What is "twinked out" is really highly variable across the player base. Apparently my Oracle casting DC18 level 2 spells at level 7.2 is a twink, at least according to one player.
So that is buying a pre racial stat of 17, putting your racial mod and level 4 boost in your main stat and buying a +2 hat by level 7.
That is a bit in the slow lane in my mind. A core Sorcerer could cast a DC 19 1st level spell at 1st level. An Exploiter wizard can rock a DC 22 Grease spell at 1st level if he really wants to. This is pretty standard on a SAD casting class. So I do really get your point about it being subjective.
|
My take on scenario difficulty is two-fold. Two-fold because I agree with BNW that playing and building are two different aspects.
|
What is "twinked out" is really highly variable across the player base.
Absolutely agreed. But I bet there is actually reasonable agreement amongst most of us that some builds are brokenly powerful.
I think, for example, that most people would agree that the archer that took out Krune in a single round at initiative 30 odd isn't that much fun to adventure with.
|
Regarding difficulty:
Just played "Before the dawn" in Tier 1-2.
There was a guy in the bar (w/ the sanguine pit) that has two attacks with +6 to hit and 1d8+6 damage.
Let's assume he rolls 1s on each, we have 14 points of damage.
How many Level 1 PCs do you know that have more than 14HP?
A fighter could get close to that, a barb might have slightly more.
That's minimum damage and with a +6 he's also very likely to hit ;)
If that guy rolls avg damage, it would be 20points of damage.
So, how many lvl1 chars with 20HP do you know?
Let's look at lvl2 chars:
In PFS, d8 chars are considered frontliners. Lvl2 d8= 13HP. With 14 con and HP bonus for fav class: 19HP.
A d10 class: 16HP. With Con 14: 20. Two more HP: 22.
So, it could actually take one strike.
d12: 19HP. Con 14: 23. Two more HP 25.
So, if the guy rolls avg damage, a Barb would still be standing. Ok, with 5 HP left
And there's also another person in the fight...
I'd really like to understand what the idea behind that encounter was....
|
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm just going to come out and say it:
"Character deaths suck."
This is PFS, not some ongoing campaign with your friends.
In a home game, it's possible to recover. A powerful persona might revive you for a favor to be named later, you might play a relative who sticks with the party just long enough to gather the funds needed to raise your character, or the party might go on a grand quest just to bring you back.
This is not the case in PFS.
If your character dies and you can't come up with the funds at the end of the scenario, that's it. They are gone for good. All the work you put into them, the scenarios that you played with them (that you CANNOT replay), any unique boons you applied to them; they are all gone. You can't get them back.
Imagine winning an auction boon, playing a unique race (like android) to level 3, then dying while short on cash.
So yeah, deaths in PFS have a larger impact than deaths in a home game. And while it's important to get a challenge out of a scenario, the line between threatened and dead is often a thin one.
|
I'd really like to understand what the idea behind that encounter was....
That if you see something that has two attacks coming towards you, the ready action is your friend.
He moves up. You hit him. He makes One attack. Your party members hit him. Then you hit him again.
Don't forget fighting defensively, single attack then move away, so an AoO, and one attack on his turn.
And, honestly, a +6 is only a 50% chance to hit AC 17, which is easily achievable out of the box, Scale Mail, Buckler and Dex 12. Better than that is well within possibility for those martial types, other than, maybe, Barbarians, too.
One scenario before that, and the first level Fighter/Paladin types are sporting ACs of 19 with only a 12 Dex, given a breastplate (+6) and a heavy shield (+2), wooden or steel. Even a Cleric can do that.
Wizard? Sure. Mage Armor (+4), Shield spell (+4), and a Dex of 12 or better, and you are looking at AC 19. And, if they plan on using Ray-type spells, with ranged touch attacks, they probably have a higher Dex than that.
It is why Wights are so scary, though. All they need is one hit. At least for those Tier 1-2 modules they show up in....
|
|
The moment you know he has two attacks is the moment one party member is pretty likely dead dead. Humanoid with 2 attacks in low tier?
The move & ready works once. Your ready. You hit. He hits. Next round: You're pretty much dead dead. The guy has 19 AC, evasion, resist fire 5. 19 HP.
So your BAB 1 + 18 STR char will not even hit 50% of the time.
The 2nd person in the fight will get invisible, cast Summon Monster and heal and buff.
Again, the damage mod alone is enough to kill most lvl1 chars.
Single attack: 1d8+6. 10 Average. That's enough to drop a d8/d10 char with a single blow. The d6 chars should not be in melee range, I guess.
My warpriest had @lvl1 AC 17, 13 HP +6 to hit.
So, he might have survived two hits. Using his normal tactics ( Chaaaarge!) he would have eaten the full attack in round 1. And survived if Avg damage had bean dealt. Unconscious on a good damage roll, and most likely dead if both attacks connect.
|
|
Let's see. To be honest, unless you are built to survive it (Barbarian with high Con), charge is seldom a good idea. Opponents with damaging attacks, you with a penalty to AC. Opponents with reach weapons, you prone on the ground.
D6 should be far away from melee.
D8, unless they are built and fight as a tank, should not be looking at melee, except as backup.
D10 is melee, but they have the feats and abilities to handle melee.
D12 is melee, but, IMO, old-style Barbarians are built as glass cannons. Low AC, never enough hit points, and more-and-more likely, as they level to go from being barely unconscious to dead instantly.
Obviously, tactics are a must for any party. Along with BAB, Str or Dex, you also get things like, say, flanking or Aid Another, which can help reduce that AC 19 "hard to hit" to much easier targets.
Two-handed weapon, Str 18, martial class: +5 to hit, 2d6+6 damage.
-1 for Power Attack, +1 for Furious Focus, +2 for Flanking or Aid Another, +9 to hit, 2d6+9 damage, average 16.
And, of course, never forget tactics. If the GM describes what you are seeing correctly, you are, or should be, attacking the other target, AC 13, hp 22, init penalty, no special defenses until she drinks that potion. And invisibility is no defense against many common first level spells, like Color Spray, Burning Hands, and others. One failed Will save against Color Spray, and one combatant disappears, the other is dead meat.
Also, and this is a serious statement: Tier 1-7 scenarios always had severe issues with scaling. Many of them had serious difficulty issues, usually being way too hard, in at least one sub-tier.
I can think of at least one other 1-7 that has a good chance of at least one PC death in the first round of combat at any of its sub-tiers for the BBEG fight. And, in the 6-7 sub-tier, it could be multiple PCs in that first round. A CL9 empowered fireball? And the party could include PCs as low as 3rd level.... Even if everyone is 7th level, that gives the d6 classes not a lot of room to spare. d6 = 6+6*4 + 14 (Con 14) + 7 (Toughness) + 7 (FCB) = 58 in an extreme case, which is ... unlikely. 9d6 + 4.5d6 = 47 hp before the save, on average, potentially 81 damage if the dice are as hot as the fireball.
|
Some players have a hard time adapting, and although in the right circumstance, they can obliterate encounters, they find anything different to be very difficult. This is especially true if their "great build" has a particularly horrible flaw, that they may not have even noticed before.
I usually build my characters with at least one particularly horrible flaw, partly to excuse some serious powergaming one the one hand, partly because they allow for some pretty hilarious situations at the tables I play at when that flaw is encountered.
I'm just going to come out and say it:
"Character deaths suck."
This is true and it is especially true when it is your character that dies. A good part of the reason to overbuild your characters is simply the survival instinct. Until your character reaches mid to high level it is quite possible that he might be killed due to bad luck that is out of your control both as a character builder or player.
|
Venture-Captain, North Carolina—Asheville
|
Perhaps someone could compile a list of scenarios known for their difficulty as a means of assisting GM's and organizers whose players crave greater challenge?
I know that the review feature on the Paizo site already does this to an extent, but as I recall, most scenarios aren't receiving enough reviews for what I'd call an accurate measure.
|
Venture-Captain, North Carolina—Asheville
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't have a problem with scenarios which have hard modes built into them, so long as that doesn't become the norm. I've already been the guy who put the kibosh on hard mode once, and I offered to leave the table to let the rest of the party do it.
The concern that might arise if hard mode became more prevalent is that 'play-up pressure' becomes 'hard-mode pressure'. Given that the campaign has already done away with optional playing up, I don't know if essentially introducing that feature again is feasible.
Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden
|
Playing up carries the possibility of greater rewards (item access, gold), while hard mode doesn't.
People who play hard mode do it because they want a hard time/bragging rights, not out of greed. I think that takes off some of the unhealthy pressure.
In the scenarios where I've seen it, hard mode was usually pretty simple to run; add a few more of the same monster or add a template here and there. Keeping it simple for the GM is good, that cuts down on having to prepare numerous different versions of the scenario.
|
I'm pretty happy with the difficulty right now. If anything needs adjusted, I think it's altering the tier calculation rules to stop things like a party with no one in high tier being forced to play high tier in seasons 4-.
I'm not opposed to additional scenarios with Hard Mode. I don't know how popular it's been, though. Is it reported as being run Hard Mode? Knowing, when given the option, how many tables choose Hard Mode would help determine whether it's worth the campaign devoting time to including the option more.
|
Venture-Captain, North Carolina—Asheville
|
Playing up carries the possibility of greater rewards (item access, gold), while hard mode doesn't.
People who play hard mode do it because they want a hard time/bragging rights, not out of greed. I think that takes off some of the unhealthy pressure.
In the scenarios where I've seen it, hard mode was usually pretty simple to run; add a few more of the same monster or add a template here and there. Keeping it simple for the GM is good, that cuts down on having to prepare numerous different versions of the scenario.
I play in an area with many people who will want to play hard mode -- every time, no diggity, no doubt. While they don't begrudge me my risk-aversion, I would personally feel like I'm cramping the table's style if the hard-mode question starts coming up more than once a year or so.
Again, I do not have a problem with some hard mode scenarios, provided that addition does not become the standard. It might also be nice if the scenario blurb mentions the presence of hard mode; it gives me the heads-up that I might need to play something else that night.
|
|
My point was simply that if hard mode was more available it would be taken advantage of. Yours was not the only post referencing hard mode. If my post was in specific reply to yours I would have quoted it.
Like other potential scenario development changes (more high level content vs more low level content), I'm guessing having some concrete data on how often Hard Mode is run would be useful to the team. Unfortunately, I don't think it's tracked currently, so I'm not sure how to go about compiling it, other than anecdotally. I've never been part of a hard mode game. I'm not sure if one has ever run in my area. Krune normal mode almost killed half our party (we had a chain of Breath of Lifes going), so I can't imagine what we'd have done against him hard mode. However, the second session of that scenario that ran stomped all over him.
|
Venture-Agent, Massachusetts—Boston Metro
|
Also, and this is a serious statement: Tier 1-7 scenarios always had severe issues with scaling. Many of them had serious difficulty issues, usually being way too hard, in at least one sub-tier.
I can think of at least one other 1-7 that has a good chance of at least one PC death in the first round of combat at any of its sub-tiers for the BBEG fight. And, in the 6-7 sub-tier, it could be multiple PCs in that first round. A CL9 empowered fireball? And the party could include PCs as low as 3rd level.... Even if everyone is 7th level, that gives the d6 classes not a lot...
The one's I've played isn't scaling but just atrocious combat design with little or no tactics available. The Tier 1-7 scenario Im preparing pretty much drops a monster with multi-attacks into chokepoint in multiple places. And this isn't even the first one I can think of. First Steps used similar cheesey design that effectively TPK'd the party I was in because no one at the level 1 could handle a Barbiarn crit.
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
Absolutely agreed. But I bet there is actually reasonable agreement amongst most of us that some builds are brokenly powerful.
I think, for example, that most people would agree that the archer that took out Krune in a single round at initiative 30 odd isn't that much fun to adventure with.
I am not sure that I would agree. Kitan was a single classed level 11 Ranger who killed Krune in a full attack although I think he might have also taken a gunslinger shot first.
Looking at Roll20 he was acting on initiative 29 with a roll of 16. His normal mod was only +9, not that unusual for an archer. He was getting an extra +4 from favoured terrain. He made four attacks, hitting with all of them. That was largely in part due to an extra +6 to hit from favoured enemy human. He was also using a holy bow and crit with his first manyshot attack.
Overall I think it was more a combination of luck and the perfect storm of circumstances where favoured terrain, favoured enemy and equipment choices combined to particular effectiveness.
I would note that your group had far more trouble with the Herald and nearly lost one or two people to what I normally consider the chump encounter with the Theurge.
Wait... Krune counts as human????
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I feel like when I spend all that time prepping a scenario, and then the players just slaughter everything in a single round, I have wasted all my time.
Or something like that. I didn't get a chance to respond at the time, and I don't feel like digging for it.
I can understand this to some extent, it is annoying to put a lot of work into something, and then have no one notice it. But maybe the answer is to look into prepping more broadly. I preprint my maps, make (or download) progress tracking sheets, make detailed charts of all the skill checks in the scenario and their effects on future rooms, come up with voices and attitudes for various NPCs, compile and compress the NPC stat blocks onto single sheets (so I don't have to try to follow a stat block off the end of a page, past a page of maps, and onto anotrher page to find out what spells they have.) There are scenarios where I look at the combats, and say "you know what, these chumps aren't going to live long enough to use their powers" and so I cut that part of the prep out. There are other scenarios where I look at the map and I say "its a 100 by 100 room with broken walls around that, why would I print that?"
Maybe the answer is to spend less time prepping the combat unless the combat has some interesting feature, and more on the rest of the scenario. I know the rest of the scenario is what I am there for when I come to play, and it is very frustrating when we finish a combat and the GM just tells us "okay, you rescue the hostages, they tell you where to go and you leave."
|
|
Absolutely agreed. But I bet there is actually reasonable agreement amongst most of us that some builds are brokenly powerful.
I think, for example, that most people would agree that the archer that took out Krune in a single round at initiative 30 odd isn't that much fun to adventure with.
We had something like this happen when I played it & it did not live up to the hype others had warned me of.
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We had something like this happen when I played it & it did not live up to the hype others had warned me of. ** spoiler omitted **Absolutely agreed. But I bet there is actually reasonable agreement amongst most of us that some builds are brokenly powerful.
I think, for example, that most people would agree that the archer that took out Krune in a single round at initiative 30 odd isn't that much fun to adventure with.
I suspect Thrune is part of the reason we *don't* see more high level full casters in scenarios. They can lay down so many effects on the battle field so quickly that it becomes all but impossible for the GM to keep track of all the moving pieces.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I suspect Thrune is part of the reason we *don't* see more high level full casters in scenarios. They can lay down so many effects on the battle field so quickly that it becomes all but impossible for the GM to keep track of all the moving pieces.
TANGENT: I suspect it has to do with word count. A high level wizard has a spellbook with enough words to make a full stat block of a mid-level pali or barbarian. But I agree the number of options a wizard might have is complicated compared to a fighter (whose extensive feats will mostly be reflected in their combat stats). [/tangent]
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have only played Traitors Lodge and Wounded Wisp, and only GMed Traitors Lodge.
Traitors lodge was brutal on a lot of different levels. I had a lot of fun with it. Especially since I built custom minis for the three unique creatures in it. I got a lot of WTF moments out of the players.
Wounded wisp was honestly more fun than hard in that we were all experienced players, playing our characters as very *inexperienced* pathfinders.
Contributor—Canadian Maplecakes
|
What qualifies as challenging RP?
I think Library of the Lion, The Disappeared, *chuckle* The Blakros Matrimony, are all examples of scenarios that begin to explore a more social-driven experience. It's an avenue that I think could use more exploration, giving characters a different type of challenge, beyond just HP damage. That being said, it needs to avoid the "If you don't have X/Y/Z skill, YOU LOSE!"
I have only played Traitors Lodge and Wounded Wisp, and only GMed Traitors Lodge.
Traitors lodge was brutal on a lot of different levels. I had a lot of fun with it. Especially since I built custom minis for the three unique creatures in it. I got a lot of WTF moments out of the players.
Wounded wisp was honestly more fun than hard in that we were all experienced players, playing our characters as very *inexperienced* pathfinders.
Not QUITE what I was expecting... I admit, I'm always learning in terms of tuning scenarios. Having awesome developers really helps with this.
I think the key to keeping things challenging while not 'ZOMG BRUTAL' is to use the unexpected. Creating unique creatures, or different NPC combinations allows for encounters to become based on the characters, rather than player metagaming. I admit, I somewhat cringe when a player reverse engineers an NPC or monster based on spell DCs and such.
|
|
What qualifies as challenging RP?I think Library of the Lion, The Disappeared, *chuckle* The Blakros Matrimony, are all examples of scenarios that begin to explore a more social-driven experience. It's an avenue that I think could use more exploration, giving characters a different type of challenge, beyond just HP damage. That being said, it needs to avoid the "If you don't have X/Y/Z skill, YOU LOSE!"
AH , ok, challenging skills.
Also, way to get a character killed because I didn't have profession Haberdasher. Thanks a lot.. :)
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
Our region is *very* diplomacy and skill focused. We very rarely have tables that don't have most of the skills covered to some degree. locks we are not so good on. We usually have someone who can detect most traps, but not necessarily someone who can disarm them.
Oh god, the maze at the end... I took the high level table, even just ignoring everything more than 20 feet from the players, just keeping track of that many walls and what was real and what was not was mind bending. I wish I had had time to build the maze first in a map software, so I could see who could see what. I am trying to remember if it was the table I played at or the Table I GMed, but one of the tables just cast haste and fled. Even with the ability to go through walls, the minotaur couldn't keep up.
The DCs on everything non combat were high enough that they missed some stuff, but got the most important stuff. (For example, the corpse blew up because the one person who could make the DCs to recognize it was staying out of sight around the wall because he was squishy and they were afraid it was going to attack...)
The "Venture Captain" was great. Every table has had a different take on how to treat her, and it is interesting to see who lets her trail along behind them, and who wants to be behind her because they are expecting to get stabbed in the back.
I am GMing this one at an upcoming con, but I haven't had time to read it yet. (I am still wraping my head around 7-03.)
The combats in this one were actually fairly easy. The table was all experienced gamers, and some of our builds were very optimized with regard to combat. My eidolon with grab and reach and two attacks simply slaughtered the small creatures in the basement. The dark Archive players took time out from the mission to take one of the creatures (Unconsious but alive) to Zarta as a present. We thought she might like it. Just in case she didn't like it, we left it tied up on her door step with a note, knocked, and fled. Then my eidolon got enlarged for the fight at the end and gave a huge amount of area control grabs. (Ranged reach + grab means that the enemy often winds up in the middle of 2-3 fighters.)
The only really hard part was the tomb, and that came down a certain amount to just plain confusion for the players on what was going on. I don't remember a lot about the house, except that it drew on a lot of tropes, and I pretty much knew what to expect in a bunch of ways before we went in. But it was fun to play my character as not genre savvy and surprised.
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
As far as challenging RP, the most challenging I have seen is the end of 7-02.
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Thurston's scenarios have been fairly interesting so far. His name on the label is a reason for me to give it a try.
Maybe this is a useful criterium? In a serious encounter, I want the players to look at the challenge, and then they want to revise their standard tactics.
Because "more of the usual" isn't the best solution. Time to think about how you can use what you have in a different way.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
"Hard Mode" also can turn away newcomers.Huh? Hard mode is optional -- every hard mode comes with mandatory text that states that if even a single player says no, then the game runs as normal. It's impossible for it to turn away newcomers unless the GM and players all collude to pressure a newbie into doing it, which is explicitly not OK by the hard mode rules we've already got in play.
There is a certain amount of inherent peer pressure if you are the only person at the table who doesn't want to play hard mode. It doesn't have to be "collusion"--it's just how things are.
|
Venture-Agent, Massachusetts—Boston Metro
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What qualifies as challenging RP?I think Library of the Lion, The Disappeared, *chuckle* The Blakros Matrimony, are all examples of scenarios that begin to explore a more social-driven experience. It's an avenue that I think could use more exploration, giving characters a different type of challenge, beyond just HP damage. That being said, it needs to avoid the "If you don't have X/Y/Z skill, YOU LOSE!"
School of Spirits is pretty cool in that regard.
|
|
"Hard Mode" also can turn away newcomers.Huh? Hard mode is optional -- every hard mode comes with mandatory text that states that if even a single player says no, then the game runs as normal. It's impossible for it to turn away newcomers unless the GM and players all collude to pressure a newbie into doing it, which is explicitly not OK by the hard mode rules we've already got in play.There is a certain amount of inherent peer pressure if you are the only person at the table who doesn't want to play hard mode. It doesn't have to be "collusion"--it's just how things are.
Then that's when your GM and/or VO need to step in. Bullying people into playing hard mode is something I simply don't stand for and I would expect the same of any of my GMs.