|
Really, if rope trick is being abused like this, perhaps the spell needs to be nerfed or removed from play.
The only "abuse" going on associated with Rope Trick is DMs that allow wizards and other casters to recover daily abilities more often than once a day and playing their monsters in the dumbest way possible.
My Arguement would conclude that any goblin tribes that did not learn how to deal with rope trick would be decimated by now and thus all remaining goblin tribes (save perhaps backward ones that have never encountered adventurers before) would be aware of the possibility of this sort of magic and take pains to have their shamans search their lair and the nearby area magically for such spells.
Proper tactics, correct ELs and the realization that every spell caster and rogue doesn't have to use a spell or wade into combat on every round of every combat will really do wonders to keeping low-level parties from having to rest after every battle.
Spell casters and rogues, you usually have a high dex, rock out with a crossbow instead of blowing a spell every round. Throw a feat into it and you'll always have something to do in combat even if you are out of spells.
DMs, make sure you are running the proper CR creatures for your low-level parties. And maybe throw a few potions of cure light wounds to the party in the cource of the adventure, or even at character generation.
I've run The Sunless Citadel several times straight through without the parties having to stop and rest at all.
ASEO out
Following the path of most effectiveness, adventurers will always blow out their most powerful limited-use but renewable resources quickly even with a host weaker infinite-use options available... IF circumstances allow.
But even if you can hide in a Rope Trick or Magnificent Mansion,or if you just leave for home after three encounters, in most instances the place you left is not going to be the same when you return the next day. While you prepare for the new day, so do your adversaries. The goblins will beef up their defenses and call a neighbor tribe for reinforcements. They'll use substantial chunks of the treasure you were seeking to take from them to hire assassins to track the intruders back to camp and murder the spellcasters in their sleep. Defenses will be shored up, surprises prepared, and remaining valuables will be smuggled away to unviolated hidey-holes. In the end, the party that walks away will have to fight tougher opponents to retake ground they've already "cleared," and with fewer rewards to show for it.
If the DM is a good one.
Really, if rope trick is being abused like this, perhaps the spell needs to be nerfed or removed from play.
Abused how? It's an extradimensional space you can go sit around in and be undetectable and untouchable for extended periods of time. This is exactly the sort of thing this spell exists for, because spellcasters really, really, really don't like being interrupted while resting.
Following the path of most effectiveness, adventurers will always blow out their most powerful limited-use but renewable resources quickly even with a host weaker infinite-use options available... IF circumstances allow.
But even if you can hide in a Rope Trick or Magnificent Mansion,or if you just leave for home after three encounters, in most instances the place you left is not going to be the same when you return the next day. While you prepare for the new day, so do your adversaries. The goblins will beef up their defenses and call a neighbor tribe for reinforcements. They'll use substantial chunks of the treasure you were seeking to take from them to hire assassins to track the intruders back to camp and murder the spellcasters in their sleep. Defenses will be shored up, surprises prepared, and remaining valuables will be smuggled away to unviolated hidey-holes. In the end, the party that walks away will have to fight tougher opponents to retake ground they've already "cleared," and with fewer rewards to show for it.
If the DM is a good one.
But then, of course, you're punishing players who actually need to rest, and encouraging them to continue with the dungeon when they're very seriously unprepared to do so.
LOL@the thought of the fighter going against a behir.
Really, maybe ToB is the way to go. Much as I am loathe to say that, mind you...
|
The only "abuse" going on associated with Rope Trick is DMs that allow wizards and other casters to recover daily abilities more often than once a day and playing their monsters in the dumbest way possible.
Personally, I agree. However, there seems to be a few vocal types that seem to have a problem with how the spell is being used in their games--for them, I suggest nerfing or removing the spell if it's nearly as problematic as they suggest.
But then, of course, you're punishing players who actually need to rest, and encouraging them to continue with the dungeon when they're very seriously unprepared to do so.
Yes. This is part of the challenge of designing adventures; you have to put the players into situations they can overcome with available resources if they are smart. If they waste fireballs they should know they will need for the boss monster to exterminate some rats in the first room they deserve what they get.
|
|
But then, of course, you're punishing players who actually need to rest, and encouraging them to continue with the dungeon when they're very seriously unprepared to do so.Following the path of most effectiveness, adventurers will always blow out their most powerful limited-use but renewable resources quickly even with a host weaker infinite-use options available... IF circumstances allow.
But even if you can hide in a Rope Trick or Magnificent Mansion,or if you just leave for home after three encounters, in most instances the place you left is not going to be the same when you return the next day. While you prepare for the new day, so do your adversaries. The goblins will beef up their defenses and call a neighbor tribe for reinforcements. They'll use substantial chunks of the treasure you were seeking to take from them to hire assassins to track the intruders back to camp and murder the spellcasters in their sleep. Defenses will be shored up, surprises prepared, and remaining valuables will be smuggled away to unviolated hidey-holes. In the end, the party that walks away will have to fight tougher opponents to retake ground they've already "cleared," and with fewer rewards to show for it.
If the DM is a good one.
Are you suggesting that having a dynamic, non-static setting and NPCs that react logically and realistically to the players actions is punishing the players? Hunh.
This is now officialy the "nerf rope trick " thread.
Are you suggesting that having a dynamic, non-static setting and NPCs that react logically and realistically to the players actions is punishing the players? Hunh.
Well, when you put it that way... yes.
Your purpose, as the DM, is to provide adventures for the players which are fun, enjoyable, and challenging yet not insurmountable. Module design is one of the primary ways in which this is done. If the monsters in your dungeons are behaving in dynamic and realistic ways, the balance for your module gets shot all to hell. If your dungeon is static, the PCs can infiltrate the enemy castle through a sewer drain. If you dungeon is dynamic and realistic, castle security rectified the security issue with the drains, and now your PCs get to go in the front door and take a hot oil bath.
The fundamental structure of an RPG depends on the Sorting Algorithm of Evil. At first level, the innkeeper needs rats killed in his basement; at 20th level, major metropolitan cities need to be defended from demon lords.
If monsters are reacting logically and realistically to the players, then this may provide a more "realistic" experience, but it's also going to kill your players dead.
tl;dr - realistic != fun
Unfortunately, the players have had the reset button for a while now, and we like it. You can pry our reset button from our cold, dead hands.
Player control is an illusion that some players have fooled their DM into believing in. Dont like me standing my ground as a DM? sorry, you can leave if you wish but if your want to act mature and join in the fun of roleplaying not rollplaying, then stick around, your sure to have fun.
the character creation and development mini game is fun, but its not the end all be all. twink your character to much and you earn the prestigious
"level adjustment" award (your character is most assuredly as powerful as a character your class two levels higher, to balance you out with mere mortal pc's enjoy a +1 level adjustment. Im really impressed, kudos!)
players of nonspellcasters would be short bus special to not complain (and not allow) for this nonsense. If a Wizard want to bust out all his magic in the first dire rat fight, and glory hound the encounter then fine, shut your mouth, man your crossbow and follow behind.
all hail the once per day spellcasting (sleep eight more hours if you want to get a little more beauty rest, you aint getting those spells back yet)
I play wizards all the time and Im all for it.
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 4, RPG Superstar 2011 Top 16
|
This is now officialy the "nerf rope trick " thread.It's a lot bigger than rope trick. Rope trick is just the easiest way to get it, and even then you need extend.
But at higher levels, you've got teleport which does the same thing.
Trying to achieve the situation where the monsters can always ambush the party just isn't going to work. Whether people are just riding away on horses back to town or safety or they're teleporting, they'll find a way.
True, but it's the DM's job to make some adventures, not all mind you, but many have either time constraints or other reasons not to hit the "Reset" button. It's also the players responsibility to drop that mentality and play through the scenario their DM probably spent ALL week setting up. It's definitely a two way street. The DM shouldn't always try to punish their players for effective choices, like rope trick. Once in a while though you need to keep them on their toes.
Really, if rope trick is being abused like this, perhaps the spell needs to be nerfed or removed from play.
This is one of the few spells I've altered in the game.
With every bad complaint of "broken" spell effect and whatnot, this is one of the few I really do agree with. Typically in my campain, I just made it impossible to sleep in a rope trick pocket dimension...but you could still use the spell normally besides that if you wanted. This isn't really a "nerf" in the traditional sense of changing the mechanic, only a clarification of what you can do with it.
It's not so much the fact that this can be done... and typically once the higher levels hit, I have less of a problem with stuff like this but at low levels it's just a bit too much.
Yeh, super-golbins who can see and are looking for invisible rope tricks....and parties who don't keep watches....and can't hear goblins setting up traps 10 to 30 feet away. Brilliant.Yes, it is. What, players can think up clever tricks but monsters can't?
No, of course not! They have to be played like they were computer-generated enemies from Diablo. Don't suggest otherwise. That would be wrong. Really. Those poor players.
:D
I love it when players think like that. They think they're the first to ever use those spells and pieces of equipment they find in the PHB. They hear about millenia of history (with great heroes and tragedy and bloody conflict) in the world their characters live in, and they know that those monsters are often smarter than your average human, but they never think all this through.
No, really, I love it. Almost as much as I love the look on their faces when they learn otherwise. :D
Now, assuming the adventurers were prudent enough to actually leave someone on guard duty, they see the goblin spellcaster and his patrol of bodyguards and realize the jig is up.
And then they kill the shaman and the fighters.
Parties rarely rest when they are completely exhausted. They rest when they have lost a good percentage of their per day powers and it would be more prudent to rest than to continue.
Or they can wait until the ENTIRE TRIBE congregates outside the room, sets up a vat of acid directly under the window, chucks a bag of holding through it,...
None of which might work. Vats of acid can be shattered by spells, bags of holding can be destroyed easily by archer fire, and ladders can be pushed over. Even transdimenionsal cloudkills need a living spellcaster, line of effect, and the party to passively let it happen.
---------------------------
But thats all beside the point. The point is that you can't stop players from resting.
Nerf rope trick, and parties will just exit the dungeon to some safe spot and come back in a few days. They'll actually it do more often than if they had rope trick, since they'll know that need to save resources to fight their way out of the dungeon they need to.
Rope trick is a convenience for the DM, not the players.
Thats why moving away from the per day mechanic by letting people use wands more often is a fine idea. It discourages people from resting, since they'll have tons of healing and useful things to do in combat.
|
|
And then they kill the shaman and the fighters.
Agreed. But then they are no longer resting, eh?
None of which might work. Vats of acid can be shattered by spells, bags of holding can be destroyed easily by archer fire, and ladders can be pushed over. Even transdimenionsal cloudkills need a living spellcaster, line of effect, and the party to passively let it happen.
Right again, but the party, rather than sitting smugly up in their hidey hole is clustered around the rope trick window, hoping that the goblins don't discover them and making plans if they do. If they are discovered, the party certainly isn't resting as they fend off this attack, they are out fighting, which is the goblin's goal and makes the point of resting moot after all.
But thats all beside the point. The point is that you can't stop players from resting.
Nerf rope trick, and parties will just exit the dungeon to some safe spot and come back in a few days.
I very much agree with this. I simply make sure that intelligent foes react intelligently to the attack. If the party wishes to retreat (my party of 12th level characters has teleported way a few times to recover) then the foes are ready for them when they come back. The trick is to make the players *want* to stick it out because the goal will be harder to meet (or the treasure gone, or the place better defended) when they come back. Thus pressing onward is sometimes the best option even if teleporting to safety is readily available but the choices are fully the players' to make. If the dungeon environment (or whatever the party is doing) is allowed to remain static, then there is no downside to retreating and this is where these problems arise.
And then they kill the shaman and the fighters.Agreed. But then they are no longer resting, eh?
None of which might work. Vats of acid can be shattered by spells, bags of holding can be destroyed easily by archer fire, and ladders can be pushed over. Even transdimenionsal cloudkills need a living spellcaster, line of effect, and the party to passively let it happen.Right again, but the party, rather than sitting smugly up in their hidey hole is clustered around the rope trick window, hoping that the goblins don't discover them and making plans if they do. If they are discovered, the party certainly isn't resting as they fend off this attack, they are out fighting, which is the goblin's goal and makes the point of resting moot after all.
Oh, but the spellcasters can keep resting. The rogues and fighters can handle any one of those chores.
I very much agree with this. I simply make sure that intelligent foes react intelligently to the attack. If the party wishes to retreat (my party of 12th level characters has teleported way a few times to recover) then the foes are ready for them when they come back. The trick is to make the players *want* to stick it out because the goal will be harder to meet (or the treasure gone, or the place better defended) when they come back. Thus pressing onward is sometimes the best option even if teleporting to safety is readily available but the choices are fully the players' to make. If the dungeon environment (or whatever the party is doing) is allowed to remain static, then there is no downside to retreating and this is where these problems arise.But thats all beside the point. The point is that you can't stop players from resting.
Nerf rope trick, and parties will just exit the dungeon to some safe spot and come back in a few days.
The problem is that risking even a few character deaths means that pushing on is never a smart move. Better defended fortresses just means more XP, and treasure not being lost in battles because someone loots you is better than treasure never gained by having future encounters have no treasure. Heck, considering that monster treasure after being sold is worth half as much as PC treasure, its in their advantage to do things that maintain their own treasure rather than go after monster treasure because the potential loss is greater than the gain.
|
|
Are you suggesting that having a dynamic, non-static setting and NPCs that react logically and realistically to the players actions is punishing the players? Hunh.Well, when you put it that way... yes.
Your purpose, as the DM, is to provide adventures for the players which are fun, enjoyable, and challenging yet not insurmountable. Module design is one of the primary ways in which this is done.
Yes, and since the adventures are designed with the notion that the players have limited resources that they must ration, if the players decide to go nova use all their resources in one encounter the problem isn’t with the subsequent encounters in the adventure or with the DM–it’s with the players refusing to manage resources that they are well aware are limited.
If the monsters in your dungeons are behaving in dynamic and realistic ways, the balance for your module gets shot all to hell.
If players are allowed to hit the reset button after each encounter–they destroy the balance of the module.
If your dungeon is static, the PCs can infiltrate the enemy castle through a sewer drain. If you dungeon is dynamic and realistic, castle security rectified the security issue with the drains, and now your PCs get to go in the front door and take a hot oil bath.
Um, no. False argument. That is not an issue of a dynamic setting or NPCs. That’s an issue of whether the NPCs have knowledge that there is a security issue with the drains in the first place (unknown security holes happen–even in real life).
In the twenty years that I’ve played D&D/AD&D and other roleplaying games, the whole “15-minute adventuring day” has never cropped up in any game I’ve played in or DMed for. In fact, I’d never heard of this phenomena until the last year or so.
In the twenty years that I’ve played D&D/AD&D and other roleplaying games, the whole “15-minute adventuring day” has never cropped up in any game I’ve played in or DMed for. In fact, I’d never heard of this phenomena until the last year or so.
Old gamers don't really have this problem. The thing is that lots of gamers now playing learned gaming on 3.X in an environment of computer gaming.
It breaks down like this: 3.X grants XP based on the strength of monsters you defeat. This means that if you fight monsters equal to your own power, it takes around five combats before you level. Basically, 3.x DnD is set at the level of four sessions per level gained, and this is constant over the board.
Considering the length of each combat, it might take a whole four-hour session to fight one combat because of lots of attacks and options. 3.x has a lot more going on than in older editions. In 2e, the highest level fighter only got two or three attacks (without haste, which aged you one year so it was used a few times a campaign), where in 3.X even a mid-level fighter might have five attacks between AoOs and his normal attack routine and attacks from feats like Cleave. That meant that combats got longer in 3e.
The problem is that three or four combats at your level should nearly kill you and drain all your resources.
Since older gamers didn't like the longer combats, they tended to fight many weaker things(lower CR) which does a better job of allocating resources. A magic missile is a fine spell for a 9th level Wizard to use against a pile of CR 1 goblins, but a joke against four CR 7 giants. Baldur's Gate is an old 2e computer game that models this well.
Younger gamers don't know any different, so they expect most combats to be at their level, and this dangerous. Most MMORPGs are built on the philosophy that you fight one combat, then rest and regain all abilities before you continue. Neverwinter Nights, based on 3e, allows complete recharge as long as your aren't in combat. Final Fantasy 11 is a MMORPG also like this.
The heart of the 15-Minute Adventuring Day is that older gamers can clear a dungeon without resting because they fight lots of weak stuff, and a party of younger gamers runs into three or four encounters before they are almost dead, so they clear one fourth of one level of a dungeon before they need to rest. If they don't rest, they die because the things they are fighting are so deadly that if they didn't have their best spells and per day abilities available, they'd lose combats and get TPKed.
So, younger gamers expect the same amount of story as the older gamers, but they can't do it because adventures are built wrong with too many "at your level" encounters. Since even professional game designers like Paizo do this, I don't expect it to ever change.
|
FR kind of has that idea, depending on your region, you start out with a Wand of a spell you can cast. It helps out a lot because you are not just using your spells or allocating them to that one task anymore, that wand will fill in that detail. As for designing this system into the game, I don't think it's the best of ideas. FR and DM's seem to be only ones that would choose this option and should not be a manditory thing. If anything make, it a sidebar for thought.
|
|
I set rules for this before play starts.I also set time limits on missions.You have 2 days to complete the adventure, ect ,ect.I also adjust my combat to more of a real time combat system. It always bothered me that we played a 10 round combat it took 3 hours of play but only lasted 1 minute game time.So I go with real time in some encounters.Using a timer to beep at certain times helps keep track of buffs.It works sometimes ......The only way to fix this is set your own house rule !!!!!Thats the best I got>>>>>
Old gamers don't really have this problem. The thing is that lots of gamers now playing learned gaming on 3.X in an environment of computer gaming.
I'm still curious exactly how many people here do this kind of thing. When you say "lots of gamers" do this, are you talking from personal experience, or are you just guessing? Do the majority of groups you've played with rest after about 4 encounters?
In my experience, I've only seen this happen at level 1-2 (where spellcasters can easily get tapped out after one fight), but it could just be campaign-specific -- I haven't played any published dungeon crawl modules other than Sunless Citadel.
Old gamers don't really have this problem. The thing is that lots of gamers now playing learned gaming on 3.X in an environment of computer gaming.I'm still curious exactly how many people here do this kind of thing. When you say "lots of gamers" do this, are you talking from personal experience, or are you just guessing? Do the majority of groups you've played with rest after about 4 encounters?
In my experience, I've only seen this happen at level 1-2 (where spellcasters can easily get tapped out after one fight), but it could just be campaign-specific -- I haven't played any published dungeon crawl modules other than Sunless Citadel.
Published dungeon crawl adventures only have at most four encounters before you win, or it is assumed that you rest.
Dungeon's Maure Castle series assumes that players are resting all the time in a hostile dungeon.
Red Hand of Doom is one that I played as player, and even the Ghost King's Lair (the largest dungeon) only has four encounters in the the whole thing.
Both are mid-level adventures.
As far as I can tell, 3.5 Undermountain may be the only "dungeon" that old-time players would recognize.
Published dungeon crawl adventures only have at most four encounters before you win, it is assumed that you rest.Dungeon's Maure Castle series assumes that players are resting all the time in a hostile dungeon.
Red Hand of Doom is one that I played as player, and even the Ghost King's Lair only has four encounters in the the whole thing.
Both are mid-level adventures.
So is that a "Yes, my group always rests after 4 encounters and we like it that way", or a "Yes, my group always rests after 4 encounters and we don't like it that way", or a "No, my group doesn't always rest after 4 encounters and we [like it that way/don't like it that way/don't care]"?
Like I said, the only resting in a dungeon I've done was in the Sunless Citadel. Most of the other experience I've had are with wilderness adventures (usually 1/day, so it makes sense to rest afterwards) or assaulting some building (with either lots of minor encounters or one huge encounter, depending on whether the alarm gets raised or not).
Published dungeon crawl adventures only have at most four encounters before you win, it is assumed that you rest.Dungeon's Maure Castle series assumes that players are resting all the time in a hostile dungeon.
Red Hand of Doom is one that I played as player, and even the Ghost King's Lair only has four encounters in the the whole thing.
Both are mid-level adventures.
So is that a "Yes, my group always rests after 4 encounters and we like it that way", or a "Yes, my group always rests after 4 encounters and we don't like it that way", or a "No, my group doesn't always rest after 4 encounters and we [like it that way/don't like it that way/don't care]"?
Like I said, the only resting in a dungeon I've done was in the Sunless Citadel. Most of the other experience I've had are with wilderness adventures (usually 1/day, so it makes sense to rest afterwards) or assaulting some building (with either lots of minor encounters or one huge encounter, depending on whether the alarm gets raised or not).
Its "we only get four encounters before we die and published adventures know that, so we can take it or leave it."
Personally, I like the old dungeons like Undermountain....but I'm an old gamer.
Following the path of most effectiveness, adventurers will always blow out their most powerful limited-use but renewable resources quickly even with a host weaker infinite-use options available... IF circumstances allow.
There is good insight here, and it allows me to make a point I've been making since playtesting 4th edition at DDXP.
4th Edition does not solve the 15-minute adventuring day problem.
The efficient tactic under 4th edition will be to storm the dungeon, blow your dailies, then retreat for a day. In fact, the only way to permanently "cure" the 15-minute adventuring day is to make sure that every single power every character has is per-round or per-encounter. Consider the following:
If every single power were at-will or per-encounter in D&D, except that once per day one character could add +1 to an attack roll, there would still be an incentive to storm the dungeon, blow the "attack bonus" in the first room, and retreat for a day to get that bonus back.
But this only works if you assume a static dungeon. The better solution, as many people have proposed, are story-based reasons to have to hurry through a dungeon (either due to time pressure to find/stop something, or due to concern that the dungeon denizens will respond intelligently to your attack).
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 4, RPG Superstar 2011 Top 16
|
(edited)
Has this four encounters standard which you refer to perhaps come about because of limits on word counts in many modules/published adventures? It is my perception that both Maure Castle (in Dungeon) and Expedition to Undermountain occupied unusual numbers of pages, relative to regular 'modules'.
How do you see the Pathfinder Adventure Path products (I'm thinking most probably Fortress of the Stone Giants, with regards to 'mid level') with their higher available page and word counts comparing up to this 'four encounters' standard?
Well four or five encounters per adventuring day is the standard set up in the DMG, not just modules. It's what the EL/CR system is set up for. Four PC's (Ftr/Rog/Wiz/Clr) should be able to handle 4 or 5 Encounters equal to their average party level before expending enough of their resources to have to rest. That's how the game is supposed to work.
As timekeeping goes I think it's implied that adventuring, like travel, rest, or work (Crafting items, Researching Spells, etc) is done in an eight hour chunk. IMC each encounter lasts a minimum of 1 minute. Looting, healing, searching, and time spent wandering the dungeon "area" happens in Local Movement/Time. This switch between Tactical and Local Movement/Time can be pesky for DM's but really helps break down that we cleaned the dungeon out in 15 minutes feel. It also solves keeping track of time for spell durations. Graph paper works wonders for this! This way everyone can easily track their spells (especially buffs) between encounters.
Its "we only get four encounters before we die and published adventures know that, so we can take it or leave it."
Personally, I like the old dungeons like Undermountain....but I'm an old gamer.
(edited)
Has this four encounters standard which you refer to perhaps come about because of limits on word counts in many modules/published adventures? It is my perception that both Maure Castle (in Dungeon) and Expedition to Undermountain occupied unusual numbers of pages, relative to regular 'modules'.
How do you see the Pathfinder Adventure Path products (I'm thinking most probably Fortress of the Stone Giants, with regards to 'mid level') with their higher available page and word counts comparing up to this 'four encounters' standard?
I don't think word count is an issue. When larger word counts are available, adventures still have a four encounter limit or allow resting. Fortress of the Stone Giants is an aberration in my mind in that the Fortress itself has hundreds of giants in and around it, and all of those giants each are near the power of the party. I don't think this adventure can be beaten if you don't have the ability to rest basically at will, though its not mentioned in the adventure.
I have to say that this thread has really given me some great insight into adventure design. I personally like the old school feel of not resting till the job is done, but it is true that younger gamers cut their teeth in video gaming and the unlimited resting option offered in most video games is what they are used to. It really depends on how the adventure is designed to find out which method works best, one size does not fit all.
This leads me to the conclusion that Pathfinder should have a mixture of both, one just needs to make sure the adventure make logical sense so that the party knows which method is the one to use for each section. The 15 min adventuring day and the long resource allocation slugfest can both be a lot of fun when used appropriately. Let me give some examples of both and see how they can be mixed.
Some examples where the 15 min adventuring day can work without being unbelievable are wilderness travel adventures (one or two encounters each day), city and political adventures (assassins attack, rest and then track down who sent them after you later; escaped monster wreaks havoc on the city; covert operation to steal/protect/con someone during a masquerade ball; luring a red dragon out of its lair with a dummy trade caravan ruse; cleaning out a crypt of guardians and mindless undead), etc. These can work fine, are great for certain stories, and guess what; they naturally lead themselves to the 15 min adventuring day style of play so the encounter challenges should be designed with that in mind.
I see other adventures as more focused on resource management. These have more puzzles, traps, low level cannon fodder, intelligent opponents, and possibly time limits to accomplish the mission. Examples include raiding a castle to stop a princess’s execution; taking down a thief’s guild, clearing out a lair of stone giants, recovering a dead body before it is eaten or raised from the dead, etc. All require a different adventure design to allow the players to stay longer without having to rest, and give concrete knowledge that dallying will have consequences.
I would prefer that we keep a system more like the existing rest and recovery period so that the old school resource allocation does not become obsolete and also to differentiate our game from most computer games. I say this because it is harder to have a 15 min adventuring style rule set and then try to create a resource allocation adventure without setting strict time limits or waves of mobs attacking one right after the other. Both get old when constantly overused. Maybe some other people can think of some more examples.
Old gamers don't really have this problem. The thing is that lots of gamers now playing learned gaming on 3.X in an environment of computer gaming.
Not much to add, but I liked your post here. I wouldn't personally phrase it in terms of young vs. old, but I thought on the whole it was very insightful.
In the twenty years that I’ve played D&D/AD&D and other roleplaying games, the whole “15-minute adventuring day” has never cropped up in any game I’ve played in or DMed for. In fact, I’d never heard of this phenomena until the last year or so.Old gamers don't really have this problem. The thing is that lots of gamers now playing learned gaming on 3.X in an environment of computer gaming.
It breaks down like this: 3.X grants XP based on the strength of monsters you defeat. This means that if you fight monsters equal to your own power, it takes around five combats before you level. Basically, 3.x DnD is set at the level of four sessions per level gained, and this is constant over the board.
Considering the length of each combat, it might take a whole four-hour session to fight one combat because of lots of attacks and options. 3.x has a lot more going on than in older editions. In 2e, the highest level fighter only got two or three attacks (without haste, which aged you one year so it was used a few times a campaign), where in 3.X even a mid-level fighter might have five attacks between AoOs and his normal attack routine and attacks from feats like Cleave. That meant that combats got longer in 3e.
The problem is that three or four combats at your level should nearly kill you and drain all your resources.
Since older gamers didn't like the longer combats, they tended to fight many weaker things(lower CR) which does a better job of allocating resources. A magic missile is a fine spell for a 9th level Wizard to use against a pile of CR 1 goblins, but a joke against four CR 7 giants. Baldur's Gate is an old 2e computer game that models this well.
....Stop being so g*@-d%*ned insightful. You're making me feel like a blithering idiot here.
I started playing about the time 3.0 came out, and the games I've played have always pitted the party against encounters which were serious threats; I don't know what the last time was I fought against creatures with a CR more than, say, three levels below me was, discounting henchmen in battles with more powerful foes and under-CR'd creatures like Greater Barghests. It never occurred to me that people were fighting against creatures which didn't present a serious threat, and there's almost no such thing as a combat that takes less than... 45 minutes, maybe?
However, while MMORPGs do have a similar power structure, I don't think you can blame MMOs for this (and I'm not saying you are, but some people certainly do); most of my gaming friends have never played an MMORPG, and most of those who have didn't do so until fairly recently. I think this is probably because the MMOs in which you fought things which weren't serious threats were excruciatingly boring; a parallel evolution.
I've personally always hated making every adventure time intensive. I'd like to have more normal adventures without having to constantly worry about the 15 minute adventuring day.
Why don't we just get rid of Daily powers altogether?
We keep spell slots and everything, but the recharge mechanism is no longer resting. Instead of getting those daily spells once per day, you get them once per adventure. For ultra long dungeons, they can refresh after 4 or 5 encounters, or perhaps after PCs have gained a set amount of XP.
Why not just attack the problem at its heart? You can rest all you damn well want, but resting won't do anything for you.
Many other systems do just this; the one that springs to mind (because I was reading the rules last night) is Dark Heresy, which has a pool of Fate Points that refresh every gaming session.
The primary problem is that you can only really do it with behind-the-scenes mechanics, like fate points and action points and karma pools and other universal resources. If you tie something like spells to an every session recharge, then within the context of the game setting you're recovering your spells at totally arbitrary times. If people need to leave early and you end the session in the middle of the dungeon, next week when you come back you've suddenly regained all your spells even though you weren't doing anything other than walking down a hallway.
No real need to do anything to rope trick. Now in 3.5 ropetrick probably is a really good trick, but in Pathfinder it has ALREADY been nerfed by a differant feature:
ALL Clerics and ALL Wizards will have the ability to have Detect Magic at will.
I expect people will do one of several things:
1. Create a blind. detect magic doesn't penetrate more than a certain amount of material, so if you can create a false ceiling with something like a thin sheet of lead you carry around with you. At mid-levels, I expect stone shape will perform this effect, but at low levels just gluing some earth or rocks, pulling off ceiling tiles or roof boards, or painting a plaster molds attached to a lead sheet will do (Craft for the win!).
Digging a hole, then casting the rope trick inside, then burying the hole also works even though it leaves someone outside unless you can summon a monster with hands(which you can), though a Rogue can do that and just not get a good night's sleep.
2. Cast levitate, then cast the spell from 40' up. The range on detect magic is 60', so you can just be outside their effective range. You can tie a rope to the other rope to get down.
3. Figure out the places where the patrols go, then DON'T put the rope trick there. Privies, bottoms of lakes, behind tree cover, sides of cliffs, etc.
Having been hired to capture the renegade wizard underground witch 'Penny Dreadful' on the streets of Korvosa, our brave band have battled their way into her layer, only to discover that they have used up a lot of their spells, alarmed by the potential risk they face if they continue, they clamber their way into a rope trick and settle down to rest. Around the corner, Mysry, one of penny's cabal, has been listen to their plans. She sneaks away to discuss this with penny.Mystry: The queens's men have just crawled up into a rope trick, they are going to rest and recover.
Penny Dreadful: What?
Byron: Seriously, they had us, we would have had to run, leaving nearly everything behind.
Greymalkin(Penny's Black Cat familiur): Well lets get out of here we have between eight to ten hours head start.
P.D. laughs: Those wacky adventures. Thats loads of time, we can get our entire research library and all our supplies out of town in that time. It'll take them weeks to pick up our trail. Who's up for magnimar?Eight hours later, the character emerge to find the halfway house empty, their enemies fled and little in the way of clues as to where they have gone. Alas, that heafty bounty cannot be claimed.
Seriously, do responcible DM's actually let their characters get away with stuff like resting during the flow of play, without logicial consiquences?
Intelligent enemies should, flee or prepare to deal with the character on their own terms.
Seriously, do responcible DM's actually let their characters get away with stuff like resting during the flow of play, without logicial consiquences?
Yes, they do.
If by "responsible", you mean "responsible for the nuisance that RPGs are viewed to be more and more like computer games". ;-P
|
|
Seriously, do responcible DM's actually let their characters get away with stuff like resting during the flow of play, without logicial consiquences?
I don't. If my party faces an intelligent foe, then a retreat of any sort will give the enemies time to prepare or flee themselves. In some cases, the party chooses to flee anyway and in other cases they press onward knowing that if they do not, they will likely lose the opportunity their efforts have thus far granted them.
For example, my group of 6 12th level PC's have (after much planning and forethought) managed to sneak into a beholder's very well-defended stronghold to reclaim a huge ransom they paid the creature's organization to free a family member of theirs. Upon entering the stronghold undetected and bypassing all of the guards with the clever use of magic, they found themselves confronted by something unexpected: the beholder lair is a vertical maze built below the rest of the stronghold and accessible only to flying creatures. They decided to seize the element of surprise and venture onward, using a good deal of their resources to fly through a vertical maze to try and locate the lair. It was then that the rogue - scouting ahead in a vertical tunnel - came upon the prepared beholder (it knew they were coming from an alarm spell in one of the tunnels) who promptly bathed him in his anti-magic gaze. The rogue fell to the distant cavern floor, alive but unconscious. The rest of the party used dimension door to reach the fallen rogue while the beholder (mistakenly) gazed toward the tunnel he expects the others to use.
This is how we ended the last session and the party is messaging one another before the next game, half advocating they grab the fallen rogue and teleport away before the beholder realizes the rest of the group won't be using the tunnel and the rest of the group saying that now is the time to act to dispose of the beholder menace once and for all. My group knows that they only have a few moments to decide before the beholder hears or sees them and if they flee, the beholder's defenses will be doubled and his ill-gotten goods hidden in an inaccessible location. The group has used many of its better spells just to reach the lair and now faces a very difficult choice indeed.
If they choose to flee, I am completely fine with that. And if they stay, I am also fine with that. The group has expended significant resources to reach this point undetected and turning back now without "their ransom" will be a big blow to their finances and capabilities in the future.
Seriously, do responsible DM's actually let their characters get away with stuff like resting during the flow of play, without logical consequences?
(spelling edit mine)
Yes. The game is built so that people can only fight a few encounters a day before a TPK is assured. If you, as a DM, have set up too many encounters, then its your failure that the PCs rest. Punishing the PCs for your failures is just Gygaxian.
On another note, real adventurers have Rings of Sustenance (2 hours to rest!).
|
I already have a solution: You can only get back your spells and abilities once per day, resting in a dungeon might not be a good idea, and time is usually against you.
Those who don't learn to conserve their resources weren't cut out to be adventurers, and will instead be cut down to be monster grub. Life's no pony ranch.
I myself solved this problem much the same way. I house ruled that, like cleric spells, wizards can only gain spells back once per day. I sometimes bend this rule and make it 16 hours, but generally speaking, i wont let characters "rest" after every encounter. If they do, they loose, one way or another. Intelligence isn't just for PCs anymore.
|
|
I myself solved this problem much the same way. I house ruled that, like cleric spells, wizards can only gain spells back once per day. I sometimes bend this rule and make it 16 hours, but generally speaking, i wont let characters "rest" after every encounter. If they do, they loose, one way or another. Intelligence isn't just for PCs anymore.
You don't need to house-rule it; it is the rule.
You get X spells/day, as long as you're rested.X spells/day is the amount of spells you can prepare/cast per day.
If you're rested, you get them.
If you're not rested, you don't.
The rested criteria is an additional criteria, not the only criteria.
You can sit down with your spellbook, and prepare some spells at any point of the day (eg, to benefit from better scouting information), but only if you left those slots free at the start of the day.
When preparing spells for the day, a wizard can leave some of these spell slots open. Later during that day, she can repeat the preparation process as often as she likes, time and circumstances permitting. During these extra sessions of preparation, the wizard can fill these unused spell slots. She cannot, however, abandon a previously prepared spell to replace it with another one or fill a slot that is empty because she has cast a spell in the meantime.
That last bolded sentence is there, specifically, to prevent a player blowing his spells and starting again during the same day. Whether this is due to realising the enemy are immune (illusions vs undead, etc), finding a new spellbook, or just wanting to double his firepower, it just isn't allowed.
Any character is free to lay his bedroll on the floor, and park himself down for eight hours, whenever he likes, even if it's 15 minutes after entering the dungeon, but it doesn't change his daily spell allotment, his daily PSPs, his daily uses of Smite, his daily domain powers, his daily wild shapes, his daily rage, or his daily anything.
It just means he's sat on his arse.