Aotrscommander's page

The most likely solution (as in "unless the other DM has any other ideas, that's what we're going with") at the minute is going to be to use the first One Night Stand module Jam412 mentioned (thank you!) It's about the right level range, for the right number of PCs (8) and has one big advantage. It's set in a jungle, so I can slap it down onto my primary campaign world, change a few names to protect the guilty, and we can use it with our Evil Dark Lord's Commandoes party, who are level four. That means only one character to generate (and that player was going to have a new character whatever we did). It *does* mean me adding a bit more of a front end and converting/replacing the monsters, but the module's monster mix will make that really easy without having to impinge on the world's not-a-D&D-at-all-redesigned-from-scratch-bestiary.

City of Strangers is, however, noted for future reference in the event of any future problems!

Thanks for the assist folks, I think this is probably the most optimal solution, under the circumstances!

I actually ran Crypt of the Everflame in one night for my group and they are a bunch of procrastinators. So, if you want to do a first level thing, that's the way to go in my opinion.

I'll bear that in mind. (*Generally*, I tend to start out day-game characters at about level 3-5; but again, beggers can't be choosers and all that!)

How serious is the comment:

"Which puts it down to me. Again. (Guess I won't be doing anything other than DMing until, like Easter then... *sigh*)"

Consider carefully whether you actually WANT to DM this session.

Yes you could do it. But it sounds to me like you already do a lot.

Maybe one of the other players could step up and give it a go. Its only a 1 off so its not like it matters too much. You could even have two guys do it. One the first module, one the second.

You are already planning on running with a pre-made adventure so its even easier for them to start.

Do you want to always be the backup when the other guy cannot do it due to unexpected circumstances?

It comes down to the fact that if I don't do it, it ain't likely gonna get done. Nobody else has the time to do the prep (first of which will involve generating new characters, and at least one player is coming down from Birmingham, so it's not like we can meet up before hand and do it); me and the would be DM have sort of agreed already to split the chargen between us. (There is one chap who might be prepared to run something if I put it in his hand, but he's suffering a bit with work at the moment - he's not making many of our weekly games at the moment, and he's more or less stopped wargaming - so I'm not prepared to put any additional weight on him.) I am, when it comes down to it, best suited in terms of time and experience, to pick up the mess.

(It is the first time we've ever had this problem, after all. As my Dad says, "these things come to try and and sometimes they suceed."

In any case, the major point is, regardless of who *does* ends up DMing (and I *haven't* ruled out slapping module in the would-be DM's hand and saying "here you go mate!" - it will really depend on how suitable the module is to our particular rules permutations - not least the fact that it'll be about an eight-character party), we still need a quest to run in the first place.

Okay, got a bit of a bind. Our group is having one of our one-off games a week on Saturday. Problem is, last night, the guy who was supposed to be running it had his motherboard die on him, and he doesn't have the time/money to repair it *and* finish writing the adventure in time.

Which puts it down to me. Again. (Guess I won't be doing anything other than DMing until, like Easter then... *sigh*)

I don't have time to write a game inside a week, obviously (at least not to our level) - I've also got to start prep for a Rolemaster game at Christmas (and I'm DMing the current weekly game as well...)

Now, I have a couple of back-up modules, which I thought might serve... Problem is, from the looks of things they are all the wrong length. A full module is, obviously, way too long for a day game. The Pathfinder Society modules (specifically, the Third Riddle) look too short (as, from what I recall from the one I played at the one convention I went to, you run two a day).

So, what I'm looking for is something in between, that I can run in about six to eight hours (or thereabouts). For example, two linked Society modules would probably do it, if such a thing exists or could be reasonably cobbled together hastily.

Edition/rules set is largely immaterial (thought D20-based is preferred) (as I'll either cough loudly over the differences and/or adjust/enhance the combat encounters either way).

Does anyone have any suggestions? Of any type?

*Yoink*

That stuff is really handy. I'm planning on using the Demonskar Ball event, so I was struggling to fill the two weeks before the ball from the festivals start with something (aside from a mid-festival trip to the Lucky Monkey). Assuming the PCs don't manage some other way, I figured I'd set the Kopru Ruins after the ball (assuming the PCs don't get too clever!)

I looked at the drinking contest on that SC resource site, but I decided if I wasn't careful trying to adapt it myself as a spread sheet would take more time than it was worth. But your contests are right in the middle ground of being more than dice-rolling contests and being too fiddly. Nice.

Name-the-meat (as you added Shensen) will potentially provide some foreshadowing with a first meeting with her, which I think could be quite useful itself (I set the contest in my timeline about five days before the PCs will go there.)

The only sad part is that if all goes as predicted, most of my PCs are going to be casters, so they consider many of the events beneath them...

Thanks for the input, I'll have to bear it in mind for the future.

Had to shelve the idea for the moment, though, since I worked out even with Paizo's *excellent* deal, by the time I'd added international shipping and UK Customs import charges *sigh*, it turned out it was still £10-20 more expensive than the buying full-price PDFs! So, maybe another time. (Not like with three adventure paths on standby, plus what equates to about another two in AD&D modules, I'm not exactly *short* of stuff at the moment!)

Hey folks... Long time no see...

With Paizo's sale on, I'm considering picking up another adventure path. So far, I've got Shackled City and Rise of the Runelords, neither of which I've run yet, but have read and am in the process of preparing for running. I, at least in theory, really like both paths, and don't foresee any problems running them. I picked up Leacy of Fire the last time on PDF, but haven't read through it all yet, but out of the choices at the time (we play 3.AotrsCommander, rather than PF) it appealed to me the most because of the the old Desert of Desolation sort of feel (which is something else I have to run at some point!)

So, currently, having looked at Curse of the Crimson Throne and Second Darkness, I'm not sure which is the best bet, particularly as they seem a bit group dependant. So, which out of the two would you recommend, given that my group:

1) Don't really mind being railroaded if necessary

2) Are highly skilled overall in both optimisation and teamwork (plus the module will 90% likely to be run for six characters with the appropriate monster additions anyway)

3) Fall closer to the hack-y side than the not-quite-as-hack-y side (though by no means are just hack-and-slashers!)

Thank you! Can't ask for a better answer the from the Man hisself, can you?

That is very much a "no, the goblin's arent carrying any cash" then!

Given as the 2nd ed games I've been converting gave out waaay to much treasure, I'll err on the side of caution. Plus, they'll be slightly more gear anyway, because of the extra NPCs that will be added in the process of buffing the module for our hidiously beskilled players...

Just a quick query, folks, regarding treasure. Specifically, should I be giving out anything not stated in the adventure; i.e. should the goblins in, say the first encounters, have any treasure (e.g. cash) on them if it doesn't specifically say so on their stats? As I'm not sure whether such creature should have treasure as their MM entries unless it tells me otherwise or not.

My thoughts are probably no, they shouldn't, but I'm not that familiar with how treasure is doled out in modules. (Since most of the modules I've played/converted up until now have been AD&D...Runelords/Shackled City will probably be the first actual 3.x modules I've run!)

I'm converting up for a slightly larger number of PCs, so I'm curious as to what treasure numbers I should increase by 50%. It'll make it a darn sight easier to do just stuff that's actually stated in the module, but it wouldn't hurt to know if Paizo as a rule counts treasure as suggested by the MM/bestiary in entries that are stated as being as [reference] or whether the module discounts it. I'm not fussy either way, really, but it'd be nice to know what ball-park I'm shooting at!

As I continue to pick my way through SCAP, totting up the XP, I reached chapter 9. Now, even giving out full XP for everything, the total falls short (to the tune of 8k XP apiece) of the projected 15th level. (Up until now, it's been about right.) In fact, the projected total for this chapter only just takes the PCs to 15th level when they've whomped Hookface.

(Let alone the half XP total...)

I think I may have to add some story-based XP awards in somewhere. (Since everyone is going to be sick and tired of random encounters; spicing up the encounters in Occipitus stretched me to the limit, never mind those one the way to and from Karren-Kural!)

Mostly, though, I'm concerned about the endurance needed for this chapter. There's a lot of encounters to deal with without a pause (forteen in fact) and several of them modest combats, plus two arguably 'boss' fights (to say nothing of resources used in non-combat encounters). Possibly more if they have to do the combat encounters more than once if they screw up the others. It seems an awful lot to do on one rest (even at the chapter's specified 15th level and not 12 or 14, where you have access to potentially 8th level magic).

So, folks who have played the module, how well did your parties handle it? Did they manage, or did Hookface pulverise the at the end of the chapter?

Don't skip the Demonskar ball. It is (according to the response on these boards) hands-down the best add-on to the Shackled City campaign. Coming quite early it is also the perfect time to introduce the nobility, which otherwise makes only next to nothing dents in the storyline.

Cheers,
Nib

Oh, I agree it's very nicely put together. However, I know my players well. They'll be lucky to get past the formal greeting event, to be honest. (I imagine half of them flipping out at the cost of hiring the costumes let alone the lessons!) Given that the party will be two wiards, a wizard/cleric, a cleric, a trapmonkey/fighter and a paladin, I'm fairly sure that while they will be a heavily-optimised combat group, they will be totally lacking in Perform skills and probably have only one character with Diplomacy (I hope - I will be stressing social skills are important in this adventure!)

So it seems a bit unfair to have the whole party make a total mess of things because only one of them is liable to stand a cat-in-hell's chance of making most of the checks. Especially since, with one exception, our group has developed simultaneous collective dice-rolling incompetance to a high art form!

That said, we haven't generated the party yet. When I've had a good look at them (much closer to the time), I might well consider it if I think it seems vaguely feasible.

Okay, I've got now down as far as plotting chapter 6. By 'eck, there aren't half a lot of random encounters (in the end, I used my spread sheet to save rolling for every ruddy hour the PCs are outside on the plane (even with an upper limit of one encounter per day!) Anyway, there's a bit of a disconnect between the end of chapter 6 and the start of 7, that nobody seems to make a big deal of. So either I'm missed something or everyone just fudges it a bit...

How do the PCs escape Occipitus? Nothing is mentioned, they just pop back into Cauldron at the start of chapter 7. I mean, the obvious answer is plane shift, but having just done several buckets of random encounters, I really don't fancy making up a mean 250-mile journey - and I'm fairly sure the PCs will be sick of 'em too, by that point!

How does everyone else handle this (especially if you have a party sans cleric or handy scrolls of Plane Shift)?

I went and quizzed the group about their respective potential characters, so I could fathom out their walking pace and thus pre-generate the random encounters (and in doing, flesh them out.) What I'm getting is a party of one Cleric/Wizard/Mystic Thuerge, a Wizard, andother Wizard, a Cleric, a rebalanced Paladin (OneWinged4ngel's version from the WotC boards) and a Tracker (homebrew, basically a spell-less fighter/outdoor type with some sneaky skills.) So now I'm sure the late game being absolutely massecred...

Poor old Nabtorwoobiedoobie. He's going to get SoD'ed to death.(Actually, that sounds rather obscene, don't it?)

He doesn't show up explicitly anymore, but he's supposed to hang around near the Demonskar, where players will eventually visit again. He can also run his own agenda, trying to get revenge or - as the story has it - lash out against Redgorge and serve as a random encounter right there.

There's different write-ups on therpgenius.com or on its successor http://therpgenius.pbworks.com/ about the Siege of Redgorge, which is a side-trek to fully exploit the background of Nabtathoron in the area.

Cheers,
Nib

Aha. Thanks for the link, it was worth a look through. I'm not sure whether I'll use anything from it, escept maybe swipe some of the ideas. I was half-tempted to use the Demonskar Ball section, but then I remembered the party composition and realised that all those numerous Diplomacy skills checks on a party wherein 4-5/6 have charisma as dump stats might be A Tad Harsh... On the other hand, they might suprise me, so I'll see when they actually generate their characters!

Not sure what you're trying to get at, but if you've read the chapter, they are not supposed to be able to touch him at that point. It will actually work much better storywise if they are incapable of scratching his hide.

Huh. Serves me right for only skim reading. I missed that part (noting only the Deveopment wehre it says about Nabtharoron's destruction. I was also partly fooled in the character section where it mentions him as being a serious threat (along with Tongueater and Aushanna, neither of whom really registered on my threat meter (especially the former!)

Not too much worry then. I'll trapse on with my spread sheet and see how I go.

I find with random encounters, the best thing to do is roll them all up in advance (epsecilly if you know the PCs are going on a journey) and plot around them a bit. That makes 'em at least interesting. Might have to do that if I find the quest is a bit shy on XP.

I've skimmed ahead, but I can't find anything: does Nabtharoron show up later in the module if the PCs don't kill him? If not, that's a random encounter right there I might use!

I'm having the same thoughts as the OP. I, however, am just daft enough to go through a module, pre-calculating the XP. After some faffing around, it suddenly struck me, that (since I do this sort of thing often with converted modules and whatnot) why did I not make up a spread sheet and save me hours of trouble...

Anyway, the results of that, and going as far as The Demonskar Legacy have left me a bit concerned.

The group I'm running this module for is extremely good as a combat team with a near-mastery of 3.5. (They will also have access to most of 3.5 to boot.) We haven't started yet (long way to go in finishing of my 3.5 Dragon Mountain 14-21st+ module yet!) so I don't know the final party composition either.

My usual wont is to award half XP for combats and none for traps. Now, that might put the PCs a touch behind the power curve, but that'll be balanced out by out usual high stats (I usually let them have base 8 plus 30 points point-for-point) and the fact they'll have a few toys the NPcs by an large won't.

However, while nothing else seems to catch my eye, if I did this, the PCs encountered Nabthatoron at only level 7 (assuming they get all of the rest of the XP available - and frankly the little biggers probably will!) Optimisation is all well and good, but even they would be struggling to hit AC 32 with any degree of reasonableness. He's currently the only spike on the power curve I've encountered; everything else is much lower (in fact I'd nearly say some of it is too easy!)

If I gave them full XP, they would reach him at about level 9. However, the net result of this would be them blendering through the first few chapters while laughing. (Drakthar, for example, would be absolutely pulverised by six level 5 PCs who know what they're doing, high DR notwithstanding; and at best case level 4 he's still going to be going down like a...really fast...droppy...thing (It's late, I'm out of humourous similes!))

My current compromise is to stick trap XP back in, which buffs them to level 8 facing Nabthatoron. A touch better.

So, people who have actually played the module, what do you suggest? Quietly slip in a touch more story-award/puzzle award XP prior to that combat? Will a party of highly organised and competant level 8 characters actually be able to take Nabthatoron down anyway?

I'm trying not to add too much content in to the module; after all, I've got to convert Rise of the Rune Lords up from four to five or six players (probably more expansively than the "Changes to Rise of The Rune Lords for 6 PCs" thread, though that'll be my jumping off point). The point with the modules is, the less time I have to spend adjusting them, the more likely I can get my arse in gear and write some more of my own while they buy me a year or so!

ON THE 4e board recently the discussion of minions was afoot...

But it gave me an idea on how to incorporate a "minion" into 3.5 without actually making it a 1HP wonder...

I have discussed this with one of my players actually. I found when I converted Dragon Mountain I ended up in a kit spiral because the monster needed the kit to be able to hit the PCs - who then use the loot to get harder...And the numbers of foes are quite high. Had I heard of minions at the time, I could have done a better job.

We figured, actully, you would just leave them as one hit and they die (and one point of ability damage and they drop), and do saves as normal. The point of minions is they are chaff. What I normally use as chaff is about half the level of the PCs, which usually gives 'em a hit or two to go down. But on the other hand, they're usually too weak to do much damage. Making 'em glass cannons would be a much better way of capturing the feel and it would reduce the amount of kit bonuses they;d need. I fully intend to test this out the next time I actually get around to writing a game.

Never let it be said there's not a few ideas worth swiping for 4E occasionally...

The more I think about it, the more I think I'll have to bite the bullet and knock up some supplementary stats for the boss's hench minions. I guess there really isn't a quick fix for increasing party size. (Though I'll no doubt try out my 3.5 solo templete as well.)

I'll have to sign off at that, for the moment, as I'm going away tomorrow over Easter (so don't anyone be shocked if I don't reply to the thread for a few days!)

By the by, a typical example of a boss fight I write myself, when I last wrote a D&D adventure was the following, pitted against a party of 8th level characters (warlock, psion, ardent, duskblade, unicorn dragon shaman, psychic warrior and swordsage with a septuplet of level 5 followers I tried desparately and failed to kill!):

12th level spirit shaman
10th level ranger
2 6th level trackers (effectively a spell-less ranger variant class)
6 4th level fighter (melee)
6 4th level archer specialists.

It was a pretty even match, actually; the PCs could have wona bit more easil,y but the Ardent (who was the sarge (actually decurion) of the NPCs) has a 'no casulaties' rule...)

With 6 PCs who know how to optimize and play together well, I would add 2 levels (or HD) to every boss and make sure to never let a boss fight your group solo. Add in 2 to 4 of the typical monsters the party has been encountering to act as guards and distractions for the fight with the boss.

Otherwise +50% numbers for the standard encounters will work.

I learned fairly early on in 3.0 that solitary bosses die super-fast. In my own games, a boss fight will have one boss and several high-ranking minions (and they'll be spellcaster support in their, garenteed!) plus some chaff minions.

Adding a few more lieutenants seems like a good quick fix, actually. As opposed to just slapping down more chaff. One of those sort of obvious ideas I tend to overlook while overcomplicating things... (Though I might be tempted to whack out the odd Aotrs-optimised minion using my full available resoucres, actually, just to keep the PCs on their toes.)

I do not think I have ever been in a group where the same six people showed up consistently. I do not think I have ever been in a group where the same four people showed up consistently. I do not think I would know what to do if I had the opportunity to plan in advance for such a core.

The core group of our Monday group have been playing together for nearly twenty years. To be fair, they're down to four players (plus the DM) at the moment, but they'll be still using six characters for quite a while, since they're slated for Shackled City first and most of out current parties stem from when we had a couple more guys; playing two characters at once doesn't phase anybody anymore! They were my first roleplaying group, actually.

While our Thursday group, granted, don't always all make it (one of them is a policeman, so he can only make about three out of four weeks) everyone turns up most of the time.

(By the by, our groups run on the principle the DM keeps the character sheets and if someone's away, the other players run any other characters. This does not slow the game down in the slightest.)

With both, the average size of party has always been about six. We've always considered that to be the ideal size, since you can have the basics but room for redunacy and folks to do something different.

If you think six players is a lot, you'd shudder to think, I imagine, the sort of level of tactical complexity and bit-count I run my games at. My personal best is the final encounter of the 3.5 converted Die Vecna Die!, where there were six PCs (at 14-15 level), three NPCs (whom two at the point of writing I had foolishly thought the players would need the help of against Vecna) of about the same or a bit higher - on the PCs side and Vecna's Avatar, two higher-power special Hand and Eye golems, an Epic Evil cleric plus some other evil clerics, plus minions on the other.

And of course, everyone's favoruite Rolemaster group has about twleve characters scattered over seven players...

So really, dealing with six players barely registers to me! It's all about practise. (That and the fact none of out players are session hogs or drama queens, so I don't have to do a lot to control them. Though my Monday group is just about perfect in that regard.)

I not only allow mutliclassing, but in fact actively encourage it. I tossed out the mutliclass penalty years ago when I realised that we weren't even using it in practise.

I think 3.x's multiclassing was among it's very greatest of ideas, and idea of such simple brilliance I often asked myself why no-one had ever thought of it before. Indeed, my biggest single beef with 4E was it's removal.

As such, I don't view classes as professions (ironically, given my Rolemaster background) but merely a collection of abilities to be mixed and matched by the players.

I, out of both our groups, and the one with all the books and who know them best. I'm also the primary DM, doing what I reckon is just slightly over half the net DMing in both groups.

I don't allow or disallow books. I allow or disallow material from books. Comes from my Rolemaster background where it was impossible to use all of anyone book. Nothing it sacred from being disallowed in Core either. (No, you may not have spiked armour or most racial double weapons). As a rule, I allow all base class (except Complete Warrior Samurai which is removed for being so bad it's beyond boosting; a properly geared Fighter can do better), spells and feats. But, yes, I actually have master lists of what is and is not available (which also serve as an index of where all those things are!)

PrC are examinined as soon as got the book, and decisions made. When playing on my own worlds, I have a very specific idea of what the flavour is. Anything that's world specific (i.e. guild related or whatnot) also usually gets the heave-ho unless it's sufficently good as to warrent reflavouring. If it has restrictitve or non-generic flavour, it's likely to be out, on principle. Secondly, the PrC must pass the Stupid test; I.e. I look at the class and say: "Is this Too Stupid?"

This extend to other areas; you will have a very narrow choice of player races, since I like to keep the number of races down and make each culture different. And each race is often redeigned to boot. I find most races outside the Big Four (human, Elf, Dwarf, Halfling) and the Bad Guys (Kobold, Goblin, Hobgoblin, Orc) to be generally Untidy and keep them to a minimum. (Certainly, any races beyond Core are flat-out non-existant.) Also, any equipment outside of Core and fair chunk of that is disallowed for being Too Stupid. Classic examples are most of the exotic racial double weapons in Core, Sword & Fist's tumbling bolt (shudder) and the later Complete Scoundral Rust-Monster-on-a-stick.

Actually, the tumbling bolt deserves a special mention for being quite probably the Most Stupid Thing I Have Ever Encountered.

As I once said:

Who can forget the delight of Sword and Fist's tumbling bolt? I certainly can't, and I've tried. Even after repeatedly cleaning my skull with anti-francium, the horror remains.

Yes, let's make the attack more accurate by making it aerodynamically unstable. (Fer crying out loud, they used the word tumble! If you had an aircraft 'tumble' it usually means it's about to make unwelcome aquaintence with the ground, assuming it gets that far!)

This is not so much raping the laws of physics (which D&D and fantasy do as a perfectly acceptable matter of course), as violating the laws of physics in front of it's parents, juvenile siblings, various friends and acquaintences and the Pope (replace with any nonevil ecclesiastical personality of your choice), then sueing the laws of physics for damages incurred and winning.

Ahem. But I digress...

Within those boundries, though, the players are generally allowed to go to town (if I'm running not on my world, I disallow only things not pertient to that world or that pass the Stupidity barrier.)

In fact, they had better do because the monsters very defintely will. I rarely if ever use stock monsters (assuming I've not toosed away the MM entriely as at least I've done with one world); usually opposotion is characters who are optimised as well or better than those of the players. That's just our playstyle. (We are mostly wargamers after all.)

Aotrscommander wrote:

Thanks, that's a good start at any rate. Probably won't use it verbatim, but it'll cut down on my own effort a huge chunk.

You also might do absolutely nothing, or very little. They will have an easier time at the beginning, certainly, but as time goes on they will be lower level, with a larger group to balance it out. The XP system (even inverted with PFRPG) handles this perfectly and "adjusts" the characters level to be equivalent.

Given our style, doing nothing would be deterimental to the game, I fear.

Unfortunately, I find the CR system tends not be good for anything except a measure of how much XP I give out (typically, we give out half XP for combat, adding the rest with story or quest awards anyway). It's certainly no indication of actual challenge to the party in my experience. (Given we don't follow the four-core-character, 25-point buy paradigm.)

If I just leave it as it, the benefit of concentration of fire onto point targets (and believe me, the point targets will be getting serious fire from a party that will be very well to superbly optimised mechanically and, most important, tactically) will more than out weigh that they may be slightly lower level. (And I say maybe, since without crunching the numbers, I could see that they might not actually be only 67% of the level of a four-player party but a bit higher, with the sharp step in XP between level and CR. Similar to the whole 3.5 XP magic item crafter actually squeezing more XP out by staying a bit behind.)

The players regularly take on well-to-superly optimised opponents significantly above their level (70% of the groups are wargamers well versed in rules and tactics and more than a slightly dose of fluky dice rolls) when I do my own stats; and with mostly Core material most Pathfinder modules opponents aren't that close, unfortunately.

I mean I could do nothing, but I don't think then the boss villains would pose much of a challenge. (Don't really care about the chaff encounters, since that's what they're there for!)

Thanks, that's a good start at any rate. Probably won't use it verbatim, but it'll cut down on my own effort a huge chunk.

Thanks to WotC's star maneuver with the PDFs, I have been able to start picking up the Rise of the Runelords months ahead of what I'd initially planned.

Right, so herein lies the problem. My standard party size is six, not four. This hasn't been a problem with Shackled City, since that was diesgned for six, but it might be with the Pathfinder modules and paths.

Now, I ran WotC's Lost Caverns 3.5 version relatively recently. [Aside]Which utterly failed to ever make me want to get any more PDF adventures from them - among their other sins, the bloody map was light grey on light blue - and when i printed it out in black and white as the cheap bastard I am, it was grey on slightly different grey. Neither was easy to trace for the PCs;I had to hold the ruddy thing up to the light in order to get anywhere...[/Aside]

That was a bit of a travesty. I increased all the numbers of monsters by +50%, as well as all the treasure (and added in +50% extra kit to make up the value). Any 'boss' monsters or creature encountered alone, I maxed out the hit points of. I also gave the party a choice of being 10th level, with high stats (basically 18,16,14,12,10,8 roughly) or 11th level and slightly lower stats. They opted for the former. Both my groups are allowed full access to the entire of 3.5 (at least as far as class, spells and feats go PrC are a bit more variable.) I gave them level appropriate gear.

And they completely minced the campaign. For various reasons, though notable the Crusader could have soled it, breaking the game she did by having level appropriate armour and a shield.

Anyway, while I blame this mainly on the fact Tsojcanth was full of crap, moribund low-level encounters pulverised by three martial adepts, the adventure was still indicative.

So, what is going to be the best way to bump the difficulty for six characters? This is mostly a minimum effort job, since if I wanted to go from scratch, I'd be using the pre-3.x modules I've got for this purpose (and that takes bloody ages...) Also given the fact that in both groups the players work well together; especially my Monday group who work in a Horrifically Flawless Team of Doom most of the time.

I reckon there's nothing wrong with the theory of increasing the number of monsters that come in two or more by 50% (argueably with my crazy-ass players, maxing the hits out too!) Also, I've knocked up a conversion package for my own house rules (basically, things like for Fighters, whom I give a feat every level, knocking up a list of what non-core feats extra they have). So, theyre not really the problem

It's the 'boss' monsters if you will, that cause me the problems. While a single enemy character might be a challenge to four players, the extra firepower from six is usually going to vastly swing things the PCs way. Maxing out the hit points is a given, but's it's nowhere near enough.

As I see it at the moment, I can see four options:

1) Add extra levels to those NPCs.

2) Add an extra lower-level henchdude

3) If dealing with a monster, not a character, just have two or them not one

4) Apply my own Solo template to them (which basically gives 'em twice the hit points and some free get-out-of-SoD rerolls provided there's not too many minions about).

So, folks, has anybody got any better or different ideas?

If you'll forgive me for quoting myself (ah heck, I just like to hear myself...type...um...or something...) but the sheer idiocy of Wotc's blunder needs to be underlined.

I wasn't planning on spending any money on RPG in the immediate future; my somewhat limited funds were all ear-marked for more starships.

WotC have succeeded in not only convincing me to spend money on their competition in preference to them [on Paizo's sale] but that I otherwise wouldn't have spent at all!

Well, guys. WotC really have ballsed up. I wasn't planning on spending any money on RPG in the immediate future; my somewhat limited funds were all ear-marked for more starships. However, a sale like this is rather too good to miss. I was - eventually - planning to start picking up the Pathfinder modules for when I finish running my converted Night Below; which would have been months and months away.

Now, however, I'm going to be checking my available funds and after Easter - if not tonight - I'll be giving you fine folks at Paizo my hard-earned pennies.

(By the way, it's a REAL achievement for anything to get priority over starships. There is, for me, no greater thing than starships ('cept maybe chocolate). I regard starships like most people regard sex, as a sort of magic holy grail and the pinnicle of existance. Getting priority over that is somewhat harder than getting blood out of a stone (or finding a speck of intellect in a WotC/Hasbro director - oooh burn!))

So to recap, WotC have succeeded in not only convincing me to spend money on their competition in preference to them but that I otherwise wouldn't have spent at all!

That's like negative sales or something.

Well given I game every week with the ex manager of Travelling Man Derby I'd say you're wrong about not having had a LGS.

I'd actually forgotten about Travelling Man. Fair point. Actually, didn't they even have some sort of game days or something, come to think of it? Another World/Forbidden Planet never has to my knowledge(mainly 'cos RPGs are just a small sideline for them).

But, I'm dragging the whole topic waaay off course with my random blither again. (I have a tendancy to do that unintentionally with my throw-away comments, sorry.)

Aotrscommander wrote:

snip

Thanks. I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that (assuming something's not be missed among the legalese that clearly restricts all of this to Magic) that any wording that would imply that Wizards is not going to sell 4e through Amazon has just got to be a goof.

My thoughts exactly.

Continues to fail check.

How would Wizards be targeting Amazon?

That comes from someone pointing out text on this link, specifically this section:

To sign up for the Internet Retailer Program, you will need to send the following:

A signed contract, which you can find here: Authorized Internet Retailer Agreement. Please read the contract over carefully and fill it out completely and legibly.
A copy of your Business License, Sales Tax License, or other physical document that shows you are in business. If this is already on file with Wizards, check with your Direct Sales or Merchant Relations rep to see if it’s up to date.
Pictures (digital or hardcopy) of your brick and mortar retail store’s:
Storefront, including signage
Point of sale or cash register area
Merchandising or main product display area

Emphasis mine.

As on this page itself, it doesn't mention any product line specifically I can see (not that I've read it in detail), someone mentioned that it might apply to D&D products. Note, I'm just reporting where this line of thought comes from, I'm no legal expert, nor have I looked at this in detail.

As I say, I'm not so sure that interpretation would actually be true in practice, because to really cut out one of (if not the largest) book retailers would seem to be utter madness.

If they really are that stupid - and given the PDF fiasco I'm unhappily willing to admit that they might, repeat might be capable of being so willfully cretinous - what next? Perhaps they'll go after ebay next...Wouldn't want those second hand books floating around when you can force people to buy new ones, would we?
(I should note I'm being slightly facieous here. WotC wouldn't be really likely to try that...would they?)

Edit: ninja'd. Shouldn't be so longwinded all the time...

Aotrscommander wrote:

Heck, we in Derby came so, soo close to losing the only comic store - which happens to have a small RPG section - we have, so if we can't buy from Amazon (where the only one of us who buys 4E stuff gets it) and Forbidden Planet goes back under again (a frightening and plausible but hopefully unlikely event) what then?

Well, fortunately for me, my local Barnes and Noble is carrying 4e stuff, so I could get it there, but it would be a lot more expensive then buying it from Amazon.

I 'spose we could use Waterstones, but that's still not supporting the local gaming store (which is presumably what WotC wants) is it? If I were (slightly more) cynical, I'd say WotC were out to target Amazon and the like specifically (it was like 25% cheaper than a store when I was buying 3.5 stuff - that's a HELL of lot if you don't have a lot of money). But that would seem to be so stupid a move as to beggar belief. But then again, given recent events...

If the whole store-front thing is to preserve the FLGS, then, sorry WotC, but you're a bit late - at least in the UK. We in Derby have not had a FLGS. EVER. We've had shops that sold RPG books for decades, but not in the 18-odd years I've been playing a store really ran by gamers. (Argueably, the closest that I know of would be Spirit Games who, as I recall at least at one point supplied the Derby store.) Internet selling is the way to go for hobbies, nowadays. Ye gods, even DRM-dozy EA have started to release digital-only stuff (Red Alert 3 Uprising). Anyway, this is slightly tangential stupidity to WotC's PDF stupidity...

Am I the only person that thinks that cutting Amazon out of the equation would harm them in the long run?

No, as I noted on the WotC forums - which are even more up-in-arms than here, actually (and for once, bar the usual obligatroy one or two folks who like to debate for the sake of it, pretty much unified) - it would seem to me to be getting close to commercial sucide surely.

Heck, we in Derby came so, soo close to losing the only comic store - which happens to have a small RPG section - we have, so if we can't buy from Amazon (where the only one of us who buys 4E stuff gets it) and Forbidden Planet goes back under again (a frightening and plausible but hopefully unlikely event) what then?

WotC seems to specialise at slowly but surely alienating their old customers one by one. All they need to do now is pull a 'SyFy' (snort) and they'll be about complete...

I think this is pretty much the best of the crowd - as I sort of expected, actually!

The plot's good and well-structured. I don't have any problem with Fey - in fact it suprises me pther people do. Fey is just another type of monster as far as I'm concerned, so why people should set them to a more mythological standard than other monsters has always baffled me...

Ditto Unicorns. Though that may be partly because when I redesigned them for my own campaign world, they stopped being shy, forest horsey and became paladins tuck in the form of a - heavily built - shire horse with a +3 sword stapled to thier forehead. And the first PC Unicorn I ran for had a ring of jumping and a +42 Jump check. When you have the image of a thing the size of a shire horse leaping 50' to smash horn-first into the poor victim who doesn't so much die as splash, it tends to supercede any less Awesome images you might have had...

But I'm getting sidetracked.

I think the combat encounters are just about suited to a party of that level. I, for one, think the final encounter is about right (I typically use characters of +50% of the party's level as bosses). She better get some minions in fast though (i.e pre combat), as experience shows that give the PCs a single target (especially a caster) and they'll take them out in one round, even with maxed-out hit points. And don't forget Dispel Magic this time, it'll be absolutely cruical! That said, depending on how much you 'push' the PCs in terms of resources with the pre-battle harrying you might not need to worry so much. (Although a half-way sane party will have one or two Wands of CLW or even better Lesser Vigour by this point...)

The Gnome Fighter/Rogues might need buffing a tad (or at least some support in the later dryad rescue encounter) so the PCs don't whomp them to quickly (at about half the PC's level, they constitute what I call as 'chaff' encounter - nice way to break in the module, but they'll probably need some stiffening in a real challenging fight.)

Combat challenge is a concern for me in an adventure, by the way, because both of my groups have access to 3.5 in it's entirity and optimise well (and one group in particular works like a team that's been together for 20 years - because they pretty much have!) (WotC's 3.5 version of the Lost Caverns of Tsojcanth, for example, which I ran recently, was pretty much a cake walk. The PCs went in at one level lower and with level-appropriate gear and broke the module in half. The Crusader could nearly have soled it - and so could a fighter of the same level - just by having a respectable armour class from level-appropriate armour and shields...) So if I have to do a lot of meddling with power-levels, it somewhat defeats the object of getting a module!

So, all that blither aside, you get my vote.

(I really hope to see Gulga out in print doing his thing on day too!)

Unfortunately, since the boards somehow lost my post - again - I must be a bit briefer.

This was a strong contender for my top four, but ultimately, I thought Erics' sanctum was just a bit larger in scope. That said, this would make an excellent secondary lair (perhaps even in the same module) for Hecataeus; after all, a man of his staure deserves more than abode, surely. I hope you make it to the next round regardless, since I would like to see what sort of adventure you can put together.

Grr. Stupid boards...

For the second time, then:

This was a very hard decision, but the palace doesn't quite get my vote this time.

Your flavour is excellent, and your encounters would be enough to (briefly) phase even my PCs. (I, for one, think that the vampiric rakshasa DR does not need twiddling. At this level, DR is about the only thing that's not a speed bump for melee types. I kind of want monsters the PCs can't just slice to bits (spellcasters aside of course).

But, ultimately, the palace just doesn't seem grandiose enough to me. The Palace feels as though it merits nearly a module all to itself (ala Warhammer's Castle Drachenfels or the Temple of Elemental Evil). So, I don't think you could have given it justice in the bounds of the contest. You could have got away with that, I think, of like Eric's Sanctum, you'd have been a bit more adventurous with the map and scope. As it stands, it's architecturaly a bit bland for a grand palace; (mostly) one level and rectangular just doesn't do it enough for me. You've left soem room for expansion, but it all feels to close together. A single-level design would have benefited, perhaps, from a bit more of Roman feel I think.

I really hope you make it to the next round regardless. (And I won't hold it against you for scragging Eric for swioping my vote with your villain!)

This was a very difficult round for me to vote on, and it's taken me nearly two hours to deliberate.

In the end, I'll give you my first vote for this one; I'll admit largley this is due to it's size. To me, lairs and dungeons should be big and sprawling (my own dungeons typically have between 30-40 and sometimes double that locations). The sanctum, while you've only detailed eight locations (plenty enough given the time and word limitatins!), has enough spare room for expansion. The lair is big enough to serve as the final confrontation, I think, without being too big in concept it could warrent a module all to itself.

Good work.

Oh boy. This was a hard round. Neil, you make it very hard. I think - like some others - your choice of villain was a bit flawed. I, personally, didn't like Sharina in the first place; not a villain I would personally care to run or oppose. I have to be honest, if not for your sterling work with Gulga, I wouldn't have taken much of a look at this.

I'll leave aside, though, my own misgivings about the subject matter, and work from the basis that a superstar should be able to craft a passable or better thing from (in my not-even-slightly, far-less-humble-than-Hecateaus opinion...) fairly lame duck concept. Which you have done. It's large (I like my dungeons quite big). The combat challenge, while quite light for a lair/final encounter I think, has a good mix of support and offense. I would consider the combat challenge as it stands as a threat appropriate really only for to a group of 2nd-3rd level PCs (certainly with the groups I play with) as a 'boss' lair as it were.

I really want to see what you can do with the adventure concept though, so after careful analysis of the playhouse, I'm going to give the benefit of doubt and my vote.

D&D isn't a historical role-playing game, it can have formaldehyde if it wants to.

Absolutely. I point out that steel is strongly anachronistic and yet in frequent use in D&D; aside from some ores with impurities alrerady present (Wootz/Damascus steel), steel was a 18th century development. (Though, typically, China had steel or sorts sometime around a couple of centuries after turn of the millenium.) Formaldehyde is hardly any different.

Is it wrong that I think that idea is so awesome that it's better than some - nay even many - of the actual serious villains? And indeed many pop culture villains?

I mean, yes, he's an egomanical goldfish - but at the end of the day he's a goldfish who's going to kick the crap out of you. How scary is that?

Well, close, but not, I fear, quite close enough for me this round. Even with his level boost, Bracht just doesn't seem to be able to deliver on his otherwise exceptional premise.

His sorcerer spells are a bit too geared towards his contructs, to the point where he's not much of a threat to the PCs by himself. Which, I fear, would make the climatic battle not as dramatic as it might be. He's basically completely reliant on others to do his fighting for him as he lacks any significant punch. He's not at all optimised for combat - which means this villain is liable to be a mere speed bump in the road for the PCs while they fight his (presumably) much more dangerous minions.

By comparison, Hecataeus manages to fulfill his whole 'creating minions thing' while being able to maintain offensive punch himself and it's not just the level difference that does it.

I wish you luck regardless.

You continue to get my vote.

Aotrs Commander's Villain critieria:

Initial Impressions
Like last round, only better.

Concept:
Good. You dropped the whole angsty-thing. I for one find playing angsty villains to be about as exciting as tying my shoelaces. This is a definate improvement - and I liked Volner before! Now he can have 'fun' with it...for a suitable definintion of 'fun'...

Optimisation: (Or: how much would I have to modify this to deal with the PC in my own games to provide a threat?)

Pretty solid, actually. No feats that seem redundant, good spell mix. You have the all-important Dispel, and two-thirds of the Divine Trinity (Divine Favour and Divine Power). I second Joel Flank's points on Righteous Might vrs Scry and the counterspell rings, though.

Not really worried about the Shard's power; though to be fair I would regulate it to a plot device, rather than an actual wonderous item, so perhaps that speaks for itself.

Tactics: Good. Well-thought out and matching his capabilities. With a little bit of backup ('cos very little stands alone against a party) he'd do very well, I think.

You get my vote again, though slightly less enthusiastically this time.

Aotrs Commander's Villain critieria:

Initial Impressions
Stat block problems. Concept good...execution...could use some work.

Concept: The concept is what keeps me going. It's a damn good idea and I second Jason's point about villains not always having to be directly against the PCs.

Optimisation: (Or: how much would I have to modify this to deal with the PC in my own games to provide a threat?)

Well, let's get the bad out of the way first. A bit, shall we say, messy in execution. I second what has been said before; his normal form would have been a better base, and the primary air elemental form stat's summarised (ala last year's druid villain Mwana). Also, you should have ditched the -2 Int from Wood Elf when he became human (reincarnation is not like Polymorph et al; your mental stats do change).

Leaving that aside, then, let's see what else we have to work with.

Overall, optimisation is passable. You're starting from Lich druid, so that's a high point (especially since Pathfinder makes wild shaped druids generally better, since they keep their kit bonuses and special abilities if I'm reading it right), but Aelfric could have been better attuned.

Improved Unarmed strike seems entirely redundant, given Aelfric's natural attacks in any form. The money spent on the Amulet of Mighty Fists was probably best invested elsewhere, such as boosting his mediocre armour class.

Spell selection is okay, but he could probably benefit greatly from some increased varity. However, you get bonus points for having two Greater Dispel Magics.

He's still going to be a tough nut to crack, if you fill forgive the almost unseemly appropriateness on multiple levels of that phrase...

Tactics:
Average. Nothing special, and really, not massively optimal given his spell load out. This could use some improvement, especially with regard to spell load out. He's got a massive wisdom - and higher Int than you gave him, so Hectateus is allowed to be cunning with his tactics if he likes.

All that said, I like the concept enough that I'm willing to give you a pass this round anyway, if for no other reason that I'd like to see where you go from here.

Okay, once more Hecataeus gets my vote.

Aotrs Commander's Villain critieria:

Initial Impressions
Pretty much what I expected from his appearance last round; solid spellcaster opponent.

Concept: Good, like last round; mostly the same comments apply. You dropped some of the buffoonery which most people seemed to like; personally, I don't think that every single thing in the entire universe needs to be played for deadly seriousness, but there you go.

Optimisation: (Or: how much would I have to modify this to deal with the PC in my own games to provide a threat?)

Good.

Plenty of hit points, fair mix of spells. Most importantly, Dispel Magic. I'd say he has a touch too many quickened spells loaded that might have been of better use of higher level spells, personally.

He has enough crafting feats and access via wizard spell list to liberally slather hs constructs with all manner of special abilities while retaining credibility.

Iron Will seems both a bit out of character and a bit redundant. It would have been better to spend it on one of the other save boosters of something else entirely.

I'd have pegged for a slightly higher AC myself (slightly better ring perhaps), but otherwise pretty good.

The feat is good. While perhaps not of use against most PCs, it does have a good few plot-related perks for NPCs (and could really ruin the DM's day if you're a PC!)

Tactics: Fair. Nothing particularly special, no glaring errors and entirely in-character.

Good, solid job.

I confess, I didn't vote for Gulga last round, mainly because he was an otyugh. Not that I have any particular dislike of otyugh themselves, but more a general reticence about creatures that are specific to D&D's mythos. (3.5 is to me just a good set or rules not a genera all it's own; frequently my worlds use little if any of the Monster Manual.)

That said, your little in-character posts after last round made me re-think and this time you've won me over.

Aotrs Commander's Villain critieria:

Initial Impressions

He's complicated.

Good. Simple monsters are a) no fun for me as DM to play and b) liable to be be pulverised by any party in my high-optimisation, high-tactic, high-party co-operation enviroment of play. Most of the player characters approching this level translate to a wall of text in statblock form.

Concept: Good. Smart, evil (and above all, witty) villains are always preferable (at this level, they need to be just for the tactics!)

Optimisation: (Or: how much would I have to modify this to deal with the PC in my own games to provide a threat?)

Fair to good.

At 226 max hit points (and I never use anything less than maximum for any serious fight) Gulga will stand for a bit. AC is okay for an arcanist, but relies on quite a few buff pre-combat. Leadership gives him at least a handful of chaff at all times to take away the PCs attention for a round (and that's about all they'll get but it's better than nothing!) (Were I to use him in one of my own games, I'd probaly shunt his stats up from the elite to my own standard, but that's not really a major issue.)

The scimitar seems pointless, though. Gulga is not ever going to be a great melee combatant due to Thurge and Wizard levels. This loss could be compensated for by the Divine Trinity (Divine Favour, Divine Power and Righetous Might at higher levels), granted but otherwise, he'd be better spending his feats and gear elsewhere, I think (or at least not burning a feat on it and using a mace or something). Outside of Pathfinder/SRD, I'd replace that with Practised Spellcaster (probably ditto with Alertness or Weapon Focus).

Blasphemy is as always the big problem, inherent to the spell. The Pathfinder version makes the ability at least possible usable against parties of lower than 14th level without being an automatic "I win" button. Still, that's Blasphemy's problem, not Gulga's.

No Dispel Magic. *slaps Gulga's tentacles* No. Bad caster. ANY caster of 5th level or higher should always have as a matter of principle some dispel capability, even if only a scroll or two. Doubly so for a hybrid like a Thurge who's got spell slots to spare. Not doing so is tantamount to suicide for any serious opposition for an even-half-way organised party of adventurers at the sort of level Gulga is looking at. The ability to heal some slight hit point damage (the Cure spells) pales into insignificance compared to the ability to dispel the party's buffs (and you can bet they'll have them - perhaps even nearly as many as Gulga himself) or dig himself out of a hole when he gets status-to-death'd by the party spellcasters.

No problems with the feat at all.

Tactics: Good overall, though I question his eagerness to go toe-to-toe in melee sans flight as he stands without some better buffs. (Divine Power is basically a requirement if he really wants to do this (making up for the BAB shortfall); otherwise, his bonuses are only on a par at best with full-BAB classes in the level range he's going to deal with.)

Nice work, I hope you make it the next round.

Actually, I'd seriously vote for that.

It irks me that everything always has to be so deadly serious. I like levity in my games (in fact it's been proven we cannot run a game without it even if we try to.) I stand by Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay as some of the best quest books I've ever encountered and they were full of humorous word-plays here and there, and more than a few funny villains. The way I see it, anything devoid of humour is infinity inferior to anything that splashes it in in approprite places. (Note: so long as it is not over-used, there are no inappropriate places for humour.)

A villain is as threatening as their game mechanics, ultimately. If the concept is awesome, but the mechanics are lame, you will fail to scare the PCs once combat starts.

On the otherhand, if the villain is a bit silly, but the mechanics are solid, you will have the joy of watching the PCs go from laughing or sneering to having an outright "oh crap!"

One can see the (1st level) PCs laughing themslevs silly at this little fop - right up until the point he says "Entangle!" while they're swimming...

Solid choice for my second vote.

Bonus points for Lich (you can never have enough liches, though any Vampire is one too many...)

Ultimately, the second plot hook and the Cleric/Assassin combo got me. (The latter is nasty enough to cause problems even on his own for a mid-level party and with a bit of support to a higher level one.)

A mad Lich is definately something to be feared as well as unusual to boot. I like the whole idea of him doing crazy things like killing people and forcefully resurrectingly them (somehow) after doing stuff to them to cause more chaos and death.

Now if he could just rid himself of that last trace of humanity with his self-loathing, he'd be a much better...ah, sorry, worse person. He'd have a lot more fun if he just revelled in kicking sand in the faces of Good. (Hell, I know I do...)

Several people have mentioned Liches-as-cold, logical, planners only, but I will riposte with Xycon of Oots fame, who is just as mad - and argueably more evil - and as chaoticially inclined as he comes. I could see Volner (and for that matter, possibly Aelfric the Dream Slayer) acting in a similar sort of manner.

Easy choice for my first vote.

Lich is nearly an auto-win button for me (being one myself). I personally - and in direct contravention to most mainstream folk - find villains with with too much a human side (coughMagnetocough) to be immensely boring. Aefric is not one of those villains. I like Aelfric's logic; it's very Lich (no such thing as 'overkill' in our book...) One sees the following conversation with his Black Captain...

Aelfric: "Bad things are in dreams, so I'll stop them by killing everyone who has dreams! Muahahaha!"

Captain: "Sir, don't you think that's a bit drastic?"

Aelfric: "Yes.

"Oh yes. It is.

"But it will work."

Captain: "Yes, my lord. I shall commense preparation at once!"

Mechanically? Hells, yes! Most powerful class in game? Check. Lich? Check. Let party pawnage commence.

Druid is good, making him a really nasty combatant in his own right. He practically demands a simiarly lich-like animal companion. After all, what's worse? A dude with his dinosaur who shapeshifts into a dinosaur while bespelling your ass or a dude with his skeleton dinosaur who shapeshifts into a skeletal Tyrannosaur while bespelling your ass and paralysing you at the same time!

Awesome.

This gets my vote. While the Gulga Sench was along similar lines, I thoguht this was a bit more interesting in the ultimate goal and had a little more flexibility in what could be done minion-wise. Perhaps a touch Warhammer Chaos-y in places, but I can live with that.

I think my biggest critisim is that Bracht is wasted as a mere CR 8 challenge. Without access to higher-level stuff, he and his minions are stunted in some of the more entertaining areas of spells - by extension special abilities. I think he'd be much better as a higher-level adversary so the PCs could have a good run at him.

I find low-level villains - by their very nature - tend not to be very good villains as they're not around in playing-time long enough. At CR 8, I'd expect the PCs to deal with him between about 5th and 6th level; not much time to get know loathe him unless you started at level 1 and didn't do much else, really.

After fighting off some stiff competition from Kar-El Haris, Hectaeus gets my forth vote. I have, I must admit something of a favouritim for contructs/robots and Undead, so the fact I'd get to create a horde of new constructs is an appealing thought.

My players would totally mock him for his over-the-topped cliche'edness, which would only earn his undying emnity, turning him into their sworn enemy. It's like a self-fulfilling prophesy.

He's be fun to roleplay as a GM, his schemes would be a challenge to enact, and my players would love to thrash his "expendable" construct minions.

I entirely agree. The fact you could encounter him early on in a non-combat situation would mean he'd be quite a 'visible' villain (villains who aren't very visible end up as being forgetable boss monsters regardless of all other concerns, I find).

And I'm not unknown for my penchant to thrown slightly silly things at my PCs - backed up with serious muscle. (Cthulu Juju, the Demon Monkey, for example, was a blant rip-off of the Mojo Jojo (of Power Puff Gilrs fame) but he was despite his innanity, really powerful.) PCs absolutely hate having the crap kicked out of them by something that's a bit silly and humiliating...and this apparent buffon would come as, perhaps, a bit of a nasty surprise...

Good job.

This was the first entry that made me even consider it - and out of all 32, only five made my list.

Good idea, good plot hooks (something that I'm much more aware of since the lack thereof was what I bogged up last year!) but in the end, just edged out because I felt that Kar-En was just a touch less interesting mechanically. I place a fair degree of emphasis on any villain being able to hold their own against the PCs, and without a lot of spellcaster support, at the end of the day, Kar-En probably wouldn't pose as much comparative challenge as the other contender for my forth vote (Hecateaus).

Kar-El is a good strategic antagonist for a campaign, but not hugely on a tactical level (unless you're dealing with a fairly low level party, in my games, translating to about 8-9th or so maybe.) He's not, though, I fear a very visible villain in the way my other choices are, being head of a secret society. My impression was that the PCs are unlikely to find anything about him until they deal with him in person, which would make him seem more of a boss monster I fear.

Still, I hope you make it through to the next round, regardless.

Epic Meepo wrote:

Jason Bulmahn wrote:

The Craft skill to be used should be noted under the Construction heading...

Does an item that uses Spellcraft (the default skill) need to note that under Construction? Or is a skill only listed if the item uses something other than the default?

As the default, Spellcraft does not need to be listed. If an item only uses Spellcraft, the skill portion is not listed.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

Thanks for clearing that up. I was just about to have a panic attack, actually, since adding another couple of words would have meant serious reediting of my item. (I tend to fill my word quota to the letter!)

I have had my item mostly prepared (albeit with some last minute revisions after a time to cool off) prepared since the contest was announced; i.e before the new rules came out and I only just heard about them this morning... I'd have had a heart attack.

Y'know, if I had a heart, which I don't on account of, y'know, being a Lich an' all.

Important quesion; what about psionics? I recall it being said (a while back, so things may have changed) that Pathfinder RPG wasn't going to be supporting (e.g. updating) psionics for the immediate future; does that mean that we can't use the SRD/OGL Psionics at all, or are they still acceptable?

I ask because I do like to sprinkle a bit of psionics in with my magic but most importantly, I like cover all my bases with rules so that magic-users and psions alike can benefit - or not - from them.

(I'm already working on my item, I must add...)

Generally, in our games, the druids sleep inside like everyone else.

'Course as we treat class as far more metagame construct than social construct, most of the druids are more "dude who casts lots of nature-affiliated spells, can turn into animals and probably has a pet and some reasonably firm ideas about conservation" than "civilisation is the opposite of nature and cities are the Root of All Evil" anyway.

I'm not a big fan of the 4 PCs vs. 1 bad guy. It's contrived, overdone, and somewhat silly.

Paizo has eliminated save-or-die effects, so that concern is gone.

Max hp, as pointed out, is easy to implement, if you feel like it's warranted.

So, overall, I'm not seeing the need for a template yet.

Why not just play 4e?

Short answer: I don't particularly like 4e.

Long answer: Because while 4E does have some good high end concept ideas, I find 4E generally inferior than 3.5.

3.5, while better than 4E, and being in my opinion the most mechancially superior set of rules I have thus far encountered, still has plenty of flaws. But not enough to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

I hold no set of rules above having it's best bits stolen and slapped on a slightly better set of rules to make an even better one. Never, in 18-odd years of gaming, has there been even one wargame or RPG that has survived contact with me without light-to-major tweaking... So I have every intention of plundering 4E's bloated corpse for every single idea of value I can find and fitting it back to 3.5. (Exactly what I have done with Rolemaster's, what? four? editions.) I bought the damn thing, and I'll be damned if I don't make it do some work for me aside from sitting on my shelf and awaiting somebody else running a 4E game (I'll play it but no way would I DM it.)

* * * * * *

I think adapting the solo template (and maybe minion too) would allow better modelling of some, large set-piece battles. It this one occasion, I am prepared to sacrifice world cohesion for a bit of dramatic lisense. This is quite uncharacteristic of me; I'm usually heavily on the side of PC = NPC dynamic (which, except for 'boss' battles I think is one of 3.5's strengths). And I'm very heavily into world cohesion and consistency. (Though on the other hand, I've never shied away from BBEG deus ex machina for plot/story reasons, either. I consider the rules to be guidelines not absolutes and not everything in the world has to be defined completely by the book; just 99% of it.)

(You could rationalise it a bit by saying the extra hit points come from masses of over-confidence, since hit points can be legitamately interpreted as morale. And 'fate' points or whatever, speak for themselves.)

Without solo monsters, I simply do not ever have single monster encounters. Or at least not anything of moment. Currently, when I have a BBEG encounter it will be him, his half-dozen toughest mates and/or a large number of disposable flunkies. Which forces the PCs to split their fire and give him some breathing room for a dramactic, longer fight.

The rate at which my highly skilled, mechanically and tactically adept players saw through things is astonishing, so it would be nice to have a kind of mechanic that would allow the dragon to actually survive more than two-three rounds against a party without being a TPK (which is why just adding HD doesn't help - not too mention many of my BBEGs are humanoids not monsters). Doubling and maxing the hit points is a good start (you could ass DR instead, but then you get the same about of damage from spells and powers and SR doesn't cover all of that either.)

Heck, I max out many if not most of my monster's hit point anyway (and always max out any BBEGs).

So, if one can just alleivate the amount of SoDs from ending the fight right out (one-hit kills is why I've more or less stopped having BBEGs when we play Rolemaster) but prevent them from being totally useless, I think it would be of benefit.

It'd be nice to have a dragon encounter, for example where the dragon didn't either wipe the PCs (due to too-high CR) or gets wiped itself (concentration of fire). Or to have the villianous Evilguy McDoBadder go all Sephiroth slash Magneto slash Orochimaru (sic) on the party without being summarily butchered in the first round.

Anyway, compared to some of the ways I've bent 3.5, this is pretty minor. (You are talking to the Lich whose latest campaign world summarily tossed out the entire MM and who has, by playing around with the front end of, made a spirited attempt at replacing Vancian casting with a mana-based system.)

Maybe give them 3 Fate Points each round. They can spend 1 to re-roll a failed save (against any kind of effect, just for simplicity's sake). If the re-roll also failed the Save, the Solo can then spend 2 Fate Points to try again.

Another good idea might be to give the Solo something like "Double Action." They get to roll initiative TWICE, and can therefore act TWICE during each combat round.

I DM for a group of 8 PCs, and against a single big bad, they're usually able to take it down in 2 rounds, maybe 3 if it's really tough. Most big bads have more than 3 really cool powers, so that's a darn shame. Even with me re-alloting feats to get some Quickened Spell-like Effects off, the big bads don't last long against large parties.

Maybe give the Solo some kind of self-healing ability, possibly dependent on some kind of combat circumstance, like dropping an opponent, eating a minion, spending a full round in a trance, something!

I think it's a better idea to leave the 'fate' points for status, rather than damage effects (mainly 'cos it's extremely hard, even with Disintigrate to one-shot anything with damage, and doubling (and probably maxing) hit points will definately make it nearly impossible (which is kinda the point).

3 per round seems a little high - unless you've got a huge number of casters. I tend to have partys of six in strength and in my general experience you don't get more than two primary spellcasters (and they don't tend to be throwing save or dies every round). I was thinking more like a fixed pool for the whole (i.e. encounter). Initially I thoguht possibly level-based; although after reflection, maybe it'd be better PC-number based (like say 1-2 per PC).

I have considered multiple actions per round for BBEGs before. Except you get right back to 3.0 Haste problems. Dealing with multiple high-level spells per round is pretty bad (heck, for that matter, who'd want to deal with a Time Stands Still/Full Attack routine every round!?)

I think what mainly needs to be done is shore up the longevity more than offense. Hit points is easy; maxed double hits should be enough even to slow the most insanely hard parties down. (If that's not enough, triple will!) Then we just have to deal with save-ord-e and I think we're there.