Seems to me that within the first ten levels Apl +3 encounters often prove fatal in the end provided the PC a don't or cannot flee. I hear slot on the boards about optimized characters smoking Apl+3 or better with no problem. So what do people think about this? Is Apl +3 indeed epic or does a party lack optimization if they can't handle it? Assume no operator error by GM or players here, the encounter was simply beyond the characters.
Depends on the creature.
Could a party of four 1st level characters slaughter a Dark Stalker? Probably.
Could a party of four 1st level characters slaughter a Giant Stag Beetle? Possibly.
Could a party of four 1st level characters slaughter a Hydra? Doubtfully.
Could a party of four 1st level characters slaughter a Hound Archon? I wouldn't bet on it.
Depends on a lot of things. I've seen one witch take down an encounter becuase the big bad evil guy failed a will save. Fell asleep and got coup de gra'd. Was easily +4 apl, he just... Failed a save or die. Sometimes its just dumb luck. Clear out the minions after he's dead and it was over.
I was once in a party with a rogue, a fighter, a light armored healer cleric, and a monk. The DM wanted us to take on the same thing another party with a summoner, a paladin, a magus, a cleric, and a sorcerer could take. Neither party was particularly optimized, but one was clearly running into different issues than the other.
The party, the people, the luck of the dice. And certain monsters of a particular CR are going to be very different encounters. Nothings ever in a vacuum. However... When I see terms liked "unbeatable" or "overpowering" for +3 over apl, I don't think it was intended to fight these too often or without conditions in your favor.
I should also note not all builds should be used in play. If you can regularly destroy creatures 3 CR above your entire party on your own wihtout any trouble, Its probably not what was intended.
Depends.
A lot can affect party balance; point buy, use of optional rules (such as traits or hero points), optimization of the classes and builds. How the GM plays the monsters is also highly subjective- do you use the monsters treasure to equip it to increase it's power the way a PC would, or do you just play it straight out of the book?
I think the CR system works about as well as it can be expected to given the vastness of the system. APL+3 should have a good chance of killing a PC. At least at low levels. At higher levels it translates more into a use of resources, rather then deaths.
Finally, this is a game of chance. You can often win or loose an encounter over a single dice roll. In theory it evens out over time and you can stack things in favor, but the dice can be cruel!
Good examples, I have also found that some Apl +3 monsters can be deadly to a party of 6th and 7th level characters. In fact it was Apl+2 inter case of the 6th level party : enter sandpoint devil cr 8. Killed the cleric, the fighter and the rogue, wizard survived because he fled, came back with a ranger and druid and finished it off. Now a 7th level party consisting of half orc inquisitor, dwarf invulnerable rager with superstition, a halfling cleric of drama and elven conjurer are ambushed by a lone nereid traveling near a river. The GM sensing a possible told or near told pulls the encounter for something else, namely four hydras. Looking at the nereid stats its hard to argue that the party would win. So does that mean Apl+3 is a generous assessment of a parties capabilities or is this for conditions favoring the party?
Desna sorry, autospelling.
APL +3 is generally a high lethality threat for the party, all else being equal. A lot of this depends on a group's "nova" abilities. When such abilities are lacking, the APL +3 is a lot more dangerous.
Yes, this party gave the GM a good laugh running set from a single cr 3 mosquito swarm as no one had a way to kill it and the wizard still ended up getting malaria and there points ability damage to con AND wisdom! 7th level party.
Grr, three points.
You know you have a one hour window to edit your posts, right?
No I didn't actually. Apologies, I struggle with my girls touch screen phone.
The more you know!
(np :> I'm posting off topic anyway)
On-topic: I think it really depends on what your party has and what the enemies have. DR at low levels is awful to deal with, same with anything that has the incorporeal subtype.
Indeed. Incorporeal/ swarms can be murder at low levels or even mid levels unprepared .
It is virtually impossible to have any sort of intelligent discussion about the lethality of encounters without having some discussion of tactics. And anytime a discussion of tactics comes up, it tends to get unpleasant fast because it is virtually impossible to suggest using any sort of tactics without being accused of criticizing other playstyles.
But into the fray I go, I suppose.
How lethal your APL +3 encounter would have been depends entirely on how effectively your party synergizes their abilities, what sort of enemy you encountered and what tactics you employed in the battle.
Knowing none of those things the only answer is "well, any encounter can be a TPK if you don't outthink, outmaneuver and outfight the enemy."
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My advice.
Never ever just look at the CR or APL and assume everything's grand just because the PC's numbers match. Know the PC's abilities so you can design appropriate encounters, if you want. If no class has ranged then you might not want to throw in things that fly, I do occasionally to remind them of the importance of being diverse.
Well right now I am actually the player, I run four characters and yes I try to cover as many possibilities as I can, sometimes its hard to think of everything. My GM is also experienced and when this campaign ends I will run for him. We have taken turns running campaigns for years but for the last couple years its been one player one GM most of the time as we don't know any dedicated gamers and neither of us enjoys gamestore pathfinder in the area.
Yes that is true.
Besides everything else people have mentioned in this thread, it matters quite a bit how the dice are going. In encounters with CR close to or below APL, if the dice are bad, usually things will get tougher, but tougher than average is still possible. However, if the dice aren't going the party's way, then an already-tough fight can quickly go to "pray you can manage to run away".
I think that the game is more interesting if the party occasionally needs to drop back and re-group, whether it's from an APL+3, or, for seriously optimized characters, maybe an APL+4 or more. Having to do so is far from operator error, it's everything happening like it should (unless the PCs and GM want something else). An APL+3 or more when the party can't flee? That's more likely operator error. GMs should usually try hard to avoid hitting the party with an 'epic' challenge they can't retreat from.
Optimization per se isn't really a desirable or undesirable goal for a party, just something to take into account. Less fun is usually had if there's a wide disparity in optimization between party members, or if a GM thinks they should take suggested challenge ratings as an absolute, rather than a usually-decent starting point to tweak based on the specific party.
As a GM, frankly I disregard CR almost entirely. A monster that's easy for one group to take down without any serious risk of death might kill might be too much for another group to handle. I much prefer to think along the lines of how reliably my players will be able to do what they do on the creature and how long it will take them, and what will they have to deal with in the meantime. It's not a simple as adding APL and CR numbers but it suits me better.
Other than high CR wandering monsters, APL+3 encounters tend to be climactic fights against the major baddies. You know, the ones you've been hunting for a reason. The kind of thing there might be good reasons to try to overcome: rituals to stop, hostages to rescue, whatever.
If the GM is running for a party of 'Big D*** Heroes'(tm), I consider putting them up against a no-margin-for-error timeline as very nearly equivalent to "can't flee". Which is, as I was trying to say, a good recipe for a TPK, so GMs need to be careful.
Let us not forget the words of Kenny Rogers, "Cuz you got to know when to hold em, know when to fold em, know when to walk away, know when to run..."
There is also a lot of times where monsters have "Must be this tall to ride" things. Abilities/spells/mechanics that without a way to deal with it makes them much more deadly. For instance incorporeal or ability damage/drain.
So not all +3 APL are even. If its +3 APL that is just a big beatstick with lots of hp then a good party will likely do alright. If its something with said abilities though and the party lacks the means to deal with it then not so much.
I think it depends on how closely you play the intelligence of the opponents. Boggards and Will O Wisps are one of my favorite encounters i have ran into in a friends game. Such a cool concept. Wisps are smart (int 15 boggards: 8 int)
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
Depends on the actual encounter and the party's capabilities. If the monster has DR or other defenses the party can't beat, it's going to be disproportionately hard. Golems, swarms, flying creatures, naturally invisible creatures, creatures with very high DC save or lose attacks: all of these can spell disaster for a party that lacks the capabilities necessary to win.
Indeed. Incorporeal/ swarms can be murder at low levels or even mid levels unprepared .
A horde of skeletons in particular is... is quite something to deal with at a mere level 2. But crypts are fun of course. Your average skeleton is... a cr 1/2, taking into account no class/npc class levels, but it has a weapon. It's immune to cold, *and* it has a damage reduction of 5, and is easily capable of wiping early teams out in groups of 5 or even 4.
However, just the same, the guy in the group with the Earth breaker is going to go on a field trip.