At what level is a CR3 Wight a "fair" encounter?


Advice

101 to 122 of 122 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

2 people marked this as a favorite.
notabot wrote:
Goblins aren't a challenge, unless there is a REALLY large number of them.

I know that experiences do vary - but Pathfinder Goblins are TPK-machines.

My play group actually has an average of 1 PC death per combat against goblins in Pathfinder.


thenobledrake wrote:
notabot wrote:
Goblins aren't a challenge, unless there is a REALLY large number of them.

I know that experiences do vary - but Pathfinder Goblins are TPK-machines.

My play group actually has an average of 1 PC death per combat against goblins in Pathfinder.

Idk, a lvl 1 goblin warior is 1/3 CR, 3 to make CR 1. They have a +4 to hit with their 1d4 bow, which means it takes a long time to kill a PC. Their melee is even worse. 6 goblins is a CR 3 encounter. Which is pretty trivial for a level 1 party with competently built characters (or even the not so competently generated pregens). I mean sure they aren't easy to hit (15-16 AC depending if they have their shields up), but any offensive PC should hit on an 11 or higher (50%) and a hit should drop them (if you can't do 6 damage on average with your hits, than you really aren't an offensive character). They also have really bad saves so the spell caster should be able to drop multiples.

Now if you talk PC classes and other modified non default gobos, that's another story. They have some good builds that they can go with if the GM wants to get the most of the race.


notabot wrote:
thenobledrake wrote:
notabot wrote:
Goblins aren't a challenge, unless there is a REALLY large number of them.

I know that experiences do vary - but Pathfinder Goblins are TPK-machines.

My play group actually has an average of 1 PC death per combat against goblins in Pathfinder.

Idk, a lvl 1 goblin warior is 1/3 CR, 3 to make CR 1. They have a +4 to hit with their 1d4 bow, which means it takes a long time to kill a PC. Their melee is even worse. 6 goblins is a CR 3 encounter. Which is pretty trivial for a level 1 party with competently built characters (or even the not so competently generated pregens). I mean sure they aren't easy to hit (15-16 AC depending if they have their shields up), but any offensive PC should hit on an 11 or higher (50%) and a hit should drop them (if you can't do 6 damage on average with your hits, than you really aren't an offensive character). They also have really bad saves so the spell caster should be able to drop multiples.

Now if you talk PC classes and other modified non default gobos, that's another story. They have some good builds that they can go with if the GM wants to get the most of the race.

Wow experiences really do vary, I doubt I have been able to get a level 1 into melee range of a goblin since 2003. Goblins which are smart enough to move-shoot, spread out, concentrate fire & take advantage of their darkvision (the ones I encounter/GM as) are really nasty. I take back the bit about not being able to melee them, a mounted paladin in Kingmaker a few years back was able to charge goblins and kill three before dying while the rest of the party playing archer managed to get the other two. Yes, goblins are melee fodder, but when well played they can really do a number on a level 1 party.


notabot wrote:
I've had level 1-10 one shotted in the past. It sucks to have a character killed so easily, but monster abilities such as save or dies/bighits/bigcrits can kill you at any time. Its just how the game is made. How a player handles his character dying is just as important for their development as a player as how they handle their successes.

I totally understand a certain level of, "but that's the game we're playing, so deal with it" attitude, but I'm curious about something:

Do you think what you described (abilities that one-shot players at just about any level) is an example of good game design?

Liberty's Edge

cnetarian wrote:
notabot wrote:
thenobledrake wrote:
notabot wrote:
Goblins aren't a challenge, unless there is a REALLY large number of them.

I know that experiences do vary - but Pathfinder Goblins are TPK-machines.

My play group actually has an average of 1 PC death per combat against goblins in Pathfinder.

Idk, a lvl 1 goblin warior is 1/3 CR, 3 to make CR 1. They have a +4 to hit with their 1d4 bow, which means it takes a long time to kill a PC. Their melee is even worse. 6 goblins is a CR 3 encounter. Which is pretty trivial for a level 1 party with competently built characters (or even the not so competently generated pregens). I mean sure they aren't easy to hit (15-16 AC depending if they have their shields up), but any offensive PC should hit on an 11 or higher (50%) and a hit should drop them (if you can't do 6 damage on average with your hits, than you really aren't an offensive character). They also have really bad saves so the spell caster should be able to drop multiples.

Now if you talk PC classes and other modified non default gobos, that's another story. They have some good builds that they can go with if the GM wants to get the most of the race.

Wow experiences really do vary, I doubt I have been able to get a level 1 into melee range of a goblin since 2003. Goblins which are smart enough to move-shoot, spread out, concentrate fire & take advantage of their darkvision (the ones I encounter/GM as) are really nasty. I take back the bit about not being able to melee them, a mounted paladin in Kingmaker a few years back was able to charge goblins and kill three before dying while the rest of the party playing archer managed to get the other two. Yes, goblins are melee fodder, but when well played they can really do a number on a level 1 party.

Yes, goblins that have that level of tactical superiority over the party can be deadly... however, Golarion goblins lack that in spades... I've driven a 3rd level party craziness with a single kobold... but if these aren't the exceptions, your DM might think that the average goblin is a reskinned Napoleon...

Shadow Lodge

cnetarian wrote:
Goblins which are smart enough to move-shoot, spread out, concentrate fire & take advantage of their darkvision (the ones I encounter/GM as) are really nasty.

Are these the average goblin or the exception?

Because the goblins I have read about seem to take time during battle to stand and laugh, sing songs, get distracted by fire and shiny things, and generally not make optimal combat decisions.


TOZ wrote:
cnetarian wrote:
Goblins which are smart enough to move-shoot, spread out, concentrate fire & take advantage of their darkvision (the ones I encounter/GM as) are really nasty.

Are these the average goblin or the exception?

Because the goblins I have read about seem to take time during battle to stand and laugh, sing songs, get distracted by fire and shiny things, and generally not make optimal combat decisions.

I think it's a clash between goblins as described in the bestiary and statsheet, vs how they are described lore-wise in the golarion setting.

The bestiary entries don't write anything about them being stupid, and they have a very average 10 in intelligence (while being slightly unwise with a -1 wisdom, so the reverse compared to a human foot soldier who has -1 int but +0 wis). They are described as supersticious, but not as stupid. Their natural affinity for hiding would lead one to believe that they are stealthy combatants.

Compare this to golarion lore where they're pretty much just plain stupid. Especially in the beginning of RotRl.

But when you just pick up the bestiary, and check the goblin, you note that they're physically weak, quite dextrous, about as smart as humans, and very very good at hiding (+4 racial bonus, so twice as good as hiding as dwarves are at stonework or elves are at hearing).
If you don't play in Golarion or don't know about how goblins are treated there, they just scream "backstabbing ambushing skirmisher".

Shadow Lodge

Yes, but cnetarian specifically mentioned Kingmaker, which defaults to Golarion in most peoples minds.


Ah. Though maybe they've scrapped the golarion-specifics on goblins? I sure did in RotRl. Really dislike the idea of goblins as being comic relief-stupid.

Very well.


mplindustries wrote:
notabot wrote:
I've had level 1-10 one shotted in the past. It sucks to have a character killed so easily, but monster abilities such as save or dies/bighits/bigcrits can kill you at any time. Its just how the game is made. How a player handles his character dying is just as important for their development as a player as how they handle their successes.

I totally understand a certain level of, "but that's the game we're playing, so deal with it" attitude, but I'm curious about something:

Do you think what you described (abilities that one-shot players at just about any level) is an example of good game design?

I have no problem with unforgiving game design. Its certainly more fun than the no challenge hold your hands games. I'm against the "rocks fall, everybody dies style of play. But in the case of one being one shotted it was "poor luck" in the style of I made decisions that left my character vulnerable. Either provoking attacks because the odds were in my favor to do what I wanted (either bad luck or miscalculations) sacrificed a save/hp/AC for other design choices, or made tactical mistakes in other ways. Or they are just random variance where crits can drop you just like how crits can trivialize encounters. A luck based game is like that, and at least in PF you can manage your risk exposure.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
TOZ wrote:
cnetarian wrote:
Goblins which are smart enough to move-shoot, spread out, concentrate fire & take advantage of their darkvision (the ones I encounter/GM as) are really nasty.

Are these the average goblin or the exception?

Because the goblins I have read about seem to take time during battle to stand and laugh, sing songs, get distracted by fire and shiny things, and generally not make optimal combat decisions.

In my Pathfinder experience, it usually goes something like the following:

Goblins surprise party, laugh at the faces they make when shot at with arrows, then swarm into melee in a 1-to-1 fashion because that isn't smart for them to do (though they do avoid the heavily armored character if they can), and then the mage and thief hit the ground while goblins laugh, dance, sing, and get ready to gang up on whoever comes to save their fallen comrades.

...and that's when the goblins involved are straight from the Bestiary instead of the typically souped-up versions with PC class levels found in Adventure Paths.

If the GM were to run goblins according to what their stats suggest they are capable of, I don't think anyone would ever actually see a goblin - just the arrows from the darkness.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber

But would they be goblins then? Or just green-skinned kobolds?


TriOmegaZero wrote:
But would they be goblins then? Or just green-skinned kobolds?

Kobolds aren't nearly stealthy enough to be "arrows from the dark" - that's why you get killed by kobolds when they aren't even in the same area... you just fall prey to their traps, especially if you see a kobold, it "gets scared and runs" and then you have the brilliant idea to chase after it.


TOZ wrote:
Yes, but cnetarian specifically mentioned Kingmaker, which defaults to Golarion in most peoples minds.

I did mention that Kingmaker was the only time in the past 10 years I've managed to melee goblins.

The idea that goblins (or other creatures) are going to behave stupidly just to make the players feel heroic is something the people I play with have long ago abandoned for D&D/PF. Goblins for whom chortle, charge into melee and then shout "shinies" is the primary combat technique would have long ago been wiped out by other species and their ecological niche filled by cowardly skulkers who snipe from the darkness and retreat leading pursuers into ambushes. And yes, if the people I play with run an AP, we do change it so that the monsters do not use "stupid" tactics. We stopped playing "nice" sometime during 2E and combat became tactical problem solving with everyone, players and monsters, using every advantage they could. It isn't that there is something wrong with "nice" combat where opponents act stupidly, but we just find it better suited to a game system which doesn't have the detailed rules PF does - monsters need to do this to balance out the fact that as players we try to eek out every advantage possible from those rules.

The PF game I play is the result of the same people playing together too long in a sort of arms' race and no doubt far from typical. I just found the difference amusing, it's been so long since I've seen goblins played any way other than nasty.


cnetarian wrote:
TOZ wrote:
Yes, but cnetarian specifically mentioned Kingmaker, which defaults to Golarion in most peoples minds.

I did mention that Kingmaker was the only time in the past 10 years I've managed to melee goblins.

The idea that goblins (or other creatures) are going to behave stupidly just to make the players feel heroic is something the people I play with have long ago abandoned for D&D/PF. Goblins for whom chortle, charge into melee and then shout "shinies" is the primary combat technique would have long ago been wiped out by other species and their ecological niche filled by cowardly skulkers who snipe from the darkness and retreat leading pursuers into ambushes. And yes, if the people I play with run an AP, we do change it so that the monsters do not use "stupid" tactics. We stopped playing "nice" sometime during 2E and combat became tactical problem solving with everyone, players and monsters, using every advantage they could. It isn't that there is something wrong with "nice" combat where opponents act stupidly, but we just find it better suited to a game system which doesn't have the detailed rules PF does - monsters need to do this to balance out the fact that as players we try to eek out every advantage possible from those rules.

The PF game I play is the result of the same people playing together too long in a sort of arms' race and no doubt far from typical. I just found the difference amusing, it's been so long since I've seen goblins played any way other than nasty.

I've always assumed that the goblins real defensive strategy is similar to mice: reproduce faster than your own stupidity can kill you off.

And yeah, they get killed a lot. And would be enslaved even more often, except they're not good at being slaves. Even punishment can't focus them for long.

And it's not so much about "nice" combat, as about variety in combat. Not every enemy, even intelligent ones make optimal tactical decisions. Some are crazy stupid like goblins. Some may be overly cautious and not press an opportunity when they've got it. Some might be more concerned with showing their personal courage and prowess than tactical advantage. Some might be too conceited to believe they're actually threatened. Some of course will make good use of tactics.


Oh I agree, that's why they are in quotes, it's style thing. Any monster which doesn't take every tactical advantage it can in the games I play is being stupid, because the players are making optimal tactical decisions. When player combat tactics are dictated by roll-play rather than role-play monsters have to keep up and when not even a barbarian player is willing to be "more concerned with showing their personal courage and prowess than tactical advantage" the monsters cannot afford to. A group which develops different positioning for light sources depending on believed vision capabilities of opponents, spells available and room layout (one of the first tasks when switching to PF) is going to have a different type of combat. I won't say it is the 'right' way to play PF (or a good way, it's actually pretty screwed up) but it is the one which has evolved among my group. It amuses me to see the difference style makes, goblins I play against fight nasty and I would much rather fight a CR3 wraith than 6 goblins.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Goblins that always use good tactics are smarter, wiser...and vastly more organized than trained human soldiers. That is all.


I always saw dogs as a great anti goblin thing. Smelly goblins detected by scent. That is why goblins hate dogs, always ruining their raids with their superior speed and ability to offset their sneakiness. Same thing with horses, allows the enemy to ride them down when they think they can just lob a couple arrows down range and withdraw for hit and run tactics. Goblins aren't very wise, so fail lots of will saves against guys with books, that makes written words dangerous and all books should be gotten rid of.

That low wisdom score also means that they aren't always good at detecting counter sneakiness. This means they can be ambushed in turn.


I agree on the dogs.

Liberty's Edge

I could see wights being seen as OP at level 1 but I've ran thornkeep a few times and have only had 1 wight kill a PC and that was with a group of 4 level 1 characters without a tank (cleric subbed in and was killed).

Sadly the most dangerous goblin was the one that passed the color spray save, surrendered to the party cleric who spoke goblin, and then was used as a trap finder for the rest of the dungeon. After surviving a few traps he when on to kill 2 skeletons, a zombie, deal most of the damage to the wight...


Iron Knight wrote:

I could see wights being seen as OP at level 1 but I've ran thornkeep a few times and have only had 1 wight kill a PC and that was with a group of 4 level 1 characters without a tank (cleric subbed in and was killed).

Sadly the most dangerous goblin was the one that passed the color spray save, surrendered to the party cleric who spoke goblin, and then was used as a trap finder for the rest of the dungeon. After surviving a few traps he when on to kill 2 skeletons, a zombie, deal most of the damage to the wight...

How did the three PCs (plus goblin) deal with the second wight?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Well the second wight starts out prone in the middle of combat, has a low AC, and not so many HP to survive a single round against a party that has competent damage dealers.

101 to 122 of 122 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / At what level is a CR3 Wight a "fair" encounter? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Advice