Is it just me, or was anyone else hoping to have adventure proposals that at the lower end of the "sweet spot" - roughly levels 7 to 10? Two were in this range and I found myself mildly disappointed by the other two.
Actually, I was really hoping we'd see at least one fantabulously crafted proposal for an even lower level adventure, perhaps around 5th level. New campaigns start far more often than existing ones run long enough to reach high levels (disregarding those campaigns that start off at higher levels), so low-end adventures are always going to be in demand. Especially, in my experience, adventures for levels 4 through 6 are particularly useful because, at 4th level, the XP scale starts to stretch out (levels 1 through 3 all receive the same XP awards per CR). As a result each level starts to take longer to earn (players just seem to scream through levels 1 through 3) and so campaigns tend to stay within this range of levels for longer periods.
Anyway, I think all four submissions are super awesome but I do wish someone had tried to pull off something at the lower end of the scale.
:-j(enni)
I am happy you started this thread, I agree completely. My current campaign is now at level 8 and that took us quite a while. The lower levels, to me atleast, are the ones I like best. No campaign I've ever been in has reached level 10 or more and I am already seeing that killing my players is becoming quite easy with the save or die spells etc.
So I was really hoping for an adventure targeted at the low levels, but sadly none of the remaining contenders provided one. And I am not buying an adventure that I, and probably a whole lot of DM's, are never going to run because it is aimed at levels 12+.
Absolutely! I was quite disappointed by this, too, and would really liked to have seen a lower-level adventure proposal.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
Grrr...
If I'd have just gone with my 4th level adventure idea I could've had a clean sweep! I figured everyone else would go in the 5-10 range so I was trying to try what I thought would be different. Christine and Boomer apparently had the same idea, and even Rob was pushing double digits.
Sorry to all the folks out there that we didn't come through with the low-level goodness. If I weren't competing this round I think I'd have been a little disappointed as well (says the guy who wrote the highest-level one of the bunch).
Actually, personally, I'd prefer to see a few more higher level adventures, myself.
There are scads of lower-level adventures out there, and when I'm forced by time constraints to use modules rather than write my own, I'd rather be able to slap a few together to run all the way up, rather than have to restart a new campaign every time.
Now, I haven't looked too hard at 3.x modules, granted, (since I'm happily converting AD&D and older versions to 3.x for the time being, tight bastard that I am!), but I don't think there are many that deal with 15-20th level characters out there, for example.
Contributor, RPG Superstar
aka Leandra Christine Schneider
|
Hmmm, I'm sorry about that and I can only speak from the experience of my gaming environment.
We usually enjoy levels 7-15 the most because all the nice PrCs abilities and feat combos start to work and you have the chance to battle more diverse monsters....not speaking of gaining more options through magic items and higher level spells/maneuvers.
Thats not to say that I don't like lower or higher (or even epic) things, but I think we spent about 50% of the adventures we play in the 7-15th (exactly the levels you can get most use out of a PrC).
Nope. You have to figure that this will get worked into a Pathfinder or supported by adventures leading up to it, so I'm fine with whatever level the designer wanted to work with. Heck, Boomer's proposal could be a complete 1-10 Adventure Path if he wins (though Ms. Schneider is my first choice and who I voted for).
I've been running games since around 1980 and the highest level group I ever had was using 3.0 just a couple years ago, they got to 12th level. Before that the highest level any of my players ever got to was 8th (and I'm not much of a killer DM so it wasn't because they died).
From a writer's stand point though I can see how the higher levels would be attractive and open up more doors.
The levels in these adventures are generally beyond the scope in what I would use as a DM. Honestly I don't even pick up something at the local hobby shop if it above level 11 or so. You have to make too many assumptions about high level magic, and encounters are generally a nightmare to scale down significantly. On the contrary you can take a low level adventure and scale it up pretty easily (usually).
Lot of good ideas though, I will surely apply some specific scenes in my own games.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 6
,
Dedicated Voter Season 6
|
The levels in these adventures are generally beyond the scope in what I would use as a DM. Honestly I don't even pick up something at the local hobby shop if it above level 11 or so. You have to make too many assumptions about high level magic, and encounters are generally a nightmare to scale down significantly. On the contrary you can take a low level adventure and scale it up pretty easily (usually).
Lot of good ideas though, I will surely apply some specific scenes in my own games.
I have to admit, my adventure seed idea was high-ish level too. High level adventures ideas are, for me at least, easier to make compelling, even if harder to execute.
I'm actually happy to see high(ish) level adventures get some love. Both me and my players prefer playing in the 10-15 range; but it's so hard to find prewritten modules in this range.
My thanks goes out to the superstars for this treat!
aka Robert G. McCreary
|
I was also going to do a lower level proposal, because my campaigns never last into the high levels either. Even my proposal, at 8th level, is a bit high for my campaigns.
But I did make a higher level proposal for one very specific reason, which I will be happy to say more about after voting ends.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4
|
There's a lot that I'd like to say, especially "Thank You" to all of the awesome Paizo-People, but I'll try to keep my comments as not-my-submission-specific as possible - because this would be a really, REALLY stupid time (and way) to get DQ'd.
Anyway: I'm pretty obviously a bit . . . "over the top", I suppose is the term, in a lot of my gaming. I've heard Tales-from-the-Table from a lot of my peers, and I've been surprised to discover that many of my fellow gamers play campaigns more focused on mapping sections of terrain or bartering with Barons over the price of silver than, for example, flying around in an flaming-zombie-cannon-equipped airship, fighting armies & punching Demon-Lords square in the face.
To each their own, obviously - there is NO right or wrong way to have fun playing Dungeons & Dragons. For every one guy who basically wants to play "The 13th Warrior meets The Lord of the Rings", there are legions of people who would rather rock out to D&D-versions of Final Fantasy 7, Pirates of the Caribbean, Firefly, Crouching Tiger or even Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure.
Which is the best and coolest thing about our hobby, honestly.
For my campaigns, the sweet-spot has always felt like 12th-17th level, so I wanted to make an adventure that could work for DMs who feel under-served by the tons of WICKED-sweet low level adventures. I suppose that I am, more than anything, just surprised that my adventure wasn't the tippy-top of recommended Character Level for this round.
You're a madman, Mr. Nelson - and I want to party with you every day.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar
aka Leandra Christine Schneider
|
...or even Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure.
*blushes* I did that for a time :-)
I am absolutely with you. One of D&d's (or RPGs in general) best features is its individuality and ability to adapt.Although everyone has his/her style, I'd also like to encourage trying something new sometimes.
I remember my first session of paranoia and I although I was SURE I won't like it (because of working against the others), I got really surprised about how much fun it was.
Actually, my games - or at least my latest campaign world, should, at it's height - resemble a mutant hybrid between Lord of the Rings, Final Fantasy, Naruto and whatever else I've been watching recently, with a bucket load if historical stuff thrown in, so liberally slathered in pyrotechnics and special effects that it would makes most movie producers cry. Something like this, in fact, to paraphrase something I once said on the WotC boards:
Gilgalad and his Elves are fighting the forces of the Dark Lord alongside his Roman human allies with Cleric-Centurion Julius Malusculus standing beside him against the equally-well organised, -motivated and -lead army of Orcs, Goblins, Hobgoblins and Kobolds. In the sky above, gryphon spellcasters clash with giant wasps and crow-falcons that breath lasers. As Malausculus fells the last evil Zulu human warrior and swings at the psionic Dark Elf commander, Gilgalad dodges the co-ordinated strikes of the elite skeletal Lich-Warrior and emotionless reptilan anti-paladin, then dives to the ground as laser-breath chews up the ground where he was standing. He looks up just in time to see a ninja dragon racing up the hill towards him, each footfall making the ground shake, while its wings rapidly flicker in the draconic equivilent of Naruto hand-seals; before it leaps 100' into the air and crashes down on the belagured heroes. Gilgalad dodges the first attack - just - which shatters the ground; only for the dragon to body-flicker behind him...
...
We're not there yet (not really even close)...but we're getting there! (At lower-level of course, it is pretty much the same except the stuff is lower level and the dragon would be much smaller...) I mainly blame this on Tempest Stormwind and Disposable_Hero on the WotC boards so showing me the light of re-flavouring; this merely encouraged me. (That said, my players have really noticed the extra descriptive effort I've been putting in and have been starting to do so themselves. Thank you ToB and psionics!)
Up until the last year or two, my games have been far more LotR/Warhammer-like, but with more explosions.
The only reason, really, that out parties haven't got to very high levels is that there a) aren't enough quests around and me and the other guy who have time to write quests take a long time to do so and b) until 3.0 came out, we played mainly Rolemaster, followed by AD&D, neither of which are exactly condusive to passably fast advancement. (Even though I mostly halve advancement speed in 3.x.) Our five long-campaign parties (one of which started in AD&D and the three in 3.0) have now reached the heights of about 10-12th level; the top one is 14th and about to undertake Dragon Mountain in 3.5, boosted to 14-21st level. (See the 8th leveluber-munchkin Kobolds!) So that's why I want to see more high-level adventures. (Actually, I've decided at some point to pick up Shacked City, since that ought to do us for a bit!)
I don't see the problem with the submissions' level envelope.
For one, ideas can be "stolen", adjusted, fitted to lower or higher levels without much of a problem. Been doing it for years, without much ill-effects. Perhaps a matter of too much experience.
Second, flamboyant or non-flamboyant adventures are not a matter of level, but of playing (and particularly GMing) style, IMHO, and with regard to that (and it has been pointed out by other people) Boomer's extensive "Ogre pirates and the Lost Isle" seed could be pulled off at levels 3+ or 13+, depending on the GM's and players' wishes and plans.
And frankly - my (and I guess any experienced GM's) left foot could come up with a non-flamboyant plotline and villain while I am asleep (or in the office) , but for the truly wild ones - like, say kingdoms with the decapitated remains of dieties as "head- of-state" - that's what I buy pre-mades for.
And the stuff by Christine and Boomer provides precisely that just fine (sorry Jason and Rob...).
oh, and as for high levels versus low levels.
While low levels (1-5) are a GM's paradise to run - since your players have very limited means to pull extraordinary tactics on you - I personally detest those (as a GM ) , liking them only for the aspects of founding a a character. Basically, at those levels, you are very much at the mercy of your dice, and some classes and especially multi-class builds are just severly outclassed (and unenjoyable through inability to contribute beyond common sense participation ) by dumb "beat them with a heavy stick" concepts.
Plus, you have hardly any means to build defenses ( and as for save or die effects - that goes for a Power Attacking falchion-wielding barbarian as well.... you just don't get a save =) )
That changes slowly for level 6- 13, and above that, GMing (and playing) becomes a matter of skill, challenge and experience, much akin to steeper slopes when skiing. So much more mileage in those....
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
...or even Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure.
*blushes* I did that for a time :-)
I am absolutely with you. One of D&d's (or RPGs in general) best features is its individuality and ability to adapt.Although everyone has his/her style, I'd also like to encourage trying something new sometimes.
I remember my first session of paranoia and I although I was SURE I won't like it (because of working against the others), I got really surprised about how much fun it was.
This contest has absolutely underlined how different are the styles that people enjoy in D&D. Not just the low/high question or the short campaigns vs. long, but what are the things that are most fun.
I was DMing last night and had a very tiny epiphany about my contest entries - why were so many of them about deception, trickery, and social interactions... well, because that's the kind of game I run. Make no mistake, there is a metric ton of min-maxed in-your-face hack and slash, but also a lot of time for talking, for using skills plus roleplaying, not just BAB and caster level. I ran a mini-adventure from the back of Stormwrack called Shatterhull Isle, which ran two whole sessions even though the PCs didn't even meet all of the encounters or explore the whole island, mostly because they ended up talking to one of the villains (first in disguise, but one PC saw through it) instead of just chopping her into hamburger.
In a contest like this, to a certain extent you write what you think people will like, but you also have to write what YOU like, and the kinds of things I created were the kinds of things I would like to use and that DMs like me would like to use, and frankly would find easy to use. I understand not everybody is like that; for a lot of DMs social encounters are harder, and one of the judges made a comment that they can fall apart easily as written adventures. Very true. They are far less 'user-proof' than a smash-and-grab adventure, but I think they are a lot more fun. My players are hardly the amateur thespian types, but I think it's good DMing practice to make sure adventures give everybody something to do, and don't always cater to the combat strengths of PCs.
But now I'm rambling... In a nutshell, everybody's game is beautiful in its own way, and that's what makes D&D a great hobby.
P.S. About Paranoia, I've only played once or twice and wasn't a big fan, but I think because I was playing with a few knuckleheads. It probably would have been more enjoyable with different people.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
For my campaigns, the sweet-spot has always felt like 12th-17th level, so I wanted to make an adventure that could work for DMs who feel under-served by the tons of WICKED-sweet low level adventures. I suppose that I am, more than anything, just surprised that my adventure wasn't the tippy-top of recommended Character Level for this round.
You're a madman, Mr. Nelson - and I want to party with you every day.
[EDIT: Stupid post-eating board gremlins]
Oh I don't know how mad I am... but then again it's the insane who THINK everyone in the world is crazy but them!!!
In a lot of ways, I'm much more traditional (though years ago my 1st Ed campaign did foray into the Marvel Universe for adventure arcs including the Darkhold, the Montesi Formula, Dracula, and the Casket of Ancient Winters), though with a lot of politics and intrigue and conversation and historical exploration (divinations are popular in my games) mixed in with powergaming and hacking and slashing. Never been a big anime fan, but love old-school D&D adventures, history, fantasy novels, movies, comics... lots of bits and pieces filter into my games.
But as far as level, while I think low-level would have been a good way to stand out in this contest (ironically, since I thought going up to 16th would do that - I was the highest level, but not by much), I really looked at the GameMastery modules out there to see. Highest level one: 11th. next highest: 9th. Come on, sure low-level mods get used more, but what about PCs who make it, who get to use those juicy powers, who are becoming BIG SHOTS? Where's the love?
So high level it was, and if that makes me mad then A MADMAN AM I!!!
Booms, I am put in mind of the immortal words of the great philosophers... that's right, KISS: "I want to rock and roll all night, and PARTY EVERY DAY!" I may not quite be an over-the-top, Dew-fueled gonzo savant, but I think we would have a great time sharing a fizzy beverage, throwing the dice, and shooting the breeze (with flaming-zombie cannonballs, of course). If I'm ever in Macomb...
|
|
I think it's sad that people would not vote for a great story line just because it's not set for the level your group tends to play, or thinks is optimal, or whatever. Why not instead judge the submission for what it's trying to do at the level it's trying to do it?
"Oh, this story is brilliant, but it's set for level 12, and I never play above level 6, so it's DQ'd". WHAT?!? And for god's sakes, branch out a little! I've had some GREAT roleplaying sessions at 1st level, I've had some great ones at 24th, and I've had great ones everywhere in between. I would hope people would vote on what would be the best material to create those, at WHATEVER level it's written for.
Now, if it says "written for 12th level", and it's something your average 7th level party would breeze through, that's a problem. Or vice-versa, if it is written for 12th, and there's no way in the 7 hells an average 15th level party would have any hope of successfully completing the adventure, that's a problem too. But if it's written for 12th, and WELL written for 12th, and it would be a not-impossible challenge for 12th, then it should be worthy of consideration, all else equal.
Sorry...rant over. Anybody need this soapbox?
I think it's sad that people would not vote for a great story line just because it's not set for the level your group tends to play, or thinks is optimal, or whatever. Why not instead judge the submission for what it's trying to do at the level it's trying to do it?
"Oh, this story is brilliant, but it's set for level 12, and I never play above level 6, so it's DQ'd". WHAT?!? And for god's sakes, branch out a little! I've had some GREAT roleplaying sessions at 1st level, I've had some great ones at 24th, and I've had great ones everywhere in between. I would hope people would vote on what would be the best material to create those, at WHATEVER level it's written for.
Now, if it says "written for 12th level", and it's something your average 7th level party would breeze through, that's a problem. Or vice-versa, if it is written for 12th, and there's no way in the 7 hells an average 15th level party would have any hope of successfully completing the adventure, that's a problem too. But if it's written for 12th, and WELL written for 12th, and it would be a not-impossible challenge for 12th, then it should be worthy of consideration, all else equal.
Sorry...rant over. Anybody need this soapbox?
Well, I'd hate to break someone else's soapbox, but I think people will naturally gravitate to that which appeals to their taste. Level difinitely counts in that regard. Might not be my top criterion, but I wouldn't dismiss it as a possible top criterion.
If this is a popularity concept on whose work would we buy, then whether you'd buy something based on level likely plays a part.
|
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
,
Dedicated Voter Season 6
aka Eyebite
|
Now, if it says "written for 12th level", and it's something your average 7th level party would breeze through, that's a problem. Or vice-versa, if it is written for 12th, and there's no way in the 7 hells an average 15th level party would have any hope of successfully completing the adventure, that's a problem too. But if it's written for 12th, and WELL written for 12th, and it would be a not-impossible challenge for 12th, then it should be worthy of consideration, all else equal.
Sorry...rant over. Anybody need this soapbox?
I can't speak for anyone else, but I voted for the submission that I thought was the best, period. I would have preferred a low level submission, but I voted for the one that I thought was the best written and most interesting. YMMV
|
|
I see that viewpoint, Propelia, and honestly, I can certainly understand people who take the level of the adventure into consideration. But it should be just one of MANY factors.
Some of the people on here seem to be dismissing perfectly good work out of hand SOLELY because of the level it's geared towards, and that it doesn't fit with what they prefer, and I think that's unfortunate. That's all I'm trying to say.
I see that viewpoint, Propelia, and honestly, I can certainly understand people who take the level of the adventure into consideration. But it should be just one of MANY factors.
I agree whole-heartedly that the level issue should only be one of many factors of the decision.
In my case it ultimately came down to a choice of Rob vs. Jason. If their submissions were the only thing I had to go on it was almost a dead heat except that the lower level of Rob's made his submission slightly more attractive to me. That, combined with the fact that I did have prior work to look at (and Rob's was, in my opinion, stronger), meant Rob did get my vote. The level of the proposed adventure only really played a part in the decision right at the end.
Doesn't change the fact that I still wish we'd gotten one submission in the 5th or 6th level range. :-)
:-j(enni)
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
I see that viewpoint, Propelia, and honestly, I can certainly understand people who take the level of the adventure into consideration. But it should be just one of MANY factors.I agree whole-heartedly that the level issue should only be one of many factors of the decision.
In my case it ultimately came down to a choice of Rob vs. Jason. If their submissions were the only thing I had to go on it was almost a dead heat except that the lower level of Rob's made his submission slightly more attractive to me. That, combined with the fact that I did have prior work to look at (and Rob's was, in my opinion, stronger), meant Rob did get my vote. The level of the proposed adventure only really played a part in the decision right at the end.
Doesn't change the fact that I still wish we'd gotten one submission in the 5th or 6th level range. :-)
:-j(enni)
The idea I didn't use was for 4th level and involved a nymph posing as a goddess in a barbarian-type area. A tale of vengeance, anguish, loss, and a love stronger than death. A little more dramatique perhaps, but hey, I had my choice of what to do and I was happy with the concept I used. We'll see how it all turns out.
I was also a bit disappointed that everybody was shooting for such high levels...admittedly writing high level adventures can include more pizzazz, which on the other hand means that writing a great proposal for low levels is a good feat...so someone gunning for those levels 4-6 would have been great.
Of course I can consider stories and also some of the writing but on mechanistic viewpoint it is harder for me to judge things which rarely make a blip in my experience, and how high-level adventures are done and played is one of them.
Oh well. With narrow marginal I liked Christine's submission the best, and since I had generally liked her entries best in previous rounds too, she is my candidate for RPG superstardom.
Seeing Rob's name in source books or articles would be a selling point too though (and yes, I like you too, Clinton and Jason).
In a lot of ways, I'm much more traditional (though years ago my 1st Ed campaign did foray into the Marvel Universe for adventure arcs including the Darkhold, the Montesi Formula, Dracula, and the Casket of Ancient Winters), though with a lot of politics and intrigue and conversation and historical exploration (divinations are popular in my games) mixed in with powergaming and hacking and slashing. Never been a big anime fan, but love old-school D&D adventures, history, fantasy novels, movies, comics... lots of bits and pieces filter into my games.
I think that's why your stuff throughout the contest appealed to me so much. Rohthang's Rest, In the Bleak Midwinter...that's 1E savory flavor with 3E sensibilitites. Core feel, but fresh. I'd pay for something with your name on it, if that's any measure of how much I liked your material.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
I think that's why your stuff throughout the contest appealed to me so much. Rohthang's Rest, In the Bleak Midwinter...that's 1E savory flavor with 3E sensibilitites. Core feel, but fresh. I'd pay for something with your name on it, if that's any measure of how much I liked your material.
In a lot of ways, I'm much more traditional (though years ago my 1st Ed campaign did foray into the Marvel Universe for adventure arcs including the Darkhold, the Montesi Formula, Dracula, and the Casket of Ancient Winters), though with a lot of politics and intrigue and conversation and historical exploration (divinations are popular in my games) mixed in with powergaming and hacking and slashing. Never been a big anime fan, but love old-school D&D adventures, history, fantasy novels, movies, comics... lots of bits and pieces filter into my games.
That's a great measure of it, and I thank you for the compliment. I hope I have the opportunity to give you a chance to do that one of these days.
If you're curious, you could dig around for back issues of Dungeon if you want to see the two I've done previously - I believe "Practical Magic" was in #112 and "Man Forever" was in #137. Both are urban/town-based adventures, with some dungeony parts mixed in, with (as you might guess) plenty of disguise, misdirection, treachery, and double-dealing. What can I say, I like what I like!
|
|
I'm more familiar with low to mid-level gaming (and DMing), so it's easier for me to really feel what is going to happen in a particular situation.
High level adventures are a lot less linear, in my experience. (In 2E, we ran the Bloodstone adventures, and after the introductory bits, the Wizard said, "So it looks like Orcus is behind all of this. Wanna just go to the Abyss and kill him?" The DM had an eye-twitch and we *chose* to plod through the adventure and not kill Orcus until the end. The fairly hapless Illusionist, that had gotten killed twice by other encounters, ended up killing the Tarrasque, twice, thanks to a mistake that sent us back to that encounter again.)
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
I'm more familiar with low to mid-level gaming (and DMing), so it's easier for me to really feel what is going to happen in a particular situation.
High level adventures are a lot less linear, in my experience. (In 2E, we ran the Bloodstone adventures, and after the introductory bits, the Wizard said, "So it looks like Orcus is behind all of this. Wanna just go to the Abyss and kill him?" The DM had an eye-twitch and we *chose* to plod through the adventure and not kill Orcus until the end. The fairly hapless Illusionist, that had gotten killed twice by other encounters, ended up killing the Tarrasque, twice, thanks to a mistake that sent us back to that encounter again.)
If I'm not mistaken, I think you can actually encounter 'the' tarrasque TWICE in that series of adventures, once on the Prime Material (in Mines of Bloodstone) and once on the Abyss (Throne of Bloodstone). Maybe one has the fiendish template... :)
I think the flavor text for the encounter was something like this:
"You see a large horned monster in this room. It charges you."
No joke. That was it. Epic setup for an epic encounter? Not exactly...
(For fun, I once statted out a paragon tarrasque. Now THAT made a satisfying monster!)
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4
|
No joke. That was it. Epic setup for an epic encounter? Not exactly...(For fun, I once statted out a paragon tarrasque. Now THAT made a satisfying monster!)
Slick! You know, I once found an online group where all the guys were committed to "template-removal' - the idea being that most creatures have a "hidden template" already applied.
Take a standard grimlock, strip off all the parts that aren't an orc, and you now have the "Grimlock" template, which you can stick onto a grey render or a hell-hound or whatever.
Using the rules from Savage Species, you can "undo" the Gelatinous template from the gelatinous cube, creating . . . The Cube!
But my favorite was the "Tarrasque"-template: peel off everything that isn't a Tyrannosaurus Rex (the reflective carapace & the 40/round regeneration, for example) and you can then apply the difference to another critter.
And yes, the Tarrasque temple adds 12 to a creatures CR and increases their size category TWICE.
Apply that bad-boy to a Balor - preferably subbing in a custom Tyranid-Augmented Bloodthirster on a four inch by four inch base for the fig - and say goodbye to those pesky PCs once and for all!
Boomer, Boomer, Boomer. Tch. You suprise me.
I'd really rather expect something far more devasting from you, like adding the Tarrasque Template to a 150HD Paragon Hecatoncheire quintuple-Gestalt Druid 20//Cleric 20//Wizard20//Warblade 20//Psychic Warrior 20.
On fire.
Now even Invisible Christopher Walken might (albeit very, very briefly) balk at that one.
Heck, Pun-Pun'd probably be going "um...okay...that ain't good..."
Or I am just going too much over the top again?
High level adventures are a lot less linear, in my experience. (In 2E, we ran the Bloodstone adventures, and after the introductory bits, the Wizard said, "So it looks like Orcus is behind all of this. Wanna just go to the Abyss and kill him?" The DM had an eye-twitch and we *chose* to plod through the adventure and not kill Orcus until the end.
That is the killer for super high level stuff. You have to expect that the characters will pull any random thing out of their derriere.
However, I typically address that by ramping up the Powers. I mean, if you've got 40th level characters walking around, what are the odds that Orcus is CR32 (or that Cthulhu is CR34)?
I haven't even bothered to stat any of the Lords of the Nine yet, and don't anticipate having to do so for quite some time. As presented in FCII they make nice aspects, but that's it. Stir that with some Dicefreaks "The Gates of Hell" goodness, and it's quite nice.
Slick! You know, I once found an online group where all the guys were committed to "template-removal' - the idea being that most creatures have a "hidden template" already applied.
Take a standard grimlock, strip off all the parts that aren't an orc, and you now have the "Grimlock" template, which you can stick onto a grey render or a hell-hound or whatever.
Using the rules from Savage Species, you can "undo" the Gelatinous template from the gelatinous cube, creating . . . The Cube!
But my favorite was the "Tarrasque"-template: peel off everything that isn't a Tyrannosaurus Rex (the reflective carapace & the 40/round regeneration, for example) and you can then apply the difference to another critter.
And yes, the Tarrasque temple adds 12 to a creatures CR and increases their size category TWICE.
Apply that bad-boy to a Balor - preferably subbing in a custom Tyranid-Augmented Bloodthirster on a four inch by four inch base for the fig - and say goodbye to those pesky PCs once and for all!
Hmmm ..... what a marvelous idea. That's even better than the epic pseudonatural template. Nice as that one is, I'm getting tired of throwing it on everything. Though the multi-headed template from Savage Species is no slouch either.
And I'm digging the demon lords article from the last Dragon.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
As an aside, I prefer high to very high level stuff. It's just so much bloody work creating high level opponents that sometimes my plotline suffers, and that's when I get cranky - it's nice to have some powerful BBEG that I can use with minimal twiddling of the dials.
Boomer, Boomer, Boomer. Tch. You suprise me.
I'd really rather expect something far more devasting from you, like adding the Tarrasque Template to a 150HD Paragon Hecatoncheire quintuple-Gestalt Druid 20//Cleric 20//Wizard20//Warblade 20//Psychic Warrior 20.
On fire.
Now even Invisible Christopher Walken might (albeit very, very briefly) balk at that one.
Heck, Pun-Pun'd probably be going "um...okay...that ain't good..."
Or I am just going too much over the top again?
Reminds me of the old 1st Ed days where we joked about making a hybird creature that was half-roc, half-hydra (with the heads being chromatic dragon heads, roughly equivalent of Tiamat,) with beholders as heads, giving it mind-flayer (back then, no one called them ilithids) abilities, and then turning it into a lich. Oh, and it had displacer beast blinking.
Yes, we all marveled at the thought of having to encounter the chromatic rocdebehydralichflayer.