Also... summoner and gunslinger.
Well, I'm pretty much a New DM, and practically what drove me to play this was the Bestiary... Really :/
I'm planning to run a levels 1 to 20 campaign with a couple pals, Summoner and Wizard. Our fist session was AWESOME; however I've read on the forums that levels 7+ start becoming just unplayable.
Also, I've read that Gunslinger and Summoner are classes that shouldn't even exist... I've read that weird quote "stay away from the Summoner" many times before.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I personally think that lv 12 and higher is when to the game really starts getting fun. It's when P.C. start being able to be proactive. It's hard on DM's however because they have to be thinking about the logical consequences of stuff like scry and died ( the protections against divination and such).
Actually I find it funny that most optimization guides tend to look down on scrying and protections against it. At higher levels they start becoming vital. Knowledge is power.
Our fist session was AWESOME; however I've read on the forums that levels 7+ start becoming just unplayable.
Ignore them. It sounds like your game is looking fine, don't buy into all the naysaying. For starters, you'll never get anything consistent. My experience (and much of what I've read on the forums) say that 7-9 are the sweet spot. PCs have enough options to really be good at what they do, without some of the scarier parts of higher levels (which are easy to keep simple if you make an effort to)
The summoner, I will grudgingly admit, should be fine. I personally don't like it, just because it does something I feel should be the role of the wizard and only adds a goofy pet class to the game (and said pet can be as goofy as you players desire. The iconic has a chicken for christ's sake), but all of paizo's classes are well written. People are divided on the summoner and gunslinger (I personally think the latter is great, especially with power attack and a cutlass for a bit of extra flair), but that doesnt matter a fig for your game. Fans will get uppity about anything.
That said, you dont have to use any class you dont want to. Did anything happen in session that seemed like cause for concern?
Not breaks open has to be accounted for.
Also at 12th level I would not try to sneak into a Divinator's fortress I would see about knocking it down without going in then mining out the loot afterwards. After 10th level dungeon crawling is for amateurs.
Yeah breaks at 7 is a load of BS. The game is not even really good until 6 when a full BaB class is substantially different from a lesser BaB class.
At 12+ the game most certainly does not play the same. Some people find this bad but that is just opinion and is most certainly not fact.
I only play until level 12, but that is just my specific preference. Allows for full martials to get three attacks with a little class dipping. Interesting spells that aren't too problematic... all the good stuff.
If you are a new DM, as the OP is, I can only suggest sticking to the lower levels until you get a hold on things. Jumping into higher level stuff right away is a recipe for disaster (even playing a 1st level fast progress game with the intent on leveling up to 12+ is problematic without a lot of DM experience in other systems under your belt).
Depends on the players/group. Lvl 7 is fine but 12+ higher begins to get significantly more involved. If the players know their character and abilities and have a good handle on the pile of modifiers it can run fine. It does take some more investment of rules, system knowledge though than some will make. But if you're running from lvl1 up then the players have time to learn their characters and their abilities as they grow. Pf/3.5 is pretty rules intensive though there isn't really any getting around that.
I've been GM'ing 5 campaigns over about the last decade from start to finish, three of them homebrewn from levels 1-20 and two whole Paizo APs from levels 1-16/17. High level play is definitely doable.
You have to be aware that preparation times improves exponentially when you have to prepare your own high-level NPCs. Avoid single opponent encounters, the action economy works brutally against them, even if they are four CRs higher than the average group level.
Summoners and Gunslingers are banned in particular in my campaigns ( all other Paizo classes normally allowed ).
Summoners are way too much of a headache mechanically, need to be constantly supervised by the GM if the player didn't make the damn Eidolon too powerful by accident and I personally don't like the flavor of the class (mostly because of the weird Eidolon).
Gunslingers at higher levels are way, way too good and circumvent almost completely one of the core defense mechanics of the game, armor class. And have weird abilities which just require them to hit the opponent, like an automatic trip against opponents of every size type. And I don't like the flavor of the class, neither, because they fundamentally throw into question the technological stasis of fantasy settings.
For a master of high level (even epic) 3.5 campaign
I suggest you read Sepulchrave's Story Hour over onENWorld.
IMHO he really mastered D&D's quirky magic system (all his wizards are very Vancian) and created an awesome epic campaign.
Given you have a 2 man party is probably a good thing you have a summoner in the pair. Overall the high level game isn't unplayable its just complex. Especially wit h2 complicated classes like the summoner and wizard. Just make sure both you and the players know what the rules for those classes are an take lots of notes.
That said, since you are starting at level 1 you should have time to get used to each new ability as you level up so it shouldnt be too bad.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What I found is that at high levels there tends to be less combat. This is because of rocket tag. Most combat is over in 2 rounds and often is over in the surprise round with all these marshals that can turn stuff into red mist in one attack and casters that can change to battlefield to make sure marshals can get that one attack or full attack if needed. This combinded with the fact that a high level there are many effective ways to run away from combat. My GM complained that I never fought at all unless I had a overwhelming advantage.
[...]I've read on the forums that levels 7+ start becoming just unplayable.
Also, I've read that Gunslinger and Summoner are classes that shouldn't even exist... I've read that weird quote "stay away from the Summoner" many times before.
Include me among the DMs who have experience with high level play. I've DM'd a level 15 group and find that the game is NOT broken at high levels, even with minimal house ruling. I can attest that the game is still fun and balanced at these levels. I've seen people say, "Wah, enemy CMDs are too high!" Or "Wah, solo encounters are imbalanced!" And other similar nonsense. Yes, enemy CMDs and AC can be quite high in many cases, but that doesn't mean the game is imbalanced. It means that at this point in the game, PCs have many options available to them for dealing with a high AC - usually as simple as finding a way to target touch AC or a saving throw. As for high CMDs, I can tell you that if a character invests enough resources into a particular maneuver (I usually see grappling or tripping), he/she can overcome even the highest of CMDs. If you invest 0 resources into maneuvers, then of course you're going to have trouble with high level CMDs. People can be silly.
Also, I don't have any personal experience with summoner, but I DO have experience with Gunslinger. One of the level 15 characters that I DM'd was a Gunslinger, and I DON'T think they're overpowered - even when combining Rapid Reload, Alchemical Cartridges, and/or Lightning Reload to be able to always reload as a free action. Reason being, Gunslingers have to invest so many feats and gold into being able to shoot well, that they're hardly good at anything else. The Gunslinger I DM'd was easily doing ~40 damage per shot or more, but that's all she could really do. If her gun was disarmed or she got grappled or something, she might as well have been a sitting log. Gunslingers CAN shoot things well, but that's the only thing they're good at... they hugely lack versatility. They're not overpowered.
I recently started running a campaign with characters at 20th level (I'm also using the mythic playtest rules for advancement). The trick is to be aware that the characters are capable of almost anything. They can travel huge distances in the blink of an eye, kill things in one hit, learn anything they set their minds to, persuade anyone of almost anything. Which means that the plot takes on the single most important role for GMing. Information flow is critical. Just because they can learn anything they want, if they have no idea what questions to ask to get the ultimate answers they need, there is still enjoyment to be gleaned from peeling away the layers. And then once they know what they need to know, they will vanquish the threat!
It isn't difficult, but it takes more work than stringing together a series of combat encounters.
I have GMed 1-20 games.
The degree of difficulty ramps up with each spell level. Everyone has a comfort zone where they feel the game plays best. My comfort zone is from about 1st to 12th level. Levels 13 to 20 are just a lot more prone to over or under estimating the party. This can lead to adventures being cake walks or TPKs.
I think you have to fundamentally recognize that the game goes through a set of transformations at points in the level progression and not everybody is comfortable with all of those transformations.
In the low levels, the game is about survival as much as anything else. Characters are relatively fragile and can be laid low with an axe crit out of the blue. They're also subject to a lot of environmental concerns from wild animals to other challenges in their physical surroundings.
Mid-levels are a sweet spot for me because the PCs aren't so fragile, are starting to really master their environment (fly spell, in particular), but can still be substantially challenged with numbers of weak opponents or smaller numbers of more powerful ones.
Once you break 9th level, you have to start thinking that the PCs have pretty much mastered their environment and logistics. Teleport is a major part of that game change. Their need to travel overland has been much reduced and they're usually rarely challenged by natural critters anymore.
|
One of the issues imo with high level play is the bookkeeping. I'm usually a laid back DM yet when I'm running a campaign that goes past 10th level I insist that players learn all their feats, spells abilites etc.. well. Not memorized yet no flipping through books or character sheets as it slows down the game play. If one of the players has Mirror Image as a spell and at his level he can have three duplicates he has to know he has three of them. Or the person playing a arcane caster loses a turn. It may sound harsh and I don't like making a player skip a turn yet it's the only way to really get players with divine and arcane casters to not slow down the game. A cleric wants to summon a monster he or she has ro have a write up of said monster on a sheet of paper or index card ready to go. No last minute copying of stats out of the Bestiary at the table. Same goes with a DM. preparing a lot of stuff ahead of time helps make running a game quicker too.
I have seen it as a problem with almsot every edition of D&D. High level 2E also required divine and arcane casters to know their spells imo.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I wish I could see a mid to high level game. Most games I play in tend to go from 1 or 3 to 7 or 8, stop, and then get revamped and start low again. Only once did I see a game get to level 15, and it took a year and a half but damn did it feel good to have all that character planning become a reality.
|
Tell me about it chaoseffect. I seem to be cursed with a level 4 ceiling or something. I'm dying to play out to high levels. And yeah, once or twice I got to level 6 or so. But I want to actually DO those cool things at high level and I want to get there from the beginning, you know? I want to see my eidolon fleshed out, roaring and ripping, I want to cast my spells and my back up spells. I want to build my tower, hire my servants, craft my magical items, and shift to the elemental plane of fire to have a chat with the lord of the city of brass because I can..and because the threat is too dire not to seek out such aid. I want to bind pit fiends as punishment and summon devils alongside angels to do my bidding...eventually.
There is just a point where facing goblins, orcs, skeletons and wolves gets tedious. And it's equally tiring when your options are always 1 attack a round (even if you're a fighter) and selecting between one or two of the feats you happen to know- assuming they aren't passive. Oh, and like, magic missile, burning hands, sleep, shield spell, mage armor.....I want to see a damn fireball or something, you know? Ughhh.
I've played in two campaigns from level 1 to 20, and I'm GMing a campaign that has just reached level 16. Let me tell you that while it does get harder to run/play a campaign at high levels, it is not impossible. It is also very rewarding to be able to finally break out the 'big guns' so to speak.
My advice is to not let the players level too quickly once they're past level 10. It is best that the path into the high levels be gradual. That way both you and the players can adjust to the change in gameplay.
At high levels, turn efficiency is very important. Make sure that your players have their most common attack combinations (including crit calculations) written down to speed up the math. Make them roll their dice in advance of their turns and calculate the numbers out as well.
Also, as someone who has played a summoner from level 1-20 twice (one normal, one synth), I have to say that they are no more powerful than any other (well built) character. However, you do have to have a good understanding of the summoner's rules as a GM unless the character is being run by a very trustworthy and rules obsessed player.
|
|
Turn order, in my experience takes time only because people are not prepared, the group doesn't work well together or because the decision on what to do is very important. In a group that works well together and comes prepared, having 30 options is little different than having one. Assuming intelligent players, turns go by relatively quickly. This is where things like trust, tactics, and such are important and part of why level gaining should slow down substantially after a point so that players have plenty of time to enjoy the characters and learn how to play them. I've played to epic levels once (my first time role playing) and it was utterly awesome. We played for most of a school year, usually 8 hour sessions and oftentimes the entire weekend. We knew our characters very well. Know your rules, take things slow, and you'll have a good handle on GMing and what level you feel comfortable with.
|
There's two big issues with high level play;
the first is the mechanical issues of running a game with more, and more complex, and situational options. To which I second the advice above, of making sure everyone understands their own PC, and has a cheat sheet or index cards for summoned critters or complex spells.
the second change that occurs, is that the goals of the PCs have to change, to reflect their new fame and abilities. The early-level goals, of breaking into orc fortresses to steal their gold or rescue a prisoner, simply cease to be relevant. The nature of the missions the PCs are given (or pro-actively set for themselves) have to evolve. What was a 'take-all-the-time-you-need' mission, has to have a time-limit, if you want to ensure the PCs resources are stretched. Move the action off-world, to ensure the PCs do the job themselves, and don't rely on armies of allies.
Ignore what the rules say regarding Challenge Rating. At high level, it is all relative and subjective, and has to be eyeballed against what your particular PCs can do. Regardless of the official line on the matter, adding some Hit Dice to a monster does not in any way compensate for the new toys the PCs have. Turning the old orc fortress into an ogre fortress, or even a giant fortress (where every giant has 20+ Fighter levels), does not make it relevant to the high level plot, when the PCs can walk in ethereally, and map the place at their leisure.
You don't give xp for 'defeating' or 'overcoming' the Balrog, if Gandalf simply teleports the Fellowship to the other side of the mountain.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The game isn't any more complex at higher levels than it was a decade ago. Newer generations are just less able to handle complex ideas and situations without being dependent on an app of some sort.
That's why it takes a mature group to handle high level play whereas everyone else just whines about how "impossible it is to master."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The game isn't any more complex at higher levels than it was a decade ago. Newer generations are just less able to handle complex ideas and situations without being dependent on an app of some sort.
That's why it takes a mature group to handle high level play whereas everyone else just whines about how "impossible it is to master."
You're really going to go with "Damn kids these days are all lazy and dumb and suck at elfgames"?
Yep. I blame the adults who think everyone should be special, in effect ensuring no one ever is.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Let me get this straight: you're unironically saying that the problem with high-level 3.x/PF is... kickball?
(Also, in case you weren't aware, Syndrome is the bad guy in the Incredibles, you're not supposed to agree with him.)
It's a valid point though, I sure wouldn't want everyone trying to be special in a game about playing fantasy mythic heroes, that would just be silly. (The clear solution is to limit the specialness to the wizard, preserving the optimal special-to-chump ratio.)
By a decade ago I would take you are referring to 3.0? Then yes I'd agree with you since PF is essentially the same game. I don't recall as many issues in high level play in 2.0. Sure, there were plenty of options with high level spells, magic items just not the quantity of prescribed rules, armies of modifiers etc. that slow down gameplay as 3E/PF does. Or rather not as much.
As for the whole kids these days argument and vague accusations of social engineering have fun with that.
The article I linked to was merely an example of the types of people ruining our youth. Nothing more than that.
A bunch of sissies teaching children to be sissies. (Click video on right)
But that's all off-topic. Best to move on from it. (Though for anyone interested in this side matter, he is some more information on the Dodgeball Debate).
|
|
You're really going to go with "Damn kids these days are all lazy and dumb and suck at elfgames"?Ravingdork wrote:
The game isn't any more complex at higher levels than it was a decade ago. Newer generations are just less able to handle complex ideas and situations without being dependent on an app of some sort.That's why it takes a mature group to handle high level play whereas everyone else just whines about how "impossible it is to master."
Best, tangent, EVER! <3 I had to like Ravingdorks post, though. I mean, comon. :-D
Joking aside, there is *some* kernel of truth to his comment. I see it with some of the younger players who have trouble with what is otherwise simple decision making, even at low level. I see it in things like the number of young magic players today versus when I was a kid, and how kids today think magic is hard and usually play their card games in order of easiest to hardest, with each game having age groups specific to stereotype (easiest games- pokemon- for the youngest payers, middle complexity games -yugioh- for teens and young adults, hard games for adults -magic-). When I was a kid, Magic was 60-70% kids and teens with the rest being young adults, older teens and some adults. No one, including several 8 year olds, had any problems understanding the game then, but they have officially SIMPLIFIED the rules (so it is easier now) and I meet older teens and adults who have trouble understanding it.
I can imagine that this very same principle is taking place in Pathfinder to some extent, though I don't know how much because I play with the same small group of people for role playing. In card games I play lots of different people and so my sample pool is faaaaaar larger.
Honestly, though, the easiest answer is this: get a good group. The problems are self resolving then.
Honestly, though, the easiest answer is this: get a good group. The problems are self resolving then.
Good advice this.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yep. I blame the adults who think everyone should be special, in effect ensuring no one ever is.
I agree with several of the games on that list, not so much because "Oh, the little snowflakes will be traumatised, if they come second!", but because they enforce elimination of most of the participants.
The goal of Phys Ed should surely to be getting all the students being active, for the whole session, not to spotlight the two best contenders in the class, and force the others to sit down and shut up.
Um excuse me but if kids don't spend more time not playing then how will they ever learn to play??? Checkmate
also Simon Says is relevant to the thread because
Better theory: most people don't master high-level play because they spend more time playing than wasting hours on stuff like this:
My 15th-level abjurer has the following written on his character sheet:
When I made the character, I searched the PFSRD database for EVERY long duration spell he was capable of casting and then I put it on him. At high levels even 10 min./level spells can last HOURS. Stacked with Extend Spell (or a metamagic rod of the same) you can have all sorts of buffs lasting through the entire adventuring day. Out of the 10 minute crowd, I highly recommend heroism.
Better theory: most people don't master high-level play because they spend more time playing than wasting hours on stuff like this:
My 15th-level abjurer has the following written on his character sheet:
When I made the character, I searched the PFSRD database for EVERY long duration spell he was capable of casting and then I put it on him. At high levels even 10 min./level spells can last HOURS. Stacked with Extend Spell (or a metamagic rod of the same) you can have all sorts of buffs lasting through the entire adventuring day. Out of the 10 minute crowd, I highly recommend heroism.
Yeah, it kinda makes me of the mind that the idea from beta, about having only a limited amount of "buff slots", was a good one. I asked James about that a few years and apparently playtesters really hated it, so the whole thing was not implemented. Those min-maxing whiners! ;)
|
Playing at high level is quite easy.
Games mastering at high level isn't.
Every critter has a stat block a mile long. Each stat block has tons of feats, su and ex abilities, plus special rules and probably spells. You need to know them all and be able to run each critter as a thing trying its hardest to survive what is in essence a group of elite special forces raiding your home.
Mastering that takes experience, and the op is starting well by going from 1st level. At least he'll learn his players abilities organically.
I'll also advise using pre made modules until you're very comfortable with juggling apparent CR appropriate encounters against actual PC ability. Past level 12 or so, and the CR model gets all wonky. At this point encounter design is more art form than formula, and you need to understand that.
Some speed bumps you'll come across as DM setting appropriate challenges. Flying, teleporting, scry and fry tactics, summonable safe houses to facilitate the 15 minute day, abilities to bypass large sections of adventure you thought you'd prepared for, death becoming a gold penalty rather than a real set back.
I'd advise reading forums or blogs that deal with all of these, and use info from to work out why type of game you want run ( either limiting the power of those issues or incorporating them fully into the game world are generally the views espoused).
All of that is based purely on my own experiences though, others may disagree. I've done 2 homebrewsand the better part of three APs into high level play (post level 15) and my players enjoyed them all. I can now honestly say I'm burnt out though. High level GM ing is quite exhausting and time consuming.
Cheers
I was always the most comfortable playing and DM'ing at high level(10+). Honestly, it's harder for me to gauge lower-level threats and making effective PC's. I always wind up over or under-shooting the encounter and either the party steamrolls the monsters, or I get an almost-TPK. Higher level games, I get all the options I'm feel necessary, and can adjust encounters on the fly easier.
Monsters have stat blocks a mile long; this is true, but there's almost no way to possibly use every feat, spell, etc in a single encounter. I look at something with such a huge stat block, and I comb through it, picking out what I feel I'm actually going to use. I give myself a 5 round clock, and try to pick out what the monster will do in those rounds. If the encounter goes longer than that 5 round window, then I go back and take a quick glance at what's available, if I feel I need to. Static bonuses should already be factored into the stats, so you don't need to remember every single one of those.
I see it in things like the number of young magic players today versus when I was a kid
Now I feel old for remembering when MtG came out. Gotta get a place with a lawn to scare kids off of now.
-TimD
P.S. to address the actual topic - no it's not impossible, but working from lower levels to high levels a few times is way better than just jumping in on the deep end.
The game isn't any more complex at higher levels than it was a decade ago. Newer generations are just less able to handle complex ideas and situations without being dependent on an app of some sort.
That's why it takes a mature group to handle high level play whereas everyone else just whines about how "impossible it is to master."
Yeah, but back when you were a kid, you could hash out the rule difficulties during the 5 mile walk to school. It took your mind off of the fact that you were walking barefoot in the snow, and that it was uphill both ways. ;-)
Seriously though, I partially agree with you: kids have a remarkable ability to grasp the intricacies of things that they are interested in. Or perhaps they just spend more time obsessing over it. Either way, I don't recall having a particularly hard time learning about something that I regarded as fun.
Math, on the other hand...
Level 7 not unplayable, it's when PCs hit their stride. I'd worry when it gets to the 15+ area, but if you've been learning as you go then there's no reason that it should be too big a problem. The hardest part is gauging power level of your PCs and the power level of your encounters. I've had a level 6-7 party stomp all over a CR 11 encounter with little or no problem due to the tactics that the module gave me. Sure 100 CR 1s is technically a CR 14-15 encounter, but they're not going to be able to hit a level 6-7 party without a slew of natural 20's, and half of them will be gone by round 2 with a single fireball.
Hehehe, well you are doing it wrong then ... it only takes "hours" the first time around. Obviously if you only play low level instead of playing one character to high levels you spend "hours" repeatedly creating and equipping your next 1st level character not playing the game :P
What exactly was it that you were trying to reply to?
Step 1: Play with friends
Step 2: Know the rules.
Every other problem is just a side affect of not doing one of those.