The Encounter of Doom


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

51 to 63 of 63 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Mark Hoover wrote:
Let's say, I don't know, the Halfling wizard stupidly gets separated from his dwarf party in the woods. You've rolled 3 trolls. Said Halfling is on his own, armed poorly and is a, let's say...first level rogue.

Ok, so the halfling wizard does something stupid, of his own choice, and runs into trouble, Sounds fair. Okay, he's in the woods at night, there's trolls around, they aren't just some crazy out-of-place inhabitant like say a sudden 11th nazghul no one's ever heard of or a bear with overalls and a shovel.

So the GM rolls them up, rolls the encounter distance and makes a believable scenario for what the encountered creatures are doing, Nowhere in the 'book' that you quote, and by 'book' I mean where you claim it's 'by the book', meaning the rules, not the Lord of the Rings book which you refer to later, does it say that trolls are automatically well-hidden in the woods. Nowhere. Trolls may be found in woods, trolls may be allowed to hide in woods just like any other creature, but don't try and claim there's any 'by the book' encounter that says encountered trolls are always an ambush. They are encountered doing any reasonable trollish activity. That could include hunting for halflings, fornicating, sleeping, or sitting around a fire preparing to cook and eat a halfling.

So your stupid, poorly-equipped (again his own choice, the DM didn't just say "Okay Bilbo, you find yourself in the woods separated from your friends with just your piccolo because that's how this encounter starts.") halfling wizard has a troll encounter. 'By the book' he passed his Perception saw their fire and then chose to approach them, apparently then turning himself into a 1st-level rogue (I'll assume you were going with a custom encounter, but changed to Bilbo).

Somehow this whole scenario you're laying out is supposed to talk about how the 'GM" of this scene is actually cheating.

First off, basing a DnD encounter and challenge by comparing it with how it would work for the hero in a movie or a story is a very poor measuring stick. This is especially true for a story being told by the author as a children's' tale for his daughters as opposed to one for an audience of people looking at it within a rule-set of some game that wasn't invented yet.
"But Daddy, even though these terms don't exist, my imagination tells me that a troll would have +6 from strength and something which the abbreviation'BAB' stands for based on at least 6 hit dice. Even assuming the difference in size modifiers to AC and a halfling's natural dexterity, that means that being unarmored I find it highly unlikely that you can tell me a bedtime story and use the phrase, 'Bilbo narrowly dodged the troll's swing.' Did the troll roll a 1, Poppa?"
"No more stories for you, sweetie."

But, if that's the scenario you want to use, I could describe that same scenario and how what actually occurred in it is the OPPOSITE of what you're trying to convince people of.

The 'group' (the dwarves and Bilbo) randomly encounter 3 trolls a random distance away.
The 'group' (all or one or a couple) pass a Perception check to spot the trolls (or their campfire or some other indicator).
The trolls do not notice the group (the group is outside their darkvision range, the group has no light-sources being mostly dwarves, the group is being quiet, etc., whatever). The GM rolls the trolls' Perceptions, they fail.
The 'group' sends Bilbo ahead to scout, alone, as his first official test as team burglar. He rolls his Stealth check, it's better than the trolls' Perception.
The GM isn't fudging any rolls for anybody here.

The GM has randomly rolled the trolls' treasure, but given them simple, typical gear for weapons and armor. Among the treasure: a magical talking purse which one troll wears, several magical elven weapons including one particular smaller blade we'll call 'Sting,' which the GM reasonably places in the troll lair, since it makes no sense for any of the trolls to wield such a weapon or even carry it except as a toothpick or toenail cleaner... and that would still be unbelievable... since trolls probably care nothing for dental hygiene or ingrown toenails, being trolls and hardy if not regenerating.

Bilbo finds three huge trolls sitting around the fire eating mutton. He decides... on his own, to try and pickpocket the money pouch off a troll. The GM has NO IDEA he's going to do this. He just thinks the party is going to avoid the fire, or investigate and see that there are trolls and then avoid them, or that the party will just be delayed in their travels because they'll wait until morning when the trolls go into their cave because he's got a loose travel timeline but the party insisted on stupidly crashing through troll-infested woods in the dark. Any one of numerous completely reasonable and not malicious reasons for this random encounter to be used (Yes, parties pushing themselves through dangerous areas hastily is precisely a reason for using random encounters.)

The GM didn't make Bilbo try and steal the troll's purse, it wasn't even some quest goal given by the dwarves. They didn't say steal a troll money pouch. This was a character choice. He thought it would impress the dwarves.

His own choice. Now, the GM knows that he's rolled a magical purse and that this talking purse is going to say something if someone tries to steal it, it's the whole nature of the talking purse which is in this encounter, just like it's the nature of these trolls to turn to stone in sunlight. The GM can't just say that Bilbo senses that the purse is magical or that he has no chance, because that would be completely the wrong thing for a GM to do. Also, just because the attempt to steal the purse is going to set off an alarm, that doesn't mean that Bilbo doesn't have a fair chance to succeed and steal make off with it despite the purse's talking. He can grab it and run, beating the troll's initiative, catching them by surprise, they have to use move actions to stand up, maybe pick up their gear, he leads them into the dwarves who catch the trolls split up and surrounded with 12 attacks to their 3 and flanked, etc.

Bilbo rolls and fails to get the purse.
It speaks up, "'Ere, 'oo are you?" No fudging, no cheating. The GM doesn't say, "Aww, well it would be cool so you succeed."
Instead he says, "It would've been cool, props for trying, but nothing is a guaranteed success. As it is, the trolls all stare at the purse and you with your hand tugging on it. Roll initiative to see who reacts faster. Trolls are slow and you're much faster. They go on...[rolls fairly in front of everyone]...6."

Bilbo's player rolls and says, "Oh no...even with the odds on my side I got a 5. You know, most whiny players might suggest that this is a good time for you to let me win anyway. I mean, there was only a 7% chance of that happening, but instead of calling you a dice nazi, I'm gonna say that Bilbo's as shocked by a magical talking purse, if not moreso, than the trolls are at finding my hands in their pockets. I mean, wow... a magical talking purse. That kind of thing just enhances and reinforces that this is a story with wondrous magical beasts and items. To think that you might not even had thought of something like that but for the random happenstance of a dice roll! And here that is now becoming a pivotal focus for what was otherwise a typical encounter with three boring, vanilla trolls!"

"Oddly insightful of you, Bilbo's player. The troll rolls and... he succeeds at the grab and... well....it's unlikely you'll beat his Grapple check, no... I rolled high... even with a 20 you won't beat him, but grapples are just a troll's strength and a halfling's weakness."

Now, it could have gone differently. Bilbo could have stealthed into their cave and absconded with Sting free and clear. The GM couldn't just tell him that though. That would have been cheating, but if the player had done it, he would have rolled fair Sneak and Perception checks just like always, not fudging them to give Bilbo a cool item.

Nowhere in that entire encounter did the GM have to fake any rolls. In fact, what occurred is completely believable. While you might claim that that's why such an encounter is too much, it isn't a good reason, because then you wouldn't have had any encounter, and now this is really turning into a good encounter. You can say that it wouldn't happen, but it's your scenario, and it did happen. I've read it and seen how things turn out.

So now Bilbo's caught, and of course, the dwarves, his party members come looking. Well, they make the choice to wander in one by one. Sure, they don't know what awaits them in-character, even though out of character they've heard the whole exchange. They don't whine about it, they play their characters as they would, moving to encircle the unknown foes. Of course, with the trolls fairly alerted, they are more than a match for an individual dwarf and they catch them all eventually.
(The dwarves have terrible stealth checks, may be wearing armor, the trolls have scent and good senses, etc. All rolled fairly and not fudged, not cheated.)

Your attempt at describing a scene with a horrible GM actually sounds like a fairly arbitrated and judged scene even letting the dice rolls work the way they should. Let's see how a Fudging, I-Know-What's-Best-For-Everyone approach affects the scenario from here.

At this point, Bilbo's player has adrenaline pumping, things are tense. He was going to try some roguish bluffing and some interaction to distract the trolls while the dwarves secretly used Escape Artists and split up. Maybe the trolls catch one or two but they can't catch all 12 plus Bilbo and most players understand this and in character they understand that death is an option while trying to reach their goal of reclaiming their mountain. One or two having to give their lives to save the lives of their brethren is acceptable both in character and to the players. (One actually has this cool idea for a half-elven duskblade, but no, the GM now decides that it's the outcome of the story that matters and its just sooooo inconvenient to make a 1st level character, I mean... after all the backstory that went into... pointing at the map and saying 'I was wandering in this area. I arrive at the shire from here. Also... I have grey eyes.")

Unfortunately, also at this point, the Dwarf Ori's player starts whining. "But these trolls are waaaay above our challenge rating. Even though there's 12 of us and we chose to split up and also press onward through the night in troll infested woods and you rolled everything fairly, I'm going to quit, and I'm Bifur's ride too."

So the GM follows the fudging suggestions of some people in a forum and has uber-dues-ex god-like being show up. We'll call him Gandalf and he throws his voice around for apparently so long that the sun rises and that despite this being a death sentence equivalent event to a creature, have it completely forget its importance.

So now the GM's fudging rolls, everyone knows it. Now he's making creatures, no matter how stupid or crude forget that there's a world-ending event of life-threatening importance to them that will happens at pretty much the same time it has every morning for their entire lives. How does everyone know it? Because it's freakin' Gandalf, who could probably roundhouse kick 3 trolls into stone statues slightly slower than Chuck Norris, let alone spend the entire period of dawn using his ventriloquism spell and making Bluff and Perform checks to emulate troll voices. Sure, he's got ranks in those skills... Not.

The GM does it that way to try and hide the fact that he brought in the Hand of God, but actually it's more unbelievable than if Gandalf had just showed up and mopped the forest floor with the trolls.
(The GM secretly promises Bilbo's player that if they ever make a movie about their game he'll let the character get some words in and then have the deus-ex machina remark that it was because of him that he was able to save the day. He also makes it clear that no one will really believe that either. Also, he'll make Ori use a slingshot. Sissy.)

First off, the party now gets gear for the encounter that was fudged, which is perfectly fair if they earned it, but they didn't. The GM does have the balls to declare the purse turned to stone along with the troll even though this sets up howls of outrage from a certain group that this is clearly 'their' loot and that their wealth level is way below normal even though their characters spent it all on prostitutes and booze role-playing in the Inn the night before and Bilbo's character insisted on paying for 6 banquet meals because he missed second breakfast the day before.

The GM also has Gandalf claim one of the numerous highly-powerful magical elven weapons. This is the least he can do to maintain some sense of actual dignity and not feel like a slimy worm who needs a shower after fudging out instead of giving the group a chance to do it on their own. The group still gets Sting and maybe a few other weapons that are incredibly powerful.

How do we know they're powerful? Because they get used by the owners through the entire rest of the campaign instead of actually being switched out for progressively better ones. That's right, even Gandalf keeps a fairly rolled random item throughout the entire saga. That's saying something. Maybe it would have been unbalancing, we can't tell with complete certainty, but we can agree that if the group had defeated the trolls they would have deserved such a reward.

Continuing on, now that the GM has fudged once and instead of being fair and allowing the party to suffer consequences, the entire story and quest is basically a farce with forgone results. The GM tries to have Gandalf leave the spotlight and let the players have a chance to have a real adventure but instead, every single reasonable challenge is reduced to a player whining, "There's goblins! Have Gandalf save us!"
"Were lost, have Gandalf come guide us out so we don't have any random encounters."
"The Goblin King looks like a tough fight, this could be a chance at a good encounter, but let's have Gandalf show up and gank him with an automatic Coup de Grace."
"Have Gandalf summon eagles to carry us away because those wargs may be an equal challenge, but they have a higher speed, so its like a tactically unfair encounter!"
"We don't actually want to face the dragon at the end of the adventure. Let's send it after that unsuspecting town of people who helped us when we were in trouble. Maybe the GM will have Gandalf kill it. I mean, what are they gonna do... shoot it with an arrow. It has friggin' DR!

Even a simple riddle challenge turns into Bilbo's player just saying, "My character's not smart enough to think up a riddle. I'm gonna say, 'What's in my pocket?' Any intelligent 3 or higher creature would obviously know this isn't a riddle, it's a question, but instead of making what would even be considered an half-arsed attempt, that's what I do. I mean, you won't let me just roll a straight Intelligence check and say I came up with a riddle that beats him."

So there! Definitive proof of how fudging dice rolls ruined the Lord of the Rings. Don't let that be you!

What do you people need a GM to do for you? Give you a freakin' artifact from a God that has no bearing on this particular campaign at all?

What next? Start a new campaign and claim you're a relative of the last hero so you can just start with all his weapons, armor, and loot. Even the possibly world-dominating artifact... no.

The GM would have to have Gandalf show up in town and summon a giant eagle to carry you all the way to a volcano to destroy it before you can start the campaign. Trekking all the way overland would take forever and you might have some random encounters. Boromir could die!


Ok, who threw the LotR-Bomb? :-P We all know how that ends. :-P


3 people marked this as a favorite.

@Pizza: Cool story bro, sad it's pretty pointless and off-topic but oh well.

So back to the real topic: Why does the GM get to cop out of responsibility for the poorly made encounter he designed, again?

Edit: Okay that was slightly more rude than I intended it to be. It really was interesting, I just don't see how it relates here. It would not be fudging dice to make a better encounter.

In the case of Bilbo and the dwarves...well 13 guys (not counting Gandalf) should be able to take out 3 trolls. They're playing well above their weight class with those numbers.

That is a case of "Bad choices from the players lead to the encounter being harder than it should have been".

That's not what the OP is about.

The OP is about the GM thinking 4 guys can take on 15 people who attack from range, and ambush (though the ambush was unintended). He was wrong.

Even had the PCs passed their Perception checks, their only real option is to run away. And the goblins have bows. "Don't run, you'll only die tired" and all.

It was a bad encounter. It happens.

Denying the fact that it was a bad encounter helps no one.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

What is so amusing here is the OP's insistence on his own lack of agency here. A GM is supposed to be the ultimate arbiter of what occurs, not a glorified dice roller (we'd all be playing WoW if we wanted a computer in charge). You are supposed to use your common sense as to what is a fun and appropriate encounter.

The protestations of "realism" by others on here are even more amusing. Realism only seems to extend as far as those circumstances that harm the players, but never to those that benefit the players. First of all, you couldn't have 15 goblins moving through the woods quietly enough to ambush four PCs from far enough away that the PCs couldn't get to them (line-of-sight), and if they aren't in a forest there's no sneaking or ambush possible in the plains. A GM has to purposely create appropriate terrain to make this encounter even possible (strike one).

Secondly, no "tactically aware" group of goblins would walk closely enough together for all of them to attack together (especially in a world with fireballs and sleep spells). You should have had several scouting ahead (real tactics) to prevent the entire group from being caught unawares (assuming your Navy SEAL-trained goblins would be so tactically astute... but you want real tactics, right?). This would entail the scouts going back and reporting, the rest preparing for the ambush and moving into position, etc. (strike two)

Lastly, all of this would have required time and noise. From the time the scouts saw the party until the first attack of the ambush was 6 seconds? For the scouts to return, the goblins to prep, them to spread out and take positions all occurred in the time for ONE perception roll? Even taking a ten on perception wouldn't take as much time as the preparations necessary. (strike three)

This encounter worked the way it did because you wanted it to. Period. Otherwise, all of the "realistic" considerations that would have made the ambush less likely would have played into the equation. As a GM you have the final say on everything. You can't escape your responsibility for the outcome here by hiding behind the "dice rolls" or a misguided sense of faux-"realism"...


Eirikrautha wrote:

What is so amusing here is the OP's insistence on his own lack of agency here. A GM is supposed to be the ultimate arbiter of what occurs, not a glorified dice roller (we'd all be playing WoW if we wanted a computer in charge). You are supposed to use your common sense as to what is a fun and appropriate encounter.

The protestations of "realism" by others on here are even more amusing. Realism only seems to extend as far as those circumstances that harm the players, but never to those that benefit the players. First of all, you couldn't have 15 goblins moving through the woods quietly enough to ambush four PCs from far enough away that the PCs couldn't get to them (line-of-sight), and if they aren't in a forest there's no sneaking or ambush possible in the plains. A GM has to purposely create appropriate terrain to make this encounter even possible (strike one).

Secondly, no "tactically aware" group of goblins would walk closely enough together for all of them to attack together (especially in a world with fireballs and sleep spells). You should have had several scouting ahead (real tactics) to prevent the entire group from being caught unawares (assuming your Navy SEAL-trained goblins would be so tactically astute... but you want real tactics, right?). This would entail the scouts going back and reporting, the rest preparing for the ambush and moving into position, etc. (strike two)

Lastly, all of this would have required time and noise. From the time the scouts saw the party until the first attack of the ambush was 6 seconds? For the scouts to return, the goblins to prep, them to spread out and take positions all occurred in the time for ONE perception roll? Even taking a ten on perception wouldn't take as much time as the preparations necessary. (strike three)

This encounter worked the way it did because you wanted it to. Period. Otherwise, all of the "realistic" considerations that would have made the ambush less likely would have played into the equation. As a GM you have...

I'm sorry I ruffled feathers with my Bilbo reference. I didn't mean to upset anyone. But the second half of my rant was eloquently articulated here by E-ticket. So what if the GM rolls 100 goblins as his encounter; its on them to decide what, if any action these goblins take.

Their Int and Wis stats are good guidelines for what they're capable of thinking of. The GM's plotline and setting are also useful suggestions of motivations for these creatures. But when push comes to shove the GM alone has the unenviable task of deciding what this force does.

@ The Calzone King: I appreciate you taking the time to dissect my analogy and point out all of the places where I was wrong. I hope that gave you a small measure of satisfaction. However my point was that the GM decides what the monsters do. In that vein, I'll take another example. This isn't made up; it's from my own homebrewed game:

4 PCs - a Cleric of Erastil, an abjurer wizard, a dwarf fighter (unbreakable) a bard/monk, and an oracle of time (APL 4) enter the great hall of a ruined castle. They had been warned that there is a ghost lurking in the ruin. As they pass through the hall the ghost manifests and the PCs fail a Perception check (only DC 20; everyone rolled fairly low). I was running the ghost right out of the bestiary and this was meant to be a set piece/hard encounter so it's a CR 7 foe.

Surprise round: ghost uses a fear effect - cleric's animal companion and bard fail their save. Both begin running in random directions since the "closest exit" was obscured.

Round 1: oracle uses a spell to grant his weapon the ability to affect the ghost; remaining PCs attack/buff dealing no damage to the ghost. Ghost touches cleric and inflicts terrible wounds.

At this point it suddenly occurs to me (in best Gob Bluth impersonation) "I've made a terrible mistake".

Round 2: Ghost glitches; does nothing but talk for a round. Cleric realizes the ghost is that of her grandmother. PCs damaged her a little but when the ghost stopped the door out was revealed and the dwarf grabs the bard to make for it. The cleric's animal companion (by random rolls) has sprinted deeper into the dungeon and been set upon by an ambush I had planned there; it is lost to the party

Round 3: the ghost pursues, regaining composure. The PCs do a bit more damage and it once again touches the cleric. The dwarf and the bard make it out.

Round 4: the ghost glitches again and the PCs flee, taking pock-shots as they go and not dealing any damage.

My mistake was relying on random rolls and overestimating my players' capabilities. I did a poor job of planning and executing the encounter. As a result I nearly killed the cleric and may have ended up killing someone else in the party before they fled. I'm not a killer GM and didn't want to murder party members. You can call me all the names you'd like; I already have said them about myself but if you need to pile on you can.

Anyway, that's why I had the ghost glitch. She stopped, hesitated and gave the party a chance to escape. It also helped to set up the plotline that I was going for; the cleric's grandmother had died there trying to protect her daughter, the character's mother. I wanted the PC to get the connection and then return to put the poor woman to rest.

I didn't pull any punches or fudge any rolls. Everything was rolled on the table. But what I DID do was decide that the ghost wasn't attacking so that my players had that chance to regroup. Ironically I was still accused of being a terrible GM for springing such an "unwinnable" encounter on the party in the first place and the players never returned to save the ghost but oh well.

I hope this helps illustrate the point a little better. GMs are more than dice and rules. They are the brains behind an entire world of possibility. They should know their PCs' capabilities or, in my case, realize when they've grossly overestimated them. No, I don't think the party should just "win" every fight or conflict, but I also don't like setting them up to fail either.


First off, Mark Hoover. Great scenario. Actually sounds like a lot of fun.

Quote:
I didn't pull any punches or fudge any rolls

You say you didn't pull any punches... but you made the ghost 'glitch'? I don't know what that means specifically, it sounds like it means you... pulled your punches and didn't try and do any damage. Just because you made the ghost not attack and so didn't have to roll a die to risk hitting a PC, that doesn't mean you didn't fudge the encounter.

Your encounter, unlike a randomly encountered one, actually was a designed encounter. The PCs knew there was a ghost in the tower and the tower with the ghost is where they were going. You know the ghost was in the great hall and that it would attack when they entered.

If you had determined beforehand, rather than as a panic-move, that the ghost was in fact the cleric's grandmother(whether they knew or not), and that if the ghost saw her granddaughter she would hesitate, that would have been not fudging the encounter.

This is different than saying 'There's goblins/trolls in the woods, even a wyvern has been spotted. Pass through only during the day to cut the risk of meeting them'. Even in the original post, where the PCs went looking for goblins to investigate, it wasn't an encounter that was set up where 'They'll run into 15 goblins when they get here.' They may have found 4 goblins, or 1d6 human bandits, or a snuffling hedgehog at that same spot. Or nothing.

The players knew there was ghost, they had time to prepare, you say they just rolled poorly, and even if a PC or two had died that doesn't make someone a 'killer DM.' Having an encounter that kills the entire party does not make someone a 'killer DM'. Could make them some other not (necessarily) complimentary adjectives; inexperienced, careless, strict, sneaky, fair, surprisingly-willing-to-see-his-players-face-adversity-and-deal-with-hardsh ip.

Quote:
My mistake was relying on random rolls and overestimating my players' capabilities

What random rolls did you rely on? You knew the ghost was there, you knew what it would do depending on what creatures enter its territory. The only rolls that seem to have been made were Perception and the Will save vs fear and those are from the PCs. What did you roll? An attack and damage roll or two in between free rounds of hesitating to let the party regroup? This wasn't one lucky critical hit followed by massive damage that annihilated a PC unexpectedly, it was an attack roll with the associated damage. That's not relying on random rolls, that's being afraid of them.

That leaves what? The random roll that the NPC animal companion made to determine which way to run? It ran into yet another planned ambush you had designed and put into place. It could just as easily have been a PC who ran into it alone. Hardly something to beat yourself up over. I don't know what kind of creature it was or what kind of creatures made up the ambush, but at that point its an encounter between NPC creatures out of sight of the action. Was it captured? Does it come running back? Is it dead because that is what would happen? Too many unknowns.

I can't speak to overestimating your players' abilities, I don't know enough. Could the cleric have turned or even destroyed the ghost? Could they have just avoided the great hall? I think the only thing that really happened is that you underestimated yourself. I think you thought about having to look a player in the eye and tell him something he didn't want to hear and you either didn't trust yourself to do it or you didn't trust him to be able to handle it. Maybe you were inexperienced or maybe you were right and he wouldn't have been mature enough to handle the bad news and in another time another place he would have gone on a 3 county killing spree and you're a hero... unsung.

You say you caught flak for an unwinnable encounter? How can you be sure it wasn't because it was obvious you were balking or suddenly throwing a PC's heretofore unknown dead relative into an encounter? That actually makes it seem more like an encounter where you didn't want them to beat the ghost because you had planned for them to save it as a personalized story goal for one player (which isn't a bad thing, but one which none of them knew or planned for when they decided to come to the tower to try and destroy a ghost, which it now looked like they wouldn't get to do because the 'right' thing would be to save a party member's dead relative)

I can't guess all the angles but I don't see a 'careless' or 'thoughtless DM' who needs to coddle his players anywhere in your story. The point of your tale just tells me that you went out of your way to shield your players from actually suffering what you believed (out of goodness or kindness) would hurt them, and in the end it amounted to them NOT enjoying the encounter, not the fact that you succeeded on an incorporeal touch attack with a ghost.


PL: I don't want to hijack the thread here. I knew the ghost was in the ruin, yes, but I didn't know where. I left that to a random roll. I happened to roll a random encounter and the ghost came up. I just figured "the PCs have only had one fight. They're nearly full capacity. They can handle this." Suffice it to say...they couldn't.

And you're right - my examples haven't been exactly like the OP, so I'll stop trying to compare. Instead, I'll reference one thing: the PCs knew "there's goblins there" but I don't see evidence that they knew what the force of them would be.

Did they not use stealth? Were they in fact careless? Or did they simply fail/botch a couple rolls? What were the Perception penalties based on the encounter distace and environmental conditions and were these factored into the goblins' rolls? Did the GM roll 15 Perception checks or 1?

I don't know; I wasn't there.

What I do know is that, after the goblins spotted them, all 15 opened fire with shortbows. If they were employing strategy they may have concentrated their fire to ensure they dropped singular foes but this I don't know. However surprise round alone would've been CAPABLE of dropping at least one PC in an APL 1 group.

Now look at that from the player's perspective:

You come around the streetcorner and...(GM rolls some dice) Wizardo the Smart; you're dying. The rest of you have been wounded for (x) HP. There's a horde of 15 goblins in front of you. Roll initiatives.

Does THAT sound like fun?

But, that's just it with this thread isn't it? What I'm asking, what the OP is asking; they're opinions. What I think is fair, others might see as coddling. Vice versa what others see as fair I might see as... not fair (no need to be inflamatory or what not).

What I CAN say is that 15 goblin warrior 1 is a 2k XP threat. That would be CR 5 - an APL +4 fight for an APL 1 group or a greater than epic fight. It would be highly likely that the PCs all die in this encounter. Beyond this we're arguing our feelings but these are the numbers of this fight.


I think a good rule of thumb here is that if the PCs can level off of a single encounter, it's too much.

And guess how much XP 1st level characters need to level?

Liberty's Edge

Christopher LaHaise wrote:


Goblins have an Int of 10, and a Wis of 9, about on par with the average human. That means yes, they would act intelligently, and use tactics. They're not stupid. If they had an Int / Wis of 7 or so I might have them forego tactics and just rush.

A wisdom of 9 is not average, it's below average. Enough to give them a -1 modifier. This means they have mediocre to poor common sense and intuition. Would they perform competently and not do anything insanely stupid? Probably.

But would they have any substantial knowledge of battlefield tactics or clever positioning? I doubt it. I'd have them shoot a few times, get pissed, and then rush in and clobber away. Believe it or not, but it takes a warrior with some nerve to keep reloading his weapon when enemies twice his size are approaching rather than drawing a weapon and shield and covering his own ass.

In other words, drawing an arrow, knocking the bow, taking careful aim and shooting requires more mental steps than using a modern semi-automatic pistol. Even more so with the slow-to-fire crossbow. When the PCs get close enough you're gonna drop that bow because your hands are shaking due to a bunch of giants coming down on you, grab your melee weapons and start poking away. If you are a level 1 goofball with Wis 9, that is. And goblins are.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Christopher LaHaise wrote:

The 1st level PCs are investigating goblin activity in an area. The encounter incoming is a goblin warband, 15 goblins. You roll for encounter distance, and get a reasonable amount of distance between the two groups.

The goblins make their perception checks to spot the PCs. The PCs fail.
The goblins go into surprise round, and rain arrowy death on the PCs. Then you go into normal initiative - and the goblins have most of the PCs dead by the end of that round, and will get another shot or two off before the survivors can engage in melee, and can easily continue the attack and hound the survivors if they flee.

So, presuming all dice are rolled in the open - what would you do differently? I'm inclined not to fudge / cheat, myself, so...

Too many variables.

Is the game setting hardcore?
What terrain?
Why did the GM set the encounter CR way beyond what the game recommends? I'm assuming there's a epic story reason or something?

My primary focus on roleplaying is the story. Sure I'll do the crunch and optimize, and I love a good beer and pretzels BS session, but mainly I want the story.

So I let the story drive the game.

If it's a case of overwhelming odds (like the goblin warband) then I also write in a way out. And I'll even point them out.
"You've heard about this warband. Apparently other adventuring groups have tried to fight them and failed so you best figure out some tactical approach...not recommended that could blunder in blindly like the other groups that tried...and get et."
"Any questions you have? - like any rumors on the goblins, their tactics, methods, makeup?"
And when the party members all fails to spot them..."Looks like the goblins have the drop on you...those of you with combat backgrounds or tactical expertise you picked up while training at Pathfinder Academy think it would be advisable to withdraw and regroup."

"Hey there's plenty of cover, your character probably would know that would be a good idea."

Or if it's a lack of cover..."well if you're going to be caught in the open, you could drop prone. Or the caster here can cast something...or anyone in the party have a smokestick?"

I don't know the experience of the players...if you are new the game, the options may not be obvious. And sometimes even if you are experienced with the game, you may not be familiar with a given GM's method or campaign style. I tend to coddle newer players until they get a feel for my style, then I ramp up the difficulty once they are comfortable.

I also want to encourage play...wiping out players at level 1 is a good way of ensuring they don't come back.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Just to address the whole idea of playing monsters or enemy NPCs as being tactically aware and capable...

Consider that the audience for this discussion is primarily composed of long-time, in some cases hard-core gamers. The knowledge and interest in combat tactics among this audience is light-years beyond the "average human". Not because gamers are smarter, but because we have dealt with tactical simulations for years, and many of us, if not most of us, actually play these games at least in part because we have an interest in combat tactics.

Add to that the understanding that we gamers, here in 2013, in a technologically advanced society, have opportunities to learn the history of tactics both in an organized environment and on our own. Concepts like attacking the enemy's flank, or battlefield control or utilizing terrain are deeply ingrained in our thought processes.

The average human being is not like that. This can be demonstrated through a study of the history of combat. There is a reason that raw recruits are considered to be at high risk of being defeated by battle-hardened soldiers. Soldiers learn about tactics by watching their buddies die beside them. That's a hard lesson that sticks.

I could provide so many examples of major battles involving battle-hardened troops who have received extensive training doing the least tactically advantageous things imaginable. If anyone has studied major battles, like Gettysburg for example, you will find an amazing assortment of battlefield ineptitude, even from armies that are acknowledged to be among the most accomplished and celebrated in history.

The question of what sort of tactics a typical goblin war party would employ is one that should be addressed primarily from the perspective of what the history of those goblins are. Is this some random raiding party that is just out to do a little pillaging and terrorizing? Or is it a war party that has been involved in a ten year frontier war with the local non-goblins? If it's just a random war party, they should not employ tactics at all, really. They should probably be played as over-confident, relying on brute force and terror and probably significantly disorganized and undisciplined.

Add to that the racial tendencies of goblins and there should be a fairly high probability that some of the goblins might be more interested in looting the spoils than in continuing the fight.

The idea that random goblins would use the sort of tactics that a modern day RPG gamer would employ is not very realistic. It is far more likely that they would just rush in, try to overpower the enemy and do so with little coordination or consideration of their own tactical weaknesses.


Roberta Yang wrote:
Look, logically Bone Devils aren't only going to fight high-level characters. They exist, so there is a chance for one to happen upon the party. And if they do, they're not just going to go, "Oh, sorry, you're only first-level, I'd better leave you unharmed until you've gained several more levels," they're going to kill you. If they players can't handle a couple of CR9 outsiders, then it's really their fault, I'm not going to fudge things or actually provide a fun playable game or anything.

Your point is still a good one and all, but a minor quibble: Why on earth would a bone devil want to kill a low-level character? Think, for instance, of the countless possible hours of enjoyment that could be derived from torture. Not to mention possible slave or even souls if you pull it off right. I mean, a troll...yeah ok we've got a couple light snacks. Or a daemon.


I have to admit, my first thought was that 15 goblins would be a clear case of GM Fiat. I would have halved it to about 8.

But listening to some of the suggestions people are giving, I can actually see it becoming a brilliant opportunity.

Consider the scenario: The goblins are wandering along mob-handed when they spot a bunch of humans (or demi-humans or whatever). Do they all see them at the same time? Of course not.

So, the pcs are first alerted when they hear a loud voice saying in goblin: "look! Humans! let's shoot 'em!"

Now, goblins being what they are, some of them will fire off their crossbows and about 5 or 6 bolts will come the way of the party. That's the surprise round.

Now, roll initiative: the goblins get initiative. One of the goblins hits the one who said they should shoot them and shouts (In Goblin): "NO! I say we BURN them!. The first Goblin responds by hitting him back and soon the two of them are scuffling on the floor, biting and kicking each other while the rest of the Goblins stand around watching with glee and shouting helpful comments ("kick 'im", "bite 'im", "knee 'im in the groin!" etc.). It's now the pcs turn.

If they attack, the goblins will put aside their differences and turn to face the pcs, If they try to retreat, one of the goblins will shout out "Oi, their gettin' away!" and some of the goblins will chase while others shoot at the pcs. If the pcs dither and do nothing, The Goblin leader wil come along, shout at them a bit and then send 8 of the goblins off to kill the pcs.

A fun, flavorful and exciting encounter which still has the potential to TPK if the pcs are stupid, but which need not be OP. No the goblins are not being tactical, but with those numbers, why do they need to be? They outnumber the pcs nearly 4 to 1 (assuming a 4 person party), this would make them cocky, they can afford to squabble amongst themselves over the spoils, they can afford to send only part of their force against the pcs, they can afford to be stupid.

Now if the pcs defeat 8 goblins, the rest are gonna think twice about attacking. They might shoot off a few arrows, but they are more likely to want to run away than to face a bunch of big people that went through their comrades like a knife through butter.

So the encounter (hopefully) ends with the pcs battered, bruised but still (just about) standing and half the goblin force running away.

Now the follow on from that is that the goblin main force is going to send a better bunch of goblins (better armed, more experienced, more tactically aware and/or more of them) to hunt down this threat that has invaded their territory, and the pcs will have to evade them for the rest of the adventure.

51 to 63 of 63 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / The Encounter of Doom All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in General Discussion