Starting a new RotRL Campaign, hoping for some tips...


Rise of the Runelords

Liberty's Edge

First thing, this is a fairly long post requesting help. I tend to write a lot, so I apologize ahead of time. I'll try my best to be to the point, but will also have a TL;DR at the bottom for my most important points.

I've been reading through this particular forum for the past few days, lots of great stuff here!! Glad so many people seem to enjoy this one :) Sadly, my players have also played the card game, but I've kept them from ever actually reading any of the flavor text. Regardless, they may be able to recognize some of the enemies as they come up. We will just have to wait and see how that turns out.

Well, some of the big things I'd like to ask for help are on the character creation. I am a bit of a control freak it seems, and have strictly stated that I'll only run this for 4 players, keeping to the AP's structure. I've seen just how much a single player more can really throw of the balance of the game. Luckily, my game group would normally only consist of these 4 players anyway, so thats a plus. I might let another player come in as a kind of recurring character, but I'm still thinking on that.

I also stated that I wanted a much more classic game, and tried to keep it down to a fighter, cleric, rogue and arcane caster. Most of the players where perfectly fine with that, except for one of them. Originally stated they had an awesome idea for a cleric, now states how much they hate and refuse to play one. Also lead to an argument for about an hour of the "fact" that arcane casters, specifically the wizard and sorcerer, are a complete waste of space in a party. Any thing they can "fail" to contribute could either be done better by another class, or eventually, completely replaced by a magical item. I did my best to persuade them that this was not the case, but they still strongly believed in their particular take on the class.

My first issue was how I may be best able to handle this. I know I could just open up the number of classes that could be played, but that would potentially skew away from the party build that I was hoping for. I may be far to controlling of course, but was hoping I could manage. I have not spoken with this particular player in a few days, but last I heard they where "fine" with making a Wizard. I did guide them to a particular post online some people in this forum may be familiar with, Trentmonk's guide to being god "aka wizard." Seems though they may very well just make a copy paste build from that.

How do you think I should try and handle this? First and foremost, does it really feel like the arcane spellcasters are at such a disadvantage in this edition/pathfinder? I've felt they where perfectly fine, just requiring a take on them that is different from the rest of your classes. I was particularly stunned when another one of my players (who is currently playing, and hating the wizard in another game) began to agree full heartily with just how bad wizard and sorcerers are. I'd rather my players have fun of course, first and foremost. I plan to get them together sometime this week to sit and make characters and really talk about it. Hopefully we can come to some understandings...

Now, for the actual character creation, I've opted for the 15 point buy system. I've always disliked rolling for stats, as they can be highly skewed. One player can get crap, one player can get OP. Point buy is always fair to the entire group. I'm tempted to bump that higher to the 20 point build, after I've seen everyone build their characters, but we shall see.

My question is, does this feel like its really the right level of power for this campaign?

Also, since I do strongly want my players to try and survive, I've decided to give them the 2 character traits suggested. For level ups for their HP, I'm stuck between a few different options. Rolling, again, could end up real horrible for the players, which I try and stay away from. I normally run a system suggested in the old d20 star wars system. Max - 2 :P Simple, elegant.. Gives your players a bit more health than normal. I'm also considering the system they have for the pathfinder society. (Max / 2) + 1. This is much less health than the prior for the most part. It is stronger than what you would get on average, and it does provide more health than what the opposition will be granted, albeit not by much.

Again, I'd like some input on how GM's have done this in the past. What would you suggest, and what do you believe may be too much?

While I do intend to make it hard enough to be challenging, I would like my players to try and keep their characters for as long as possible. If a player death where to occur, I'd like them to have enough HP to hopefully not have to worry about sudden death due to a few bad rolls against some random encounter, but in an epic and memorable way. To this effect, I was also considering giving all my players an additional Feat at first lvl, Toughness. This, I hope, will help mitigate some lucky rolls and while allowing players to get the most out of near death situations, and not a bunch of player deaths in the first few games, or over the course of the entire campaign.

Question being, do you believe this is too much? Is it a good idea, a bad idea?

My last two points are not really related at all, just wanted to try and wrap this up beyond the truly big wall of text that I COULD make it, and it is already sizing up to be >.< Hero points, and starting gold. I've never really looked in great detail on hero points, and as such have never really though of using them. I've heard other GMs using it, and some to great effect, some wishing they had not added them to the game. Thoughts? For starting gold, I'm not sure how I should handle it. I believe that I've come to two possible ideas. Have each player start with a set amount of gold, IE 150 ala Pathfinder Society, or take the average gold for their class on page 140 of the core. This is probably a very small detail that will not come to great issue at all in the future, as money begins to become less of an issue, but I was hoping to get a little bit of input none the less to try and help...

Anyway, to all of you that will take the time to read and give your input, I thank you greatly ahead of time now, and will thank you again as I look upon your responses :)

To all who want the bullets, here they are XD

TL:DR

Classes, is wizard and sorcerer ineffective in pathfinder? are they a waste of space in a party, or do they have the ability to contribute as much or more as other classes?

Should I be less of a stickler, and allow more classes? IE, is only allowing a Fighter, Rogue, Cleric and arcane spellcaster too strict? Wanted to have a much more traditional party for my first true campaign, but would this possibly be to much?

Is 15 point buy good for this particular AP? Should I maybe consider bumping it up to 20 points for 4 players?

2 character traits from the players guide for RotRL and the traits list on the paizo site. Do these truly help for character creation and depth, or are they just statistics that end up adding more clutter?

Thinking on giving players a specific feat for free at 1st lvl, toughness. Good idea, bad idea? Wish for players to have enough survivability to get some good mileage out of the campaign

HP, hate rolling for it. Should I go max-2, (max/2)+1 ala pathfinder society, or some other possible way to generate? What has been your experiences

Hero points, yes or no? Worth having for those more difficult encounter, or can it over trivialize some potentially more stressful or epic encounters?

Starting gold. How do you normally handle it? Should I go with average gold amounts from the core, default everyone to 150 as per pathfinder society, or try to come up with another way? Or would this potentially be one of the best places to actually let them roll for it?

Again, thank you for your time and help =) I greatly appreciate it, as will my players!


Sorceror and Wizard remain immensely powerful particularly at the high levels but even at the low levels sleep or color spray can defeat entire groups of Goblins.
This is a truly excellent adventure for Wizards. I woudl consider it suicidal to go into the final battle with out a full Arcane caster and preferably 2 full Arcane/Divine casters as with decent tactics Karzoug will be a killing machine.
I think allowing only Fighter, rogue , cleric and Arcane caster is silly but if it suits you AND your players thats fine. My group had no cleric instead having Paladin, Wizard, Rogue/Wizard, Slayer and Synthesist summoner. The only thing I regret is the sysnthesist summoner. IMO Rogues are largely useless but if someone enjoys playing one go for it.
15 pt is the recommended point buy, I went with more but have also spent a lot of time upgrading encounters. I like 20 pt buy as 15 pt feels restrictive to me
Traits are interesting and useful at low levels, some remain relavant all the way through I always use them.
Giving them Toughness won't unbalance things but won't keep them alive much either it will help the arcane casters.
Hp I go for max at first level then slightly over average every level after that, rolling can end up leaving someone crippled
Hero points I have never used, but if you want to keep people alive it could help a lot.
I give maximum gold, anything else increases the relative power of Wizards/Sorcerors who need no gear vs Fighters/Paladins etc who need good weapons and armour.

There are some encounters which many People seem to consider very dangerous , I have not particularly noticed this but others may


I agree with a lot of what's said above, and I hope this won't be too repetitive:

-This adventure is awesome for Wizards. None of my players bit on the opportunity to play a Wizard and are doing fine, but they would be so much better off with a Wizard or a Sorcerer.
-I agree that it has to work for both you and your players. The game is collaborative. My recommendation is to sit down with your players and to explain why the things are important to you are important to you, and to listen to them. If you limit them, and they don't get it, they may grow to resent you. That's not good for a game. If you get their buy in, then you can get a lot more trust - which breeds role playing, risk taking, and all around good times for everyone.
-I went 20 point buy. It's less important for the class options you presented, but I just find 15 point buy really limiting, and there are some options (bard, monk, etc.) that just can't be done to the level that I and my players enjoy.
-My players like rolling hit points. It made it dicey for early levels as our ranger rolled minimum, but we're going into the third book and they're all still alive without me pulling punches. Smart play can do a lot, but again: I'd talk with them. I'd say high average (6 on d10; 5 on d8; 4 on d6) would work plenty good. I'm hesitant to tweak rules like give bonus feats, etc. as I trust a lot into playtesters to have a good sense of balance.
-We use hero points. I didn't give them out to start, but handed them out after the first session. My players really enjoy them. We have a printed set of rules and it allows them to be brave, and to do heroic stuff which is why we set down to game in the first place.
-I've offered average starting gold, or people can roll it. Most have rolled it and been okay with the results. I also handed out prizes (masterwork backpack, throwing axes, a packmule, a coil of silk rope, etc.) for prizes for the various games. That did a lot to make sure they were prepared.

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I'd like to meet your player who states that wizards and sorcerers are useless in Pathfinder, and introduce them to every thread on these boards that state how over-the-top powerful full progression arcane casters are. Seriously, casters that have the right spells change an impossible fight into a winnable fight, and a winnable fight into a cakewalk. The problem, of course, is making sure you have the right spells. That's what makes them the most difficult class to play "correctly." In short, they contribute as much, if not moreso, than any other class throughout the life of a game.

I'd allow more classes than those four. I'd open up the entire core 11, but tell your party to make sure they've got the four pillars covered - beatstick, divine caster, arcane caster, and skill monkey. As long as you've got those pillars covered, your players should be able to take care of everything.

I prefer 20 point buy in general. 15 feels too restrictive, and with four players, I'd definitely look at that.

Traits are awesome. They're mechanical bits that the PCs gain for tailoring their characters to the AP. Not only would I suggest strongly that one of the traits should be a Background trait, I'd suggest that they can take a Drawback to gain an additional trait. I wish I'd known about those when I started my game - I definitely would have used those!

A free Toughness increase might not be a bad idea, and if you're worried about accidentally killing PCs, then this might be a good idea if you're not going to use Hero Points.

I'm with you - rolling for HP and getting a 2 on a d12 is never fun. I've used LG/PFS rules for years, and most players that play in my games agree - a guaranteed dX/2+1 is better than a chance for a high number, while risking a low one. There's no functional difference from d6/2+1 and (max (d6)-2), but in all other cases, (max (dX)-2) is better. Again, if you're not going to use Hero Points, this might be a good idea to examine for survivability.

I like Hero Points, and I think they're damn useful during those awkward low levels. My party banked them up and held onto them until they made it to Nualia - they had to blow most of them in order to beat her. They really haven't needed to use them since, and I will probably quietly remove them from the game once they get to Book 3, since they'll be able to cast raise dead by then. I ended up making a cheat sheet that let the PCs know what they could use Hero Points on, and gave them some poker chips to physically represent the Points. They add a few more rules, but nothing especially difficult to remember.

I wanted to use average gold for the class, but none of players actually noticed that, and ended up using PFS standards to buy equipment. I ended up handwaving it. In the end, it won't matter a great deal. I'd avoid rolling for gold here - a fighter is determined by his gear, and a terrible roll there will mean they're underpowered for a good portion of their first level.


Hey! I'm currently running ROTRL for a new group of players. We just wrapped up the third book this past weekend.

On the card game - We also played some of the card game prior to the AP. The card game ultimately doesn't spoil much, especially if you don't read the flavor text! However, some of the more dramatic monsters that show up can be kind of spoilerish so we actually are playing the card game concurrently with the AP. It helps refresh the players on plot points as we do this.

There are a lot of NPCs that a random fifth player can work with in the AP - Shalelu, Ameiko, or someone new of your own creation all work well.

On wizard and sorcerer: Wizard and sorcerer aren't wastes of space, that is just silly! They're extremely powerful. They offer a lot of utility, but they can be exhausting to play - keeping up with a big spell book might not be what your players enjoy doing. Your players will be able to get by without an arcane caster but you should have at least one player capable of using magical devices or else they may have issues getting out of the big dungeon in the fifth book - read ahead to the end of that chapter for info on that. Of course you can always change that for your own group ;) My group does not have any arcane casters and are doing just fine BUT for later fights you may need to alter stuff....but by the time you get to the final fights you will have an idea of what your group can handle. I do concur that this is a FUN AP for a wizard or sorcercer. You get to learn a lot about old Thassilonian magics so a scholarly wizard type will feel natural and would be fun to roleplay.

On allowing other classes: I believe that RoTR's old pre-gen pcs were cleric, rogue, fighter, sorcercer, so forcing your players into those roles will ensure they have the tools needed to deal with everything the AP throws at you. As a new GM it would also be easier to keep track of what your group can and cannot do - advanced classes are advanced for a reason. I think this would be good as long as your players are still happy and having fun. Don't force them to play with classes they don't consider fun!

On 15 point buy: We use 20 point buy, but again, news players. 20 point buy did not make the game too easy for us, but you know your player's skill level.

On character traits: The point of the RotRL character traits is to help the players tie their characters to the campaign setting. So if your players just used them to pad some saves or something and didn't actually work the flavor of them into their character then yeah, just more clutter. However, if your players used them to ALSO enhance their back stories they will find that they enjoy the story more, and as a GM, you will be able to customize the AP to the characters. Why not have a rogue be a member of a local crime family? A wizard, an aspiring scholar of Thassilonian magic? A ranger who hates giants with an unholy passion? These are good characters for this AP and won't feel forced. You REALLY want your characters to like Sandpoint, for instance. If they are already natives, then it is made easy for you! Otherwise, you will need to get your players to care about this place.

On lucky rolls and Hero Points and worrying about difficulty: If you're REALLY worried about characters dying to lucky rolls, consider the Hero Points system, which awards 1 point per level per character and can be used to spend 2 points for a resurrection, 1 point to reroll a dice, and other effects. It helps mitigate the randomness somewhat. My group is using Hero Points to good effect but they are also new and are learning how to strategize - a more experienced group may end up trivializing encounters using them. It will ultimately be up to you as GM to judge exactly how difficult the game should be for your players... some players may not like dying at all and others like the suspense.

Starting gold/HP rolls: We rolled for this, and also for HP and are not having issues. We have had a few rolls for HP at 2 or 1, also. This AP is a little dry in terms of WBL - if your players do not search every corner and cranny they can end up behind. This isn't really a big deal for us but if your players feel entitled to staying at WBL they could get upset. Not being at WBL hasn't hurt the power level of our group.

Liberty's Edge

Thank you all for giving me some time from your day and posting!! I do greatly appreciate it.

So far, I'll consider introducing the hero points a little later into the story. Still within the first chapter most likely, but first see if the players really even need them. As far as my group goes, most of us have been roleplaying in one game or another for the better part of the last decade, some of us for longer than that. Mostly what we've played is Vampire the Masquerade, with a dash of pathfinder/d&d every now and then. Sadly, especially over the past few years, no one has been able to really keep a game going for more than a few sessions. Not necessarily that the players don't want to play, as most are upset that the game goes down, but the DM/ST themselves lose interest with the game and stop running.

Sadly, I have not been able to get a game going for a long time. I've ran a few one shots, demos, ect. My greatest sin I'd think, is my love of learning new systems. I'll get hooked on one, get most of the players interested in it, then never get the story to a point where I feel comfortable running it... :(

NOW, I will start to think about letting some of the players pick their classes rather than forcing them... I do want to stick to a much more classical game, so I hope my players will be fine with sticking to this, but especially if I do manage to get this game going for the long haul, would want everyone to be making and playing something they really enjoy...

I'll talk with the players about starting gold, see what we get from there :)

As for the player that thinks wizards and sorcerers are worthless, yeah, I tried to talk to them, but I have a really bad habit of being mousy and passive, so in the end, while I knew I could have argued more on the subject, I ended up just kind of sitting out. Especially since another one of my players jumped in and started agreeing :(
EDIT: oh yes, I forgot to mention. They did not believe the class was COMPLETELY useless, just a waste of space in a party. They believed it was TOTALLY viable to just take the leadership feat, have a wizard companion, and have THEM sit their asses down all day making magical items for the party. Otherwise, you'd have the player wasting their time doing so and being a waste of space >.<

Also, I noted that Mr JohnHawkins stated that you believed the rogue class to be worthless. Is that in general, or specific to the AP itself? I have never really wanted to play a rogue, or at least get a decent enough character concept to try and make and play one for a game. Are they really that under powered for pathfinder or something? The particular player who will be playing them is a long time lover of rogues... She hasn't really had a chance to play D&D or pathfinder or many games really for the past few years, as she has not been handily invited to many of the games :( Gave her first choice on what to play, and shes really excited for it...


There are a lot of traps/locked doors in this AP so having a person capable of disable device is important. Otherwise you may have a lot of characters dying by falling into spiked pits or the like. I would encourage your player to play the rogue since she enjoys it. Rogues are not so underpowered that she will feel like she contributes nothing (assuming she isn't the sole rogue in a team of 3 other hardcore power players or something!) Rogues don't scale so well at high levels and this AP spends a good amount of time at high levels - this is the main problem of rogues.

I'd warn the player of this and tell her that towards the end her character's skills will be less important in combat and more important as someone who picks locks and disables traps and scouts around corners. Her role will still be important but she won't be putting out the most damage per round in fights. If that is okay with her, then encourage her! And also, the GM has the power to add encounters to allow player's skills to shine. Tweak dungeons so that each player has something to contribute and no one will feel worthless.

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I still can't get over that - maybe they'll change their tune once they get into higher level play, which is when the full progression caster starts getting incredibly powerful. If there's not an arcane caster in your group, who's getting you the haste spells? Who's dropping a web on a section of baddies to split them up? Who's countering the invisible creatures? They're being incredibly short sighted, but there's probably no real way to convince them of this, short of showing them in-game what a prepared caster can do.


Saying a Rogue is worthless is probably stronger than I meant. I did not find the rogues ability to find traps necessary , it was used a couple of times but was not vital.
The problem I have is that they seem to end up fairly weak in combat without a lot of good tactics. The slayer (Rogue/Ranger hybrid) in my group was definitely the least effective in combat until his death by prismatic spray. The Rogue/Wizard/Arcane trickster vanished but before his disappearance he was functioning much more as a Wizard than as a rogue and proving quite effective.
However with proper flanking tactics they can probably be useful as long as the player enjoys playing them. I believe the consensus is that Rogue is actually a weak class unlike Wizard/Sorceror.


Unable to comprehend the assertion that arcane casters are useless. Though after the OP's post clarifying the group's background, I can only conclude they don't really have idea how a wizard actually works.

There's no class that can't be used successfully in RotRL. I would suggest that any group that doesn't have both a divine and arcane caster is going to find it very tough going once you get to Book 3 and really, really difficult in Books 5&6. Keep in mind arcane casters are important from a skill perspective since they are most likely to have the skills to figure out the magical structures and backgrounds that make up the story (skills like Knowledge Arcana and Linguistics.) The AP is about Runelords, you know - some of the most powerful wizards Golarion has ever seen. Perhaps having a wizard along might be a good idea...

If your players are feeling constricted in class choice, perhaps you could open it up to role - 1 warrior, 1 divine, 1 skill, 1 arcane and let them choose classes in both core and the Advanced Player's Guide.

My group rolled ability scores but I/we let them generate a couple different sets so while I haven't done the analysis, I bet the outcome is similar to a 20 point buy. The extra 5 points ends up meaning another +2 in bonuses. Not trivial but not overwhelming either. Honestly, good hit points are probably worth more. Having the players like their characters is worth even more.

My group rolls HP - we're kind of dinosaurs (or in a positive marketing term "Old School") I implemented Hero Points and let the players use the Hero Points to re-roll HP (which is NOT RAW.) So far I have not found Hero Points to be at all encounter breaking, indeed the group has used them to stay alive or in other interesting ways. Session before last, the cleric used a hero point to recall a remove disease to use on a farmer they encountered who was gravely ill. I would advocate Hero Points over giving them toughness for free at 1st level - if you're looking for increased tolerance for error/fatality and to encourage role-playing, hero points are way more effective and flexible.

Again, we rolled starting gold too. (We've always done it that way! It's a tradition!) The bard was a little crunched for cash but that got worked into his backstory. It's probably not worth too much thinking - they players are going to earn 1-2 PC's worth of starting gold in the first couple encounters, so any deficiency is likely to be quickly forgotten.


Regarding hit points, here's how I've done it for a long time now.

Max hit points at 1st level, as usual.

Afterwards, they roll dice, but any result of 1/3rd the maximum or less gets rerolled. For the various dice, you'd reroll on these values:

  • d4 = 1
  • d6 = 1-2
  • d8 = 1-2
  • d10 = 1-3
  • d12 = 1-4

It's still possible for someone to get below-average results, but not so far below that they're crippled by it.

I also use a combat-managing program (specifically, DM's Familiar) that can be set to automatically roll hit points for all creatures the moment they're added to a fight. This means that each critter has its own hit-point value, so you might get the occasional weakling or tough guy.


jybil178 wrote:
Sadly, especially over the past few years, no one has been able to really keep a game going for more than a few sessions. Not necessarily that the players don't want to play, as most are upset that the game goes down, but the DM/ST themselves lose interest with the game and stop running.

This is why your players think Wizards and Sorcerers are a waste of space. They haven't had a chance to play with them as they come into their own.

I have two comments:

First, what do you mean by "a classic game?" I don't know of anyone who actually played in a party of just Cleric, Fighter, Magic User, Thief. Heck, in my games 20 years ago all those roles were commonly filled by one person with two characters. What do you want to get out of this group composition? And do you mean anything more than just those 4 classes when you say "a classic game?" My memories of "a classic game" revolved around figuring out how to make due with what we had more than ensuring we had the correct party composition. (I'll also note that survival was NOT one of the common features of games back in the day. Things like Green Slimes that drop on you when you walk through a doorway, without any actual method of finding them, in a dungeon meant for level 1 or 2 characters was not exactly uncommon.)

Second: Your game is a lot more likely to be successful if you allow and enable your players to play what they want. If they think an arcane caster is a waste of space in a party, that's fine. If they have a chance of heart after an invisible, flying enemy drops Cloudkill on them and seals off the escape rout with a Wall of Stone, let them reroll. Your players will have more fun when they're playing characters they want to play. You'll have more fun when your players are having fun, and your game is much more likely to succeed when everyone is enjoying themselves.

As for your initial questions:
-If a player knows what they're doing, Wizards and Sorcerers are game changers from level 1. They don't have enough spells to reshape the fight every time, but a well placed Grease, Silent Image, Color Spray, etc wins fights and saves lives. The party might have 8 encounters with Goblin Warriors in a day, but if the only "real" spell the Wizard cast was Grease on the Bugbear's masterwork Horsechopper, making him drop it and fall back to his backup Dogslicer, the Wizard still played a key role because he trivialized the only non-trivial encounter of the day.

-Let your players play what they want. If you want to limit it to the core classes for simplicity's sake, that's fine. But limiting it to just 4 classes is straitjacketing your players. (And the classes don't do the same things they did classically. More often than not in 1st Edition, the Fighter was the party leader and face character. That's really, really hard to do now.)

-15 point buy works fine. It's limiting for non-casters and really limiting for some classes, mostly martials and hybrid types. But it works unless you want to play a monk. Whether it's good enough for the AP depends on your players' skill levels. Note that, until you hit Thistletop, most of the combats are intentionally very easy. But once you get into Thistletop they ratchet up very significantly. Don't judge your PCs abilities by the first couple encounters and think they're OP, give it a while.

-Whether traits turn into backstory or mechanics depends on the player creating the character, and to some extent what kind of character they're building. Frankly, for some players everything is going to add to back story while for others their characters will never be more than a bundle of stats. For most players, it's somewhere in between.

-I don't think Toughness at first level is a bad idea. It gives them better survivability, and more so at lower levels than higher ones.

-PFS rules work pretty well for HP. If you start going with Max-2 or something really high like that, you're going to start looking at very high HP totals by the mid levels, which may make it harder to make the group feel in danger from physical damage in combat. It might also encourage some players to dump Con to sad results.

-I've never used Hero Points, so I don't have an opinion there. The option to reroll on occasion, though, really saves lives from unfortunate events like crits or unlucky save rolls. But you can still end up dead from bad decisions and things that overwhelm you.

-Average, or even above average starting gold works fine. The first half of book 1 is pretty stingy, so it can be hard to upgrade gear. That makes getting good starting gear very important, especially for martials.


Small note: Do not allow the Leadership Feat - or at the very least don't allow Cohorts to participate in combat.

The reason? It overpowers the group. The action economy is tilted in the players' favor, and it fills holes in the group that are otherwise interesting and enjoyable to witness. More importantly, it slows the game down.

I have chosen to discontinue the use of Cohorts and are refunding the Leadership Feat that was taken by two players. The Cohorts are still with the group and will provide roleplaying banter and other benefits (healing by the Paladin cohort), but will "guard the rear" and not be a time sink. Nor will I have to massively rewrite encounters so that it's still a challenge. (Well, I have to rewrite anyway because of five players and high rolled stats, but that's easily done by adding +3 to every stat of the monsters they face, and adding one or two extra critters rather than doubling the number of foes they face.)

-------

If your players don't want to play an arcane caster or a cleric, then let them stick with the classes you have available. Bards can do healing, after all. So can Paladins. If no one goes with a healer, then once they start getting hurt in combat, they'll soon realize someone has to fill that roll, even if it's a thief with Use Magic Device and a Wand of Cure Light Wounds.


Overall your players should play what they think will be fun. However there are certain jobs that need to be done and you may have to compensate for that.

Re: Point buy - the AP is meant for a 15-point buy but giving your players 20 points means that if they make "mistakes" in character design then it won't hurt them as much. If you end up with more than 4 players then maybe keep them at 15 points.

Re: Traits: definitely use these. They help your players think about what kind of background their characters have. Make sure you download the anniversary edition player's guide which has campaign-specific traits.

Re: Hit points: at the start of the campaign I gave my players the choice to use the PFS hit point progression, as long as all the characters were doing it. They decided to go with it.

Re: Rogues, rogues are considered pretty weak overall combat-wise and their skills don't seem to make up for it. However, the role of finding traps can be filled by basically anyone with a high perception skill and disable device. So if nobody is playing a rogue you need to encourage someone to take these skills, preferably a ranger, bard, or inquisitor who has 6+INT skill ranks. If someone does want to play a rogue, make sure they look at the various archetypes for ideas.

If you end up with four characters that all get 2+INT skill ranks then you should probably hand out some extra skill points.

Re: Wizards / Sorcerers, the main issue is the system mastery needed to make a good one of these. I would encourage a new player to play a sorcerer because there is less looking up spells required. You may need to coach a player who is new to playing a caster. Use the guides. At early levels the wizard or sorcerer has to hold back with his main spells until they will be decisive. But you can do a lot with cantrips like daze, ghost sound, message, and others. When in doubt your wizard should shoot his crossbow or throw an acid splash. You may want to let the party find a partly charged wand of magic missile (I gave a wand of ear-piercing scream instead) early on to help the wizard out.

I would be inclined to take a player who is not resistant to playing the wizard/sorcerer aside and offer to coach him in building/playing a sorcerer. Use the "The Inner Power" guide - I found this very helpful when designing my sorcerer character.

Re: healing - Often nobody wants to play a character whose job is to patch people up. An effective party will need less healing anyway. But if you let the party find a partly charged wand of CLW early on, a paladin, bard, ranger, druid, inquisitor, or oracle can all use the wand. You could encourage a player to play an oracle with the battle mystery, or an inquisitor, if they want to have a divine caster that can smash face. It is definitely good to have someone in the party that can use breath of life scrolls. If nobody has it on their spell list then someone has to build up their UMD. There is also the Infernal Healing spell which I would allow if there is no decent healer in the party (and no paladin!). A wand of that actually heals more than a wand of CLW.

Re: Hero Points - I don`t mind the concept, but I despise the idea that there are game mechanics that allow you to `game` the hero point system. If you want to allow these go ahead but I would disallow things like feats that manipulate the system.

Re: Party Makeup - Full-BAB martials are always important, and a ranger can substitute for a rogue in many situations. But a full arcane caster is definitely important, and a divine caster is nearly as important. If you don`t have all the "roles" you may need to tweak things a bit to suit the party. If you have a 5-player party then you have room for an extra "oddball" character that doesn`t fit the general "roles" you normally have.

Peet


Regarding party make-up and having a full arcane caster:
Let people play what they want to play. As a GM/control freak you have plenty of things to occupy your fetishes, but the only thing in the game the players can actually control is their characters. Its fine to ban whatever you think might be unbalancing to your campaign but once you have, give them free reign. Full casters aren't for everyone and low level full casters are even less popular. Let them have a go, and if someone gets killed down the road, nudge them towards a full caster when the average level is a bit more palatable. In truth we often play without a full caster of either arcane or divine and it works out quite fine - things may be a bit more difficult at times, but facing and overcoming challenges (even if they're of your own making) is a pretty big part of the fun.

Regarding character attributes:
We never, ever roll. We always use the 20 point buy for attributes (including for our RotRL run) and we've never regretted it. The increase in power is very, very minor and might be appreciated a bit to make up for lacking a strong caster.

Regarding hit points:
We always give max hit points for your hit die for level one, and then follow the more traditional max/2+1 thereafter. It helps keep the low level characters alive when they are at their most vulnerable (especially @ 1st level). Following that, I wouldn't hand out Toughness myself.

Regarding character traits:
Four would seem to be too much. We usually allow two standard character traits and then one campaign trait, kind of splitting the difference. They are of mechanical benefit to the character certainly, but can also help in establishing a history and a place in the world they are about to begin. I find it helps more with backstory than role-play moving forward.

Regarding Hero Points:
I like the concept, especially as a means to increase the 'fun factor', but we've never used them as written and have never missed them.

Regarding starting gold:
No need to be a miser. They could start with twice the normal gold and be fine - they still don't have enough to buy magic items, which is what matters, who cares if they have enough to buy a pony and some saddle bags or maybe a masterwork weapon which they'll exchange for something magical soon anyway?


My mind boggles at the idea of full casters being under-powered (though I had a similar conversation with one of my own players who felt wizards needed a boost based on the group's low-level experience in RotRL.)

And wizards definitely get plenty of love in this AP. My wizard player's only real complaint is finding time to scribe all the spells he finds into his spellbook. He was also running out of room in his spellbook, so he recently got himself a Blessed Book crafted. That being said, if no one wants to play a wizard, don't force them. Just to be sure to point out, if they complain about a given scenario being too difficult, where a wizard would have made things easier.

While I like the idea of a "Core Four" game, if the players aren't into it, I wouldn't push it. As others have said, at least open up the 11 classes from the CRB. There's no shame, IMO, of declaring you want to have a game that's "Core Only". I did Core+APG for mine, with the ability to petition for stuff from other books. I've ended up allowing a lot of stuff from other books, but I feel being able to review random feats/spells/whatever from the latest "Splatbook of Awesome" before they're used makes things run smoother.

There's also the case where the AP pretty much doesn't take non-core options into account when setting up the challenges.

As others have said, the AP is designed with 4 players and 15 point buy in mind. The more you deviate from that, the more work you have to do to adapt things. That being said, bumping it up to 20 points, especially with inexperienced players, shouldn't have a dramatic impact.

For hit points, 1/2 die+1 will put them more or less on par with monsters of equal HD. As others have suggested, if you're worried about durability, I would do this with free Toughness OR Max-2, but not both. (Max-2+Toughness+Favored Class Bonus effectively means max per die.)

Character traits: I highly recommend using at least the Campaign Traits from the RotRL AE Player's Guide and the APG (though some of the latter take some post-RotRL events into account and may need the flavor tweaked slightly) to give them each a tie to Sandpoint and/or reason for being there when the campaign begins. After that, 1 or 2 more traits wouldn't be bad. Remember most traits are effectively half-a-feat. So giving 4 would be on par with giving them 2 extra feats (3 if you give them Toughness as well.) The early parts of the Chapter 1 are fairly easy as-is (provided you stick to the written tactics) so you don't need to boost the PCs too much, even if they're beginners.

Hero Points: I've been using them in my current RotRL game and I like them. I originally thought the 3 point limit was a little harsh, but in practice I think it works really well. My PCs have used them to get out of tough scrapes (such as acting out of turn to save the paralyzed fighter who was surrounded by ghouls about to tear his throat out) or to keep themselves in a fight when faced with a save-or-suck spell. Out of my six person party, 3 decided to use Hero Points and 3 decided to take the free "Anti-Hero" feat instead. I don't think anyone has really regretted their choice.

One thing to remember, though, is the rule that says you can't gain hero points for anything you spent hero points to accomplish. I missed that rule initially, and it lead to my group fighting well above their weight class as they used hero points to conquer the really tough fights to promptly be awarded them for their heroic deeds. Once I started enforcing that restriction, things normalized quite a bit and they're much more discerning in when to spend them.

Starting Gold: Knowing that the AP is a little stingy treasure-wise in the 1st chapter, I let everyone start with max GP for their class (and still had someone take the Rich Parents trait) which worked out okay, except where a couple of my players combined it with Craft skills (which I allowed them to make anything they could Take 10 on to make prior to the game started) which meant the fighter and the dwarven cleric had almost 3-times max gold in weapons and armor, and thus ridiculous ACs at first level. Once they hit about 3rd level, though, the rest of the party had caught up.

Liberty's Edge

Thanks again for everyones help, I really don't know if i could have gotten as far along with the material without everyone's input =) Sadly, a little bit of drama might be pushing off the game for a little bit, but hopefully I'll be able to resolve that shortley. I did have a few more issues pop up

Namely, how much of a twink do you allow your characters to make, before saying no? Such as, a person playing a spellcaster (who hates them to begin with, but laughs at playing something they hate, and decided they where fine with it) decides to dump 3 stats about as low as they can go?
Ie, Str 7, dex 16, con 13, int 17, wis 8, cha 7? First, I know this stat build is wrong for a 15 point build, I just haven't had the chance to really go over his character and correct it yet. Second, when I did, I wanted to know whether I should say NO, or what...

Another thing I've noticed, which I've begun note more and more... Are just the bloody prices of items in the core book...

My favorite example is the lantern of revealing, which is specifically listed as an example on pg 550 for a continuous item.

lantern of revealing
30,000 GP

invisibility purge
1 min/lvl

3 spell lvl x 5 CL x 2000
This perfectly leads to the 30,000 it lists, BUT there is something else that needed to be done. the continuous use has a note on it, at the end of the cost, for 2 under the key. the key states,

If a continuous item has an effect based on a spell with a duration measured in rounds, multiply the cost by 4. If the duration of
the spell is 1 minute/level, multiply the cost by 2, and if the duration is 10 minutes/level, multiply the cost by 1.5. If the spell has a
24-hour duration or greater, divide the cost in half.

Invisibility Purge is a 1 min/lvl spell, so it should end up costing 60,000 GP, not 30,000 GP. I've been going at the book all day, and have found so many prices that where off from what I would THINK they should be... Just makes it so confusing, wondering if either I'm doing something wrong, or the book is just way off, even after errata. Note, I mostly ask this, as the player in question may very well be showing an interest in item creation feats, so I wanted a stronger understanding of pricing for item creation... Sadly, I think I've walked away a bit more confused than what I had started...


He's just off by one. If he dropped the Con to 12, it would work. I assume this is pre-racial modifier? (And seeing this build, I'm guessing Elf.)

As for the price, was that the price of the to-build, or the for-sale price?

I will admit I'm tempted to do a "pre-rolled" stat line for players in the future: 16, 14, 13, 12, 11, 9. This would allow a player to have one 18 after racial modifiers. And yes, I know this is a 20-point build, but my players have had difficulties with their rolled stats that are the equivalent of 32 points. I'm not going to kill their stats instantly! They'd never survive! ^^

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Aye, the price for that item was 30,000 GP to buy, 15,000 GP to make, pg 522 of the core.

Hehe, yeah, elf :P he saw trentmonk's guide to being a wizard, which I did show him to try and help him and understand that wizards aren't the bad class that he thinks they are, but didn't assume he would just outright copy paste everything over from it *sigh*

I'll see what to do from here, once it all starts boiling down...


Boy oh Boy, my DM spidey-sense is going off. That ability array could be trouble. While the idea of arcane casters being under-powered is off-base (as observed by many others here) they can definitely have their challenges at 1st level. The balance for arcanes tends to be spread across the duration of a campaign - when they get to 5th-7th level with much greater spell count, perhaps supplemented by magic items (like wands and scrolls) they come into their own. To get there though, you have to want it. Playing a class you don't like especially one with the limited avenues for action of a 1st level wizard seems like a ticket to frustration. And I'd be concerned about those scores even in the hand of an experienced player who wants to be an arcane caster. That character is going to be really hampered in combat (including delivering touch spells) just as challenged in social situations and have Will save penalties (normally a strength for arcanes.) That character is going to cast spells; make items (most likely not until 3rd or 5th level); do knowledge checks and not very much else. This might be a self-fulfilling prophesy - at some point the character will be forced into action outside his limited sweet spots, struggle with it and the player will throw his hands up - "See! I told you wizard's suck."

Regarding the Lantern, my explanation would be - it's not a continuous item but rather a use-activated item. The item description reads "While it is lit, it also reveals all invisible creatures..." (Emphasis mine.) It's a bit semantic, but it's not actually continuous like bracers of armor or a headband of vast intelligence which work all the time - the lantern has to actually be lit and presumably requires oil as well.


Depending on when you're going to start your campaign, you could let him look at the Arcanist from the upcoming Advanced Class Guide. A quick summation is it's a wizard-sorcerer hybrid, able to memorize spells each day but then able to cast like a Sorcerer (thus if he memorized Mage Armor, Magic Missile, and Sleep, he could cast all Sleep or one Mage Armor and several Magic Missiles or whatever). They have other nifty abilities as well.


I typically limit my players to single dump stat and no lower than 8 AFTER racial adjustments. But I just really dislike dump-statting.


jybil178 wrote:


Namely, how much of a twink do you allow your characters to make, before saying no? Such as, a person playing a spellcaster (who hates them to begin with, but laughs at playing something they hate, and decided they where fine with it) decides to dump 3 stats about as low as they can go?
Ie, Str 7, dex 16, con 13, int 17, wis 8, cha 7? First, I know this stat build is wrong for a 15 point build, I just haven't had the chance to really go over his character and correct it yet. Second, when I did, I wanted to know whether I should say NO, or what...

Is this before or after racial adjustment?

Str 7 = -4
Dex 16 = 10
Con 13 = 3
Int 17 = 13
Wis 8 = -2
Cha 7 = -4
===============
Total = 16 points

However, if that Int is 15+2 Racial, your total is (-4+10+3+7-2-4) = 10 point buy.

I don't get too worried about dump stats unless players get really serious about roleplaying to their stats in an annoying way. If he's going to use that 7 Cha and 8 Wis to make his character an annoying jerk, then I'd have problems. If he's just going to play a character who doesn't take the lead all the time and occasionally makes bad decisions, then no problem. (Though he's likely going to run into situations where the low stats kill or disable him. There are shadows, ghosts and probably poisons throughout the AP.)

Even if he's shooting for a 19 on his casting stat at level 1, that's not particularly overpowered. Roughly equal to what you would see with a 20 point buy but with some serious weaknesses added in. Drop Con to 12 and he's golden.

I wouldn't necessarily want to play a PC like that. As was mentioned earlier, his options are mechanically limited to casting spells and making knowledge checks unless he invests in other areas of the game. But he should still be able to contribute if you as the GM don't excessively punish him for having low stats. A 7 Cha is low, but mechanically it's just a -2: If you treat him as a social pariah because of that, you should treat a peasant with 14 Int as a standout genius. Don't give him the same spotlight in social situations as someone with an 18 Cha, but don't exclude or punish him for participating, either. And if he invests the points to make Diplomacy or Bluff useful, that's what you use, not the low initial score.

Quote:


I've been going at the book all day, and have found so many prices that where off from what I would THINK they should be... Just makes it so confusing, wondering if either I'm doing something wrong, or the book is just way off, even after errata.

Item creation rules are more art than science. Don't expect all items to follow the listed rules for creation costs. My suggestion: Don't allow for custom items. Crafting things out of the book is fine, but creating something new like a Ring of Shield is a no-go. That nips the problem of figuring out the correct price for things in the bud.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Adventure Path / Rise of the Runelords / Starting a new RotRL Campaign, hoping for some tips... All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Rise of the Runelords