|
He said a fundamental role, not the fundamental role. As in, PART of, not the WHOLE of.
This.
Flexibility absolutely has an important role in the GM's toolkit. I just don't think the rules and a certain level of believability should be sacrificed too much. If the players can't expect a certain result from their character build it makes the game appear too arbitrary. Which means death becomes a frustration rather than an occasional complication. Or worse players feel no risk and thus lose interest in the game because their character's victory is a foregone conclusion.
|
It always helped me to understand the challenges by building a party of 5 level 13 characters. (About the point the skill/spell micro management kicks in.)
Go ahead, we'll wait.
...
The point is, in the time it took you to dream up the dozens upon dozens of neat gimmicks those characters have imagine having to develop a campaign to address lets say...half of those. Events and challenges for the whole party.
That's the big break point for some people. Time for fun investment. Especially on the GM's part.
|
Its that you may as well be playing a game called "initiative"
There are so many ways to kill someone/remove them from a fight
Hit point damage
Ability drain
Failed fort save
Failed reflex save
Failed will saveYou can't possibly defend against them all. The only viable strategy at that level is to go first and obliterate your opponent in one action. casters can play this game, martial types cannot.
I disagree completely. In Age of Worms adventure path that i converted to PF, do you know who killed kyuss? The fighter who got smite evil from the paladin. He did a full attack and did more then 600 points of damage. Martial characters can obliterate as well as spellcasters...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This may be my favorite quote of all time:
"yes I cheat, but only when it's fair"
This is where I try to remember the days of 2e. How did I make high-level play more challenging for my players?
Seriously, I know it sounds like too simple a solution to too big a challenge, but sometimes, the guy behind the screen has to have some fun too. Make stuff up, cheat, learn the rules, and then ignore them, fudge die rolls, AND PLAY GOD!
"High level villains are too risky, I don't want a TPK." Okay, when you roll it, soften it.
"High level villains are too soft for my players." Tell your players they didn't roll well enough to beat the DC of the villain's ability.
"The fighter is a broken little toy soldier next to the god-fueled cleric and the pyro wizard." Occasionally, throw the guy a bone, change a stat block to include magic immunity and susceptibility to physical attacks.
"High level encounters are too time consuming." Wing it.
Also, make your players know their characters. Of course, having them play from low (not necessarily 1st, but 5th or below, for sure) to high ensures that they will learn their abilities, especially if they spend enough time at each level, and experience a wide enough variety of tough encounters to have to figure out what to do when party resources run low.
The biggest challenge for me is keeping it fresh. I can do it, but it's tougher with published adventures. Especially if they're keyed maps, and not event-based. But, it's not insurmountable. I just default to 'make s@#$ up'.
Of course, I still want Paizo to publish their take on high-level play, so that I will be able to make LESS s@#$ up. :-)
+1, sir, +1
|
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
I'm beginning to realize as I read this thread that I think many of the problems people have had with high levels is overpreparation/lack of improvisation. I definitely would never spend two hours writing up a single encounter, and I'd be hard pressed to justify spending more than 30 minutes writing up any NPC that wasn't meant to be a long term threat. Even that can get dicey at high levels because of the PC's ability to short circuit barriers. My high level games are a lot more about problem solving than combat though.
My solution for high levels might be tough for some people who aren't good at improvising/thinking on their feet. Basically, I come up with a nearly impossible task, then let the players figure out how they are going to leverage their mighty abilities to accomplish it.
If I want a little more prep, I introduce the next plot near the end of a session, and let the players hash out how they want to approach it. Then I can plan around their plan. I have a good group though, who understand this gaming thing is cooperative and who try to work with me on such matters.
Also the "just add stuff on the fly" and "ignore the rules" camps ignore a fundamental role of GMin.I'd have to say that the "Always go exactly as you've designed the encounter" and "The rules are completely inflexible" camps are the ones guilty of ignoring the fundamental role of the GM.
agreed
my 2 cents.
High level play is problematic when the DM can't, or won't, take the time to prepare properly and to understand that .. as the PC's level up, so to must the DM step up his game. At level 15 a dungeon crawl is insufficient challenge because the PC's *will* either ignore it or bypass it altogether. As the PC's level up, the DM must "level up".
Now is this bad if the DM can't or won't? Not one bit. Not every one likes the same things. Just look at E6 and E8. Both spring out of DM's being fundamentally unwilling to do the high level games. They want to keep their PC's low level. Nothing wrong with that -at all-.
But if the DM wants to engage in higher level play then he needs to realize that it *does* take a good bit of time and that he'll have to level himself up and the game the fit the PC's. Using the same ole tired crap from level 5 isn't going to cut it at level 15.
Scry n'Fry are all eliminated not by being heavy handed but by altering the fundamental adventure design such that it doesn't work or that it works according to plan. (i.e. you assume they'll skip from part A to B, and allow them to do so with scry/fry.. just don't make B the end.)
An unwillingness to account for the new abilities of the PC's and to adapt the campaign and adventures around those new abilities makes high level play unplayable. If the DM refuses to step up his game then the game falls apart.
-S
And by the way I wouldn't really call 12th and above high level. I'd start high level at around 15th, and definitely by 17th.Personally, I would call level 9 the "beginning of the end"; Teleport and Commune are two examples of what I would call high-level abilities, for instance. Where high-level play reaches its peak, I don't know.
I don't particularly have a problem dealing with those two spells.
Teleport is certainly a game changer, but the two most irritating aspects of it: scry and fry and teleporting in and out to rest, haven't been that hard to deal with. In both cases, by that level they are facing intelligent opponents with similar capabilities that know how and have the resources to defend themselve against teleport. Scry and fry will get them a few victories, but its not an autowin or even close. As for teleporting out to rest, my group has seven characters, so they have to be fairly high level before they can take the whole group, unless they reduce person or use similar magic, which requires additional resource consumption.
Commune is a great spell for the GM, as he controls what information is available. The spell description flat out says that deities aren't omniscient and sometimes they will give no answer. Combined with the inflexibility of yes and no answers and I have no problem ensuring that they get good, but not gamebreaking information from the spell.
And by the way I wouldn't really call 12th and above high level. I'd start high level at around 15th, and definitely by 17th.Personally, I would call level 9 the "beginning of the end"; Teleport and Commune are two examples of what I would call high-level abilities, for instance. Where high-level play reaches its peak, I don't know.I don't particularly have a problem dealing with those two spells.
Teleport is certainly a game changer, but the two most irritating aspects of it: scry and fry and teleporting in and out to rest, haven't been that hard to deal with. In both cases, by that level they are facing intelligent opponents with similar capabilities that know how and have the resources to defend themselve against teleport. Scry and fry will get them a few victories, but its not an autowin or even close. As for teleporting out to rest, my group has seven characters, so they have to be fairly high level before they can take the whole group, unless they reduce person or use similar magic, which requires additional resource consumption.
Commune is a great spell for the GM, as he controls what information is available. The spell description flat out says that deities aren't omniscient and sometimes they will give no answer. Combined with the inflexibility of yes and no answers and I have no problem ensuring that they get good, but not gamebreaking information from the spell.
Anyone who builds a stronghold in a world where scry exists is going to sandwich lead into the walls/floor/ceiling of at least the important rooms where he/she spends his/her time. If they don/t have the foresight to do that they deserved to be scry'd and fry'd.
|
My solution for high levels might be tough for some people who aren't good at improvising/thinking on their feet. Basically, I come up with a nearly impossible task, then let the players figure out how they are going to leverage their mighty abilities to accomplish it.
This. So much this. Design something that you don't think they can handle, that you personally can't think of any way they would suceed at, and then see how they fare. Let the players suprise you. Either they will amaze you by doing some cool stuff, or they'll all die and you can start over at 1st level and not have to worry about high level play for a while.
|
Overbuff, scryport, and minimal ways for PCs to get pounce.
Mage tyPes have it made; their spells generally stop being as save-reliant, often just messing up the battlefield "no matter what". They also are able to pour everything into getting insane DCs for their instant kills.
Fighting types suffer from the inability to typically execute their full attack on the first round. To keep up with the insane scaling of HP, AC, and damage monsters get, they have to be buffed "to the gills", which puts a limit on the time they can adventure (ironic, since mages are supposed to be the ones to run out of tricks first).
When pCs are fully buffed, it takes a long time to "math" out all the ability changes; same with monsters. It's also difficult to predict PC power levels, as buffs can effectively raise beatable CRs by 5 (or more).
It's hard for every monster to be able to deal with party-level flight/invisibility; and scryport is the worst (still).
So it just kinda falls apart, without severe fiat on the gm's part; even if they keep it together, "buff math" slows down the game to the point of it being not fun.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Anyone who builds a stronghold in a world where scry exists is going to sandwich lead into the walls/floor/ceiling of at least the important rooms where he/she spends his/her time. If they don/t have the foresight to do that they deserved to be scry'd and fry'd.
Even better: The King, Grand Vizier, Royal Knight Captain, and the rest of those stuffed-shirt-medal-wearing-popinjays? Yeah, they're nothing but decoys.
The real mastermind BBEG dresses like a peasant/scullery boy/nameless mook #2812, and generates all his orders through at least half-a-dozen cut-outs and blind drops.
Sure, it makes getting things done quickly a problem, but that's what SOP's and contingency plans are for, right?
Can't be too careful, after all!
Personally, I would call level 9 the "beginning of the end"; Teleport and Commune are two examples of what I would call high-level abilities, for instance. Where high-level play reaches its peak, I don't know.I don't particularly have a problem dealing with those two spells.
I'm not saying those are bad spells, per se. I'm just saying those are the kind of spells that illustrate my points above:
- Some things that are fun at low levels don't work at all at high levels. (E.g., overland trips can be bypassed with teleport, murder mysteries can be trivialised with commune.)
- There can be a lot of tedious accounting involved. (E.g., you can come up with convoluted plans and situations that negate teleport or commune, but that makes extra work for the GM trying to figure this stuff out in advance.)
|
|
Also the additional work required from GMs has a diminishing return. If you spend 2 hours making an encounter and your players wipe it out in a round then you feel you've wasted 2 hours you could have been spending watching a movie/playing/video games etc.
Using APs mitigates this but only somewhat. Consistently the most frequent complaints about APs is the later adventures tend to be cakewalks or miss common high level staples thus bypassing entire chunks of story. As much as I'd love to work on my campaign all day, it doesn't pay the bills or write my essays.
Thus "extra preparation" is not a panacea for high level play. I want to play through an AP and have it be just as fun and well paced as the lower levels, letting me use my prep time to customize the story elements for my PCs rather than waste countless hours optimising monsters to make them more than speed bumps or slogs.
This is correct. It is unfair for the DM.
Also the "just add stuff on the fly" and "ignore the rules" camps ignore a fundamental role of GMin.I'd have to say that the "Always go exactly as you've designed the encounter" and "The rules are completely inflexible" camps are the ones guilty of ignoring the fundamental role of the GM.agreed
I say that camp does not exist.
|
|
Also the "just add stuff on the fly" and "ignore the rules" camps ignore a fundamental role of GMin. Fair and reasonable arbitration of the world and rules. Previously unseen sorcerers casting protection from elements are hardly fair or reasonable especially when the caster reasonably asks how he did not see the caster with their see invisibility spell.
It strains reality to constantly fudge the monsters in order to reduce PC abilities to wiffle bats for a few rounds. If that attitude is taken why use the pathfinder rules at all? Just play pretend. It's bad improv to negate. I won't go so far as to say it's bad GMing because your players are having fun. It doesn't mesh with me or my group though and that's why I want to see the rules simplified/streamlined at higher level for faster/ease of play.
This is the other problem. This becomes unfair for the players.
One of my old DMs used to prepare quite a bit. And then he realized it didn't matter. And then he started doing the really annoying thing of "I'll give give them more if the current monsters are not enough". We start off outnumbered, and then he triples that during the fight. And then once we're almost dead, he calls off the attack and then the RP happens with why they called off the attack and such. It's tiresome.
That's why high levels really suck. It's unfair to the players or unfair to the DM. It's rarely fair for both sides.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
We should make a 2000 NPCs thread around here, and then a database (maybe on d20pfsrd ?) collecting the contributions and organizing them per class, CR, creature type/subtype/kind, environment, combat role, social role/organization, and (importantly) expected survivability for the party and the NPC.
Each could be made on the model of the NPC gallery of the gamemastery guide, with a short description description of its background, tactics and observed effect in combat.
It could include organizations, displayed as clouds of codified relations between major NPCs and stereotyped mooks.
That could save a lot of time, as models for more campaign-specific NPCs or as directly usable ones. The published NPC gallery and NPC guide lack high-level characters.
|
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One of my old DMs used to prepare quite a bit. And then he realized it didn't matter. And then he started doing the really annoying thing of "I'll give give them more if the current monsters are not enough". We start off outnumbered, and then he triples that during the fight. And then once we're almost dead, he calls off the attack and then the RP happens with why they called off the attack and such. It's tiresome.
Argh! That style of DMing drives me completely nuts! I've played in many a boffer LARP where the plot team's plan was "Keep throwing monsters at the PCs until they seem tapped out." Ugh.
This is correct. It is unfair for the DM.Also the additional work required from GMs has a diminishing return. If you spend 2 hours making an encounter and your players wipe it out in a round then you feel you've wasted 2 hours you could have been spending watching a movie/playing/video games etc.
Using APs mitigates this but only somewhat. Consistently the most frequent complaints about APs is the later adventures tend to be cakewalks or miss common high level staples thus bypassing entire chunks of story. As much as I'd love to work on my campaign all day, it doesn't pay the bills or write my essays.
Thus "extra preparation" is not a panacea for high level play. I want to play through an AP and have it be just as fun and well paced as the lower levels, letting me use my prep time to customize the story elements for my PCs rather than waste countless hours optimising monsters to make them more than speed bumps or slogs.
I would not say it is unfair. It is just a byproduct of the system. High level play requires more system mastery in order to avoid things other than the dice gods making a difficult encounter into an easy one.
Whether I spend 2 hours or 20 minutes on a difficult encounter has no affect on me feeling better or worse when the PC's trounce it, if I expected more out of it.
I don't think 12+ is problem but at around 16th level things can really go sideways with casters. In particular Cleric and Druids. Wizards seem to be too easy to stop. At least that is my experience, it's pretty easy to shut down a wizard with CR 17 and 18 encounters but Clerics not so much. Even easier to shut down a fighter.
I don't think 12+ is problem but at around 16th level things can really go sideways with casters. In particular Cleric and Druids. Wizards seem to be too easy to stop. At least that is my experience, it's pretty easy to shut down a wizard with CR 17 and 18 encounters but Clerics not so much. Even easier to shut down a fighter.
How are you shutting down wizards and sorcerers at level 16? At those levels they generally do what they want to do.
PS:I am assuming you have a player that has a good selection of spells that can be used in a variety of situations, and knows when to use them.
PS:This is not a challenge, just a question.
This thread underscores why I think a Game Mastery for high levels book is a must. Now that I think about it, probably a guide book for 10-20 (roughly) and then a guide for the mythic levels, once that goes live.
How are you shutting down wizards and sorcerers at level 16? At those levels they generally do what they want to do.PS:I am assuming you have a player that has a good selection of spells that can be used in a variety of situations, and knows when to use them.
PS:This is not a challenge, just a question.
I second the question because, as implied previously, I found arcane magic being the most problematic thing by level 16+.
Always in 3.5 and in PF expecially after APG.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I must say that in spite of all of the valid reasons you guys mentioned about high level play being more difficult, I simply cannot wait for the PC's in my campaign to get there. I don't mean that I am rushing them. I only mean that to me the high level stuff is more fun to play and GM.
We have been playing together for many years, so high level play is not that unusual - and we always start from 1st level.
They are 10th level now, soon to be 11th. It is just starting to get fun for me now, because I can really take the gloves off with the encounters. Sure sometimes the PC's defeat them way easier than they should have - but I blame myself for that.
Plus players absolutely love it when they do something like - kill a major NPC before the GM was ready for it to die. I have learned to roll with the punches and let them enjoy it, just as I do when I am playing. Besides I can always make more.
When I have planned things well, these fights can be a lot of fun - although long of course. It takes me hours to prepare, and sometimes that time is wasted if they destroy or avoid the encounter. But I can usually find a way to recycle, alter, and re-use that stuff.
+1 to the two posters above me.
Sometimes it doesn't actually take much to make an encounter a challenge even to high level groups, if you know what their strengths and weaknesses are...
Ex:
My PC's are running through a high level campaign involving lots of vampires, and the Oracle in the group was making excessive use of Sunburst, while the melee brute was tearing things up like no tomorrow...
They get to the BBEG, the Oracle throws a Sunburst, the melee character charges in... only to find the boss has been watching their methods and has Greater Spell Immunity-Sunburst, and throws up a Replusion just before they get in. 2 characters most powerful options neutered before the fight even starts. Now obviously high level characters have lots and lots of options, so they still had a lot they could do, but just some minor changes can make a huge difference.
:)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I disagree completely. In Age of Worms adventure path that i converted to PF, do you know who killed kyuss? The fighter who got smite evil from the paladin. He did a full attack and did more then 600 points of damage. Martial characters can obliterate as well as spellcasters...
So did they start out 5 feet apart or what?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A few things I've learned from the few times I've played high level play and from DMing.
1)I know it's been said, but make the players know their character.
2)At this point the characters should be movers and shakers of the world. Make them run of the organizations, countries, and NPCs of the world. Than shape what happens based in part on how those organizations, countries, and NPCs act and how well they fare in their actions.
3)Don't try to focus on single encounters. This is true for all levels of play, but especially high levels. Come up with an outline of events you want to happen, with some flexibility in the order of some of the minor ones, and let the party go through it however they choose. This way, they might one shot kill one foe before it can act, but that will make it harder to answer a riddle farther down the line because they never got to see the unique power of the creature that the riddle asks about. Between the two encounters, the challenge level is consistent, and the party has the freedom to determine where the challenge is without making the other encounter seem like a mere roadblock.
4)READ THE BOOK. Everything can be countered. All those spells that people complain break the game have limiters built into them either directly or indirectly through other mechanics. Know what those limiters are, and the game becomes a lot more managable. An unexpected high wealth by level simply means that worthwhile money sinks need to be developed; get the players involved in this, and you kill two birds with one stone. The players are less likely to try to "break" the game because they are more invested in it, and the DM has an easier prep time.
5)Lay the groundwork at lower levels. If you build up the campaign expecting to do 1-4, it's a lot easier when you get to that level. This means that both you and your players have to be committed to spending time on the campaign from the very start, but makes a huge difference.
6)You don't have to start at level 1, 3-5 seems to be a good range for those not wanting to go through level 1 yet again, but start low enough that everyone has time to grow into the campaign.
7)Don't forget the two most important words: DELEGATE and IMPROVISE. Use both words to their fullest from day 1, and your job will be much easier without having to go so far outside the rules that believability becomes a problem.
4)READ THE BOOK. Everything can be countered. All those spells that people complain break the game have limiters built into them either directly or indirectly through other mechanics. Know what those limiters are, and the game becomes a lot more managable. An unexpected high wealth by level simply means that worthwhile money sinks need to be developed; get the players involved in this, and you kill two birds with one stone. The players are less likely to try to "break" the game because they are more invested in it, and the DM has an easier prep time.
This would actually be useful subject material for a GMs Guide to Higher Levels. Using Core spells and items as examples of the process of spotting those weakness in other supplements.
High level magic. Nothing a fighter does can ever compare to "I wish."
More specifically: Long duration buffs and action economy. A wizard wins against a lot of encounters at the beginning of the day when they cast over land flight. Also, the first round of combat a wizard can change the world, a fighter can run forward and draw a weapon.
Since the fighter and wizard in the group are not usually fighting each other, this idea is completely irrelevant to high level play.
Since the fighter and wizard in the group are not usually fighting each other, this idea is completely irrelevant to high level play.High level magic. Nothing a fighter does can ever compare to "I wish."
More specifically: Long duration buffs and action economy. A wizard wins against a lot of encounters at the beginning of the day when they cast over land flight. Also, the first round of combat a wizard can change the world, a fighter can run forward and draw a weapon.
Yes and no. I found more difficult create a fighter BBEG than a wizard BBEG.
Then I decided for EK, but that's another matter :D
Since the fighter and wizard in the group are not usually fighting each other, this idea is completely irrelevant to high level play.High level magic. Nothing a fighter does can ever compare to "I wish."
More specifically: Long duration buffs and action economy. A wizard wins against a lot of encounters at the beginning of the day when they cast over land flight. Also, the first round of combat a wizard can change the world, a fighter can run forward and draw a weapon.
Remember that the fighter can draw a weapon as he moves, so he should be able to whack at least once. For what its worth...
While the fighter and the wizard are working together, as the fighters player it gets a little boring when
Fighter: Ok, i move up to the monster and whack it for.. yes! 100 points of damage.
Wizard: I move back one kilometer and Cast Tensers Roaving meat packing plant. It deals 11ty million points of damage save for half , purifies the creatures remains, cuts them up into delicious snacks and teleports the snacks to orphanages around the world. The place where the monster died will now grow tomatoes the size of a kobold that emit sparkles under the moonlight.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm running a lvl 18 campaign right now. I don't find it unplayable as long as you accept that D&D is its own fantasy genre. You must play in the dynamic to make it work.
A few guidlines for that dynamic I follow:
1. Magic is like technology. You must constantly be seeking an edge whether it be better tactics, better defenses, or constant upgrades.
2. High level adventurers are about as common as movie stars or billionaire moguls. The general public rarely interacts with them. They are generally involved in affairs that don't allow them time to engage in common activities. Creating magic items at their levels takes months. The fighter and rogue to maintain that level of mastery must always be training. The cleric is involved in the highest echelons of his church. For the power he receives, he is often directly expected to take a great role in the church. These folks are the cream of the crop and often the most famous and powerful folk in a given land.
3. Enemies know every little trick a player uses. Dragons that have lived for thousands of years don't fall for new spells. Wizards with a 25 or higher intelligence can outthink an entire party. Lvl 20 fighters take the feats to counter things like Come and Get Me or other little tricks if they are available.
Rogues stay out of fights they know they'll die in and rely on stealth as much as possible, which is why they aren't good for direct high level play. And should be redesigned. This is the one class that has almost no role in high level play unless the DM works real hard to make one.
There are some troublesome spells at high level even Paizo did not take care of for some reason:
1. Negative level spells. With Quicken Spelll, you can fire off an enervate and energy drain in the same round. This is from 3 to 12 negative levels in one round. As long as you penetrate spell resistance that is enough to hobble most high level creatures which are not immune to energy drain. As well as set up save or suck spells with such huge modifiers on saves that it is nigh impossible to save.
So I don't allow any high level creature to travel without resistance to energy drain given the danger and the lack of resistance to it.
And now Paizo has added Thanatopic Spell to the energy drainer's repertoire while at the same time not providing a standard means to clear negative levels beyond a 3 round casting time restoration spell or the taking of a Word of Power, an optional rule.
This is a serious, serious oversite on the part of the game designers. I still do not understand why they let this combination get through the filters given its potency and lack of defense.
2. Spells with no save like Euphoric Tranquility and Prediction of Failure. These types of spells are hard to counter and render encounters trivial. Even calcific touch in essence renders high level colossal monsters with low dexterity utterly trivial when Empowered and Reached.
I still do not understand why the game designers at Paizo have not created a filter system that constantly questions the ability of a spell or ability to render an encounter trivial with no defense other than very specific builds that cannot possibly be constantly used by a DM without getting ridiculous.
They should have a designer dedicated to checking counters and defenses for spells and checking how they affect encounters including what possible defenses a DM can reasonably expect a creature to have to the attack. If the spell can make utterly trivial 95% of encounters such as those with dragons or single powerful creatures, then that spell has a problem.
So did they start out 5 feet apart or what?
I disagree completely. In Age of Worms adventure path that i converted to PF, do you know who killed kyuss? The fighter who got smite evil from the paladin. He did a full attack and did more then 600 points of damage. Martial characters can obliterate as well as spellcasters...
Kyuss could have easily mazed the fighter out. No save for that spell. He can gate in CR 20+ backup if needed. I agree that martial characters do a lot of damage, but I would not have Kyuss sitting in one spot so he could do that much damage.
I don't think it becomes unplayable, instead players just become more invested in their actions. You need to strategize and develop strategy, as a DM i would think it would be very hard not to meta-game.
Kyuss could have easily mazed the fighter out. No save for that spell. He can gate in CR 20+ backup if needed. I agree that martial characters do a lot of damage, but I would not have Kyuss sitting in one spot so he could do that much damage.So did they start out 5 feet apart or what?
I disagree completely. In Age of Worms adventure path that i converted to PF, do you know who killed kyuss? The fighter who got smite evil from the paladin. He did a full attack and did more then 600 points of damage. Martial characters can obliterate as well as spellcasters...
Proof against teleportation or similar things can shut down Maze, and Maze might potentially keep even a fighter for one round.
He's gotta get the Gate off to bring the creatures in...And Age of Worms is 3.5, not hard to get Pounce then from bunches of sources. Even if it's round 1, they moved up on the suprise round, and the paladin went before the fighter with his aura up, the fighter is still going to get to go.
==Aelryinth
Probably is an hell of a fight. Casters and Kyuss will use heavily spells aggressively and the thing could go in several ways.
The fighter could be mazed because the boss manages to use allies or summons or whatever to keep him at bay, and debuffs party to make him vulnerable to teleport effects. In this case the fighter is just a spell sponge.
Other times the fighter is the nonmagical, diffucult-to-be immune "key" of the strategyu, because high level bosses can be immune to a lot of things, but (IF DEBUFFED) not melee.
Often he's somewhat in the middle, maybe because slaughters the summons and the not banished gates and deals some damage to the boss.
Nevertheless, the fact that the figter slaughtered the boss says nothing about te combat, and what the whole party did to lead the situation to that.
I'm running a lvl 18 campaign right now. I don't find it unplayable as long as you accept that D&D is its own fantasy genre. You must play in the dynamic to make it work.
A few guidlines for that dynamic I follow:
...
3. Enemies know every little trick a player uses.
...
So I don't allow any high level creature to travel without resistance to energy drain given the danger and the lack of resistance to it.
Unless the opponent knows the characters, how is he going to know every trick. Even 25 int wizards and 1000 year old dragons have limits. Should such characters be powerful and smart, yes. Be prepared for most of the major tactics (fly, invisible, scrye/die...), ok. But to know EVERY trick, that's going too far. And while energy drain is dangerous, how often do high level creatures encounter it? If they are traveling in an area know to be infested with monster that drain, sure. If your enemy is known to use it, sure. But as an everyday defense, that's metagame thinking at it's worst.
Fighter: Ok, i move up to the monster and whack it for.. yes! 100 points of damage.Wizard: I move back one kilometer and Cast Tensers Roaving meat packing plant. It deals 11ty million points of damage save for half , purifies the creatures remains, cuts them up into delicious snacks and teleports the snacks to orphanages around the world. The place where the monster died will now grow tomatoes the size of a kobold that emit sparkles under the moonlight.
I'm not sure, but I think you may be exaggerating just a little bit right here.
There is a 3.5 book for Forgotten Realms called Power of Faerun that is about dealing with high-level characters. I haven't delved into it very deeply, but it looked OK when I was skimming it. It does suggest that the types of adventures have to change. Also, Champions of Valor/Champions of Ruin might have ideas about adventures to steal.
In short, it's tough, but there are ways to do run high-level, as has been pointed out already in this thread. You need to change the types of adventures the PC's have to deal with.
AJ
I don't think 12+ is problem but at around 16th level things can really go sideways with casters. In particular Cleric and Druids. Wizards seem to be too easy to stop. At least that is my experience, it's pretty easy to shut down a wizard with CR 17 and 18 encounters but Clerics not so much. Even easier to shut down a fighter.How are you shutting down wizards and sorcerers at level 16? At those levels they generally do what they want to do.
PS:I am assuming you have a player that has a good selection of spells that can be used in a variety of situations, and knows when to use them.
PS:This is not a challenge, just a question.
It's not hard to do, I just build the right adventure with the right encounters. By shutting a wizard down I mean shutting them down from ruining the adventure. I've had many experience in the past where a wizard just took the game apart making the adventure kind of pointless. It takes knowing you players well and knowing the spells. I just imagine what I'd do if I were wizard in my game and look what things would ruin the adventure. Then I prepare for that. If I was playing a wizard and I could cast 3 spells at the start of an adventure hook that would take me to the BBEG and allow me to play the I win card then that is something I prepare to block. That's shutting down the Wizard.
Fighters are easy to shut down. I've had games where the fighter ended the adventure before it begun too by going on killing spree and with out knowing killed BBEG. It's much easier to fix that so that doesn't happen than trying to anticipate every move wizard might make to do the same thing.
I'm not sure, but I think you may be exaggerating just a little bit right here.
The sad thing is i am. But only a little.
There is a 3.5 book for Forgotten Realms called Power of Faerun that is about dealing with high-level characters. I haven't delved into it very deeply, but it looked OK when I was skimming it. It does suggest that the types of adventures have to change. Also, Champions of Valor/Champions of Ruin might have ideas about adventures to steal.
The fundamental issue which i haven't seen addressed is that when you have linear fighters and quadratic wizards with high numbers the power disparity gets insane.
It's not hard to do, I just build the right adventure with the right encounters.
This is... less than specific. And as is amounts to little more than you're doing it wrong.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
People talk about the GM "knowing the rules" and "being familiar with counters" and I'm sorry, but I'm going to call foul.
It's not just individual spells that are at issue, but their synergy (it's why it's called "scry and fry" afterall).
I am not convinced that the GMs on this thread have contemplated every synergy between the various spells in the Ultimate Magic, plus Core, plus whatever 3PP or campaign-specific stuff that's being used. That's too many spells, too many class abilities, etc to keep track of how they all might interact. And problem is, the 30 INT, five-thousand year-old Red Dragon the party is up against: he does know all those synergies and counters, at least in-game. Problem is, I'm his GM, I only have so much time to prep an encounter, not to mention his lair/backstory and other non-combat elements of the session. While at the same time, I have a handful of PCs pooling all their prep-time browsing through d20pfsrd looking for broken combos. I can't compete with that. And telling me that I should is just rediculous.
And then after they past him in one beautifically executed round, they ask "why didn't Mr Ancient Supergenious Dragon think of that, it could have been totally undone by X, Y and Z spells? They've been around since the founding of Thassalon." and then I throw the book at them, which was printed last month (considerably more recently than Thassalon's founding) and we're back to playing E6.
People talk about the GM "knowing the rules" and "being familiar with counters" and I'm sorry, but I'm going to call foul.
It's not just individual spells that are at issue, but their synergy (it's why it's called "scry and fry" afterall).
I am not convinced that the GMs on this thread have contemplated every synergy between the various spells in the Ultimate Magic, plus Core, plus whatever 3PP or campaign-specific stuff that's being used. That's too many spells, too many class abilities, etc to keep track of how they all might interact. And problem is, the 30 INT, five-thousand year-old Red Dragon they are up against, he does know all those synergies and combos, at least in-game. Problem is, as a his GM, I only have so much time to prep an encounter, not to mention story elements and other non-combat elements. While at the same time, I have a handful of PCs pooling all their prep-time browsing through d20pfsrd looking for broken combos. I can't compete with that. And telling me that I should is just rediculous.
And then they ask "why didn't Mr Ancient Supergenious Dragon think of that, it could have been totally undone by X spell?" and then I throw the book at them, and we're back to playing E6.
And this is why you mostly find GMs complaining about rules overload. Unless you literally have no life other than PF/D&D, you're never going to be able to master everything put out by just Paizo. Mix in supposedly compatible 3.5 material and 3PPs, and you compound the issue at high levels. Players all love having more new toys to play with. For GMs they are a very mixed blessing, though, particularly at high levels of play.
Sorry for my ignorance, but what is E6?
Sorry for my ignorance, but what is E6?
A Google search for "Pathfinder E6" will turn up much of what you need to know.
Or this link for the original/source idea.