|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
First, there will be Rise of the Runelords Spoilers. If you have not run it, sorry, stay out.
I've proposed this in the theorycraft threads to deal with the "viability" and "overpowered" debates. Here is the concept.
Four "players" representing four classes create 4 legal 1st level characters.
A set of judges (at least 3, no more than 5) look at an encounter group and rate which characters would be the most useful to the group in that encounter, as built, with a number 1-4.
For example looking at the opening sequence of Rise of the Runelords, if I were a judge looking the beginner box party I would rate them as follows:
1. Fighter – Can one hit kill most of the time and unlikely to be hit.
2. Cleric – Healer will be helpful during the pauses, but having Father Zantus means it isn’t mission critical. May be first if not for Father Zantus being present considering healing likely needed over three consecutive conflicts.
3. Rogue- Skills not that useful and will be dependent on fighter for flanking.
4. Wizard- Will likely be great for one of the three encounters, but will likely run out of non-cantrips very quickly and low hit points and ac will leave vulnerable. A sorcerer would be much higher, possibly number one with multiple color sprays or the like. But a 1st level wizard isn't going to have the spells for such a drawn out encounter.
Something short and sweet like that from each judge for each encounter. Over time it will be clear if one person is lagging or not.
Prior to judging each person would say what their character would do to help the party for that specific encounter, and we would total the judges ratings over time with lowest average score being the most valuable.
You can only have what you acquire through the AP or can buy based on factors like availability in the city you are in, crafting skill at the time you craft it, etc...I would recommend a "lead" judge to adjudicate these disputes in the same way a GM would, as well as dividing up what is an "encounter" (as in what is a set of encounters that should be expected to be completed in a day) and when the characters should have enough XP to level.
Anyone interested, and if you are interested, in what role. I would like to see some of the "Wizard God" posted join and create their god wizard, as well as representatives from the "not viable" classes like monk demonstrating build value.
I think I might be willing to help with the wizard specifically, however I would need more information on when/how this goes down and what building rules are to be followed.
After all RotRL was made for 3.5, if we are using pathfinder it will make things slightly different.
|
|
Conceptually I'm fine with any of the AP's, RoTRL tends to be the one most people already know and don't have to worry about spoilers.
If memory serves the changes should be easily adjudicates since we aren't actually playing it out. Occasionally an item will need to be changed to the current, but last time I ran it for players who were running pathfinder it worked fine more or less as is.
Having the rules judge be someone we all would trust is the key I think. I was trying to recruit Bob_Loblaw as he always seems a straight shooter even if you disagree with him, but he didn't seem interested.
I think I might be willing to help with the wizard specifically, however I would need more information on when/how this goes down and what building rules are to be followed.
After all RotRL was made for 3.5, if we are using pathfinder it will make things slightly different.
The CRs would need to be adjusted for a lot of creatures. Possibly causing the number of creatures to rise or general XP gain to slow down slightly. For example, virtually all the humanoid creatures (goblins, NPCs, etc) should be listed CR-1. You could either leave their numbers as-is and just accept the slower XP growth, add a PC level or a couple NPC levels to boost them, or add another when XP values permit it (going from CR 1 (400 XP) to CR 1/2 (200 XP) means you can support a pair of them instead of a single creature) in the same XP budget.
EDIT: I had to do this for a friend of mine running CotCT for our group. I was playing in the game but he knows I don't metagame, so he had me help with the NPCs. The option we went with was revving the enemies up until their CR was what it was in CotCT only in Pathfinder. This generally made encounters a bit more interesting, because NPCs usually had an extra hit die or two, and some slight tweaks here and there (Gaedren Lamm was actually pretty dangerous as a result, and not quite the joke he was in the book).
|
|
The CRs would need to be adjusted for a lot of creatures. Possibly causing the number of creatures to rise or general XP gain to slow down slightly. For example, virtually all the humanoid creatures (goblins, NPCs, etc) should be listed CR-1. You could either leave their numbers as-is and just accept the slower XP growth, add a PC level or a couple NPC levels to boost them, or add another when XP values permit it (going from CR 1 (400 XP) to CR 1/2 (200 XP) means you can support a pair of them instead of a single creature) in the same XP budget.
And as I said before in another thread, no.
The AP is what it is. We aren't adding or subtracting, because we aren't actually running the AP. Your character will be judged on the contribution the judges feel they will make to the encounters as written.
Period.
Advancement will occur when the XP dictates it occurs, the monsters will be what they are and what will matter is what you can bring to the encounter as written.
When I described this exact plan before, you said it was fair as described. Death by a thousand cuts is not an option.
|
|
To get this started, I am fine with either Abraham or Ashiel as wizard (I am also fine with them each doing a wizard, but this could effect party dynamics so I will defer to whoever we can get to judge.
We need at least two other classes, I'm willing to do one if no one else is interested (I'll take any class, as my general argument is they are all viable contributors if built in the team concept) and at least three judges, one of which should be a lead judge.
We are going to have to agree on judges (particularly lead judge), but once they are selected they make final calls.
This test is already bias in favour of the melee due to the level its based at but no matter.
Edit: i only own the kingmaker AP by the way, we play a fair bit of home brew. But i can provide builds if you wish for rotrl or we can run them through km.
This is a party i use for quick play testing, its rare i test at level one so please keep an eye out for any errors. At higher level they synergise much better but at level 1 they hope to beat down the opponent before it can react. All are built with 15 point buy and have a single trait which they can live without so they can be customised for any AP.
Human (LG)
Anatomist
Cavalier(Order of the Dragon), Honour Guard 1
Init +1 Senses perception +4
Ac 18, touch 11, flat-footed 17 (+5 armour, +2 shield, +1 dex)
HP 14 (d10+3 con+1 fav)
Fort +5 Ref +1 Will +0
Defensive abilities aid allies (+3 when using aid another)
Speed 20ft
Melee pick +6 (d6+4/x4) or 2h pick +6 (d6+6/x4)
Ranged throwing axe +3 (d6+4/x2)
Offensive abilities challenge (-2 AC, +1 damage, allies +1 to hit)
Str 18 Dex 12 Con 16 Int 13 Wis 10 Cha 8
Base atk +1; CMB +5: CMD 16
Feats lookout, weapon focus pick
Skills perception +4, survival +4(+1 when providing or protecting), handle animal +3, ride +5, intimidate +3
Class challenge 1/day, sworn defence, mount, tactician(outflank) 1/day,
Languages common, dwarven
Treasure/equipment pick, 3 throwing axes, scale mail, heavy wooden shield, pathfinder adventuring kit
Human (NG)
Birthmark
Oracle(life), Dual Cursed(Haunted, Tongues) 1
Init +1 Senses perception +1
Ac 17, touch 11, flat-footed 16 (+5 armour, +1 shield, +1 dex)
HP 11 (d8+2 con+1 fav)
Fort +2 Ref +1 Will +2
Speed 20ft
Melee morningstar +2 (d8+2)
Ranged dart +1 (d4+2)
Spells (CL 1; concentration +5)
1st – DC15 – 4/day – cure light wounds, protection from evil, bless
0th – DC14 – ultd – stabilise, guidance, create water, mending, mage hand, ghost sound
Str 14 Dex 12 Con 15 Int 8 Wis 10 Cha 18
Base atk +0; CMB +2: CMD 13
Feats lookout, selective channelling
Skills perception +1, knowledge dungeoneering +0, heal +4, diplomacy +8
Languages common
Class channel 7/day(1d6 dc15)
Treasure/equipment 10 darts, morningstar, scale mail, light wooden shield, pathfinder adventuring kit
Human (CG)
Rogue, Scout 1
Armour expert
Init +5 Senses perception +4
Ac 18, touch 15, flat-footed 13 (+3 armour, +5 dex)
HP 11 (d8+2 con+1 fav)
Fort +2 Ref +8 Will +0
Speed 30ft
Melee kukri +0 (d4-1/18-20) or 2 kukri's -2/-2 (d4-1/18-20)
Ranged throwing dagger +5 (d4-1/19-20) or 2 throwing daggers +3/+3 (d4-1/19-20)
Offensive abilities sneak attack +1d6
Str 8 Dex 20 Con 14 Int 13 Wis 10 Cha 12
Base atk +0; CMB -1: CMD 14
Feats lookout, two weapon fighting
Skills perception +4(+1 vs traps), acrobatics +9, appraise +5, bluff +5, disable device +9(+1 vs trap), escape artist +9, sense motive +4, use magic device +5, knowledge local +5
Class sneak attack +1d6, trapfinding
Languages common, halfling
Treasure/equipment kukri, kukri, 8 throwing daggers, studded leather, pathfinder adventuring kit
Human (NG)
Wizard(Foresight) enchantment and evocation barred, Scrollmaster 1
Reactionary
Init +9 Senses perception +0
Ac 17, touch 16, flat-footed 15 (+4 mage armour, +1 shield, +2 dex)
HP 8 (d6+1 con+1 fav)
Fort +1 Ref +2 Will +2
Defensive abilities scroll shield (+1 AC, +1 ehancement per 2 levels of spell on scroll)
Speed 30ft
Melee scrollblade +1 (d6/19-20)
Ranged jolt +2 (d3 electric)
Offensive abilities scroll blade(scroll acts as mw shortsword, +1 enhancment per 2 level of spell on scroll)
Spells (CL 2; concentration +6)
1st – DC15 – true strike, mage armour, colour spray
0th – DC14 – predigitation, jolt, message
Str 10 Dex 14 Con 12 Int 18 Wis 10 Cha 8
Base atk +0; CMB +0: CMD 12
Feats lookout, improved initiative
Skills spellcraft +8, knowledge arcana +8, religion +8, planes +8, nature +8,
Class scroll blade, scroll shield, scribe scroll, forewarned, prescience 7/day
Languages common, celestial, elven, draconic,
Treasure/equipment spellbook, spell component pouch, scroll case, pathfinder adventuring kit, 2 scrolls of enlarge person
spellbook:
0th level – all
1st level – anticipate peril, enlarge person, silent image, true strike, colour spray, mage armour, ray of enfeeblement
They walk in a T shape cavalier on the left, rogue on the right, oracle in the middle and wizard behind adjacent to all three.
When combat begins the wizard acts and normally goes first, he uses a scroll on the cavalier or colour sprays if its a tough fight, if its a walk over he jolts to pass the time, he uses true strike to trip.
The rogue goes next and due to the wizard being there combined with his perception score his lookout feat goes off, he will probably get a full round and will use it to move and throw for sneak attack damage.
The cavalier will partial charge as he can always act in the suprise round due to lookout and the diviner, he uses outflank in a tough fight with multiple opponents and challenges single tough foes, prefering to 2h the heavy pick but turtling when neccessary.
The oracle will cast bless then either join in melee if it looks like an easy fight or stand back and throw darts if it looks like they will have to heal.
The MVP in this party at this level is imo the cavalier since he will be doing 60%+ of the actual killing and has some excellent group utility and tanking. The rogue is weak until finesse next level but can still deal damage by throwing and getting sneak attack flanking(eventually this character is getting butterfly sting). The oracle is a weak fighter without divine favour next level but should easily keep the party stable and bless helps with the to hit, he will also pick up misfortune at level 2 to start rerolls. The diviner is mechanically capable of letting the party win fights by its mere presence but contributes little to actual combat other than weak damage, some flank bonuses and colour spray in a hard fight until they get more spells and probably adds in grease for an alternate form of control.
Skill wise the wizard is a knowledge battery, the cav/rog/ora all have a different social skill and the rogue is basicly carrying them through traps etc though the party has pretty much every core skill covered. The oracle will use heal to treat deadly wounds to save on spells/channels if needed.
Judge away. However bear in mind this is a specialist party and level one is a great level for fights and a dire level for all casters.
Here's a key question -- does the role have to be filled or the class?
|
|
Here's a key question -- does the role have to be filled or the class?
My intent is to take the classes that are viewed as under or over powered, run them through an AP with a group building level by level with the resources available in the AP (as the game is designed to be played) and see if the "over" or "underpowered" statements are valid.
My hypothesis is that the bias comes from home brew, not from design, and that starting at 1st level (so you need to suffer the penalties that come early with certain builds) using the resources (so you can't just magic shop the world) and tracking as you go (so for example you craft an item at the level you craft it, not at the ideal level for the build) will demonstrate the classes are far more balanced than is generally argued.
If you have a specific thing you want to demonstrate, for example if you wanted to show a wizard can "tank", this would be a good forum to attempt to demonstrate that that I think.
The concept is to either prove or disprove by testing in actual designed conditions.
This test is already bias in favour of the melee due to the level its based at but no matter.
How? We are following an Adventure Path, which is more or less what the system is designed to run.
If you feel running the game as designed creates a bias, I don't know what to tell you.
As long as you are levelling them up your test could be valid, but depending on your judges perceptions on "most useful" it is a minefield of opinion.
Fighters (in my parties case cavalier) are widely considered underpowered, however mine does most of the damage, the best ac, the ability to aid allies, a good skill list, a mount companion, a 1/day ability to give everyone +4 to hit, a 1/day ability that makes tanking easier, increases damage and increases allies to hit. Thats an excellent first level fighter.
The diviner otoh has very few spells, next to no AC. He has loads of knowledge skills which will be good in the long term but not so useful at 1st level, he is also one of the most productive party members just by turning up due to lookout and has the ability to end encounters with colour spray but he needs to pick his moments to shine.
Which is more powerful? The cavalier is consistant, the wizard is powerful. The cavalier will stay consistant and will always be providing buffs, he will grow into power attack and dazzling display so his rogue buddy can shatter defenses, the diviner will "always" go first and will use that to set up advantageous situations for the cav/rog killing machine.
The oracle has endurance but less powerful options, the rogue is weak but has neccessary skills. As we level you will see the oracle grow into an optimised healing build that provides/forces lots of rerolls, the rogue will grow to a dualwielding crit machine who gives up his damage so the cavalier can one hit things.
This could just as easily be a paladin aegis build and an urban ranger archer build but i prefer a party with synergy over "powerful" options, now the only "op" build is the diviner but as a "godwizard" if he does his job properly the other classes will reap the lions share of the glory and he will spend a lot of his time waiting.
Do you want to do RotRL or KM?
|
|
This test is already bias in favour of the melee due to the level its based at but no matter.
How? We are following an Adventure Path, which is more or less what the system is designed to run.
If you feel running the game as designed creates a bias, I don't know what to tell you.
As long as you are levelling them up your test could be valid, but depending on your judges perceptions on "most useful" it is a minefield of opinion.
This is 100% true. However the whole debate is subjective, this is just intended to provide context.
The idea is to go day by day through the AP, leveling when XP is appropriate, distributing what the AP provides reasonably, and seeing how theory interacts with design.
As to the RoTRL or KM, I would be fine with either. Parallel threads would also be interesting if we can get interest/judges.
I personally think RoTRL would be the better campaign option. I'm fine with just about any class for whatever character I end up building.
The reason I asked about role vs class comes from an idea I am having on a sorcerer that 'replaces' the rogue in the party.
|
|
I personally think RoTRL would be the better campaign option. I'm fine with just about any class for whatever character I end up building.
The reason I asked about role vs class comes from an idea I am having on a sorcerer that 'replaces' the rogue in the party.
I would be all for that kind of test.
I want this to be a testing ground concept. Bring an idea to a forum with context and see how it is viewed in that context with other races.
I would suggest if we are going with "roles" your sorcerer take the "rogue" role. Ashiel can have the "caster" role. If psionic hamster is still around he could have a monk take the "tank" role, and perhaps someone,either Egoist or I could prove Oracles are viable in the "Healer" role (which I've heard criticised). I'll take it if no one else wants it.
Any interest from judges. I would volunteer, but I'm quite certain Ashiel at least would object (fairly, as my position is pretty clear).
I can run a life oracle if you wish. I'm sure its a mechanically stronger healer than cleric but not as useful outside its speciality, you might be better off to run it as an online campaign rather than as a thought experiment.
|
|
I can run a life oracle if you wish. I'm sure its a mechanically stronger healer than cleric but not as useful outside its speciality, you might be better off to run it as an online campaign rather than as a thought experiment.
A campaign is a log slower than a thought experimeant.
Don't change your oracle to be a "healer", as the whole argument is the oracle is viable generally, not just as a healer. If you want to run a life oracle, feel free. But don't feel like you have to.
That oracle is life anyway, its designed be a "healer" and generate rerolls. If theres none of that to do it buffs and wades in.
|
|
While we are recruiting for judges (feel free to suggest) let’s see if we can agree on the “Break Points” for the first book (Burnt Offerings). A break point is an agreed on “days” worth of encounters.
For each break point the players would state their case for why their character is valuable in this encounter set, and then the judges would vote.
This is how I would propose breaking out the book.
1st Encounter event is the three consecutive festival encounters. The players shouldn’t metagame any prior knowledge of this attack, as it is a complete sneak attack. Everyone would have base equipment as a level one. Presume all loot is taken and the group decides who gets what (just like in a real game).
2nd Encounter event involves the side quests included in the “Local Heroes” segment (‘The Shopkeep’s Daughter”, “The Boar Hunt”, and “Monster in the Closet”)
After these encounters the PC’s should be able to Level to 2nd level.
3rd encounter event is the Glassworks. Players can argue as to what knowledge they can have prior as part of them making their case for character value. Again, presume all loot is taken.
4th encounter event is Catacombs of Wrath (we will assume the players take a day to rest before exploring, but only a day.) Players will presumably have very little foreknowledge as to what they will be encountering here, unless they can demonstrate otherwise.
After these encounters, the PC’s should be able to Level to 3rd level.
The next encounter event is Thistletop. It is unlikely the PC’s would be able to do all of this in a single day (although retreating would have consequences) so I would divide into two encounter events. I will let each player say as part of their argument what prior knowledge they would have for spell/equipment preparation.
5th Encounter event would be all of the events that occur under “C”, or all of the above ground action.
The 6th encounter event would be all of the events that occur under “D” and “E”, which would be all of the below ground action.
At the completion the players would be level 4, moving into the next book.
This isn’t written in stone, just starting the baseline for discussion.
I would like to offer a suggestion that the party as a whole be graded as well -- after all this isn't a "character against character" thing, but a "how does each class integrate into a party" thing.
I agree with the festival being the first 'encounter set' and the second set seems reasonable to me as well.
When we ran through this we went from local heroes to thistle top then glass works catacombs.
I have not read the adventure however and haven't been through it all in a while so your direction seems reasonable to me.
|
|
I would like to offer a suggestion that the party as a whole be graded as well -- after all this isn't a "character against character" thing, but a "how does each class integrate into a party" thing.
I agree with the festival being the first 'encounter set' and the second set seems reasonable to me as well.
When we ran through this we went from local heroes to thistle top then glass works catacombs.
I have not read the adventure however and haven't been through it all in a while so your direction seems reasonable to me.
I agree with the grading system 100%. I would hope that is the criteria for the judges, as I personally think that is the way the game works.
We could have that as a Party grade at the top, with individual contributions rated below.
Good idea.
As to order, I think it can go either way and I would defer to whoever ends up lead judge to pick.
|
|
Ok, sounds good to me.
Character generation preferences?
AP default is 15 pt buy, PFS is 20, personally I'm fine with either (or another method).
Should have a 1st lvl build up later on.
I am also fine either way. Going PFS 20 point buy may make more sense so we can fall back to them for other rulings, but I will defer to the people making the characters.
Now next question -- time between encounters that are part of the same set. In several places the party does have control over how long they take to explore something. I'm comfortable saying that encounter set one should probably all be within the same hour of each other at the longest, but other sets should probably be longer.
Also there is (in several places) the chance that a party might fine themselves wanting to back out and go at it again (this would favor prepared casters of course) -- how are we going to add value judgements to these options and how are we going to handle things like traps, and environmental encounters while we are at it?
Personally I think going with PFS standards for the characters should work fine -- it would allow a general consensus point for the larger community and streamline the process without getting bogged down in minutia of character building.
Should item creation be included as a variable?
|
Half-Orc Monk 1
LN Medium Humanoid (Human, Orc)
Init +4 Senses: Darkvision 60’, Perception +6
Speed 30, Languages: Common, Orc, Goblin
Height: 6’2” Weight: 220 lbs Hair: Black Eyes: Red Age: 21
Defense
AC 16 Touch 14 FF 16 (Dex +2, Wis +2, Dodge +1, Natural +1)
HP 10 (1d8+2)
Fort +4 Ref +4 Will +4
Offense
Melee: Falchion +3 (2d4+4 18-20/x2)
or Unarmed Strike +3 (1d6+3) or Flurry +2/+2 (1d6+3/d6+3)
Ranged javelin +2 (1d6+3) Range 30’ Ammo [][]
BAB 0 CMB 4 CMD 17
Abilities: Str 16, Dex 14, Con 14, Int 12, Wis 14, Cha 8
SQ: Favored Class: Monk (Skills), Orc Blood, Orc Ferocity, Weapon Familiarity
SA: Flurry of Blows (-1/-1), Stunning Fist (DC , 1/day),
Traits: Poverty-Stricken, Reactionary
Feats: Improved Unarmed StrikeB, DodgeB, Ironhide
Skills: Acrobatics +6, Intimidate +5, Climb +7, Perception +6, Stealth +6, Survival +7
Combat Gear: caltrops (2), lamp oil (2), alchemist fire (1)
Gear: falchion, quarterstaff, longspear, dagger, javelin (2) backpack, belt pouch, bedroll, monk’s outfit, crowbar, flint & steel, rations (5 days), hammer, iron spikes (5), 100’ silk rope, 100’ twine, torch, waterskin, wrist sheath (dagger)
Coin: 12 gp 2 sp 4 cp
Carrying Capacity: Light 76lbs Medium 153lbs Heavy 230lbs Lift 460lbs Drag 1150lbs
Weight Carried: 72.5 lbs
For Google Docs version (with nicer formatting) Clicky Here
|
|
Now next question -- time between encounters that are part of the same set. In several places the party does have control over how long they take to explore something. I'm comfortable saying that encounter set one should probably all be within the same hour of each other at the longest, but other sets should probably be longer.
Also there is (in several places) the chance that a party might fine themselves wanting to back out and go at it again (this would favor prepared casters of course) -- how are we going to add value judgements to these options and how are we going to handle things like traps, and environmental encounters while we are at it?
Personally I think going with PFS standards for the characters should work fine -- it would allow a general consensus point for the larger community and streamline the process without getting bogged down in minutia of character building.
Should item creation be included as a variable?
My only issue with backing out and going again is I come from the school of "If you leave, it will be worse when you come back because they will know you are coming."
I think we need to decide to break encounter blocks into "You are doing this section in one go". If you think about it, Thistletop being a two day project kind of breaks reality, but it is too much to reasonable expect a party to do in a single go.
As to crafting, there will be time within the AP, if you have the feats to do it. If I recall there is almost a full year gap at one point, not to mention travel time.
The problem with the "It will be worse" thing is we know already what is in there already -- and if no one that sees us survives we quickly enter into 4th wall territory and punishment for not being stupid. If you get half way through the fortress for example but the fighter has 5 hp and everyone else is the same or worse with no spells left it's dumb to try and continue. Likewise if you need a certain something to continue but you don't have it you don't have much choice there either.
I don't see how Thistletop couldn't be a two day project -- the idea that at level 2~3 you'll clear an entire fort full of goblins and the boss that is at the end of it in one go is a bit much, especially if you include the thicket and druid with that. Now if the bridge goes down that could be a problem, but there is no guarantee that will happen either.
Not sure exactly what is going to be totally required, but I'd be down to judge this. I find the whole debate very interesting (in the interest of full disclosure I used to be on the whole "WIZARDS RULE!!11!! side, but have since come back to acknowledging that I'm not really sure who rules the most overall). I don't really have any specific bias (for or against) toward individual posters or classes (other than always posting arcane archer style builds :p). I've also played through all of RotRL, GMing one leg of it. I'm not an expert on it, but I certainly know it decently.
I won't be insulted if I'm not chosen, tho. Just offering. I'll throw down an Arcane Archer build into the conversation if I have to! :)
|
Oh, I must say I LOVE this idea! I would be happy to lend assistance, though I understand if you would rather wait for more, shall we say "known quantities", if any of such venerable personages who post more regularly than I wish to join in the fun. Either way I fully intend to keep up with what I expect to be a most entertaining thread.
If it matters I have run half of RotRL (the party moved and broke up in RL at that point), have read the entire thing, and am quite conversant with PF rules in general. I have no real biases toward or against any class, having seen builds I thought would be terrible dominate the table and vice versa, though this may very well stem from a lack of experience at what anyone might call an "optimizer" game. Still, I think my number-crunching abilities are up to snuff.
One way or another I expect to be entertained, and so, gentleman, ladies, please do play on.
An unknown factor among the judges could be a good thing -- no one has anything to say for or against you in any given case and there aren't any previous personality conflicts.
|
|
At this point while we are looking for the last judge, since we seem to have agreement on what the first encounter is I think we can "start"
The three confirmed players should post why the judges should view their character as the most valuable for that specific encounter.
If either Abraham Spalding or Egoist want to also do a wizard (as I know both are on the same side of that particular debate) I have no issue with it.
Sylvanite and AsmodeusUltima, your "job" is after the players have all posted why they should be considered valuable in the encounter is to post the following.
1. Overall grade for the party - Whatever criteria you judge with as much or as little explanation as to why you gave that grade as you like. I would suggest considering the AP party in the book to be a "C" (or average party) and the players being judged relative to that baseline. But you are the judges, you set the criteria.
2. List the 4 remaining players in order of value for that specific encounter day (and only for that encounter) with the most valuable receiving a 1 and the least receiving a 4.
I'll keep a running tally, the lowest score will be the most valuable and the highest score will be the least.
Feel free to add as much or as little justification for your ratings as you like.
We'll reset and start the next "Encounter Day" after all judges are in.
Any disagreement or concern with this format?
|
|
If no-one else wants to create a Wizard, here's one straight outta Treantmonk's "God" guide.
Elf Diviner 1
N Medium Humanoid (Elf)
Init +10 Senses: Low-light vision, Perception +4
Speed 30, Languages: Common, Elf, Draconic, Abyssal, Infernal, Orc, Goblin
Height: 5’9” Weight: 125 lbs Hair: Blonde Eyes: Blue Age: 121
Defense
AC 13 Touch 13 FF 10 (Dex +3)
HP 8 (1d6+2)
Fort +1 Ref +3 Will +3 (+2 vs Enchantment)
Immune: Magical Sleep
Offense
Melee: dagger -1 (1d4-1 19-20/x2)
Ranged longbow +3 (1d8 20/x3) Range 100 Ammo 20_________
BAB 0 CMB -1 CMD 12
Abilities: Str 8, Dex 16, Con 12, Int 18, Wis 12, Cha 10
SQ: Favored Class: Wizard (HP), Elven Magic, Keen Senses, Weapon Familiarity, Arcane Bond (Familiar), Forewarned
SA: Diviner’s Fortune (8/day, +1 insight to attacks/skill checks/ability checks/saves for 1 round)
Traits: Reactionary, Dilettante Artist (Diplomacy)
Feats: Improved Initiative, Scribe ScrollB
Skills: Diplomacy +5, Linguistics +8, Knowledge (Arcana) +8, Knowledge (Local) +8, Perception +4, Spellcraft +8 (+10 to ID items)
Combat Gear: lamp oil (2)
Gear: Longbow, 20 arrows, dagger, backpack, belt pouch, spell component pouch, wandermeal (4), waterskin, bullseye lantern
Scribing materials: 50gp
Coin:7sp, 6 cp
Carrying Capacity: Light 26lbs Medium 53bs Heavy 80lbs Lift 160lbs Drag 400lbs
Weight Carried: 23.5
Spells Prepared (CL 1, Concentration +5, Save DC 14+Spell Level):
Cantrips: Detect Magic, Dancing Lights, Ghost Sound
1st: Obscuring Mist, Silent Image, True Strike
Spellbook (prohibited schools: Enchantment/Necromancy): All cantrips, Color Spray, Mount, Obscuring Mist, Protection from Evil, Shield, Silent Image, True Strike
For pretty version, Cicky On Me
|
|
Ok, then, on to the nitty-gritty.
For the first set of encounters (the Swallowtail Festival ambush):
Boghu Khalee the Monk:
- Social: next to no input here, mechanically speaking. The player will be pressed to actually RP out interactions with the civilians, unless trying to Intimidate the populace for some reason. Dispersing the crowd may call for an Intimidate check, and there's always old fashioned thuggery.
- Combat 1: Each goblin has to roll a 13 to even hit our Monk-Tank, which is the same roll he needs to smack a gobbo. Of course, any blow from the falchion will drop a goblin with one hit, while they'd be hard pressed to take Boghu down. Like a lot of 1st level fights, this is likely to result in several rounds of misses, unless he can be buffed up somehow (flanking would help significantly.
- Combat 2: In the same boat here, but with the Warchanter sitting at AC 17, it'll be even tougher to hit her without some assistance. The foes are still unlikely to hit Boghu, though, and he still puts them down in a single blow, even the Warchanter gets staggered from a minimum damage Falchion hit.
- Combat 3: This could prove a bit challenging, especially if any of the gobbos landed attacks earlier (assuming Boghu has not been healed). The Commando is the primary target, especially as the goblin dog is much less dangerous without its rider. AC 15 means we only need a 12 to hit with melee (only 10 if we can get a flanking buddy), while he needs the same 13 as the rest of the goblins to whack Boghu.
Potential tactical maneuvers: Dosing a goblin in oil is a cheap alternative to alch-fire, and they are generally likely to light one another (or themselves) on fire pretty readily.
Fighting Defensively means Boghu hits the little guys on 17s or better, but they need 15s to scratch him.
The Warchanter or Commando eats the 1/day stunning fist. Which one depends on how the first round of battle progreses. Bards usually attract a high level of aggression from my players, for good reason. Fort +1 and Fort +4 mean its a 50/50 shot for the Warchanter, potentially shutting down Inspire Courage for x goblins for a fight.
|
|
Aldous Mor'esti the Diviner
- Social: Diplomacy, Knowledge (Local), & Linguistics yield a well-rounded dice rolling social game. With enough time, Al knows everyone in town, who's schtupping whom, and where all the best deals are. Familiar doesn't really add in anything yet.
- Combat 1: Stay behind the Monk, and plink with the longbow. "I go first" usually applies here, with Init +10 at 1st level, and that's only going to climb. Rule of the day is stay away from goblins and let the fighter-types handle the threat.
- Combat 2: Against another spellcaster, cast true strike on the surprise round (if possible), and plug her round 1 with a longbow arrow. Repeat Combat 1 as necessary; namely, hide & snipe.
- Combat 3: Try to distract/disturb the final group with a silent image. If aware of the goblins' fears, a horse or dog works well. Know(Local)+8 should help here. Round 1 yields another longbow arrow or diviner's fortune on a melee guy. Repeat hide & snipe routine.
Potential Tactical moves:
If the goblins turn out to be easily cowed/swayed with images, silent image is duration:concentration. Stay slow, stay hidden, and get the little freaks to chase fake dogs/people/pigs into ambushes/pits/the town guards. Imagination is key!
Obscuring mist is the "getaway" spell. Also used to block LoS for any ranged threats.
Oil and potentially a lit lantern in hand means fire is an option.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
At this point while we are looking for the last judge, since we seem to have agreement on what the first encounter is I think we can "start"
The three confirmed players should post why the judges should view their character as the most valuable for that specific encounter.
If either Abraham Spalding or Egoist want to also do a wizard (as I know both are on the same side of that particular debate) I have no issue with it.
Sylvanite and AsmodeusUltima, your "job" is after the players have all posted why they should be considered valuable in the encounter is to post the following.
1. Overall grade for the party - Whatever criteria you judge with as much or as little explanation as to why you gave that grade as you like. I would suggest considering the AP party in the book to be a "C" (or average party) and the players being judged relative to that baseline. But you are the judges, you set the criteria.
2. List the 4 remaining players in order of value for that specific encounter day (and only for that encounter) with the most valuable receiving a 1 and the least receiving a 4.
I'll keep a running tally, the lowest score will be the most valuable and the highest score will be the least.
Feel free to add as much or as little justification for your ratings as you like.
We'll reset and start the next "Encounter Day" after all judges are in.
Any disagreement or concern with this format?
Sounds good to me. So encounter day 1 is the series of fights in the festival, correct? I have all the books, so I will have to look back through at the fights to really gauge what players are saying they will do.
This is a really interesting idea. Looking forward to contributing.
Edit: It'd be great if someone could copy and paste the players' responses for a specific encounter day into one post in spoiler blocks after all 4 have posted. Maybe you could do that as MC, ciretose? Otherwise it's gonna be a slog to find 'em all and try to figure out how they all fit together.
|
|
At this point while we are looking for the last judge, since we seem to have agreement on what the first encounter is I think we can "start"
The three confirmed players should post why the judges should view their character as the most valuable for that specific encounter.
If either Abraham Spalding or Egoist want to also do a wizard (as I know both are on the same side of that particular debate) I have no issue with it.
Sylvanite and AsmodeusUltima, your "job" is after the players have all posted why they should be considered valuable in the encounter is to post the following.
1. Overall grade for the party - Whatever criteria you judge with as much or as little explanation as to why you gave that grade as you like. I would suggest considering the AP party in the book to be a "C" (or average party) and the players being judged relative to that baseline. But you are the judges, you set the criteria.
2. List the 4 remaining players in order of value for that specific encounter day (and only for that encounter) with the most valuable receiving a 1 and the least receiving a 4.
I'll keep a running tally, the lowest score will be the most valuable and the highest score will be the least.
Feel free to add as much or as little justification for your ratings as you like.
We'll reset and start the next "Encounter Day" after all judges are in.
Any disagreement or concern with this format?
Sounds good to me. So encounter day 1 is the series of fights in the festival, correct? I have all the books, so I will have to look back through at the fights to really gauge what players are saying they will do.
This is a really interesting idea. Looking forward to contributing.
Edit: It'd be great if someone could copy and paste the players' responses for a specific encounter day into one post in spoiler blocks after all 4 have posted. Maybe you could do that as MC, ciretose? Otherwise it's gonna be a slog to find 'em all and try to figure out how they all fit...
I will do you one better.
I am setting up a "playtest" for this here..
That will give us separate areas to discuss and post separately.
Ideally if the "players" could set up aliases as you would for a PbP, but I will defer to them as to that.
Ciretose, that link gave me some issues, although I eventually found my way to the thread you made. Just an FYI. I think there was an extra period in the web address at the start of it or something.
http://paizo.com/forums/dmtz5aoj?RoTRL-Experiment#1
that's the full out address is anyone needs to copy and paste it.
Alright. Just re-read the festival night fights. Ready to start judgin'.
|
|
Ciretose, that link gave me some issues, although I eventually found my way to the thread you made. Just an FYI. I think there was an extra period in the web address at the start of it or something.
http://paizo.com/forums/dmtz5aoj?RoTRL-Experiment#1
that's the full out address is anyone needs to copy and paste it.
Sorry, this link should work
i'm just going to rewrite the oracle without lookout since it doesn't look like we will be taking advantage of teamwork feats. when i've done that i will post up the full build in simple format and run through it for everyone. after that i can do a wizard if you want me to.
|
|
i'm just going to rewrite the oracle without lookout since it doesn't look like we will be taking advantage of teamwork feats. when i've done that i will post up the full build in simple format and run through it for everyone. after that i can do a wizard if you want me to.
Sounds good to me, and I would love for you to build out a wizard as well if you don't mind the double duty. With the last judge, assuming Abraham is still is we would then be 100% ready to go.
I'm still in -- and I posted in the other thread as to why I seemed to disappear. I'm sorry for the inconvenience and am still very much interested.