I noticed in the new Rise of the Runelords book that it is designed for 4 players on the fast track, but that slower XP tracks cause the players to be lower levels as you go forward in the story.
So I am wondering, if you have 5 or 6 players, can you simply use the slow track and expect that it remains challenging (after maybe the first section)?
Thanks!
There are two schools of thought:
(1) Let the players advance on the slower track and be lower level when they face the BBEGs.
(2) Find a way to up each encounter to the proper CR; usually by applying the Advanced template or otherwise tweaking the monsters.
Personally, I like (2) because you'll find that the AP expects them to have certain spells available at certain points in time, and if they don't, it can lead to pain. So a lower level might make the fight more fair using the as-written encounters, but makes roleplaying the other stuff harder.
Wouldnt lack of the right spells then also be a problem if even in a 4 man group, the spellcasters multiclassed?
Usually, it is safer to add monsters to an encounter to balance for a larger group then to make individual mosters tougher. This is to avoid problems with the AC or Saves from getting too high. (It also makes scaling backdown easier if you have a no-show.)
So, add numbers and/or minions to balance for a bigger group while keeping them on the correct Exp track.
Wouldnt lack of the right spells then also be a problem if even in a 4 man group, the spellcasters multiclassed?
Absolutely. But then this was a decision by the players, rather than the GM.
"You just dragged our party to the Ethereal Plane, and our cleric is only 7th level?!?! What were we supposed to do about that?!?!"
vs.
"You just dragged out party to the Ethereal Plane, and our cleric 7/paladin 4/fighter 1 doesn't have Plane Shift? I knew I should have taken another couple levels of cleric!"
It shifts the blame from the GM to the player. (Yeah, I'm not one who understands multiclassing spellcasters before they get their major travel spells like Plane Shift and Greater Teleportation.)
It's one of the reasons I've been hesitant to run my CoCT cmapaign through Crown of Fangs -- all of the players are completely new to Pathfinder, so they haven't taken ANY planar spells (Dimensional Anchor, Dimension Lock, Plane Shift, etc.), and they're about to face a creature that drags them one-by-one to the Ethereal Plane and dispatches them. If I don't play it VERY carefully, it'll be a TPK all for failure to pick up a couple of simple spells that apparently they're supposed to know about because they're playing Pathfinder. I'm slowly working knowledge into the local city rumors to help.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
There are two schools of thought:
(1) Let the players advance on the slower track and be lower level when they face the BBEGs.
(2) Find a way to up each encounter to the proper CR; usually by applying the Advanced template or otherwise tweaking the monsters.
I prefer method [2] as well. However, simply slapping an 'advanced' on each and every monster the group encounters may get a tad repetitive. As alternatives, you may consider
- adding a 'giant', 'fiendish', 'entropic' or 'axiomatic' template where applicable, instead of 'advanced'
- adding a class level to classed opponents. (Careful with spellcasters, reaching a new spell level may be too harsh on the party)
- increasing a dragon by an age category (once again, careful with this one)
- adding class levels to an existing monster. (Careful though, the resulting CR may be off when using Bestiary calculations... Antipaladin, I'm looking at you!)
- tossing in 50% more weenies (e.g. 3 guards intead of 2, or 15 goblins instead of 10)
- adding a lieutenant (with a CR of 2 less) to a BBEG
- changing the environment, or the situation (this one is more an artthan a science)
Generally, adding more monsters shifts the action economy away from player domination... but increases the amount of bookkeeping, and, of course, may be illogical in places.
I have taken a mix-and match approach of all the methods stated above (including templating)... so far, things seem to work :)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
^^^ Midnight Angel's advice is better than mine. Use it!
I would lean more heavily on the "more enemies" options than the "stronger enemies," myself. Not that a mix isn't nice, but I feel the biggest issue with larger parties is action economy. They improve their ability to dogpile, which is already the bane of small numbers of enemies. If the give a caster another couple of levels his spells will be more dangerous, and an Advanced monster will hit harder, but they can still only cast one spell or make one attack a round. The large party, meanwhile, can have someone buff, someone debuff, someone summon, and a pack of martials swarm the enemy for flanking bonuses, teamwork bonuses, and increased difficulty of escape. You'll also have a better chance of at least a few characters surviving a save-or-die or being outside a battlefield control, and losing a character will only reduce your abilities by 1/6th, rather than 1/4th. Overall, it can be bad news for the bad guys, unless they get some teammates too. For that reason, I'd recommend leaning towards extra mooks and lieutenants rather than simply stronger versions of what exists.
As a side note, I'd recommend checking what people have to say about encounters before doing anything with them. Every AP has a few meatgrinders that are pretty crushing as-is, and making them harder could get into TPK territory, even for a large group.
I have gamemastered or played in 3 AP for 7 player parties so for what its worth here is my advice.
1) For 5 players (our current group size) I suggest no changes. If you feel you need to make changes make them as early in the campaign as possible.
2) Don't add extra treasure with 5 or 6 players the extra attacks, over lapping abilities etc more than make up for the shortage of cash.
3) In combat encounters giving all the monsters max hp can help keep thing interesting.
4) One key note is bard and bard like class really really shine in large parties so beware, that a bard enspiring three other players vs 4 or 5 others will really have a telling affect.
|
I generally go for the 150% enemies approach. It's quick and easy and keeps the challenge level of the individual creatures the same.
NOTE: be aware of the environment though. Adding extra enemies can turn out to be just free xp for the party if the extra bad guys have to line up in a narrow corridor to reach them. You may have to widen rooms/corridors to use the extra enemies.
Bosses I'll usually just max out their HPs for staying power.
|
|
Midnight_Angel has nailed the list perfectly.
Me, being the prototype time-harried (lazy) DM, very often just go for more low-level critters or just fire up the HPs to the max. Having enough time however, adding templates and levels works best for boss/lieutenants, while adding henchmen is optimal to counter the action economy issue. Mix and match as needed.
Thanks for all the continued replies. I appreciate them!
|
I recommend a few things:
(1) Ditch XP altogether. Have the players level-up when appropriate to the campaign.
(2) Whenever the party faces a group of lower-level creatures, add 1 or 2 more of these. It is easy as you already have the stat blocks.
(3) For "boss" types of encounters, if you don't want to mess too much with his stat block, give him 50% more hp and add +1 to all of his d20 rolls.
(4) If you have 6 players, double the amount of coinage in treasures. Since roughly half of the treasure will be in coins (the other half in magic items, weapons, etc.), this will work out to a 50% increase in treasure found. I might also add in many more consumables, like potions and scrolls.
Just adding more enemies of the same CR can work, but it depends on the encounter. Paizo writers have a tendency to throw a lot of "trash" ( meant in the MMO way ) encounters at the party between the "boss" encounters, meaning that those encounters have little chance to hit a party member and even if they do, the damage is so negligible as to barely inconvencience them. They just cost a lot of time and are filler for the rooms between the big battles.
I can't really talk if that also happens as often in RotRL as in the newer APs, because RotRL still used the fast XP track. The slower medium XP track seems to have exerbated this problem, since suddenly a lot more encounters are needed for a group to level up.
Another thing to keep in mind is that more party members means that there are more buffs on the side of the players. Just adding more of the same type of opponent will not counter that aspect. A Bard or other buff-based class can substantially elevate a partys effectivity for their level. When buffing up your OPFOR, take that into account and either add a buff-bot to the encounter or put on an extra advanced template.
I just add more monsters. It is a lot faster than advancing a monster and has a greater effect on the difficulty of the fight most of the time.
My group is 7 players, and I usually double the number of minions in combat and ALWAYS give my BBEG minions with him that can't quite be one shotted by the party (usually in the AP I find say a miniboss in the module and just import it over to the boss).
I just add more monsters. It is a lot faster than advancing a monster and has a greater effect on the difficulty of the fight most of the time.
Although adding another opponent is a great way to even out the action economy, it often is hampered by improved PC class synergies and fighting space restrictments. Also there is the problem that adding another opponent who can barely hit the PCs will only serve to make the encounter longer, rather than more difficult.
Only if the resource-dependent players are too impatient to wait out the two more rounds the less resource dependent characters would need to mop the encounter up.
In any case, sprucing up encounters is not a hard science. As I said, class synergies are something which is seldomly accounted for with just maxing out HP or adding another hapless mook. And since it is pathetically easy for almost all frontline classes to get their ACs high enough to make it very hard for CR-2 oder CR-3 challenges to even hit them, those hapless mooks often look much more dangerous on paper than they are in-game.
I have a six man group running through Carrion Crown. When/if all six show up, I do add about 25-40% more mobs. I ran seven at one point, and 60-75% more kept things challenging :) For BBEGs, a will usually give him extra mooks and bump his stats a bit as the economy of actions tends to work against him big time. To keep the table from slowing down too much, I will often put mooks/trash mobs into groups of 2-3 on my initiative sheet.