|
" NPCs receive less gear than PCs of an equal level."
I think this is true of anything but 1st level. They're talking about PC WBL vs NPC Gear.
1st level PC's don't have WBL yet, they have "starting cash." The PC WBL chart starts at 2.I know this is a little counter-intuitive, but it seems to be how the rules handle it.
Remember, we know for sure that 1st level NPC's get 260 GP in NPC Gear. Now thejeff has asked whether monster NPC's are different, and use their CR instead of class level for NPC Gear. This got ignored by everyone, so I started a thread about it. If he's right, then maybe Goblins get less, but you can't blame Ashiel or anyone else for misunderstanding this, since there is no entry on the NPC Gear table for "level 1/3". It starts at Level 1.
But no matter what, regular NPC's (not monster NPC's) definitely get 260 GP at Level 1, which is more the PC starting wealth. So like it or not that is part of the games design.
Anyway the awkwardness disappears after level 1 so its not that bad.
The problem is that the only reason you would convert NPC treasure into NPC gear was because you are saying "logically" they would use the treasure to buy gear, rather than just having gold, gems, etc...
There is no rule that says to do it. You can argue if that actually logically makes sense from encounter to encounter, but for the purpose of this argument, let us say "logically" the creature would convert the gold to equipment for this particular encounter.
You can't then ignore logic (and what is written in the rule) by arguing that a random goblin has more and better gear than a first level adventured.
You are already going beyond what is written in the bestiary by adding gear to an already equipped complete build. We aren't leveling the goblin, we are pulling directly from book and then making a "logical" argument that they would have more gear than they do because we make a series of assumptions that goblins have access to purchasing various items we want them to have, and more wealth than a PC of the same level.
Which is not logical, or consistent with the rules of NPC vs PC wealth.
What makes sense is to equip your creature however you like, preferably in a way that makes logical sense given setting, available resources, etc...and then looking at the chart in the bestiary see if you have improved (or even damaged) the creature to the point it would change the CR value.
If I were running it, I would probably up Ashiel's goblins to something like 1/2 CR each rather than 1/3 CR. They still only have 6 hit points, so they are likely one shot kills, but they can do a lot more damage now with the alchemist fire and +1 weapon. And in doing so, I would likely add the difference between 1/3 and 1/2 treasure in gold, as goblins who can apparently purchase magic items would likely have some wealth.
This is actually less of a bump than the +1 CR for gaining a flaming bite attack.
"Not that bad" is fine if it is on the margins or occasionally. But this is being argued for the norm and standard.
I don't disagree that you don't have to change CR if it isn't that much of a bump. And if you are doing it for "logical" story purposes to make the treasure make more sense, I agree.
But that isn't what was proposed with the goblin or Schrodinger's Dragon, or by the CR guidelines in the bestiary.
At the end of the day, the CR guidelines in the Bestiary are the best tool for determining CR, and determining CR is more art than science, particularly at higher levels.
I wouldn't call it "converting" treasure to gear. Its already listed as NPC Gear in the stat block. I think your a little off on that issue, although I can see why because when I look at a Goblin in an AP (Runelords) for example, it looks like most of them just have a dog slicer or rusty sword or whatever.
So Paizo themselves apparently often runs monsters with minimal gear like what we see in the bestiary entry already equipped. Then they presumably take the treasure value and stash it somewhere else for the PC's to find before they level up. So this is obviously a perfectly fine way of doing things, if its good enough for AP's.
The rules themselves give us other options, and spell them out pretty carefully too. I don't run AP's myself, and I'm glad that the game has the flexibility built in to let me customize my game to taste, within parameters. Having used those rules a lot, I can tell you that what Ashiel is doing is not as far outside the recomended guidelines as you might think.
|
|
It is actually listed as "Other treasure" in the stat block for goblin for things other than the equipment.
It says:
Treasure NPC gear (leather armor, light wooden shield, short sword, short bow with 20 arrows, other treasure)
I am fine with options. We actually disagree elsewhere with regards to feats as I like having more options.
But exploiting options to increase power is where you run into creep, and I hate creep.
I love changing equipment to make more interesting creatures and encounters. But you have to be careful when you increase (or decrease) the difficulty of an encounter when you do so, lest you get into an arms race with your PCs.
The way I read that is: "NPC Gear (some examples to default to, other treasure)"
Im glad you mentioned the arms race, because I was wondering why you had a problem with this, since normally you are worried about powergamers overwhelming challenges. When someone said "paging ciretose, paging ciretose" I was curious if you would surprise them and except this thread as a way of raising the challenge level to deal with optimized parties.
But now that you say "arms race" I get where you stand.
I just run most encounters out of the books as written, unless it's a specific npc(or Boss, MiniBoss), or unless I'm just feeling frisky and want to throw my players a curveball.
Gearing up intelligent foes with what they would appropriately have on them, I see no problem with. If an intelligent, formidable foe has plenty of resources on hand(dragon's hoard, for example) and somehow gains intel on the PC's that are on their way to slay them, I see no problem with said Dragon using his resources to bulk up his survival chances.
Yeah, that seems to be a common way of doing things. Named NPC, Boss, Mini-Boss, sure, deck them out.
Everything else, who has time for that?
But for those who do, I think there's no reason to be threatened by that, or act like they are doing something wrong, which is what I saw happening in this thread. It's a flexible game, your group will play it differently then my group.
Now if someone shares something they do, it may or may not be within the recomended guidelines of the game. Even if it isn't, that's obviously fine. Discussing whether or not it is, is a different kind of discussion, and I don't mind having that kind of discussion, as long as we remember that its just a game.
|
|
Im glad you mentioned the arms race, because I was wondering why you had a problem with this, since normally you are worried about powergamers overwhelming challenges. When someone said "paging ciretose, paging ciretose" I was curious if you would surprise them and except this thread as a way of raising the challenge level to deal with optimized parties.
But now that you say "arms race" I get where you stand.
One of the things I really like about 3.5 and Pathfinder is that both sides of the table play from the same rule book. The dice decide the outcome more than the GM.
I don't want to stop optimization, I want to stop powergaming.
Optimization is trying to make the best PC you can, within the framework of the game. For me the framework includes considering the setting and trying to meet the expectation of RAI and not just RAW.
Powergaming is about finding every loophole and exploit and pushing them as far as you can, regardless of considerations of RAI or setting.
Optimized players should be rewarded for creating good characters that fit in well with the setting and the group and don't depend on "creative" reading to be successful.
But if you always allow loopholes and exploits, you push the game to the point where everyone must use them to survive, and suddenly game logic falls apart.
I want people to be able to create setting logical concepts and not need loopholes and exploits that are jarring to verisimilitude in order to survive.
If suddenly a CR 1 encounter includes 3 ranged splash damage 1d6 fire bombs and enemies with +1 weapons, your players have to jump into the arms race to survive what should be a fairly routine encounter.
Now if that encounter becomes, say a CR 2 encounter, that seems appropriate to the challenge expectations for a normal party of 4 level one characters.
Many of the proposed "tricks" are fine in isolation. But when you combine them, and demand them be the norm, suddenly you "have" to play a certain way that isn't consistent with the setting and is frankly pretty cheesy.
So I make sure I weigh in on these kinds of threads if I feel they are going to far, just as someone might encourage someone who eats only candy to beware of type 2 diabetes.
Yeah, I didn't mean "stop" an optimized party, I meant "challenge" them.
"Deal with" was a poor choice of words.
I use creatures outfitted similarly to Ashiel's examples for my group lately, and they aren't even optimizers, they just like a good challenge.
Like I say my goblin squad wouldn't have quite the same level of consumables, and there would be a little more spare coin left over. But I go pretty close to what Ashiel is describing, and my players adjusted to it after only one session.
Of course not every single encounter is like this in my games now, its just one tool in my toolbox.
|
|
And I don't want to close a GM's toolbox. I just want them to realize creating a challenging encounter should also provide a challenging reward.
4 equal CR encounters a day is a normal adventure day. I pretty much always run +1 CR (or higher) encounters against my players, because they also like to be challenged.
But I give them the appropriate CR relative to the risk.
Again, it doesn't always increase the CR of an encounter if you give a few items, that is why you consult the chart if you are making major changes.
But some of the proposals are major changes that do change the CR of the encounter.
It isn't challenge I am against. It's cheese.
There's a disturbing (at least to me) trend with what seems like a lot of gamers today. It seems that there is this idea that monsters, regardless of resources and Intelligence, do not have or use equipment. They act as though those treasure ratings on their creature entries that read stuff like "NPC gear", "Incidental", "Standard", "Double", and "Triple" are just there to let the GM know how many gold pieces the monster is supposed to magically turn into when slain, or are supposed to be magic items that the NPCs are simply carrying on them but aren't allowed to use.
Wow, that's a bizarre expectation. I've never met a player who expected D&D monsters to just "drop" gold like Diablo monsters do.
I will say that well-chosen equipment can make a significant difference in the challenge a monster provides -- possibly a big enough difference to warrant a CR change. But that's more because CR is borked than because the DM is "doing it wrong."
|
|
There's a disturbing (at least to me) trend with what seems like a lot of gamers today. It seems that there is this idea that monsters, regardless of resources and Intelligence, do not have or use equipment. They act as though those treasure ratings on their creature entries that read stuff like "NPC gear", "Incidental", "Standard", "Double", and "Triple" are just there to let the GM know how many gold pieces the monster is supposed to magically turn into when slain, or are supposed to be magic items that the NPCs are simply carrying on them but aren't allowed to use.Wow, that's a bizarre expectation. I've never met a player who expected D&D monsters to just "drop" gold like Diablo monsters do.
I will say that well-chosen equipment can make a significant difference in the challenge a monster provides -- possibly a big enough difference to warrant a CR change. But that's more because CR is borked than because the DM is "doing it wrong."
It is only bizarre because it was a complete distortion of what people actually said when Ashiel used all of a dragons hoard to Schroedinger equip a dragon during a derail of another discussion.
Because a dragon just having a hoard of gold and not using it all to buy equipment for a specific PC fight is wrongbadfun.
You might be surprised at the range of difficulties encompassed by what ends up being technically an encounter of the same CR depending on who built it, even if everyone stays within the rules. The rules have quite a bit of flexibility in that respect. So a CR 3 encounter with goblins put together by Ashiel or myself might be quite a bit more difficult then one that shows up in an AP, but if we haven't made any mistakes, it will still be a legal CR 3 encounter.
That doesn't mean we're doing anything tricky necessarily, we might be just adjusting to taste. If I had to house rule things to get the feel I wanted for my games, I would, but it turns out the tweaks I want to make are baked right into the rules. You don't even have to come to my home game to see this happening, a lot of the third party publishers who's adventures I run do things the same way. If you check them out you might not think the encounters were legal for their CR, but if you run the math you might be surprised. Barring human error, these designers are using the rules to budget things when they design encounters, just like I am in my home game, just like Ashiel is.
Looking at the scenario Ashiel created earlier in the thread, some of those goblins are equipped a little beyond what they should be for their CR. But its much closer then you might think. (The areas where Ashiel went over were do to a couple confusing, ambiguous points in the rules. Not some cheesy trick or exploit.) It might be completely wrong for your group, but it might be ok for mine, and with a little math double checked and small adjustments, it might be legal enough to show up in reputable 3rd party material like Frog God Games, who have similar play style assumed.
Now someone else could have built another scenario with the same exact CR budget, and the same creatures, and you might see much less well equipped Goblins that yield a lot more raw coins. Both are allowed for within the system, both are fine.
"Gear should help a monster with class levels remain challenging and retain statistics close to those presented on Table 1-1: Monster Statistics by CR."
Pg 297 Bestiary.
Excellent find, very relevant quote.
|
|
Grimmy, I think you are being unintentionally patronizing. I am not surprised by what is allowed, I am disappointed that people constantly look for exploits that force the rules to become more rigid to control powergaming.
What is allowed is defined by the GM, who looks to the guidelines. When you look to the guidelines for a CR 1/3 creature, adding disposable items of more value than the base gear changes the difficulty of the encounter.
If within the range of what was allowed, Ashiel wasn't invariably pushing the envelope toward power creep, benefit of the doubt would be warranted here.
It isn't a matter of not allowed, it is a matter of appropriate assigning CR to the encounter. Of course you can use whatever the creature has. But look at the monster statistics chart to see if doing so raises the CR of the encounter.
To be completely honest I don't even use CR except as a starting point. I use my PCs as the final determiner of what is challenging or average or even easy. I am not going to let someone like Ciretose game the system to get extra levels. If my group is full of non-optimizers I lower the treasure and stats without altering CR, the opposite for when I have a table of power gamers. They should be getting XP for the difficulty of the fight not because Ciretose refuses to understand that the rules are deliberately flexible when kitting out any NPC because the stat block writer can't list the thousands of variant gear packages a goblin could start with.
I also love how he changes the developers wording from cheesy to maybe. Yes the developer said in a certain case giving an NPC full plate armor could become cheesy. But it is hardly "REALLY GOOD buffing or power gaming" to give a goblin an alchemical fire...
|
|
I didn't change anything.
If you don't use CR to determine XP, I don't know why you care that I think a more challenging encounter should have a higher CR. You are apparently assigning XP based on how difficult you feel something is and not using the book as a guideline.
Great for you if it works.
The question is when a 1/3 cr creature gets a 1d6 splash touch attack and a +1 weapon, are they still a 1/3 creature.
They actually did kit out the goblin, and all the other creatures with levels. They just didn't kit them as much as you would have, because doing so would result in different CR based on the CR chart.
Look at it this way. If you use table 1-1 for all encounters regardless of circumstance then it pays to power game in that group. Why? Because the numbers on that table are static and don't represent that all groups play at different power levels. So if CR X = exactly these stats and by power gaming we can challenge much harder fights without it becoming difficult then we can rake in tons of extra XP when the GM tries to actually challenge us. Giving us lots of extra levels and dramatically increasing our power in a short time. Yay you Won Pathfinder.
The question is when a 1/3 cr creature gets a 1d6 splash touch attack and a +1 weapon, are they still a 1/3 creature.
They actually did kit out the goblin, and all the other creatures with levels. They just didn't kit them as much as you would have, because doing so would result in different CR based on the CR chart.
Is that still a CR 1/3? Yes, unless your group warrants it being a different CR. If you are anti-power gaming why are you fighting so hard on the side of increased power gaming?
Wow I am having trouble with your seemingly deliberate refusal to see that they gave NPCs a budget to spend. The default equipment even leaves an opening for other gear why can't you read that?
|
|
Look at it this way. If you use table 1-1 for all encounters regardless of circumstance then it pays to power game in that group. Why? Because the numbers on that table are static and don't represent that all groups play at different power levels. So if CR X = exactly these stats and by power gaming we can challenge much harder fights without it becoming difficult then we can rake in tons of extra XP when the GM tries to actually challenge us. Giving us lots of extra levels and dramatically increasing our power in a short time. Yay you Won Pathfinder.
Because those are the rules of the game?
You can just use the slow progression if you are worried about XP, and the rules specifically say to have no to low treasure encounters for every high treasure encounter, so no issue there...
An equal CR encounter isn't really much of a challenge. If a fully equipped full WBL PC is equal CR to a party of 4, basically what you are saying is a 4 on 1 fight is an equal CR fight.
4 on 1 of equal level shouldn't be very challenging.
When you look to the guidelines for a CR 1/3 creature, adding disposable items of more value than the base gear changes the difficulty of the encounter.
Agreed about the consumables. Even if Goblins do have 260 GP in NPC Gear (that's still open to debate, until someone answers the question raised by thejeff), the % that Ashiel put into consumables was a little high IMO.
But its strong to call that an exploit. It might be an error due to a lack of clarity in the rules.
I for one am still pretty confused as to whether or not a CR 1/3 creature with 1 NPC level is supposed to get 1st Level NPC Gear.
|
|
The question is when a 1/3 cr creature gets a 1d6 splash touch attack and a +1 weapon, are they still a 1/3 creature.
They actually did kit out the goblin, and all the other creatures with levels. They just didn't kit them as much as you would have, because doing so would result in different CR based on the CR chart.
Is that still a CR 1/3? Yes, unless your group warrants it being a different CR. If you are anti-power gaming why are you fighting so hard on the side of increased power gaming?
Wow I am having trouble with your seemingly deliberate refusal to see that they gave NPCs a budget to spend. The default equipment even leaves an opening for other gear why can't you read that?
Because the group doesn't dictate the CR, the difficulty of the encounter does. There is a chart and everything.
Why can't you read that?
The problem I have with the assumption that the standard goblin kit is just one of may possible variant gear packages a goblin could start with is that the gear given is a small fraction of what being claimed should be the available.
leather armor (10gp), light wooden shield(3gp), short sword(10gp), short bow with 20 arrows (30gp+1gp) = 54gp. Less than a fifth of the 260gp that's being argued for.
Is it really just a very bad example? Did the designers choose to understate what goblins (and by extension other similar humanoids who tend to have similar equipment) have? With 260gp, the first thing I'd probably do is replace most of that.
If they're intended to have 260gp worth of gear, why aren't they listed with most of it.IMO, regardless of RAW for NPC gear, the average goblin isn't intended to have anywhere near 260gp worth of stuff. They're intended to have what's listed or something similar plus a few gold.
I started a thread in Rules since your question didn't get answered here (about monsters with NPC Gear). Please pop into that thread and hit faq if you want. Ive been wondering this for a long time. I asked about it a while back in another thread and no one even acknowledged it there either.
I am not saying that a Goblin MUST have 260gp in gear. I am saying that however you gear the goblin out is largely not relevant to it's CR except in cases where your group is going to be overly or underly challenged by the fight.
Your group NOT what the table says.
In most cases adding a one shot splash attack is not going to change the threat significantly.
|
|
When you look to the guidelines for a CR 1/3 creature, adding disposable items of more value than the base gear changes the difficulty of the encounter.
Agreed about the consumables. Even if Goblins do have 260 GP in NPC Gear (that's still open to debate, until someone answers the question raised by thejeff), the % that Ashiel put into consumables was a little high IMO.
But its strong to call that an exploit. It might be an error due to a lack of clarity in the rules.
I for one am still pretty confused as to whether or not a CR 1/3 creature with 1 NPC level is supposed to get 1st Level NPC Gear.
Which is why I said upthread we largely agree. You just don't like the connotations of the word "exploit" because you are giving some the benefit of the doubt toward the intention not being someing trying to game the systems loopholes.
After 4000 some posts, I'm not.
I regularly play in games where we roll 4 times and drop the lowest, and some of the stats are way over point buy and as a result some of the players are more powerful than would be expected at level. So I up the challenges.
But the CR is the CR. If it means they level faster because I need to give them more challenges, I can just use the slow progression if it is a problem.
But messing around with gear to buff a monster and ignoring the CR chart is exactly what James and the book say not to do.
Even the developer said to ignore the chart except in extreme cases.
|
|
I am not saying that a Goblin MUST have 260gp in gear. I am saying that however you gear the goblin out is largely not relevant to it's CR except in cases where your group is going to be overly or underly challenged by the fight.
Your group NOT what the table says.
In most cases adding a one shot splash attack is not going to change the threat significantly.
Actually it is adding 3 splash attacks, each doing 1d6 against a 1st level party in an equal CR encounter, and a +1 weapon to each goblin.
Your group is your group. The table is the table. Ignoring the table is like saying "since you are so tough, fireball now does d8 damage rather than d6 damage."
Which is why I hate creep, as it created the arms race that made 3.5 so problematic.
Aranna, I'm reading it and interpreting it the same as you. No matter how many times I go through the steps, with books open, PRD, and Hero Lab, I can't find any other way to spin it.
But you do end up with some pretty kitted out and/or treasure laden Goblins.
This is something hard to find examples of in AP's for example.
So I think the folks who see it differently are not being deliberately obtuse, they have a fair point of view.
Full plate on a Goblin IS an extreme case...
I think by the time he got to the part about the full plate he had moved on to his "save the cool stuff for memorable named NPC's and Bosses and use real ways to juice them up like templates and class levels instead of cheesing everything you can out of their treasure budget" speech.
That is exactly why full plate on a goblin IS an extreme case Grimmy. The cool stuff should go to the boss and by then you have already thrown the base CR out the window.
It dose not matter if the gear useful to the party. It only matter how useful it is to monster. If you give a Ork an 100k deed to some ocean front property in Arizona it does not change his CR one bit.The storm giant example is not the best, as suddenly it has the AC and high damage of a CR 15 encounter, two above its listed one. Not to mention good luck finding someone willing to buy a Huge sized magical greatsword =/+2 AC, +1 to hit and d6+1 extra damage is that big a deal?
The cheesy part of that is the gear being useless.
Off topic, but how can one have ocean front property in arizona? It is somewhat surrounded by land on all sides.
True it is joke.... Old one at that...
Edit: On topic, that is not nice. At least give them something they can try to unload.
And it still dose not change the fight.
Full plate on a Goblin IS an extreme case...
Right and full plate on Goblin Warrior 1 is also completely and totally outside the realm of what anyone has ever been talking about here. At best he has 260 GP in NPC Gear, 25% for defensive items gives him 65 GP to spend on Full Plate? WTF? Full plate is 1500 GP??
You can't compare this to giving a Goblin a tanglefoot bag or some caltrops.
Edit: Just checked the table, that should be 130 for protection items.
What are you talking about? I didn't bring up full plate, James and Ciretose did. I was just agreeing that would be an extreme case and deserves a CR adjustment.
A tanglefoot bag or caltrops are perfectly reasonable for their low CR.
Not @ you :)
Exclaiming with you (^_^)
oh sorry
|
|
Full plate on a Goblin IS an extreme case...Right and full plate on Goblin Warrior 1 is also completely and totally outside the realm of what anyone has ever been talking about here. At best he has 260 GP in NPC Gear, 25% for defensive items gives him 65 GP to spend on Full Plate? WTF? Full plate is 1500 GP??
You can't compare this to giving a Goblin a tanglefoot bag or some caltrops.
You can compare it to a goblin in scale mail (50 gp) who now has a 19 AC as a 1/3 CR creature and has spent less that 1/5 of the "treasure"
Where did they get it? Where did they get the oil of magic weapon or the alchemist fire?
So now we have three goblins with 19 AC, each with a 1d6 splash damage ranged attack and/or oil of magic weapon giving them a +1 to attack and damage.
What James said was if something changes where they are on the chart dramatically, consider it, but otherwise it is fine.
There is no 1/3 cr on the chart, but 1/2 CR average AC is 11.
Which is why I started the thread about Monster with NPC Gear. thejeff raised a good question.
260 GP in NPC gear gives goblins some nice stuff. Too nice, better then 1st level PC's. SO what gives?
With all the brainiac experts that were in here earlier showing off their system mastery, no one has even tried to address this question.
please faq or at least pop in and say hello to give the thread some traction.
Ciretose did.
What James is realy saying is do not worrie about advancing monster with template or class level. Use this general rule /guidle line and is it messed up do not worrie to much it only a game. But... If you want some thing that done right we will do it for you and sell to you see new adventure path line buy this.
This promble of advanceing monster has been around since 3.0 some monter advance just fine. Some get way to strong. Some get way to weak.
It a verey subjuctive process not pure scince more of an art.
Not all CR 7 are equal but can try keep them close.
James do not take this a slam cause I have played legace of fire,king maker, skull & shackels, and Rise of the runelord all great AP. Put out by this company.
I will admit most of what I am arguing was meant for challenges higher than 1/3. I imagine whoever picked that CR because it wasn't clearly defined. It does look as if it was meant to have less than 260gp in gear...
Tom I definitely missed the part where James said any of that you goofball :)
I will admit most of what I am arguing was meant for challenges higher than 1/3. I imagine whoever picked that CR because it wasn't clearly defined. It does look as if it was meant to have less than 260gp in gear...
Well this idea that it has 260 in gear comes from the fact that its a level 1 NPC. (Creature with no racial hit dice, and it has 1 NPC level)
But the bestiary also says monsters with NPC Gear as their treasure type count as an NPC of a level = to their CR. So goblin would get only Level 1/3 NPC Wealth right? Problem is there is no level 1/3 on Table: NPC Gear.
So what now?
Ashiel and I have been assuming that the bestiary line about using CR in place of level must refer to monsters with racial hit dice, as a way of calculating their equivalent levels.
So a Goblin with a level of Warrior gets 1st level NPC gear just like a human with a level of Warrior would. Problem is you end up with some kitted out goblins and the kids get upset.
And at the end of the day, Wu-Tang is for the kids.
Tom I definitely missed the part where James said any of that you goofball :)
It was like 200 range post it was talked about. I say that and it just hit as time to give a shameless pug for Pathfinder in sprit of DX.
Oh I thought you were interpreting his comment regarding this thread. Im like "ooohhkay I think he's reading into that a lil bit..."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To sum up this whole thing... Let talk pizza put what ever 4 topping on you pizza you want it still $8.95. But calorically that may not all be the same. One may blow your diet more than the other. You have to decide double cheese, double bacon on your pizza is worth eth extra 20 minutes on the tread mill or should you get mushroom, green pepper, tomato, and onion. And only do 10 minutes. On that note I am going to eat lunch.
Ashiel, according to the book, you're wrong about one thing that I'd like to stick on.
Equal to the party's APL is an easy encounter. Not an Easy, with a capital 'e', but an 'Average' encounter will not tax the party's resources overmuch, and it is highly unlikely to result in casualties. The book says as much...somewhere.
I can't find where, sadly, so this is just me reciting from memory. It's not in the Gamemastering chapter. All the same, I remember this pretty clearly. >_>
|
Depends on the demoness, some of them might enjoy it while living. :)And make the Paladin or Good alaigned cleric have to go in for atonement or loose all powers. ~wicked smile~ Hey, I am sure that the demoness is doing her best to make them fall... HARD!!!
Hey the pally or cleric might enjoy it too. :)