In this thread Erik Mona had some specific suggestions for playtesting that I can report back on. "Things that Yon Publisher would like to see playtested:"
The cleric's channel energy ability, especially as it pertains to big fights with undead and long-term healing. It is intended to soften the impact of the so-called "15 minute adventure day". Does it?
Yes. I am finding it that it does. I say that without hesitation. The party cleric has to use some tactical sense on when to apply it. The player also took Selective Channeling promptly. I'd look for that to be a favorite, because otherwise Channeling is a really risky and 'interesting' combat option (something I sort of liked about it, but I don't have an issue with Selective Channeling as a Feat).
Caveats:
1.) There's been only a few undead encounters thus far. They've only just cleared out the top floor of Thistletop. I expect Chapter Two will be interesting because there are so many more undead.
2.) You can't overlook the impact of Domain Powers when trying to evaluate the extended playability of the Cleric. In this case, with a Cleric of Sararae who took both the Fire and Sun Domains, he has a wealth of combat and ranged combat options. You better believe he picked a local god whose Domain Powers gave him ‘double barreled’ touch and ranged combat alternatives. He's tossing low level fire effects right and left, and saving his spells. See how that dovetails with the Channeling? However- I've wondered if all the Domains have a similar strong combat supplemental nature to them? And if with other Domains to choose from, would the player be breaking that "15 minute day" threshold as well as they are now. Looking at them, some Domain powers are pretty passive. Then again, my cleric is staying fresh a *lot* longer.
The #1 hesitation I see among a lot of gamers regarding switching to Pathfinder is the claim of backwards compatibility. Some of the changes (we hope improvements) in the core rules do mean things are a little different here and there, but how different does it really seem in play? How difficult is it to, say, convert any Pathfinder adventure to the system? A lot of people seem to be running Curse of the Crimson Throne or Rise of the Runelords in their Pathfinder RPG playtests. How easy is the "conversion" process?
I am converting Runelords. Taking some advice from James Jacobs, I have not spent a whole lot of time or effort to convert. James' point was, "if it's compatible, you shouldn't have to re-write everything."
So far, it's been pretty easy and I haven't done a lot of work.
I think that is proportional to the levels however. In first to 3rd level, PCs don't want to fool with CMB maneuvers. That's not because they're bad necessarily, but they don't want the AOOs and their damage output is good against goblins anyway. They haven't invested in feats (yet) that strongly encourage CMB maneuvers. Neither have they had many CMB tricks pulled on them either.
Example: At first 1st level, the Warchanter pulling a trip attack really messed with a PC. At 3rd level, that trip attack equates to a dead Warchanter. (Granted, I should have used the reach)
Now that the Goblin Fort has been cleared, the lower depths of Thistletop await them. Our next session is this Tuesday evening. This weekend I feel it's necessary to look at actually converting the "leveled" NPCs and stronger monsters (like the tentamort). I don't want them to be too easy, and that means bringing them on par with the PCs with School and Domain powers, Feats, and pre-calculated CMBs.
I guess I'm saying, once you break 4th level my instinct is to pay closer attention to the conversion. After Tuesday, I'll let you know how that conversion went, and how the session played out.
I look forward to reading it, because I intend to run ROTRL in september using the Beta rules, and wanna see what challenges, etc need the most attention with the rules change.
|
As mentioned in other threads, the backwards compatibility means that you don't have to update NPCs (so I don't see what the worry is there) but I've had similar thoughts in my conversion process. Classed NPCs definitely need a boost to compete with PFRPG parties, but at what point does this become necessary? Also, it may help address the concerns of those adopting PFRPG if there are "quick adaption" rules. Something like guidelines for enhancing 3.5 characters and NPCs to compete with the updated PFRPG versions, perhaps by granting a few extra feats or gear allowance. Simply having it there in a sidebar would help get across the message that Pathfinder is catering to 3.5 rather than leaving it behind as 4E has done. Even a short conversion guide as a free PDF would be not only useful for those looking for help, but also those interested in the direction Pathfinder is taking with their favourite ruleset. How would such a product be presented, and what are peoples ideas so far on raising the power level of 3.5 characters to compete with PFRPG counterparts without actually using Pathfinder rules?
Classed NPCs definitely need a boost to compete with PFRPG parties, but at what point does this become necessary?
It shouldn't be very necessary, as I'm fairly certain that a Pathfinder Fighter NPC would present as much of a challenge to a group of Pathfinder PCs as a 3.5 Fighter NPC would to a party of 3.5 PCs.
Thanks guys...
As Wicht point out elsewhere, Channeling Energy kinda simplifies your classic low level undead encounters. Though, like him, I'm of the opinion that I like Channeling the way it is enough not to want to change it just in order to preserve the rights of low level skeletons and zombies.
It becomes of something of a trade-off, which I think you can mitigate by where you place the your low level undead in a string of encounters. You don't want to them to be the first ones out of the gate, otherwise they get nuked quick (which has the side effect of getting them to use their Channeling Resources up faster, which might be diserable in some situations).
You can also mitigate it by mixing a non-undead in with the skeletons and zombies.
For example, to jazz things up I had Koruvus (the mutated Goblin from Burnt Offerings) sick the zombies on the PCs. They of course used Channel Energy against the zombies, but it became a trade-off because Koruvus had waded in amongst them. Consequently he got a free heal. The Cleric hadn't gotten Selective Channeling yet (they we're only 2nd level).
4E edition plays a similiar trick with minions, where you sneak an identical one in amongst the others.
|
Classed NPCs definitely need a boost to compete with PFRPG parties, but at what point does this become necessary?
It shouldn't be very necessary, as I'm fairly certain that a Pathfinder Fighter NPC would present as much of a challenge to a group of Pathfinder PCs as a 3.5 Fighter NPC would to a party of 3.5 PCs.
I agree with that, but I think that the point was if you don't convert the 3.5 Fighter NPC, how will he fare against the Pathfinder party? There has definitely (and admittedly, as a design concept) been a power shift up. It just depends how far it stretches out past what 3.5 assumes as to how much conversion is really necessary.
From my own perusing and playtesting, I'd say it really only matters for the big guys, or those who are intended to present a possibly lethal challenge to the party that need to be "converted" - and there are quick conversion ideas in the alpha book for this (toss it a few more feats, add more HP, that kind of thing - the kind of stuff you could conceivably do on the fly as long as you are familiar with the adventure ahead of time... and all DMs should have at least read it through, I would hope :)
I agree with that, but I think that the point was if you don't convert the 3.5 Fighter NPC, how will he fare against the Pathfinder party? There has definitely (and admittedly, as a design concept) been a power shift up. It just depends how far it stretches out past what 3.5 assumes as to how much conversion is really necessary.
That's a fair comment. I'm sort of stuck here, because the players are excited to playtest, but they want the campaign too. For them, that's part of the bargin. Consequently, we're having to go through the lower levels by the numbers.
I'm running Runelords in 3.5, and that group is starting Chapter 4 (they meet every other Saturday). My PF RPG is going through Chapter One (they meet every other Tuesday evening). I'm not calling myself an expert, but I have a frame of reference for comparison.
This is subjective, but I feel like the PF RPG group is having an easier time of it. The problem is, and this is why I cite that we're playing the lower levels, is I can't tell exactly why.
1.) Maybe the increased damage output from not only the wizard, using Hand of the Apprentice a lot.. Or the Saranrae cleric laying down a lot of Fire and Sun Domain powers.
2.) Maybe they're rolling better. :)
Whatever the reason, I can feel the power shift you're referring to. One theory I have is: they're just easily doing 5 hit points most hits, and that's enough to 'one shot' many of the goblins.
Although, it's not universal. It feels like a very delicate balance. Like I could easily overcompensate.
For example: Ripnugget fared well in the fight and I never converted him or his commandos and warchanter.
Likewise, I did a side trek with Bruthazamus. Taking a cue from Classic Monsters Revisited. He kidnapped one of the PC's younger siblings and took them to an abandoned house to keep his Attic Whispering 'child' company (and make the sibling into a Whisperer too). The Attic Whisperer and the Bruthazamus gave them quite a time.
Goblins, Sinspawn, goblin dogs? Felt very easy to me. Almost obligatory and prefunctory encounters.
So far, I haven't really converted anything. So converting Nualia, Lyrie, Orik, and Tsuto (he escaped in this version), is really sort of an experiment to see how different it feels when the PCs do go against converted NPCs.
From my own perusing and playtesting, I'd say it really only matters for the big guys, or those who are intended to present a possibly lethal challenge to the party that need to be "converted" - and there are quick conversion ideas in the alpha book for this (toss it a few more feats, add more HP, that kind of thing - the kind of stuff you could conceivably do on the fly as long as you are familiar with the adventure ahead of time... and all DMs should have at least read it through, I would hope :)
Agreed... so far. I might have a better idea in a few days.
I think I found the problem with the easiness that I'm sensing!
::bangs head repreatedly on the table::
They're built on too many build points.
Let me explain: Almost a year ago I started my original 3.5 Runelords game. I was inexperienced with 3.5, and I came out of the diceless tradition, where we don't actually kill people unless it's part of the story.
I've outgrown that killing phobia, I just play fair and let the chips fall where they may.
Anyway, in the 3.5 game I let them use the 32 point buy-in. It's too late to take that back from that group. They're having fun and are well invested.
However, I just sat down and did some analysis with Pathfinder RPG. Per James Jacobs, NPCS for the 3.5 modules are built on 25 points per the DMG methodology.
25 points corresponds exactly to the 15 point buy-in in Pathfinder.
And my players are all built on approximately 24 build points in Pathfinder.
That explains a lot. NPC have 15, they have 24... No wonder it's seemed easy.
I am going to have them use the Pathfinder point buy-in, and stick to 20 points. That gives them a modest advantage over the NPCs, but not the generous advantage they have now.
And do it before they get too invested...
Just buff up the monsters a bit, that way they won´t feel cheated out of their attributes.
Also, it´s not *that* big a difference in stats ( but lets the players feel that they are better for it. ). It normally means you´ll get some 14 and one or two 16 stats, instead of one 16 and lots of 12.
Could just be me, though. I´ve been in only one campaign where the master prescribed 25 point buy ( and gave us three pre-generated stat lines to choose from ), and boy do those characters look gimp. I just prefer the characters ( as DM and player ) to be a bit more heroic in their stats. And even with 32 points, two good stats already means three average to bad ones. That may be acceptable for a fighter, but a paladin, ranger or monk would be pretty hosed.