When I saw that creatures of the giant type (ogres, trolls, giants) were becoming a sub-group of humanoids, I was a little worried. I feel that this change has far reaching consequences that have not been properly addressed by the current rules.
In the last session I DM'd several of the named ogre's fell to Hold Person, quickly followed by a coup de grace. Not a big deal in my book, as I wasn't expecting much toe-to-toe combat between these ogres and my players. When Jaagrath Kreeg was executed without even getting to act, I really began to wonder.
As bad as a death sentence from a second level spell might be, the far more serious trouble is from spells like Dominate Person. Jaagrath has something like a %35 chance to avoid becoming the casters personal hand puppet for the next week and a half.
I'm not sure if it is a problem yet, but I don't see any reason that chapter 4 isn't going to just be a long series of hold person based executions. Hold Person is SO effective, why not use it on every giant?
What do folks think? Is this a problem, or just good playing? Should the monsters take precautions against this? Are there reasonable counter measures? Has anyone else experienced this?
Hold Person has one key difference between all other spells of similar levels - It allows a single round coup de grace kill of ANY creature that is humanoid. (OK, Sleep could do this, but the whole 4HD limit controls the power.) I suppose it is OK as a 3rd level wizard spell, but seems game breaking as a 2nd level cleric spell in a campaign like Runelords.
I think a perfect solution would be to change paralyzed to stunned. It would still be devastating to the victim, but would not result in a near automatic death sentence. A more drastic solution would be to get rid of the "Person" version of spells, and just allow the "Monster" versions.
James - I agree that specific creature type spells are somewhat troublesome. That Hold Monster is 5th level wiz/sor only shows about where the power level of this spell should be. While we are on the subject of creature type based sub-optimal spells, it is the "Animal" version of charm, hold, etc. that need help. Considering the limited situational nature of these spells, they should be far better then they are.
Anyway, I'm not sure if this is really a game problem, or simply a case of several factors coming together in a Giant focused campaign. Has anyone dealt with these issues in their Runelords campaign?
I left Giants as Giants and not Humanoid (Giant). My reasoning is that they seem more primordial than humanoid. Frost, Fire, Earth, Storm, Cloud, etc. And I felt they fell outside of Humanoid limitations. The only one that I might have justified falling into Humanoid(Giant) would be ogres.
I'm just not seeing the difference between hold person taking out a CR 7 giant due to a coup de grace setup and hold person doing the same setup on a CR 7 orc barbarian, I guess.
I believe the issue is that it is a powerful spell with restricted usage - but in a giant heavy campaign (like RotRL) you now have opened up that restriction making it too powerful for the spell level.
Honestly, I don't think this is really a problem normally, unless (as noted) you are in a giant heavy campaign. Then you might want to houserule it up to the level of Hold Monster, or maybe a level behind.
I'm with James here... I don't really see the problem, I don't think hold personing a Hill giant is any more devastating then hold personing an 8th level human NPC enemy.... although I think the GM needs to plan ahead for the possibility, just like with any spell effect...
I thought the Giants -> Humanoid (Giant) change was a good one. Same for the Elemental -> Outsider (elemental). My only issue of the type changes was the fact they didn't change Ooze -> Hazard or some such thing. They seem, to me, more like obstacles than actual monsters.
Damn, now I wanna play a half-giant.
I'm just not seeing the difference between hold person taking out a CR 7 giant due to a coup de grace setup and hold person doing the same setup on a CR 7 orc barbarian, I guess.
This is basically my response as well. It's pretty scary to see any sufficiently powerful NPC fall to the spell.
If there's an NPC you want to give plot armor against this kind of technique, there are ways to do that. Such is the life of a GM.
If the DM hides the rolls for the monster, a cool BBEG can always "make" their save (wink, wink), unless the players would really enjoy a quick end to a long journey.
The big difference is that some dang fool made a great adventure path with many giants, but few leveled humanoids.
A quick glance through volume 4: The Fortress of the Stone Giants - reveals... big spoiler here... Stone Giants. A dozen in the first encounter, and something in the neighborhood of 60 creatures of the giant type by the end of the mod. 90% of these creatures have a less than 50% chance of making the will save. It even introduces a new type of giant with a whopping -6 will save modifier vs. Hold Person!
Humanoids (non-giant) with class levels: 1 (She is cool, I must say!)
The Against the Giants series has been a favorite of mine for something like 20+ years. It is a dream come true to DM an updated version, and I really want it to be epic for everyone involved. What I foresee is a long series of coup de graces, with the occasional non-giant encounter to keep it from being totally boring. Why not scribe 100 scrolls of hold person, for about the cost of a +2 weapon, and hardly bother making an attack roll? Can anyone think of anything even half as efficient at blowing through all those giants?
I could fudge the rolls, bump up their will saves, give them some funky immunity, or some other rules bending, but I like to set up the game, and let the dice fall where they may. I would like to see if anyone has any by-the-rules ways of handling this before resorting to house rules.
[Disclaimer: I have no problem with the players wholesale butchering mooks. I have always had a plenty-more-where-that-came-from attitude, but it should at least present some risk, or tax resources.
Easy fix... give all humanoids with the "Giant" subtype the following extra ability:
Giants are treated as monsters for any spell or effect dependent on creature type for success. Thus they are immune to spells with "person" in the title such charm person and hold person.
This could certainly be worded better, but you can probably see what I'm getting at.
The big difference is that some dang fool made a great adventure path with many giants, but few leveled humanoids.
A quick glance through volume 4: The Fortress of the Stone Giants - reveals... big spoiler here... Stone Giants. A dozen in the first encounter, and something in the neighborhood of 60 creatures of the giant type by the end of the mod. 90% of these creatures have a less than 50% chance of making the will save. It even introduces a new type of giant with a whopping -6 will save modifier vs. Hold Person!
Humanoids (non-giant) with class levels: 1 (She is cool, I must say!)
The Against the Giants series has been a favorite of mine for something like 20+ years. It is a dream come true to DM an updated version, and I really want it to be epic for everyone involved. What I foresee is a long series of coup de graces, with the occasional non-giant encounter to keep it from being totally boring. Why not scribe 100 scrolls of hold person, for about the cost of a +2 weapon, and hardly bother making an attack roll? Can anyone think of anything even half as efficient at blowing through all those giants?
I could fudge the rolls, bump up their will saves, give them some funky immunity, or some other rules bending, but I like to set up the game, and let the dice fall where they may. I would like to see if anyone has any by-the-rules ways of handling this before resorting to house rules.
[Disclaimer: I have no problem with the players wholesale butchering mooks. I have always had a plenty-more-where-that-came-from attitude, but it should at least present some risk, or tax resources.
I'm not quite up to running this part of the AP yet, but I would imagine that the best defence against the indiscriminate use of Hold Person would be the number of giants present in a particular encounter. Sure it's easy to "hold" then coup de grace one giant, but it's trickier to pull off when he has a few buddies with him.
So if your group is consistently using this trick, you might want to rework some of the encounters to include a few more giants to keep them challenged.
The big difference is that some dang fool made a great adventure path with many giants, but few leveled humanoids.
A quick glance through volume 4: The Fortress of the Stone Giants - reveals... big spoiler here... Stone Giants. A dozen in the first encounter, and something in the neighborhood of 60 creatures of the giant type by the end of the mod. 90% of these creatures have a less than 50% chance of making the will save. It even introduces a new type of giant with a whopping -6 will save modifier vs. Hold Person!
Ok I have not read the adventure but I am not seeing the big issues here. The spell is good for 1 creature per casting. In a battle with 12 or so..yeah you stop 1, yay you, not an auto win in most cases. Sure it can be useful but how many 2nd or 3rd level spell slots do you have? It took a often nver used past low level spell and made it more useful.
Ok I have not read the adventure but I am not seeing the big issues here. The spell is good for 1 creature per casting.
The trouble is that many of the giant type creatures in volumes 3 and 4 have a CR of about party level minus 1 or 2. We are not talking about a big mob, but rather an encounter of 2-4 or the creatures. Whack one or two right away, and it becomes a cake-walk. In most groups, at least one character has scribe scroll, so there is no real limit to the number of times you can cast the spell.
I might resort to just doubling the number of giants in each encounter, but I would rather find another way to make the module a challenge. I also think the cleric is indispensable enough without being responsible for 50% of the kills.
[Disclaimer: I have no problem with the players wholesale butchering mooks. I have always had a plenty-more-where-that-came-from attitude, but it should at least present some risk, or tax resources.
I refer you to James' original post/opinion...
My theory: ...spells that only target a specific type of creature... are suboptimal.And increasing the number of targets that they can affect in the game is good.
Translation: Add more monsters. No fudging of numbers or retooling of stats required... print your thug monsters 2-3 more times.
Also, since they're humanoids, have them fight with a bit more intelligence, such as not leaving a paralyzed companion to get coup-de-grace'd. Even a caveman has basic wolfpack tactics such as flanking. Your casters only have so many spells, one or two fights of trying to hold person everything all the time and they're gonna wish they had been a bit more reserved with their spellcasting.
I might resort to just doubling the number of giants in each encounter, but I would rather find another way to make the module a challenge. I also think the cleric is indispensable enough without being responsible for 50% of the kills.
Another option would be to give the giants some sort of non-humanoid minions. (Fire Giants = Hell Hounds, Frost Giants = Winter Wolves, Stone Giants = Cave Bears, etc.) It might require a bit more work, but potentially increasing the encounters toughness without shooting the CR through the roof. Traps and Terrain can also increase a CR quite a bit, but can easily get wonky fast.
As others have said, the cleric is one character, that effects one monster per one spell.
Easy fix... give all humanoids with the "Giant" subtype the following extra ability:
Giants are treated as monsters for any spell or effect dependent on creature type for success. Thus they are immune to spells with "person" in the title such charm person and hold person.
This could certainly be worded better, but you can probably see what I'm getting at.
A note about Hold Person is that it requires a will save EACH round, at 50% chance that means it could be free from the hold just as someone runs up to do the cdg. AoO anyone? Hold Person is a VERY powerful spell, it also has a built in limitation. Also it can also be aimed at players.. 3rd level ogre cleric of Rovagug would be just as dangerous to the players.
I'm just not seeing the difference between hold person taking out a CR 7 giant due to a coup de grace setup and hold person doing the same setup on a CR 7 orc barbarian, I guess.I believe the issue is that it is a powerful spell with restricted usage - but in a giant heavy campaign (like RotRL) you now have opened up that restriction making it too powerful for the spell level.
I don't see the trouble here. After all, it's the same in a humanoid-centred campaign. If the campaign is full of humans, the spell is just as powerful (and humanoids are in most every adventure and adventure path out there).
And don't get me started about undead-heavy campaigns and clerics. Or paladins in campaigns where there are many fiends, undead and/or evil dragons!
-------Spoiler--------
Now the worry is that some players may hold, charm, whatever giants then slay them easily. Part of the adventure for my group that just finished the AP is they figured out that each death of a tattooed enemy brought the villain one step closer to his release on the world. Whenever they were killing one i would mark a card that I always kept with me. This added to the feeling that when they killed too many then the end of the world was nigh. PFRPG isn't a dice game it's a role playing game. As a GM use that to your advantage.
As others have said, the cleric is one character, that effects one monster per one spell.Except Sorcerers, wizards and bards also get it too...
Except for when I'm replying to the OP's quote that specifically points out the cleric... "I also think the cleric is indispensable enough without being responsible for 50% of the kills."
So if the cleric is responsible for 50% of the kills due to Hold Person, you feel that mentioning the fact that every primary casting class in the game save druids has access to this spell is somehow irrelevant??
I felt like you were being a bit snarky, LIKE YOU ARE NOW and posted the reason for my statement.
So...
Round 1: Cleric casts Hold Person on a giant and holds him.
Round 1: All other giants converge on the cleric.
Round 1: The non-spellcasters in the party move to intercept the giants.
Round 2: The cleric casts Hold person on another giant.
Round 2: (Potentially) The Held Giant from round 1 makes its save this round and rejoins the fight.
Round 2: The cleric gets beat on by the other giants.
Round 2: The party attacks the giants.
Round 3: The cleric gets beat to death?
I'm just saying, if the cleric is the biggest threat with his Hold Person spells, then aren't the giants going to deal with him first? It doesn't matter how much he can cast it when he's dead.
|
I felt like you were being a bit snarky, LIKE YOU ARE NOW and posted the reason for my statement.
So if the cleric is responsible for 50% of the kills due to Hold Person, you feel that mentioning the fact that every primary casting class in the game save druids has access to this spell is somehow irrelevant??
Well I wasn't the first time, but you can bet I was the second time.
Thanks for the warm welcome to the thread, though.
I'm just not seeing the difference between hold person taking out a CR 7 giant due to a coup de grace setup and hold person doing the same setup on a CR 7 orc barbarian, I guess.
then why not let it take out a CR 7 magical beast or outsider?
Just change the spell to 2nd level hold monster that way it isn't sub optimal. (sarcasm - but without disrespect to Mr Jacobs intended)
to me hold person is a good spell in limited circumstances, against people. I have no problem with it being sub optimal. But this problem with the change extends beyond this spell. Dominate person will cause further problems.
essentially with this change a whole class of creatures has lost their immunity to a bunch of spells- unfortunately it turns out to be a bunch of spells they are particularly vulnerable to - surely this has to be recognized as significantly weakening them?
Were giants too strong before? not in my experience.
|
Easy fix... give all humanoids with the "Giant" subtype the following extra ability:
Giants are treated as monsters for any spell or effect dependent on creature type for success. Thus they are immune to spells with "person" in the title such charm person and hold person.
This could certainly be worded better, but you can probably see what I'm getting at.
Good idea.
I was also thinking about giving the giant subtype a feature of monstrous humanoid - "Proficient with all simple weapons and any weapons mentioned in its entry."That way they can lose the need for "Martial Weapon Prof" feat, drop that then give them the Iron Will feat instead or if they have that feat (Stone, fire, cloud) give them Improved Iron will for a much more difficult monster encounter.
Ogres and Trolls already have Iron Will to pad their weak will saves, so it would be consistent with the trend.
^^^ Werecorpse and Auxmaulous - EXACTLY! ^^^
I like the proficiency idea - it fixes a gap in the rules, and makes disarming a giant slightly less brutal (for the giant).
Giants have enough vulnerabilities without being subject to pretty much all enchantment spells (even hideous laughter works better on them now!). Once you hit Dominate Person, what wizard with a 18+ intelligence wouldn't have at least one dominated troll, ettin, or giant? Cast Enlarge Person on it, and let the fun begin!
Hold Person is a near automatic giant kill button for everything up to fire, cloud, and storm giants. A second level cleric spell. (2nd lvl bard, 3rd wis/sor)
I'm not sure it would really matter outside of a giant specific campaign, but since those are a classic part of this game, that needs to be addressed. Runelords is trashed by hold person. Under the Pathfinder rules, is it even possible to build a giant focused module or adventure path for the levels between 7-15 that would not require massive re balancing if the group had ready access to hold person castings or scrolls?
|
|
I think if you can pad the will saves, either with the fix I listed or another the issue shouldn't be too much of a game breaker. Having a +2 extra for the bottom tier giants or an extra save for the higher ones (via Improved Iron Will) would probably discourage most players from relying on will save "easy" spells as a combat ender.
Plus mixed fights would probably include a Hill giant caster in the enemy encounters - assuming it is going to be more than one giant, either a cleric or adept is going to A) have a better will save, B) have access to Prot from Good to cast on one of the warriors. The +2 from the Prot:Good and Iron Will (if you use that fix) will at least make one or more giant mooks get a +7 will in a fight.
Not too shabby. Ogres already have the feat -and their will saves are crap, but an orge adept/cleric can use the same trick to bring up will saves for the best/closest combatants on his side.
I know its not a very good answer - I still need to figure out what I am going to do to close this gap in my own game, but it could help dissuade reliance on low level spells to shut down higher level beef.
Looking back at the Rise of the Runelords game that I ran, I really doubt that it would have trashed by hold person working on giants.
I guess opening this does make giants slightly weaker, but I don't believe my campaign with humans and elves as the primary enemies would have issues with the spell. The spell might be too good, but if it is the issue isn't that it can now work on giants. If it is a problem, it would trash campaigns with non-giant humanoid enemies as well.
Also, I'm reasonably certain that the DC on a wand or scroll of hold person would just be 13 no matter who was crafting it.
I'm just not seeing the difference between hold person taking out a CR 7 giant due to a coup de grace setup and hold person doing the same setup on a CR 7 orc barbarian, I guess.then why not let it take out a CR 7 magical beast or outsider?
Just change the spell to 2nd level hold monster that way it isn't sub optimal. (sarcasm - but without disrespect to Mr Jacobs intended)
Because magical beasts or outsiders aren't just oversized people.
to me hold person is a good spell in limited circumstances, against people. I have no problem with it being sub optimal. But this problem with the change extends beyond this spell. Dominate person will cause further problems.
It still is. Dominate person still just works against people, too. Both are not universal.
It's just that the definition of people was a bit broadened in the rules.
Were giants too strong before? not in my experience.
They were too people before. The giant type made no sense. It was just "humanoid, but larger". Just like the silly "beast" type, this one needed to be gone.
I'd personally have put the giants into humanoids and monstrous humanoids depending on creature type (trolls are probably monstrous humanoids more than humanoids), but I can live with it.
The change was made because it fit. Creature types should not be "sizeist".
And I don't see the fact that giants are now susceptible to spells like hold person and dominate person and similar spells as that much of a game-breaker. CR doesn't really figure into this - after all, the spell already targets powerful creatures like high-level humanoid fighters.
And don't forget the flipside: Enlarge person! Rune giant apprentice wizards of colossal size!
KaeYoss - "And don't forget the flipside: Enlarge person! Rune giant apprentice wizards of colossal size!"
Considering the -6 to will saves, that thing is hold or dominate fodder in round 1. Can you show me a mod for levels 7-15 that features many leveled humanoids with bad will saves?
I like the weapon proficiency and iron will/improved iron will idea.
I think a fundamental change in encounter design is needed as well. Runelords features many encounters with 1-3 named ogres (i.e. with class levels) or other giants who are CR 1-3 below the party. It also features several bosses who are fighting ogres or giants (bad will saves). I think these encounters would need to be changed to a greater number of slightly weaker giants. Another option would be to add a major religious element, and have a priest type in many of the encounters, and perhaps give many giants a level or two of cleric. I think boss giants with bad will saves are just bad encounter design these days.
There are also several ogre-mobs, or bosses with decent will saves which work fairly well with the new giants-as-humanoids rule.
|
|
I think a fundamental change in encounter design is needed as well. Runelords features many encounters with 1-3 named ogres (i.e. with class levels) or other giants who are CR 1-3 below the party. It also features several bosses who are fighting ogres or giants (bad will saves). I think these encounters would need to be changed to a greater number of slightly weaker giants. Another option would be to add a major religious element, and have a priest type in many of the encounters, and perhaps give many giants a level or two of cleric. I think boss giants with bad will saves are just bad encounter design these days.
You can add some cleric or adept levels if it makes sense, but if you don't want to go down the divine route you can always a few levels of expert to ogres, hill and stone giants, that would increase their base scores plus give them a bonus on will, bab, hd, all on a CR budget of 2 NPC class levels per CR improvement.
You can do that or advance them enough to add 1 CR - should net +3d8, +2 BAB, +1 Will, +2 feats, skill points, etc (basing this on Hill Giants). So they don't need to all be clerics or adepts but if you are dealing with 4 or more ogres/giants as a group it wouldn't hurt to consider adding a few casters into the ratio as the numbers scale up.Just some ideas as another fix if you are considering a higher level giant "campaign"
I'm just not seeing the difference between hold person taking out a CR 7 giant due to a coup de grace setup and hold person doing the same setup on a CR 7 orc barbarian, I guess.then why not let it take out a CR 7 magical beast or outsider?
Just change the spell to 2nd level hold monster that way it isn't sub optimal. (sarcasm - but without disrespect to Mr Jacobs intended)
Because magical beasts or outsiders aren't just oversized people.
to me hold person is a good spell in limited circumstances, against people. I have no problem with it being sub optimal. But this problem with the change extends beyond this spell. Dominate person will cause further problems.
It still is. Dominate person still just works against people, too. Both are not universal.
It's just that the definition of people was a bit broadened in the rules.
Were giants too strong before? not in my experience.
They were too people before. The giant type made no sense. It was just "humanoid, but larger". Just like the silly "beast" type, this one needed to be gone.
I'd personally have put the giants into humanoids and monstrous humanoids depending on creature type (trolls are probably monstrous humanoids more than humanoids), but I can live with it.
The change was made because it fit. Creature types should not be "sizeist".
And I don't see the fact that giants are now susceptible to spells like hold person and dominate person and similar spells as that much of a game-breaker. CR doesn't really figure into this - after all, the spell already targets powerful creatures like high-level humanoid fighters.
And don't forget the flipside: Enlarge person! Rune giant apprentice wizards of colossal size!
In essence your argument is that giants are just oversized humanoids. I dont agree. I would think Annis and Jann are as close to humanoids as frost giants, ettins and trolls.
The only giants that did seem like oversized humanoids to me were hill giants & ogres. Stone giants had that whole speaking to the stones thing going for them- frost & fire come from norse mythology and they are 'elemental' creatures- cloud from jack & the beanstalk, again magical creatures, storm- not sure but they are again 'elemental'. Trolls and ettins are less human than annis and even minotuars IMO. Are ogre magi still giants?
To me saying these guys are just oversized humans is like saying fey are just magical little humans or medusa is just a hell ugly human.
I guess it was a judgment call for Paizo and they went one way when I would have gone the other. For mine I would rather they made less changes to 3.5 than more- this one seems at best unecessary
runelords spoiler
when the rules came out we were in the middle of Runelords about to face stone giants - the bard picked up on it and said can I take the spell and get myself a couple of stone giant bodyguards, which we can enlarge every fight. I stuck with the 3.5 definition of giants who needs the extra headache
I've been thinking about creating a template that could easily be applied to creatures of the giant subtype that would make them a separate creature type.
Primordial: This template can be applied to any creature of the giant subtype. The creatures type changes to monstrous humanoid, although all stats remain the same. If the creature had an elemental subtype, it's type instead changes to outsider (elemental type native). The creature gains proficiency with all simple and martial weapons, as well as medium armor, shields, and any other armor or weapons listed in it's description.
Perhaps some other minor tweaks could be included, and I was also thinking of including the word jotun in there as well.
Anyone have any thoughts?
I think the expansion of Hold Person to include giants dovetails well with the "save every round" part of it.
Probably most realize this, but do remember, it takes a full-round action to coup de grace, not standard, so you have to be w/in 5' or so to do it.
This could have been a serious issue in Fort Rannick though - most of the encounters are with individuals or pairs. In a situation like that, I can see any Ogres escaping the held fate screaming bloody murder about magic and bringing the keep down on the intruders.