Advice with the 3.5 tomb of horrors port

[mrofmist]

I just started running in today with a group of 3 players, all 9th lvl build with basic pathfinder. I'm playing the cleric.

The first thing I noticed is that it wasn't going to be hard. The rogue was rolling like 40-50 search checks. So as long as he rolled, he found everything, he disarmed everything. His stuff is legit, he min-maxed for it. If he get's in one of the few combats, he'll die. If he misses something and gets hit by it, he'll die. But otherwise, there's no challenge. And they complained that my dummy healer set aside had no resources for raise dead, that I was just doing it to make it easier on them.

I'm a bit irritated that the player that can't fail a roll, period, feels he has the right to complain about me helping them a bit.

What am I missing here? How can he fail these dc 20-30 search and DD checks? Why is his check so high. His numbers add up, their either from gear or feats. Is there a cap? Is there a limit to how much he can get? Hopefully, do some of these bonuses just plan not stack? I know he has the search goggles, masterwork tools, high int, maxed skills, etc. How can I limit this some and actually bring back the challenge?

[EDIT] partially figured it out. He was stacking competence bonus's.

[DreamAtelier]

Check the typing of his bonuses. Multiple bonuses of the same type do not stack, and only the highest applies.

Also remember there are two different skills being rolled here: Perception to find the device, disable to turn it off. Perception isn't keyed off Intelligence, but rather off wisdom (though there might be a trait or ability that changes that).

Generically, at 9th level he should have 9 ranks in both skills, with a +3 modifier from them being class skills. Add in another +4 from Trapfinding, and he's looking at a +16 before ability modifiers.

His ability modifiers are probably somewhere between +4 and +6. Which means he could be looking at a +22 on the roll.

The goggles become a +5 competence bonus, the tools a +2 circumstance... which'd put him at +29, rather handily.

But I can't see it reaching too much higher than that with a rogue working alone.

Also note that a lot of magic items provide a bonus either to perception or to disabling a found device... not both.

--------

Feel free to rule that natural 1s will fail.

But really, it sounds to me like the player min-maxed knowing he would go through the Tomb of Horrors, which is heavy traps and low monsters.

Consider adding some monster encounters to change things, or something that makes it so he doesn't have time to work at a leisurely pace on the things in the way.

[Faazazel]

Remember that not all traps in tomb of horror are traps. The mouth of the devil isn't a trap, it's a magical item hidden in the mouth of a devil.

The levers you have to pull aren't a trap either. You know something will happen if you pull them. You can't know what. Searching them will reveal they open something, but you can't know what's below the trapdoor. Could be a stairs or a pit.

5% of all checks fail all the time, even when the checks are on 30+, since a natural 1 is allways a fail. Since you need two checks (one to find and one to disarm) the real chance becomes allmost 10% to fail.

Some traps are clearly visible but can't be disabled. How does a thief disable the traps in the complex of secrets doors? The old edition clearly says: there are no ways to prevent this damage.

... and so i would evaluate every encounter/trap

[Bellona]

Having just finished running the 3.5 version of Tomb of Horrors myself, I can tell you that the Detect Secret Doors spell is equally annoying. There was a huge paradigm shift between 1e/2e and 3e/PF. Before, one had to specify what one was looking at and how one was prodding it; now, just one spell gives the character the locations of and methods for opening the secret doors - without even being a rogue. Grrr.

[Faazazel]

Bellona wrote:

Having just finished running the 3.5 version of Tomb of Horrors myself, I can tell you that the Detect Secret Doors spell is equally annoying. There was a huge paradigm shift between 1e/2e and 3e/PF. Before, one had to specify what one was looking at and how one was prodding it; now, just one spell gives the character the locations of and methods for opening the secret doors - without even being a rogue. Grrr.

I sthere so much difference between the old version and the new one? I only have the old version. There some doors say: this door cannot be found by magic used to find secret doors.

[Bellona]

Bellona wrote:

Having just finished running the 3.5 version of Tomb of Horrors myself, I can tell you that the Detect Secret Doors spell is equally annoying. There was a huge paradigm shift between 1e/2e and 3e/PF. Before, one had to specify what one was looking at and how one was prodding it; now, just one spell gives the character the locations of and methods for opening the secret doors - without even being a rogue. Grrr.

Faazazel wrote:

I sthere so much difference between the old version and the new one? I only have the old version. There some doors say: this door cannot be found by magic used to find secret doors.

Not that I recall. There are some doors which have some type of anti-magic on them.

[Kthulhu]

Faazazel wrote:

Bellona wrote:

Having just finished running the 3.5 version of Tomb of Horrors myself, I can tell you that the Detect Secret Doors spell is equally annoying. There was a huge paradigm shift between 1e/2e and 3e/PF. Before, one had to specify what one was looking at and how one was prodding it; now, just one spell gives the character the locations of and methods for opening the secret doors - without even being a rogue. Grrr.

I sthere so much difference between the old version and the new one? I only have the old version. There some doors say: this door cannot be found by magic used to find secret doors.

For a character with large bonuses in perception and disable devices, 3.5 Tomb is largely a joke...and even with average bonuses, it's still got rubber guide bumpers up. Since those things didn't exist in 1E, the character actually had to explain what they were doing, which made it an amazingly unforgiving deathtrap.

I leave it to you to decide which is better, a nerfed rubber bumper "dungeon" or a deathtrap. I prefer the deathtrap, since that's how it was originally intended.

[Bellona]

Kthulhu wrote:

For a character with large bonuses in perception and disable devices, 3.5 Tomb is largely a joke...and even with average bonuses, it's still got rubber guide bumpers up. Since those things didn't exist in 1E, the character actually had to explain what they were doing, which made it an amazingly unforgiving deathtrap.

I leave it to you to decide which is better, a nerfed rubber bumper "dungeon" or a deathtrap. I prefer the deathtrap, since that's how it was originally intended.

Yeah ... I wanted the deathtrap version, but all I have is the the 3.5 nerfed one, unfortunately.

[Lorden]

Any idea if Paizo plans on doing a pathfinder version of the tomb of horrors officially? thats not watered down?

id love to have a pathfinder version that was as close to the original as possible. but im just getting back into this stuff, and im not sure with the mechanics if thats even possible.

[Kthulhu]

Lorden wrote:

Any idea if Paizo plans on doing a pathfinder version of the tomb of horrors officially? thats not watered down?

id love to have a pathfinder version that was as close to the original as possible. but im just getting back into this stuff, and im not sure with the mechanics if thats even possible.

They can't, as WotC owns Greyhawk, Acererak, and the Tomb of Horrors lock, stock, and barrel. In fact, it wasn't that long ago that they put out a sequel adventure under 4E (despite the apparent non-existence of Greyhawk).

As for doing it with PFRPG mechanics, I suppose it could techinically be done, but d20 really made traps pretty hideously boring, Pathfinder didn't really do anything to correct that, and the Tomb is about 95% traps. Like I said before, due to the aversion to things that are not level appropriate, any rogue with maxed-out perception and disable device will simply leasurely stroll through the tomb until he reaches the demi-lich. At which point he'll probably die, especially if they altered the demi-lich to give him Acererak's original ridiculous immunities (and even more ridiculous weaknesses).

It would consist of the party taking 20 on their search checks and progressing through the tomb with maddening slowness.

[Killer_GM]

I am running Return to the ToH now.

Spoiler:

If I had a PC rogue who was tricked out to high heaven in the DD checks, I would gradually (over the course of the tomb) raise the DC of the checks, until the rogue only had between a 66% to a 75% chance of success. The more dangerous (lethal) traps are in the latter half of the adventure, and you'll clean house more as the adventure progresses.
Additionally, I am having a competing group of evil NPCs also exploring the tomb at the same time as my player's characters are. While the NPC will only be encountered one at a time, the NPCs can use the existing traps to deadly effect against the PCs. Imagine What a Telekenisis spell could do in Room 16, by 'forcing a PC into a certain part of the hallway; or what an invisible spellcaster in room 21, who fires magic missiles at certain curtains when PCs are in certain areas in the room. Numerous possibilities exist. Find them.

[Spacelard]

A big shock to people used to Pathfinder is make poison save or DIE....yup not damage to CON but death as Gygax intended...