Hi other GMs of Paizo
Ever had the experience of seeing a major high-level antagonist that you have spent sessions foreshadowing, several hours creating and so forth, only to have it go down on the first or second round in combat due to over-optimized PCs doing 300+ damage a round, or having impossibly high save DCs? Tired of spending hours on making baddies that the PCs take down in 5 minutes?
Boss Template:
- HP Max x2 (Example: A lv15 Antipaladin with Con26, favored class to HP and toughness would have 15d10+150, which would be 227 normally. With this template, he would have 600 hp)
- Immune to daze, death effects, paralysis, petrification, sleep, slow, stun and other save or lose effects.
- +5 to hit, damage, AC, saves and initiative.
CR adjustment: +0. Because optimizing and power-gaming should not get positive reinforcement.
This is something I have been thinking of since as it stands, nothing short of heavily optimized and planned out baddies can hope to challenge my current Kingmaker party. Slap this on just about anything published, and the fight should at least last long enough to be remembered 3 sessions later.
Thoughts?
My translation of the adjustments:
Boss can only be affected by direct damage. Be prepared to slog through a lot of hp.
Don't like it. Why not simply use something CR 5 higher or so? If you just want the fight to last longer, why a +5 bonus to attack and damage? Also, "immune to all debuffs" as this seems to be seems far to harsh. +5 saves should be enough by FAR, especially if he's got imp. iron will/great fortitude.
My suggestion: Create a template that allows the boss to be a "clone" of himself in himself. Basically, the boss rolls initiative twice and acts in both instances. Effects that buff a creature buffs the whole boss, while negative effects just affect one part of him (the one that acted last).
Maybe add a few "hero points" or whatever they're called to allow him to survive debuffs more easily, but whatever. The main reason single opponents get trashed is through action economy, and to make up for that you can either give the opponent a hell of a lot of major different bonuses that might be hard to adjudicate the difficulty of (leading to you as a DM not knowing if to expect certain TPK in turn one or party blowing through it without a scratch) or you can give him a boost to his action economy. I prefer the second variant.
I think perhaps the problem is not the boss but a conflict of play style. You may want to consider a rational conversation with your group about what everyone wants from the game before you passive aggressively make your monsters immune to all their effects and beefed up intensly without any change to CR.
I think also you may be in the wrong game. Realistically you would probably be happier in 4E where alot of your conserns were addressed in the game design (no save or lose, debilitating effects last almost no time, boss monsters are beefed to hell, and for the most part people just do hit point damage). It is also faster and easier to dm, and any 'challenging' combat is gauranteed to last a while, there isnt any of the rocket tag(short brutal combats) you get at higher levels of pathfinder or 3.x.
Edit:
Also you arent sending in your bosses alone are you? It doesnt work unless you create very well thought out circumstances to account for the action economy of the game. If your boss if bearing the full brunt of the party on turn one, the encounter was not designed well. There should be minions of reasonable strength to get in the party's way and divert their attention.
|
Arms race, much ?
Problem I see is that when the PCS get to fight the BBEG, the first party to get a decisive advantage wins.
So either the PCs down your BBEG within a few rounds or the BBEG TPKs them within a few rounds. Unless of course you made it weak on offense to compensate its awesome defense.
I feel using this template is akin to decapitating someone who suffers from a headache. The patient is cured, sadly he is also dead.
I much prefer using numbers to dull the efficiency of the PCs : lots of minions and/or a group of BBEGs rather than only one target for the PCs to overwhelm.
Honestly, 4th Edition's handling of this was one of the few things I liked about the system. Action economy imbalances between a single BBEG facing off against 3-8 players is why the BBEG gets his butt kicked. Well, that and HP relative to what the party is doing.
I'd love a set of general guidelines for enhancing bosses with more HP and extra actions in order to make single-monster encounters work--something that can be applied to different enemy roles rather evenly (caster, brute, etc...) without feeling cheesy and without dumping a ton of items into the PC's hands. Maybe creating a new set of magic items with finite uses that grant extra actions or turns or something? The BBEG would have a few, and if the players kill him very quickly, maybe they get a few to use in an emergency.
I know that in games where I've tried DMing these sorts of encounters, the one or two that have been successful have been through faux-action economy and some degree of crowd control. One of the best, probably, was a Voidmind enlarged minotaur (may have been another, similar creature) with Combat Reflexes, a lot of reach and the Knockback feat. Players rush him, are subject to some pretty big damage via AoOs, and may get pushed back 5-20 ft. without ever getting a chance to hit him. He gained a few immunities and boosted saves via the template, and they were all fighting on a smallish fighting space--a dais raised above the rest of the room by about 40 ft.--I think it was a pedestal upon which a speaker could address an assembly, so players were also at risk of being knocked off the space entirely and either plummeting 40 ft. (and then having to run back up the stairs) or dealing with Featherfall, when they'd rather be trying to help down the boss.
I wouldn't mind just giving bosses 1 extra turn per 2 players or something, with initiative at a penalty for each additional "self" he's getting, and with maybe +50% HP per turn, but I'm not a big fan of creating special cases that don't exist within the rules.
if you are having that hard a time with your players, you should look into the wealth by levels guideline and next time you start a new adventure path or world use 15 stat buy.
This usually fixes those problems far better then making some "boss" template.
Also the advanced creature template is easy to add to any creature u want it on.
How much crafting and down time does your Kingmaker party have? What are they at comapred to listed WBL? If they have mountains of time to make rediculous amounts of magic gear, (and I hear this can happen in Kingmaker, but have never played/run it) so they become over-geared then yea they may be stomping a mud hole in things more easily. If that is the case then perhaps the GM should be more mindful of what the crafters are doing/ making. You could if they are over-geared start destroying magic gear to tone them down a bit not all of it mind you just some. makes me wish the disenchanter and ye olde rust monster still "Ate" one "plus" per hit on magic items lets you lightly 'de-twink' them (if that is the case, Which I suspect may be contributing to the situation that brough you here).
@Lathiira: Either that, or me cheating. And psionichamster pretty much explained why.
@Stringburka: Because they chainsaw through stuff that is 5CR higher if I use it as written. And the +5 is more to mitigate the fact that most monsters and AP encounters are not optimized in the slightest.
I can make the encounter equally optimized, but then I have to replace all combat encounter in any AP I want to run.
@Kolokotroni: I prefer PF to 4e, but as yeti1069 says, the boss battles at least offers a break from the slaughter of helpless foes that might be able to annoy them at best.
And no, I make sure the bosses have mooks. Last boss had a giant with obscene HP and Shield Other to act as the boss' HP battery, as well as a bard/healer, archers to harass casters, and a couple of martial roadblocks. First and only boss that has challenged them.
@Black Raven: Yeah, good old Rocket Tag. This template is purely for optimizers and power-gamers though. My party is about 5-7 levels ahead of the curve when it comes to static numbers. The fighter has over 40 to hit and AC, the wizard casts spells that anything that is not blood-optimized needs a 20 to resist, and so forth.
@yeti1069: I find myself almost forced into the realm of cheese. If I do not give archers Bane arrows and have "someone" cast greater magic weapon on them as well, even level appropriate encounters joins the "Need 20 to hit"-club. And without magical defenses, the martial characters rips through anything in 2 rounds. Seriously, they could take the Tarrasque as written and have a good chance of winning. And they are barely lv14.
Tactics and shenanigans works on low level. I cannot use combat maneuvers against them since the melee people have way too high CMD, and fly. Nor can I inflict status effects on them, except certain will-save effects on the fighter, as they are either immune, or have resistances that makes them succeed on low rolls. They always fly, always have invisibility and so forth.
I have been increasing the HP of everything to 90% of max, and even then most things get cut down in one round, tops two.
@Dragonsong: Indeed. They have pretty much been able to cherry-pick from the items that exist, and there is the rub. I could go and have Lord Sundersmash come along and beat them back into the WBL, but the cacophony of whines would reach the stars and beckon the old ones to tear the veil, I fear.
Thanks for the feedback. I am definitely going to try the "double action" solution for the final boss, so that it at least gets to do something before it dies. I guess this should be a "Advice on dealing with power-gaming" thread instead.
Kamelguru, my 1st post was made entirely in jest. I apologize. Now, for your problem:
How many PCs do you have? What books are available? You already have tactics down, we might as well know the whole story.
Kamelguru, my 1st post was made entirely in jest. I apologize. Now, for your problem:
How many PCs do you have? What books are available? You already have tactics down, we might as well know the whole story.
Four PCs and one cohort paladin. I use the core rulebook and the APG.
Basically:
- Lv14 Fighter: Decked out with everything he could ever want. He has the optimal armor, optimal shield, optimal belt, optimal resistance item etc within his price range. They have roughly WBL, but everything is cherry-picked. His flat AC is 40, and he has just about every 2wpn sword&board feat in the game. Every hit triggers a DC24 fort save or the target loses his turn. He hits most everything on all attacks. Deals closer to 200 damage per round.
- Lv14 Universalist: Int30 and pretty much got all he needs as well. Has a combination of metamagic and item-creation feats that allows him to craft all manner of stuff, and be able to react to almost any situation, and target any opponent's weakness with debuffs and such. He wins the battle for the most part, and makes sure the enemies fail at all they try.
- Lv14 Cavalier: AC monster that buffs everyone's to-hit by +10 or so. Not overly optimized, and thus protests when I raise the bar to be a challenge for the rest.
- Lv14 Cleric: Summoner/support that makes sure no-one ever dies, and even if they do, it is a minor set-back quickly remedied.
- LV12 Paladin: Smite makes right switch-hitter. Would have been weak, but due to buffs gallore, he hits and kills like you would expect a lv16 character would.
|
since you're running Kingmaker, and have Level 14ish PCs, I assume you're through book 4, well into book 5?
If so, fear not...the critters at the end of Book 5 stand to be beefed up quite significantly (as Turin the Mad & I have been doing for most of the boss types as is). The critters in Book 6 are pretty much good to go, with a few minor tweaks.
A few things I have used, to make things at least partially interesting for my group:
Everything from Level 3 to 10 has been getting the Advanced Simple template. Sometimes I forgot the extra AC, but most of the time it was full-on Advanced Everything.
Illusions & Trickery: some of the nastiest NPC's in the later books are spellcasters. Bards, Wizards, and even Druids can get some very interesting tricks going when they really want to.
Environmental effects. Next big fight, swap out a few mooks for Fire-Resistant or Fire-Immune creatures. Trap the party inside somehow (portcullises, iron shutters, etc), and light the whole bit on fire. Even if it doesn't really pose that great of a threat, it'll get them moving.
Guards and Wards. Yes, it sucks for the players. Too bad.
Finally, templates on mooks are super fun. Advanced, Giant, and Fiendish can make weak foes much more challenging. And those are just the easy ones to apply. Search for the 3.5 templates for even more ideas.
I roll all my dice in the open and try not to attach myself to the idea of making certain fights epic. What makes a boss a boss is what he does between encounters that builds emotional tension.
If there is a lot of tension and then they wack him in two rounds, let them have their fun.
I think that works for some groups, but others will feel let down if they 2 round a boss. I get the most "good game's" when I bring the party to the brink of a TPK or running away without killing them.
I normally do this by trying to kill them, but if I come too close I let up on the gas. Some groups want me to floor it the entire time so I build a slightly weaker encouter and hope I eyeball it correctly. I only messed it up once, and that was due to a player dropping in the middle of the game because he got mad at another player.
I roll all my dice in the open and try not to attach myself to the idea of making certain fights epic. What makes a boss a boss is what he does between encounters that builds emotional tension.
If there is a lot of tension and then they wack him in two rounds, let them have their fun.
Quote from just about any "boss" or solo encounter: "Oh, that's is? That wasn't even a challenge."
Like when they destroyed Armag in two rounds, hardly taking damage, realizing that the fighter could have solo'ed him without much problem, even without buffs at lv11. Not much fun for either party.
|
|
I think perhaps the problem is not the boss but a conflict of play style. You may want to consider a rational conversation with your group about what everyone wants from the game before you passive aggressively make your monsters immune to all their effects and beefed up intensly without any change to CR.
I think also you may be in the wrong game. Realistically you would probably be happier in 4E where alot of your conserns were addressed in the game design (no save or lose, debilitating effects last almost no time, boss monsters are beefed to hell, and for the most part people just do hit point damage). It is also faster and easier to dm, and any 'challenging' combat is gauranteed to last a while, there isnt any of the rocket tag(short brutal combats) you get at higher levels of pathfinder or 3.x.
Edit:
Also you arent sending in your bosses alone are you? It doesnt work unless you create very well thought out circumstances to account for the action economy of the game. If your boss if bearing the full brunt of the party on turn one, the encounter was not designed well. There should be minions of reasonable strength to get in the party's way and divert their attention.
4e isn't any better in these regards. Once you reach mid-high paragon rocket tag reigns supreme once again in 4e. Also, debuffs only last a turn each but that's often the only turn monsters get to live in 4e.
My suggestion: find people to play with that share your beliefs on optimizing and powergaming. Punishing them for min-maxing and forcing yourself to play their game are both bad solutions.
While equipment and character power come into play, the insurmountable issue is that lone creatures just can't stand up to a party without HUGE advantages thrown their way due simply to the difference in actions.
4 full-round actions vs. 1 is a problem.
6 vs. 1 is almost impossible to overcome.
That, and having 4-6 players' abilities all focused on a single target becomes a big problem as well. Flanking becomes more likely, single-target debuffs are more relevant, crowd control takes a back seat to debuffing and damage.
Extra turns for the boss partially addresses the first problem. More HP kind of addresses the second, but it's hard to adjust that in a universal way, as the difference in damage a party can do from one encounter to the next is pretty significant.
These are the two reasons that encounter creation guides and suggestions promote bosses with minions and I view it as a failing of the system, since we have so many instances of single bad guys squaring off against multiple adventuring opponents and posing a real threat in fantasy film and literature, yet the system cannot replicate those encounters very well.
|
|
I roll all my dice in the open and try not to attach myself to the idea of making certain fights epic. What makes a boss a boss is what he does between encounters that builds emotional tension.
If there is a lot of tension and then they wack him in two rounds, let them have their fun.
Quote from just about any "boss" or solo encounter: "Oh, that's is? That wasn't even a challenge."
Like when they destroyed Armag in two rounds, hardly taking damage, realizing that the fighter could have solo'ed him without much problem, even without buffs at lv11. Not much fun for either party.
Agreed.
PCs often want to feel like they got through an epic fight by their own merits but it's almost impossible to get that effect by letting the dice fall where they may.
The best DMs I've played under can create this effect without the PCs knowing when they've been softballed or ninja-nerfed.
Problem is if they ever find out that they were softballed or ninja nerfed, they may feel cheated. If as a DM, you dont like something, I think you should just ban it instead of invalidating the player having it.
Ninja Nerfing
Example: A DM doesnt like any of the damage increasing feats, so he just gives the bad guys more hp or ignores the damage done by the PC that has those feats. While everyone else gets to be at full fighting capacity. In that case, the DM has just made it so the PC has wasted his/her turns.
Softballing
Example: DM has uber monster that happens to almost steamroll the party even though he meant for the party to win. When he realizes it, he starts softballing tactics, magically doing less damage, etc... and the party makes it out. At that point, why not just tell them a pretty story?
Sometimes you should just be honest with your PCs and say what you dont like/want in your campaign. You may be surprised how much less animosity you get from them.
|
|
Problem is if they ever find out that they were softballed or ninja nerfed, they may feel cheated. If as a DM, you dont like something, I think you should just ban it instead of invalidating the player having it.
Ninja Nerfing
Example: A DM doesnt like any of the damage increasing feats, so he just gives the bad guys more hp or ignores the damage done by the PC that has those feats. While everyone else gets to be at full fighting capacity. In that case, the DM has just made it so the PC has wasted his/her turns.Softballing
Example: DM has uber monster that happens to almost steamroll the party even though he meant for the party to win. When he realizes it, he starts softballing tactics, magically doing less damage, etc... and the party makes it out. At that point, why not just tell them a pretty story?Sometimes you should just be honest with your PCs and say what you dont like/want in your campaign. You may be surprised how much less animosity you get from them.
Well, yes, that's why I said.
The best DMs I've played under can create this effect without the PCs knowing when they've been softballed or ninja-nerfed.
A good DM will do those things without you ever knowing it and you'll just think, 'Wow, we made it out alive!'.
Even if you think they won't find out, you're still lying to them. Sure, if they never ever find out, it will probably work out well. I understand some don't value an organic experience, but I do.
|
|
Even if you think they won't find out, you're still lying to them. Sure, if they never ever find out, it will probably work out well. I understand some don't value an organic experience, but I do.
Sweet, there's always WoW for you.
In the meantime this is a roleplaying game where we are often trying to tell a story.
I'm not going to fault a DM who decides that the BBEG's AC needs to be 4 points higher so he can live long enough to deliver his evil monologue.
Even if you think they won't find out, you're still lying to them. Sure, if they never ever find out, it will probably work out well. I understand some don't value an organic experience, but I do.
Would you prefer that because the GM accidentally didn't balance the fight or the players were horribly unlucky that he TPKs the party?
Ninja nerfing has its place as well though I typically never use it. If you've somehow got a fighter dropping anything near the parties challenge rating in 1-2 turns and basically everyone else only marginally helps then it can be a good idea to artificially boost enemy HP. Your other option is to keep boosting the CR and eventually you'll get the point where the enemy will have abilities that can quickly lead to a TPK.
I don't consider steamrolling enemies or getting steamrolled by enemies that organic of an experience. I'd rather have a GM that adapts the enemies to the party. It shouldn't be every fight, but I think it has its place.
|
|
Even if you think they won't find out, you're still lying to them. Sure, if they never ever find out, it will probably work out well. I understand some don't value an organic experience, but I do.Would you prefer that because the GM accidentally didn't balance the fight or the players were horribly unlucky that he TPKs the party?
Ninja nerfing has its place as well though I typically never use it. If you've somehow got a fighter dropping anything near the parties challenge rating in 1-2 turns and basically everyone else only marginally helps then it can be a good idea to artificially boost enemy HP. Your other option is to keep boosting the CR and eventually you'll get the point where the enemy will have abilities that can quickly lead to a TPK.
I don't consider steamrolling enemies or getting steamrolled by enemies that organic of an experience. I'd rather have a GM that adapts the enemies to the party. It shouldn't be every fight, but I think it has its place.
Nothing sucks more than playing through an adventure building up to the climactic final battle and then not getting to actually do anything because the BBEG was one/two shotted and the DM just called the rest of the encounter.
Nothing sucks more than playing through an adventure building up to the climactic final battle and then not getting to actually do anything because the BBEG was one/two shotted and the DM just called the rest of the encounter.
I think it was worse back in 3.5 when a BBEG goes down to a save or die. Very anti-climatic.
EDIT: This is to say that I think it's perfectly fine for normal encounters to ended by a save or die, but I think it should be next to impossible without a lot of debuffing to drop a BBEG with a save or die.
|
|
That definitely still happens in pathfinder. I was playing a game this weekend, the end of a four part series, in which the final encounter was ended with one spell when the witch threw a Dazing Spell metamagicked Fireball and the BBEG failed (with a roll of a 13 on the reflex save)
When the DM heard 'dazed for 3 rounds' he called it. I never got to act.
Even if you think they won't find out, you're still lying to them. Sure, if they never ever find out, it will probably work out well. I understand some don't value an organic experience, but I do.Would you prefer that because the GM accidentally didn't balance the fight or the players were horribly unlucky that he TPKs the party?
Ninja nerfing has its place as well though I typically never use it. If you've somehow got a fighter dropping anything near the parties challenge rating in 1-2 turns and basically everyone else only marginally helps then it can be a good idea to artificially boost enemy HP. Your other option is to keep boosting the CR and eventually you'll get the point where the enemy will have abilities that can quickly lead to a TPK.
I don't consider steamrolling enemies or getting steamrolled by enemies that organic of an experience. I'd rather have a GM that adapts the enemies to the party. It shouldn't be every fight, but I think it has its place.
If it was legit, then yes we didn't earn a successful encounter. You can tailor encounters legitimately so everyone can have a spotlight, but I just don't like being cheated. If the fighter is mowing down encounters, make some encounters with flying creatures, or creatures that deny him the full attack occasionally. Don't just cheat and give the monsters more hp artificially just to nerf the fighter's damage.
common tactics ive used include.
surprise attacks (take someone out fast)
large aoe's make combat feel dangerous.
mind control a character. one of the most effective mages ive ever thrown aginst a party dominated the barbarian the other martial character spent his actions grappling with the bar. a few minions don't hurt either.
take turns taking chars out to don't always stun paralys charm etc. the same char every time players hate that.
dragons are one of the few creatures ive never had to worry abotu holding their own magic res ac hp cast some spells on yourself first huge aorebreath devestating full attacks fly by breaths...yeah id throw a lone dragon at a party
If it was legit, then yes we didn't earn a successful encounter. You can tailor encounters legitimately so everyone can have a spotlight, but I just don't like being cheated. If the fighter is mowing down encounters, make some encounters with flying creatures, or creatures that deny him the full attack occasionally. Don't just cheat and give the monsters more hp artificially just to nerf the fighter's damage.
Instead you'll just be artificially be nerfing the fighter by preventing him from being able to do damage. There's no difference between modifying a monster's hp or attacking a melee fighter with a flying creature.
In either case you are designing the encounter to "nerf" that character. Honestly I don't consider it a nerf to boost hp. Sure you'll have to do more damage but it keeps the encounter fun at least when I've been a player. At least I can imagine the character is hurting said enemy (and is). I'd much rather that than be stuck in fights where my character isn't mechanically built to be very helpful.
As I said boosting hp shouldn't be done every fight but I see it as a legitimate strategy for a GM.
Also on the note of softballing, I think there are times for it and times it shouldn't be used. When a battle starts dropping PCs like flies by sheer accident is when it should be used. If a battle is hard and a PC dies then that's fine. I don't believe in destroying an adventuring party with a random encounter, legit or not.
Oh No Effective Characters!
Oh No Effective Characters!
Effective characters are cool. The main point is to make badguys effective too. Otherwise it's boring to just watch the adventures lazily cut off the badguy's head.
Honestly I usually just use minions to make a more dynamic encounter rather than the methods suggested here.
Yea, there is a difference. There is nothing wrong with having varied encounters. If you only have melee thugs and nothing else in your encounters, then yes you will get owned by someone who is designed for it. Im also not saying that you should only have archers/flyers. Just have it varied enough so everyone can do something. That is the way to go. Have a few evil creatures so the paladin can shine, and have a few non evil creatures that the other people can fight. Same thing with ranger's favored enemy. Good encounter design is not nerfing a character. Upping someone's hp with the sole reason being that the fighter does too much damage is nerfing him and cheating him.
|
|
Oh No Effective Characters!
I have nothing against well-designed characters.
In fact, that's pretty much the most fun part of the game for me.
There comes a point, though, when the GM says, "Well, that was fun (dripping with sarcasm)" as his latest NPC/Monster/Etc gets destroyed by 1 PC's first round salvo.
GMs having no fun means no games happen.
Yea, there is a difference. There is nothing wrong with having varied encounters. If you only have melee thugs and nothing else in your encounters, then yes you will get owned by someone who is designed for it. Im also not saying that you should only have archers/flyers. Just have it varied enough so everyone can do something. That is the way to go. Have a few evil creatures so the paladin can shine, and have a few non evil creatures that the other people can fight. Same thing with ranger's favored enemy. Good encounter design is not nerfing a character. Upping someone's hp with the sole reason being that the fighter does too much damage is nerfing him and cheating him.
A campaign should have varied encounters but when you are designing an encounter so that character B is less effective it doesn't matter whether it's because the enemy is flying or because he has more HP.
Variety is good and variety to challenge different party members to make some more effective than others is good too.
I don't think artificially boosting HP should be used for run of the mill encounters, but for a boss fight I see it as completely legitimate. Characters can do a ton of damage across most of the classes. A lone boss will be overtaken by sheer action economy if he's alone (which is why I use minions typically) and needs some boost to be a better opponent for a party. It doesn't matter if that comes from a homebrew template, fancy new abilities or a simple boost to HP.
Most times boosting HP is not meant to cheat or nerf the fighter but to prolong a fight that would otherwise be trivial. Most classes deal a form of HP damage so it isn't typically going to be an attack against a single character, but meant to draw out a fight. Sure you could just pick the BBEG or monster to be a higher CR all around but then you can start running into problems with balance. It's no fun when the enemy starts dropping a character each turn and has tons of HP (ok it can be fun... but I'm crazy).
Upping someone's hp with the sole reason being that the fighter does too much damage is nerfing him and cheating him.
Only really if your fighter is counting kills as notches on his belt. Otherwise, he is likely still performing well by smacking the hell out of whatever you're fighting, except that, after he cuts the thing down to half HP, instead of outright killing it, everybody else gets a turn.
To that end, I will occasionally add on monster HP if I find that something is going down too fast and will similarly softball a little if the encounter ends up being too ridiculous. Balancing an encounter isn't exactly easy, particularly when you have powerful characters. If they aren't doing something especially ingenious or incredibly stupid, they shouldn't be overly rewarded or penalized because I (or another DM) failed to present an appropriately balanced encounter. Sure, you could simply dock them XP, or grant bonus XP, but what's more important? The XP or the actual experience of the encounter? Particularly if you spent some real time crafting the adventure and fights.
i don't think you should nerf a toon every fight give each character a fight where they can shine. but don't forget you need to make it a challenge ever so often. so maybe after the legion of orcs is easily wiped out by the fighter and mage next time make them less effectual give other people a chance to shine. also a fight where the fighter has to break out unothodox methods could be fun and challenging as well.
Upping someone's hp with the sole reason being that the fighter does too much damage is nerfing him and cheating him.Only really if your fighter is counting kills as notches on his belt. Otherwise, he is likely still performing well by smacking the hell out of whatever you're fighting, except that, after he cuts the thing down to half HP, instead of outright killing it, everybody else gets a turn.
To that end, I will occasionally add on monster HP if I find that something is going down too fast and will similarly softball a little if the encounter ends up being too ridiculous. Balancing an encounter isn't exactly easy, particularly when you have powerful characters. If they aren't doing something especially ingenious or incredibly stupid, they shouldn't be overly rewarded or penalized because I (or another DM) failed to present an appropriately balanced encounter. Sure, you could simply dock them XP, or grant bonus XP, but what's more important? The XP or the actual experience of the encounter? Particularly if you spent some real time crafting the adventure and fights.
I'm not sure what the point of stats are if you are going to change them mid game. I'm not trying to be snide but if the goal is to have a fight that goes a certain way, why not just narrate the whole thing. Pretend the armor class changes based on how they describe their attacks and position, and just give them the win.
God knows I've done that in the past running Nightbane.
This. Except for the whole nightbane thing.
I'm not sure what the point of stats are if you are going to change them mid game. I'm not trying to be snide but if the goal is to have a fight that goes a certain way, why not just narrate the whole thing. Pretend the armor class changes based on how they describe their attacks and position, and just give them the win.God knows I've done that in the past running Nightbane.
I can't speak for yeti1069 but this is my take on it. The purpose is not to force a combat to one outcome. I've modified enemy hp during a fight before and other things (nothing like AC since that'd be obvious). The purpose is to attempt to make the fight more dynamic and balanced. Sometimes this means beefing up the encounter, sometimes it means holding back some.
If it were just a narrative then at least in my games characters wouldn't die... and in my games a lot of characters do end up dead over the course of the game.
I've had less characters die when I stopped changing stats mid game.
Like it or not, the players know you do it. The problem is that they can't tell when you will hold back and when you won't. My Heroes Unlimited GM used to designate certain super villains as "Alpha Level Threats" meaning he would kill you with them and not fudge rolls, but we knew that basically nothing else could kill us so long as we stayed in character.
If your players don't think you will fudge, they will be more careful... ymmv.
I've openly admitted to my players that I've done it. They've never cared because they know when it matters it can help them and at times it can work against them. Typically I do things to make fights easier and not harder. Certain fights I tell players that it will be a straight up fight, typically with a major NPC or such.
My players understand not to do anything stupid either because if they do something they shouldn't logically survive they won't.
I'm not going to let my mistake of picking a bad monster for a fight cause a TPK. Also my players have never enjoyed just slaughtering the BBEG. We had it happen once and it caused what had been a very long epic campaign to end on a rather pathetic note. Everyone was fairly disappointed, but at the time I ran the enemy legitimately and he failed 1 saving throw. I'm not going to let a BBEG die in the first round of combat without a very good reason.
It's not as though it is something I do every battle, and even when I hold back a character can end up dead. Sometimes it's not even due to poor balance but the luck of the dice. I'm not going to let a bad night of rolling for a party end a campaign because I had that happen once as well. I had 4 gestalt players fail saving throws for 3 turns in a row which caused a TPK.
I may be different from other people, but my own experience with my games has told me to play with my methods to help balance and keep the game fun.
This. Except for the whole nightbane thing.
Man, I love that Nightbane metaplot goodness. I normally don't go for touchy feely teen angst horror, but there is just something about it.
Its like what would happen if White Wolf was honest about the fact that OWoD was just a dark supers game and catered to it.
BUT MY INNER MONSTER!
Every major encounter ever:
- Always have buffs rivaling Dragon Ball Z super-saiyan levels, since they have infinite wands and all spells they ever wanted due to Kingmaker.
- Wizard goes first and either takes out the buffs/defenses of an enemy or debilitates them
- Cavalier uses ability to let fighter move within melee reach.
- Over the top anime b~!$%*@* damage from fighter
- Cleric annuls damage done if any, or summons flankers and roadblocks to control the field.
- Combat is won, and it is more a question of mopping up stragglers
I have gotten to the point where I don't even bother playing out encounters that are not APL+1, and just say "Meh, you win." and toss them one once in a while to let the cavalier feel relevant in damage-dealing, where the wizard usually either just blows a charge from one of his staves, or lets his turn go, as he doesn't need to do anything.
But yes, there is a HUGE discrepancy between the games my players are used to, and published adventure paths. I find myself forced to "fix" every encounter, which basically means I could just as well take the extra hour to write my own fluff and it will be my own creation after all.
Which is a problem, since I don't have the time to spare to spend 2-6 hours every week on making stuff. Thus the search for a "patch" I can slap on encounters to make them viable for the monster party.
But yes, there is a HUGE discrepancy between the games my players are used to, and published adventure paths. I find myself forced to "fix" every encounter, which basically means I could just as well take the extra hour to write my own fluff and it will be my own creation after all.
Which is a problem, since I don't have the time to spare to spend 2-6 hours every week on making stuff. Thus the search for a "patch" I can slap on encounters to make them viable for the monster party.
This leads me to a question: Is there other modules out there that are made with optimizers in mind? I know Jason Nelson's director cut was just what I needed, with NPCs designed to do what they do, and do it very well. Decked out with potions, scrolls, buff items, solutions to obvious problems and so forth. While the published AP is careful to not demolish people who play less optimized/effective characters.
I guess I could instead of "cheating" just optimize, and add a package on all mid/high level bossy or mini-bossy encounters:
- Permanency: See Invisibility. If you are a boss, you can pay some caster to fill a borrowed ring of spell storing and do this. Counters the "We are all invisible" defense.
- Potions of Barkskin, Shield of Faith, Stat Boosts, Invisibility, Displacement and False Life. Starts chugging once they hear trouble.
- Add a generic support-caster mook to spam counterspells on the worst debuffs and cast Heal when needed.
Just keep a few separate documents with such stats and vary things so not every encounter plays the same.
Making challanging encounters is very hard. I had my share of quickly flattened Bosses I put a lot of time making.
But our main GM is very good at this. Often situational bonuses come into play where the boss, while not really much stronger than the group, has control of the battlefield and a few smaller helpers.
One thing he threw at me you could try. He called it mirror zombies. It was basically a zombie with all my abilities, stats and equipment, which mirrored every move I made.
I attack, it attacks. I heal myself, it heals itself (with inflict). I channel positive energy, it channels negative energy. I use fire, it uses ice. You get the idea.
There were some slight differences of course.
I don't know exactly how he created them but it was something like this:
- Make them a zombie (but one with standard and move action) with double the hitdice of the character they are based upon).
Since undead get bad BAB anyway each zombie has a BAB equal to the HD of the character it is based on. So they can hit good, but not too good.
- Use extra feats it gains for generic buff things like toughness, improved natural attacks and such.
- Give it limb for limb. A cool feat (not really PF, but from libris mortis I think) that allows a zombie to regenerate 25% of it's HP by loosing a limb. So when you reduze a zombie to 0 it looses one arm, leg or head instead of dying and gets 25% of it's HP back. It can do that five times before it really is dead.
This way they have to fight themselves and all their optimization works against them. Ironically in my case I didn't have to fight it at all. I could have worked together with it to achieve my goal in the room.
It shouldn't immediately obvious the enemies are copies of the players (my zombie had an outer shell that cracked away during battle revealing my own face... think Luke in the woods where he fights pseudo darth vader ;3) In the end the zombies turn to dust (including the equipment which was just illusionary anyway).
But yeah that would call for a special, homemade adventure. You could try adding the template to some mooks though. They suddenly get surprisingly hard to kill (while looking weak) while not getting much stronger. For extra shock effect you can let the cut of arms and legs move and crawl around as well, grappling/tripping them and such.
But yes, there is a HUGE discrepancy between the games my players are used to, and published adventure paths. I find myself forced to "fix" every encounter, which basically means I could just as well take the extra hour to write my own fluff and it will be my own creation after all.
Every AP or just Kingmaker? While I enjoyed Kingmaker the down time made things rather easy compared to other AP's.