So I am a few game sessions into this campaign and my party just entered Harrowstone last night. The haunts are definitely challenging to them even though they stocked up on plenty of holy water and have a cleric of Sarenrae in the party. They have no problems disabling the haunts by hitting them with positive energy and they still have their haunt siphons (although they used one last night in the auditorium. I notice that there is not much they can do to find out how to actually destroy a haunt. Some haunts are pretty obscure in how to permanently destroy them.
Are any of you DMs out there allowing your party to make religion checks to discover how to lay these things to rest or are you allowing them to stand without a check since killing off the five major baddies in the prison will rid Harrowstone of the haunts for good? The reason I am asking is that some of the haunts can get downright annoying since they have minimal resets.
The one in the entry way started to piss them off quickly, so after experiencing it a few times I allowed a DC 25 knowledge religion check to determine if anyone knew about haunts and how to destroy this particular one. The party bard made the roll easily and I told him how to destroy it so he went ahead and did just that. It made things a little better on them especially since they plan on many trips into the prison. So, are any of you doing the same?
Are any of you DMs out there allowing your party to make religion checks to discover how to lay these things to restThe description of Knowledge skills in the core rulebook lists typical DCs for various activities for the various knowledges... including "identify a monster's abilities and weaknesses" being a DC of 10+CR.
It's standard rules to allow a PC to try and think about how to deal with the threat they have been confronted with.
I don't know exactly what page of the book you could read all about it on, but this wonderful doohicky has the information too.
Well, for the actual monsters that may manifest I can totally agree with you. The slamming haunt isn't a monster though, so the DC 10 + CR I don't think would work that way. It could, and honestly I may just resort to utilizing that ruling but I think that the effect haunts may be considered obscure knowledge and would warrant the DC 20-30 range. I guess it also depends on how common the haunt is as well. Regardless, using the knowledge religion in this aspect seems like a very good idea. Thank you for the input.
Well, for the actual monsters that may manifest I can totally agree with you. The slamming haunt isn't a monster though, so the DC 10 + CR I don't think would work that way. It could, and honestly I may just resort to utilizing that ruling but I think that the effect haunts may be considered obscure knowledge and would warrant the DC 20-30 range. I guess it also depends on how common the haunt is as well. Regardless, using the knowledge religion in this aspect seems like a very good idea. Thank you for the input.Are any of you DMs out there allowing your party to make religion checks to discover how to lay these things to restThe description of Knowledge skills in the core rulebook lists typical DCs for various activities for the various knowledges... including "identify a monster's abilities and weaknesses" being a DC of 10+CR.
It's standard rules to allow a PC to try and think about how to deal with the threat they have been confronted with.
I don't know exactly what page of the book you could read all about it on, but this wonderful doohicky has the information too.
Well, if you feel that the method should be difficult to discover with a straight knowledge check, why not encourage them to use the Spirit Plancette and have the haunts themselves tell the players how to release them?
Have you read the sidebar on page 65 of the Pathfinder 43? It's called "Investigating Haunts".
He was a disappointing cake-walk for my party, but that may be because the majority of them were 3rd level, with around 6-7 PCs, still had a few ghost-touched items, had positive energy spells, had just rested & re-geared at the temple and were otherwise loaded for bear.
He scared them for a a few rounds though.
My Party was F**king lucky. 2nd round in the Monk crited (and confirmed) with the Loopers Handaxe -> 42 Damage...that made it a 4 round combat.
Well, if you feel that the method should be difficult to discover with a straight knowledge check, why not encourage them to use the Spirit Plancette and have the haunts themselves tell the players how to release them?
Have you read the sidebar on page 65 of the Pathfinder 43? It's called "Investigating Haunts".
Yeah, I read that. Wasn't sure how far to take the haunts in the game and since they have only ventured into Harrowstone once up to this point it might not be a bad idea to start utilizing that option. That way they have a good in game way to discover how to lay to rest the haunts. The thing is that I don't want it to be difficult for them to discover how to destroy haunts because it would just be nerve wracking and frustrating and harrowstone can be tough as it is with some of the encounters in there. I think I will just utilize the standard knowledge checks vs the CR of the haunt. Seems to be the best way for the party to cope with permanently ridding the rooms of haunts so they don't have to continuously worry about them resetting. Thanks for the input! Much appreciated.
|
The Lopper worries me for when my party gets to the dungeon. Due to some very lucky nat 20's on knowledge checks, the group managed to gather all the information and make the first trip to Harrowstone before Gibs even got to letter #2. Also, they reported the cache's rumor to Grimburrow who brushed those outsiders off, and they've never followed up. Short story, they were entering from the West Balcony, and fought the Piper as level 1's on day 4, and near TPK later (and some creativity on my part to actually give him a weakness that the party could hurt, having no area channel and having no GP to buy holy waters), I have changed from XP to using a fixed progression based on the outline of the Advancement Track sidebar...
Anyway, the Lopper seems like a guaranteed (or near) TPK for an APL2 party, especially since the inherent loot in Harrowstone isn't very plentiful (except that hidden room w/ 10K of cursed loot in it). I'll know for sure probably next week whether they can handle it or not though...
Also, damn paranoid paladin ruined the surprise of Father Charlatain's haunt by his constant spam of Detect Evil :P
...
Also also, did you guys reward the whole party the full listed XP for the knowledge topics or a 1/n split of the XP? Its not clear in the volume, and splitting it may be why my party was still 600xp from level 2 when they arrived at Harrowstone (mind you they didn't to the gibs quest {100xp}, the tomb {50xp}, or the burning town hall {its not day 15 yet}).
|
Also also, did you guys reward the whole party the full listed XP for the knowledge topics or a 1/n split of the XP? Its not clear in the volume, and splitting it may be why my party was still 600xp from level 2 when they arrived at Harrowstone (mind you they didn't to the gibs quest {100xp}, the tomb {50xp}, or the burning town hall {its not day 15 yet}).
For story awards, things like knowledge and such, I have been giving that to the entire party as opposed to combat xp. My party was planning on going to harrowstone right when they turned level 2, but I've been tossing in various bits of spookiness in town that has had them doing more digging(they have taken a bit of time to help 'warm up' some of the people in town to get their trust score up, so they have pretty much hit all the knowledge checks needed for harrowstone and the prisoners, but haven't thought to look about the whispering way at all yet).
At this point, a few combats in harrowstone and they will be level 3, which I am pretty comfortable with. The group has a good tactical mindset and are quite experienced, but they made a very un-optimized party so I think this will make them much more survivable.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My Party was F**king lucky. 2nd round in the Monk crited (and confirmed) with the Loopers Handaxe -> 42 Damage...that made it a 4 round combat.He was a disappointing cake-walk for my party, but that may be because the majority of them were 3rd level, with around 6-7 PCs, still had a few ghost-touched items, had positive energy spells, had just rested & re-geared at the temple and were otherwise loaded for bear.
He scared them for a a few rounds though.
Incorporeal undead are immune to critical hits, just FYI.
Incorporeal undead are immune to critical hits, just FYI.
The Lopper's axe actually gets around that - it counts as ghost touch when wielded against the Lopper, so it trumps his incorporeal state.
It still doesn't give it ability to deal critical hits, it just gets around their 50% damage reduction.
Ghost Touch: A ghost touch weapon deals damage normally against incorporeal creatures, regardless of its bonus. An incorporeal creature’s 50% reduction in damage from corporeal sources does not apply to attacks made against it with ghost touch weapons. The weapon can be picked up and moved by an incorporeal creature at any time. A manifesting ghost can wield the weapon against corporeal foes. Essentially, a ghost touch weapon counts as both corporeal or incorporeal.
It still doesn't give it ability to deal critical hits, it just gets around their 50% damage reduction.
Well, actually...
Incorporeal Subtype: An incorporeal creature has no physical body. An incorporeal creature is immune to critical hits and precision-based damage (such as sneak attack damage) unless the attacks are made using a weapon with the ghost touch special weapon quality. In addition, creatures with the incorporeal subtype gain the incorporeal special quality.
The rules governing incorporeal are rather obnoxiously scattered. For example, the definition of incorporeal in the core rulebook leaves out the immunity to crits and sneak attacks.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, what do you know. I guess you learn something new every day. :D
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Had to post this. One of the PC's is a sweet artist. And he drew everybody's character, which I then made into minis. They've pretty much only got the Splatter Man left to kill, so I used the time I'd usually use for prep to make this.
Go to Group Photo. L to R: Human Cleric of Pharasma; Half-Orc Barbarian; Half-Elf Monk; Elf Ranger/Cleric of Erastil.
It now hangs on the front of my GM screen.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, I read that. Wasn't sure how far to take the haunts in the game and since they have only ventured into Harrowstone once up to this point it might not be a bad idea to start utilizing that option. That way they have a good in game way to discover how to lay to rest the haunts. The thing is that I don't want it to be difficult for them to discover how to destroy haunts because it would just be nerve wracking and frustrating and harrowstone can be tough as it is with some of the encounters in there. I think I will just utilize the standard knowledge checks vs the CR of the haunt. Seems to be the best way for the party to cope with permanently ridding the rooms of haunts so they don't have to continuously worry about them resetting. Thanks for the input! Much appreciated.Well, if you feel that the method should be difficult to discover with a straight knowledge check, why not encourage them to use the Spirit Plancette and have the haunts themselves tell the players how to release them?
Have you read the sidebar on page 65 of the Pathfinder 43? It's called "Investigating Haunts".
Try these haunt cards I made up. I found haunts to be a problem thematically with how players would know things about them and these were what I constructed to get around them. Hope they help.
|
|
Ok, so party finally got to the splatter man tonight. last week they didn't really have problems with the Lopper, but they were smart and figured out how he healed quickly, removed that pretty well (even w/o burst heal) and he wasn't really much of a fight.
Anyway, splatter man could have been TPK had I not dialed down the fight quite a bit. The magic missiles did a good job of keeping the party in mid hp, but honestly, if the monster's tactics weren't to play it dumbed down, then it would have been an assured TPK on my level 3 party.
First, not isolating the magic missiles is a good tactic to extend the fight and not insta tpk, but, really, concentrate max magic missle, corrupting touch = dead PC #1. Empowered then corrupting touch = dead PC #2. Empowered then corrupting touch = dead PC #3. letting the last guy flee, priceless.
Also, the difficult terrain just made it hell on them
Our group didn't come away with a very good opinion on the design of that fight, and had I not held back a 20 INT monster's tactics, they wouldn't have come back at all.
For DMs who've finished this mod, I'm interested in how the battle with the animated scythe went, especially in parties w/o a greatsword-wielding/PA/Str-18 PC.
Hardness 10? Really?
With AC 18 & over 20 h.p., this means it'll take that 18 Str. PC some time as well, time for the scythe to crit...
And if everybody uses one-handed weapons, this could take forever...
(Rogue, after scoring solid damage (10) and doing nothing to scythe, to Fighter) "Please tell me you took Power Attack."
"Umm..., I was going to take it next level." (Slinks off)
Thanks.
I made its hardness 5.
Asking 1st level characters to fight something that has DR10/- is pretty dumb, so I don't know why it's accepted as bad when hardness 10 is fine. It ends up with the wizard using like magic missile or acid splash over and over and over.
I just said it was rusted. Suddenly everyone in the party did damage. It was good.
Good tweak, Ice Titan, and great answer, thenobledrake. I do like to overpower my PCs every so often with slow or dumb creatures they can escape. It gets them to think and/or retreat to reflect about how this game can actually be dangerous.
And, yeah, returning to the site where there's a recurring creature they fear and have to outmaneuver is in keeping with the mood. "Do you guys think it's chopped through the door yet?"
Other than somebody getting grabbed by the manacles, that should be easy enough with these critters.
I do fear PCs will keep blowing their healing until somebody gets critted and "oops, maybe we should go."
Thanks again for the rethinking, as in what was I thinking. This is a horror AP not a high fantasy AP.
(P.S. I don't think acid in PF bypasses hardness.)
|
I've long been of the opinion that the way animated objects function in PFS is unfun and leads to incredibly dull fights, especially at low levels. Hardness 10 only costs 2 construction points, so an animated object of CR 3 can take it. That's technically a viable challenge for a level 1 party...except that 3/4 of the party or more end up being unable to hurt the object. And not in a 'that was a tough fight!' way, more in a '1 damage AGAIN? Jesus, how long is it going to take to kill this thing?' way.
An extreme example comes from a book in one of the Paizo adventure paths. This book has the party needing to destroy an animated object in the form of an adamantine cage in order to progress. We had a 6-man adventuring party, mostly formed of caster and rogue types, with my paladin as main tank and melee dps.
After looking at the numbers (hardness 20?!), we realised that there was literally no way we could deal damage to the cage with the abilities we had. If I wielded my sword two-handed and used Power Attack, I could end up doing something like a max of 5 points of damage per hit, with a 3/8 chance of doing no damage at all. The casters were in even worse straits - 10d6 fireballs *sound* good, before you halve the rolled damage and then take 20 away. It was the one and only time in my experience that the party has come up against a challenge, looked at one another and said "So..we've got nothing." To avoid an ignominious end to the campaign then and there, we basically handwaved the cage away and continued on.
In short, animated objects are a pain in the ass.
EDIT: Oh, and the people saying you can magic missile or acid splash it to death? Neither of those spells ignores hardness. Energy damage is actually halved and then hardness is applied. Other damage types (force? is force 'energy'?) merely subtract the hardness before they deal damage, which still leaves you screwed. There's almost no form of attack which does bypass hardness besides adamantine weapons, hence why animated objects are so annoying.
I've long been of the opinion that the way animated objects function in PFS is unfun and leads to incredibly dull fights, especially at low levels. Hardness 10 only costs 2 construction points, so an animated object of CR 3 can take it. That's technically a viable challenge for a level 1 party...except that 3/4 of the party or more end up being unable to hurt the object. And not in a 'that was a tough fight!' way, more in a '1 damage AGAIN? Jesus, how long is it going to take to kill this thing?' way.
An extreme example comes from a book in one of the Paizo adventure paths. This book has the party needing to destroy an animated object in the form of an adamantine cage in order to progress. We had a 6-man adventuring party, mostly formed of caster and rogue types, with my paladin as main tank and melee dps.
After looking at the numbers (hardness 20?!), we realised that there was literally no way we could deal damage to the cage with the abilities we had. If I wielded my sword two-handed and used Power Attack, I could end up doing something like a max of 5 points of damage per hit, with a 3/8 chance of doing no damage at all. The casters were in even worse straits - 10d6 fireballs *sound* good, before you halve the rolled damage and then take 20 away. It was the one and only time in my experience that the party has come up against a challenge, looked at one another and said "So..we've got nothing." To avoid an ignominious end to the campaign then and there, we basically handwaved the cage away and continued on.
In short, animated objects are a pain in the ass.
I was the damage guy versus that cage also. It was annoying.
|
|
In short, animated objects are a pain in the ass.In situations where you cannot just have someone take an AoO, grab on the unruly object, and drag it out of the way so everyone can move on, absolutely...
Reminds me of a player that was seemingly intent on trying to battle an animate chair to the death despite his being a Rogue with nothing more than a dagger - and when made a demand to his Wizard friend "Get over here and help me with this thing before it kills me!" he was given the advice "...just throw it in the closet and shut the door, we have more important things to do than fight with chairs all day."
It's true, the last time I played in an adventure containing animated objects I was a monk in a 3rd level party. We went and bought about 1,000 feet of rope and tied the suckers up. It was the only way to win because - say it with me - we had no way to overcome their hardness.
Bit trickier in the higher-level example I mentioned above, though - mainly because 1) how exactly do you tie up a cage? and 2) to progress the plot, we needed to get to what was *inside* the cage, and the only way to do that was to destroy it.
|
|
It's true, the last time I played in an adventure containing animated objects I was a monk in a 3rd level party. We went and bought about 1,000 feet of rope and tied the suckers up. It was the only way to win because - say it with me - we had no way to overcome their hardness....I'm adding that to my list of reasons why I suggest more than 50 feet of rope per party.
Bit trickier in the higher-level example I mentioned above, though - mainly because 1) how exactly do you tie up a cage? and 2) to progress the plot, we needed to get to what was *inside* the cage, and the only way to do that was to destroy it.1) Depends on the type of cage, but looping some rope around it, sticking a piton in the ceiling (or just using a rafter if one is exposed) and hauling it up in the air is usually a good start.
2) A plot with literally 1 way to proceed is doomed - could not have someone picked the lock on the cage, much like someone can pry open your fingers, if the cage were pinned/tied up by a grappler?
I mean yeah, it's silly hard to "kill" an animated object - but then, why would you be so intent on killing an object and not just utilize its lack of intelligence and opposable thumbs? Maybe it is just me, but I feel like a lot of people get hung up in a "must kill everything to get XP" train of thought, and get frustrated because intentional efforts are made to make sure that such is not needed.
I'm pretty sure that regarding the adventure in question, the only way to proceed as to destroy the cage. Due to the situation, I'm not sure that the cage even had a lock on it - the idea behind it was very much that they never, ever wanted what was inside the cage to get out. I'll double check when I have access to my books this evening. Even if there was a lock, I would certainly have expected a minimum lock DC of 30, and I would also have expected a ridiculous penalty applied for trying to pick the lock on the creature that is trying to smush you, nevermind the fact that you're trying to pick a lock in combat rounds when it normally takes 1 minute to attempt.
Make no mistake, for the situation in question it was very much not the case that our party had a 'break everything' mentality - part of the reason we were having so much trouble with the cage is that the party was heavily social-specced to the point of having somewhat lacking combat skills against mindless, non-evil targets.
my players noted that arrows do damage when used stabbity fashion...
one adamantine arrow...one construct
*stabbity, stabbity*
|
|
I'm pretty sure that regarding the adventure in question, the only way to proceed as to destroy the cage. Due to the situation, I'm not sure that the cage even had a lock on it - the idea behind it was very much that they never, ever wanted what was inside the cage to get out. I'll double check when I have access to my books this evening. Even if there was a lock, I would certainly have expected a minimum lock DC of 30, and I would also have expected a ridiculous penalty applied for trying to pick the lock on the...
It's true, the last time I played in an adventure containing animated objects I was a monk in a 3rd level party. We went and bought about 1,000 feet of rope and tied the suckers up. It was the only way to win because - say it with me - we had no way to overcome their hardness....I'm adding that to my list of reasons why I suggest more than 50 feet of rope per party.
Bit trickier in the higher-level example I mentioned above, though - mainly because 1) how exactly do you tie up a cage? and 2) to progress the plot, we needed to get to what was *inside* the cage, and the only way to do that was to destroy it.1) Depends on the type of cage, but looping some rope around it, sticking a piton in the ceiling (or just using a rafter if one is exposed) and hauling it up in the air is usually a good start.
2) A plot with literally 1 way to proceed is doomed - could not have someone picked the lock on the cage, much like someone can pry open your fingers, if the cage were pinned/tied up by a grappler?
I mean yeah, it's silly hard to "kill" an animated object - but then, why would you be so intent on killing an object and not just utilize its lack of intelligence and opposable thumbs? Maybe it is just me, but I feel like a lot of people get hung up in a "must kill everything to get XP" train of thought, and get frustrated because intentional efforts are made to make sure that such is not needed.
Checked the adventure I mentioned above. No lock on the cage, no means of dealing with it besides destroying it, period. Oh, and because I haven't mentioned it previously, you're 8th level characters for this.
THat cage gave us way more trouble than the book's 'boss', or any other fight in the whole campaign. CR 8 animated object = 1, 8th level adventuring party = 0.
|
|
Make no mistake, for the situation in question it was very much not the case that our party had a 'break everything' mentalityI didn't say anything about your party having that mentality - I said "people" which is very vague, and can just as easily apply to a DM or to the writer of an adventure or developer of the game.
Sometimes someone in that chain forgets that there should be other options for success than destroying everything, and that is always a downer considering how much effort was put into the core rulebook to explain ways to earn experience.
If you meant 'people' in the more general sense, then I apologise for misunderstanding you. It's just a slightly sore point to have someone ascribe a specific mentality to me or my group, because it so often comes across as dismissive. As such, I may be a little over-sensitive when the conversation starts moving towards that area.
As regards your point, I do tend to agree. There should be more than one option in a given situation whenever possible, but I can accept that pre-written adventures often don't have the space to map out alternatives.
It does seem to mostly work as intended - the animated object debacle has to date been our only real momentum killer in a session. My view is that it's more the fault of the animated object rules than the adventure, since if the cage had been an actual golem or some kind of unique monster, we could have done things like breached its DR (and DR on constructs is usually 5 or 10, far more manageable numbers to overcome). That's simply not an option with hardness 20. Hence my problem is with animated objects, rather than the adventure itself.
I've added up all the treasure available in this mod and it seems to me that there's too much.
4 Level 4 PCs should have 24,000gp by the end. However the module gives them 48,475 gp! That's more than double.
The False Crypt (8,571)
Monumental Desecrations (8 gp)
R7. East Balcony (104 gp)
S4. Warden's Office (3,800 gp)
S8. Chapel (500 gp)
S14. Infirmary (550 gp)
S16. Property Room (5,567 gp)
S17. Hidden Vault (4,166 gp)
U3. The Headless Guard (6 gp)
U4. The Oubliette (5,135 gp)
U6. Captain's Office (11,308 gp)
U11. The Nevermore (8,500 gp)
Am I doing the math wrong?
I've added up all the treasure available in this mod and it seems to me that there's too much.
4 Level 4 PCs should have 24,000gp by the end. However the module gives them 48,475 gp! That's more than double.
The False Crypt (8,571)
Monumental Desecrations (8 gp)
R7. East Balcony (104 gp)
S4. Warden's Office (3,800 gp)
S8. Chapel (500 gp)
S14. Infirmary (550 gp)
S16. Property Room (5,567 gp)
S17. Hidden Vault (4,166 gp)
U3. The Headless Guard (6 gp)
U4. The Oubliette (5,135 gp)
U6. Captain's Office (11,308 gp)
U11. The Nevermore (8,500 gp)Am I doing the math wrong?
Did you check the 2nd book to see if the treasure is a lot less? Many times you will be have more or less treasure than you should in a game.
Did you check the 2nd book to see if the treasure is a lot less? Many times you will be have more or less treasure than you should in a game.
Yes. Assuming the players don't loot someone's home (as that's just outright thievery now. It's one thing to steal abandoned goods, but another to steal someone's jewellry) they're still 9,000 gp ahead of the curve.
In a way, yes. You are counting expendables equal to permanent for one
Table 12-4 lists the amount of treasure each PC is expected to have at a specific level...It is assumed that some of this treasure is consumed in the course of an adventure (such as potions and scrolls)
If Harrowstone is much more difficult then your standard adventure book, that would help explain the discrepency. Is it significantly more difficult?
for another, WBL is not a "all campaigns should cause a character of this level to have precisely this much wealth at this level"
I realise WBL is a rough guideline. But in this case it's not a minor discrepency. They'll get twice what the assumed standard requires.
so much as it is a "here's a way to quickly and fairly adjudicate how much gear you should give characters when creating them above 1st level"
Table 12-4 can also be used to budget gear for characters starting above 1st level.
This seems to be an additional purpose WBL can have, rather then it's primary purpose.
Assuming that there is too many consumables and that the players aren't going to have as many magical items as they should, here is what a typical fighter would be expected to have by 4th level using the WBL to create a 4th level fighter:
- 2,000 gp on weapons = Sword +1
- 1,500 gp on armour = Full Plate
- 1,000 gp on other magic items = Cloak of Resistance +1
- 1,500 gp on disposable items and mundane gear
By the end of Haunting in Harrowstone the PCs will have (assuming 1 fighter, 1 cleric, 1 rogue and 1 wizard):
- Weapons: Heavy Mace +1, Keen Longsword +1, Mithral Dagger +1, Handaxe +1, 2 Masterwork Crossbows
- Armour: 2 Masterwork Chainmail Suits, 1 masterwork studded leather armour.
- Other magical items: 1 Ring of Protection +1, 1 rope of climbing, 1 stone of alarm, 1 spirit board planchette
- Consumables: Crapload
- Mundane gear: healer's kit and masterwork set of thieves tools
- Cold hard gold: 5,856 gp (or 1,464 per PC)
So even with the heavy amount of consumables (which will continue to be useful for the entirety of the campaign or until they're finally used up at least) they're still ahead of the power curve.
I'm trying to keep my players as close to the "standard" power as possible while allowing them to still have fun (I've relented and allowed them 20 point buy). This is because they've been playing 3rd ed from day 1, whereas I only started playing with Pathfinder and this will be my first 3.5e campaign.
I was also hoping to allow the professor to leave each of them a special something in his will, but I'm going to be unable to leave anything magical and not overpower them even more.
Is twice what they should have (or 9,000 gp ahead of where they should be by the end of the second adventure) something I shouldn't be concerned about?
The WBL is not used to tell you how much gear to give you, but how much gear(market value) a PC should have one them. Remember they will probably sell a lot of that stuff(for half price) so they wont be having that much extra gold value on them.
If I give you a +1 longsword and you sell it then your WBL value is about 1000gp, not the 2000 the sword is worth.
If I give you a +1 longsword and you sell it then your WBL value is about 1000gp, not the 2000 the sword is worth.
Thanks. I had asked in another thread whether I should assume PCs will sell stuff or not, and I was advised I should assume they don't (that said, I did assume they would for all but magical items).
Thanks. I had asked in another thread whether I should assume PCs will sell stuff or not, and I was advised I should assume they don't (that said, I did assume they would for all but magical items).You need to remember that WBL is how much they have, not how much they get.
So if it's a concern for you, do audits of the players to see if they're horrible over or under wealth. Every level (or few levels) see what the players have, and how far off they are from the Wealth level. You can then adjust the treasure going forward to account for that.
Or you can not. There's no reason that you can't have PCs with lower wealth than the table dictates. No Paizo staff are going to come confiscate your game :)
Personally, I like running low-wealth games. Some players are just addicted to WBL.
Thanks. I had asked in another thread whether I should assume PCs will sell stuff or not, and I was advised I should assume they don't (that said, I did assume they would for all but magical items).You need to remember that WBL is how much they have, not how much they get.
So if it's a concern for you, do audits of the players to see if they're horrible over or under wealth. Every level (or few levels) see what the players have, and how far off they are from the Wealth level. You can then adjust the treasure going forward to account for that.
Or you can not. There's no reason that you can't have PCs with lower wealth than the table dictates. No Paizo staff are going to come confiscate your game :)
Personally, I like running low-wealth games. Some players are just addicted to WBL.
Nobody was making demands. He was given advice since the OP wants to keep the party at WBL.
Nobody was making demands. He was given advice since the OP wants to keep the party at WBL.Thanks. I had asked in another thread whether I should assume PCs will sell stuff or not, and I was advised I should assume they don't (that said, I did assume they would for all but magical items).You need to remember that WBL is how much they have, not how much they get.
So if it's a concern for you, do audits of the players to see if they're horrible over or under wealth. Every level (or few levels) see what the players have, and how far off they are from the Wealth level. You can then adjust the treasure going forward to account for that.
Or you can not. There's no reason that you can't have PCs with lower wealth than the table dictates. No Paizo staff are going to come confiscate your game :)
Personally, I like running low-wealth games. Some players are just addicted to WBL.
Oh, I get it. I'm just saying that sometimes when someone asks a question such as "how do I do keep players at proper WBL?" ... sometime's it's worthwhile suggesting that they might not really need to ensure players are at 'correct' WBL.
I know my players. There is an 80% chance that once they get down to U1, they will progress to U2 and then will want to go to U10 and then U11. Ther reason for this is that whenever in a dungeon we "always go left." It's one of our group's habits (along with "always go up a level before you go up/down a level" and always "full power attack." No matter how difficult your chance of hitting the monster is, if you have power attack then you must always FULL power attack).
This is a CR 6. Now the module assumes the PCs will be level 2 by the time they clear out U1 and U2, assuming they've gotten max XP for the research (not a safe assumption).
This makes U11 an APL + 4 encounter, which is more powerful then an epic encounter. Should that cause a TPK for most groups using the tactics as written?
I'm considering making some alterations which would allow them to be level 3, which makes this an APL + 3 encounter. This is an Epic Encounter, which is doable. Considering it's actually on the difficulty chart, I'm considering using good tactics instead of the terrible tactics the module advises.
I'm using a 20 point buy. Will that in addition to their level 3 actually give them a chance of succeeding? Or will it be a guaranteed TPK if I use sensible tactics?
If it helps to give an idea of our group's effectiveness. We just achieved the following in Serpent's Skull
I know my players. There is an 80% chance that once they get down to U1, they will progress to U2 and then will want to go to U10 and then U11.
Quick Fix: Make the portcullis super-jammed (ie, make it impossible to lift). This might be a bit cheesy, but it's what was intended in the adventure as I see it.
Considering the encounter: I think the damage output and effects in U11 is pretty constant, there is little chance of a crazy spike killing the players in one or two rounds. If your players understand the concept of a retreat, it should be possible to escape (maybe run some slightly suboptimal tactics for the BBEG). On the other hand, if they REFUSE to run away, I would go with the quick fix above.
I know my players. There is an 80% chance that once they get down to U1, they will progress to U2 and then will want to go to U10 and then U11. Ther reason for this is that whenever in a dungeon we "always go left." It's one of our group's habits (along with "always go up a level before you go up/down a level" and always "full power attack." No matter how difficult your chance of hitting the monster is, if you have power attack then you must always FULL power attack).
Well, I don't really see a problem here. If I correctly understood, and if your players take the front entrance, they should be lvl 3 by the time they reach U1, since they will have explored almost or all first floor, plus the second (go up a level first before going down)
So it's basically OK since they should be fighting TSM at this level.
If I correctly understood, and if your players take the front entrance, they should be lvl 3 by the time they reach U1, since they will have explored almost or all first floor, plus the second (go up a level first before going down)
So it's basically OK since they should be fighting TSM at this level.
Yup. I was just curious how others had reacted in this situation and whether or not they feel being level 3 vs TSM is a high enough level for me to take the kid gloves off with TSM's tactics.
Well, if you really use full potential of the TSM (ie not using some of the tactics described), you would prtobably kill at least one PC.