| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm currently running a 4th Edition version of Rise of the Runelords for my players and decided to create a project blog detailing the conversion process and offering advice on how to run the adventure in the new rules set. Like pretty much everyone, I'm still getting the hang of designing encounters and monsters for 4th Edition, and it's always helpful to have other suggestions and input as well. You can find the blog at Tales from the Rusty Dragon. Thanks in advance, and feel free to utilize anything posted there in your own games. It's designed to serve as a community resource.
I am literally finishing Rise of the Runelords later today - the map of the Pinnacle of Avarice is on my dining room table as I type this....
but wow your blog looks awesome! :)
I will be reading it regularly anyway!
Chris
Updated with the majority of the Glassworks encounters. More to come after this Thursday and once I've had a chance to draw out last week's maps and upload them.
Consider me to be another regular reader. I look forward to your updates!
Maps are up for last week's encounters. Tomorrow I run my group through the end of the Glassworks and (hopefully) most of the Catacombs of Wrath. Catacombs of Wrath encounters and changes will go up sometime this weekend.
Wow, color me impressed with the work you've done, Scott. Very useful stuff and much appreciated! :-)
The Glassworks is finished, all the way through the final encounter with Tsuto. Also made some minor tweaks to some of the crunch from the Player's Guide conversion. Catcombs of Wrath are up next.
Meh...
I realize you don't like 4th Edition, DoppleGangster. In fact, most of your recent posts seem to focus on nothing but your dislike for 4th Edition. But please keep that to threads where it is appropriate. I'm not interested in hearing you rag on a game system here. This is to talk about a conversion process and offer constructive advice and comments.
Meh...I realize you don't like 4th Edition, DoppleGangster. In fact, most of your recent posts seem to focus on nothing but your dislike for 4th Edition. But please keep that to threads where it is appropriate. I'm not interested in hearing you rag on a game system here. This is to talk about a conversion process and offer constructive advice and comments.
To be fair he really has not said anything about 4E - so this would just be a personal insult.
To be even more fair, I assume, he is so blinded by his loathing of 4E that he is having difficulty distinguishing between attacking 4E and attacking random people who happen to play 4E.
OK, in a vain attempt to post something constructive on this thread...
I've noticed in looking over conversions of Age of Worms that there seems to be a significant levelling problem. Characters seem to go up levels much faster in 3.5 then they do in 4E. Counter intuitive as that may be experience seems to show that characters that would normally be 3rd level for the final battle in Whispering Cairn are often still first level when they reach that same point in a 4E conversion unless the DM is really be generous and handing extra XP in order to boost the players to 2nd before they get to the final encounter.
I believe your Blog mentions this as something of an issue but I don't really recall how it is your dealing with this. Could you expand on the issue and what your solution is?
I'm particularly interested as I'm going to be running a game for young adults with no prior experience in D&D and I'm concerned with my conversion being too hard for them. I mean I love killing PCs and all but its not a good way to introduce kids to the game.
Thanks for taking the time to tackle the project and for posting the blog link.
OK, in a vain attempt to post something constructive on this thread...
I've noticed in looking over conversions of Age of Worms that there seems to be a significant levelling problem. Characters seem to go up levels much faster in 3.5 then they do in 4E. Counter intuitive as that may be experience seems to show that characters that would normally be 3rd level for the final battle in Whispering Cairn are often still first level when they reach that same point in a 4E conversion unless the DM is really be generous and handing extra XP in order to boost the players to 2nd before they get to the final encounter.
I believe your Blog mentions this as something of an issue but I don't really recall how it is your dealing with this. Could you expand on the issue and what your solution is?
I'm particularly interested as I'm going to be running a game for young adults with no prior experience in D&D and I'm concerned with my conversion being too hard for them. I mean I love killing PCs and all but its not a good way to introduce kids to the game.
I've had to take a close look at both number of encounters and level of encounters in the conversion process. I'll explain.
First, there are 30 levels in 4th Edition where in D&D 3.5 there were 20. In an effort to allow players to experience all three tiers of play, I set out with the intention of scaling the leveling process up so that characters would reach level 25 or 26 by the end of Rise of the Runelords.
In taking a look at the first adventure, Burnt Offerings, I decided that in order to meet that goal the PCs would need to hit level 4 before the end of the adventure. In order to accomplish this, a couple of things need to happen. First, the number of encounters needs to be dramatically increased in some areas. This is most notable in the Glassworks. Where there was once a single encounter there are now four separate ones for the PCs to tackle. Of course, the vast majority of encounters also involve many more monsters than the original simply because fights in 4th Edition are designed to contain five monsters of the party's level as a baseline instead of a single monster of CR equal to the party's level as was the case with D&D 3.5.
You'll also note that the encounters presented in the original adventure tended to have ELs above the party's average level. In some cases this was necessary to create a challenging and entertaining combat, but it also encouraged (and responded to) the 15-minute adventuring day problem, in which parties would rest after only one or two combat encounters, spending all of their limited-use abilities immediately. This is not necessary in 4th Edition, as a) combat encounters are challenging and entertaining even if they are at the same level as the party (or even below the party's level in some cases!) and b) characters have many abilities which are refreshed after each encounter, and expending daily powers is often not necessary to complete an encounter.
Adding in a handful of skill challenges (I've already created two on the blog, and I'm planning on another soon to come for the Catacombs of Wrath) also helps increase the amount of experience the party receives. There are a number of quests that the PCs can be sent on, each with its own quest experience (I will be suggesting a few quests after the Catacombs of Wrath).
Finally, the original adventure contained a huge number of potential encounters in Thistletop (more than 20, in fact). When I convert these to 4th Edition they will probably net the party around two entire levels' worth of experience just in that dungeon. Given all of this, I'm not too concerned about the amount of experience being too low. It's much easier to plan things like this out in 4th Edition than it was in D&D 3.5.
Meh...I realize you don't like 4th Edition, DoppleGangster. In fact, most of your recent posts seem to focus on nothing but your dislike for 4th Edition. But please keep that to threads where it is appropriate. I'm not interested in hearing you rag on a game system here. This is to talk about a conversion process and offer constructive advice and comments.
I'd like to apologize on behalf the rest of us, normal people who can appreciate two different RPGs without having to attack one or the other. Keep up the good work bringing the AP to as many people as possible!
First, there are 30 levels in 4th Edition where in D&D 3.5 there were 20. In an effort to allow players to experience all three tiers of play, I set out with the intention of scaling the leveling process up so that characters would reach level 25 or 26 by the end of Rise of the Runelords.
I think this assumption might lead to some trouble.
The third tier of 4e is "Epic" which I tend to equate with the "Epic" levels of 3e, only possibly more manageable. I never player with 3e epic levels, but I know that the Runelords AP wraps up around 15th-16th level in 3e. I wouldn't presume that just because there are 30 levels in the core rules of 4e that there is a clear ratio there.
Picking the correct level progression seems more art than science, but I would guess that 4e 25th level is actually more powerful than the players should be for the end of the AP. My wild guess would actually aim for 4e 20th, the end of the characters "paragon" levels, where they should be dealing with conflicts that affect cities and nations, rather than entire worlds and planes. That seems like an equivalent to 3e 15th to me.
Then again, I don't know 4e well enough, and I haven't finished the AP, so you would do well to ignore this post.
First, there are 30 levels in 4th Edition where in D&D 3.5 there were 20. In an effort to allow players to experience all three tiers of play, I set out with the intention of scaling the leveling process up so that characters would reach level 25 or 26 by the end of Rise of the Runelords.
I think this assumption might lead to some trouble.
The third tier of 4e is "Epic" which I tend to equate with the "Epic" levels of 3e, only possibly more manageable. I never player with 3e epic levels, but I know that the Runelords AP wraps up around 15th-16th level in 3e. I wouldn't presume that just because there are 30 levels in the core rules of 4e that there is a clear ratio there.
Picking the correct level progression seems more art than science, but I would guess that 4e 25th level is actually more powerful than the players should be for the end of the AP. My wild guess would actually aim for 4e 20th, the end of the characters "paragon" levels, where they should be dealing with conflicts that affect cities and nations, rather than entire worlds and planes. That seems like an equivalent to 3e 15th to me.
Then again, I don't know 4e well enough, and I haven't finished the AP, so you would do well to ignore this post.
Actually, the last adventure in Rise of the Runelords does end up involving the fate of an entire world and the influences of other planes. I'm not too concerned about the PCs "outleveling" the adventure, since I will be designing the encounters along its length to remain challenging for the party in 4th Edition. We'll see how it turns out.
I like what you've said about controlling the leveling-up; I just wanted to see where you are thinking the breaks between the "tiers" will occur in your campaign. Or even, what level range you expect to use for each adventure, if you've already thought it through to the extent.
Personally (i.e. for my group, which hasn't started these adventures quite yet), I'm thinking of trying to have them be Heroic until they reach the Paragon tier most of the way through the third adventure.
And I was thinking that the entire 5th adventure seems to fit Paragon tier rather than Epic tier to me, but the 6th adventure seems to be pretty much Epic.
Note that I haven't yet done the math to figure out how realistic this would be.
I like what you've said about controlling the leveling-up; I just wanted to see where you are thinking the breaks between the "tiers" will occur in your campaign. Or even, what level range you expect to use for each adventure, if you've already thought it through to the extent.
Personally (i.e. for my group, which hasn't started these adventures quite yet), I'm thinking of trying to have them be Heroic until they reach the Paragon tier most of the way through the third adventure.
** spoiler omitted **
And I was thinking that the entire 5th adventure seems to fit Paragon tier rather than Epic tier to me, but the 6th adventure seems to be pretty much Epic.
** spoiler omitted **
Note that I haven't yet done the math to figure out how realistic this would be.
I'll have to check all of this out. For the time being I'm going adventure-by-adventure. There's just too much to keep track of in each individual publication to focus on getting the level breaks for Paragon and Epic right just yet. The suggestions help a lot, though. Now I have a couple of places to start looking at making the tier-breaks. Thanks, Cintra!
First, there are 30 levels in 4th Edition where in D&D 3.5 there were 20. In an effort to allow players to experience all three tiers of play, I set out with the intention of scaling the leveling process up so that characters would reach level 25 or 26 by the end of Rise of the Runelords.
I think this assumption might lead to some trouble.
The third tier of 4e is "Epic" which I tend to equate with the "Epic" levels of 3e, only possibly more manageable. I never player with 3e epic levels, but I know that the Runelords AP wraps up around 15th-16th level in 3e. I wouldn't presume that just because there are 30 levels in the core rules of 4e that there is a clear ratio there.
Picking the correct level progression seems more art than science, but I would guess that 4e 25th level is actually more powerful than the players should be for the end of the AP. My wild guess would actually aim for 4e 20th, the end of the characters "paragon" levels, where they should be dealing with conflicts that affect cities and nations, rather than entire worlds and planes. That seems like an equivalent to 3e 15th to me.
Then again, I don't know 4e well enough, and I haven't finished the AP, so you would do well to ignore this post.
Thats really not the impression I'm getting. Comparing things like level 25 Wizard Daily Elemental Maw and you have a power that does 6d6+Int damage to everyone in the burst and is pulled 2 squares toward the vortex. If they are pulled in they take a bit more damage. OK all thats nice and everything but its not wish or gate - which lets you summon creatures that have wish and a whole lot of arrows of slaying to boot. 3.5 Epic level characters can probably move mountains - 4E ones just can't.
Thats really not the impression I'm getting. Comparing things like level 25 Wizard Daily Elemental Maw and you have a power that does 6d6+Int damage to everyone in the burst and is pulled 2 squares toward the vortex. If they are pulled in they take a bit more damage. OK all thats nice and everything but its not wish or gate - which lets you summon creatures that have wish and a whole lot of arrows of slaying to boot. 3.5 Epic level characters can probably move mountains - 4E ones just can't.
First, there are 30 levels in 4th Edition where in D&D 3.5 there were 20. In an effort to allow players to experience all three tiers of play, I set out with the intention of scaling the leveling process up so that characters would reach level 25 or 26 by the end of Rise of the Runelords.
I think this assumption might lead to some trouble.
The third tier of 4e is "Epic" which I tend to equate with the "Epic" levels of 3e, only possibly more manageable. I never player with 3e epic levels, but I know that the Runelords AP wraps up around 15th-16th level in 3e. I wouldn't presume that just because there are 30 levels in the core rules of 4e that there is a clear ratio there.
Picking the correct level progression seems more art than science, but I would guess that 4e 25th level is actually more powerful than the players should be for the end of the AP. My wild guess would actually aim for 4e 20th, the end of the characters "paragon" levels, where they should be dealing with conflicts that affect cities and nations, rather than entire worlds and planes. That seems like an equivalent to 3e 15th to me.
Then again, I don't know 4e well enough, and I haven't finished the AP, so you would do well to ignore this post.
Exactly. Design is a LOT tighter in 4th Edition. DMs have a great deal of control over the path their game takes thanks to all of this. I'm having a lot of difficulty imagining ways that the PCs being in the epic tier would seriously impact the flow of RotR. I think, in fact, that epic tier play is probably completely appropriate for the end of the adventure path. But again, we'll see. One of the great things about this project is that I have a regular group of fantastic players who are putting up with being essentially guinea pigs. Everything that is posted has already been run by a group and should be completely playable (assuming we didn't miss something, which is possible). I also have the ability to instantly change anything I've already posted thanks to the online format. So if something simply doesn't work the way I've designed it, I'll get it fixed before too long.
By the way, if you see something in the conversion blog that you'd like to comment on, please do! That's what the comments feature is there for!
Blog updated with the Guard Cave and Ancient Prison areas of the Catacombs of Wrath. Game is tomorrow, and the possibility exists of the PCs getting through the rest of the dungeon. That means the only thing left is Thistletop! And then it's on to The Skinsaw Murders!
Everything in the Catacombs of Wrath save the encounter with Erylium is now updated, including a new skill challenge for the Meditation Chamber. The party didn't quite make it all the way through, but they'll be well onto Thistletop by the end of next week's game.
The Catacombs of Wrath is now finished! Erylium's encounter and a skill challenge involving deactivating the runewell have been added. My game isn't until tomorrow, but the chances of my players checking the site between now and then are pretty low. Working on Thistletop right now!
Also added a quest (with quest card) for rescuing Ameiko as part of the Glassworks portion of the adventure. Quest cards are designed to be printed out onto plain 3"x5" notecards.
Thanks again for doing this. I am planning on starting a 4E campaign using the Runelords AP, and this is invaluable. Please see it through, and let us know how we can help!
Comments and suggestions are always appreciated. I'm learning the ropes of 4th Edition monster and encounter design as I go, and I'm just as new to it as everyone else is. Other than that, though, the encouragement goes a long way! Thanks!
Scott, you rock!
I am very interested in this and hope to start a 4e game using Runelords next week.
Awesome! It's not quite at the point where I can guarantee that you won't catch up to the material I'm converting (my group seems to progress just a touch slower than I would guess for the material) but I'll do my best to keep ahead of those who want to use the converted adventure.
And again, comments and suggestions are appreciated!
Hello Scott,
I would just like to say, that your work is much appreciated (and especially sharing it with us).
I am currently converting my own 3.5 Ptolus campaign to 4E, and I have read your blog with keen interest.
Thanks again.
I started my 4e version of Runelords over the weekend and used Scott's info from Tales from the Rusty Dragon. The game rocked! Thanks Scott! We ended our first session with the players heading towards the Glass Works and everyone is excited for our next game (in 2 weeks).
Oh crap, now I really have to get to work. ;P
Thanks for the encouragement guys. I just got back from the Penny Arcade Expo last night, so I'm still pretty beat. There will be new content up this week though since I am running my game on Thursday. Only a few more sessions before Burnt Offerings is finished!
Blog updated! The first portion of Thistletop (the goblin warren) is complete (maps and all), including what I think ought to be a fun build for Gogmurt and Tangletooth. Next week will cover the goblin fortress atop the island. Let me know what you think.
This is great stuff Scott, and really helpful...thanks for all your time and effort.
I'm starting my 4E RotRL campaign tomorrow night, and this will really help. I'm running it as a sequel to the Red Hand of Doom, and also basing it (as we did with RHoD) in Eberron, so I've got a bunch of work to do already - your 4E conversions are really helping me with that whole process.
Thanks again
This is great stuff Scott, and really helpful...thanks for all your time and effort.
I'm starting my 4E RotRL campaign tomorrow night, and this will really help. I'm running it as a sequel to the Red Hand of Doom, and also basing it (as we did with RHoD) in Eberron, so I've got a bunch of work to do already - your 4E conversions are really helping me with that whole process.
Thanks again
Glad to hear it. Let me know how your campaign goes, and if there are any suggestions you have.
|
I just wanted to thank you again for all of your hard work. I put together this powerpoint slideshow of all the rumors, to show your players (or print out cards with).
Why did I do this? Well, for a few reasons:
1. It's more cinematic and convenient to show my players a couple of slides at the beginning of the game session.
2. I can print handouts of specific slides (6 slides per page), cut the squares out, and have instant rumor cards. Edit: here is a PDF of cards, pre-made.
3. I put in a randomize macro into the file (go to macros and run it) - which shuffles all the slides in the show so I can have random rumors at any time. Some repeat of course, but so do real rumors.
4. I can put in DM notes into the Notes section under each slide to note if the rumors are true or false, or to jot down any other notes I wish.
Here is the Powerpoint. You may get a warning about macros, but that's the randomizer one. No worries. You must enable macros if you wish to use that feature.
Thanks to both Scott and Tintagel, it is really useful work you are both doing. I will be running this in 4e as well, but I am resetting it my own homebrew campaign setting. As I work it through I will be using ideas from both of you and really appreciate the explanations you are both giving as to where you are coming up with your ideas. I have to say the story line in the Adventure Paths really are very good, I hope that at some point licensing shifts or Paizo just decides it is a good idea to include some level of 4e support in the modules directly. I am impressed with the Goodman stuff as well, but Paizo's storylines and flavor are very good indeed. Anyhow, thanks again, if I do anything that is useful outside of my campaign I will post it up for you all to loot as well.
Great to hear. Thanks for following along, and I'm looking forward to anything you might cook up yourself.
|
|
Hey Scott,
I tried my hand at envisioning the Sinspawn Ripper a bit. I tried to stay true to the original in flavor, so some things deviated from your build.
First, I made it a brute. The original had low AC and 3 attacks (high-ish damage) so this kind of fits. Soldier's ACs are just so high that it seemed to go off more than necessary from the original. I also split its claw attacks. I gave it a low damage claw attack and a power that lets it make 2 claw attacks as a standard action. The two attacks together come close to the damage for a brute (average 11 pts instead of 10). This is offset by the fact that Opportunity Attacks are much weaker.
Second, I looked at the bite from the original and gave this one a recharge bite as a minor action (which lets it get the 3 attacks in sometimes). This is a low damage attack, but it has a secondary attack that makes the victim possibly attack its friends. The victim's possible dissension attacks serve as the high end damage for limited attacks. Also note that it plays into 4E's battlefield movement concept; allies will want to get away from their enraged friend - and the nerfed Opportunity Attack of the Sinspawn makes it less painful to disengage as well.
Anyways, here is my take:
Sinspawn Ripper, Level 2 Brute; Medium Abberant Humanoid
Sinspawn Ripper Level 2 Brute
Medium Aberrant Humanoid XP 125
Initiative +3 Senses Perception +2
HP 44; Bloodied 22
Regeneration 2 (if the sinspawn ripper takes radiant damage, regeneration does not function until the end of its next turn)
AC 14; Fortitude 14, Reflex 14, Will 14
Speed 6
M Bloodtinged Claw (Standard; at-will)
+5 vs. AC; 1d4+3 damage
m Ripping Claws (Standard; at-will)
Make two Bloodtinged Claw attacks as a Standard action.
m Wrathful Bite (Minor; recharge 56) ♦ Charm
+5 vs. AC; 1d4+2 damage plus secondary attack: +3 vs Will; target is enraged until the end of his next turn. While enraged, the victim has -2 to hit, +2 to damage and must attack the nearest creature with at-will powers only (even if an ally). If two or more creatures tie for proximity, roll randomly to determine the target.
Bloodied Rage (Free)
The sinspawn ripper deals an extra 2 points of damage with each attack while bloodied.
Alignment Evil Languages Thassilonian
Skills Stealth +8
Str 17 (+4) Dex 14 (+3) Wis 12 (+2)
Con 14 (+3) Int 10 (+1) Cha 14 (+3)
I agree with Tintagel that the original Sinspawn Ripper is more suited to a Brute than a Soldier, so I too would drop the AC and to hit numbers while bumping up the HP.
However, I think Tintagel's version is too powerful for a 2nd level Brute - the loss of control in particular is very nasty, and not difficult against 2nd level characters. You're looking at an average of once per 3 rounds with this ability, which could get nasty.
Personally I think I'll use a combination of both of these suggestions: Tintagels Brute stats and approach, with Scott's powers (with the to hit numbers toned down to +5 or +6, which seems typical for a 2nd level brute. I'll try and post an amalgamated version for comment later.
|
|
However, I think Tintagel's version is too powerful for a 2nd level Brute - the loss of control in particular is very nasty, and not difficult against 2nd level characters. You're looking at an average of once per 3 rounds with this ability, which could get nasty.
I think it should be a level 3 monster, to be honest, but not because of its current power level, but because of numbers and crowded maps. It would make fights less crowded (we have to use 5 per combat at level 2) and many of the official maps are too tight with 5 monsters.
I have to say that I don't think the rage is that bad. Let's look at the numbers: First, the +5 vs. AC has to hit. That's about 40% chance versus AC 18 (average front-line ac). Then, you have a 1/3 chance of having the power. So that's about a 1/7 chance of using it on any given round. Now, you have to also succeed at a +3 vs. Will attack. That's about 50% likely for a typical front line. That's 1 in 14 chance that you have the power up, hit with the bite, then connect with the Enrage ability. THEN you have to have an ally next to you, and still roll off randomly to see if you attack the ally or the monster (another 50%) - so about once every 28 rounds of combat?
Not exactly that strong, to be honest. OH! Then you have to HIT your ally too...
Well first off, the work you guys are doing is awesome. I want to run this path as I like the story, but wasn't sure if itd end up being a 3.x or 4e game and now I have the option for both thanks to your hard work.
Now that that is out of the way, my very little contribution is a bit of thought I had. Personally I think the brutes are overly strong, but the amalgam will be really good. As for the crowded maps I have come to the realization that any 3.x conversion to 4th needs more critters and larger maps. Which I think is fine. Besides I use minis and map tiles, so I can barely acurately build most maps anyway so I have to modify them.
I have to say that I don't think the rage is that bad. Let's look at the numbers: First, the +5 vs. AC has to hit. That's about 40% chance versus AC 18 (average front-line ac). Then, you have a 1/3 chance of having the power. So that's about a 1/7 chance of using it on any given round. Now, you have to also succeed at a +3 vs. Will attack. That's about 50% likely for a typical front line. That's 1 in 14 chance that you have the power up, hit with the bite, then connect with the Enrage ability. THEN you have to have an ally next to you, and still roll off randomly to see if you attack the ally or the monster (another 50%) - so about once every 28 rounds of combat?
Yeah, good point, on subsequent rounds this will be tricky to pull off.
However on the first round you're looking at around a 20% chance of success, given that you're likely to use it against an opponent who has an adjacent ally (and you're guaranteed to have the power available). If you have 4 of these guys, as suggested by Scott for the Guard Cave, there's a very good chance that at least one will work.
Not exactly that strong, to be honest. OH! Then you have to HIT your ally too...
It's not just hitting the ally that's the problem - it also removes any positive action from that character for the round. Bearing in mind that the Sinspawn Rippers are Brutes, and therefore pretty good at staying on their feet, you could potentially see a fighter locked down for more than one round.
Obviously this is all theoretical - I haven't playtested your build at all, so I could be talking rubbish! :oD
The blog has been updated! Finally!
The party is now knocking on the door to the fortress. A quick overview of the first floor has been posted, along with the encounter just outside the fortress (and an updated version of the rope bridge trap!)
Hey Scott,
I'm just preparing for the Catacombs of Wrath, and I was looking at your Flameskulls - they look too strong to me for a 4th level Artillery. As you admit, three of them firing together could easily decimate a party before the encounter even starts, which implies there's something not quite right.
I then compared them to a similar 4th level artillery monster, the Magma Hurler, which turned out to be considerably weaker than your conversion.
What do you think about removing the Fireball, and just leaving them with the Flame Ray only. They still come in slightly tougher than the MH, but are pretty comparable. I think that's what I'll run with this Thursday, but reduce the number of Flameskulls to 2 and add a couple of brutes to protect them - I've converted the Eberron Dolgrim for my game, which also fits the theme of the place.
Keep up the great work!
Hey Scott,
I'm just preparing for the Catacombs of Wrath, and I was looking at your Flameskulls - they look too strong to me for a 4th level Artillery. As you admit, three of them firing together could easily decimate a party before the encounter even starts, which implies there's something not quite right.
I then compared them to a similar 4th level artillery monster, the Magma Hurler, which turned out to be considerably weaker than your conversion.
What do you think about removing the Fireball, and just leaving them with the Flame Ray only. They still come in slightly tougher than the MH, but are pretty comparable. I think that's what I'll run with this Thursday, but reduce the number of Flameskulls to 2 and add a couple of brutes to protect them - I've converted the Eberron Dolgrim for my game, which also fits the theme of the place.
Keep up the great work!
Yeah, this is one of those cases where the DMG's suggested up-level and down-level guidelines don't quite cut it. Even though the level difference was only 4, the damage expression on the fireball ability is simply too high to throw three of them at the party simultaneously and expect them to recover (especially since it still deals damage on a miss). I'll tweak them a little to make the encounter less potentially devastating.
Another update is up, with the first level of Thistletop now completed. The Ripnugget fight was a lot of fun to run. When the chieftain had only 10 hit points left, the cleric used Cause Fear to drive him away - and, as fate would have it, the only possible place he could end up was all the way back on his throne in the corner. The party warlord ran up and finished him off with a final strike, and so Ripnugget collapsed, dead on his own throne.
Anyway, go check the updates out: Tales from the Rusty Dragon
In the middle of updating the blog right now. Most of the second floor of Thistletop is up, and the remainder of the adventure will be posted over the next few days (my D&D group will finish the adventure tomorrow).
Onward to The Skinsaw Murders!