|
This is the first of the Pathfinder adventure paths that my group has played. We are not new to DnD in any way. Some of us playing since 1st edition. We jumped into Rise of the Runelords using just the Core books (MM,PHB and DMG) as sources. Thinking that using the other sources would make the game too simple. We have almost completed the Adventure path and are quite happy. Frankly, most of us are tired of the poor design, and the made up creatures that are absurd.
A CR 12 creature... that casts spells as a 12th level cleric with +14 natural armor? 6 of them... Also they have a touch attack that has no save for Wisdom DRAIN? Show me another creature like that? The authors also just have a poor understanding of the 3.5 edition game. (In one mod stating someone could flurry and two weapon fight which is explicitly wrong.) And just taking MM creatures and changing their abilities to be more powerful. (The Lamias for example.)
Some of us are even getting worried about playing the second adventure path.
Please tell me that it gets better from here?
One of my groups just finished Rise of the Rune Lords and thoroughly enjoyed the adventures. As a sympathetic GM, I'm disappointed to hear that the AP didn't satisfy your players. Our experiences aren't in accord: Could you clarify what aspects of the design disappointed you?
(You'll want to mask your comments under a spoiler warning.)
I'd generally agree that the creatures you cite may be under CRed. My players found them reasonably challenging, able to give a tough fight but not overwhelming. If you found the creatures so unbalanced, did you tweak them to better suit your game? High-level scenarios generally need some modification to make them work well; this appears to have been a case where alteration was needed to better suit your play style.
A CR 12 creature... that casts spells as a 12th level cleric with +14 natural armor? 6 of them... Also they have a touch attack that has no save for Wisdom DRAIN? Show me another creature like that?
There are many creatures with similar stats; Ghaele Eladrin is the closest comparison, I suppose, at CR 13 with 14th level cleric spellcasting, +14 natural armor, and a ton of additional abilities.
I happen to like Rise of the Runelords a lot, but Paizo has naturally learnt from what they did wrong, and expanded on what they did right, from each of the early adventure paths. Legacy of Fire (the 4th AP) is probably my absolute favorite so far, although Council of Thieves (the 5th AP) may surpass it once I've finished reading through it :)
|
The authors also just have a poor understanding of the 3.5 edition game.
Ouch! That line could get you a bit of flack ;)
The first Module having been written by James... Well, lets just say you may want to google his employment/credit history before you say that too loud! ;)
I've read all of the adventures, I'm currently playing in the 3rd module in a pbp, and I'm part way through DMing the first module for the 2nd and 3rd times...
What I've read/seen I like, apart from some maps being a little restricted/complex (thisletop's upper level, built by goblins? huh?).
|
1. RotRL is an old-school AP. It's BRUTAL. The boss of the second adventure and several fights in 5th and 6th part pretty much require one to be on the top of his game (both in understanding of D&D combat and optimization). For your consideration, the second AP is less deadly.
2. The authors have very good understanding of 3.5 game, but they are also cruel, wicked and dastardly, in particular Mr. Vaughn and Mr. Pett take great pleasure in reading forum posts like this one.
3. Perhaps switching to Pathfidner RPG would be a good move for your group ? PCs are more powerful and monsters are better balanced.
|
1. RotRL is an old-school AP. It's BRUTAL. The boss of the second adventure and several fights in 5th and 6th part pretty much require one to be on the top of his game (both in understanding of D&D combat and optimization). For your consideration, the second AP is less deadly.
2. The authors have very good understanding of 3.5 game, but they are also cruel, wicked and dastardly, in particular Mr. Vaughn and Mr. Pett take great pleasure in reading forum posts like this one.
3. Perhaps switching to Pathfidner RPG would be a good move for your group ? PCs are more powerful and monsters are better balanced.
1. Definitely brutal. I'm running this now, converted to PFRPG and I have 6 dead PCs so far. I am not trying to kill them, but I'm not pulling punches. Caveat: At least two of the deaths are due to blatant player stupidity.
2. Mr. Pett and Mr. Vaughn are indeed dastardly. PF #2 alone was responsible for 3 of the aforementioned deaths. Adventuring is deadly work - not for the faint of heart.
3. As I said, even converted, the path has been tough, although I feel that the PFRPG characters are much better equipped overall than their 3.5 counterparts would have been.
As for the story hiccups and inconsistencies...James Jacobs has commented in other threads that the Paizo staff is always learning new and better ways to accomplish their goals. Having played in the very first 'AP' - The Shackled City, back in the Dungeon Magazine days, I can attest that every path has indeed, gotten sharper, more cohesive and more clever...although I can't say that they have become less deadly. ;)
For my own tastes, I feel that RotR has some plot holes you could drive a small truck through (many due to editing issues and last minute sacrifices to the page count gods, as opposed to writing) - but it doesn't matter because there is so much good stuff to be had. As you said yourself, it is part of the DM's job to make or break the adventure, which comes from knowing your group.
If you haven't looked at the other paths yet, give them a chance. These Paizo guys know what they're doing...at least most of the time. :)
On the whole, RotRL is not brutal. In my experience, for 90% of AP, intelligent players that actually use tactics and know basics of 3.5 (like "core melee = suck") can only be challenged at all if you scrap the prescripted behavior for the enemies and make them react to PCs presence as if they want to win. Even if PCs are quite suboptimal, like sword and board clerics, unfocused bards or two-handed weapon swift hunters.
However, there are a few spikes in difficulty that are all but guaranteed to result in TPK, unless the party uses stealth. In particular, Shadow Clock tower, will kill any party of proper numbers and level most of the time, barring very heavy optimization. (And if Xanesha remembers that she is intelligent enough to just stay out of reach and spam spells against melee characters, any party that decided, based on previous parts of AP, that melee can win the day every time, is screwed).
We are not new to DnD in any way. Some of us playing since 1st edition.
Some of the people I play with have been playing for decades, too. And some of those actually know jack about the rules, even. Others couldn't see what is unbalanced about a balor as player character on level 1, so I always separate play-time from competence, as they're clearly unrelated.
Frankly, most of us are tired of the poor design, and the made up creatures that are absurd.
I might concede that Runelords has its weak points - teething problems, as this was the first Pathfinder AP, but poor design? It's still head and shoulders above a lot of crap that is being put out.
And "made-up creatures that are absurd"? As opposed to real creatures that aren't? I'm not quite sure what you mean. The nature of fantasy worlds is that a lot of critters are made-up. That puts the fantasy into fantasy.
A CR 12 creature... that casts spells as a 12th level cleric with +14 natural armor? 6 of them... Also they have a touch attack that has no save for Wisdom DRAIN? Show me another creature like that?
The AC is well within the norm for this CR.
Having spellcasting powers equal to the CR isn't such a stretch, either.
The wisdom drain is strong, true, but we're talking about CR 12 here. Not exactly weakling country.
The authors also just have a poor understanding of the 3.5 edition game. (In one mod stating someone could flurry and two weapon fight which is explicitly wrong.)
Now this is funny. You insult some of the people with the best understanding of the ruleset (seriously - PF was a great fix to the system) and state something that shows that you don't know the game.
Granted, two-weapon flurry is a weird thing, and Pathfinder (made by those people you wrongly accused of having a poor understanding of the game) fixed it, and flurry in general.
And just taking MM creatures and changing their abilities to be more powerful. (The Lamias for example.)
They didn't change the MM lamias at all (unless I'm misremembering). They merely added more lamia-kin, including one that has more resemblance to the original Lamia.
They expanded lamia lore and added several distinct sub-species, all with their own role in the grand scheme of things. Quite nifty, actually.
Looking at all the new monsters they have done (and the Critters Revisited books) shows they're very, very good at monsters.
And it does get even better from here.
|
|
When I say made up creatures, I mean taking something that already exists and just changing its abilities to make it more annoying. (The Lamias are a perfect example.) When you take something that has a single touch attack that does wisdom drain and try to say that if it two weapon fights it gets the wisdom drain on all attacks. That is just stupid.
As far as pathfinder being a great fix to the system. That is completely an opinion. The last thing I thought when I was playing 3.5 was, "Man everything just needs to be more powerful". Granted they did fix a few problems, but they caused more.
My problems with the game arent that it was too challenging. On the contrary, the only thing that was really challenging something from the first or second book. Towards the end, the fights were just downright boring and long with no potential threat to the PCs. Fighting 12 Huge creatures at one time IS poor design.
Like I said before, maybe I just had a bad experience because of the way it was run at some points, who knows?
I'm at work so I dont have any books in front of me, but I have to ask is the wis drain attack once a round (i.e. the vampire's energy drain) or is it actually every attack?
If its just once a round like vampires then I dont see any real issue with it. Yes its touch attack, and unless you a min-maxed monk, its prolly going to hit you. If it is every attack then you better make sure the PC's have lots of ranged weapons and can move away so that the critters are only able to do it once a round.
Besides why would they focus on that part of their attacks, since they have cleric levels. If the DM is resorting to the lamias just using their touch attacks then that DM has issues...
|
|
The normal lamia, yes the wisdom drain touch attack is a standard action. But the ones in RotRL get it on every single attack in their full attack action.
Its the same as saying that a Vampire Monk would level drain on every attack in a flurry.
Maybe Pathfinder rules are different, but the point has been made that Pathfinder lamias can indeed do it every attack.
Like I said then, if thats the case, then ranged attacks against the lamias is the most viable option..
Creative Director
|
To the OP: Sorry you're not enjoying "Rise of the Runelords."
That said, a CR 12 monster is supposed to be tough. They assume that the PCs have access to high level spells and options other than direct toe-to-toe melee fighting. Not all monsters should be designed so that the best option is ALWAYS a toe-to-toe fight, and the lamia matriarch is, to a certain extent, one such example. Although when she does do a full attack and drains wisdom through her weapons, she's limited to only 1 point of drain per attack, not the full 1d6 points. So even if she somehow manages to hit six times in one round, she's not doing more wisdom drain in that round than if she made her one draining touch attack and rolled a 6 on the die. From the post, it sounds like this bit might have been overlooked by the GM...
That said, things like ability score drain and petrification and other pretty tough special attacks are generally assigned to monsters with the assumption that the PCs have access to the countermeasures. At CR 8 (the lamia matriarch's CR) we assume the PCs have access to restoration spells—a super efficient way to heal ability drain. If, as a GM, you run a game where your players DON'T have access to restoration spells, you should not use ability draining monsters. It's simply not cool.
At CR 8 (the lamia matriarch's CR) we assume the PCs have access to restoration spells—a super efficient way to heal ability drain.
Well, it's not super-efficient in battle. Afterwards it is, though.
Mr. Fishy agrees wands are more efficient that casting. But not getting hit is more effective than that. Wands also are expensive and limited to 4th and below, so scrolls are a trife cheaper and more cost effective in the short term.
Mr. Fishy has noticed a few warts but when you cook a buffet you have to be as bland as possible without being too bland so some people are going to be diappointed.
Concern yourself only with that which you control and can change.
To the OP: Sorry you're not enjoying "Rise of the Runelords."
That said, a CR 12 monster is supposed to be tough. They assume that the PCs have access to high level spells and options other than direct toe-to-toe melee fighting. Not all monsters should be designed so that the best option is ALWAYS a toe-to-toe fight, and the lamia matriarch is, to a certain extent, one such example. Although when she does do a full attack and drains wisdom through her weapons, she's limited to only 1 point of drain per attack, not the full 1d6 points. So even if she somehow manages to hit six times in one round, she's not doing more wisdom drain in that round than if she made her one draining touch attack and rolled a 6 on the die. From the post, it sounds like this bit might have been overlooked by the GM...
That said, things like ability score drain and petrification and other pretty tough special attacks are generally assigned to monsters with the assumption that the PCs have access to the countermeasures. At CR 8 (the lamia matriarch's CR) we assume the PCs have access to restoration spells—a super efficient way to heal ability drain. If, as a GM, you run a game where your players DON'T have access to restoration spells, you should not use ability draining monsters. It's simply not cool.
A number of the encounters encourage and yes even require out of the box thinking. THAT is excellent design. I had two very experienced gamers totally panicked over the Quasit staying out of melee range They still grump about that. I love it.
Put it in a wand. Lots more efficient then.At CR 8 (the lamia matriarch's CR) we assume the PCs have access to restoration spells—a super efficient way to heal ability drain.Well, it's not super-efficient in battle. Afterwards it is, though.
Doesn't help the 3 round casting time.
Activation: Wands use the spell trigger activation method, so casting a spell from a wand is usually a standard action that doesn't provoke attacks of opportunity. (If the spell being cast has a longer casting time than 1 action, however, it takes that long to cast the spell from a wand.)
(Sorry for the threadjack.)
|
|
James : You're just too kind . the OP has no real arguments. He just doesn't say how he liked/didn't like it. And it is even insulting.
My players (Experienced players too) are in the middle of HMM and they LOVE it. Specially with all the fans addition which allowed me to make it more lively.
Of course it's not perfect but it has a HUGE amount of things and it's not very hard to fix the flaws with all the fans....
Description of Varisia in HMM holds ideas for my next two decades of gaming and I love these brief descriptions that sparkle my mind.
Paizo you are doing great.
When I say made up creatures, I mean taking something that already exists and just changing its abilities to make it more annoying. (The Lamias are a perfect example.) When you take something that has a single touch attack that does wisdom drain and try to say that if it two weapon fights it gets the wisdom drain on all attacks. That is just stupid.
Can you point me towards where they do that? I just did a full-text search on my Rise of the Runelord PDFs for lamia and drain, and the only instance I found of multiple drainings was lamia matriarches (which are not modified lamias, but a separate lamia race) doing one point of drain on a weapon hit (instead of 1d6 on the single touch).
Fighting 12 Huge creatures at one time IS poor design.
Yeah, it's, like, totally, a rule or something, that more than 11 huge creatures can work together. Right. And if you don't behave, the pilot will turn around and fly back! :P
James : You're just too kind . the OP has no real arguments. He just doesn't say how he liked/didn't like it. And it is even insulting.
Yeah, it sounds more like the GM in question doesn't know what the hell he's doing (not allowing two-weapon fighting with flurry under 3.5, applying normal lamias' wisdom drain to full attacks) and what we here are complaints that should be directed at that GM (maybe accompanied by pain-threats - death-threats would be a bit harsh at this point ;-))
...My players (Experienced players too) are in the middle of HMM and they LOVE it. Specially with all the fans addition which allowed me to make it more lively.
...
Paizo you are doing great.
+1
Fighting 12 Huge creatures at one time IS poor design.
...Why?
Fighting 12 Huge creatures at one time IS poor design....Why?
It's completely off the charts.
And with charts, I mean table.
And with table, I mean the game table.
You'll need to play on the floor, what with a dozen huge critters frolicking on the battlefield. Unless you have a huge table.
Which would be cool - I'd like to have a table big enough to play the StarCraft board game with 6 players. :)
|
Creative Director
|
That said, a combat in which the PCs face off against a dozen dinosaurs sounds pretty cinematic and interesting.
Just make sure you put the battle in a room or area where they'll all have room to move around! (this is something we DID make an error on a few times... although the defense of "the room is really high and the huge monsters can climb on the walls above" tends to get ignored for reasons I don't get.).
It's completely off the charts.And with charts, I mean table.
And with table, I mean the game table.
You'll need to play on the floor, what with a dozen huge critters frolicking on the battlefield. Unless you have a huge table.
Which would be cool - I'd like to have a table big enough to play the StarCraft board game with 6 players. :)
KY, I thought you used MapTool?
I used it for the big fights at Ft. Rannick, and it was sublime. I love the sheer size of the battlefields in those cases. I actually like the RotR uses encounter sites that are a bit larger than is friendly for 5 ft:1 inch scale, simply because it lets me run maptool combats on a scale that puts previous campaigns to shame.
But I can see that being annoying on a tabletop dry erase grid. :/
|
That said, a combat in which the PCs face off against a dozen dinosaurs sounds pretty cinematic and interesting.
Just make sure you put the battle in a room or area where they'll all have room to move around! (this is something we DID make an error on a few times... although the defense of "the room is really high and the huge monsters can climb on the walls above" tends to get ignored for reasons I don't get.).
For some reason this makes me think of a cage match with a bunch of giants climbing on the walls taking turns doing body slams on the PCs on the floor.
Because its not difficult. Its boring. In a five hour game session getting through two combats is just a waste of time.Fighting 12 Huge creatures at one time IS poor design....Why?
Personally, I think that having a high level fight that isn't over in a round or two based on who got the highest initiative is a nice change of pace. As long as people are having fun playing the game, why does it matter how much real time was spent on how much game time? You seem to have a good idea of what is and isn't a waste of time for your particular group, but I don't understand what that has to do with Paizo, the individual designer of an encounter, or anyone else. If something is going to be a waste of time at your table, change it to make it less boring and more difficult.
KY, I thought you used MapTool?
I use it locally. If I were the only customer, they could rename it AutoMapTool!
I have it running on my laptop (which I use to help me run games, anyway - much easier to have the PRD and PDFs with full-text search than thumbing through books, or having 3 books or so open on the table if I need this monster, that NPC, and some rule or other), and have a second screen hooked up with it.
The GM instance is shown on my "private screen", while the player instance is on the "public" screen.
It's a much easier and more elegant way to handle maps: Instead of explaining (often quite complicated) dungeons and forcing the players to draw a map (which usually leads to misunderstandings), I just show them the map.
If it comes to combat, I use the good old table. I'm a huge tech fan, but some things I prefer to do the old way.
But anyway, I was only half serious: While I don't have that big a table (I'll rectify that when I move in a couple of months), but It's usually big enough to accommodate the battlefield. It should even be okay for a dozen huge critters. You can always get creative if you run out of space.
Hm.... maybe I should look into hooking the secondary output up to my TV, which is bigger than that little 19" screen I use for the public maps.
You'll need to play on the floor, what with a dozen huge critters frolicking on the battlefield. Unless you have a huge table.
Oh. We play on my custom-covered pool table (with the entire top being a gridded dry-erase board), so I was confused... space is the least of my concerns.
|
Creative Director
|
And I've said it before... but it's worth repeating. We have NO IDEA how anyone's personal game is being run. It could be via a virtual tabletop or on a converted pool table where space is not an issue at all... or the game could be run in the back seat of a car where every one has to balance their PCs and the battle map on their knees while the GM drives through the outback.
As a result, we generally try to aim for a middle ground, but now and then we do encounters that we know won't fit on the average play area. In those cases, the hope is that the encounters are either rare enough that the GM can plan ahead and set up a special area to play out the encounter, or that the GM can plan ahead to adjust the encounter as necessary for his group. What it all comes down to is the same old mantra: "We don't know your group as well as you do, so it's your job as GM to make the adventure work for your group." Our job is to do as much of the advance work as possible so that the GM's job of adjusting is as minimal and easy as possible.
We have NO IDEA how anyone's personal game is being run.
Oh sorry. I thought I told you. I'll have you brought up to speed!
If we play at my place, we play in my dining room (might as well call it my gaming room - I don't eat there unless the guys are over and we're ordering in, and the rest of the time, it's a walking-through-room more than a room where I actually hang around) on my table (not the biggest or most robust of tables - if someone uses an eraser, the rest has to stop writing or everything will be illegible. As I said, It probably won't make the move and I'll get something more sturdy).
I have one of those chessex mats with an 1" grid (we use the squares, though It does hexes, too), it's one of the big ones (it was one of the "faulty" ones they sell at sales fairs or conventions), and also use my laptop (for the PDFs and PrD).
I have a small cabinet on rolls where one of my old 19' flatscreens sits on. I run MapTool twice - once on the main screen in GM mode, and once in Player mode on the second screen. As I said above, that's a lot nicer than having to draw maps, and the maps are a lot prettier, too.
In addition, I use a CombatPad to track init and monster HP. We use miniatures, too, a mix of DDM figures from my old DDM addiction, Legendary Encounters, and Pathfinder minis from Croc/Reaper.
If we're playing at my players', it's a bit more crowded, since they only have a small table in a small flat in the kitchen/dining room/tv room (two students flat sharing). It's all a bit more crowded (there's a second screen, too, and it sits on the table), and we use a paper mat (either from the 3.5 DMG or from a DDM starter set), but everything else is more or less the same.
As I said, I'll be moving soon, twice (two residences due to work matters), and things will probably be a bit different, though the basic setup won't change (I might look into hooking the computer up to the TV instead of the small secondary computer screen then). I'll keep you posted ;-P.
or the game could be run in the back seat of a car where every one has to balance their PCs and the battle map on their knees while the GM drives through the outback.
How often does that happen you think? Sounds, to me, to be an exotic set-up, but you can never be sure.
|
|
Haven't gotten to the encounter where you fight a ton of huge creatures, sounds like maybe we'll need to do something different for that. Personally I like different. For the Skull Gorge scene in Rise of the Runelords we made a fairly elaborate and large map and took over the entire table, it was pretty big. It gives me an excuse to play somewhere different and unique settings make encounters more memorable and fun. This is making me jones for a road trip game.
We have yet to play in the back seat of a car but we have played in the RV which is a lot tighter setup than our normal games.
Pathfinder Road Trip!or the game could be run in the back seat of a car where every one has to balance their PCs and the battle map on their knees while the GM drives through the outback.
We totally did this last year on the way to GenCon.
We totally did this last year on the way to GenCon.Pathfinder Road Trip!or the game could be run in the back seat of a car where every one has to balance their PCs and the battle map on their knees while the GM drives through the outback.
Us too. Dice rolled in little plastc buckets. Actually works a little better with Mutants & Masterminds, just because you only have to keep track of a single d20, but Pathfinder is totally doable.
Just don't try to GM and drive at the same time. That pretty much guarantees Something Bad Happening.
I can just see right now running the game on one of those magnetic checker boards with numbers or pictures on the pieces.
Flannelgraphs FTW!
|
|
I can just see right now running the game on one of those magnetic checker boards with numbers or pictures on the pieces.Flannelgraphs FTW!
Oh look, someone's already done the HMM giant combat on Flannelgraph
A number of the encounters encourage and yes even require out of the box thinking. THAT is excellent design. I had two very experienced gamers totally panicked over the Quasit staying out of melee range They still grump about that. I love it.
Yeah, Erylium is still running loose in my campaign. I let her loose from her "domain" so she's become a pain in the arse for the party. Each time they have encountered her, they have refined their tactics for snaggin' her.
Maybe next time they'll get her... *evil laugh*