Hey guys I'm thinking of running Expedition to Castle Ravenloft for my Pathfinder group has anyone else run it?
Also just have a couple of questions:-
Will it be too easy or too hard for a party of 6 (6th+7th level) characters which include a Alchemist, Summoner, Barbarian, Wizard, Cleric and Archer Ranger who hates undead?
What is the main difference in the storyline between this version and the original?
I played the original years ago but I haven't read this one completely to see what has changed from a plot POV.
Thanks in advance
FDM
I ran Expedition to Castle Ravenloft in 3.5, and I'm pretty experienced in PF, but I have not run EtCR in PF, so take that for what you will.
I had a group of 5 PCs that started at level 6. I leveled them up very slowly (I ignored the XP rules). The module was easy, easy, easy for them, with only a few encounters really causing them to break a sweat (mostly at the very beginning and very end). They were fairly optimized, and tactically saavy.
Given that PF characters are approximately one CR more powerful than 3.5 characters of the same level, I would recommend starting your group at level 5 at the most. If you have a party of 6, consider dropping the starting level down to 4, or otherwise buffing the enemies - that extra man makes a huge difference.
The campaign is very loot-light, and there's pretty much nowhere to go to buy better stuff. That is by-design. Don't try to follow the WBL chart: the module assumes you will deviate from it. However, I would recommend that you give the PCs a heads-up (or otherwise force them) to buy a lot of comsumables before entering Barovia. (Besides, it ups the horror theme to see your pile of resources dwindle.)
And for the love of the game, buff Strahd. Give him at least a 100 extra hit points, and have minions present. If the PCs do the majority of sidequests (and they should, they're fun), then the final fight is a yawn without some retooling.
---
As far as the major plot differences from I6:
- they added a zombie plague to Barovia
- they statted out and mapped out the wilderness (to good effect!)
- added various plot-items to help in the fight against Strahd
- methods of "powering up" these plot items
- Strahd has lieutenants running around as mini-bosses
- and lots of other window-dressing stuff
|
I ran Expedition to Castle Ravenloft in 3.5, and I'm pretty experienced in PF, but I have not run EtCR in PF, so take that for what you will.
I had a group of 5 PCs that started at level 6. I leveled them up very slowly (I ignored the XP rules). The module was easy, easy, easy for them, with only a few encounters really causing them to break a sweat (mostly at the very beginning and very end). They were fairly optimized, and tactically saavy.
Given that PF characters are approximately one CR more powerful than 3.5 characters of the same level, I would recommend starting your group at level 5 at the most. If you have a party of 6, consider dropping the starting level down to 4, or otherwise buffing the enemies - that extra man makes a huge difference.
The campaign is very loot-light, and there's pretty much nowhere to go to buy better stuff. That is by-design. Don't try to follow the WBL chart: the module assumes you will deviate from it. However, I would recommend that you give the PCs a heads-up (or otherwise force them) to buy a lot of comsumables before entering Barovia. (Besides, it ups the horror theme to see your pile of resources dwindle.)
And for the love of the game, buff Strahd. Give him at least a 100 extra hit points, and have minions present. If the PCs do the majority of sidequests (and they should, they're fun), then the final fight is a yawn without some retooling.
---
As far as the major plot differences from I6:
- they added a zombie plague to Barovia
- they statted out and mapped out the wilderness (to good effect!)
- added various plot-items to help in the fight against Strahd
- methods of "powering up" these plot items
- Strahd has lieutenants running around as mini-bosses
- and lots of other window-dressing stuff
So basically at their current level (6th) they'll waltz over all the encounters? Bummer, have to run something else.
Thanks for the advice ErikFDM
I ran Expedition to Castle Ravenloft in 3.5, and I'm pretty experienced in PF, but I have not run EtCR in PF, so take that for what you will.
I had a group of 5 PCs that started at level 6. I leveled them up very slowly (I ignored the XP rules). The module was easy, easy, easy for them, with only a few encounters really causing them to break a sweat (mostly at the very beginning and very end). They were fairly optimized, and tactically saavy.
Given that PF characters are approximately one CR more powerful than 3.5 characters of the same level, I would recommend starting your group at level 5 at the most. If you have a party of 6, consider dropping the starting level down to 4, or otherwise buffing the enemies - that extra man makes a huge difference.
If I read Erik correctly it might largely depend upon the style of play and optimization of your group.
Also, there is always possibility of tweaking the encounters and augmenting the opposition.
Hey guys I'm thinking of running Expedition to Castle Ravenloft for my Pathfinder group has anyone else run it?
Also just have a couple of questions:-
Will it be too easy or too hard for a party of 6 (6th+7th level) characters which include a Alchemist, Summoner, Barbarian, Wizard, Cleric and Archer Ranger who hates undead?What is the main difference in the storyline between this version and the original?
I played the original years ago but I haven't read this one completely to see what has changed from a plot POV.Thanks in advance
FDM
I have never played it, but I have looked it up before. It seems that it is easy for experience/optimized parties, and moderate for the average party.
The Count would really need to be beefed up to provide a real challenge and/or given backup.
I've run this in both Pathfinder Beta and the finalized Core Rules, and I concur with what many other people have said in this thread: it's far too easy, especially if the group has made characters that are innately skilled at dealing with undead.
The best way to handle it, if you really want to run this, is to not tell your players you're doing Ravenloft at all. Just tell them you want them to build PCs of level X (and consider dropping them down a level below the recommended level for the variant you want to run, as the different campaign setups outlined in "Expedition" recommend different starting levels). If they don't know what's coming, the payoff will be all the more sweet.
And, ye gods, please buff Strahd. I never rebuilt him using PF rules, so that may toughen him up some. One easy way to do it is to add the Mighty template from Super Genius Games' Guide to Templates. (That may actually make Strahd too hard, but that's sort of the point, IMO.) You could also consider moving his coffin to somewhere outside the castle, or giving him multiple coffins a la Dracula - defeating Strahd is one thing, but actually destroying him is quite another indeed.
If you have access to the Swords & Sorcery Ravenloft books, you could also use Strahd's Darklord stats, as I did when running the module for a party of 10th level PCs. Be warned, though, that he will be much tougher in this incarnation than the one presented in the book as it is written. You'll also need to add the fane abilities detailed in "Expedition" on top of the White Wolf stat block.
Hey guys I'm thinking of running Expedition to Castle Ravenloft for my Pathfinder group has anyone else run it?
Also just have a couple of questions:-
Will it be too easy or too hard for a party of 6 (6th+7th level) characters which include a Alchemist, Summoner, Barbarian, Wizard, Cleric and Archer Ranger who hates undead?What is the main difference in the storyline between this version and the original?
I played the original years ago but I haven't read this one completely to see what has changed from a plot POV.Thanks in advance
FDM
The previous posters have all made some good points, so I don't feel the need to add to their comments on converting the adventure, party level, etc.
However, from a purist's point of view, I was very annoyed by EtCRL's changes to Madame Eva and the Vistani. For what it's worth, I think that 2e (and later Sword & Sorcery/Art Haus/White Wolfe for 3.x) did a great job in describing and fleshing out the Vistani. Then EtCRL just ruined all that good work. If you are of the same opinion, you might want to return Madame Eva and the Vistani to their original forms, and change the cirmcumstances of the party's second (?) visit to the encampment. As always, YMMV.
|
If it was too easy, then I don't think that the DM ran it the way it was suppossed to be, honestly.
It is actually extremely easy for a 6th or 7th level party to be TPK'd throughout most of the adventure, unless they do a lot of metagameing and/or cheating. I personally feel that this is the best adventure that WotC published, and it is far better than the original. Not because it was an improvement, but because they added so much filler. EtCR is about 7 times bigger than the original Castle Ravenloft, and includes a lot of information and history that the original didn't. It also adds a lot of details like the many epitaphs for the crypts, backstory that the players may never find out if they don't encounter something at a certain time, and the original Sun Sword.
EtCR (saddly) is not the Ravenloft setting, but neither was the original Castle Ravenloft, and that people seem to forget that is I think why so many people mistakenly disliked it.
The main issues I see with a Pathfinder EtCR is the massive changes to primarily the Cleric and also the Paladin. EtCR was one of the first times that Turning became Channel Energy to harm Undead, but that was only for special cool guy players that earned it. I would suggest returning both to the original Turn/Destroy Undead, (not the PF version), and grant Chanel Energy only to the Lightbringers later on as a Bonus Feat or something.
Hey guys I'm thinking of running Expedition to Castle Ravenloft for my Pathfinder group has anyone else run it?
Also just have a couple of questions:-
Will it be too easy or too hard for a party of 6 (6th+7th level) characters which include a Alchemist, Summoner, Barbarian, Wizard, Cleric and Archer Ranger who hates undead?What is the main difference in the storyline between this version and the original?
I played the original years ago but I haven't read this one completely to see what has changed from a plot POV.Thanks in advance
FDM
I'm in the process of converting EtCR to PF now. I'm merging EtCR into the Rise of the Runelords adventure path, replacing episodes 3 and 4 of RothRL with EtCR, so I've been a bit more concerned with getting RotRL ready for play first.
I'm going through EtCR encounter-by-encounter and re-stating all of the enemies to PF rules, making sure that the ELs of the encounters will be well-balanced. I'd recommend doing the same. Undead are quite different compared to 3.5, for example. I'm also changing several things in EtCR to put it into the PF campaign world. (e.g. the Vistani of EtCR become Varisian Sczarni; the Lightbringer that's holding the zombies in Barovia at bay is now an Eagle Knight). I'm actually ditching all of the Lightbringer stuff, as PF includes most of their cool powers as standard cleric abilities or feats.
If you're not planning to take the time to re-stat the bad guys, and you don't want to mess with the PF rules for PCs, then I'd recommend starting the PF characters at 5th level and just running it straight. Even then, you may need to beef up the monsters a bit, as PF characters are about one 3.5 EL stronger than their PF level would indicate.
Good luck!
Thanks all for you responses. I really don't want to have to do any work to convert it but at the same time I don't want to have the party walk through the encounters and then back hand Strahd. I'll have to consider if its worth the effort.
I did run the original back in the day for a 1st edition party but that was back when D&D was actually tough! ;-)
FDM
If it was too easy, then I don't think that the DM ran it the way it was suppossed to be, honestly.
It is actually extremely easy for a 6th or 7th level party to be TPK'd throughout most of the adventure, unless they do a lot of metagameing and/or cheating. I personally feel that this is the best adventure that WotC published, and it is far better than the original. Not because it was an improvement, but because they added so much filler. EtCR is about 7 times bigger than the original Castle Ravenloft, and includes a lot of information and history that the original didn't. It also adds a lot of details like the many epitaphs for the crypts, backstory that the players may never find out if they don't encounter something at a certain time, and the original Sun Sword.
EtCR (saddly) is not the Ravenloft setting, but neither was the original Castle Ravenloft, and that people seem to forget that is I think why so many people mistakenly disliked it.
The main issues I see with a Pathfinder EtCR is the massive changes to primarily the Cleric and also the Paladin. EtCR was one of the first times that Turning became Channel Energy to harm Undead, but that was only for special cool guy players that earned it. I would suggest returning both to the original Turn/Destroy Undead, (not the PF version), and grant Chanel Energy only to the Lightbringers later on as a Bonus Feat or something.
If you build a character focused on channeling(3.5) it is very easy to destroy Strahd.
Maybe if you are restricted to 3.5 core rules, but not many books do that.