|
Alright, I've known Paizo stuff to be pretty challenging for a long time (a number of TPKs in Shackled City proved that) but this is just getting ridiculous.
5 level 6 characters, with Shalelu level 5 and two level 4 cohorts didn't stand a chance against Xanesha. I'm tired of having to fudge dice in these adventures, scale it down a little bit.
Oh and the map of the clocktower was extremely confusing as to where platforms landings/how the stairs worked for the middle maps. This adventure just got completley 'blah' after Foxglove Manor (which was awesome except for Iesha being a little too powerful in the fight against Aldern). There wasn't anywhere near enough of a focus on the cult, the group is expecting 5 other 'justice ironbriar' like villains to make up the leadership of the cult, and I can easily understand why, the 15 cultist mooks seem just as they are, mooks. Thankfully they aren't too interested in that aspect of the storyline and we can just move on to Turtleback Ferry.
But I was very disappointed with the last half of Skinsaw I must say; shame too with such a strong start.
Edit: Just a note that I put this in Pathfinder General because it's a comment/request for the APs overall. The Gamemastery modules seem to be balanced much much better.
Yeah - she's pretty brutal. AC is 26 and then she castes fly, mage armour, shield, haste, mirror image, invisibility. To top it off she casts silence on the bell tower room and then exits the room and flies around the bell tower blasting PCs. Her speed is ungodly, her number of attacks phenominal and she should be nearly impossible to hit for 6th level players. That said their is only one of her - she should be suffering from the single BBEG problem but she might just have enough buffs to pull it off.
Hmm - her saves are astounding as well so she's not likely to go down to something cheap like glitterdust. She's pretty cool all in all but maybe Mary Yamato's solution of swapping her with the later, more mundane Lamia Matriarch is a good idea.
I mean she rocks and all and I love the scene and her tactics (battling a creature thats flying around a tower the PCs are in is cool) but maybe she's a bit too good here unless the PCs get some extra help from somewhere.
TPK IMC.
Xanesha can either be seen a very tough challenge that tests what a DM does in this situation (let the dice fall as they may, rework encounters to be 'fair' or fudge dice during play) to review later ("Holy crap, how did your table beat Xanesha?") or perhaps she's a failure of the 3.5 CR/EL system in general.
Paizo does not playtest nor require their authors to playtest. The logic is that their game is built on a system that is supposed to be balanced, but in this case I think a party who fought Xanesha would have quickly said 'Yes, this is a bit too much'.
Paizo, did anyone playtest Xanesha before she was printed? If so, what was the feedback?
|
|
I had her waste a few rounds of her haste by curing herself instead of poking away at the spear (btw is that supposed to be a +1 spear, if it has a magical ability it has to be, but it doesn't seem that way in her stats). And they managed to get off a very lucky Ray of Enfeeblement, but I still had her retreat at about 26 HP instead of less than 20.
I was a little disappointed with the second part of Skinsaw Murders too. It wouldn't be hard to flesh it out and add more detail though. I think that ultimately the problem was that they spent too much space on the utter awesomeness that was Foxglove Manor and weren't left with enough space to properly expand on the next part. Sometime I'd like to see an expanded version of the Skinsaw Murders thats been edited to be more of a standalone and has a more thorough second half.
When we faced off against Xaneesha we went up and fought her on the tower. When it became clear we weren't doing jack against her, we fled. She pursued us and things were looking very bad for our heroes when I convinced our druid to use a spell to break the chains holding one of the bells up. It fell, slamming into Xaneesha and knocking her against a wall. When she recovered, the druid summoned a hippogriff to grapple her. Needless to say the hippogriff didn't last long but the DM ruled that Xaneesha was still tangled in its corpse and falling towards the ground. Thats when we lit the hippogriff on fire.
Thats when we lit the hippogriff on fire.
That's a sentence you don't hear enough!
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32
|
You're not alone.
Unfortunately this link isn't working although it worked when I first checked it out. In this link one of the posers... I mean, posters (yeah sure I do (still j/k)) asked what spells had no Verbal Components. I immediately wondered this myself and decided to figure it out and list them. The following is a list of MOST of the non-verbal spells in the Player's Handbook & Spell Compendium, cause even I might have missed some.
PLAYERS HB
gaseous form
hide from animals (druid, ranger)
hypnotic pattern (wizard/sorcerer)
mislead
rainbow pattern (wizard/sorcerer)
SPELL COMPENDIUM: accelerated movement, aiming at the target, air breathing, amorphous form, amplify, animate breath, breath flare, breath weapon admixture, breath weapon substitution, buoyant lifting, corpse candle, desiccating bubble, dispelling breath, distract, dragonskin, dream sight, enervating breath, ethereal breath, hide from dragons, hunter’s mercy (ranger), ice knife, imperious glare, joyful noise, know opponent, launch item, mesmerizing glare, naturewatch, rebuking breath, silent portal, stalking brand, sticky fingers, stunning breath, greater stunning breath, telepathic aura, wings of the sea
There are enough spells in the Spell Compendium to easily get around Silence. Assuming, the players don't just huck the magick'd object to begin with. Heck, launch item is a cantrip for sorcerers & wizards which'll do just that!
|
On of my players was a duskblade, so he was able to get in one good, serious melee attack that hit her pretty hard.
then, the summoning druid summoned a dire lion and cast a flight spell upon it using his Summoner's Totem. It flew up to her and grappled, preventing her escape via flight. Then they started shooting her with ranged spells and touch effects. It actually wasnt that hard for them, they got lucky.
Plus, I kind of forgot to factor in some of her buffs, and she was forced to move around alot, which lost her some of her extra attacks.
On of my players was a duskblade, so he was able to get in one good, serious melee attack that hit her pretty hard.
then, the summoning druid summoned a dire lion and cast a flight spell upon it using his Summoner's Totem. It flew up to her and grappled, preventing her escape via flight. Then they started shooting her with ranged spells and touch effects. It actually wasnt that hard for them, they got lucky.
Plus, I kind of forgot to factor in some of her buffs, and she was forced to move around alot, which lost her some of her extra attacks.
Our group's duskblade was hit in the first round by the Impaler of Thorns. She spent the rest of the fight on the top of the tower unconcious and we only just decided to take the risk of rescuing her on our way out.
Yeah - she's pretty brutal. AC is 26 and then she castes fly, mage armour, shield, haste, mirror image, invisibility.
In fact, her AC is 26 including Mage Armor, Shield and Haste (the spells are incorporated into her stats).
Well, we adventure with 4-8 characters on any given day and have always been about 1 level below recommended because of this but, my goup has found pathfinder insanely difficult. What started as a fun and interesting plot that could incorporate plenty of role-playing has been trashed by the endless rotations of new characters caused by the brutal natues of the "boss monsters". Don't get me wrong, I love the premise of pathfinder, love the adventures themselves, but it just seems to me that the recomended levels for them are a tad low. I like a challenge, what I don't like is that every player (including myself) currently has at least 2 backup characters because we know that our crrent ones will inevitably bite the dust. Ressurections are out of the question as well because of the sheer cost to the party both in power and money.
It strikes me that pathfidner could be a tad more balanced, with greater focus on creating memorable foes than immortal ones. Everytime my group has faced a boss, at least one player is dead by the end of the fight even with heal-bots, tanks, and arcane howitzers.
Oh and off topic but... couln't there be a single bloody safe pool of water in the path? Every single pool we come across has some curse or monster associated with it, from the bunyip in #1 to the scrag in #3 it's gotten so annoying that my party has started to treat pools of water as if they were land-mines.
Creative Director
|
Yeah... Xanesha was a bit too much. We should have taken a little bit of her over-the-top PC-murdering skills and given them to Ironbriar, making him tougher and her a little less so.
That said... we don't know your game group. When we present an adventure, it has to make some assumptions about the group that may be playing it... and sometimes those assumptions end up being really off. In the case of a character like Xanesha, where we assume the PCs are flying or have dispel magic or dimension door or other effects a 7th level party would normally have, you can have an encounter that's challenging only for the toughest PCs and that's a TPK for everyone else.
Actually... that brings up another question. What level were your PCs when they faced Xanesha? The encounter itself more or less assumes a party of 7th level characters, which is where a group should be if they've finished the majority of Burnt Offerings and Skinsaw. If you don't hand out XP at the end of every session, it's really REALLY easy for a group to suddenly be outmatched when an Adventure Path ratchets up the expected party level in the course of an adventure.
Would adding in a bit that says what average party level each of the various portions of the adventure expects be a good thing?
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Paizo does not playtest nor require their authors to playtest. The logic is that their game is built on a system that is supposed to be balanced, but in this case I think a party who fought Xanesha would have quickly said 'Yes, this is a bit too much'.
Paizo, did anyone playtest Xanesha before she was printed? If so, what was the feedback?
We don't playtest in-housebecause we don't have time to do so. It's unfortunate, but true. The responsibility of playtesting adventures falls squarely on the shoulders of the adventure writer.
For the most part, the CR system works pretty well at helping balance encounters, and after developing hundreds and hundreds of encounters, you get to be pretty good at eyeballing things yourself... but it's far from a perfect system, and now and then things get through that are too tough (or too easy). And honestly? In theory, that's where the final "quality control" check, the GM, kicks in. I know it's a bit of a cop-out to say that it's the GM's responsibility to make sure an adventure or encounter is appropriate for his group, but it's also true. You know your group better than me.
That said, do keep posting to these boards when you encounter something that seems over the top. We've had a LOT of feedback saying Ironbriar was too easy and Xanesha was too tough, and I've taken that feedback to heart and applied it to Pathfinder's current encounters. Hopefully with each volume, the crazy encounters will be getting less and less. Or at the very least, we'll be able to run a designer's note sidebar that acts as a warning: "BEWARE: THE FOLLOWING ENCOUNTER IS ROUGH!"
Actually... that brings up another question. What level were your PCs when they faced Xanesha? The encounter itself more or less assumes a party of 7th level characters, which is where a group should be if they've finished the majority of Burnt Offerings and Skinsaw.
We were 6th level when we encountered Xaneesha.
|
I haven't run the encounter yet, but I did playtest it with the 7th level sample characters at the back of The Hook Mountain Massacre.
They were massacred a bit early.
The whole dungeon seems too difficult to be completed in one go by a core-only party. I can see a party heavy on supplements struggling through, however--which is good. I like my adventures to be intentionally difficult just so that I don't have to retool it for the sake of the sneaky new spells and PrCs that the party has.
And I certainly agree that more space needed to be spent on the latter half of the adventure; in particular, I think Xanesha's plans in case she escapes need fleshing out. But I'm happy to do that myself, and the Skinsaw Murders is still one of my favourite parts in the series.
Would adding in a bit that says what average party level each of the various portions of the adventure expects be a good thing?
Yes it would. You can't really control pacing, but having suggestions for it would be a great help.
And the CR10 next to her name isn't fair enough warning for the DM?
Yeah, fair enough, but it wouldn't be objectible, especially if it added it in for different numbers of pc's, for example, 4 lv7's, but for a party of six all lv.6 should suffice.
And it can't take up that much space, or it shouldn't, because while somewhat helpful, especially gauging the amount people struggled with Xanesha, it shouldn't take away from the adventure's space, which is already limited enough.
Maybe but it up on the forum's, as a stickied thread, so that the people who buy it can playtest it and Paizo can get alot of feedback on how the fight/encounter went, and so they know how such a thing will work in future and update the suggested level thread, etc.
|
|
Sure, it's a great warning to the encounter itself, but it's useless to the pace of the adventure. Should the party try to complete the clocktower in a single run, without retreat? Should they go straight to the clocktower after fighting Ironbriar? Should they take on Ironbriar after defeating Aldern, without fully exploring Foxglove Manor?
If there's any one thing the adventure could benefit from, I believe that it's a closer look at how it's meant to be run. After all, the players always screw up the pacing, and this seems to be a good example. The easier it is for the DM to compensate, the better.
|
|
I would say it's poor planning on the part of the DM.
The room is listed as a EL10.
The monster is listed as a CR10.
Things that can't be helped..
The DM rolling a bunch of 20s in a row.
The players rollings a bunch of 1s in a row.
The session going faster then the DM expect and didn't read that far.
HOWEVER...
When the DM reads the last 3 peoples of the adventure, knows what's coming, and to still run it knowing that the party is 3-4 levels BELOW 2 warnings that are given, it's the DM's fault for the party wipe.
Maybe the encounter is a little bit tougher then it should be considering the XP the party may have earned up to that point in the adventure, bad Paizo. However, there are 2 labels telling you that you should be close to mid level to fight her.
There's no reason for an extra special label. That's ridiculous.
Wait.. nevermind.. scratch that, you're right.. we need special labels.
While we're putting special labels for boss fights, let's get rid of CR and EL labels and use lengthy explanations for each encounter about expected party progress at each point since the ones that have always been used aren't explicit enough.
On of my players was a duskblade, so he was able to get in one good, serious melee attack that hit her pretty hard.
then, the summoning druid summoned a dire lion and cast a flight spell upon it using his Summoner's Totem. It flew up to her and grappled, preventing her escape via flight. Then they started shooting her with ranged spells and touch effects. It actually wasnt that hard for them, they got lucky.
Plus, I kind of forgot to factor in some of her buffs, and she was forced to move around alot, which lost her some of her extra attacks.
I note that your using splat books. She's somewhat reasonable if we presume that the PCs have access to splat books and do some min maxing. However this campaign is supposed to presume core only. Splat book wielding DMs (like myself) should have to update the campaign to deal with the fact that our PCs our more powerful. She should be beatable with a party thats using core only and I'm not sure that this is the case.
Yeah - she's pretty brutal. AC is 26 and then she castes fly, mage armour, shield, haste, mirror image, invisibility.In fact, her AC is 26 including Mage Armor, Shield and Haste (the spells are incorporated into her stats).
Well that does make her somewhat more reasonable - I see know where it says that but there should be more of a visual clue in the stat block. Bold the spells or put a little star beside them for example.
I haven't run this encounter yet. My players just made it to Magnimar last session and investigated the first lead there. They skipped over a large section of the beginning of Skinsaw Murders, so they are only 5th level.
Because of this, I'm expanding the campaign a bit using the following (behind spoiler tag in case my nosy players are reading):
In addition, I'm planning on expanding the campaign past 15th level using something from Elder Evils. I'm seeding that plotline now with early encounters.
Between the above, I figure the payers will be 6th level when they encounter Ironbriar (who I was considering making a cleric of Norgorber/Champion of Death from Arcana Unearthed) and they should be 7th by the time they fight Xanesha.
The one thing that I'd like to see improved upon in the next adventure path (which I'm supporting) is more ways to progress the plot then notes/journals/correspondence. It seems like they are all that the adventures use so far.
Well that does make her somewhat more reasonable - I see know where it says that but there should be more of a visual clue in the stat block. Bold the spells or put a little star beside them for example.
Watch for the Before Combat tag in the Tactics block. All of Paizos new adventures, be it GameMastery or Pathfinder adventures, use this area to alert you of buff spells and usually tell you that they are included in the stats presented. There's also a Base Statistics section sometimes included in that Tactics block if there's a lot of buffs included. It's something you have to get used to looking for, I guess.
|
|
Watch for the Before Combat tag in the Tactics block. All of Paizos new adventures, be it GameMastery or Pathfinder adventures, use this area to alert you of buff spells and usually tell you that they are included in the stats presented. There's also a Base Statistics section sometimes included in that Tactics block if there's a lot of buffs included. It's something you have to get used to looking for, I guess.
Yeap. Reading the whole encounter and understanding how it's intended to play out is supposed to do be done as part of prep before the that game session. Once that's done DMs should be able to come up with a plan B or atleast when they're at the table, be familiar enough with the encounter to do something on the fly.
|
Would adding in a bit that says what average party level each of the various portions of the adventure expects be a good thing?
Absolutely!
I realise this wasn't done in the early Pathfinder volumes, however this has been requested on the boards previously, and I'm surprised it hasn't already been implemented in volumes coming out now. Especially when a single volume can advance characters three levels, and not every DM is experienced with the whole EL/CR to XP conversion (I know I'm not!)
I don't tally XP per encounter, especially with something long-running like Pathfinder, I expect the adventure to inform me when might be appropriate to level the characters. I know the expected character level for each Pathfinder volume (Burnt Offerings 1-3, Skinsaw 4-6 etc), but not the stages within each volume, eg when to level up to 2, 3, 5 or 6?
I realise that not every group is going to play the same, some may have four players, others may have six, some may skip encounters, others may do additional side-treks, but a rough guide would be most useful.
I really appreciated the sidebar in Burnt Offerings discussing woodland stride, as I realised the characters should be 2nd level before reaching that point.
While some DMs might consider it a no-brainer to expect characters to have a counter to a villain's powers prior to that encounter (eg, access to flight prior to combating a flying opponent), that won't be obvious to everyone (they should be able to take it down with ranged attacks).
I am comfortable running low-level adventures, but I haven't had much experience running mid-high level. Pathfinder is an excellent product, but it will be a learning curve for many as the challenges increase. Something as simple as "recommended character level: X" or "adventuring party recommended access to flight" sidebar in appropriate places could assist the GM and prevent TPK.
Some groups will have what is required to adequately deal with the threat, but if a wizard specialised in a different field, the GM may be pre-warned to drop an appropriate magic item as treasure prior to the upcoming encounter.
|
|
I'd like to point out that the CR and EL matched, and they shouldn't have. The CR doesn't account for things like terrain advantage and prep time (which is what the EL is for) and Xanesha definitely had both.
My group was all 6th level and they did almost everything in Burnt Offerings (skipped a few things in Thistletop), all of Foxglove Manor (every single haunt and encounter except fighting the birds), a side adventure from Dungeon (the one with the Runehounds) after Foxglove Manor to get them up to 4th, and then the Townhouse/Seven Sawmill/Bottom of the clock tower.
The party has ranged from 3-5 players, but even the three who always come to every game were still only level 6.
Also, no, if you retro her AC it's 30 after the buffs.
Before buffs:
AC 26: +1 Armor (Snakeskin Tunic), +1 Deflection (Ring of Prot), +6 Dex, +9 Nat, -1 size.
Haste adds +1 Dodge, and Mage Armor adds +4 Armor, which overrides the tunic.
I didn't even USE Deep Slumber, Major Image, Mirror Image or Suggestion.
Also Drain was a bit rough too, they ended up spending a big chunk of their reward on buying a half-charged wand of Restoration (but at least that will come in handy later). If I had been just using her touch attack wisdom drain though she could've dropped everyone into comas easily, and negated any healing by killing the healer's casting stat.
|
|
Especially when a single volume can advance characters three levels, and not every DM is experienced with the whole EL/CR to XP conversion (I know I'm not!)
It's not about experience, it's about understanding the rules and the adventure before you DM. The only way you're going to do that is to read the DMG and make sure you understand the basics.
Encounter Level means the average level of a party of four +2.
That means four characters who's average level is 6, can handle a EL8 encounter.
And not to be condescending.. ok I really am being condescending.. you figure out average level like this..
fighter 3, wizard 4, rogue 1, druid 3
3 + 4 + 1 + 3 = 11
11/4 = 2.75 or 3
You add up everyone's level and then divide by the number of characters. They can handle anything fully rested of +2 more then that number.
The only different between EL and CR is EL refers to everything in the fight, and CR is there for party vs 1 monster.
If you're sitting there DMing and don't wonder what EL means for each room or section of the map, your player's deserve to have their characters get killed for letting you DM.
|
|
It's not about experience, it's about understanding the rules and the adventure before you DM. The only way you're going to do that is to read the DMG and make sure you understand the basics.Encounter Level means the average level of a party of four +2.
That means four characters who's average level is 6, can handle a EL8 encounter.
And not to be condescending.. ok I really am being condescending.. you figure out average level like this..
fighter 3, wizard 4, rogue 1, druid 3
3 + 4 + 1 + 3 = 11
11/4 = 2.75 or 3You add up everyone's level and then divide by the number of characters. They can handle anything fully rested of +2 more then that number.
The only different between EL and CR is EL refers to everything in the fight, and CR is there for party vs 1 monster.
If you're sitting there DMing and don't wonder what EL means for each room or section of the map, your player's deserve to have their characters get killed for letting you DM.
SirUrza, you might want to make sure you’ve got all your facts straight before you go being condescending and rude to other posters. That includes correctly understanding the rules, and correctly understanding the question being asked / issue being discussed.
|
|
SirUrza, you might want to make sure you’ve got all your facts straight before you go being condescending and rude to other posters. That includes correctly understanding the rules, and correctly understanding the question being asked / issue being discussed.
Except that the discussion has moved past the original poster's issue and onto extra labeling that's already there. .
Aside from giving a very basic definition of EL, nothing I said was inaccurate. A thorough definition of how EL is calculated when you have multiple creatures isn't necessary or even relevant. And I looked at the DMG just now, it says that 1 or 2 levels higher will tax the PC resources and they should be able to take 2 such encounters before needing to rest but risk possible death. Hence why I said a fully rested party can handle +2.
I welcome a correction if my understanding is wrong... but like I said, we only lost 1 party member when we played through and we're about half way through PF4 as of yesterday without any other deaths even though we have someone in the group that's 1/2 our level now.
|
|
SirUrza, I presumed you were responding to Darkwhite’s post, not the original post (which I agree, the discussion has to some degree moved beyond).
Although Darkwhite admitted to being inexperienced with EL/CR to XP conversions, he/she did not ask what EL was, nor ask how to work out average party level.
What Darkwhite did ask was how to determine what level party should be before tackling a particular part of the adventure; a question which your post only partially addressed at best; using the information you provided, it could be assumed that a party would need an average party level of 8th before tackling an EL10 encounter. I realise that’s not what you are saying, but the point is you didn’t answer the question.
While perhaps nothing you said was inaccurate, stating that “Encounter Level means the average level of a party of four +2” is oversimplification to the point of confusion… In fact, I’d go as far to say that the statement is incorrect, but I see what you’re getting at, so I guess it’s understandable in context.
To be honest, what I reacted to most in your post was the last sentence; “If you're sitting there DMing and don't wonder what EL means for each room or section of the map, your player's deserve to have their characters get killed for letting you DM.” I think that is extremely rude and unnecessary, particularly considering that, as far as I can see, no one in this thread is saying they don’t understand what EL means; they are questioning whether the listed EL is correct or appropriate.
|
|
So, whose party was rested after the climb up that tower?Hence why I said a fully rested party can handle +2.
No ones, which is why a DM should be paying close attention to the EL10 and CR10 for that fight.
Particularly since they just took on a CR8 a page before.
My point has been there is warning and the DM should do something about it before they get to that point if the party can't handle it. Like a random encounter or two, or a side quest. It's part of DM prep before the game session to be familiar with what's a head before the start of the session.
|
|
No ones, which is why a DM should be paying close attention to the EL10 and CR10 for that fight.Particularly since they just took on a CR8 a page before.
My point has been there is warning and the DM should do something about it before they get to that point if the party can't handle it. Like a random encounter or two, or a side quest. It's part of DM prep before the game session to be familiar with what's a head before the start of the session.
Agreed. The information that this is an EL10 encounter is there, and the DM should have a reasonable idea of what that means, and must take some responsibility on that.
The question here is, was this encounter really an EL10 encounter? Or was something not taken into account, or is this a case where the CR system isn’t quite working? The second question is, was an EL10 encounter (if that’s what it is) appropriate at this point in the adventure?
It sounds like it was about right for your group, but obviously other groups are not finding that to be the case, so it makes sense to at least question it.
If the designers are putting in an encounter that they know will be tough for its EL, it may be appropriate to note this; whether this was one of those encounters I suppose is still open to debate.
|
|
Sidequests should not be required to run these adventures; that's the whole point of the adventure paths. If a DM wants to add sidequests maybe to better flesh out a PC back story or something, kudos to him. The books though should be written with the idea that only the information in the book is being used.
My group even rested after the construct battle (but they had a particularly hard time of it because they weren't bright enough to shoot at it from upstairs where it clearly couldn't follow)
But even by your 'party average level +2' system, 10 is still three higher than 7 (and the encounter is most definitely more like an 11) which is what the adventure is described as bringing characters to (my group isn't 7 yet even AFTER the fight, the only one who'll make it is the one who does a campaign journal for bonus xp)
The one thing that I'd like to see improved upon in the next adventure path (which I'm supporting) is more ways to progress the plot then notes/journals/correspondence. It seems like they are all that the adventures use so far.
Interesting. I mostly use notes/journals/correspondence in my homebrew. Mainly becuase this is the kind of thing that can easily fall into the players hands. I might use other plot drivers more if I could think of cool ones. What do you have in mind for other kinds of handouts?
The only other kinds of items I've used are either the personal item of significant NPC X (if you find a noble womans earing it can lead you to her family or some such) and the unusual item linked to organization X.
My experience has been that, while both of these work their not very visceral for the players. Even if you give the players a trinket to represent the item your basically depending on their memory to push the plot forward.
For me, this can lead to good things (the players - or at least one of them, is paying attention and understands my world well enough to connect the dots), but it can also lead to them constantly asking me to explain, yet again why the fake dollar star earing is important or the players or they misinterpret something and I'm stuck with telling the players "No, your character would know..." which I hate. Journels and such allow one to both convey the atmosphere and gives the players something they can read and reread at their leisure.
I'd like to point out that the CR and EL matched, and they shouldn't have. The CR doesn't account for things like terrain advantage and prep time (which is what the EL is for) and Xanesha definitely had both.
The designers only very rarely modify the EL from what its supposed to be mathematically and even then only in pretty extreme cases (you come upon a badly wounded monster with 1/2 its normal hps - that sort of thing).
I think its generally a good idea that they don't modify the EL based on circumstance as how detrimental circumstance is between groups can vary a heck of a lot.
A group loaded with characters more or less optimized for range combat is going to find Xenshu much easier then a group chock full of hand to hand combat cheese builds. Its impossible to really know whether the circumstance are going to be much of a hindrance for group A or B so, baring real extremes, I think sticking to the standard manner of working out EL is for the best.
|
|
I'm still playing Burnt Offerings and haven't started Skinsaw yet, so this thread is most useful for me to flag potential issues before they arise.
It would seem from other posts on this board, that not everyone's characters were up to level 7 to meet this encounter. And frankly, I'm not surprised:
Pathfinder #2 - The Skinsaw Murders - for characters of 4th to 6th level
Pathfinder #3 - The Hook Mountain Massacre - for characters of 7th to 9th level
I don't wish to calculate XP from session to session - I wish to level my players to keep pace with the challenges they face. Whether that is early or late compared to actual challenges defeated isn't important to me.
I rely on the advertised level range for that product. Based on this, I would have expected to level my players to 7th only AFTER completing Skinsaw.
I consider EL/CR to be largely academic, they're not important to me, I mostly ignore them. I don't believe this makes me a bad DM when recommended character levels are printed clearly on the product cover. All I'm suggesting, and I don't believe this an unreasonable request, is to provide suggested level bumps, for those who wish to use them, within the actual adventure.
bit of an aside for those trying to keep score, experience/cr-wise, at home:
the following is a breakdown of XP per chapter, based on the following:
1. obtaining every listed CR / ad hoc award (note: I didn't include civilians, i.e. the town watch, classed non-combative npcs, etc.)
2. a party of five, since that's what some of the posters have been reporting at their table, and what I have at mine.)
Burnt Offerings:
Chapter --> Max XP per player
1 --> 400
2 --> 580
3 --> 2,030 *2nd level
4 --> 4,630 *3rd level
5 --> 7,980 *4th level
Skinsaw:
1 --> 9,480
2 --> 15,380 *5th early on, 6th if total clear including Vorel
3 --> 15,74o
4 --> 17,490
5 --> 18,990 (doesn't include Xanesha, 20,430 if she's included)
So, with out a hefty side quest quest prior to chapeters 3 or 4, the part will probably be under level for Xanesha. I charted this out a while back, as I'm running 5 pcs myself. I'm planning on a minor sidetrek involving a thorp full of crazed fishing villagers [Grubber's Hermitage] and a Sea Hag, as well as a run in with some local Magnimarian brigands during chapter 3, so hopefully the pc's will hit 7 right after Ironbriar or the Scarecrow.
Note however, if only 3 pcs were present for some of the chapters, those pcs *should* be right at level 7 if XP isn't awarded to absent players.
Sidequests should not be required to run these adventures; that's the whole point of the adventure paths. If a DM wants to add sidequests maybe to better flesh out a PC back story or something, kudos to him. The books though should be written with the idea that only the information in the book is being used.
Paizo intended the adventure paths for 4 players, which I base on comments found here on the boards, the overall CR/XP breakdown and pacing, and the presence of 4 Iconics all over all of the AP art. Part of being a DM means modifying source material when you stray from the intended implementation. This includes adjusting encounters (by adding more monsters or harder monsters) or introducing sidetreks if you have more than the intended number of players at your table.
|
|
I consider EL/CR to be largely academic, they're not important to me, I mostly ignore them. I don't believe this makes me a bad DM when recommended character levels are printed clearly on the product cover. All I'm suggesting, and I don't believe this an unreasonable request, is to provide suggested level bumps, for those who wish to use them, within the actual adventure.
It is unreasonable. The mechanic you're request is there already. It's the label that says EL10. It's just too "academic" for you and you chose to ignore it.
EL10 is no different then saying "The party should be atleast level 8 now."
What you're asking for is redundant.
|
|
EL10 is no different then saying "The party should be atleast level 8 now.
Which is even further beyond "for characters of 4th to 6th level".
We're clearly not going to agree regarding using/ignoring EL/CR figures, and I'm not trying to prove you wrong. There are many styles of play, light and loose, or to the letter of the rule. Some calculate encumbrance to the nearest pound, others ignore material components.
EL +2 has been mentioned here a few times as an indicator of required party level. The DMG presents a table at the bottom of p49 suggesting 15% of total encounters might be EL 1-4 higher than party level (very difficult), and 5% may be EL 5+ higher than party level (overpowering). Going by that rule of thumb, an EL 10 encounter might be considered very difficult, but not inappropriate for the end-boss of a party level 6.
There is a degree of art vs science when it comes to EL/CR, and I trust the authors construct encounters appropriate for the character levels for which the adventure was written. I don't have to know how each encounter was constructed, I just need to run it. This is why I purchase pre-written adventures, and don't try to author them myself.
I understand your position. EL/CR have their purpose in the game, as do encumbrance and material components, and I ignore them at my own risk.
My reasoning is that if the adventure states "for characters of 4th to 6th level", and the next volume recommends "for characters of 7th to 9th level", then gaining 7th level should be the reward granted after defeating the BBEG at the conclusion of Skinsaw, not the required level to approach that encounter.
If my players complete each encounter, but still find themselves short by a level, as F33b demonstrated in his spoiler above, I should be able to level-bump them at the appropriate places in the adventure to keep them up to speed, without having to run side-treks if I choose not to.
Would adding in a bit that says what average party level each of the various portions of the adventure expects be a good thing?
I merely responded "YES", and offered my reasons why.
Perhaps after this discussion, I will start paying a little more attention to EL/CRs. That's what these messageboards are great for, sharing of ideas, and learning from the experience and mistakes of others. Nonetheless, I still stand by my previous comments regarding EL/CRs.
Cheers :-)
One thing that has helped in my campaign is adjusting the amount of XP given.
I have five players in my group, but I adjust it so that they gain XP like there was only four of them. This sometimes makes things a bit easy, but we usually don't run into an encounter like this where it's just a slaughter. It's a lot easier to make a fight more difficult, than to make one easier, while you are in the middle of a game.
Would adding in a bit that says what average party level each of the various portions of the adventure expects be a good thing?
Yes. In some cases a sidebar is nice. But also in many cases, this simple statement that you're alluding to above would be just as good.
I'd save sidebars for big, critical, or potentially complex encounters. I'd use notations of the expected level, as a brief routine measuring stick for the GM.
That way you're using word count efficiently.
|
|
Would adding in a bit that says what average party level each of the various portions of the adventure expects be a good thing?
Yes, things like that would be, and have been, useful (such as it saying the PCs should be level 6 by the time they reach Magnimar).
Also to the person who pointed out my group's NPCs, cohorts/hirelings don't figure into the equation with regards to XP gain. And regardless, a game meant for 4 players up to 6th level and they attacked with 5 players 6th level, 1 NPC ally (Shalelu) 5th level, and 3 cohorts 4th level.
So, whose party was rested after the climb up that tower?
Mine. Actually, they never climbed the stairs.
The party's Gather Information checks revealed the ten deaths trying to climb the "Terrible Stairs" and the serpentine shape flying into and out of the gap near the roof. They decided it made much more sense to pop Fly potions and assault the tower from the top.
Mid-way through the 3rd book, the pattern seems to be a lot of easy fights for the PCs with an occasional fight that requires solid tactics and their best firepower. The biggest problem is the PCs recognizing when they are in that kind of fight. The Xanesha fight went well for my party because they saw a tough fight ahead planned well, but the Jaagrath Kreeg fight ended in a PC death when the party failed to react to the bane weapon being wielded.