So, to return again where we started, I suppose that the first encounter(s) (with Die, Dog, Die) should take the PCs to the second level.
If we can agree on this, can we make a first draft of how many and which monsters should be used in order to keep the flavor of the adventure (regardless of whether it would be one encounter or several)?
Another thing of note is when we want the other level up to occur.
So, to return again where we started, I suppose that the first encounter(s) (with Die, Dog, Die) should take the PCs to the second level.
If we can agree on this, can we make a first draft of how many and which monsters should be used in order to keep the flavor of the adventure (regardless of whether it would be one encounter or several)?
Another thing of note is when we want the other level up to occur.
At a guess the PCs will level up after the battle of Sandpoint. They did in the modules IIRC and PCs will need less XP to make a level. Other level points are going to be much trickier. We really can't choose where they are going to occur without a better understanding of the XP mechanics and without some kind of agreement on which level this should go to.
So, to return again where we started, I suppose that the first encounter(s) (with Die, Dog, Die) should take the PCs to the second level.
That strikes me as really quite fast... in the original, a party of 4 would only be half-way to level afterwards and would only really have a _chance_ at 2nd after Sandpoint assuming they did at least one of the side encounters (like Monster in the Closet)
I think aiming for after Sandpoint makes more sense.
It's probably worth noting that we'll probably have several different conversions of Burnt Offerings come out, over the course of events, so it may be reasonable at some point to highlight obvious splits in opinion so that people can pick and choose which way they want things. For example, the first obvious split is Festival and Fire - do you allow rest or not? Do you _require_ rest by making it extra difficult (and more xp laden)? There's at least three solid variations there, based on whether you treat it as 1 big chaotic encounter with no rest, 3 easy encounters with little rest, or 3 moderate to tough encounters with rest.
|
It's all headed to the same endpoint. A graph of the paths a party can take wouldn't be too hard to create. Label nodes with expected levels, possible sidequests, etc. I always wanted something like that for an AP. If I have time tomorrow, I will throw something together that maps Burnt Offerings under 3.5 rules to demonstrate.
It's probably worth noting that we'll probably have several different conversions of Burnt Offerings come out, over the course of events, so it may be reasonable at some point to highlight obvious splits in opinion so that people can pick and choose which way they want things. For example, the first obvious split is Festival and Fire - do you allow rest or not? Do you _require_ rest by making it extra difficult (and more xp laden)? There's at least three solid variations there, based on whether you treat it as 1 big chaotic encounter with no rest, 3 easy encounters with little rest, or 3 moderate to tough encounters with rest.
I agree with this idea but with significant reservations. If we can't agree on how something like one encounter goes well then one can always simply include the different options. If we can't agree on what level this is going too then we have a much more significant issue because we can't have the same document track two significantly different APs and they will be very different if the end point has a six level spread. At that point we either come up with some mechanism to resolve disputes or we break into smaller groups.
Generally I'd think a mechanism to resolve disputes is a better option. In the end people are likely to have differences of opinions through out the process if, every time, there is a difference of opinion another group breaks off eventually one ends up with seven different individuals all making a 4E conversion for RotRLs.
That said resolving disputes can be tough with strong willed people. Once you've put forward your passionate reasoning on why something should be done in a certain way you expect people to agree with you. If they don't well that can be a tough pill to swallow and being able to continue with a project while following part of a vision you don't agree with takes a certain mindset. However I think its pretty much required for a collaborative effort. People are not going to agree all of the time, its just not going to happen. So a method that allows us to resolve that and continue becomes critical if this is to be done as a group project.
I agree with Jeremy that we should find a mechanism to resolve disputes rather than losing time and effort to insert different versions.
Having no knowledge about game design I suppose that we should agree in some general guidelines like whether we will input some fluff or if we will base our conversion only in crunch.
I await for your suggestions.
It's all headed to the same endpoint. A graph of the paths a party can take wouldn't be too hard to create. Label nodes with expected levels, possible sidequests, etc. I always wanted something like that for an AP. If I have time tomorrow, I will throw something together that maps Burnt Offerings under 3.5 rules to demonstrate.
Umm - well if you do this post it on the RotRLs forum, but, uhh .... thats a hell of a lot of work and I'm not really sure how applicable it will even be to this conversion. We don't know how the XP system works in 4E and we are not in 100% of agreement on what we are even aiming for as the end point as of yet. I'm just concerned that you'll pump 40 hours into this and it won't be all that important in terms of doing a conversion.
Having no knowledge about game design I suppose that we should agree in some general guidelines like whether we will input some fluff or if we will base our conversion only in crunch.
I'm not really sure what you mean by this. Can you elaborate more were your heading here?
I'm not really sure what you mean by this. Can you elaborate more were your heading here?
Having no knowledge about game design I suppose that we should agree in some general guidelines like whether we will input some fluff or if we will base our conversion only in crunch.
We have to set some general guidelines. The leveling is an important such issue. Another thing we should consider are the social encounters, are we going to include them or not? Of course we cannot have the full picture without the books, but we can try to create some guidelines for the first module.
|
We have to set some general guidelines. The leveling is an important such issue. Another thing we should consider are the social encounters, are we going to include them or not? Of course we cannot have the full picture without the books, but we can try to create some guidelines for the first module.
I would say that we have to include the social encounters in the module total. I read that the expectation is that in 4E a party will level after 10-12 encounters. We are probably not going to have a good insight into this until the DMG4E comes out where the social encounter system is explained.
|
|
It's all headed to the same endpoint. A graph of the paths a party can take wouldn't be too hard to create. Label nodes with expected levels, possible sidequests, etc. I always wanted something like that for an AP. If I have time tomorrow, I will throw something together that maps Burnt Offerings under 3.5 rules to demonstrate.Umm - well if you do this post it on the RotRLs forum, but, uhh .... thats a hell of a lot of work and I'm not really sure how applicable it will even be to this conversion. We don't know how the XP system works in 4E and we are not in 100% of agreement on what we are even aiming for as the end point as of yet. I'm just concerned that you'll pump 40 hours into this and it won't be all that important in terms of doing a conversion.
You're killing any enthusiasm I had for helping do conversions.
That said, I still have a little left over and I think there's probably a place for something similar to my original idea. I did a test run with the 3.5 rules and quickly learned the mapping I originally envisioned was ill-suited. I came up with something different in a spreadsheet, but it's not where it needs to be yet. The utility I got out of my experiment was a listing of all the pre-ordained points in the module where XP is given out. This is a good start on helping a DM see where XP is coming from and what the encounter levels are like throughout the module. Let me give an example (from memory, calculations are at home.):
Against the Goblins; EL 3; 8xCR1/3, 1xCR3; Expected Party Level (Main Quests Only):1; Expected Party Level (Main Quests + Side Quests):2; XP (Main Only): 425 (Overpowering); XP (Main + Side): 425 (Very Difficult);
Adapting this to 4e wouldn't be hard, and having variations for all the different flavours that are developed would be as simple as adding another row to a spreadsheet. Assuming some sort of wiki, one could just add his own conversion entry to the list and a quick identification of why it is unique. We could also remove expected levels bits because we know 4e is based on a static XP for level x monsters, regardless of party level. Anyway, if there's no perceived value from anyone, I'll just drop this idea entirely. :)
|
|
I would say that we have to include the social encounters in the module total. I read that the expectation is that in 4E a party will level after 10-12 encounters. We are probably not going to have a good insight into this until the DMG4E comes out where the social encounter system is explained.
I was reading through PF1 last night and there are many points where there's an obvious social encounter and a pre-figured skill challenge (as they exist in 3.5). For example, the Shopkeeper's Daughter gives XP equivalent to smashing a CR2 creature. There are some others in Part 2 of the adventure that don't have any XP value attached. I assume making them into skill challenges wouldn't be a huge challenge. Anyway, I agree that there probably should be some social challenge action in any conversion.
I should start by pointing out that I'm not really all that knowledgeable about the ins and outs of current 3.5 rules (though I use them) but I am strongly motivated to help out with a conversion because I like the AP so much and I am keen on the 4th edition. That being said, here are my thoughts (for what they are worth):
1) I think a chart or graph listing major encounters as they exist is almost crucial to a proper conversion. This will help identify the amount of work that needs to be done and help with creating an outline to follow when we convert.
2) We need to establish (and agree upon) a large framework first and then work down to the details (specifically in terms of levels). If we can't agree what the overall level progression is, how can we possibly even start converting?
3) Social encounters should definitely be included. Anything with stats is gonna need some love, I figure. Which brings me back to the first point: identifying all "encounters".
4) I think the best way is to work from the top down. Lets assume we want the AP to run 1-20 levels (I realize we haven't agreed on this yet). The next step is to break that down into individual PF adventures then from there into encounters that match the current ones but total up to the experience we need for that adventure. I think the simplest system would be to set up this framework, then stat the encounters appropriately, maintaining the flavour of them but understanding that on a per encounter basis they may wind up at a very different power level.
for example:
RotRL AP lvls 1 - 20
PF1: 1-4
PF2: 5-7
PF3: 8-10
PF4: 11-13
PF5: 14-17
PF6: 18-20
Obviously 20 doesn't split 6 ways evenly but once we do step 1 (the outline), it may be more obvious where the extra levels should wind up. Or, perhaps, for the sake of math, 18 is the place to stop???
Anyway, top down is key, I think.
My 2GP
Pat
Here's a google spreadsheet that kinda illustrates what I am talking about:
http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pnzL2awWIwW4--QiNTwG9Xw
(off the top of my head - please don't pay much attention to the numbers)
A google spread sheet to illustrate what I'm talking about:
First, I'm glad that we have new arrivals like steelwhisper and Patrick.
I agree with both of them about the importance of social encounters.
I also agree with all the points Patrick mentioned except the leveling up till level 20th. I think that would be exciting to make the AP till level 24 and see how the rules above level 20 fare since they are core now (I am not a fan of epic level play but I think that now it will be more balanced than previous editions).
janxious I would love to see your work when it is done. The spreasheet prepared by Patrick can be handy too.
Anyway, I await to see what Keith and Jeremy have to say about those things.
Well, mostly I have to assume that unless we get sanctioned in some way to make an unofficial official conversion... that we'll have multiple conversions. Different people will go their own ways on certain things, and that's just how it's going to be because there's no direct management.
In one conversion, it might go to 24th, and in another to 20th. One might not even try to track XP at all, and end up completely off kilter if you did (but that GM just has you level when it's appropriate, so what's the problem?). Etc.
My gut feeling is that there's only so much we can do without the rules. Trying to guesstimate particular creatures and encounters, sure... but figure out the final level or how much XP to allow? Eh, not so much. Not yet. In 2 months? Probably.
Well, mostly I have to assume that unless we get sanctioned in some way to make an unofficial official conversion... that we'll have multiple conversions. Different people will go their own ways on certain things, and that's just how it's going to be because there's no direct management.
There are a lot of creative commons projects out there which allow people to come together and work on a project. Many of them do really great work. I guess thats what I'm looking to be part of, a group of people who share a goal of making conversions of Paizo products to 4E to a high standard. I understand that in choosing to join such a group I give freedom to design exactly what I want and instead have to work with the rest of the members of the group which mea1ns sometimes I don't get what I want. However I do get other benefits. I share the work load, other people are around to correct my mistakes, the project itself gains higher status simply by virtue of having many members and maybe I learn something about adventure design from some one else in the group along the way. Plus its fun!
My gut feeling is that there's only so much we can do without the rules. Trying to guesstimate particular creatures and encounters, sure... but figure out the final level or how much XP to allow? Eh, not so much. Not yet. In 2 months? Probably.
Here I pretty much agree with you. One can hardly really argue the pro's and cons of epic without even knowing what the rules are.
You're killing any enthusiasm I had for helping do conversions.
I'm trying to do the opposite. If you really do pump 40+ hours into something it had best be useful. I mean if you do that kind of work and then with much florish post it only to have the conversation basically pass over it you'd rightly feel angry and ignored.
No one wants that which kind of means trying to be sure that a task has real value before having anyone goes off and does 40 hours of work on it.
Well, mostly I have to assume that unless we get sanctioned in some way to make an unofficial official conversion... that we'll have multiple conversions. Different people will go their own ways on certain things, and that's just how it's going to be because there's no direct management.
In one conversion, it might go to 24th, and in another to 20th. One might not even try to track XP at all, and end up completely off kilter if you did (but that GM just has you level when it's appropriate, so what's the problem?). Etc.
I get the impression that you and I have a different idea of what such a conversion means. I kind of get the feeling what your thinking of is something along the lines of all of us doing our own conversions and bouncing ideas off each other in the forums while we do that.
Thats kind of neat and I've done basically this with conversions of material from 1st and 2nd into 3.5 but its not what I'm envisioning here. What I'm envisioning is something that involves a Wiki or another program similar to a Wiki and what amounts to a group of people working together to create the final product.
Essentially a creative commons similar (if on a far smaller scale) to projects like The Gimp, Open Office or UFO:Alien Invasion... or about a million Mods for popular games.
Now I recognize that working in any such creative commons means giving up some of my personal freedom. For example the project presumably follows 4E rules - even the ones I personally think are dumb and plan to house rule. However it comes with benefits as well, the work load gets divided up, good ideas get debated and hopefully the best ideas rise like cream to the top. Plus working with others can be frustrating but it can also be very rewarding and a lot of fun.
Hence there is no version that does not have XP - There is only one version presumably with side bars to incorperate members alternitive ideas which get included only when this can be worked into the AP without actually damaging the final product. The project is not declared finished until all the t's are crossed and the i's dotted and we have a full blown conversion of RotRLs that one can play in 4E.
My gut feeling is that there's only so much we can do without the rules. Trying to guesstimate particular creatures and encounters, sure... but figure out the final level or how much XP to allow? Eh, not so much. Not yet. In 2 months? Probably.
Now this I whole heartedly agree with. The real business of organizing this pretty much has to wait until the actual rules come out. At this point work on this project can get serous.
I would tend to agree with all of the above except with the caveat that work CAN be started now. My spreadsheet, for instance, is really just a (hopefully) comprehensive list of the existing encounters and breakdown of the XP under the 3.5 rules. We will need this for our conversion no matter what we do.
If we can get a consensus on the value of such a thing, I will go ahead and finish off Burnt Offerings (including XP calculation based on a 4 character party).
I will also make the sheet available to the rest of you (through google accounts - I think you'll need one) so that you can all pitch in and the document will be ready with the entire adventure path by the time the rules come out in June. (and so I don't have to input all the adventures!)
I would tend to agree with all of the above except with the caveat that work CAN be started now. My spreadsheet, for instance, is really just a (hopefully) comprehensive list of the existing encounters and breakdown of the XP under the 3.5 rules. We will need this for our conversion no matter what we do.
If we can get a consensus on the value of such a thing, I will go ahead and finish off Burnt Offerings (including XP calculation based on a 4 character party).
I will also make the sheet available to the rest of you (through google accounts - I think you'll need one) so that you can all pitch in and the document will be ready with the entire adventure path by the time the rules come out in June. (and so I don't have to input all the adventures!)
There is some concern about using Google Accounts. As I understand it basically anything we do on Google Accounts becomes property of Google which potentially is in conflict with the fact that we are using Paizo IP.
See Conversions Thread for more details.
Thats kind of neat and I've done basically this with conversions of material from 1st and 2nd into 3.5 but its not what I'm envisioning here. What I'm envisioning is something that involves a Wiki or another program similar to a Wiki and what amounts to a group of people working together to create the final product.
That would indeed be interesting, I just assume that lacking clear project approval or declared leadership that gamers will be gamers and do their own things.
If the wiki or whatever has a clear way to distinguish between the 'idea bin' and the 'consensus path', that should help keep things on track at least.
I would tend to agree with all of the above except with the caveat that work CAN be started now. My spreadsheet, for instance, is really just a (hopefully) comprehensive list of the existing encounters and breakdown of the XP under the 3.5 rules. We will need this for our conversion no matter what we do.
If we can get a consensus on the value of such a thing, I will go ahead and finish off Burnt Offerings (including XP calculation based on a 4 character party).
I will also make the sheet available to the rest of you (through google accounts - I think you'll need one) so that you can all pitch in and the document will be ready with the entire adventure path by the time the rules come out in June. (and so I don't have to input all the adventures!)
Well I agree that we'll need a list of all the encounters I'm just not sure whether or not we'll need a list of what their XP was in 3.5. Depending on how the 4E XP system works and depending on what level we eventually choose to make this go to our conversion may or may not have anything to do, level wise, with the 3.5 version. It may be that 4E characters level up at completely different places and at a significantly different rate then what was true in 3.5.
So a list of all the encounters is certianly useful but as for calculating what the XP gained from those encounters. I'm not at all sure its useful and I don't think we'll know one way or another until we have the 4E books and until we make some decision on what level this is going to. Thats fairly important as making a list of encounters is fairly easy but calculating the XP value based on a 4 person group actually involves a fair bit of work. Work which might or might not be relevant for this project.
Polite Thread bump.
I have little/no current interest in 4E. However I have noticed you should now have enough information available from the spoilers to decide if you want to involve Epic Destinies in your conversion, and consequently to go above level 20, thus giving you a better idea of how you want to space out your level gains over the path.
Edit:
In your conversion, I think you need to decide upon what effect you want the domineering weapons to have in some of the final fights in Xin-Shalast. In the Rise of the Runelords (original, 3.5 Edition) they allow the PCs to 'punch above their weight' to a certain extent in some encounters.
I've seen the spoilers but without some feel for the baseline I'm still not really sure what this will feel like at the actual table. I'm pretty much just waiting on the books and a chance to read them before I throw my 2 cents in heavily on this debate.
Well, now that I have access to the complete core rules, here goes my first stab at the initial encounters.
Initial Assault
Encounter Level 1 (Assumes 5 PC's)
500 XP
2 Goblin Blackblades (the one who killed the dog, plus one more hidden)
12 Goblin Cutters
Use the stats as in the MM but substitute dogslicers for short swords (same stats but break when a natural 1 is rolled). The rest of the encounter should play out as in the module.
Goblin Pyros
Encounter Level 2 (Assumes 5 PC's)
625 XP
1 Goblin Hexer (Warchanter)
3 Goblin Warriors (with torches)
9 Goblin Cutters (with torches)
Use the stats as in the MM but substitute dogslicers for the short swords (same stats but break when a natural 1 is rolled) and a whip for the hexer's hexer rod (same stats). The cutters also wield torches that they can use to set PC's on fire. A torch would be a one-handed improvised melee weapon that deals 1d4 damage, and does 1 ongoing fire damage (save ends). The rest of the encounter should play out as in the module.
Encounter 1
2 goblin warriors (level 1 skirmisher)
2 goblin blackblades (level 1 lurker)
4 goblin cutters (level 1 minion)
The goblin blackblades try to flank with skirmishers and minions.
Encounter 2
1 goblin hexer (level 3 controller)
2 goblin warriors (level 1 skirmisher)
6 goblin cutters (level 1 minion)
Encounter 3
1 goblin skullcleaver (level 3 brute)
1 goblin dog (level 2 skirmisher); use stats for a wolf
2 goblin warriors (level 1 skirmisher)
2 goblin cutters (level 1 minion)
We really should consider doing a Wiki or some other similar colabortive program for this. Otherwise everything is just going to be buried in one or a few really long posts and won't be of much use to anyone.
I can use WikiPad...
I think a Wiki will be important for this, maybe even include it in the Pathfinder wiki under conversions?
It seems different people will have different takes and ideas on each encounter and what to include.
I'm trying to keep the encounter levels and monster tactics the same as in the modules. At the same time, the encounters follow the 4e encounter guidelines in all respects.
That's also why I added the stuff about the torches, dogslicers, and whip. It's interesting to note that the 4e rules seem to pull off the theme of the encounter even better than the 3.5 rules did. The warchanters (hexers) are extremely cool and boost their fellow goblins up quite a bit.
I am not sure if this has been stated yet (I had to read through really quick), so I apologize in advance if I am merely repeating something else.
Regarding conversions. If you look at the list of solo monsters in the MM, you will find that there aren't that many.
Dragons, Dracolich, Orcus, Purple Worm, Tarrasque, Aboleth, Primordial Hydra and a few others are among the few solo's in there.
Most of them truly epic and great encounters.
Anyway, my point is that you shouldn't use the solo template too often, when converting. Instead use the elite template for the "boss encounters", and if the story calls for him to be alone, well consider if it couldn't make sense if there was a few mooks to balance out the encounter.
Just my 2 cp,
I think that many of the "boss" encounters work best as elite monsters with some backup support. Take the fight against the Skinsaw Man in The Skinsaw Murders: it could be him and a bunch of ghouls. Against Barl Breakbones in Hook Mountain Massacre, it could be a couple stone giants instead of just Barl and one other guy (and perhaps a few bears).
Generally, many BBEGs work great as elite status, or just regular guys with a lot of henchman to throw around. Solo stuff can be good, but I would do it sparingly.
|
THE GOBLIN ATTACK
During this battle you end up facing off against three sets of goblins. Mainly, this is probably the most you could expect out of a typical party before they are bound to get into trouble in 3rd Edition. My play-by-post game is an indication of this: they've been squaring off against the first set of goblins for awhile, now.
Goblin Slicers (2): A goblin slicer is a basic level 1 skirmisher that lacks any special attacks, but has the goblin racial power to shift away after an opponent fails to hit it with a melee attack. I'd keep the sneak attack feature that kobold skirmishers have.
Goblin Pyros (2): Pyros would have virtually identical blocks to slicers, except that they have a crappier melee attack (and no sneak attack), instead relying on hurling flaming objects. I imagine them hucking burning debris, torches, or molotav cocktails that would function like the kobold slinger's fire attack. Goblin sharpshooters can make a ranged attack and not reveal their location (Sniper), and you could use this as the PCs run through Sandpoint from one...
This wonderfully illustrates why I would personally have difficulty converting Burnt Offerings to 4th edition. The opening attack by the Goblins is hilarious because the DM is *meant* to have the goblins make tactically suboptimal decisions - a facet greatly expanded in Paizo's own "Classic Monsters Revisited".
Now, if you parachute your goblin stat blocks and tactic sections from "Keep of the Shadowfell" into this scene, you get a neat contradiction. Instead of picking up food, dropping their weapons and scratching their backs furiously, the goblins will march into perfect formation like Marines to perform their rehearsed combat movements.I'm sure you can pluck 4th edition into that scene in another way, but my impression is, either it won't be 4th edition or it won't be Burnt Offerings. Your choice.
And please stick a huge "IMHO" on this post. I've addressed my own incapacity to come up with a viable solution to a problem, rather than anyone else's.
Why would they march in "perfect formation"? Skirmishers would gang up on a character while the other goblins threw burning crap at them. There is nothing stopping you from making intentionally stupid choices or to describe random goblins dying from equally random mishaps (since you can have goblin Minions, it would even be mechanically supported).
If you really wanted to, you could have a natural 1 on a goblin slinger's attack roll have it hit another random target within range. Its not hard, and it doesnt require any more houserules than what Paizo put into place.
|
Been watching this thread for a while, and it's time I stop lurking...
Now that I have my copies of the books (buy.com's mistake is my gain!) I think we're going about this the wrong direction.
The first thing I think we need to do is look at the level range and decide where we want the AP to END when we're finished. Then I think we need to break that down into the individual adventures comprising the AP, and only THEN can we figure out how best to stat each encounter in the greater context of the AP.
At least, that's what I am going to do. And I honestly think I'm taking it all the way to 20th, and maybe beyond. That the PCs level to 21 after defeating Karzoug or something like that. Seems to me that beating a Paragon-tier baddie is a great way to enter the gates of Paragon-hood yourself.
Been watching this thread for a while, and it's time I stop lurking...
Now that I have my copies of the books (buy.com's mistake is my gain!) I think we're going about this the wrong direction.
The first thing I think we need to do is look at the level range and decide where we want the AP to END when we're finished. Then I think we need to break that down into the individual adventures comprising the AP, and only THEN can we figure out how best to stat each encounter in the greater context of the AP.
At least, that's what I am going to do. And I honestly think I'm taking it all the way to 20th, and maybe beyond. That the PCs level to 21 after defeating Karzoug or something like that. Seems to me that beating a Paragon-tier baddie is a great way to enter the gates of Paragon-hood yourself.
Ditto on the lurking. I've recently decided to run Burnt Offerings once a week at lunch for some friends at work.
I don't think I'm going to scope out the entire AP first, although I certainly wouldn't mind if the campaign went on that long. I'm going to do enough prep to get me halfway through Burnt Offerings (Catacombs of Wrath), and then see how it goes. That said, I think facing Karzoug around the end of the paragon tier makes sense. And I suspect you meant to say defeating an Epic baddie is a great way to enter the gates of Epic Destiny yourself.
This wonderfully illustrates why I would personally have difficulty converting Burnt Offerings to 4th edition. The opening attack by the Goblins is hilarious because the DM is *meant* to have the goblins make tactically suboptimal decisions - a facet greatly expanded in Paizo's own "Classic Monsters Revisited".
Now, if you parachute your goblin stat blocks and tactic sections from "Keep of the Shadowfell" into this scene, you get a neat contradiction. Instead of picking up food, dropping their weapons and scratching their backs furiously, the goblins will march into perfect formation like Marines to perform their rehearsed combat movements.
I'm sure you can pluck 4th edition into that scene in another way, but my impression is, either it won't be 4th edition or it won't be Burnt Offerings. Your choice.And please stick a huge "IMHO" on this post. I've addressed my own incapacity to come up with a viable solution to a...
I respect your opinion, but I don't see the difficulty. There's no need to use the tactics from Keep on the Shadowfell for Burnt Offerings. It's a totally different story. 4e goblin minions is an easy replacement for 3.5 goblin warriors. They're even worth about the same xp, proportionally. The advantage of the minions is that they have a trick or two to reflect their cunning, but that doesn't have to negate how the DM uses them for comic purposes.
Antioch and Pop'N'Fresh, I like your thinking on the initial encounters of Burnt Offerings. So far this is an easy conversion. I especially like the idea of throwing a few blackblades and warriors in with the cutters, as it allows the goblins a few moments of vicious retaliation when they get off a sneak attack or skirmish move.
One additional possibility is combining the first two encounters into a single encounter with waves. It certainly doesn't sound like the PC's have five minutes to rest between them, while the adventure does give them a breather before they go rescue Aldern. Healing surges are an excellent substitution for cure spells from the town priest.
I've been looking over the conversions done by Keith Richmond
Great Job!
A few things to think about...
I agree that the Encounter should not stop for a 5min Rest however Don;t let the PC's die, If they are having major problems in the fight have a "this section of the city calm down" that way they can take a rest and Heal up.
Goblin minion:love it! however i want a few more Dogslicers to break so i would change the "Shoddy weapon to 1-3 or 1-4... just so it will be fun showing off how goblins are a crazy foe.
Goblin Pyro- Amazing Great job.. i was thinking of Converting these my self but you did a better job than i could do... I will be using this Great!
Goblin Warchanter: I very much like the idea. daze i'm Not sure Psychic Dmg is the best way to go, but i don't i have a better answer yet and it will do just fine. whip crack I think this is a little to strong, Move action? Recharge 4,5,6? minion only are all good fixes... Personally i would do minion only.
If anyone does a wiki i would love to help out make sure to post here so i can come help.
Thanks!
I dont think an end-cap is really necessary to predict ahead of time; just figure out where your group is at and make sure that the monsters are at the same level. The only problem that might crop up is that I suppose the party could hit 30th-level before they are supposed to.
Its roughly 10 encounters to the level, not counting quest rewards, so as long as you dont exceed 290 encounters you should be fine.
I think the hardest part is altering the treasure in the adventure: stuff isnt nearly as expensive as it used to be (50gp for plate armor, for example; 360 for +1, and 1000 for +1 battleforged plate).
This wonderfully illustrates why I would personally have difficulty converting Burnt Offerings to 4th edition. The opening attack by the Goblins is hilarious because the DM is *meant* to have the goblins make tactically suboptimal decisions - a facet greatly expanded in Paizo's own "Classic Monsters Revisited".
Now, if you parachute your goblin stat blocks and tactic sections from "Keep of the Shadowfell" into this scene, you get a neat contradiction. Instead of picking up food, dropping their weapons and scratching their backs furiously, the goblins will march into perfect formation like Marines to perform their rehearsed combat movements.
I'm sure you can pluck 4th edition into that scene in another way, but my impression is, either it won't be 4th edition or it won't be Burnt Offerings. Your choice.And please stick a huge "IMHO" on this post. I've addressed my own incapacity to come up with a viable solution to a...
Some one made 'Paizo Goblins' and posted them around here and I felt they really captured the feeling that the module was trying to convey. Hence I think its a bad idea to 'parachute' 4E goblins straight from Shadowfell (or even the 4E MM) into RotRL. Paizo's goblins are 'different' enough that its probably best to acknowledge that and design some specific goblins to match the flavour.
I think the hardest part is altering the treasure in the adventure: stuff isnt nearly as expensive as it used to be (50gp for plate armor, for example; 360 for +1, and 1000 for +1 battleforged plate).
QFT. This is something I just started thinking about. On the plus side, it encourages me to customize the treasure for the players, which I didn't do much of when running Age of Worms.
I dont think an end-cap is really necessary to predict ahead of time; just figure out where your group is at and make sure that the monsters are at the same level. The only problem that might crop up is that I suppose the party could hit 30th-level before they are supposed to.
Its roughly 10 encounters to the level, not counting quest rewards, so as long as you dont exceed 290 encounters you should be fine.I think the hardest part is altering the treasure in the adventure: stuff isnt nearly as expensive as it used to be (50gp for plate armor, for example; 360 for +1, and 1000 for +1 battleforged plate).
Use the parcel method from the DMG, and ignore what the original adventure says, while at the same time striving to hit as close as possible.
[MRBURNS/] Excellent [MRBURNS]
Use the parcel method from the DMG, and ignore what the original adventure says, while at the same time striving to hit as close as possible.
Thinking through the events in Sandpoint, here's what I'm thinking for treasure and skill challenges:
Initial Assault (EL 1)
No treasure parcel
Goblin Pyros (EL 2)
1 treasure parcel (potion)
Die, Dog, Die (EL 3)
1 treasure parcel (potion)
The Shopkeep’s Daughter (Level 1 Complexity 1 Skill)
No treasure parcel
The Boar Hunt (Level 1 Complexity 2 Skill)
1 treasure parcel
Monster in the Closet (Level 1 Complexity 1 Skill)
No treasure parcel
Grim News from Mosswood (Level 1 Complexity 2 Skill)
1 treasure parcel
The Missing Bartender (Level 1 Complexity 3 Skill)
No treasure parcel
Against the Goblins (EL 3)
3 treasure parcels (ring)
Guard Cave (EL 2)
No treasure parcel
Welcoming Chamber
1 treasure parcel (staff)
Washing Pool (EL 2)
No treasure parcel
Ancient Prison (EL 2)
No treasure parcel
Prisoner Pits (EL 4)
1 treasure parcel (longsword)
Meditation Chamber
2 treasure parcels (wand)
Cathedral of Wrath (EL 5)
3 treasure parcels (dagger)
It seems to me that each of the interludes can function as a skill challenge of sorts (avoiding trouble with the shopkeep, dealing with Aldern, comforting the widow, meeting with the town leaders, investigating the barkeep's disappearance). In each case there are potential positive and negative consequences.
I added a treasure parcel to the Grim News from Mosswood event, figuring the sheriff and mayor can at least give the party something for their willingness to help guard the town (particularly if they succeed at a skill challenge to earn it). Other than that the treasure pretty much falls in the same places. The party should be a little ways into level 2 after all this, which is why the number of parcels is around 14.
Just checked the magic items. Rings start at level 14 now, so Tsuto's ring will probably become a neck item (improving defenses).