but otherwise clatter unharmed on the ground. It was designed to be a hassle that forced players to spend resources to fetch the weapon, not to destroy it completely.
Other than a big slap in the face to tenth level characters who cam finally cast dim door (or maybe spent 20ACP and 980 gold to buy a cape of the montebanc) what purpose is served by having teleport effects specifically called out as not working on this module? (And 2-24)?
Presumably the same as the point of it being so difficult to fly, in making it not be a simple matter to skip 2/3 of the scenario. The whole thing is set up so that going straight to the top of the cyclops without difficulty isn't an option.
This is exactly right. The outline for this scenario specifically called this out, and required some mechanism of preventing the PCs from simply teleporting directly to the boss if they had the right resources. I understand Shea & TwilightKnight's point, and I did try to brainstorm alternative layouts to the plot that would allow PCs to use teleportation magic if they invested in it, but at the end of the day it was simply untenable with the narrative structure of this scenario. As more high-level scenarios are written I'm sure teleportation will be more seamlessly factored into the adventure options, but for this first one we played it safe to see how the other factors of high-level play work out.
|
And a simple reading of the teleport spell shows that the margin for error even on a ten mile teleport (wich is what you would be casting) is 50ft ... even if you aimed for the center of the bowl you could be 20 ft BELOW it and fall ... or 50 ft off the center and miss landing inside ... and fall... or end up inside the statue (not on the pathway) and fall... any time you are teleporting to a RAISED area it is not a good idea... so as soon as you put the Boss Battle (and the only place you could teleport too with the clues of the pillar of light) over 100ft in the air you have already given the GM an easy way to dissuade the party from teleporting... but preventing a combat spell like Dim Door ... SMH not cool.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There is a wide gap between "that is not recommended" and "no, you cannot use a perfectly legal resource." I agree that there are clearly reasons not to use porty magic to jump the end, but player agency should rarely/never be taken for the sake of story. Write a better story that doesn't require a manipulation of core rules.