Creative Director
|
I do think that there's some unfortunate power-creep going on; just compare the beguiler class form PHB II to the rogue or the bard... or more to the point, to the sorcerer or wizard who specializes in illusion and enchantment spells. No question in my mind that the beguiler is a stronger class. Which is rather unfortunate, but it's also not on topic.
The adventures in Dungeon are designed primarilly with the core classes in mind. The adventure paths in particular are meant to be tough; our research shows that tough adventures are more popular and more fondly remembered than easy ones; just look at the old-time adventures that are now classics. Tomb of Horrors, Queen of the Spiders, Temple of Elemental Evil... those were really tough adventures as well.
If I had to peg Savage Tide, I'd say it's probably tougher than Shackled City, but not as tough as Age of Worms. It assumes the players play to the best of their ability, and takes into account assumptions like, "by 5th level, the party should have access to magic that allows them to breathe water or fly," or "by 9th level, the party should be able to raise the dead or teleport." We have to make these assumptions, because we're writing this campaign for tens of thousands of people. When a DM gets ahold of the campaign, he should step in to finish the job—that is, to adjust the adventure so that it's appropriate for his campaign. If several encounters of ELs 1-2 above your PCs average level would do them in, you should either tone down the adventure or let the PCs be one or two levels higher than the recomended levels before you run the adventure. Likewise, if your PCs are too tough and chew through ELs 3-4 higher than their average level... punch things up a bit. No two game groups are alike, so it's unwise to assume that a pre-made adventure should work the same for any two groups.
When I write modules (for the RPGA, haven't submitted anything to Dungeon...yet), I assume the party is a fighter, rogue, cleric, and wizard. At any given level, I then assume the cleric has standard spells, and the wizards takes the standard magic missle/fireball/fly/teleport (the staple wizard spells). The fighter gets the standard longsword/armor he can afford/etc. The rogue has all the classic rogue skills. Each encounter is built with these in mind. Now, this leads to some parties having a harder time, and some easier, depending on class choice, character build, etc. but it's usually a good middle ground that most people can work from.
For the difficulty question, I can happily say there's never been an adventure published that my players can't overcome! I say this because I tweak each as suggested above to provide maximum fun depending on the party. For a STAP example, the Blue Nixie encounter seems to be chewing through groups from what I read. I have no intention of my players' first experience with this series being "wow, we got beaten down/TPK'd by baiscally some flunkies and a random encounter." So, I played the thugs as stupid as they're written, gave the party some leeway for good ideas, and they handily drove the bandits from the ship. There were some down-sides to their plan--all but one of the thugs fled, including Vark, so they got no loot. But they felt good about ther characters, liked the encounter, and were ready for more.
Make the game your own, know your group, and focus on fun rather than the exact text written in the module. That's what I encourage anyone running something I've written to do!
I will say that SCAP was a total meat grinder for our group. Though, the DM did not adjust for our group fo 5 (the hardcover is supposed to have 6).
After discussing things with our DM, he now adjusts the difficulty level of the fights and things are tough, but do-able (as they should be).
Unfortunately, the guys and Paizo cannot write an adventure that is perfect for everyone's group out there - some adjustments will need to be done.
JT
I'm running STAP for a group of around 6 (there are 7 players, but after 2 sessions, we've had 5 and 6 show up). For There is No Honor, I stuck to running the encounters as is, and found them just about the right challenge level. My players are two rooms away from the big finale, and have just about cleared out the Lotus Dragons with no downtime/retreating. They did, however, purchase a wand of cure light wounds with their pay from the earlier encounters, and have burned through nearly 30 charges between Parrot Island and the guild hall.
I may increase the difficulty of the encounters in the Bullywug Gambit slightly, especially if their 7th player shows up. However, I'm pretty happy with the challenge level overall, and haven't had to go easy on party.
>> How challenging is the new adventure path so far?
As you've noted, I think that is too subjective a question to ask. Do the players in question use a lot of material from other books? Do the players tend to tactical rather than role-play heavy characters? How experienced is the group? How rutheless is the DM? etc. I think you'll get a wide variety of answers to your question, all of them probably valid.
Fortunately, there's a real easy fix - just have your PCs be higher/lower level as you see fit. Given your past difficulties, I'd have them be 1 or 2 levels higher for STAP.
I think a big question in regards to difficulty would be: what is the point buy of the group, or average point buy if rolling is used.
I have a group of 4, with 32 point buy, and they have so far torn through the savage tide. They're also veteran gamers who combine solid roleplaying with effective tactical choices and only a modest amount of optimization.
So, when determining difficulty, what is the Point Buy assumed by the Adventure Path?
We've not started yet. :(
I've a group of four now, as two players are moving house again and just had another kid.
We're going with 32 point buy and we maybe using action points; might sound like they’re going to be all-powerful but my group are heavy roleplayers and often multiclass themselves into a hole when it comes to combat just because they like the flavour of something or it fits their character idea.
(I had a campaign in which one high level sorceror/bloodmage saved an elven warriors family from certain doom and the elf gave him an elven violin *a family heirloom* as a thank you; the violin was crafted using a special form of pottery. The player was so enamored by this notion that he started putting all his skill points into learning how to play it well enough to be considered a master with it; he never went down the bard route or took the violin on any adventures with him for fear of it getting damaged but every time he returned to Silverymoon he put on a great performance and gave me an awesome Vanessa Mae cd to play in the background so we could actually hear his characters musical skills at the playhouse (which he also had built with his loot.) ;). So yeah, my players can run with things that have no bearing at all on combat and pull some weird but cool roleplaying into things.)
Thus, I really hate killing them.
I've given them each a district feat for free.
One guy is a bit of a powergamer in the sense that he always builds big bulky characters that dish out lots and lots of damage (and does it well) but he still goes for looks and role play feel over pure game mechanics.
The last two paths were hard on my players, lots of deaths made the high drama roleplayers in them frustrated at times but I did forewarn them of the much reported difficulty of AOW and told them this new one is made by the same people so they are learning quickly and trying to be more combat effective these days. For this path each person has a couple of characters in a 'character tree' waiting to step up if their original dies with a vaguer more ‘free and easy’ back story written for ease of dropping the new person into the game at any point.
One thing I am slightly concerned about is the group picking lots of new classes and races I’m not very familiar with this time around (some even going for low level adjustment templates like half vampire!) I think its cool to give these new things a spin but don’t know what they are actually like in practice yet to it’s both worrying and exciting for me.
I just hope I can judge their worth well enough to allow them to shine properly.
Looking over the first ST adventure, I think the blue nixie part is going to kick them firmly in the arse and action points might just be a must; the second adventure looks even harder and I just know the savage creatures will freak them out.
They have no PHB classes, its all PHB2 or XPHB.
elven dragonborn dragon shaman, human healer, fire genasi wilder and half vampire human duskblade.
So a pair of level adjusted guys for some low hit points, no undead turner, no arcane caster, no rogue, no strong 'tank' type. :0
My players are - in my estimation - a good mix of roleplaying and tactical players. During SCAP I revised the party's configuration so they would be better optimized for the encounters.
We had a wizard, rogue, cleric, favored soul, fighter, and ranger, and the party still got their arses handed to them - having to flee from most every encounter.
We created the party with 32 point buy. I gave them a bonus feat at character creation. A different method of rolling for hit points ensured they got at least 50% maximum every level. They always had at least the average party wealth. I gave them action points and Fate Points - which let them reverse any bad situation once every three levels. We had the recommended 6 characters, with rogue/fighter/ranger tooled out for combat, two divine healers, and a wizard with great utility magic (and some powerful punches later in the campaign).
So why is it that they failed in the SCAP? Why was the SCAP the most frustrating module I've ever tried to run?
Likely because it was written without any concern to balance the encounters to standard D&D play.
So if Savage Tide is even more difficult than SCAP (which is intended, as the hardcover says, for 6 characters whilst the STAP is supposed to be for 4), I'm sorry that I'll have to be passing on it.
Unfortunately it seems my Dungeon Mag subscription will now be 1/3 useless to me for the next year, filled with overpowered, unreasonably challenging modules that my group will refuse to play and that I will refuse to DM.
Doc
STAP is tougher than SCAP? Really? That conclusion has been made already with only 3 of the adventures in STAP printed? And who exactly determined that? James Jacobs? Who's that? What kind of authority does he think he is anyway?
OK. Seriously, though, James is an uber authority and all, but maybe his spot take on measuring which one is tougher might not be right on. Sorry, James. No disrespect meant.Sorry, if that were the case I'm glad I didn't run SCAP since my players would have breezed through it. Of course, the whole notion that an adventure is too tough or too easy for you to run is completely ludicrous and I dare say the sign of a lazy DM that isn't willing to tweak something here and there to make sure an adventure isn't too challenging or not challenging enough.
Here is a tried and true fact that you should take into consideration before turning your nose up at 1/3 of each issue of Dungeon from 139 to 150, low level play is almost always tough for PCs to make it through. That's just the way it is. Every encounter is a brush with death when you only have say 6-12 hp. One thrust of a longsword that the DM rolled max damage on could drop you to negatives.
That's probably the charm and challenge with low-level play, though. It's a fight to survive those fledgling levels and make it to the more survivable levels of 4+.
But back to nitpicking your post... So you heard that STAP was tougher than SCAP and before determining for yourself how your own group would fare by actually reading through the first few adventures and maybe coming to your own conclusion, you're ready to condemn the magazine? Yes, James's opinion weighs pretty heavy, but might not be the accurate one when it comes to your group of players.
The thing about D&D is that you can never gauge exactly how things will go in any given module. Unless you decide to do away with rolling dice and just arbitrarily make your own judgement calls.
But, hey, do whatever you want. But I should warn you, I heard ALL of the movies and books for the rest of this year are terrible. Oh and ALL of the TV shows are ten times worse than last year's. So don't bother.
EDIT: I actually am picking on Doc in case anyone failed to notice >:)
Maybe it has to do with the ornery mood I'm in because of the annoying traffic I had to deal with this morning. I HATE Las Vegas drivers. I'll probably feel bad about picking on Doc later. Damned conscience...
|
I've got to chime in here. I can't reliably predict the difficulty level of STAP, as I'm still in preparation mode on this (and will be until my players finish the SCAP), but I can comment on the difficulty of Shackled City.
On a scale of 1 to 10 on the Killer DM chart, I probably clock at 7 or 8. I've made players keep what they believed to be mediocre stat rolls (net +3 or +4 in modifiers), I only occasionally ask "are you sure you want to do that"? And I rewrite NPC bad guys to fit my campaign better (note my version of Ike Iverson - http://www.dmtools.org/details.php?id=33#Start33
My players have gotten to Foundations of Flame (14th level) with 3-4 character deaths. That's it. There have been close calls, but never was the Adventure Path "[too] challenging and lethal". I recall one death was because of the fragility of low-level characters, and another death was because the player made a tactical mistake (rushing into a room before the rest of the party). Occassionally they don't pay attention, and only half of them are keen on using optimal feats or prestige classes.
There are a number of factors that exist between the printed page and the ambient enjoyment of a game session - the DM's perspective and understanding of the adventure, the DM's ability to clearly describe the adventure, the players' ability to clearly hear and understand what the DM is saying, and the players' ability to be effective in that adventure, either by tactical know-how, experience, well-built characters, or dumb luck.
Maybe if you think that the Shackled City was too hard, one of your factors is off from the rest of us. I mean no offense here. Your description of the SCAP is very, very different from my experiences. What kind of characters were your 5-6 players playing that they fell so shy of the mark in Drathkar's Way?
Shoot Doc - I have three players and they breezed through the first installment - they are smart players and their strategy was a winning one. With as much gold that was thrown around they had plenty of cure potions scrolls and even a wand PLUS a cleric. This same group survived SCAP - but got their asses handed to them at the very end of AOW (call it deific smack down). And they LOVED it. It was meant to be hard. They are STILL yacking about it and laughing about how insane that adventure was!
With all this said I am looking at the second installment and figuring out how to make it more challenging.
So why are my three players able to be more successful then your six?
Part of it is the players. Another part is the DM and his willingness to prepare for an adventure. Before I run a session - I have just about the whole thing memorized and contingent plans mapped out. If I find that the players are being to successful I throw them a curve - it they are struggling too much I cut them some breaks.
Only a torpid DM would blame Dungeon for making too hard of adventures.
Only a languorous mind would consider the adventures useless.
>> Unfortunately it seems my Dungeon Mag subscription will now be 1/3 useless to me for the next year, filled with overpowered, unreasonably challenging modules that my group will refuse to play and that I will refuse to DM.
Boo-friggin-hoo. If you think things are too difficult, then have your players be 2 levels higher than the suggested level. Problem solved.
It sounds like the modules account for part of your problem, but the majority of your frustrations sound like they stem from your players' ability to deal with the challenges, use the game rules in their favor, and come up with innovative ways to deal with problems. If you bumped thier levels up 1-2 higher than the suggested APL and were giving them a 32 point buy for stats, and they still kept getting thier asses handed to them, then the problem is definitely not the adventures. It's your players. Perhaps you feel that they are an experienced and competent group because you haven't been exposed to a lot of other groups.
I think exposure to some new players, new gaming groups, and hitting the books might be in order. Not just for you, but mostly for your players.
I don't know what else to say. Even really great players can have bad luck with the dice rolls or make mental errors that cost them their character's life. Some accountability has to be divvied out. You say you did all of that work to make the adventures more playable (scaling down, leveling up, etc.), yet your game was still a meatgrinder. That speaks volumes about your players or perhaps your DMing. I don't know. But something's definitely broke and I'm inclined to think that it's not the Dungeon AP modules.
As with any published adventure (or even any encounter in a published adventure), "your mileage may vary."
Depending on the characters, players, or even pure luck, any adventure/encounter designed to be challenging for a "typical" party can be either be a TPK or a walkover for a particular group. Even groups that breeze through most encounters in an adventure may have problems with an encounter that a different group, who struggles with the rest of the adventure, defeats in one round without taking a scratch.
The Adventure Paths, as stated, are designed to be high risk/high reward, which places an emphasis on combat ability and "efficient" character design (tending to reward min/maxers). It also places a premium on intelligent play; parties who don't have a plan beyond "I run in and shoot/hit/blast something," who fail to manage their spell/item resources, who don't work as a team, or who make other errors will pay for it. Poor teamwork, in particular, has killed more characters than any other reason I can think of in the games I've played in or run.
Good point - I think it comes down to teamwork.
Point in case - The Arizona Cardinals have good players - a good team on paper. Yet they come out and lose most of the games they play. Why?
It sounds like your group falls into this category.
|
|
Incidentally, I force team play on my PCs.
I do too. When they split up or don't work together, I kill them extra dead.
Of course, I haven't had to do that in a long while. After a rash of character deaths prior to the SCAP, and me running this campaign extra-scary, they are constantly on their toes.
My three big rules for character creation are:
1) No evil
2) No chaotic neutral
3) all characters must be group-oriented, no lone wolvesMany groups would find this restrictive, boring, heavy-handed, and unneccisary. But I stick with it and over the years, I think I've had some good results.
I'm willing to let 1) and 2) slide a bit if the group/players are up to it. There's evil and EVIL, just like there's chaotic and CHAOTIC. Sometimes it's fun to play in an Elric-style campaign (or Shadowrun-style) and snake-pit intrigue scenarios. 3) is the big one though.
I'm looking at the Bullywug gambit, and thinking that most 3rd level parties wouldn't have too much trouble with it. I think the challenge level system is really messed up when it comes to villains with character classes. For instance Javell is rated CR 13 at full health, which means that if a a 3rd level party fought her they should be obliterated. However when she is dealing 1d6+2 per round and has 76 hp a 3rd level party might have a shot against her. Of course if she gets in a few sneak attacks there might be trouble. A 9th level party would mop the floor with her. So CR 13 is way off. Furthermore, so of those EL 4 or 5 encounters that involve 3 savage pirates with 10hp apiece are also pretty off. I think a troll is good example of a solid EL 5 encounter and I would much rather face a few of those guys than a troll. If I dm this adventure I'd up their numbers by a couple.
I think that towards the end of the adventure it looks like it gets a little tougher, but by then the PCs will likely be 4th or 5th level, so that might not be the case.
How are people who've run this adventure finding it?
|
Creative Director
|
I'm the first to agree that the CR system is fundamentally flawed. I mean... the following characters are all supposedly CR 20 encounters:
a: human commoner 21
b: human bard 20
c: human barbarian 10/frenzied berserker 10
Some of these are going to be tougher fights than the others, but you'll get the same XP no matter what.
Sometimes, D&D just doesn't make sense.
Best still, compare those (with normal npc gear) to
Old Red Dragon
Pit Fiend
So given that the game designers are all fully aware of this and have an intutive sense of the true EL or CR that is much better than what using the formuals in the dmg produces, why do you continue to give readers numbers that aren't reflective of the true ELs? You know that its not an CR 13 encounter even if the fomula puts it at such. Stop using the formula and leave that as a guideline for dungeon masters.
All you need is a disclaimer at the beginning saying the "CRs and ELs in the adventures published in the magazine reflect the views of the designers and do not necessarily follow the formulas used in the dungeon masters guide."
I guess wizards is probably concerned about consistency and what not, but the CRs for creatures with class levels are messed up and everyone knows it. The CRs in the monster manual don't seem to be generated through a formula, they seem to be based on some guidelines, combined with knowledge gained from play testing- why not do everything that way. I'm noticing that a lot of the ELs for encounters based on villains with class levels are too easy for the xp the PCs will earn from them.
On the other hand in a recent game session my 11th level party was TPKed by a 12th level cleric, so maybe I should shut up.
I'm the first to agree that the CR system is fundamentally flawed. I mean... the following characters are all supposedly CR 20 encounters:
a: human commoner 21
b: human bard 20
c: human barbarian 10/frenzied berserker 10Some of these are going to be tougher fights than the others, but you'll get the same XP no matter what.
Sometimes, D&D just doesn't make sense.
Well, I've run the first adventure with a party of five at the suggested levels.
The Blue Nixie was hard for them. They were down a person to start, and the ninja was taken down by a lucky shot before he could do anything, and everyone's favorite spider like critter got onto deck, and nearly TPKed them.
But, they had no issues with the rest of the adventure. The adapted quickly to the Parrot Island zombies - with the swashbuckler even eventually luring them to the group with offers of 'tasty brains'
And they did a good job in the Lotus base as well.
So, I don't think the path is so hard - it is challenging, yes, and it will punish impulsive play. As, IMO, it should.
As to how to apply this to your game? I wish I could help with that. But, I think the path is very nicely blanced between challenge and playability.
I'm looking at the Bullywug gambit, and thinking that most 3rd level parties wouldn't have too much trouble with it. How are people who've run this adventure finding it?
I ended up having to revise reality to prevent repeated TPK in "No Honor," and made that clear to the players. Character optimization and especially tactical play, as a consequence, ramped up sharply thereafter, and they had an easy time with "Bullywug" up until the mansion.
Interestingly, the cleric of Ehlonna, who did nothing but cure wounds in "No Honor," rocked hard in "Bullywug," saving the party on at least 2 occasions. The urban rogue who stole the show in "No Honor" was more or less in the background in the sequel. I kind of like it that the adventures are different enough to give everyone a chance. Can't wait to start "Sea Wyvern" this weekend!
I'm the first to agree that the CR system is fundamentally flawed. I mean... the following characters are all supposedly CR 20 encounters:
a: human commoner 21
b: human bard 20
c: human barbarian 10/frenzied berserker 10Some of these are going to be tougher fights than the others, but you'll get the same XP no matter what.
Sometimes, D&D just doesn't make sense.
I have found that character levels do not a CR make.
That said, I figured I would toss in my two coppers. I haven't started STAP yet, but I do monitor these boards for when I do run it. Learn from experience, I say. And you can't get more experience than some of the folks here.
I am currently running AoW and the posts on that board helped me out a lot. Before we started, I warned the players that poor teamwork would get them all killed. That it ranked with some of the classic "death" dungeons.
Since I am running in Eberron, I ran an adventure set during the Day of Mourning. It gave the characters history together and also brought them to 1st level. That made a big difference when we actually started. Since then, the changes I have made have been mostly for flavor. The players have learned from each encounter and I have made a point to remind them that it just gets harder (as if the adventures haven't taught them that already).
I am already starting to put my notes together on this AP. I am not sure what route I will go or when i will run it, but I know I can count on some good advice on these boards when I do.
It gave the characters history together and also brought them to 1st level.
That should be 2nd level. I need to pay more attention to what I type.
What is the "officially" recommended point buy for a group of
4 moderate players playing a good mixture of PHB1 characters
starting at 1st lvl. in STAP?
With this figure at hand, any DM could vaguely calculate the best point buy for his group...
Sorry if this is already pointed out somewhere else and thank
You for Your input.
Loops!
Any ideas?
Mr. Jacobs?
The Dungeon Crew?
I'm asking this because I want to make as few changes as possible during the STAP. My AoW group was overpowered with
32 point buy and this time I want the AP to be more challenging. But STAP is not AoW, that's why I would like
to hear something "official" concerning the point buy
for an average group.
Best regards
Loops!
|
Creative Director
|
If there's an "official" point buy, it'd be the standard point buy of 25 points. In my home campaign though (six players) I let the players use the 32 point buy, so their characters WOULD be tougher. I'd rather err on the side of having the PCs be too tough rather than have them be killed in every third encounter; that tends to disrupt the flow of the campaign. We're about done with Bullywug Gambit and things are going well so far (adjusting up for 6 players from 4 is best done by simply adding a few bad guys to several encounters rather than by increasing the bad guys' levels).
Thank You James,
6 x 32! Wow. Return of the X-Men.
Considering that I will give my 4 veteran Munchkins
a hard time with a 30 point buy...
Loops!
Warning to DMs: if a single character is heading belowdecks and gets ambushed by the flotsam ooze in "Sea Wyvern's Wake," tear up the character sheet. You *MIGHT* save him if the rest of the party arrives immediately, but I wouldn't count on it. Instead, I'd very strongly advise having someone else (like the faux priest) grabbed by the ooze, and all the characters come to investigate.
My players did the standard 4d6-drop-one roll method, and then I noted the point buy value of the best rolls (33 or 34, I think), and let the players choose between their rolls and a slightly-lower-than-best point buy (31, I think). Generous, but perhaps not overly so: One character has been dropped twice, and most of the others have been seriously wounded (aside from the sorceress, who has stayed well away from enemies so far).
The method I use for attribute generation is a bit odd.
Two attributes are rolled 1d6+12, two are rolled at 2d6+6, and two are rolled at 3d6. They can then assign them as the wish.
I migh try the point buy method when I start Savage Tide, but the method above has work to give the players some good attributes for characters in AoW.