KickStarter Knights of the Chalice 2 Thread - Augury of Chaos

[covr]

Guys, how to beat Spider Queen?

 

[Koolz]

Beat the Spider Queen.

Make sure you have True Sight. Grapple her, see if you can Pin her.

Cast web on the Statue that comes alive and blow it away with spells.

Remember while playing that Will Power and Spell Resistance is really important also Spell Penetration.

I really enjoyed the game it reminded me of the Gold Box Games.

Played Pool of Radiance and all the rest on a Commadore 64.

 

[Koolz]

I mean true seeing.

 

[Darth Roxor]

Guys, how to beat Spider Queen?

There is no single method more reliable than grapple + pin. On my second playthrough when I had a greatergrapmonk, I think I killed her on first try.

And after she's taken care of you deal with the giant statue with a combo of disarm/suppress sword + grease.

Spoiler

In case you didn't live long enough to trigger it, yes, there is a giant statue of rape spawning a few turns after the queen.

Spoiler

remember that it has death explosion

 

[Dickie]

And after she's taken care of you deal with the giant statue

First time I saw that guy:

 

[Modron]

First time I saw that guy:

Shame they never made the part two to that film, still it had the coolest Hercules to grace film in it.

 

[Serus]

First time I saw that guy:

Shame they never made the part two to that film, still it had the coolest Hercules to grace film in it.

What movie is this?

 

[Modron]

What movie is this?

Jason and the Argonauts from the 60s
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0057197

You might recognize the stopmotion special effect stylings of Ray Harryhausen in the gifs above
https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0366063/

 

[Darth Canoli]

Guys, how to beat Spider Queen?

First, you silence the top left area of the cave before turn 3 (when fighting the spiders).
You buff your fighters as much as you can contingent break enchantment, mind blank, mass enhance weapons if necessary, mass buff STR, mass buff INT for your wizard(s) and psion.
Enlarge or mass enlarge for your grappler if you have one.
True seeing on your fighter(s) or grappler.

You should have true seeing means because she has a lot of mirror images + concealment, there was a true seeing equipment but i'm not sure it's in the game anymore.

You could build a wall and laugh at the spiders, eventually go for a stall, you'd never win but they wouldn't either, then you make a video of the longest Spider queen fight without anyone getting killed.

Or you could just build a small wall (two vertical pieces) to protect your mages from the spider queen spells while your fighters get ready to surround you.

The key is to make the initial spiders last 3 turns (chaos/control/enchantment spells), buff the team and put your fighters in the Queen's pawn area, the small upper cave.
And true seeing.

Or you can hoard xp and get there level 18/19, hide behind a wall, accelerated spells and nuke her with prismatic spells.

Also, hide and protect the prince.

So just metagame shit out of Chalice 2 with right builds and its not hard? Anyway I would guess that some fights are unwinnable in archmage if you get bad initiative roll but obviously I cannot say this for sure. Minimizing rng is an interesting concept when the game has so many variables.

Currently playing fake ironman with archmage difficulty and the crashes are driving me insane. Think I take a break from chalice haven't seen any posts from Pierre for a while.

It's not metagaming if it's your own experience.
Few fights are unwinnable even when losing the initiative rolls if any, the ones with fewer party members like the forge will fuck you over if you lose the initiative rolls but you could win nonetheless (but this one might be the worst offender).

If you have a cleric/divine caster who can use True Resurrection scrolls, you give your healer the dragon's belt (+100 HP) and you're fine, in chapter 4, get a psion or wizard cast a accelerated spells on him, just in case and he can heal and resurrect fast enough to keep you in the game.

Also, many tough fights offer you some tactical advantages through character skills (pre-fight dialog) like Pizarra or castle fights.

 

[Desiderius]

One of Pierre’s design goals is to force you to use consumables. If you find yourself hoarding it’s time to up the difficulty.

Luckily he gives you a lot so you don’t have to worry too much unless it’s a spell scroll you really want to learn later and you’re on an early playthrough.

 

[Tweed]

Oof this encounter might be too much for my ass party. Looks like the end of playthrough 1! Not too ruffled about this since I accidentally skipped like all of Finchbury and now know that Bards have a lot of dialogue options.

Use the acorns.

 

[Jermu]

Flying familiar also gets surprise round which removes most of rng in that fight.

Think I give up with archmage ironman and just do normal archmage run for now (with all the settings including gold for levels which I dont really like).

So far getting good results with this party:

Death Knight
Rogue
Bard
Wiz
Psi
Bishop

companions mantis druid and sorc.

Probably should have 1 guy with wade-in but I want to play with classes I have not played with yet (used wiz+psi before). So far done with the salamander rogue+bard might fall off end game but we will see. DK passive is always going to be handy.

 

[Oligryan]

I don't understand the logic behind crossbows— or the lack thereof, rather. Anyone who could use a crossbow could have gotten a bow for the same investment. Not only that, but crossbows also come with the feat tax of rapid reload, so it takes more investment to use a crossbow than a regular bow. The casters that would benefit from crossbows can't even take them because they would have to invest a feat for proficiency and then another to make them somewhat worthwhile, and even then they'd be better off just getting a bow instead.
So crossbows cost more than bows, they have the same range as bows, they don't get a 3X crit multiplier like longbows and warbows do, they do less damage than bows overall, I don't think I've seen a single unique crossbow at any point in augury, and the heavy xbow and arbalest don't even get iterative attacks (aside from rapid shot I guess) despite doing similar damage as the greatbow and warbow BEFORE strength bonuses.
They'd make some kind of sense if they were simple weapons, but even in that case it'd be a better idea to take bow proficiency than waste a feat on rapid reload.

 

[Berengar]

Oof this encounter might be too much for my ass party. Looks like the end of playthrough 1! Not too ruffled about this since I accidentally skipped like all of Finchbury and now know that Bards have a lot of dialogue options.

Use the acorns.

Funny you mention that because I remembered I had a Sirocco acorn and it fucking made it cake walk haha.

 

[Desiderius]

I don't understand the logic behind crossbows— or the lack thereof, rather. Anyone who could use a crossbow could have gotten a bow for the same investment. Not only that, but crossbows also come with the feat tax of rapid reload, so it takes more investment to use a crossbow than a regular bow. The casters that would benefit from crossbows can't even take them because they would have to invest a feat for proficiency and then another to make them somewhat worthwhile, and even then they'd be better off just getting a bow instead.
So crossbows cost more than bows, they have the same range as bows, they don't get a 3X crit multiplier like longbows and warbows do, they do less damage than bows overall, I don't think I've seen a single unique crossbow at any point in augury, and the heavy xbow and arbalest don't even get iterative attacks (aside from rapid shot I guess) despite doing similar damage as the greatbow and warbow BEFORE strength bonuses.
They'd make some kind of sense if they were simple weapons, but even in that case it'd be a better idea to take bow proficiency than waste a feat on rapid reload.

XBows don't need STR so you can dump STR and still use one.

Wiz starts with XBow prof. Wiz doesn't get iteratives until late anyway.

Reload doesn't really come up much because you only use them every once in a while to save spell slots on non-challenging fights to get them done faster. On the tough fights you're casting. Not having any drops sort of makes sense because by that point in the game you should have enough casts to be casting all the time or using consumable or Meteors etc...

 

[Serus]

I don't understand the logic behind crossbows— or the lack thereof, rather. Anyone who could use a crossbow could have gotten a bow for the same investment. Not only that, but crossbows also come with the feat tax of rapid reload, so it takes more investment to use a crossbow than a regular bow. The casters that would benefit from crossbows can't even take them because they would have to invest a feat for proficiency and then another to make them somewhat worthwhile, and even then they'd be better off just getting a bow instead.
So crossbows cost more than bows, they have the same range as bows, they don't get a 3X crit multiplier like longbows and warbows do, they do less damage than bows overall, I don't think I've seen a single unique crossbow at any point in augury, and the heavy xbow and arbalest don't even get iterative attacks (aside from rapid shot I guess) despite doing similar damage as the greatbow and warbow BEFORE strength bonuses.
They'd make some kind of sense if they were simple weapons, but even in that case it'd be a better idea to take bow proficiency than waste a feat on rapid reload.

XBows don't need STR so you can dump STR and still use one.

Wiz starts with XBow prof. Wiz doesn't get iteratives until late anyway.

Reload doesn't really come up much because you only use them every once in a while to save spell slots on non-challenging fights to get them done faster. On the tough fights you're casting. Not having any drops sort of makes sense because by that point in the game you should have enough casts to be casting all the time or using consumable or Meteors etc...

Arbalest is, iirc, the highest damage range weapon. If you have a negative STR modifier (which you probably have on a wizard) it's even better compared to a bow. Wizard has a proficiency in Xbows but not bows. It only really matters in prologue and chapter 1, at some point in chapter 2 you start getting enough low level spell slots to cast spells most of the time, when it matters. As Desiderius said, iterative attack comes at level 11 when non-spell attacks for wizards are already obsolete anyway and reload matters a little, if a fight requires your wizard, you need to use spells anyway.

Most other spellcasters can gain very little from using bows OR crossbows to make taking a feat worthwhile.

Druid can fight in melee early on if you give him 12-14 STR so the point of bow vs crossbow is moot. With the Shilgegah-whatever spell he gets a "free" +1 quarterstaff/club with +2 size and damage of a greatsword. Later he gets those "several uses per cast" spells.

Psionic, is the only one, other than wizard, who could profit from crossbow if he has negative STR but it would require a feat.
I suggest a Kobold Psionicist instead. He is almost semi-decent at melee very early on. Has very good AC early and 3 attacks (2 a full ab) and you can afford 14 STR on a Kobold without sacrificing anything. Later he can cast bazillion of level 1 or even 2 spells so no need of a range weapon.

A Cleric/Bishop - either give him Hunting of forget about range combat. There are some nice cleric self-buffs, unfortunately no way, afaik, to make them move-based spells.

For high BAB / high STR characters, bow all the way if you can afford the feat.


TL;DR: Agree with Desiderius. X-Bow = wizard. That's all.

 

[Desiderius]

Copium? I’m not even running a Wiz in this party so didn’t buy the Arbalest. Not using any xBows.

There’s a five to seven or so level window where you’ve got more rounds than spells so it gives wiz something to do, especially if you have ranged feats for your Rays.

You could also do something with it and Hunting Domain but there you’d be wasting Heavy Proficiency.

 

[felipepepe]

BTW, for those interested in making modules, a good reference is One Page Dungeons: https://www.dungeoncontest.com/

It's a contest that's been going for 10+ years now where people have to make a full dungeon that fits in 1 page. You can freely download all entries and check the winners, and everything is under Creative Commons 3.0, meaning you can use them even commercially as long as you credit the author.

Here's a good example from 2009:

Spoiler

 

[Desiderius]

Retard emotes is how you get ignored.

I could give a shit about xBows. I do care about people taking advice from those who have no idea what they’re talking about and losing enjoyment of the game.

 

[Oligryan]

TL;DR: Agree with Desiderius. X-Bow = wizard. That's all.

A -1 or -2 damage roll malus is hardly going to make a difference when you're using your ranged weapon as filler, and handing that guy any non-crafted magic bow would make it even more irrelevant. The arbalest is a god awful weapon to use as filler (or in general) because of the full round reload. You will never fire that thing more than once per encounter unless you go out of your way to do so or take rapid reload. Regardless, the point was never whether a caster should spend a feat on crossbows or bows. Both options are obviously unappealing unless you plan to switch the feat before leveling or get the group proficiency for free to begin with. The point is that crossbows have no real niche or purpose. Why even place action economy-centric restrictions on them as though you need to contain the earth shattering might of 1d8, 1d10, and 2d8 with -1 to attack rolls? They're all around terrible and "just something for wizards to do for their first few levels" doesn't justify three weapon types and an exclusive feat. Hell, even slings have a niche of being able to apply bludgeoning enchants to a ranged weapon. Being able to instakill a ghost dragon by chucking ghost touched undead bane+destruction rocks at it is kosher, but simply wanting xbows to be viable in any way beyond being a slipshot wizard cantrip stand-in is silly?

 

[Jvegi]

I could give a shit about xBows.

Couldn't. Also, Kingmaker is a mess and you're annoying.

I just solved the coded message puzzle in the tutorial. I had a brain fog, couldn't crack it, even though I knew exactly what to do. Went for a walk, did the obvious "a" and "the" and solved it.

 

[Darth Canoli]

A -1 or -2 damage roll malus is hardly going to make a difference when you're using your ranged weapon as filler, and handing that guy any non-crafted magic bow would make it even more irrelevant. The arbalest is a god awful weapon to use as filler (or in general) because of the full round reload. You will never fire that thing more than once per encounter unless you go out of your way to do so or take rapid reload. Regardless, the point was never whether a caster should spend a feat on crossbows or bows. Both options are obviously unappealing unless you plan to switch the feat before leveling or get the group proficiency for free to begin with. The point is that crossbows have no real niche or purpose. Why even place action economy-centric restrictions on them as though you need to contain the earth shattering might of 1d8, 1d10, and 2d8 with -1 to attack rolls? They're all around terrible and "just something for wizards to do for their first few levels" doesn't justify three weapon types and an exclusive feat. Hell, even slings have a niche of being able to apply bludgeoning enchants to a ranged weapon. Being able to instakill a ghost dragon by chucking ghost touched undead bane+destruction rocks at it is kosher, but simply wanting xbows to be viable in any way beyond being a slipshot wizard cantrip stand-in is silly?

I'm not sure about the point of your argument.
Some weapons sucks, light maces for example, just don't use them.

One thing I disagree with though, 1/2 damage can make a huge difference, often, mostly in the village, some enemies will survive with 1 or 2 hp and it will allow them to act again, which could lead to a disastrous outcome.

Then again, if you absolutely want to use a crossbow but can't affort to spend one or two feats necessary and it makes you horribly mad, just change the feat settings once or twice for that char level up and then use crossbows.
What stopping you?
He's a mage but he spent some time hunting with a crossbow as a kid. He's not a sharpshooter but he's gifted, hence the 1/2 bonus feats.
It's as simple as that, you don't even need the justification as there's no GM to validate your choices.

Problem solved.

 

[Desiderius]

A -1 or -2 damage roll malus is hardly going to make a difference when you're using your ranged weapon as filler, and handing that guy any non-crafted magic bow would make it even more irrelevant. The arbalest is a god awful weapon to use as filler (or in general) because of the full round reload. You will never fire that thing more than once per encounter unless you go out of your way to do so or take rapid reload. Regardless, the point was never whether a caster should spend a feat on crossbows or bows. Both options are obviously unappealing unless you plan to switch the feat before leveling or get the group proficiency for free to begin with. The point is that crossbows have no real niche or purpose. Why even place action economy-centric restrictions on them as though you need to contain the earth shattering might of 1d8, 1d10, and 2d8 with -1 to attack rolls? They're all around terrible and "just something for wizards to do for their first few levels" doesn't justify three weapon types and an exclusive feat. Hell, even slings have a niche of being able to apply bludgeoning enchants to a ranged weapon. Being able to instakill a ghost dragon by chucking ghost touched undead bane+destruction rocks at it is kosher, but simply wanting xbows to be viable in any way beyond being a slipshot wizard cantrip stand-in is silly?

I'm not sure about the point of your argument.
Some weapons sucks, light maces for example, just don't use them.

One thing I disagree with though, 1/2 damage can make a huge difference, often, mostly in the village, some enemies will survive with 1 or 2 hp and it will allow them to act again, which could lead to a disastrous outcome.

Then again, if you absolutely want to use a crossbow but can't affort to spend one or two feats necessary and it makes you horribly mad, just change the feat settings once or twice for that char level up and then use crossbows.
What stopping you?
He's a mage but he spent some time hunting with a crossbow as a kid. He's not a sharpshooter but he's gifted, hence the 1/2 bonus feats.
It's as simple as that, you don't even need the justification as there's no GM to validate your choices.

Problem solved.

Wiz already has xBow prof. Use it against things not in melee and you don’t need any feats. If your fights are lasting long enough for reload to matter try sucking less.

2d8 >> 1d4-2

I can do this all day. Take the fucking L.

(not Darth, the dead horse beaters)

If you want Pierre to give you some better xBows for Rogues or make them use STR or whatever that’s different, but these arguments are both weak and pointless.

 

[Darth Canoli]

If you want Pierre to give you some better xBows for Rogues or make them use STR or whatever that’s different

On that topic, Pierre is receptive to good arguments about weak classes and races.

For example, he might add something for the monks, no spoiler but it's really cool.
And some new sub-races for Dwarves and Salamanders. No spoiler either, small changes but really neat.

(not Darth, the dead horse beaters)

I also beat dead donkeys, dead dogs and dead Rustys.

 

[Oligryan]

I'm not sure about the point of your argument.
Some weapons sucks, light maces for example, just don't use them.

I was hoping someone would have have figured something out that I hadn't considered. Instead, I got some guy exploding because someone posted a frog.

On that topic, Pierre is receptive to good arguments about weak classes and races.

For example, he might add something for the monks, no spoiler but it's really cool.
And some new sub-races for Dwarves and Salamanders. No spoiler either, small changes but really neat.

Right-O. I'll bring it up with him directly.

If you want Pierre to give you some better xBows for Rogues or make them use STR or whatever that’s different

STR to damage isn't necessary and would be boring. IMO, what should be done is
-Make light crossbows simple weapons
-Make heavy crossbows 18-20 3X and make Arbalests 4X
-Make some crossbow specific enchants and special bolts

I'll try to think up some specifics after I finish my current gimmicky archmage playthough with my underperforming crossbow ranger. On the flip-side, I'm also running a centaur psy healer with a reach weapon that I expected to be shit but has actually been putting in a surprising amount of work.