|
Our party just hit 15 and this is the highest we have ever gotten in any pathfinder game we have played in the 3 or so years our group has been together. I love being this high! We are currently headed into Eel's Skull on Nalt's Island to tackle this mega dungeon and find a piece of a staff our party is trying to put together. DM has us traveling around the Shackles and Mwangi looking for these pieces. I, myself, love dungeon delves.
In all fairness to our DM our group were overcoming his obstacles rather easily. We had multiple mobs to fight in each encounter, but we still prevailed. The only issue our party really encountered was being perma blinded during a fight which we still won and managed to get the blindness removed. I know our DM could probably hit us up with harder encounters, but I think he's trying to walk that fine line of a tough encounter and a TPK.
All I know is I am having the time of my life playing in this game! Best game we have played since we converted to Pathfinder from 3.5 back in Beta.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That pretty much nails it for me. Many times when I'm reading the high level spells in the old First Edition Players Handbook, it has struck me that Gygax only intended the real high level stuff to be used by NPC's, either the Big Bad Wizard and/or the EHP as we used to refer to his clerical counterpart, or the very very rare helpful NPC, who'd just as quickly bow out of the stage and leave the player heroes to get their job done.I love Pathfinder. I have but one gripe. Why is there so little material for levels 16+?If you asked me (and in doing so disregard the more qualified respondents upthread) it's because 16th-20th are really "the villain levels."
If we were all still playing the game as intended by Gary Gygax, most of our characters would be permadead after hitting that instadeath trap on Level 1 of The Dungeon. And I for one after failing 20 saving throws and writing up 19 new characters, would have probably quit RPGs and be reading a book instead.
God bless him and god rest his soul, but as much as the man contributed to RPGs along with Dave Arneson, and as much as I am grateful for that, I for one am glad RPGs have evolved past certain ideas Gygax had.
One of these ideas is "oh, this cool toy is only for the GM to have, even though it's in the player book. You can't have it." Frankly, screw that idea. The cool toys the GM has is the whole game, the whole system, all the monsters, the whole world. That's enough, I think.
If I read about the cool capstone abilities in Pathfinder, I want to enjoy envisioning playing a character that has reached that capstone. I don't want to see, on the advancement sheet for a PLAYER CHARACTER CLASS, "oh, but this isn't for you, you'll only ever see an NPC give a deadly performance or become a holy champion." HELL NO. As far as I'm concerned, if it's in the list of player options, then it can be used, potentially, by player characters. End of story. (And how many "villain holy champions" are we going to see anyway?)
That I've run a game where I've gotten to see a player activate his awesome capstone ability and exult in it just makes me even more delighted to be a Pathfinder player and moreoever a Pathfinder GM, and as a GM I am in fact delighted those options were not restricted to me only. I pity anyone who thinks it ought be otherwise, for they shall never see that joy.
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
I've often asked people who say "the system doesn't work at high levels" what happened in their high level adventures that made them think this. The answer I usually get is the sound of crickets chirping. By all means, if there are good experiential stories that illustrate this issue, I want to hear them.
I've GM'd STAP start to finish, the last 5 chapters converted to PFRPG from 3.5. Between doing those conversions myself and actually running the game at those levels, I feel pretty well qualified to talk high level mechanics.
I would agree with what you wrote, with this one caveat: high level play magnifies the difficulties that are inherent at low- to mid-level play. High level play is like low level play "writ large;" the wins are bigger, the risks are bigger, and the game-stoppers are bigger, too.
For instance, initiative rocket tag is much more of an issue at high levels. Likewise save or die/save or lose effects. In high level play in STAP, I've seen multiple bosses die in the surprise round due to a failed saving throw. On the topic of cool capstones, I had a rogue straight master strike a CR 25ish balor lord stone dead in the surprise round. You can read about it in the STAP Glories thread if you want the whole story. It was pretty awesome. Similarly, I had a major chapter boss get quivering palmed. Now, I'm not one of those GMs with an unhealthy attachment to his badguys. But there are those GMs out there, and they're going to have a harder time adjusting to that kind of thing at high level, when it happens more frequently, if they don't grok it at lower levels. Moreover, it also happens to PCs more often at high level, and can be more difficult to recover from.
That brings up the issue of encounter balance. Encounters tend to be swingier at high levels--either the badguys can base you and full attack, in which case you lose, or they can't, and you win. Buffs and debuffs also *radically* change encounter balance dynamics at high levels in ways they do not at low levels. Haste is great, but haste + good hope + inspire courage + mass bull's strength + heroes feast + stoneskin + barkskin = you get the picture. If a buffed enemy catches you unbuffed, you either teleport away or die in place.
The supposed "caster-martial disparity" is in greater effect at high levels. There is literally nothing a high level wizard cannot accomplish given enough time. IMO this is a feature, not a flaw, but you can find plenty of posters who disagree with even a cursory search.
Large party problems also get exacerbated at high levels (if you have a large party). I had a 7 player party. It was just more manageable at lower levels than at higher levels, no question. At high levels, players get analysis paralysis every turn because they have so many options and modifiers to calculate; play slows down as a result.
Now, by and large, I agree with you that the system doesn't just simply stop working at 16th level. Nonetheless, if a GM/player/group has small problems with the system at low levels, those problems can become game-stopping at high levels. Both GMing and playing are harder at higher levels. Adventure design and encounter design are harder, too.
TL;DR it's not so much that the game suddenly stops working at high levels, it's that little pitfalls inherent in all levels of play get magnified like everything else at high levels.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Our latest release, the high-level 58-page adventure "Kingdom of Toads," is very timely. It's for 17th-18th level PCs, and scales down to 15th level or up to 20th. You can get it in pdf right here!
It's not a Paizo product, but written by a Paizo adventure-writing freelancer--does that count?
This is an old argument predating 3rd ed. Apparently ex TSR staffers said most player do not play or care about the higher levels and most of the classic D&D adventures are low level and the high level ones tend to be about level 8-11.
It might have had something to do with how long it took to level up with TSR era D&D games but you do notice that even with something as basic as BECMI there was not a lot of material produced for the CMI part of BECMI.
3.x is terrible to run at higher levels. I did actually run that epic adventure back in 2002 or so. It was just awful and when Sorcerers can cast 17+ spells per round it is just not fun. How does the DM deal with chain timestops and animal armies via the Druid?
I've often asked people who say "the system doesn't work at high levels" what happened in their high level adventures that made them think this. The answer I usually get is the sound of crickets chirping. By all means, if there are good experiential stories that illustrate this issue, I want to hear them.I've GM'd STAP start to finish, the last 5 chapters converted to PFRPG from 3.5. Between doing those conversions myself and actually running the game at those levels, I feel pretty well qualified to talk high level mechanics.
I don't know what STAP is, but I appreciate your response.
I would agree with what you wrote, with this one caveat: high level play magnifies the difficulties that are inherent at low- to mid-level play. High level play is like low level play "writ large;" the wins are bigger, the risks are bigger, and the game-stoppers are bigger, too.For instance, initiative rocket tag is much more of an issue at high levels. Likewise save or die/save or lose effects. In high level play in STAP, I've seen multiple bosses die in the surprise round due to a failed saving throw. On the topic of cool capstones, I had a rogue straight master strike a CR 25ish balor lord stone dead in the surprise round. You can read about it in the STAP Glories thread if you want the whole story. It was pretty awesome. Similarly, I had a major chapter boss get quivering palmed. Now, I'm not one of those GMs with an unhealthy attachment to his badguys. But there are those GMs out there, and they're going to have a harder time adjusting to that kind of thing at high level, when it happens more frequently, if they don't grok it at lower levels. Moreover, it also happens to PCs more often at high level, and can be more difficult to recover from.
I'm largely with you here. These kind of things can happen at any level, but it can certainly be more frequent at high level. I've seen few bosses one-shotted, but when it happens it's kind of mystifying even if you realize it was possible (for me it was during the mythic playtest I ran, when the shadowdancer hit a mythic fire giant in the surprise round with a vorpal blade, and he rolled a 1 on his saving throw... mythic or no, there was nothing to stop his head from rolling off).
There's kind of a give and take though, here... sometimes part of what's AWESOME about playing high levels is exactly that kind of thing happening though. An 18th level character SHOULD have a chance at a one-shot kill. There are some things they SHOULD just be able to mow through without blinking. There should be things in the world that in fact reinforce how powerful, how heroic or villainous, the PCs are at that point. The trick and trouble is just to be sure that it doesn't happen all the time.
Now, I'd also note that some of the design issue itself also isn't in the design of high level play but of save-or-die kind of circumstances. Whether you're level 2 or level 18, it can be deflating to see either a PC or NPC die just because they flopped a 1. This is a core system issue that is beyond level. (And it's one not easily solved; I have one player who I can understand his POV--if you're a nearly godlike hero, you should be able to point at a mook and say "die" and it dies; personally however I'd prefer spells that aren't necessarily ever godlike in power but ALWAYS are effective to some degree, rather than be nothing-or-everything. But that's really a conversation/debate to have another time.) But you are right, anyway, that you see the negative aspects of that game mechanic more often at higher levels, just because more opportunities for them are created.
That brings up the issue of encounter balance. Encounters tend to be swingier at high levels--either the badguys can base you and full attack, in which case you lose, or they can't, and you win. Buffs and debuffs also *radically* change encounter balance dynamics at high levels in ways they do not at low levels. Haste is great, but haste + good hope + inspire courage + mass bull's strength + heroes feast + stoneskin + barkskin = you get the picture. If a buffed enemy catches you unbuffed, you either teleport away or die in place.
To me, the issue here is more about learning how to design high level encounters and understand that high level encounter design is different from low level encounter design (not to say you do not understand this, as I am sure you do, but some of these problems can be mitigated). If the party ALWAYS has the 7 rounds you listed to buff in advance without interruption, something's up (even if some of those have lengthier durations that they can be cast in advance). Single BBEGs, never a great idea, really can't work at all at high levels. You need to be also really willing to think about stuff you don't always consider -- terrain, hazards, ongoing effects, indeed pre-buffs as you note, etc.
The bigger challenge from what you mention to me is less the power level -- because everything gets to buff to some extent -- and more just having the wherewithal and focus to keep track of it all. Although I guess now that we have condition and buff cards and such, that can help a bit. Oh yeah, high level play is possible -- but for me one of its biggest challenges is just keeping track of everything. Digital tools like combat manager are a great help.
And as for - what if the PCs teleport away? Okay, they teleport away. And if they teleport away from the enemies' buffed mooks while the big bad is devouring the king's soul, so that by the time the PCs teleport back in all buffed up, the king is utterly destroyed and the fate of the world imperiled because of that... well, they're high level, they should know how to face the consequences of their actions. High level adventures should have high stakes. If you're always able to spend half the day buffing yourself before doing anything, something's not quite working right, and it isn't the simple fact that it's a high level game.
At the same time, when stakes aren't high... again, sometimes it's okay just to let the PCs be completely amazing. It makes that really tough encounter around the corner all the more frightening... "we tore through those last demons like tissue paper, but these guys aren't even showing a scratch on their scaly hides! Damn!"
All this illustrates the need of what we were talking about earlier -- guidelines to help avoid the pitfalls of exactly the kind you are describing.
The supposed "caster-martial disparity" is in greater effect at high levels. There is literally nothing a high level wizard cannot accomplish given enough time. IMO this is a feature, not a flaw, but you can find plenty of posters who disagree with even a cursory search.
While this is true, it is also true there are likely to be more things to get in the way of the high level wizard.... anti magic and wild magic, enemy counterspellers, etc. NOT that everything should be designed JUST to stop a high level wizard, but that high level wizard doesn't exist in a vacuum, and the kind of things that are going to attract a high level wizard's attention for adventuring are going to come with challenges to the wizard's abilities, same as everyone else.
And I agree with you otherwise, that unhindered a high level wizard SHOULD be awesome and bending reality to his will, etc. But again, there will be stuff keeping that high level wizard distracted and busy---whether it's crafting a paradise demiplane or fighting the forces of evil--that they're unlikely just to be running around warping reality as they plase.
Large party problems also get exacerbated at high levels (if you have a large party). I had a 7 player party. It was just more manageable at lower levels than at higher levels, no question. At high levels, players get analysis paralysis every turn because they have so many options and modifiers to calculate; play slows down as a result.
I can barely manage more than a 5 person party at level 2... I just think running large parties is hard anyway. Some of this can depend on the party or players too... some always know immediately waht they're going to do, others hem and haw. You have to hope if you're running a high level game your players are veteran enough to try and keep things going.
Though actually I'd say analysis paralysis can be hardest on the GM... if you're running your uber demon with 85 Sus and SLAs but of course only one can be cast per turn... it can take forever to figure out the best tactical option for the moment (mythic rules help with this a little but, but also in themselves add more options to be paralyzed by). So I don't disagree with you but my concern there is actually more on how it affects the GM than players.
Now, by and large, I agree with you that the system doesn't just simply stop working at 16th level. Nonetheless, if a GM/player/group has small problems with the system at low levels, those problems can become game-stopping at high levels. Both GMing and playing are harder at higher levels. Adventure design and encounter design are harder, too.
Agreed.
Again, that's why I want a guidebook! :)
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Our latest release, the high-level 58-page adventure "Kingdom of Toads," is very timely. It's for 17th-18th level PCs, and scales down to 15th level or up to 20th. You can get it in pdf right here!
It's not a Paizo product, but written by a Paizo adventure-writing freelancer--does that count?
I've run through a lot of the authors previous work, and he's good.
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
I don't know what STAP is, but I appreciate your response.
Savage Tide AP. It was the last of the Dungeon mag APs Paizo published. It consists of 12 chapters and goes from level 1 through 20-21-ish. It was written for 3.5; I played it using those rules until PF got out of beta and then converted stat blocks for the last 5 chapters.
I agree with everything you wrote in your last reply--I won't quote it all point by point for readability's sake, but you point out a lot of ways to mitigate the difficulties involved in adventure design and encounter design at high levels. Paizo's AP writers know how to do that; some GMs and players know how to do it; but those that don't are going to have problems that they wouldn't necessarily have a lower levels. If you are a brand new GM with brand new players right off the turnip truck you can muddle your way through at low levels. High levels are less forgiving in a lot of different ways. (just to make it clear, I am not insinuating that you personally are not high level GM material--on the contrary, I'm really enjoying this conversation)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Count me in, in the "High level play requires a change in play design" crowd". That came out clunky, but I hope you get my point.
I've played epic-level 3.5 games that went well into level 30+. We traveled the planes, fighting gods, commanding armies, building headquarters and personal "lairs," etc. The same old "save the farm from the Ankheg attack" stuff just doesn't work anymore. Think BIG.
One thing our main epic-level DM did, that saved a TON of time and math, was that he allowed us to just take averages on successful attack rolls for damage, spell effects, etc. Instead of rolling 25d6, plus Xd8, plus multiple modifiers, etc, he had us average out what each attack or spell could do, and gave us the option to simply declare the average in the event we use something.
This little step saved a TON of time and math, considering not only is epic play increasingly time-consuming and complex, but we also had 7+ players at the table. Active time for each player to make use of their actions, was precious.
I would think if there was a great demand for high level adventures, 3rd party publishers would have filled the gap that Paizo's left open.
Which, btw, if anyone knows of some, PM me. I'll buy it. Our group is parked at 17 right now and everybody's a little anxious of home-brewing something that high/complex.
Count me in, in the "High level play requires a change in play design" crowd". That came out clunky, but I hope you get my point.
I've played epic-level 3.5 games that went well into level 30+. We traveled the planes, fighting gods, commanding armies, building headquarters and personal "lairs," etc. The same old "save the farm from the Ankheg attack" stuff just doesn't work anymore. Think BIG.
One thing our main epic-level DM did, that saved a TON of time and math, was that he allowed us to just take averages on successful attack rolls for damage, spell effects, etc. Instead of rolling 25d6, plus Xd8, plus multiple modifiers, etc, he had us average out what each attack or spell could do, and gave us the option to simply declare the average in the event we use something.
This little step saved a TON of time and math, considering not only is epic play increasingly time-consuming and complex, but we also had 7+ players at the table. Active time for each player to make use of their actions, was precious.
Another useful option for this is to use laptop/smart phone apps to speed up dice rolling and keep track of all the different modifiers.
Those can be rather hazardous to use though, if any of your players have a short attention span.
|
|
I posted something almost exactly like this in the Modules forum giving some ideas for the new quarterly format to help fill the void while still giving the low-level fans the love they deserve. I suggested planning the modules as follows: two low-level (1-6), one mid-level (7-14), and one high-level (15-20) each year.
In the subsequent discussion there was a lot of dislike, shall we say, thrown out against high-level play and all the same arguments were made about game balance and system breakdown. I disagree and have run a handful of 3.5 games that went into high levels, SCAP went levels 1-20 and a homebrew that went 3-25, and neither game had issues with the system breaking down or any fun being lost.
Ultimately it is a matter of preference and I feel that there are obviously more people who prefer low-level and mid-level play. Personally, I greatly enjoy all three types of play with very different styles and tones to each.
In the previous thread Mr. Jacobs chimed in dispelling a misunderstanding about limited space and word count that I had long held to be a major contributing factor and that is the stat-blocks for high threat adversaries are not the things that eat up word count but it is the author needing to account for a large number of variables implied by character options and abilities. Raise Dead being made as a specific example gives PCs a massive informational resource so designers then need to determine what dead mooks may or may not be able to tell the party and what might happen once raised and so on. This is just one example but many other such powers exist.
If you do a statistical breakdown, and I have because I'm a dork like that, it is clear to see that there is a massive lean toward low-level adventures and virtually nothing for high-level play. The lean, I fear, is saturating the Pathfinder market with low-levels material and abandoning the, admittedly smaller, part of the fanbase that enjoys high-level play. This low-level leaning seems even to be limiting the Module options for the so-called 'sweet spot' of levels 7-14.
PFSRPG Modules (Old Format)
Low-Level (1-6): 12
Mid-Level (7-14): 8
High-Level (15-20): 2
As you can see there are more than twice the number of low-level adventures than there are mid- and high-level adventures combined.
PFSRPG Modules (New Format)
Low-Level (1-6): 2
Mid-Level (7-14): 1
High-Level (15-20): 0
The new format beginning soon with Dragon's Demand will hopefully push this trend in a more balanced direction but only time will tell.
3.5 Modules
Low-Level (1-6): 12
Mid-Level (7-14): 9
High-Level (15-20): 1
Adding the 3.5 material to the mix just shows more of the same.
Once I did these numbers I saw the gap was greater than I expected so I added the APs to the mix to see all of the options available to high-level fans. Not all of the APs go to 17th level with most stopping at 15.
Adventure Path Installments
Low-Level (1-6): 17
Mid-Level (7-14): 27
High-Level (15-20): 4
These number count only the PFSRPG AP installments but I am sure the trend exists in the 3.5 paths as well.
The flood of low-level material here isn't as extreme with a greater emphasis on mid-level but there is still very little support for high-level options. Wrath of the Righteous may lean away from this but again, only time will tell.
In conclusion, there is very little in high-level options and that is a shame with even the existing material focusing on the low end of the spectrum (AP installments are level 15, Moonscar is 16, Witchwar Legacy is 17, and Blood of the Dragonscar (3.5) is 15).
--
EDIT: Clarification
|
|
There are some intruding Third Party options out there and I applaud their efforts. I have had little opportunity to really peruse the options available since my gaming budget is limited but thought Rappan Athuk was a decent enough effort and succeeds in it's intentions of a megadungeon with an old school feel. Slumbering Tsar seems to be heading toward high-level play and I have heard great things about Coliseum Morpheuon which focuses on levels 18-20, a range COMPLETELY unsupported by Paizo.
I would also like to delve into pure speculation since I have no facts to back this up. In looking at the level ranges of the products presented by Paizo between the Modules line and the Adventure Path line the bell curve is way off when compared to each other. Interestingly enough, the AP line continues to boom while the Modules line is faltering. A new format may breathe new life into the line but perhaps if the level ranges were a bit more like the ranges offered by the APs sales would be a little better. Again, only time will tell.
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
At the risk of going off-topic, I wanted to speak to this. I've been doing some reading about the early history of D&D, and this idea of "Gygax was always throwing around instant death traps" is overstated.
The reason that this idea caught on is because, back in the early days of TSR, they were trying to drum up business by running tournaments at various conventions. These tournaments were usually multi-round elimination contests, where dozens of characters who played through the first round needed to be whittled down to a much smaller group who could advance to the second round. Also, the PCs received scores based on the things they did during the adventure, and the longer they were running around the dungeon the more the DM had to tabulate after the adventure ended, again, for dozens of characters usually run back-to-back in a very tight time-frame.
While the tournament modules were quite deadly, it isn't just those adventures that can give that impression. If you look at some of the "examples of play" from early D&D there was a lot of lethality. The 1e PHB had a pinned illusionist possibly being killed in the example combat; the 1e DMG example of play had a gnome being dragged off by ghouls because he got very slightly separated from the group (climbed a wall and was trying to fasten a rope for the rest of the party); I have a Basic set sample of play where a character dies to a poison needle trap. TPKs may not have abounded but the expectation seemed to be that 1-2 PCs out of 7-8 might croak in a level 1 adventure. Now, it was often through some tactical error on the PC's part - illusionist in melee, splitting the party, not finding a trap - but those kinds of mistakes were intended to be lethal.
If we were all still playing the game as intended by Gary Gygax, most of our characters would be permadead after hitting that instadeath trap on Level 1 of The Dungeon. And I for one after failing 20 saving throws and writing up 19 new characters, would have probably quit RPGs and be reading a book instead.
God bless him and god rest his soul, but as much as the man contributed to RPGs along with Dave Arneson, and as much as I am grateful for that, I for one am glad RPGs have evolved past certain ideas Gygax had.
One of these ideas is "oh, this cool toy is only for the GM to have, even though it's in the player book. You can't have it." Frankly, screw that idea. The cool toys the GM has is the whole game, the whole system, all the monsters, the whole world. That's enough, I think.
If I read about the cool capstone abilities in Pathfinder, I want to enjoy envisioning playing a character that has reached that capstone. I don't want to see, on the advancement sheet for a PLAYER CHARACTER CLASS, "oh, but this isn't for you, you'll only ever see an NPC give a deadly performance or become a holy champion." HELL NO. As far as I'm concerned, if it's in the list of player options, then it can be used, potentially, by player characters. End of story. (And how many "villain holy champions" are we going to see anyway?)
That I've run a game where I've gotten to see a player activate his awesome capstone ability and exult in it just makes me even more delighted to be a Pathfinder player and moreoever a Pathfinder GM, and as a GM I am in fact delighted those options were not restricted to me only. I pity anyone who thinks it ought be otherwise, for they shall never see that joy.
At the risk of going off-topic, I wanted to speak to this. I've been doing some reading about the early history of D&D, and this idea of "Gygax was always throwing around instant death traps" is overstated.
The reason that this idea caught on is because, back in the early days of TSR, they were trying to drum up business by running tournaments at various conventions. These tournaments were usually multi-round elimination contests, where dozens of characters who played through the first round needed to be whittled down to a much smaller group who could advance to the second round. Also, the PCs received scores based on the things they did during the adventure, and the longer they were running around the dungeon the more the DM had to tabulate after the adventure ended, again, for dozens of characters usually run back-to-back in a very tight time-frame.
Both of these considerations meant that these tournament modules were incredibly lethal, as that eased the burden on the DMs that were doing so much so quickly. The fact that these were one-shots with (randomly) assigned pre-gens for the players helped to dull the sudden loss of a character also.
But these tournament modules had a tendency to survive the tournaments they were made for. TSR realized that they could make some extra money by repackaging and selling these adventures for retail purchase...and often, the only changes...
My point, which was "RPGs have changed in how they were played, and we shouldn't assert that something has to be a certain way because that's how Gary Gygax did it," stands. I have re-added the context which provides that. I'm sorry the fluff at the beginning didn't work for you, but it's hyperbole, the purpose of which is to help illustrate a point even if it is an exaggeration.
And perhaps my actual point is even much better reinforced by your post, as Pathfinder I don't think is at all designed for tournament play, so thanks for your help.
I feel like The Block Knight said it best in the last page. The story works for the game, meaning old threats don't hold the same amount of sway. I have been noticing the argument that a lot of high level play is tough to design around, but the issue seems to be mostly based around theory. In theory, PCs could pick up ways to scry or buff themselves to the point where nothing stands a threat. But in practice, that only comes up when they're allowed to do that. You'd like to cast Heroic Invocation before entering the archlich's main chamber? Well, if you weren't giving such a loud speech, the bag of bones wouldn't have kicked down the door on you all and started blasting you with instakill spells.
Plus, it might just be me, but it seems like the whole "power levels get too high" argument swings both ways. Yeah, you can get heroes that can foil plans of BBEGs, but who's to say that BBEGs don't have ways to foil the heroes' plans from the get go. I feel like the sorts of adventures that should be involved in high level play are essentially speed chess on both sides of a relatively cold, yet increasingly hot, war. The culmination of action should be after the end of both parties surveying the scene and playing the odds, not just a standard "kick down door, kill X enemies, get loot" scenario you'd see at lower levels. Plus, I'm a large proponent in high level games of PCs being guardians or protectors of continents, planets, or even planes.
But that's all just my two cents.
The Witchwar Legacy is for a 17th level party. That's the highest level Paizo adventure I know of. I don't know how well it sold, but there haven't been any more, to my knowledge.
Too bad there are so few published adventures that go all the way to 20th.
A few 3pps fill the niche:
Btw Adventure Quarterly #2 has an 18th level adventure. Also from Rite Publishing, Coliseum Morpheon and the Faces of the Tarnished Soukh line provide high level content.
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
aceDiamond: Check my post above. The design and play difficulties are not just theory.
STAP bears out a lot of the design themes you mention in the second paragraph of your post. The last three chapters in particular are that high level speed chess. It's actually a really great example of working high-level design.
I may need to check that AP out soon, then. I also like the part in your post where you say that "There is literally nothing a high level wizard cannot accomplish given enough time." That indeed is a massive caveat that gets often overlooked. For example, people say that Batman can defeat any DC hero or villain if given the proper amount of prep time. But that's a large "if". And that "if" becomes even larger when applied to PCs and villains.
I feel like being prepared and being unstoppable are two very different things that keep getting lumped together by people. Is there that much of a mechanical difference than crushing a glass and throwing it into an enemy's eyes at level 1 and casting Sunburst at level 15-16? Both options allow the chance to blind (or should, I'm not certain of explicit rules on tossing crushed glass), but one involves a high level of abstract "power" that most casters don't reach.
I'd like to see an occasional module that's actually done like Part 6.5 of an Adventure Path.
Basically, take an Adventure Path, and write a module that's designed to be run after the completion of Book 6, but can also be run on it's own.
By tying it into an existing Adventure Path, it may help increase sales, and it may fit in better with a higher level campaign that's spent most of a year running through an Adventure Path in that particular setting.
This is an excellent idea. Legendary Games offer supplemental material to Paizo APs already and Fire Mountain Games offers a book 7 with supplemental stuff for their Way of the Wicked AP , though neither has gone for the high level end module yet. Maybe an opportunity for these 3PPs?
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
I may need to check that AP out soon, then.
Also see Age of Worms and Shackled City. I haven't played the higher levels of those, though, so I'll defer to others who have.
With regards to your other point, spot on. Folks who get apoplectic over stuff like sleep hex, for instance, are going to have much bigger problems at high levels when things like Stunning Assault become the order of the day.
I also found it hard as GM (but not impossible or game-destroying) to keep track of monsters' abilities when they had gazillions.
I just want to say that while this is true, I like it when powerful monsters have a gazillion abilities. It gives them the variety they need to truly compete with high-level adventurers.
One if the things I didn't like from the transition from 3.0 to 3.5 was the culling/paring of abilities from powerful monsters. I understand why it was done, it does make it easier for DMs to understand the stat-block on the fly, and gives clarity and focus to encounters.
But it's less-good for giving monsters the versatility they need for existing in a campaign long-term. I recognize most critters last an encounter, but IMO, high-level campaigns are (or should be) about recurring characters, long-term opponents.
That's harder to pull off in an adventure. I'd like to see some of the things Evil Lincoln talked about, but also high-level adventures and APs that at least occasionally topped off at L.20-21 like the not-so-olden days.
But...it is true that too many people "check out" of APs and adventures when they enter high levels. THus they'll never be as profitable as lower-level stuff, even if a majority of people do want them (all it takes is a significant plurality of people who don't).
|
|
Shackled City fell apart a little bit in the end stages but Age of Worms had some epic throwdowns that were pretty damn amazing. Take a look at Into the Wormcrawl Fissure (Dungeon 134) and Dawn of a New Age (Dungeon 135) for what damn good high-level adventures look like. It's a shame we don't have those sorts of adventures for Pathfinder, especially considering the byline on Wormcrawl.
I'd like to see an occasional module that's actually done like Part 6.5 of an Adventure Path.
Basically, take an Adventure Path, and write a module that's designed to be run after the completion of Book 6, but can also be run on it's own.
That would actually work really well because most APs end with "hooks" for continuing the campaign, which means the writers of the AP have some notions of how things might continue to unfold.
|
|
One of the ways to fix that problem is character levels. Compare storm giant to stone giant/ monk 10.
There's more to it than just hit points and BAB.
It's also important to mix things up. You'll need a group of giants, plus a spellcaster and someone that can fly, like a giant wyvern.
That way, it's harder to defeat them with a single spell or tactic.
aceDiamond: Check my post above. The design and play difficulties are not just theory.
STAP bears out a lot of the design themes you mention in the second paragraph of your post. The last three chapters in particular are that high level speed chess. It's actually a really great example of working high-level design.
Hence why I used Savage Tide as one of my examples in my last post. Frankly, the high-level chapters of Savage Tide should be the go-to example/case-study of how to design solid high-level modules. The high-level chapters of Age of Worms are really great as well, but Savage Tide is probably the cream of the crop.
However, looking at more recent PFRPG fare, I still say Spires of Xin-Shalast is also an excellent example of how to design a high-level adventure. The dichotomy of design element differences between low, middle, and high-level play are actually showcased quite well throughout Rise of the Runelords. From the types of adventures and quests given to the players between the six modules to the adventure-style itself. For example, it's an Adventure Path that is largely a single-path narrative (which some may unkindly dub as a "railroad") throughout the first five modules, but the final module switches over to a more sandbox-style format once it hits high levels - though that's not to say the players can take an unlimited amount of time to complete their goals in the final module, on the contrary, the BBEG (being suitably appropriate for high-level) adjusts his tactics the longer the party takes (and also adjusts tactics based on party tactics as well).
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
I think the Paizo team incorporated a lot of lessons they learned about high level in SC and AoW into STAP.
For instance, near the end of each AP chapter there is usually a clue or hook that sends the PCs on to the next chapter. At a certain point in STAP, the PCs don't get those any more. It actually says that the PCs will have to use high level divinations like contact other plane or vision in order to figure out what to do next. That's good high level design. Don't nullify the PCs' high level abilities; design the adventure so they NEED those high level abilities to succeed and progress.
I haven't played through the end of RotRL, but it sounds a lot like the way STAP got sandboxy toward the end, especially ch 11, "Enemies of My Enemy."
The fun thing about high level play as a GM is that you can really take the kid gloves off, confident in the assumption that the PCs will figure out a way to handle pretty much anything you can throw at them. Once you have stuff like clone and contingency, even TPKs aren't a game stopper.
TOZ: It was pretty awesome, one of my proudest memories as a GM. It was also a merry bloodbath. :D
As a thought...
I've seen posts from time to time on running mooks, advice for GMs, running your BBEGs...
...but those guidelines, while they don't completely change, they are different at higher levels.
Just a suggestion, but we could use some guides on:
- Designing high level encounters
- Handling high level play
...from the GM's perspective.
I don't know what STAP is, but I appreciate your response.Savage Tide AP. It was the last of the Dungeon mag APs Paizo published. It consists of 12 chapters and goes from level 1 through 20-21-ish. It was written for 3.5; I played it using those rules until PF got out of beta and then converted stat blocks for the last 5 chapters.
I agree with everything you wrote in your last reply--I won't quote it all point by point for readability's sake, but you point out a lot of ways to mitigate the difficulties involved in adventure design and encounter design at high levels. Paizo's AP writers know how to do that; some GMs and players know how to do it; but those that don't are going to have problems that they wouldn't necessarily have a lower levels. If you are a brand new GM with brand new players right off the turnip truck you can muddle your way through at low levels. High levels are less forgiving in a lot of different ways. (just to make it clear, I am not insinuating that you personally are not high level GM material--on the contrary, I'm really enjoying this conversation)
I am enjoying it as well too. I remember Savage Tide now... I think I have a few issues of Dungeon with some of its chapters (ironically, I was just thinking of beginning a Dungeon and Dragon subscription just when WotC cancelled them). My game was an early one as well -- we started in 3.5 at 14th level and converted around the time the party hit 15th or so. Interestingly, the handful of things we homebrewed to easy the transition ended up being quite similar to mechanics added in later Pathfinder splats (for example, we homebrewed a feat to cancel out the AOO when using a ranged attack in melee, which ended up being quite similar to the one in UC).
I wonder if the Strategy Guide will have anything for advice regarding high level play. My sense is it is very geared towards beginners. Or Mythic for that matter.
If not there's still a gap that needs filling.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Designing high level encounters...
Here's my thinking on the subject.
First, I go for versimilitude, which is to say, there needs to be internal consistency inside the game world. Ex: If room one has a powerful lich, and room two has a bunch of dwarves with a pile of gold; the players better get there today. Tomorrow, room one is empty, and room two has a lich and 42 dwarf zombies.
Why does this matter to you? Because it means that any monster over CR 10 wasn't just born lucky. It's had to fight to get to where it is, against other creatures who were also formidable. It's not that the forest has a green dragon and no one knows. It's that we DO know, and it's dragonslayers 0, dragon 5. So we pay the tribute, and the dragon leaves us alone.
Any useful NPC will have thought of a way to deal with flight, invisibility, arrows, and magic. How do we know? Cuz it's still standing there.
#1) So before you run an encounter, think. What's the appropriate response? It doesn't have to be brilliant, just has to be enough.
Ex) Half-dragon ettin barbarian 3 (CR 10)
Flying creature? Fly up to it and smash it
Invisible creature? Use breath weapon
Darkness? Ignore, and smash it
Arrows? Fly up to archer and smash it
Magic? Fly up to wizard and smash it
Good magic? Rage, power attack, then smash it
Really good magic? Run away
#2) What's this dragon thing do when it's not fighting adventurers? Think about that. There's no correct answer, maybe it's worshiped by a local kobold tribe, maybe it lives alone in a cave and builds another trap to defend itself. Maybe it hangs out with her husband on the pier, I don't know, but you should.
#3) Encounters have to be different. You can't square off against a succession of creatures on the other side of a blank battlemat. There needs to be terrain, weather, circumstances. This is a question of fairness- Acrobatics is only worth having if it comes up sometimes. The same is true for a HUGE section of the rules, so give everyone a chance to do their thing.
#4) Players are going to be GOOD at their thing. Don't take that away, and make them into 2nd level characters with a lot of HP. Make them USE what they have, and track people across the shifting sands of the mana waste instead.
#5) Mix it up. You need multiple, different enemies for each encounter as well. Multiple, because of action economy, and different, because it forces players to plan B, and pulling off combos is much harder.
First, use the few barbarian levels to shore up defenses. See what you can do to increase senses and saving throws, there's a few ways to make that happen. Even a single barbarian level adds a bunch to the ettin. She's most dangerous with a full attack, and rage makes that more true. If she has to close, faster movement will help that happen, and opening up class skills should really help her see things coming.
I'd mix the ettin above with a second one at least (actions), and throw in something radically different as well to round out the encounter. That way, tactics that work well on the ettins are helpful, but not as encounter breaking.
Options: some sort of elemental creature to which it is immune; a spellcaster of some kind, a hag witch would be good; or a favorable environment.
Perhaps the white dragon ettins erupt from the snow and attack while the party is standing on the surface of a frozen lake. A sixteenth level party could have to face a LOT of these guys. Sure, the front line guys will have the AC and HP to get by for a while, but when half the party drops in the surprise round; well, that's an encounter.
|
|
I am not fond of high level adventures for several reasons :
The first is the rule system, where the number of things to remember increases with each level, and game balance is already difficult for me by level 11.
The second is that in many high level adventures, the plot is often full of logical holes.
Next, you need a challenge worthy of these high level heroes, and it way too often goes into "extra planar invasion" to avoid upsetting the existing world.
I want to mention Legendary Games mythic plugins line in this thread. (also available on paizo)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
+1 from me, for more high level stuff
On a side note, having quality high level modules would be a big help to the newbies. It's commonly agreed that higher levels have more stuff involved with them when it comes to creating encounters and plots. It's a whole new world out there.
Because of this, it's generally regarded as easier (or at least simpler) to prepare a low level adventure. Which in turn makes the idea of having someone else do the prep work for you all the more appealing, especially if you trust that they know what they are doing when it comes to high level play.
Which in turn may help give ideas for people running their own high level games, so it's kind of a win/win in that regard. You get to test the waters of high level play with some premium example material and then that may help you when you're designing your own high level games in your homebrews.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"The System Doesn't Work"
No.I have ran a level 14-19 game over the course of a couple years. I also ran a mythic playtest one-shot with 20th level characters. The system worked just fine for me. The hardest part wasn't game balance, it was simply encounter design, because NPCs had a lot of spells (and this is before stuff like the NPC Codex came out). I also found it hard as GM (but not impossible or game-destroying) to keep track of monsters' abilities when they had gazillions. I think often high CR monsters are designed by tacking on more and more abilities rather than making them really, frighteningly good at a few things, and that is a flaw in the game's creature design. It is especially problematic because while a monster may have 20 options for what he can do with his turn, he still only gets one turn per round (mythic rules where there's ways to give big bads an extra turn per round really helps).
It's not imbalanced, at least in my experience. It's just a lot of work.
You know, this is a really good point.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The Book of Beasts: Legendary Monsters is available in both print and PDF. (This is basically a reposting of an earlier post, but with an updated link since the old link is no longer valid.)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
High level play is perfectly doable, but yes, it takes quite a bit of work on the DM's part, and some adjustment as well.
My highest level game so far (and probably highest level game ever) was a 3.5 campaign that went to level 35.
While the final battle of the campaign involved the PCs becoming gods and fighting a world-destroying monstrosity (known as the Devourer of Souls) inside its prison in the sun, my actual personal favorite moment of epic absurdity came around L27ish IIRC.
The Devourer was served by a number of very powerful beings, one of whom was a wizard who'd descended to the depths of the Abyss to obtain the aid of Obox-Ob, obyrinth lord of vermin and former prince of all demons.
After a fairly convoluted trip through the Abyss (during which, among other things, the party fought and killed Pale Night) the party traced the wizard's path and finally made it to Zionyn, where they were able to force a confrontation with the wizard right as he concluded his pact with Obox-ob.
The party killed the wizard (who had a clone, so he returned to fight another day) right before the obyrinth lord's form became manifest.
And then the fight got ridiculous, as the party opened a gate to the holy water sea of Mount Celestia and the barbarian passed the grapple check necessary to pick up the Lord of Vermin and haul it through the gate.
Much to the surprise of everyone at the table, the barbarian then survived getting counter-attacked with the epic spell Crown of Vermin for over 1,000 damage.
The rest of the party came through the gate and closed it, where they were joined at the bottom of the holy water ocean by their ally Bahamut. And so battle commenced between a seriously ramped up obyrinth lord, a dragon god, and seven epic level characters.
It was good.
I think the biggest obstacle for DMs to overcome for high level play is realizing you're running a game for a party of super heroes, and embracing it.
Anyways, a short DM's guidebook with tips and suggestions for how to design high level adventures would not be a bad idea.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think the biggest obstacle for DMs to overcome for high level play is realizing you're running a game for a party of super heroes, and embracing it.
I think this sums it up quite nicely.