In PF, you have even more incentive to jack up Init. Since your saves won't be able to withstand save or lose spam, and your AC won't be able to withstand full attacks. Which means your only option other than die is win init.
Only very, very boring people spam SOLs. And I refuse to play with boring people.
And here I thought the reason dragons had all that gold lying around was because it made for nice bedding. Good thing dragons aren't known for being great socializers. Could you imagine the gossip when company arrives to find no furniture or artwork in their lair but the host is decked-out with more bling than a rap star?
I'm pretty sure the modern equivalent would be a crazy person polishing their firearms collection in a bare-walled apartment with only a cot on the floor, silently waiting for someone to knock at the door...
Of course, I think verisimilitude might actually have some correlation to the original premise of this thread. Who's to say what's off-topic at this point, right?
|
And here I thought the reason dragons had all that gold lying around was because it made for nice bedding. Good thing dragons aren't known for being great socializers. Could you imagine the gossip when company arrives to find no furniture or artwork in their lair but the host is decked-out with more bling than a rap star?
I'm pretty sure the modern equivalent would be a crazy person polishing their firearms collection in a bare-walled apartment with only a cot on the floor, silently waiting for someone to knock at the door...
Of course, I think verisimilitude might actually have some correlation to the original premise of this thread. Who's to say what's off-topic at this point, right?
Remember the breadbox comment? It doesn't work that way. Dragons cannot have beds of coins. Not without viciously breaking WBL at least.
One coin is one third of one ounce. So let's say it is one eighth of an inch thick, and one inch in diameter. Which is likely far bigger than such a tiny coin would actually be.
If you have 1,152 coins, you have enough to fill out an area that is one foot by one foot by one inch. Which means that you need somewhere on the order of 207,360 coins to form a mattress... for a medium sized humanoid. And that's only a Twin sized.
Since every size category increases your size by a factor of 8, let's see what happens when we apply the same logic to dragons.
Large dragon needs 1,658,880 coins. Keep in mind, this dragon is only about the size of a horse.
Huge dragon needs 13,271,040 coins. Keep in mind a Huge dragon is only about the size of a van.
Garguantuan dragon? 106,168,320 coins. Over one hundred million coins. And it's still about the size of a trailer.
Colossal dragon? Don't make me laugh. 849,346,560 coins. Let me repeat that. CLOSE TO ONE BILLION COINS.
Now, how many coins does Mr. Dragon have? If you said substantially less than 1.65 million at Large size, substantially less than...
Ayep. that's about right.
Smaug style hordes? Not a chance in RAW/WBL/Magic Walmart D&D/Pathfinder.
.
..
...
....
.....
Nowhere in the rules does it support your position that monsters get to spend all their treasure at the one stop magic shop to buy precisely what they need to beat the party in this one encounter.
Remember the breadbox comment? It doesn't work that way. Dragons cannot have beds of coins. Not without viciously breaking WBL at least.
One coin is one third of one ounce. So let's say it is one eighth of an inch thick, and one inch in diameter. Which is likely far bigger than such a tiny coin would actually be.
If you have 1,152 coins, you have enough to fill out an area that is one foot by one foot by one inch. Which means that you need somewhere on the order of 207,360 coins to form a mattress... for a medium sized humanoid. And that's only a Twin sized.
Since every size category increases your size by a factor of 8, let's see what happens when we apply the same logic to dragons.
Large dragon needs 1,658,880 coins. Keep in mind, this dragon is only about the size of a horse.
Huge dragon needs 13,271,040 coins. Keep in mind a Huge dragon is only about the size of a van.
Garguantuan dragon? 106,168,320 coins. Over one hundred million coins. And it's still about the size of a trailer.
Colossal dragon? Don't make me laugh. 849,346,560 coins. Let me repeat that. CLOSE TO ONE BILLION COINS.
Now, how many coins does Mr. Dragon have? If you said substantially less than 1.65 million at Large size, substantially less than...
Someone missed the point.
Dragons are hoarders, not adventurers. They are so sure of their own capabilities that they are probably not dumping all their wealth into combat gear. Reading through the dragon entries, there are even descriptions of what their hoards generally look like.
So, for example, a CR 16 black dragon should have 135,000 gp (51,000 is offensive gear; 40,500 is defensive gear; 33,000 is magic that is not offensive or defensive; 9,000 is consumables; 1,500 is general gear) worth of treasure. According to the description: Black dragons tend to make their lairs in remote parts of the swamp, preferably in caves at the bottom of dark and fetid pools. Inside, they pile up their filthy treasure and sleep amid the roots and muck. Black dragons prefer their food a bit rotten and will often allow a meal to sit in a pool for days before consuming it. Black dragons prefer treasures that do not rot or decay, making their hoard, full of coins, gemstones, jewelry, and other objects made from stone or metal.
So what should the hoard look like? Well, there should be few scrolls, wands, or staffs since those are wooden and can rot. Since the dragon can destroy potions with his corrupt water ability, there probably aren't too many of those in the hoard. So most consumables are not available. I would lump the value of the consumables with general gear (10,500 gp) and make that available in coins and gems.
There are probably some weapons and armor from previous adventurers. I might even give him some items that he could wear. A ring of protection +4 is worth 32k and can give him a boost to his AC. That would leave him with 8,500 for defenses. An amulet of natural armor +2 is perfect for another +2. That leaves 500 gold to dump into the hoard which is now 11,000 gp. Offensive stuff, a belt of Physical Might (Strength & Constitution) +4 is 40k. I don't see anything else that's offense related that I would want to give him that's 11k or less so let's put that in the hoard (which is now 22,000 gp). That leaves us with the general magic gear. He could use a headband of Charisma since he has spells, so let's jump right to that. The Headband of Alluring Charisma +6 is worth 36k. Let's take some out of the hoard bringing that to 19,000 worth of gems, jewelry, and coins (Divvy that up anyway you like as DM. I might even put a magic item or two that he can't use in there instead of having 19k in loose change).
So now we have an ancient black dragon that has been buffed and still has a decent hoard, all within the guidelines in the Core Rulebook. What does the dragon look like (I have him power attacking since he will still have a decent attack bonus but he can use Combat Expertise instead, reducing his damage by 12 and increasing his AC to 50. Heroism and True Strike can help offset the penalties if he does both Power Attack and Combat Expertise and Mage Armor could bring his AC to 54)?
Hissing green acid drips from the fanged maw of this black-scaled, horned dragon.
--------------------
BLACK DRAGON, ANCIENT CR 16
Male Dragon, Black, Ancient
CE Huge Dragon (Water)
Init +4; Senses Blindsense (60 feet), Darkvision (120 feet), Dragon Senses, Low-Light Vision; Perception +34
Aura Frightful Presence (300 feet, 5d6 rounds) (DC 28)
--------------------
DEFENSE
--------------------
AC 44, touch 12, flat-footed 44. . (-2 size, +32 natural, +4 deflection)
hp 341 (22d12+198)
Fort +22, Ref +13, Will +18
DR 15/magic; Immune acid, paralysis, sleep; SR 27
--------------------
OFFENSE
--------------------
Spd 60 ft., Flight (200 feet, Poor), Swimming (60 feet)
Melee Bite (Dragon, Black, Ancient) +28 (2d8+37/20/x2 plus 4d6 acid) and
. . Claw x2 (Dragon, Black, Ancient) +27 x2 (2d6+25/20/x2) and
. . Tail Slap (Dragon, Black, Ancient) +25 (2d6+37/20/x2) and
. . Unarmed Strike +27/+22/+17/+12 (1d6+25/20/x2) and
. . Wing x2 (Dragon, Black, Ancient) +25 x2 (1d8+12/20/x2)
Space 15 ft.; Reach 10 ft.
Special Attacks Breath weapon (100-ft. line, 20d6 acid, every 1d4 , Crush (Small creatures, 2d8+19) (DC 30)
Spell-Like Abilities Corrupt Water (1/day), Darkness (100 ft. radius) (At will), Insect Plague (At will), Plant Growth (At will), Speak with Reptiles (Constant)
Sorcerer Spells Known (CL 11, +27 melee touch, +20 ranged touch):
5 (6/day) Wall of Force, Cone of Cold (DC 22)
4 (7/day) Black Tentacles, Dimension Door, Arcane Eye
3 (8/day) Heroism, Hold Person (DC 20), Slow (DC 20), Dispel Magic
2 (8/day) Blur (DC 19), Whispering Wind, Glitterdust (DC 19), Invisibility, Summon Swarm
1 (8/day) True Strike, Mage Armor, Alarm, Obscuring Mist, Magic Missile
0 (at will) Dancing Lights, Read Magic, Message, Light, Detect Magic, Mage Hand, Mending, Prestidigitation (DC 17), Resistance
--------------------
STATISTICS
--------------------
Str 33/37, Dex 10, Con 25/29, Int 18, Wis 21, Cha 18/24
Base Atk +22; CMB +37; CMD 51 (55 vs. Trip)
Feats Alertness, Combat Expertise +/-6, Flyby Attack, Greater Vital Strike, Improved Initiative, Improved Vital Strike, Multiattack, Power Attack -6/+12, Skill Focus: Stealth, Vital Strike, Weapon Focus: Bite
Skills Fly +17, Handle Animal +29, Intimidate +32, Knowledge: Arcana +29, Knowledge: Geography +29, Knowledge: History +29, Perception +34, Sense Motive +7, Spellcraft +29, Stealth +23, Swim +46
Languages Common, Draconic, Giant, Goblin, Orc
SQ Acid Pool (Su), Acidic Bite (Su), Swamp Stride (Ex), Water Breathing (Ex)
Other Gear Amulet of Natural Armor +2, Belt of Physical Might, STR & CON +4, Headband of Alluring Charisma, +6, Ring of Protection, +4
--------------------
ECOLOGY
--------------------
Environment Warm marshes
Organization Solitary
Treasure Triple
--------------------
SPECIAL ABILITIES
--------------------
Acid Pool (Su) An ancient or older black dragon can use its breath weapon to create an acid pool as a standard action. This acid pool has a radius of 5 feet per age category of the dragon. When an acid pool is created, anyone inside its area takes an amount of damage equal to the dragon's breath weapon (Reflex half). Any creature that starts its turn touching this pool takes damage, but can make a Reflex save for half. Each round, the total damage dice of the pool is halved until the result would be less than 1d6. The acid pool floats on water, and deals damage to anything on the surface.
Acidic Bite (Su) At old age, a black dragon's bite deals an additional 2d6 points of acid damage. An ancient dragon's damage increases to 4d6, and a great wrym's to 6d6.
Blindsense (60 feet) (Ex) Sense things and creatures without seeing them.
Breath weapon (100-ft. line, 20d6 acid, every 1d4 rounds, Ref half) (DC 30) Using a breath weapon is a standard action. A dragon can use its breath weapon once every 1d4 rounds, even if it possesses more than one breath weapon.
Combat Expertise +/-6 Bonus to AC in exchange for an equal penalty to attack.
Corrupt Water (1/day) (Sp) Once per day an adult or older black dragon can stagnate 10 cubic feet of still water, making it foul and unable to support water-breathing life. The ability spoils liquids containing water. Liquid-based magic items (such as potions) and items in a creature's possession must succeed on a Will save (DC equal to the dragon's frightful presence) or become ruined. This ability is the equivalent of a 1st-level spell. Its range is equal to that of the dragon's frightful presence.
Crush (Small creatures, 2d8+19) (DC 30) A flying or jumping Huge or larger dragon can land on foes as a standard action, using its whole body to crush them. Crush attacks are effective only against opponents three or more size categories smaller than the dragon. A crush attack affects as many creatures as fit in the dragon's space. Creatures in the affected area must succeed on a Reflex save (DC equal to that of the dragon's breath weapon) or be pinned, automatically taking bludgeoning damage during the next round unless the dragon moves off them. If the dragon chooses to maintain the pin, it must succeed at a combat maneuver check as normal. Pinned foes take damage from the crush each round if they don't escape. A crush attack deals the indicated damage plus 1-1/2 times the dragon's Strength bonus.
Damage Reduction (15/magic) You have Damage Reduction against all except Magic attacks.
Darkvision (120 feet) You can see in the dark (black and white vision only).
Dragon Senses (Ex) See four times as well as a human in dim light and twice as well in normal light.
Flight (200 feet, Poor) You can fly!
Flyby Attack You can take a standard action during your move action while flying.
Frightful Presence (300 feet, 5d6 rounds) (DC 28)
Immunity to Acid You are immune to acid damage.
Immunity to Paralysis You are immune to paralysis.
Immunity to Sleep You are immune to sleep effects.
Low-Light Vision See twice as far as a human in low light, distinguishing color and detail.
Power Attack -6/+12 You can subtract from your attack roll to add to your damage.
Speak with Reptiles (Constant) (Sp) A young or older black dragon gains the constant spell-like ability to speak with reptiles. This functions as speak with animals, but only with reptilian animals.
Spell Resistance (27) You have Spell Resistance.
Swamp Stride (Ex) A very young or older black dragon can move through bogs and quicksand without penalty at its normal speed.
Swimming (60 feet) You have a Swim speed.
Vital Strike Standard action: x2 weapon damage dice.
Water Breathing (Ex) A black dragon can breathe underwater indefinitely and can freely use its Breath weapon, spells, and other abilities while submerged.
He is tough, but it's reasonable that he would use gear that he has to help himself if he can. He can still buff more too. He wouldn't have all of his treasure tied up in gear designed to fight one particular party. You would still feel like you have taken a dragon's hoard too. I know that's something my players like: looting the dragon's lair.
|
Re: the coin bed
I have never thought about the feasibility of making a bed entirely out of coin. Perhaps that's why, during Curse of the Crimson Throne...
That's a pretty good idea for the shapeshifting dragons. Maybe instead of that, take a shallow 'pool' maybe 4-6 inches deep and fill it with gold coins (or Silver or Copper depending on CR and wealth available)Re: the coin bed
I have never thought about the feasibility of making a bed entirely out of coin. Perhaps that's why, during Curse of the Crimson Throne...
** spoiler omitted **
I think you could make a pretty decent sized bed of coins if you converted it all to copper pieces. I used to love those random tables in the DMG. You killed a Barghest you get *roll roll* 30,000 copper pieces. Have fun guys!
Players: *shake fist*
In order: Balors and Pit Fiends only melee to finish off crippled foes, any argument that depends upon highly intelligent creatures carrying around a breadbox, instead of things that actually help them is automatically invalid, triple standard treasure is roughly equal to NPC wealth, any argument that is based on the super low ball chart that isn't even consistent or accurate with itself is automatically invalid (not to mention +23 to +30 is a lot closer to level 10 stats than level 20 stats), buffing is the name of the game at those levels, Dispel is so heavily nerfed in PF you'll never see it
In order.
I've asked you to explain how balors and pit fiends can ever cripple their foes with their weak spell selection. You've not done so.
Whether you want to call it invalid or not, dragons, in the game as you like to put it when describing, do not spend all of their treasure on gear. Deviating from that is playing something other than DnD. Nonetheless, I gave the sample dragon gear for the sake of argument. It still falls short of the mark you claim, and I suspect it costs more than he has to spend on it.
You've failed to list gear that can produce the results you claim.
You've failed to list buffs that can produce the results you claim.
We're discussing both PF and 3.5 at this point, so dispel's supposed nerfing in PF is not a point to preclude its further discussion. Nor would it preclude other means to dispel such as greater dispel or disjunction from being a factor to the same if not a higher degree.
|
Something that's been on my mind awhile, and I'm going to get out on the paper.
CoDzilla, IIRC you've said that these other people who don't play the monsters to their Int scores and use their powers in optimal fashion and all such things aren't playing D&D. That they are not playing RAW because RAW is RLT.
However, you then use the monster treasure to trick out the enemies attacks and defenses, change spells known on dragons and feats selected on monsters.
How is this different from what other people do? Why do you not use stock monsters from the manuals like others?
Back on the original topic sort of.
mirror image is a buff that helps agianst armor class. Now mooks with bows can and rapid shot could really make a mess out of mirror image hitting a caster's AC-5 seems pretty easy with multiple attacks even with the to hit penalties from rapid shot.
How is this for some mooks that are trained archers for a level 4 party at a CR+2 encounter.
COdzilla if you are using different buffs please tell what you are using.
The two human weapon master fighter 3 use the following feats
improved inititive, point blank shot, precise shot, rapid shot, and deadly aim. From weapon master they get +1 to hit and damage.
Their to hit if you are within 30 feet of them is +5 using rapid shot and deadly aim. What is the armor class of a wizard at level 4. to this not impossible scenario.
Okay so mirror image at this level produces 3.5 mirror images on average. The archers remove a mirror image on a 6+ vs armor class 17(+1 masterwork, +3 dex, +1 weapon training, +1 pbs and get two shots each. This is assuming 17 armor class for the wizard wihch is high. +4 mage armor +2 dex +1 deflection or natural armor. without mage armor it becomes a 2+.
Are these mooks relvent remember they have a +7 initiative bonus.
Their dex is 17+2 human bonus. str 14 con 13 int 10 wis 12 cha 8
Let us say they are protecting a level 5 wizard. Each hit from them will do d8+6 +1 pbs +2strength +deadly aim +1 training.
Why do you not use stock monsters from the manuals like others?
I don't want to speak for CoD, but if his group is like mine, stock monsters just don't provide the excitement and challenge that the players are looking for. With rather minor alterations they can become a lot better at doing what they are intended to do. I think it was ealier in this thread we discussed how we alter giants in similar ways. Or take the Erinyes from the PF Bestiary for example. It has a whole bunch of archery feats, and then Combat Reflexes. One of these things is not like the others. It appears that with the exception of this one feat, the monster is intended to use its bow from range (preferably in the air where it will be harder to be surrounded at the level it first sees play) as its main way to win in combat. Switching that to a more helpful feat increases its combat potential, without altering its flavor at all. And as an intelligent creature it would only make sense to want to get the most out of its capabilities. That said, poor thing still is hosed by a Wind Wall.
Scaling by 8x per size assumes that the "mattress" has to get thicker. A mattress of constant thickness would scale with creature size steps by a factor of 4. That's still over 53,000,000 coins for a colossal dragon, however (x 0.01 gp per cp = 530,000 gp value in coins alone if they're 100% copper).
I enjoy making npcs and applying templates to monsters and that can make it fun. Hmm a skeltal champion with still human warrior 1 with archery feats could be nice behind an arrow slit. I do it because I enjoy it.
And what do you mean, change spells known? There are no spells preset for dragons. Their feature is x level Sorcerer casting. They still have that.
I seem to recall many of the 3.5 supplements (and even the base MM) with monsters in them state "typical spells known". Like the Drider, which I think states that they cast as your choice of Wizard, Cleric, or Sorcerer and their spells can / should be changed accordingly. I'd also support that with the various spells in the supplements that seem to be geared for monster use (Bloodwind, the "dragon breath" spells that alter your breath weapon, ect).
Well, imagine someone putting a car on your bed. Chances are it does need to get thicker.
Fair point. Maybe that's why Gygax's Greyhawk City had bronze pieces and lead pieces, so that you could get collections of coins that large. (Assuming an extraplanar source for all that ore and a large-scale magical smelting operation running 24/7.)
Thanks for the reply. Just a thought I had for awhile.
So you see, I do use monsters using the resources they are entitled to. Most people here play them as featless itemless spellless auto attackers... even if they have any and all of those things.
Along those lines, it's been my experience that monster difficulty doesn't inflate too much if you make legal feat, skill, or spells known swaps, or if you make most of their permanent item treasure stuff they can use.
It's when you give them much in the way of consumable items that they can and will use that the wheels really fall off the whole thing. In a sense this is a specific example of a more general principle: that something built to win only one fight or a small number of fights can trump (in the short run) something built to win a larger number of fights. Essentially, it's the NPC inverse of the "15 minute adventuring day." meme.
I'm not sure there's a good way to fix it. Logically, yeah if I'm a pit fiend I'm going to chug the 5 potions and read the four scrolls I have before I let myself get into a fight, but the game just does not work if you play it that way. (Unless you make 50 other choices/changes/additions to try to balance out that one choice. I don't think that's a good solution.)
Dragons are hoarders, not adventurers. They are so sure of their own capabilities that they are probably not dumping all their wealth into combat gear. Reading through the dragon entries, there are even descriptions of what their hoards generally look like.Translation: You need highly intelligent enemies to behave incredibly stupidly just so the things you claim are just fine can barely function. I think we've already established that. It's just as invalid as it was the first time.
Against a real dragon, low tier classes are dead in a round.
So in other words, all creatures act the same way all the time, just like playing the old Atari video games. You play your way. I think I'll enjoy playing with different creatures who actually act differently. It's a little concept that we call "role playing." It's a lot of fun.
Monster treasure is RAW. It's right there in the statblock.Something that's been on my mind awhile, and I'm going to get out on the paper.
CoDzilla, IIRC you've said that these other people who don't play the monsters to their Int scores and use their powers in optimal fashion and all such things aren't playing D&D. That they are not playing RAW because RAW is RLT.
However, you then use the monster treasure to trick out the enemies attacks and defenses, change spells known on dragons and feats selected on monsters.
How is this different from what other people do? Why do you not use stock monsters from the manuals like others?
No argument there. The only argument I would have is that the creature should not always have something to defeat the exact bunch of PCs coming its way. I have had DMs in the past who have done this and it's annoying. I love when monsters use their treasure. I also love it when there is a reason for them to have those particular items. It can bring a creature to life. I don't think that all creatures should have usable treasure though. Just because an owlbear has some treasure doesn't mean that it is going to be using it any useful way.
Do PCs run around with tens or hundreds of thousands of gold and pictures of lolcats, or do they actually have things that are useful to them?
True, to a point. I have seen PCs with treasure hoards back at their keeps/towers/etc. I have even played PCs that collect items because they like the way the items look. Sometimes it's fun to have artwork back at the characters' home. Generally I divide this treasure up amongst all the PCs and take it out of the WBL in smaller portions from all of them instead of one PC having to bare the brunt of that. The reason I do this is because they can still sell this stuff and I don't want to have them break the WBL because I wasn't paying attention. Note that I currently have a level 12 party of 6 so an item that is worth 1000 gold is less than 1% of their WBL. It's all part of the role playing. Not everything needs to be useful in combat.
When you understand why the Int 5-36 PCs do this, you will understand why the monsters do. The monsters have less treasure, and better innate stats but the concept is the same.
True (see we do agree on some things). I think it's important to make sure that the treasure is spent as close to the guidelines as possible though so that the opponent(s) don't get too powerful in this way. There is a reason why the breakdown is the way it is.
And what do you mean, change spells known? There are no spells preset for dragons. Their feature is x level Sorcerer casting. They still have that. Their exact loadout will vary depending on the individual, but that's their resources. Next you will argue all PC Sorcerers must have the same spells...
I don't think that's what he meant. Dragons were not the best example. I think he should have picked creatures with innate spell-like abilities.
So you see, I do use monsters using the resources they are entitled to. Most people here play them as featless itemless spellless auto attackers... even if they have any and all of those things.
Most people actually try to use them straight from the book. There are some that don't think that the opposition should use their treasure. There are some that think that the opposition should what's at hand. There are very few who think that the opposition should only have combat gear.
|
|
Why do you not use stock monsters from the manuals like others?I don't want to speak for CoD, but if his group is like mine, stock monsters just don't provide the excitement and challenge that the players are looking for. With rather minor alterations they can become a lot better at doing what they are intended to do. I think it was ealier in this thread we discussed how we alter giants in similar ways. Or take the Erinyes from the PF Bestiary for example. It has a whole bunch of archery feats, and then Combat Reflexes. One of these things is not like the others. It appears that with the exception of this one feat, the monster is intended to use its bow from range (preferably in the air where it will be harder to be surrounded at the level it first sees play) as its main way to win in combat. Switching that to a more helpful feat increases its combat potential, without altering its flavor at all. And as an intelligent creature it would only make sense to want to get the most out of its capabilities. That said, poor thing still is hosed by a Wind Wall.
There is nothing wrong with altering monsters, you just have to adjust the CR.
Adding additional creatures to a combat (see how I am bringing it back to the actual topic) is altering the encounter, and something you should always be doing if your group is doing things to make your group over CR (not using point buy, more than 4 in a group, no WBL, etc...)
I would say it is fine to alter before game, but not so much in the process of the gameday. They should have the same minuses and bonuses as the players.
|
|
Thanks for the reply. Just a thought I had for awhile.
So you see, I do use monsters using the resources they are entitled to. Most people here play them as featless itemless spellless auto attackers... even if they have any and all of those things.Along those lines, it's been my experience that monster difficulty doesn't inflate too much if you make legal feat, skill, or spells known swaps, or if you make most of their permanent item treasure stuff they can use.
It's when you give them much in the way of consumable items that they can and will use that the wheels really fall off the whole thing. In a sense this is a specific example of a more general principle: that something built to win only one fight or a small number of fights can trump (in the short run) something built to win a larger number of fights. Essentially, it's the NPC inverse of the "15 minute adventuring day." meme.
I'm not sure there's a good way to fix it. Logically, yeah if I'm a pit fiend I'm going to chug the 5 potions and read the four scrolls I have before I let myself get into a fight, but the game just does not work if you play it that way. (Unless you make 50 other choices/changes/additions to try to balance out that one choice. I don't think that's a good solution.)
+1
And even then I would say it is fine with a CR adjustment. If BBEG has been watching your group and set a trap, of course he is going to try to nova you with the best specific use items he can obtain in the time alloted.
On the flip side, if the party traps the BBEG using strategy, give them the full XP for good problems solving.
|
|
Well, imagine someone putting a car on your bed. Chances are it does need to get thicker.Fair point. Maybe that's why Gygax's Greyhawk City had bronze pieces and lead pieces, so that you could get collections of coins that large. (Assuming an extraplanar source for all that ore and a large-scale magical smelting operation running 24/7.)
The dragons in the APs generally have a ton of copper pieces, to the annoyance of my players.
|
|
Back on the original topic sort of.
mirror image is a buff that helps agianst armor class. Now mooks with bows can and rapid shot could really make a mess out of mirror image hitting a caster's AC-5 seems pretty easy with multiple attacks even with the to hit penalties from rapid shot.
How is this for some mooks that are trained archers for a level 4 party at a CR+2 encounter.
COdzilla if you are using different buffs please tell what you are using.
The two human weapon master fighter 3 use the following feats
improved inititive, point blank shot, precise shot, rapid shot, and deadly aim. From weapon master they get +1 to hit and damage.
Their to hit if you are within 30 feet of them is +5 using rapid shot and deadly aim. What is the armor class of a wizard at level 4. to this not impossible scenario.
Okay so mirror image at this level produces 3.5 mirror images on average. The archers remove a mirror image on a 6+ vs armor class 17(+1 masterwork, +3 dex, +1 weapon training, +1 pbs and get two shots each. This is assuming 17 armor class for the wizard wihch is high. +4 mage armor +2 dex +1 deflection or natural armor. without mage armor it becomes a 2+.Are these mooks relvent remember they have a +7 initiative bonus.
Their dex is 17+2 human bonus. str 14 con 13 int 10 wis 12 cha 8
Let us say they are protecting a level 5 wizard. Each hit from them will do d8+6 +1 pbs +2strength +deadly aim +1 training.
A first level fighter can get to +5 pretty easily (Str or Dex + weapon focus +1) so if your AC is 15 they hit your 50% of the time.
And mirror image is useful when you have prep time for a minute per level spell just before combat.
Against a real dragon, low tier classes are dead in a round.So in other words, all creatures act the same way all the time, just like playing the old Atari video games. You play your way. I think I'll enjoy playing with different creatures who actually act differently. It's a little concept that we call "role playing." It's a lot of fun.
So, in your "game," the "dragon" doesn't "fight." It might "put its head on a chopping block and ask to be killed." Allowing your "role playing" participants to "defeat" it?
So, in your "game," the "dragon" doesn't "fight." It might "put its head on a chopping block and ask to be killed." Allowing your "role playing" participants to "defeat" it?Against a real dragon, low tier classes are dead in a round.So in other words, all creatures act the same way all the time, just like playing the old Atari video games. You play your way. I think I'll enjoy playing with different creatures who actually act differently. It's a little concept that we call "role playing." It's a lot of fun.
How did you come to that conclusion? How on Oerth did you come to that interpretation?
I don't play every monster the exact same way. I don't play dragons the same way I play demons. I don't play dragons the same way I play hoards of kobolds. I don't play dragons the same way I play enemy druids. Heck, I don't even play one dragon the same way I play another of the same species. Go back and look at the dragon I posted with its hoard. If I played it to lay down and die, I wouldn't have buffed it.
I think the difference between how I would give gear and how other give gear is that I use the guidelines in the book so that I don't give it more than what is expected for its challenge rating. I also keep in mind the personality of the creature when I am making selections.
The funny thing is that we often fight exactly those things. Up to, and including Pit Fiends actually prebuffing with potions and scrolls. And they still get defeated easily. And before anyone says it, the houserules in effect are aimed at things like making martial characters succeed, not as a response to buffed monsters.
Those are actually the same thing. When you buff the monsters, you need to make adjustments to how the characters work as well. That's how house rules generally work. You make a change and realize that the change affected other things so you make another change. Do your pit fiends buff themselves to be able to handle the casters? If so, why are your casters still alive? If casters are so superior, why buff against the non-casters? Wouldn't a smart creature buff against the real danger? You can claim that the monsters are played intelligently but the truth is that they aren't. They are meta-gamed beyond belief.
We get it. You love strawmen. The rest of us prefer arguments with substance. Kindly oblige us.
Because it isn't possible that there's a setting for enemies other that incredibly stupid (you know, just like those Atari games you don't like) or smart, but also exactly the same. A point you conveniently overlook.
You keep using that word but I don't think it means what you think it means. Do you even know what a straw man argument is or are you just enjoying throwing out that word because you think it makes you look like you have an argument? For someone who wants substance, I think it would be awesome if we saw some from you. Have you ever showed us what your uber party looks like at this exact moment in time? The one you are currently playing in. I would love to see what your character looks like as of today. All we have ever seen is hyperbole. Why don't you do what you have asked: show some substance.
And what are you talking about in that last sentence? It really doesn't make any sense at all.
There is nothing wrong with altering monsters, you just have to adjust the CR.
Adding additional creatures to a combat (see how I am bringing it back to the actual topic) is altering the encounter, and something you should always be doing if your group is doing things to make your group over CR (not using point buy, more than 4 in a group, no WBL, etc...)
I would say it is fine to alter before game, but not so much in the process of the gameday. They should have the same minuses and bonuses as the players.
I've typed a few responses and keep erasing them, because I'm having a hard time phrasing what I want to say. But I guess the simplest way to put it, is that with my regular group, around a physical table, I understand where the PC's are compared with monsters and what the core assumptions are based on APL. They optimize and powergame and are substantially more powerful than what prebuilt monsters and modules are designed to challenge appropriately.
So with them, I scrap CR for the most part. I feel it is not a well designed system by which to guage threats for many groups, and there is quite the disparity in power between members of the same CR. Obviously this is because it would be impossible for the designers of the system to take into account, simualtaniously, all groups and play styles and still flesh out something capable of accurately guaging threat levels on a universal level. I know that by altering the feats and abilities of base monsters, they move back up to how threatening they should be when opposing the group I run for.
If I then looked at the statistics and how they match up with the CR chart, they would be substantially better, potentially moving up a few numbers, which would grant more XP and cause leveling at a very rapid rate. As such I grant XP by event and adventures as opposed to by encounter. And this works for me not that I expect it to work for everyone.
I sometimes help out a couple of other DM's I know who often have a lot less free time on their hands by designing adventures, setting plots, or fleshing out details of their adventures and statistic blocks. When I do that, I follow the RAW, and am more prone to using stock monsters as written without adding ability enhancing gear without upping their CR appropriately, knowing that not all groups are like mine, but usually add a few notes on how to slide the adventure for optimized or inexperienced parties.
I'm also in the process of DMing my first PbP game ever. I'm sticking to the APL assumptions there and using the XP and CR systems, because I'm playing with people I've never met before and knew rather than weighing down the game with alterations and trying to gauge just how "strong" (for lack of a better word) each player is, and thus how powerful the group is as a whole it would be best just to play by the rules that everyone was hopefully familiar with with challenges a standard, non-optimized party would expect to face at each level.
Also, aren't you the sly dog for getting this topic back on track, touche, Sir.
I like to use multiple monsters, more often than not. Just last night I had one combat last over half the session. The PC's were defending an encampment from a raid. The map I used, of which we are blessed with the largest wet erase map I've ever seen, was 325 by 450 feet (that'd be in 1 inch, 5 ft squares of course). Enemies came in waves, starting with a horde of gnolls and every two to three rounds smaller groups of slightly stronger enemies came in. Next were Worgs, then Ogres, then Ice Trolls/Winter Wolves, and followed by the leader, a Half-Fiend Harpy Ranger. There were a lot of minis on the board, and Fireball was quite friendly (blasting has been quite viable throughout the campaign, as it is a frostfell game with many combats involving multiple, low-Ref, fire vulnerable enemies).
One of the poor Ice Trolls got quite a bad deal. He was hit with a Glitterdust from the Bard, and upon recovering was the target of a fire bombing Alchemist. The Bard demoralized him with a good intimidate. He rushed the Wizard who had a readied action to Scorching Ray it when it came within range and got a double nat. 20. The damage roll was near max and broke 80 easily after vulnerability. Poor melted troll.
Anyway, the group had a blast; They got to choose whether they wanted to stand and fight the bigger enemies or go around hacking off the heads of the gnolls and worgs. AND the fights were appropriately challenging. And the Bull's Strengthed, Enlarged, Raging, Power Attacking Barbarian/Cleric really enjoyed taking down ogre after ogre with his +1 Frost Bastard Sword. I've never seen so many criticals at a low level game - every die was hot, including mine. Their Druid almost died to a max damage critical from one of the Advanced Winterwolves.
I don't see the fight being more fun if I had boiled down the entire nights battle into one or two big enemies.
That was a lot longer winded than I had intended.
Am I the only one who thinks NOT preparing a dragon (or true fiends for that matter) to be all he can be, with spells, items and unique powers, mooks and so forth is a huge insult to a creature that is so smart it makes Einstein seem like a short-bus candidate, so patient it makes Ghandi seem like a spoiled teenager with ADD, and enough charisma to make Hitler seem like a introvert recluse?
I mean, they are DRAGONS. They were in the TITLE of the game. They should inspire awe and terror, lay waste to countries, and make the paladin only HOPE his inevitable sacrifice should be enough to stop it.
My dragons have names, lairs, LEGENDS. If I am going to use dragons later in the game, the players will hear of them long before, when they are still inexperienced and fresh, tales spoken in hushed voices, stories how an ancient and powerful creature that make history and nations their playthings has come and gone with the centuries, and that even the gods fear the time when it awakens, for even their champions will stand impotent against the greatest engine of doom that ever dominated the sky.
Kingmaker Spoilers:
There is also options for "Beyond Kingmaker" where you learn that the conqueror that united Brevoy and ruled the region with an iron fist, indeed is a dragon. A great red. His awakening is predicted to bring nations to their knees and end all hope for those who stand against him. The cleric communed with her goddess, who said that a terrible disaster will burn the sky, and rain doom onto all. Now they are scared, as they should be. I _intend_ to kill them all, holding nothing back, and letting the battle be the final one of the entire campain. If they succeed, they will become legends. If they fail, the face of the world is rearranged.
If you are using a little runt, then you have an aspiring dragon, and as such, it has even more of a reason to be paranoid and have an easily relocated treasure, as it knows that people rightfully fear their kind, and would hunt it. Even a young dragon is as smart as a college graduate.
I'm not sure there's a good way to fix it. Logically, yeah if I'm a pit fiend I'm going to chug the 5 potions and read the four scrolls I have before I let myself get into a fight, but the game just does not work if you play it that way. (Unless you make 50 other choices/changes/additions to try to balance out that one choice. I don't think that's a good solution.)The funny thing is that we often fight exactly those things. Up to, and including Pit Fiends actually prebuffing with potions and scrolls. And they still get defeated easily. And before anyone says it, the houserules in effect are aimed at things like making martial characters succeed, not as a response to buffed monsters.
Eh. We may just have to agree to disagree on that one to some degree. Certainly there's a number of things that help casters in your games (regardless of the reason for their inclusion, whether they help non-casters more, or whether enemies can also use them) that aren't allowed in mine. Some of these things certainly make the game more into rocket launcher tag than it would be without them, even if you think it still would be some form of that without them.
The game can turn into a rocket launcher arms race; I just don't think it automatically has to be.
The game can turn into a rocket launcher arms race; I just don't think it automatically has to be.
The problem is, if it can, then at some point it likely will. Not with every group obviously, and probably not with most groups. But with some, which one might consider a flaw in the design, or simply an imparital part of the system.
Eventually players learn that certain options are in general superior to others. They know that they are more likely to survive against various encounters if they take X on a regular basis. So it becomes common for characters to have X. The DM compensates for the game getting easier by having more encounters ready to deal with problem X, and can be explained in game, that if it is that common, surely they will take that into account. So enemies get Y on a regular basis to counter X. Then players respond with Z to counter Y and so on.
At anyrate most players like their characters, and will want to do anything in their power to keep them not only surviving but thriving, and the best way to do that is to make them powerful enough to deal with any scenario they can imagine while still trying to keep to their flavor. As soon a one or two players in a group begin going down the road of trying to make themselves nigh-indestructable by simple math, the DM has to begin compensating to keep the game fun and exciting, and thus the spiral ensues.
|
|
So, in your "game," the "dragon" doesn't "fight." It might "put its head on a chopping block and ask to be killed." Allowing your "role playing" participants to "defeat" it?Against a real dragon, low tier classes are dead in a round.So in other words, all creatures act the same way all the time, just like playing the old Atari video games. You play your way. I think I'll enjoy playing with different creatures who actually act differently. It's a little concept that we call "role playing." It's a lot of fun.
That is unfair.
Dragons have a lot of options. Depending on what they are fighting, who they are fighting with, and the setting they are placed in to fight, Dragons will take different approaches.
It doesn't make sense to close on a martial class, while it makes perfect sense to close on a caster.
Same monster, different strategy.
|
|
I've typed a few responses and keep erasing them, because I'm having a hard time phrasing what I want to say. But I guess the simplest way to put it, is that with my regular group, around a physical table, I understand where the PC's are compared with monsters and what the core assumptions are based on APL. They optimize and powergame and are substantially more powerful than what prebuilt monsters and modules are designed to challenge appropriately.So with them, I scrap CR for the most part. I feel it is not a well designed system by which to guage threats for many groups, and there is quite the disparity in power between members of the same CR. Obviously this is because it would be impossible for the designers of the system to take into account, simualtaniously, all groups and play styles and still flesh out something capable of accurately guaging threat levels on a universal level. I know that by altering the feats and abilities of base monsters, they move back up to how threatening they should be when opposing the group I run for.
You also have to remember that an equal CR encounter is supposed to be easy.
An equal CR encounter (with 4 characters on a 15 point buy with WBL) should use about 1/4 of the parties resources. In other words, it should be a speed bump to make you waste spells/hit points on your way to the BBEG.
You should be dealing with +2 CR to challenge a party, and even more if you are doing above 15 point buy, more than 4, and higher than average WBL.
I generally have between +2 and +4, unless they are coming in waves back to back (I really like waves of attacks, particularly in fortresses). Tends to level very quickly, but I'm ok with that.
Eventually players learn that certain options are in general superior to others.
Well.. I criticize THIS too. The game is too situational to allow a "general better" option.
You also have to remember that an equal CR encounter is supposed to be easy.
An equal CR encounter (with 4 characters on a 15 point buy with WBL) should use about 1/4 of the parties resources. In other words, it should be a speed bump to make you waste spells/hit points on your way to the BBEG.
You should be dealing with +2 CR to challenge a party, and even more if you are doing above 15 point buy, more than 4, and higher than average WBL.
I generally have between +2 and +4, unless they are coming in waves back to back (I really like waves of attacks, particularly in fortresses). Tends to level very quickly, but I'm ok with that.
I know; in fact I aim for closer to 1/6 resource drain per encounter. Any more than than and it becomes difficult for players to take even a fortress or dungeon in a heroic run-through, and they have to make the decision whether to withdrawn and recuperate, which gives the enemies a chance to do so as well and shore up their defense as well, or press on with limited ability. While I'm fine with this in larger areas, in small dungeons...meh.
More often times an "on CR" encounter by the RAW will not make the spellcasters in my group bother to cast and let their martial buddies tackle the situation with minimal threat since their AC is usually high enough they may not even take damage, save for good roles on the opponent's side. And if the enounter isn't doing a single HP of damage, nor causing a spell to be used past maybe a weak wand charge or two, it isn't following the resource draining formula.
And since the PC's I run for power game quite a bit, using multiple smaller enemies can be more difficult to cause alarm, since they are even less likely to make an impact when they connect. PF, with far fewer overpowered supplements however, has made this much less of a problem. I like PF.
|
|
The game can turn into a rocket launcher arms race; I just don't think it automatically has to be.The problem is, if it can, then at some point it likely will. Not with every group obviously, and probably not with most groups. But with some, which one might consider a flaw in the design, or simply an imparital part of the system.
Eventually players learn that certain options are in general superior to others. They know that they are more likely to survive against various encounters if they take X on a regular basis. So it becomes common for characters to have X. The DM compensates for the game getting easier by having more encounters ready to deal with problem X, and can be explained in game, that if it is that common, surely they will take that into account. So enemies get Y on a regular basis to counter X. Then players respond with Z to counter Y and so on.
At anyrate most players like their characters, and will want to do anything in their power to keep them not only surviving but thriving, and the best way to do that is to make them powerful enough to deal with any scenario they can imagine while still trying to keep to their flavor. As soon a one or two players in a group begin going down the road of trying to make themselves nigh-indestructable by simple math, the DM has to begin compensating to keep the game fun and exciting, and thus the spiral ensues.
But there aren't really optimal builds in and of themselves. And if I were a BBEG and they party used the same moves each time, I would use that against them.
If combat is only lasting a few rounds, that means that the party can only do a few things. If those things don't work because the enemy has prepped for them (or used illusions to make them waste spells, etc...) then they will have to become a more diverse and versatile party. Or die.
Until someone posts an truly "optimized" build, it's like a unicorn to me.
|
|
Well.. I criticize THIS too. The game is too situational to allow a "general better" option.
Eventually players learn that certain options are in general superior to others.
Criticize it all you want, Monte Cook admitted traps options were built into 3.0, and neither 3.5 nor Pathfinder eliminated them.
Spell > non-spell. ;)Well.. I criticize THIS too. The game is too situational to allow a "general better" option.
Eventually players learn that certain options are in general superior to others.
:D Well, partly right - see FoM as an example.
Of course, one should careful of what wishes for.
Playing a melee, I'd prefer FoM at full power at high levels because of several foes with +3 billions in the Grapple CMB.
I guess this could deserve a debate by himself...
Criticize it all you want, Monte Cook admitted traps options were built into 3.0, and neither 3.5 nor Pathfinder eliminated them.Well.. I criticize THIS too. The game is too situational to allow a "general better" option.
Eventually players learn that certain options are in general superior to others.
Interesting.. source?
And more important.. WHEN did he say it? After being fired by Wotc? ;)
And more important, this can mean several things.
One thing is saying: "this weapon is made for being more optimal with these feats" and another is "this option will always suck, this other one will always rock".