# Adventure 1 (TIatAotW) Questions - SPOILERS



## Noodle (Jul 19, 2011)

** DMs ONLY **

So.. it's out.  I'm reading it, I'm loving it!  But I'm confused in a couple of places & I figure other folks might be as well, so I figured I'd start a consolidated thread for clarification questions.  Needless to say, spoilers throughout.  (Is there or should there be a DM-only forum for threads of this nature?)

I've read through Act I a couple of times now, and two things I'm unclear on:
[sblock]
1. On the Coaltongue map, what are the gray squares right outside the sets of rooms at fore/aft on each deck?  Metal plating?  Ladders?  Magical elevator shafts?  Is there any access between decks at these locations, or only at the more obviously marked up/down stairs & ladders amidships?

2. Does the 40-round countdown begin at the start of combat, wherever that may happen?  If the PCs lollygag until the steam no longer comes out of the stacks, how many rounds are left at that point?
[/sblock]

I'm sure I'll come up with more questions once I've read & digested Acts II/III.  Do I need to continue using sblock tags in this thread?

Thanks!


----------



## RangerWickett (Jul 19, 2011)

[sblock]1. They're hatches. With a gaff hook or some brute strength you can lift them out of the way, to provide access from the top deck to the engine deck. The cranes on deck can move supplies between different levels of the ship.

2. I figure this is one of those "DM's prerogative" sort of things. It's kind of bad for long-term enjoyment of the campaign if you kill the PCs in the first session, so I'd say it's 40 rounds from when the PCs get involved in the action. If they wait for a long while and the enemies have already escaped the ship, then when they go to check out the engine, there's 40 rounds, minus 10 rounds for broken relief valves, minus 6 rounds for the firegems, leaves 24. Divided by 2 for Sokana's contribution, leaving 12 rounds. That's bad enough, I think.[/sblock]


----------



## Mortagon (Jul 19, 2011)

First off congratulations, Zeitgeist has got to be one of the most unique and promising Campaign concepts I have ever seen. Island at the Axis of the world starts this AP with a bang. 

I have a few questions and concerns about the Pathfinder version though.

Beware, Spoilers ahead.



At the Genius Loci the pc's have to defeat a bunch of creatures including a shadow stalker. The shadow stalker is incorporeal thus immune to normal weapons and as far as I could see the pc's will have found none of those yet at that point. I am afraid that if the pc's can't get the Golden icon of Nem, or have enough magical resources, that this encounter can easily turn out to be a TPK. Was this an omission from the writer(s) or is it suppossed to be that challenging ? (I only ask because shadows is one of the few low-CR creatures I regularly threatens and kill high level characters within my other Pathfinder games). 

I am confused about the trap mentioned under the road trek encounter. It mentions weapons and firearms used as bait, but doesn't say what kinds of weapons these are. Can the pc's salvage them or are they broken? 

If Asrabay succeeds in kidnapping Nathan Jierre, or get away, will this have any impact on the remainder of the AP?


----------



## RangerWickett (Jul 19, 2011)

Mortagon said:


> At the Genius Loci the pc's have to defeat a bunch of creatures including a shadow stalker. The shadow stalker is incorporeal thus immune to normal weapons and as far as I could see the pc's will have found none of those yet at that point. I am afraid that if the pc's can't get the Golden icon of Nem, or have enough magical resources, that this encounter can easily turn out to be a TPK. Was this an omission from the writer(s) or is it suppossed to be that challenging ? (I only ask because shadows is one of the few low-CR creatures I regularly threatens and kill high level characters within my other Pathfinder games).




Oh. Blame our conversion guy. 4e simplified incorporeality to just make it so any attack against it just does half damage, since usually any time you're fighting an incorporeal creature, you'd have magic weapons anyway. 

Um, . . . I dunno. Maybe instead of being an incorporeal shadow it's just a sorta semi-corporeal shadow, and you can hit it with normal weapons? Or, as Rugult Galacian (conversion guy) suggests, let the dice fall where they may. If the party doesn't have enough spellcasters with offensive magic, or any clerics, to take out the shadow, then the party needs to retreat or surrender. If that happens, I'd suggest having Nicolas Dupiers call off the shadow and take them alive.



> I am confused about the trap mentioned under the road trek encounter. It mentions weapons and firearms used as bait, but doesn't say what kinds of weapons these are. Can the pc's salvage them or are they broken?




They're a bunch of mundane knives, swords, axes, pistols, carbines, muskets, etc. Although you'd probably want to skip the firearms if you use the "stupidly expensive guns" costs I saw listed in the Ultimate Combat playtest. Guns in the setting are pretty common, so the prices ought to be lower, in my opinion. Even if the party tries to grab the whole cart full of weapons, it wouldn't be more than a couple hundred GP if they sold it. 



> If Asrabay succeeds in kidnapping Nathan Jierre, or get away, will this have any impact on the remainder of the AP?




Slightly. Not enough to derail the plot at all. Lya Jierre would be upset with the party. And in adventure 3 there's an opportunity to talk to Nathan Jierre and get some information, but he can be replaced with someone else. Asrabey is ultimately released/resurrected even if the party defeats him, and he shows up in adventure 5. (Again, if the party somehow manages to stop that, it's easy enough to have an equivalent NPC show up in his place.)


----------



## Rugult (Jul 19, 2011)

Mortagon said:


> At the Genius Loci the pc's have to defeat a bunch of creatures including a shadow stalker. The shadow stalker is incorporeal thus immune to normal weapons and as far as I could see the pc's will have found none of those yet at that point. I am afraid that if the pc's can't get the Golden icon of Nem, or have enough magical resources, that this encounter can easily turn out to be a TPK. Was this an omission from the writer(s) or is it suppossed to be that challenging ? (I only ask because shadows is one of the few low-CR creatures I regularly threatens and kill high level characters within my other Pathfinder games).




This is one of those strange conversion items as Ryan mentioned, as incorporeal is a more powerful ability in PF.  A shadow is a CR 3 creature, which is listed as a 'hard' challenge for 1st level PCs.  Technically speaking a well rounded 1st level party should be able to take down a shadow by expending a good chunk of resources.

The Shadow Stalker in the adventure is essentially a very weakened shadow. The PCs should be able to target it with magical attacks from any spellcasters in the group, as well as effect the creature with positive energy abilities (channeling for example).

The Stalker also appears as the first combat encounter after the PCs have had a long rest and have been able to spend their 1000gp/player stipend from the RHC.  If the GM allows the PCs to pool their money, they might possess a magical weapon, otherwise the money is likely going to fund potions/wands/armor.  I would *HOPE*that PCs would invest in a _wand of cure light wounds _with some of their money as it's a pretty common item to pickup right away. A side benefit of such a wand, would be that it makes an excellent implement to attack the Shadow Stalker.

Worst case (a party of fighters and rogues with no real healing abilities), as GM I would gloss it over and have the Air Elemental mess around with the Shadow and perhaps whirlwind it away.

Hope that helps!


----------



## Mortagon (Jul 19, 2011)

RangerWickett said:


> Oh. Blame our conversion guy. 4e simplified incorporeality to just make it so any attack against it just does half damage, since usually any time you're fighting an incorporeal creature, you'd have magic weapons anyway.
> 
> Um, . . . I dunno. Maybe instead of being an incorporeal shadow it's just a sorta semi-corporeal shadow, and you can hit it with normal weapons? Or, as Rugult Galacian (conversion guy) suggests, let the dice fall where they may. If the party doesn't have enough spellcasters with offensive magic, or any clerics, to take out the shadow, then the party needs to retreat or surrender. If that happens, I'd suggest having Nicolas Dupiers call off the shadow and take them alive.




Thanks. Thinking about it my players should probably be able to handle it. Maybe I'll give them some slight hints that hey should pick up some healing wands, magical ammo or holy water when they get their stipend or just place some of the items above as treasure in one of the earlier encounters. 




> They're a bunch of mundane knives, swords, axes, pistols, carbines, muskets, etc. Although you'd probably want to skip the firearms if you use the "stupidly expensive guns" costs I saw listed in the Ultimate Combat playtest. Guns in the setting are pretty common, so the prices ought to be lower, in my opinion. Even if the party tries to grab the whole cart full of weapons, it wouldn't be more than a couple hundred GP if they sold it.



I use my own system for firearms, so the price is no issue. I'll just place some random weapons there then. They should come in handy later on.




> Slightly. Not enough to derail the plot at all. Lya Jierre would be upset with the party. And in adventure 3 there's an opportunity to talk to Nathan Jierre and get some information, but he can be replaced with someone else. Asrabey is ultimately released/resurrected even if the party defeats him, and he shows up in adventure 5. (Again, if the party somehow manages to stop that, it's easy enough to have an equivalent NPC show up in his place.)



I have a strong feelings my players probably won't be able to defeat Asrabey, he is after all a 15th level character. So I was just checking that it doesn't derail to much from the plot in case of this highly probable outcome.


----------



## Rugult (Jul 19, 2011)

Mortagon said:


> I have a strong feelings my players probably won't be able to defeat Asrabey, he is after all a 15th level character. So I was just checking that it doesn't derail to much from the plot in case of this highly probable outcome.




I am seriously waiting for the one wizard with _Magic Missile_.  He'll feel so very special afterwards...

Also, glad my random thoughts cleared that up!


----------



## Mortagon (Jul 19, 2011)

Rugult said:


> I am seriously waiting for the one wizard with _Magic Missile_.  He'll feel so very special afterwards...
> 
> Also, glad my random thoughts cleared that up!




As it currently stand none of my players have any plans to play a wizard. My group is looking to be pretty magic starved. I currently have a rogue, a fighter and a gunslinger and maybe an alchemist if i convince the player to play one. But we'll see how it goes


----------



## SirCharles (Jul 20, 2011)

Rugult said:


> I am seriously waiting for the one wizard with _Magic Missile_.  He'll feel so very special afterwards...
> 
> Also, glad my random thoughts cleared that up!




I thought about this! If one of my players had this spell, I seriously considered giving Asrabey a _brooch of shielding_.


----------



## RangerWickett (Jul 20, 2011)

He probably had one. The idea is, he just ran through an army, and got shot at, slashed at, and pinged with any spells people nearby had handy. If he had a brooch, it's out by now (or maybe just has a couple of points of defense left).


----------



## Rugult (Jul 20, 2011)

Mortagon said:


> As it currently stand none of my players have any plans to play a wizard. My group is looking to be pretty magic starved. I currently have a rogue, a fighter and a gunslinger and maybe an alchemist if i convince the player to play one. But we'll see how it goes




Well, the splash damage would knock him down as well!


----------



## Mortagon (Jul 20, 2011)

Rugult said:


> Well, the splash damage would knock him down as well!




Hopefully


----------



## LightPhoenix (Jul 20, 2011)

*4E Version* comments...

Overall, I like the story a lot.  Specifically, I like the way it's divided up into three distinct parts that provide ample stopping points.

What's the purpose of the scene descriptors?  While in some cases they're informative (especially regarding how long each scene takes), in many cases they seem entirely superfluous.  Why does a scene where the PCs talk to other PCs have a level, when there's no skill challenge or combat?  Why does it need to be indicated combat takes place on a round-by-round basis?

"The Sabotage" seems rather clunky in it's presentation, and it seems like a bear to run as the first real encounter.  If I'm reading it right, the idea was to have the PCs and enemies basically tug-of-war for control of the "clock."  I don't really like the mechanics though.  For one thing, I think the action economy for the PCs to counter is _far _too steep.   It's much better tactically for the PCs to focus on killing enemies, and then deal with the countdown.  Of course, barring enemy action, one PC can effectively stop the countdown by shoveling.  It does provide an interesting tactical quandary (increased power versus countering the countdown).  However, the downside is one player basically shovels while the others combat.  Overall, it's a neat idea that I don't think will really work in practice (but I may be wrong).

Personally, I would (and will, eventually) run the combat straight up while giving the enemies a couple of goals (throw the amber rod, break the wards/valves, etc).  Afterwards, I would probably make it a skill challenge/straight puzzle (probably with timer) for the PCs to figure out how to stop the ship from exploding.  The DC/possibilities would change depending on how many rounds the PCs spent in combat and what goals the enemies accomplished.

I like tying the use of the Golden Icons to Action Points; it's an elegant way to have an "artifact" that isn't overly powerful.

I like the "Hold the Lighthouse" skill challenge (and the single page description is awesome).  However, I feel the adventure has a dearth of combat encounters in it, so I'd probably run this as a straight up combat.

Clever use of my least favorite magical item: the immurement.

How many squares specifically are on fire in "The Labyrinth?"  Being extremely generous, I count 7 squares, and so straight off the bat Gillie takes 35 damage.  That's almost a third of his hit points right there, before he even gets to act.  Being less generous, it's more like 10 squares/50 damage; almost half his hit points.  Gillie won't spend _any_ time engaging the PCs.  He'll be lucky to last four rounds.  I'd get rid of his mechanic altogether, and make the burning hedges deal extra damage to the PCs.  The hedge disappears if Gillie is killed or convinced to stand down.

I'm glad the lower level stats for Asrabey et al were included.  The higher level stats make Asrabey, for all intents and purposes, unbeatable (which may be the intention).  I think the lower level version provides a much more interesting and satisfying combat while representing Asrabey as tired, but still a bad-ass.  The PCs can go toe-to-toe with him and still feel heroic without actually subduing him.  He still doesn't go down easily, but it's not wholly contingent on a lucky PC roll.


----------



## RangerWickett (Jul 20, 2011)

Well, I assume that in the sabotage most parties will try to stop the NPCs from making things worse, but won't waste time trying to turn back the clock until after all the threats are dealt with. And unless you've got a tiefling, the party shouldn't be able to just shovel themselves to safety because of the fire damage from standing beside an overheating furnace.

My thought was that a little line of scene keywords will help DMs have a clear sense how the scene is paced and what role it serves in the adventure when they first read it. Once you've read through it, of course they're fairly obvious. But the first time through I'd hope it makes it easier to grok things.

With Gillie Dhu, the labyrinth map was finished after I statted him, and I honestly didn't realize that the number of burning squares (which looked nice on the map) would be mathematically bad for combat. I'd reduce it to just 3 squares that are actually on fire; the outer corner, one near the fence, and one in the middle. The rest are, I dunno, smoldering but not burning.

When the PCs first see him he's putting out the fire in the corner, so he'd just take 10 damage the first turn. Then he runs off to put out other fires, and comes back in round 3.


----------



## gideonpepys (Jul 20, 2011)

I think the encounter keywords are useful reminders.  Not invaluable, but a nice touch.


----------



## rangda (Jul 20, 2011)

RangerWickett said:


> My thought was that a little line of scene keywords will help DMs have a clear sense how the scene is paced and what role it serves in the adventure when they first read it




I've only skimmed the module (been busy prepping for WotBS 5) but I think the scene layout and headers *fantastic* idea.  Even with a quick 2-3 minute skim of the module just by looking at the headings I get a vague idea what's going on.

I also like the fact that the encounters are just part of the module content rather than the wotc style of a separate index.  I've always hated the wotc model of "this is the module fluff" and "this is the module crunch", way too much page flipping.


----------



## Morrus (Jul 20, 2011)

rangda said:


> I also like the fact that the encounters are just part of the module content rather than the wotc style of a separate index. I've always hated the wotc model of "this is the module fluff" and "this is the module crunch", way too much page flipping.




Yeah, we used the delve format in WotBS and I _hated_ it. So, no more!

Interestingly, WotC recently announced they were abandoning the format, so it seems I was not alone.


----------



## OnlineDM (Jul 20, 2011)

It's definitely a welcome change. Flipping back and forth between story and battle was always a huge pain. Sometimes there's some information in the "story" section right before the encounter begins that's relevant during the encounter. Having it on the same page or the previous page is so much better than having it 40 pages earlier!


----------



## rangda (Jul 20, 2011)

When I run WotBS modules I print out the two parts separately so I can at least have the fluff part open to where the PC's are in the story and the encounters part open to the encounters.  But even with that shuffling between the two printouts is still a pain.


----------



## benfromidaho (Jul 21, 2011)

I'm also a fan of the keywords for each scene.  Coming from a D&D 3.5 background, and only a few months of Pathfinder experience, I'm a huge fan of the way this adventure is laid out compared to previous WotC and even some Paizo adventures I've run.  I'd like to doll out a ton of kudos for the work everyone has done on this first adventure, and I love how much the perspective of both 4E and Pathfinder have influenced it.


----------



## Riastlin (Jul 21, 2011)

Alright, so I'm only through Act I, but just wanted to chime in to say that I really like the way the skill challenges are presented so far.  I think doing the "round by round" format where you just need X successes -- irregardless of the number of failures -- is a pretty good way to go.  The 3 failures can be harsh, but it seems as though so far at any rate, the SCs are set up such that you can potentially have more than 3 failures but still succeed at the challenge.  It makes a bit easier to get everyone involved this way as you won't get "Well, we've already got 2 failures and I suck at perception, so someone else should probably look instead."  

Additionally, I think to a certain extent you can flow into it a little more naturally as there doesn't need to be a "better be careful" tip off which often triggers players (in my games) to simply say "I roll athletics -- 19?"  Its not so much that these players are not roleplayers, its more that they are more or less trained that in an encounter, its all about the numbers.  At any rate, I am definitely liking it so far.  Will try to finish the module this weekend.


----------



## Colmarr (Jul 22, 2011)

My main concern with the skill challenges is the DCs.

The first challenge has a default DC of 18, which is one off the hard DC for level 1. With a DC that high, there is a very real risk that players will learn not to even try unless they're trained in the relevant skill and have a good modifier.


----------



## RangerWickett (Jul 22, 2011)

WotC has a clear sense of what is an easy/medium/hard DC, and it works great for normal incidental skill checks that come up in the course of the adventure. But since I hate the "X successes before 3 failures" system, I used Stalker0's Obsidian Skill Challenge system as a guideline. Because the party is limited by time, not failed rolls, DCs can and need to be higher in order to make the encounter actually carry a risk of failure. 

Also, I didn't want players to think, "Oh, these skill checks are easy, so I can focus on putting everything into combat." I want the campaign to reward skill-focused characters.


----------



## Mortagon (Jul 22, 2011)

RangerWickett said:


> WotC has a clear sense of what is an easy/medium/hard DC, and it works great for normal incidental skill checks that come up in the course of the adventure. But since I hate the "X successes before 3 failures" system, I used Stalker0's Obsidian Skill Challenge system as a guideline. Because the party is limited by time, not failed rolls, DCs can and need to be higher in order to make the encounter actually carry a risk of failure.
> 
> Also, I didn't want players to think, "Oh, these skill checks are easy, so I can focus on putting everything into combat." I want the campaign to reward skill-focused characters.




This will please a couple of my players who always tends to play skill monkeys, but rarely gets to use their skills in any meaningful way. (we're playing the Pathfinder version btw)

My main concern is at higher levels. Magic always seem to trump skills when you get past certain levels.


----------



## Riastlin (Jul 22, 2011)

[MENTION=63]RangerWickett[/MENTION]:  Good point about time based vs. failure based skill challenges.  If the party can absorb extra failures, then the DCs do need to be higher.

As for me personally, while I think the current DC table for skill checks/skill challenges is a big improvement on the earlier models, I still find it to be a tad off.  For my players I find that the moderate DCs are pretty much auto-successes while the hard DCs will be too hard except for the one or two that are trained in it.  Its weird and could just be an odd dynamic with my group.  The easy DCs I don't even worry about because even untrained characters pretty much always make them.  Again though, this is likely a combination of my party's dynamic and the fact that they are 13th level which has opened up stat increases, feats, magic items, etc.  This is also probably made worse by the fact that I still don't think I do a particularly great job at running skill challenges.


----------



## benfromidaho (Jul 23, 2011)

I'll certainly have to encourage my normally combat focused players to be a little more considerate with their skill points, but hopefully this will prevent the entire group from running into a room and saying, "We all search the room!" and each shouting out their Perception scores.


----------



## Morrus (Jul 23, 2011)

benfromidaho said:


> I'll certainly have to encourage my normally combat focused players to be a little more considerate with their skill points, but hopefully this will prevent the entire group from running into a room and saying, "We all search the room!" and each shouting out their Perception scores.




I think out adventures train people out of that fairly well. Check out the preview of the last adventure of WotBS, where all their decisions  throughout the entire adventure path come to a head and they _really_ wish they hadn't alienated that guy back in Adventure #6.  We're totally cool with the PCs losing at the end.


----------



## Colmarr (Jul 23, 2011)

RangerWickett said:


> I used Stalker0's Obsidian Skill Challenge system as a guideline. Because the party is limited by time, not failed rolls, DCs can and need to be higher in order to make the encounter actually carry a risk of failure.




18 just seems too high. Using the Crowd Security challenge as an example, and 
assuming a trained character with a +4 attribute, they have a 60% chance at succeeding per roll. If every check in the challenge is made on that basis, the PCs get a total of 9 successes.

But once you take into account the PCs that aren't trained or that don't have +4 in a relevant attribute, the party's chance of success falls significantly, which is IMO odd for a _level 1_ challenge.

Of course, all of the above is just theorycrafting. I'll be running Crowd Security tomorrow night and will be happy to reconsider if I'm proven wrong.


----------



## Riastlin (Jul 23, 2011)

Colmarr said:


> 18 just seems too high. Using the Crowd Security challenge as an example, and
> assuming a trained character with a +4 attribute, they have a 60% chance at succeeding per roll. If every check in the challenge is made on that basis, the PCs get a total of 9 successes.
> 
> But once you take into account the PCs that aren't trained or that don't have +4 in a relevant attribute, the party's chance of success falls significantly, which is IMO odd for a _level 1_ challenge.
> ...




The timing in terms of number of rounds will obviously make a difference, but don't forget too that certain races and backgrounds also grant bonuses to skills which can boost the odds even further.


----------



## Ajar (Jul 25, 2011)

I wasn't planning to use backgrounds. Should I?

Edit: I just finished reading the first adventure (4E version), and I liked it quite a bit. The only place where I got a bit confused was the encounter with Asrabey; there's very little direction (and no numbers) for figuring out how feasible it is to talk him down. It says that a bold party might be able to, and a REALLY imposing party might be able to get him to give up Nathan as a hostage, but the DM is left to infer that this means Intimidate v. Will checks have an extremely small chance of success even when aided. 

I'm not really sure how I'll handle this when I get to it. The low-level stats do seem like they'd facilitate a cool encounter, but I prefer the high-level stats from a "this is what would actually happen to a 20th level character assaulting a fortress" perspective. And I'd like it to be at least _possible_ to talk Asrabey down even if I use the 20th level stats. 

I currently plan to handle it through RP; depending on how things have gone up to that point, the PCs will hopefully have plenty of compelling legitimate reasons for Asrabey to stand down. But we'll see what happens!

Overall, though, the thought that came to mind most often when reading the adventure was "dang, I wish I was going to be a PC!" I'd be a gunslinger rogue/ranger or a technologist artificer, I think. But alas, I'm the DM.  First session is this Saturday, and I'm hoping to at least get to the start of the Coaltongue sabotage.


----------



## RangerWickett (Jul 25, 2011)

Depends on why you weren't planning to use them in the first place. They fit my play style, which is why I put them in, but if you don't think they'd work with your group, you don't have to use them. You might want to make a few DCs a smidge easier, though, since the PCs won't have bonuses from their knowledge of various power groups.


----------

