As nothing is happening here, I did a little math to see how a 3d6 compares to 1d20 when it comes to attacking.
Assuming Little Jimmy is annoyed with his sister and wants to punch her.
Jimmy has +0 on attack, because he is a commoner without levels and not very strong. His sister Jenny is a little bit agile and has an AC of 11.
No matter which system they take, Jimmy would have a 50/50 chance to hit his sister.
While they are quabbling, a goblin comes along. A mean little bugger, but the kids might have a chance.
They would need a rolled 16 to hit the goblin with it's AC16.
That is a 25% chance with 1d20
and a 4.63% chance with 3d6 or for the fight the chance of a snowflake in hell.
Luckily player characters have a few more HP at the level we have, but still, an enemy with a bit better armor (Enemy AC -10 -PC_AtkBonus >= 5) would drag out a fight forever, as the PC would hit once in 10 rounds or less.
What's your experience with that so far?
@DM ShadowBloodmoon Or do you adjust for that?
I’ve done a ton of exploring the math of 3.x, upon which pf1 is based. One thing to keep in mind that most players miss is that a level 1 character is an adult that has completed their apprenticeship, or roughly that equivalent. Further, level 5 is about the maximum of real world human ability. The best olympic athletes might be level 5, and the best of elite soldiers are level 5.
Anything beyond level 5 is basically supernatural. That javelin thrower that smashed the world record multiple times with throws so far they had to increase the weight of javelins to shorten their range, that guy might have been a level 6, maybe.
Once you realize that, then it’s much easier to see how 90% of the population is merely level 1.
Once you realize that, you can start to see how 3d6 models real world much better. And you can also see how PF1 basically gave everyone a boost in power.
That goblin has hardened leather armor, basically stiff plates of leather, and a shield, and is an adult with plenty of practice and experience in combat, plus with a +2 dex mod is really talented in the agility department (around 1 in 6 humans would be equally dextrous). Just from the description I gave, do you really think a non-combatant would see that goblin as anything but terrifying? A noncombatant would have very little chance of defeating such a goblin, and the mechanics reflect that quite well, especially with 3d6.
That said, on 3d6, a 16+ on the dice is supposed to be a critical hit.
Thus when you consider how knights in fullplate are described as the tanks if the medieval era, and were more often battered to death ir defeated by immobilization and sticking a special dagger through the suit cracks rather than hitting with a sword, now you begin to see why and just how accurate it is to call them tanks of medieval times.
As you can tell, this is a favorite topic of mine. :)
Yes, and you named the real problem with that: It's realistic! Who wants that in their fantasy games? In reality roman solders had an advantage in battle, as they had kind of spikes on their sandals that prevented them from slipping and falling when in a long battle the ground got slippery from blood.
But in a Pen and Paper RPG - and especially one with play by post - I don't want battles that long. Before puddles of blood accrue to slip on want that battle decided!
With the 3d6 it looks like you have sure hits and short work with all the minions as your chance to hit them is usually drastically increased compared with d20. And I like that part of it. But that boss fight, that is meant to be challenging with d20 might become impossible to do for all practical purposes if the BBEG keeps his stats unchanged.
I'm with Jominda on this. The effect is to make the slope between things you can beat, and things you can't beat much steeper.
If either a PC or a monster needs to roll a 15+ to hit, on 3d6 that's 9.26% of the time; on 20, that's 30% of the time. Mooks tend to be low threat to hit you, and easily hittable; BBEG though... Often a BBEG is set up to need a 15+ to hit, which is still workable if he's outnumbered by the the party (in D20): he's tell getting hit by one player per round...in 3d6 that's one hit every 3 rounds.
Tactically, I should probably have dropped all Khamul's actions into shooting Ironbriar while he was vulnerable (flat footed) ... but the shard gel had style (or would have if I hadn't rolled a 3).
As most people know in my games, I prefer the gritty realism of how adventuring would be if it were, well, real. As far as the swinginess of it, you are right. Mooks will drop quickly, as in most cinematic films and stories. Bad boss guys will be tough as hell unless you have some way to get around their higher numbers, get in a sneak shot (like Khamul) or some other way of mitigating their defenses. If you watch enough movies and fantasy films, it usually takes more than one encounter to deal with the BBEG once and for all.
In play, even with the 3d6, it has shown to be about the same as far as time goes, except with the bosses. If I had the time, I could go through the entire history of the game to see for sure the number of rounds each fight was, but to me, the time difference was not as profound. (Real time posting not withstanding).
That said, I don’t always play the NPCs straight from the stats. They form a baseline and I go from there, and I try not to make every fight a ‘to the death’ thing. Either way, that is one reason I wanted to make clear when I started this game was that I was using the 3d6 model. Plus, you have the added bonus (?) of rolling for usage rather than having to keep track of ammo and such which, on average, gives you more uses, if you look at it mathematically.
Bottom line, this was a test run anyway, as I had never used the 3d6 version before and thanks to few long term players (Khamul and Zarque), it has continued into where it is now and I am able to see how it works in game and the player’s perception of it. I plan on continuing of course, as long as I have at least one player that is still invested in the story, which is what this is all about anyway, right?
I plan on continuing of course, as long as I have at least one player that is still invested in the story, which is what this is all about anyway, right?
First of all I'm curious, as I've never played a 3d6 game. But with the fight at hand I guess I'll get a feeling about how that plays out.
What it is all about, I'd say: having fun together.
@Zarque, Jominda, some actions in gameplay (and an init roll for you Zarque), as well as math chat if you please.
Yes, and you named the real problem with that: It's realistic! Who wants that in their fantasy games?
I do! Or at least in part. One of the things I like best about 3.x is that it scales smoothly from commoners who run from axe murderers to demigods that find Superman a mere annoyance and beyond.
That said, I like a fair amount of realism, not too realistic, but I actually like old school play of being normal people sometimes. Having one system that can handle both normal people and high fantasy people is in my opinion awesome. The only downside (which I’m fixing in my system) is the limited advancement within a particular tier of play.
There are very important additional considerations,
3.x is designed for combat as war with a wide variety in encounter difficulty. 40% of encounters are supposed to be below your level, and you’re supposed to be taking every advantage you can get from several hirelings to wizards making scrolls every chance they get downtime so they have a bunch of scrolls to use instead of just their slots. Use oil and the environment, divination and scouting, run away from fights you can’t win, arrange for fights to happen when you have the advantage, etc.
But around the beginning of 3.0, the community started moving towards combat as sport. In fact, WotC originally published modules following the guidelines in the DMG for variety in encounter difficulty only for the community to disparage them for making modules “unbalanced.” Clearly the community never read the DMG (confirmed this many times over on several different issues). Thus WotC started making combat as sport modules since those seemed to make the community happy, and many of the other issues the community has complained about 3.x for have been direct results of the community using 3.x contrary to it’s design. Things like advancing characters from 1 to 15+ in a single AP with little downtime, the lack of proper resource management, little to no downtime, etc.
3.x was designed around old school expectations and experience, but the community at large played in a new school fashion.
Right now we should have a whole squad of minions between us rather than facing this fight alone.
Heck, the 2e dnd DMG even mentions parties with more than 100 members, as in that happened often enough that they felt the need to mention it.
@Zarque, Jominda, some actions in gameplay (and an init roll for you Zarque), as well as math chat if you please.
I assumed that it is your turn in the second normal round and my turn is after the bad guys. If I'm wrong with that assumption and the game is waiting for me, that would be vexing.
Where do I see what modifier to add for their saves?
@DM ShadowBloodmoon
You took care of checking, if Ironbriar was in the blast? As he is no longer shown in the correct position due to invisibility I can't tell and didn't list him.
Where do I see what modifier to add for their saves?
It's the players roll all the dice modification.
The NPC's are assumed to roll a 10 for their saves (ie if a cultist had a +5 reflex save, they get a 15 for all reflex saves), while your spell/ability strength is rolled.Normally, your bomb DC would be: "The DC of this save is equal to 10 + 1/2 the alchemist’s level + the alchemist’s Intelligence modifier." (and add feats, etc.). Now you roll 3d6 in place of the 10. So your bomb strength would be 3d6+ + 1/2 the alchemist’s level + the alchemist’s Intelligence modifier (and add feats, etc.).
So if the save DC for whatever you did would normally be DC 17, then you roll 3d6+ (17-10) to figure the attack strength.
Where do I see what modifier to add for their saves?It's the players roll all the dice modification.
The NPC's are assumed to roll a 10 for their saves (ie if a cultist had a +5 reflex save, they get a 15 for all reflex saves), while your spell/ability strength is rolled.
Normally, your bomb DC would be: "The DC of this save is equal to 10 + 1/2 the alchemist’s level + the alchemist’s Intelligence modifier." (and add feats, etc.). Now you roll 3d6 in place of the 10. So your bomb strength would be 3d6+ + 1/2 the alchemist’s level + the alchemist’s Intelligence modifier (and add feats, etc.).
So if the save DC for whatever you did would normally be DC 17, then you roll 3d6+ (17-10) to figure the attack strength.
Thanks.
Thanks for putting the link in there, Zarque. Yes, Jominda, I checked to see if Ironbriar was in the blast. As everyone has mentioned, the Effect roll bonus is your normal spell DC -10. Since you wrote that the DC was 15, I subtracted 10 and rolled 3d6+5 for you. Hope that helps. It does take a bit of getting used to, I know.
Ok, I am travelling from 5 Nov to 12 Nov. I hope to be able to keep up with posting, but if not, feel free to bot me...
Safe travels, see you soon.
I found the map confusing too and searched a bit, and the confusion stems from the missing surroundings.
The entrance to the mill is from the path onto a wooden terrace that runs around two sides of the mill.
The undermill is reached via a flight of stairs outside the mill on the shore side.
The main entrance is on the ground floor on the river side of the mill.
And then there are two floors above that.
On the second floor there are also two stairs shown, but one is blurred meaning it is the one a story below, seen though the opening.
Pictures I found put into the correct order from lowest to highest:
Undermill (lowest floor)
Ground floor
First Floor
Second Floor
Searching some more I'd say those are vastly beautified maps compared to what is given in the original AP.