As indicated in the title, roughly 90% of all combat encounters our party faces are against a single APL +2 to +5 monster of some sort. Additionally, (and this mostly irks me because I'm the only one who owns a set of books, meaning I literally bought some books specifically for him to use) the DM mostly likes to use the Bestiary as a 'reference' to figure out roughly what stats his custom horror-terrors should have, rather than using actual published monsters. Don't get me wrong, in moderation that's fine, but this is nearly every single combat encounter. Oh, and the one encounter in this entire campaign (which has run from level 5 to 15) that was against more than one monster was 5 of the same monster. Lovely variety there.
I've already sat down and talked to him about this, and have done the same with some of the other players. One guy built a Barbarian around massive intimidate and group intimidate skills, and just doesn't ever get a chance to use them. I'm playing a utility buff/debuff Mystic Theurge and aside from Haste at the start of combat and some horribly inefficient emergency healing, I'm pretty much useless, as monsters usually have to roll a 2 or higher to pass my save-or-suck spells.
Really, I'm looking for suggestions on how to convince this DM that:
A) Actually using the bestiary is a good thing.
B) Variety and multiple-monster encounters are worth the extra planning time.
C) Action economy is IMPORTANT. Most of his big-bad's only get one to three rounds of attacks before dropping.
And to answer the obvious question, he's the only guy DM'ing something other than 4th Ed in this tiny city, and actually is pretty good aside from this.
Honestly the only thing I can think of at this point is trying to build a character who's nearly invincible against single large opponents but who could be taken down by a group, and then just stomping everything with it until he gets the hint.
|
Guilty as charged!
I'm not your DM and we don't know each other but still -- you're talking about me.
I certainly can't speak for your DM but at least I can give you MY reasons and you can do with them what you will:
Making "Boss" fights "only" is a problem I've gotten better at with the new game I'm running. Still, I admit it's a problem. It just takes too damn long for me to design fights to design more than one or two per session. I don't have that much prep time so I gotta make it count. The problem, of course, is that in that style of DMing -- Sorcerers SUCK compared to Wizards cuz the Wizard's number of spells is sufficient for one session. AND, Barbarians & Pallys are considerably GREATER cuz few Rages and Smites are sufficient.
That knowledge -- that Class balance is designed on a couple small fights and one big fight per day -- is what has gotten me to address how I design my sessions.
But it's a work in progress and most my fights are still against an APL+3 to 5 encounter.
-------------------------------------------------
As for monsters, well, F_ you, man! (Just kidding). One of the things I love about DMing is redesigning all the monsters I use. Really -- I use the Monster Manuals for the pictures.
About 15 years ago I started this cuz we ALL knew ALL the monster stats in the book. How can a DM shake things up for experienced and jaded gamers?!
Change some of the stats on a monster and the PC HAS to have a Knowledge Skill he can roll or just learn the hard way!
As for you,.... why does "not knowing" the monster stats bug you, I'm curious?
Sure, if your PC has Knowledge: Planes he can roll to see if the Barghest can shapechange from "wolf-like" beast to "goblin-like" beast but if you don't have that Knowledge why should you know?? And if the DM wanted to change it and YOU DO have that Knowledge, won't the DM let you roll to see that HIS Barghest doesn't shapechange at all but instead casts Arcane spells as a wolfie creature?
Mass player meeting would be helpful. A group consensus pointing out whats not working is likely appropriate at this point. Now that sounds like a gang up but if 100% of your players are disgruntled with how the game is going then any good GM should take that as a point to change up the game play. I've had players point such things out to me before and one just takes it in stride. Either fix what isnt working or stop the game and start a fresh.
Now... one thing from the GM perspective comes to mind. It's something I call "rush to epic" where the GM throws many high CR encounters to quickly bring the party up to a given level more "organically" instead of just starting at say 10 or 12th level. I would ask him if he is doing something like that.
Does he know the trick of pulling encounters out of adventure path books and normal standalone adventure to filling CR encounters without doing much extra work?
Just because he is the only GM running non-4e games doesn't mean you guys as players can't decide to just stop the game. Again I've hand players veto games on me when they started to sag, and with good reason as they were getting stale.
|
|
I would like to add, though, that I am VERY cognizant what what my Players like.
If I was a DM who, for example, only threw one monster at a time against the PCs and learned that one of the Players really wanted some fights where three or four monsters were thrown at them -- I'd make sure to include it.
Like, if a Ranger has a Favored Enemy -- I'll find a couple times to throw them in there. Or if a Player is exceptionally horrified of Aboleths I'll throw one in there if I can.
As indicated in the title, roughly 90% of all combat encounters our party faces are against a single APL +2 to +5 monster of some sort. Additionally, (and this mostly irks me because I'm the only one who owns a set of books, meaning I literally bought some books specifically for him to use) the DM mostly likes to use the Bestiary as a 'reference' to figure out roughly what stats his custom horror-terrors should have, rather than using actual published monsters. Don't get me wrong, in moderation that's fine, but this is nearly every single combat encounter. Oh, and the one encounter in this entire campaign (which has run from level 5 to 15) that was against more than one monster was 5 of the same monster. Lovely variety there.
I've already sat down and talked to him about this, and have done the same with some of the other players. One guy built a Barbarian around massive intimidate and group intimidate skills, and just doesn't ever get a chance to use them. I'm playing a utility buff/debuff Mystic Theurge and aside from Haste at the start of combat and some horribly inefficient emergency healing, I'm pretty much useless, as monsters usually have to roll a 2 or higher to pass my save-or-suck spells.
Really, I'm looking for suggestions on how to convince this DM that:
A) Actually using the bestiary is a good thing.
B) Variety and multiple-monster encounters are worth the extra planning time.
C) Action economy is IMPORTANT. Most of his big-bad's only get one to three rounds of attacks before dropping.And to answer the obvious question, he's the only guy DM'ing something other than 4th Ed in this tiny city, and actually is pretty good aside from this.
Honestly the only thing I can think of at this point is trying to build a character who's nearly invincible against single large opponents but who could be taken down by a group, and then just stomping everything with it until he gets the hint.
I would tell him that fighting the same monster over and over again is boring. Making it version 2.0 is not really helping. Fighting boss monsters also gets old. It also makes the actual boss fight not as special since it is really just like any other fight.
Multiple monster fights are also hard due to action economy.I would bring this up to him first, and explain it to him in detail. If you are not a good "on the spot" speaker then shoot him an email. Then stomp away if need, but I hope it does not come to that.
You have a better grasp of the game, you own the books, and you're not taking cues from mmo design. Why not GM yourself?
Really, I'm looking for suggestions on how to convince this DM that:
A) Actually using the bestiary is a good thing.
B) Variety and multiple-monster encounters are worth the extra planning time.
C) Action economy is IMPORTANT. Most of his big-bad's only get one to three rounds of attacks before dropping.And to answer the obvious question, he's the only guy DM'ing something other than 4th Ed in this tiny city, and actually is pretty good aside from this.
Honestly the only thing I can think of at this point is trying to build a character who's nearly invincible against single large opponents but who could be taken down by a group, and then just stomping everything with it until he gets the hint.
Ach, this is a bad one - because it generally gets you into a weird arms race -- because of the action economy, the GM needs to drop a massive monster at you, but then it can kill you far too easily... and often the GM then blames the system that he's not using correctly.
Especially when a single-foe lets people nova more than groups would.
My first suggestion is to show him. Next time there's a lull, offer to run a one-off and show him how a single CR12 encounter with multiple folk is way nastier for the party (of which he's a member) than a single fight with a single CR12 opponent. That will, probably, have way more effect than telling him ever would. Especially when he can see said opponents supporting each other. [As part of this, especially since it leads to my final point, generate a party of, say, hobgoblin mercs with class levels and watch the fun!]
Second, in terms of looking for variety, I would suggest having your party use knowledge skills to learn about these things (especially if you face them more than once) -- if you know all the weak spots, it may be worth the GM's time to dig out a different monster.
Third: Remember that you're only facing 1 (albeit super) guy at a time when picking spells and take the ones that have secondary effects even on success of a save (be it damage or short conditions -- for instance, cause fear still gives 1 round of shaken, though at level 15, this is less useful). Spells like Interposing Hand that mess with 1 target, no save are your friend. And, if you have Precise Shot (and if you don't for shame!) then I recommend using rays, because they (generally) don't allow saves.
Fourth: Make him pay. If he's ignoring the economy of actions, then use the heck out of it -- Summon armies of monsters, take the leadership feat, etc. -- anything that you can do to give you guys the edge thanks to flanking, aiding, and generally supporting the heck out of each other.
As for you,.... why does "not knowing" the monster stats bug you, I'm curious?
It's not so much that I don't know the monster stats. I'm one of those players who goes "Gee, that's a troll, does my character know it's weak to fire or acid 'rolls knowledge' nope, oh well, guess he'll find out when it gets back up." What bugs me is that I'd like to actually fight a medusa or some hill giants, something cool and recognizable once in a while. Un-named Tentacle Horror #56 gets old after a while. Also the fact that I bought both bestiaries specifically so he could use them, and he doesn't, bugs the hell out of me.
Also, side note, we usually do only have one or two combats per session, so the prep time really shouldn't be massive.
Does he know the trick of pulling encounters out of adventure path books and normal standalone adventure to filling CR encounters without doing much extra work?
He won't touch AP's or Modules. To paraphrase, "They're stale, too straight-forward, and have lowest-common-denominator puzzle design". Yeah, he hates Modules, not likely to happen.
Also, I'll repeat, he's a pretty good GM aside from the monster thing and impossibly convoluted or subtle puzzle clues.
I would bring this up to him first, and explain it to him in detail. If you are not a good "on the spot" speaker then shoot him an email. Then stomp away if need, but I hope it does not come to that.
Yeah, already brought it up with him a few times, hasn't really helped. After I nagged him enough we got one combat with 5 of the same type of angel. It actually stomped us pretty hard, as opposed to our usual steamroller effect. Since then, three more single-monster fights...
Also, not exactly sure how to pull of a character who's invincible against single enemies but still manages to be weak to groups. Best I can think of is a super-tank who can force single monsters to aggro him exclusively, but he'd either need stupefyingly high AC or he'd need to be DR focused instead, as most monsters we fight have absurd attack bonuses.
You have a better grasp of the game, you own the books, and you're not taking cues from mmo design. Why not GM yourself?
Eh, mostly because it takes me a minimum of 3 months of planning to set up a game. I'm really bad at winging it as far as plot goes, so I have to try and at least roughly plan the entire damn campaign before I start running it. As such, I usually run a game once every couple years.
Second, in terms of looking for variety, I would suggest having your party use knowledge skills to learn about these things (especially if you face them more than once) -- if you know all the weak spots, it may be worth the GM's time to dig out a different monster.Third: Remember that you're only facing 1 (albeit super) guy at a time when picking spells and take the ones that have secondary effects...
Don't get me wrong, every tentacle-horror is a slightly different tentacle-horror, so we can't exploit known weaknesses.
As for point three, this character isn't really a nuke caster. It's a bizarre divine/arcane build with a highly thematic spell selection (read: Yeah, mildly crippled already, but would be amazing against mobs). I'll have to take a look at some of that stuff, but I'm only willing to sacrifice the character theme to a point. Also the monsters are usually so powerful that minor 'you succeeded but still suck a little' debuffs have no noticeable effect.
|
|
It's not so much that I don't know the monster stats. I'm one of those players who goes "Gee, that's a troll, does my character know it's weak to fire or acid 'rolls knowledge' nope, oh well, guess he'll find out when it gets back up."
I see.
What is fun for me (not that it's this way for others) is challenging that my Players already know what the Troll's weakness is. Admitedly, I don't really hit D&D's Scared Cows (much); trolls for me are still vulnerable to fire. ...BUT, it is my kinda thing to redesign, for example, a Troll that is not vulnerable to fire but instead maybe has natural SR and is vulnerable to Cold.
Wouldn't it be fun, I posit, if YOU have no idea what to expect from a troll unless you get that Knowledge check.
Jacobs (or Mona) wrote an editorial along these lines in Dungeon a few years ago. He said Constructs are more fun than Dragons because all the Players know all the Dragon Colors and their Breath Weapons. But we don't (typically) remember which Construct is immune to what and vulnerable to what. So when the PCs run into a Stone Golem they're more uncertain than when they run into a Blue Dragon.
.
.
.
What bugs me is that I'd like to actually fight a medusa or some hill giants, something cool and recognizable once in a while. Un-named Tentacle Horror #56 gets old after a while.
Ah, that's different. Yeah, that'd bug me, too. I like a variety of different monsters, and different monster abilities, weaknesses and tactics.
.
.
.
Also the fact that I bought both bestiaries specifically so he could use them, and he doesn't, bugs the hell out of me.
No help coming for this one.
.
.
.
So the prep time really shouldn't be massive.
About the GM who wings everything and keeps roughly two or three pages of notes for his entire 20 level campaign. A third of which is character and place names.
Wouldn't it be fun, I posit, if YOU have no idea what to expect from a troll unless you get that Knowledge check.
It is, if done occasionally. We've literally fought three monsters out of the bestiaries in 10 character levels. Everything else has either been: undead abominations that fly using their own ribcage and can't die, swarms of black particles that eat organic matter, and many many tentacle monsters. Oh, and all the custom monsters were so bizarre and obscure that the knowledge skill monkey can only occasionally figure out their weaknesses. We never did figure out how to permanently put those undead down, and spent 3 sessions beating them unconscious and then running in terror.
About GMing yourself:
I have the same problem as you do, for some reason i want to plan everything and doing that would take months, in fact that's the reason i have only GMed two times in my life (one VtR and one WtF).
What i have to offer as advice is to run a published Paizo AP, they really have done most of the job for you. I know i will run rise of the runelords in October using d20pfsrd convertions to PF rules.
I'm curious, how long to your sessions run, and what are they mostly populated by?
In my first ever campaign, Combat was sporadic, and some sessions, we wouldn't even a single combat encounter. Lots of mystery and detective work for the group. Fights, if they occurred, would be near the end of the session, and they'd be boss style. (A vampire here, some dire rats, Owlbears etc.)
It was mostly about the skill checks and RP for that campaign.
Man if I could have a signature here it would include an explanation on why single monster encounters are almost always a bad idea in pathfinder.
The action economy matters. No matter how you design the monster if it follows the rules laid out in the game it wont be a good encounter if it's on its own. Either the monster is too strong and thus too much of a threat to any individual pc (such as when it only needs to roll a 2 to save against a primary caster's spells or if it is cuting more then half the fighters hp in a single attack) or it is too weak and the players easily overwhelm it with their action economy advantage.
With a 4 person party you should never have fewer then 2 enemies and should aim for 6-8. Its like encounter design 101 at this point in the history of 3.x. Single monster encounters should be few and far between and they should only occur when the enemy is of a strength where they are not an overwhelming threat to a single pc and instead use very carefully thought out circumstances and tactics to keep from being overwhelmed. The final fantasy style boss fight doesnt work in Pathfinder.
What i have to offer as advice is to run a published Paizo AP, they really have done most of the job for you.
+1 to this. Left to my own devices I will get bogged down making exhaustive weather/lunar cycle charts for the first year of the campaign, only to step all over myself by making 1/2 of that campaign indoors. Something about running my first bit of an AP made me realize, oh yeah, I can actually wing it on the weather.
Does he know the trick of pulling encounters out of adventure path books and normal standalone adventure to filling CR encounters without doing much extra work?
He won't touch AP's or Modules. To paraphrase, "They're stale, too straight-forward, and have lowest-common-denominator puzzle design". Yeah, he hates Modules, not likely to happen.
Also, I'll repeat, he's a pretty good GM aside from the monster thing and impossibly convoluted or subtle puzzle clues.
So? Doesn't mean he has to run them, just strip the raw encounter mechanics from them. As any 1st grader knows, collages can be fun.
For example he could do a CR16 using a single CR 16 critter OR he could use the Horned Hunter encounter from Kingmaker 6. 1 satyr ranger and 12 ettins. Or the Misbegotten Troll with his 6 smilodons. Or in his typical case the single Nighmare Roc.
I have 7 AP paths running 1st through 17th levels of raw material and pre-designed rather interesting fights I can pull from if pressed for time.
tough one. i can say from experience that running boss after boss encounter at APL +3 got boring even for me. it lasted about only 3 sessions. my players got tired of seeing monsters always make their save, and honestly it got old even for me after the first couple of encounters ran this way. just try to stress to your gm that smaller encounters are fun too. smaller encounters that fit in with the adventure do alot to enhance the story of the game.
plus running encounter after encounter like that takes away the feel of a boss fight. my players started referring to the boss battles as random encounters lol