|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've seen a few threads around calling for banning spells, or broken classes, or getting devs to make changes to things. While those threads have their places, and some have clarified issues, I'd like this to be one where we offer advice to gm's on how to curb some of the excessive rules bending or breaking some players may try. ( even if they come about it innocently).
I'll start the ball rolling by discussing one that's popped up recently
Golems - a recent poster was discussing how something as powerful as an Adamantine golem was easy to overcome using antigravity. This was then used to provide an argument for casters being op.
I'd like to discuss how I design golem encounters to see if application of in game logic and campaign setting can address this.
My first thoughts are, if you only put a golem there as an obstacle to by pass in order to reach an objective, then you will have trouble. If you want them guarding something, and you want them to be a hard fight, make so they must be destroyed in order to succeed.
Eg put the item being guarded inside the golem. Pcs need to destroy it in Oder to get to the item.
Eg2 make it so the portal/ door/ cunningly wrought device can only open with the power that is animating the golem. Once this animus is freed for the golem ( by destroying it) then the way is opened.
Another trick I use is to ensure golems are in locations where their reach is always viable, including reaching the roof. This poses problems for flying creatures as much as it does for thebantigrav crowd.
Lastly, golems always had issues with being tricked by illusions etc. one of my favourite tricks here is to use golems in conjunction with controllers of some type. I once ran a golem encounter where an imp familiar was left to control it. The creature hung around invisibly and called orders to the thing that heed negate illusions and other tricksy things. Mostly by getting the golem to change targets every second round. Nothing scarier for a caster who thinks the golem has already engaged and locked on to a target, only to have it switch objectives suddenly and come thundering after him.
Pit spells my still be problematic, but then they are less so if you use my first piece of advice.
Ok, I'm typing this on an iPad, which is a painful process. I'll pop back in later with some ideas and advice on high level stuff involving extra planar creatures and certain magics.
Cheers
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
ok, got my little ipad keyboard up and running now which is somewhat easier.
so, a note on extra planar creatures and game balance.
DnD and Pathfinder after it, has always had a long history of dealing with creatures that exist outside the material plane.
Some of these creatures have a vested interest in either destroying said plane or trying to maintain balance on it. Any of these can be used as foils against players creating overly powerful uses of magic to potentially break a game.
The ineveitbles, the aeons, the genies and thier ilk, all watch the planes for over use of certain magics or certain activities that threaten their own agendas. As GM I would advocate the creative use of spells to solve problems or modify the game world. However, If I felt things were getting a little whacky or overtly power trippy, then I had access to some cool and powerful creatures who may just pay a visit to the mortals trying out this funky stuff and messing up their plans. I once had a group of Inevitable s visit my players during Age of Worms and give them a gentle warning that if they continued on a certain path they were planning, then the Inevitables would have to "set things right". My players took the hint, because they knew that the in game consequences would be severe. They also understood that it made perfect sense for that consequence given the campaign setting. The group enjoyed the fact that I let them try their little plan, and even let parts of it work. But when it looked like creating an inadvertent power surge for the group, they didn't complain when forces beyond their control intervened.
On the flip side of this, many other extra planar creatures have their own agendas completely. Summoning spells force creatures to attack your opponents. The summoned creature has no say in it. Some extraplanr creatures just may take offence at that sometime, However, I've never found summoning over powered so never really pursued that line of thinking.
Gate and binding though, those I've thought about. Here we have a powerful caster dragging powerful creatures away from their own agendas. These beings are fighting planar battles or crafting the multiverse in pursuit of their own goals and now some upstart has pulled them away to perform a duty on the material plane, a place they aren't interested in or they'd already be there doing stuff. Getting away with this once or twice is probably ok. Start making a habit of it though, and suddenly you have a whole bunch of things looking at you from their plane of existence with something less than jovial attitudes. I suggest its a bad idea to get powerful creatures to start paying attention to you, or may not enjoy the experience.
This approach limits use of very powerful abilities but still lets players try them occasionally. In some cases it may even provide a new driving force for your campaigns as you start to introduce external factors that the players themselves brought in through their actions. This is creative GMing using the tools provided in the campaign setting and the bestiaries.
note that this is not house ruling. This is applying the setting and monsters in logical ways. Just because the players handbook doesn't spell out these consequences in the spell description, doesn't mean they wont happen. This is why there are books for players and books for GM's. GM's have options beyond what the players get. Using them in creative, yet sparing ways, can lead to easy balance of otherwise problematic situations.
OK, well this thread is part of a process I'm using to work off stress and remove myself from these boards. I'm trying to create something positive from the way I've run my games and the way I think certain issues can be resolved without the need for complete rewrites.
This is likely one of the last threads I'll create here, so if possible, I'd like to see it remain civil (assuming anyone finds it worth while posting in at all)
Cheers
This reminds me of some ' environmental' aspects of old Forgotten Realms modules. In Myth Drannor and Undermountain teleport didn't function normally. Certain other spells where also effected.
This never bothered me as a player. I always felt magic got a bit silly at high level breaking verisimilitude.
This is a great thread! Thanks for the thoughts and observations.
I'm working on a campaign world where spells that pierce the veil between planes (summoning, gate, teleport, etc.) weaken the boundaries between planes. If too many of these spells are used in a single area in a span of time it can cause a rift to another plane. If the players are lucky it is an elemental or lower plane. If they are not it will be the Far Realms.
There's no reason to place a mechanical limitation on world-breaking powers when you can simply have the breaking of the world be part of your campaign story.
|
Interesting proposal. One thought though is to make certain that it doesn't appear to be an overt punishment. There are other options to dealing with overpowered tactics. Like asking the players to switch it up, for instance. I'd hesitate to use tactics that feel like an outright punishment. That said, this is still a great idea. Gives players full choices, but implants consequences should they abuse them. It isn't perfect, but then again such checks and balances aren't perfect in real life either...so...
I'm sorry to hear you're leaving the boards Wrath, this kind of thread is what I look for here, myself.
I particularly like your solution regarding the golem and antigravity. Simply lowering the ceiling so antigravity can't put the golem out of reach of targets is a very eloquent solution to the problem. It's also extremely logical. After all, a wizard capable of creating an adamantite golem is almost guaranteed to have access to--or at least knowledge of--antigravity, and would take steps to ensure his creature isn't so easily foiled.
I have to admit I've yet to play in a game that had a great deal of summoning, other than a druid who'd toss out a summon nature's ally every so often.
However, my current magus PC will eventually gain the ability to summon powerful dragons via a custom spell chain, so it'll be interesting to see how that plays out. I've already suggested some possible RP opportunities regarding the spell to my DM, which will make the spell more fun for me, and allow him to potentially cause it to fail at times when he doesn't want that level of power to skew an encounter.
OK, well this thread is part of a process I'm using to work off stress and remove myself from these boards. I'm trying to create something positive from the way I've run my games and the way I think certain issues can be resolved without the need for complete rewrites.
This is likely one of the last threads I'll create here, so if possible, I'd like to see it remain civil (assuming anyone finds it worth while posting in at all)
Cheers
=(
Where did you go for so long, if you don't mind me asking?
We were all pretty disappointed when RotRL fizzled out.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Thanks for the feedback so far. I only have a few more things to post myself, but I'd love it if other GMs could post in here to put forward ideas themselves.
On working with gods - many divination magics and divine magic specifically, calls upon the powers of the gods or other powerful beings to provide information. In a situation where high powered beings are setting in motion world changing events, information is vital. Not only will the creatures in the material plane be taking steps to mitigate it, but their patrons, or other interested parties in the other realms will as well.
I tend to think of as a divination proliferation war. Most divinations spells give you answers on what something might reasonably know. If the other side has made it difficult to know, you may find the players divinations are for nought.
Alternatively, when your party uses divination to discover major plot elements, the enemy can do similar things and work out what's been discovered. They can then adapt strategies or set traps when the time comes to act.
This is not about punishing players, its about making them wary and not becoming blasé about said powers.
Teleport is another one. Teleport is fundamental to high level play. It's powerful and if you're not careful as a GM it can change your game horribly. Teleport has a chance to fail, make sure that gets reminded to your players every time they go to use it. When it does fail, put them in a situation that is uncomfortable at best. When I was playing a sorcerer in Savage Tides AP I had a teleport fail on my way back to Sasserine. Me and the tow companions travelling with me were deposited on a small raft of flotsam in the middle of the ocean, right on the boundary of the error range of the spell. We were perfectly safe, as per the requirements of the spell, but very close to us was a battle of sea creatures, and some of them had noticed us. The DM had reminded us how dangerous the spell could be, but we didn't suffer overtly from it. My sorcerer merely cast it again the following round and we were off. However, if it was something being abused in a game, we could have easily found ourselves on a flotsam raft in the centre of that battle, suddenly facing a full round of actions from enraged behemoths, kraken s and water elementals before I could teleport again. Imagine that scenario in more dangerous environments at higher levels.
Scry and fry is a fantastic tactic. It should be rewarded at times, but then it should also be able to mitigated. Scrying can be detected, and when done so, used against the scryer. If an enemy knows he's being scryed, have him set up false information or show the players false areas that are actually traps but lead the players to believe its the enemies throne room or bedroom.
Here's a scenario that combines the stuff above to try and illustrate my point.
Bad guy has used a statue of his god to get some divination information. Turns out some adventurers are going to scry him this week in the hopes of dropping in unannounced and kill him. So bad guy gets his flunkies to help him set up a room for ambush. He knows when it's going to happen so he just waits on that day. Adventurers scry, teleport and Bam get hit with readied actions by flunkies . Or perhaps find themselves in a dimension locked room that activates when they teleport in and opens the secret doors concealing 4 golems in a room where they can reach all spaces.
The trick here is not to make it so the players are slaughtered for the tactic, but to make them wary of over using it. Or spending more resources to try and use it effectively.
Remember as GMs, you have access to powers the players don't. You can create ancient buildings with defences not known in any player book. Artefacts or deity devices can be used by even non casting types to get access to divination are information. Visits from a gods agents or even a god itself can provide your NPCs with information your players can't get.
However, for consistency, you should allow that to happen both ways as well. Occasionally, your players should stumble across something that lets them get powers from divine beings they wouldn't normally access.
The idea is to make the game world seem to work in conjunction with the powers players have, not break because of them.
Cheers
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ok, one more post from me this weekend, unless something jogs my creative urge or someone asks some specific question I can address.
A thread I was looking over was talking about simulacrum being used to break games. It was an interesting thread, with many arguments unfortunately.
Once scenario was put forwards where the players created a simulacrum of the local queen to find out what she actually was (since she wasn't supposedly the human she was purporting to be).
To me, this is actually a really clever use of the spell. I'd probably reward that. However, the poster was suggesting it ruined his game.
My advice would have been to make the spell fail or not work as intended. The spell itself calls for a sculpture of the target. If the queen is actually a shape shifter, then the party simulacrum won't work because they haven't actually sculpted the true target at all. They may get a perfect copy of the queen, but absolutely none of the information they are after.
Imagine if the queen was actually being possessed by something. Again, the simulacrum wouldn't reveal anything at all since they haven't actually sculpted the target.
Some folks put out ideas like crafting the Tarrasque, or really powerful dragons, or genies for wishes. This kind of thing is rather ingenious, but seriously open to interpretation. As a GM, you ultimately have the power to determine the consequences of these actions. Some that I can think of immediately
- Genies are aware of how wishes are used (according to a paizo publication no less). When the players create their genie wish machine, the real genies act in force to either corrupt the wishes or steal the simulacrum.
- Too many wishes in an area can actually make the area fragile in terms of planar powers. The planes become "thinner" and bad stuff happens. It may not affect the players directly, but it will certainly affect the game world. This is also mentioned in a Pathfinder publication (Legacy of fire issue 6 on the wish economy)
- Powerful creatures as simulacra or mounts. I think at a level where this tactic is being used, its something I'd be tempted to run with. Let them try it, but adjust things accordingly. Other creatures may hear of this and decide they want that mount as well. Steal it for themselves and use ritual magic to rest control from the players.
- Better yet, have the powerful creature that has been copied hear about it and come looking for the offending players. Imagine the look on the players faces when the ancient golden dragon they copied turns up and politely asks to have its likeness destroyed or risk having their bodies turned to ash. An evil dragon of course wouldn't give the offer, it would just lay waste to the players.
- The tarrasque. This one actually made me laugh. As a GM I'd have said something like the following "In all the thousands of years of history in this planet, no one has succeed at this. It doesn't mean they didn't try though. Are you sure you want to find out why they failed?" Sometimes that will be enough. Sometimes it may not. Make sure you have a reason it failed that makes sense in the game. Some examples (depending on how harsh you're going to be).
1) The sculpture used looks nothing like the actual tarrasque and so doesn't meet the requirements of the spell (which states a statue of the target.)
2) The spells works...sort of. Since the Tarrasque is unique and can't be controlled by spells (see the Tarrasque description about immunity to mind controlling etc) then the moment it appears, its immunity kicks in and now the party has to deal with a simulacrum of the Tarrasque in their midst.
3) Make it work, but the damn thing is so hard to control that it takes a full round to make it do what you want. Every time.
4) The moment it comes into being, the real Tarrasque becomes aware of it. It turns out everytime this has been tried in the past, it has brought about the rise of the real Tarrasque. Have the creature arrive 3 or 4 weeks after the players created their creature. Now they have to work out a way to defeat it or prevent it wasting their entire area and all they hold dear.
5) This one is only really if you feel the players are deliberately being nasty and trying to trash your world. Have the simulacrum be the actual Tarrasque. Turns out that this technique is actually one of several methods that have been discovered to summon the real thing. No one has actually survived long enough to warn anyone though, because you know....the Tarrasque landed in their lap when they tried.
Some of these sound punitive, but please remember they are only for use after gentle warnings or simple discussions between parties. I love having game world consequences for players actions. This is what this thread is about.
Cheers
|
I particularly like your solution regarding the golem and antigravity. Simply lowering the ceiling so antigravity can't put the golem out of reach of targets is a very eloquent solution to the problem. It's also extremely logical. After all, a wizard capable of creating an adamantite golem is almost guaranteed to have access to--or at least knowledge of--antigravity, and would take steps to ensure his creature isn't so easily foiled.
For more deviousness, have the golem's location already be affected by antigravity, but the PCs may not realise it.
EG, golem attacks from above, (possibly with surprise?); maybe shaped in such a way that it appears to be grasping handholds on the ceiling.
Attempting to tumble through its reach, or invisibly sneak past, send you flying off into its grasp.
PCs have to reverse the prevailing antigravity, to avoid being hoist into the ceiling.
|
|
Once scenario was put forwards where the players created a simulacrum of the local queen to find out what she actually was (since she wasn't supposedly the human she was purporting to be).
To me, this is actually a really clever use of the spell. I'd probably reward that. However, the poster was suggesting it ruined his game.
My advice would have been to make the spell fail or not work as intended. The spell itself calls for a sculpture of the target. If the queen is actually a shape shifter, then the party simulacrum won't work because they haven't actually sculpted the true target at all. They may get a perfect copy of the queen, but absolutely none of the information they are after.
Imagine if the queen was actually being possessed by something. Again, the simulacrum wouldn't reveal anything at all since they haven't actually sculpted the target.
There's nothing in the spell, giving the copy the memories of the original, except for the vague mention of knowing how to use level-relevant abilities. The body could be targetted with divinations or spell effects, to deduce what creature type it is, but that's about all.
The traditional use of the spell is to create a body-double of the caster or an ally (to trick assassination attempts, provide an alibi, etc).
I don't know if it was ever the intent, for it to be used to create victims for torturing information from.
And if it were, then it should be fair game for such tactics to be used against the PCs.
It makes sense, when creating a double of a friend, that the simulacruum needs the memories of the original, since the caster would want to teach it as much as possible, to perform as his proxy.
Until you teach it, it's a blank slate, that knows nothing of the world.
That teaching, and the time taken to provide it, should be made an explicit part of the spell text, both to limit the number of times this will be used in game (making it a Story Ritual), and to rule out using this as a method of pumping an absent NPC for information.
If the caster is copying a stranger, it should only know things about the original, that the caster is able to teach it.
That still leaves it open to creating a Manchurian Candidate, to wreck the reputation of an enemy, or gain access to forbidden locations, but that's why any organisation worth the name in a magical world would not rely on a simple face-check for ID purposes.
|
|
Snorter, I believe the original plan was to create a simulacrum and use it to find the su and sp abilities of the pretend queen. From that they worked out what it was.
I do like you pointing out the bit about memories though. It certainly doesn't say they are present in the simulacrum. Something I hadn't discussed above because it wouldn't pop up in my home games since we all assume that it has no memories by default.
Thanks for the contribution. Any other ideas for some of the stuff being bandied about?
Anyone got some stuff on things like creating other planes etc?
I've got one more to put together tomorrow, and then I'm done. It'd be nice to see the thread with more ideas from other experienced DM's out there.
Cheers.
First of all, I love the idea behind this thread. It's full of things that are too often glossed over by GMs and players alike on the road to a forum post about how broken something is.
Regarding Simulacrum,
My GM and I were actually chatting about this. Both of us tend to be of the 'not really broken, don't screw with it' camp, but he pointed out something that really stuck with me. If you make a simulacrum of a 20th level wizard you don't expect it to have 9th level spells. Why then do you expect the simulacrum of (for example) a pit fiend to have access to all of his CR 20 SLAs when he's only 10 hit dice?
Seems to me that reducing the particularly 'broken' SLAs that PCs can in theory gain access to with the spell is entirely within the spirit of the rules, even if it isn't explicitly called out.
As to new ideas...
Mystery in the World
I think something too many GMs underestimate is the value if ambiguity and world knowledge. An NPC saying something isn't likely to work is worth ten active spells that prevent it in terms of keeping the PCs from doing something. As a couple examples...
During the course of an adventure that pitted the my party against the evil ruler of a city they were told that, for instance, his palace dungeons were heavily warded, and that trying to teleport into them was unlikely to work and/or likely to be a disaster. The exact nature of these wards was never expanded upon - the PCs had exhausted the source of knowledge in that regard - but that little statement that gave away nothing mechanically kept us from attempting such a maneuver in a way that the dungeons being dimensional locked never would have.
I don't think there is anything wrong with a GM being vague about these things via NPCs - the world is not spelled out to PCs via all game terms - and leaving some mystery to magic is remarkably valuable.
Killer Day
There's also some value in the 'killer' day approach to mitigating things like the five-minute work day. Basically, the theory goes that you don't have to bludgeon your PCs with murderous 10 encounter days every day to keep them from blowing their loads on the first enemy they fight. You just have to hit them with it once out of the blue to make an impact. This happened to us a couple of years ago, when we were unexpectedly taken prisoner while astral projecting on the way to a twenty some encounter day that involved fighting our way through an entire tower full of powerful wizards, golems, clockwork things, and aberration horrors (with no gear!).
I never blew through spells the same way again unless it was an encounter that was tremendously personally important.
First of all, I love the idea behind this thread. It's full of things that are too often glossed over by GMs and players alike on the road to a forum post about how broken something is.
Regarding Simulacrum,
My GM and I were actually chatting about this. Both of us tend to be of the 'not really broken, don't screw with it' camp, but he pointed out something that really stuck with me. If you make a simulacrum of a 20th level wizard you don't expect it to have 9th level spells. Why then do you expect the simulacrum of (for example) a pit fiend to have access to all of his CR 20 SLAs when he's only 10 hit dice?
Seems to me that reducing the particularly 'broken' SLAs that PCs can in theory gain access to with the spell is entirely within the spirit of the rules, even if it isn't explicitly called out.
As to new ideas...
Mystery in the World
I think something too many GMs underestimate is the value if ambiguity and world knowledge. An NPC saying something isn't likely to work is worth ten active spells that prevent it in terms of keeping the PCs from doing something. As a couple examples...During the course of an adventure that pitted the my party against the evil ruler of a city they were told that, for instance, his palace dungeons were heavily warded, and that trying to teleport into them was unlikely to work and/or likely to be a disaster. The exact nature of these wards was never expanded upon - the PCs had exhausted the source of knowledge in that regard - but that little statement that gave away nothing mechanically kept us from attempting such a maneuver in a way that the dungeons being dimensional locked never would have.
I don't think there is anything wrong with a GM being vague about these things via NPCs - the world is not spelled out to PCs via all game terms - and leaving some mystery to magic is remarkably valuable.
Killer Day
There's also some value in the 'killer' day approach to mitigating things like the five-minute work day. Basically, the theory goes...
Because most of those SLA's are race dependent. Therefore, much like I expect both a level 1 and a level 20 Drow to have dancing lights, darkness, and faerie fire 1/day, I expect a 10 HD and a 22 HD Efreeti to both have have Wish 3/day. Also your example is flawed because a half HD version of a 20th level caster is a 10th level caster and their spells come from class levels, not racial abilities (though again if they were Drow they should both have the same SLAs). There is no logical reason for a Efreeti Simulacrum to not have its wishes outside of game balance nor would it be in the "spirit" of Simulacrum to deny them their SLAs. In fact most racial SLAs are static, much like the Drow example, so it be weird to see that a 1/2 HD that did not have the full HD versions SLAs.
The problem with the mystery in the world example is that PCs have spellcraft and should be able to determine *what* is blocking teleportation (maybe not until their inside, but definitely then). To not be ready to answer that question when a PC drops a 25+ Spellcraft check makes the wards against Teleportation nothing more then fiat.
Finally, while a killer day is fine the 5 minute workday becomes less and less of an issue as the caster get higher and higher leveled. Sure a killer workday of 10 encounters might tax a caster that is only level 5, but a level 9 or 11 one (especially ones with teleport or word of recall)? Very much less so.
Because most of those SLA's are race dependent. Therefore, much like I expect both a level 1 and a level 20 Drow to have dancing lights, darkness, and faerie fire 1/day, I expect a 10 HD and a 22 HD Efreeti to both have have Wish 3/day. Also your example is flawed because a half HD version of a 20th level caster is a 10th level caster and their spells come from class levels, not racial abilities (though again if they were Drow they should both have the same SLAs). There is no logical reason for a Efreeti Simulacrum to not have its wishes outside of game balance nor would it be in the "spirit" of Simulacrum to deny them their SLAs. In fact most racial SLAs are static, much like the Drow example, so it be weird to see that a 1/2 HD that did not have the full HD versions SLAs.
And yet, you can expect a fetchling to have disguise self but not shadow walk as a SLA untill he hits 9th level, or to have plane shift untill he hits 11th... But they are still are race dependent SLA.
Which are specifically called out as being level dependent racial SLAs.
Wish is not.
Which are specifically called out as being level dependent racial SLAs.
Wish is not.
Not written in the monster sheet, right. So instead of finding an in game solution to avoid abuse, let's outright ban the spell open to abuse or ignore the fact that it can do that, in the name of some GM-Player contract, without giving any in game reason. This will surely make the game more fun, immersive and real...
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
And so Anzyr brings me beautifully to the last point I wish to make in this thread, and indeed on these boards at all.
Before I do so though, could I ask that the rules RAW discussions be held elsewhere. I understand that arguments are raging over simulacra and wish etc, but this thread isn't about whether they are viable. It's really about what you can do to encourage players creativity without limiting the things in the books, but also preventing your world from being destroyed. I know I have no plicing powers in this, especially since after this post I'll effectively be gone, however, it would be nice if the thread could keep its core objective for a while longer yet.
And now to my final points.
Anzyr, while I don't agree with many of your game philosophy (that I've seen in these threads at least), I do agree with the point you made about having some reason why things are happening.
Peter posted some fantastic strategies that will indeed slow down power creep and also keep the mystery of the game alive. I liked them greatly, and have used similar tactics myself.
However, what does a DM do when the players eventually get to the point where they want to find out why something happens the way it does. It behooves a good GM and indeed a good campaign world to have reasons that can indeed make sense in the magical realm which their games run.
Firstly, every player and GM needs to remember one thing. What the GM has access to using far exceeds what the players have access to and may indeed not even be published yet. A player may never find the answer to why something works in the books he has available to him, but they should never cry foul, for there are many secrets to the gaming world that the players don't know coming into the game.
The following are all useful but please use sparingly. It gets old fast if every fortress or dungeon has these in them.
1) Ancient magics beyond the ken of mortals - the gods, the old ones, the titans, things from the far realms, ancient thassilon, cultures dead before even those. Golarion is ancient beyond the recall of mortals.Some of the most powerful magic ever seen appeared and died out before the player characters ever arrived. Scholars have been researching these things for centuries, but still only scratch at the surface of this knowledge. Sometimes it is perfectly valid for you to say "Despite your vast knowledge in the area, the power behind this device elludes you". However, don't make it a habit or it reduces the effort a player put into his characters skills almost mute.
I ran a PbP on these boards where this very thing was happening. A powerful magic ward had been created to capture an ancient evil. The ward was powered by the life blood of an ancient earth elemental. However, in order to keep the elemental bound, a druid or other divine caster had to sacrifice his divine power on a daily basis to keep the bindings active. If the culture where this was built failed in its dity, or no divine caster was able to power them enough, the whole thing would fail. None of the players could actually replicate this magic, but it all made sense in game world, and they could certainly work out how it worked eventually. It added much enjoyment and immersion to the game.
2) Ritual magics - Nearly all the spells in the players handbooks and other publications so far deal with things a players character can do on his own. Nothing (that I'm aware of), deals with what can be accomplished given a group of casters working over a long period of time in a collaboartive ritual. However, the adventure paths and muodules are filled with such scenarios. There is precedent for them in the game. They are in fact a GM tool, not a players tool. Be prepared to let players know roughly what effect is being used and let them know it is only possibly through special rituals known only to the cult of blah blah blah. Or perhaps it is only possible when 4 powerful wizards of differing beliefes (ie alignments) work together to create it, etc. etc. This way a spellcraft can actually tell what is going on, but players cant replicate, and may not be able to break it. This type of thing is fantastic for game play, as it allows you to create possible ways to destroy the thing through messing with the ritual or trying to discover said ritual to see if you can reverse it. You don't need to detail it, just know its there.
3) Magical nodes and places of power - many palaces and crypts and towers etc are built in locations that eminate a power of some type. The world seems to coalesce magic of certian types all the time. This is why we have places where the dead walk among us, or where elementals and fey are more predominant. Eberron was a setting where the planes occasionally became co terminal with the material plane and all sorts of things could be built or created this way. I don't believe this is true in Pathfinder but certainly could be, and certainly is an option for homebrew worlds. A building where the undead are constantly regenerated doesn't have to have a zone of desicration to work, it merely needs to be built where the negative energy plane happens to be really close to the material plane and some of its power leaks in.
4) The room is a giant magical item. There are rules for creating magic items for player use. As yet there aren't any for creating huge items like entire dungeons etc, but its not that hard to extrapolate on the current rules to get to it. A set of rooms that prevent scrying and teleporting merely require someone who can cast mind blank and dimensional anchor while the room is being constructed. Just like crafting magic wands or helms or other such things. Of course it's going tobe amazingly expensive, or take really long periods of time to do it. This makes it beyond the realms of most player characters. Quite a useful thing to play with if running kingmaker though. Any type of sandbox game can benefit from this type of thinking.
5) Finally, the magic that holds the spells in place could be powered by something the players would never use (gm judgement required here). The dungeons mentioned above may have wards that are powered by the fear and mysery of those captured within it. As such, the king regulalry has enemies of the state torirtued and maimed, but rarely killed. He needs them in agony for as long as possible to keep the place powered up.
While those are ideas I have used in my games, I'm sure there are many others. In fact, something you can do (and something my group have done on occasion), is discuss with the gorup how they think it might work and run with that. I occasionally set traps or puzzles with a rough idea of how it works then sit and listen to my players hash it out. Sometimes a player comes up with something much cooler than I thought of so I run with it. Try not to let the players in on it though or it can ruin the moment of victory for them.
Ok, that's all from me. I have the option to lurk for another week, but posting for me from this point is out. Best of luck, and I truly hope some folk get mileage out of these ideas.
Cheers
Wrath
Wow, I was actually enjoying the good ideas on this thread . . . Until Anzyr and the others started the (not unexpected) hijack. Would like to see other great ideas on "Using the game world to maintain balance" please. Less of the "the game world cannot help to keep things in line because = GM FIAT!!!!
Thank you.
I am in favor of having the spell rebalanced or removed if the fact that if it used to create a copy of an Efreeti will create a situation where the game is imbalanced. It is silly to make up rules (clearly, a 5HD Efreeti does in fact have Wish I can't imagine you are seriously arguing they do not), simply because the rule you are dealing with to powerful. The correct option is clearly to have it balanced or removed, instead of ignoring the rules and pretending the ones you don't like aren't there. The same thing goes for the WBL/crafting rules. If allowing a crafter to be able to half their costs creates an unbalanced situation, then the rules should be changed or removed.
What I am arguing is that there is that there is very little balance one can fairly accomplish through the game world and that the root of the problem, the imbalanced rules need to be changed or removed. It is absolutely silly that if Jim decides to use his spell Simulacrum, he must willfully ignore (pick up the idiot ball) the fact that some monsters have very powerful SLAs. Or alternatively, it is ridiculous that in order to play the game, the GM must houserule spells to work differently so that Jim will not have to pick up the idiot ball when using Simulacrum (either because it has been changed or removed).
Amatsucan_the_First: You seem to be misreading something. There is a large difference between using the world to balance out the game and using fiat to balance out the game. Having all places the PC's want to go have a "mysterious ward that prevents teleportation/ethereal travel" is fiat. Having the villain's castle be lead lines or a Permenacy'd Mage's Private Sanctum is using the world. One of these is something that the PCs can solved, the other is not.
(On a side note, I myself use Unhallow + Dimensional Anchor in most buildings that have access to casters of that level, which allows the villains full reign to teleport around a site, while locking down the PCs. Note that there are rules for that and everything, instead of "mystery anti-PC wards".)
|
Thanks for the reminder, my last homemade game world had ideas like this. The inspiration was the old Dragon cartoon Wormy, where there were two levels of story, what the regular size characters were up to, and what the big folk were up to (dragon, ogres, cyclops)
So, think about what the major individuals and groups in your campaign world are, and what they are trying to achieve.
My last world had very clear rules on how wars were to be fought. Battles were observed by priests of the war god, and they would attack any who broke the rules.
Teleportation magic had become a monopoly, and was limited to certain routes. The mages guild dealt quickly with those who broke the rules. Likewise, magical items all had trademarks, and the core rulebook represented guild prices. Cheaper illegal items could sometimes be found, but were sometimes unreliable.
All temples and even some shrines were defended by the faithful, usually augmented with outsider help. Stealing from temples just wasn't done lightly.
And dying meant legally dead, even if you were brought back. Usually only mattered to those wealthy enough to inherit estates and such.
Thanks for the posts Wrath. I will be using some of these ideas in my games.
And dying meant legally dead, even if you were brought back. Usually only mattered to those wealthy enough to inherit estates and such.
Now that is fascinating. What brought about such a law?
I like utilizing environmental factors to help balance.
Peter Stewart's first feedback post on my game included this gem, back around 4-5th levelish.
"It was also a little refreshing to have random encounters and the weather to deal with, something my past DMs haven't ever really paid much attention to, and by virtue I had never paid much attention to. When you aren't out in the cold and rain yourself sloshing though muck it is easy to forgot just how cold and awful it is so having them included gave the game a new sense of realism, at least for me. Fluffy descriptive text it no longer is. I'll be sure to pay more attention to the weather when Kain describes it in the future."
That was after the party nearly died out in the Cold Marshes.
At higher levels, I still like keeping weather/environment relevant, but in a suitably more impressive manner. I've had PCs fight a massive tidal wave, made them deal with an astral storm (which disrupted astral based teleportations), and plague style rains of serpents.
The astral storm serves a dual purpose. First off, it added an element of risk to what was becoming mundane teleportation. Second, its mitigation provided an adventure hook. I don't like simply taking away toys. I try my best as a DM to always provide things in a pattern of problem > partial solution > full solution. I think it's important to provide methods for your PCs to utilize their abilities.
As for issues like simulacrum, a DM does not have to justify themselves further than "appropriate hit points, feats, skill ranks, and special abilities for a creature of that level or HD". As long as they are consistent within their campaign world, it doesn't really matter whether the simulacrums of genies, glabrezu or pit fiends have wish or they don't. In my world, they almost certainly would not.
Similarly, utilizing planar binding on an efreet to gain wishes is fairly classic fantasy. Using it on a second or third or seventeenth means to me, at least, that the campaign is going to be about binding efreet, and adventures will proceed accordingly. At no point, however, will a wizard player simply state "Oh, btw, I paid the gold and bound fifty wishes from efreet"
Calling in general I think should be an impressive encounter, not simply a few rolled checks. It is an opportunity to explore the mindset of an outsider in a way that most demon slaying doesn't capture. To use Pete as an example again, we had an interesting situation crop up. I had custom designed a host of angels based on the classic angelic orders. They had a ton of abilities like true seeing and such that made them extremely inappropriate for longtime called servants. When I designed them, I had only been thinking of things from the CR perspective, rather than the PC usage perspective. However, I had never really intended them to be active on the Material Plane either. Pete knew little of this, he only knew their statblock and that they had a nice host of useful abilities that he wanted to make use of.
I could have squashed the attempt, either in character or out, but I decided to have it play out instead. Pete's character ended up calling a pair of these angels (though only one managed to be bound), and in letting that play out, I drove home a few key ideas, such as that these angels aren't suited for binding/Mortal Coil adventures, that true seeing might have some limitations, that outsiders don't have simplistic desires, what it feels like to be banished (as in the spell) and a lot more. I think that it ended up as an opportunity for something richer than it would have been had I merely nipped it in the bud.
Most of the 'outrageous' ideas players come up with aren't terrible...if they are used sparingly. Scry and die, bind wishes, gate in a god...they are all pretty cool until they are repeated ad nauseum.
Using things like Otataral from Erikson's Malazan books to allow martials some effectiveness against casters and embuing fortresses or at least vaults with an anti-magic capability which is not magic itself can be an effective means of balancing casters.
Also, using tactics which account for them. OOTS is full of excellent battle scenes where casters are nullified by clever strategems, do the same in your world. Create encounters that expect casters, use wands of greater dispel, have casters rocking counterspells, throw in some SR for good measure.
Use dungeons that react to magic being cast in them, effectively nullifying certain spells, like a dungeon that shuffles its room locations whenever teleport is cast, or a dungeon that requires a key to navigate safely.
Create spells dedicated to undoing some magics. Create feats to give martials nice things. Drop magic items selectively and close the magic item stores forever: make it craft, find or recieve as a gift or reward. GP is for mundane things. Also, tack on quests to craft items and minimize downtime: this keeps casters from going craft crazy.
Give martials some in world benefits: a mage guild or a temple can provide spells and components for casters, a knightly order or a theives guild can provide influence outside of the rulebooks: allies who will side with the fighters and rogues as non feat cohorts for certain quests, will provide fantastical animals for mounts or allow for social achievements that would be harder to accomplish via spells. These things give martials agency without rewriting their classes.
As for silmulacrum, give the genies, etc. wishes, but just go wishmaster on the PCs if they abuse it: the genie's essence is false so the wish is corrupted, the genie's body was empty so the soul of an ancient, powerful, and evil genie has filled the void, twisting the wishes until it is free of its new master, etc. etc.
None of this violates the RAW, in fact they become adventure platforms, and adventuring is what the game is about.
And Rule 0 is RAW, whether DM fiat or not. As long as everybody's having fun, then Rule 0 is tops.
Key note though, which will likely be ignored in rebuttals, but I'll put it in anyway:
Moderation is key here. Every dungeon with Otataral, only cool guilds for monks and rogues, every encounter rocking counterspells, this becomes tedious and punishes casters. If your casters are sharing the reality bending goodness for all, don't hit them with the nerf bat. Only the selfish, "stand back guys, me and my 50 summons and my eidolon have got all the encounters, always" types need that bat a lot. The rest of the time these balances should be fun challenges which deserve rewards for overcoming and out thinking.
And clever spell casting, within RAI, shouldn't be discouraged just because it bypasses something you had planned: don't punish players for out smarting you. That's a good thing when they do. Reward it.
Ahhhh failed Will save . . .
Anzyr: I am not misreading anything. Wrath started a great thread that was intended to be used to offer advice to prevent or curb rules bending or breaking by using the game world. Peter Stewat did just that. Then the "mystery in the world" was questioned as a viable bit of advice because the PC would have a skill to learn what caused the mystery. Therefore, DM Fiat if there is no game rule explaining all.
No argument here by me, but anything that is done by the DM is Fiat. The whole rpg is DM fiat. Example:
The Big Bad somehow got to be the Big Bad. BBEG in his past performed an impressive deed to help out a divine/otherworldly/ancient being. In gratitude, they gave him/his residence protections. Divine/otherworldly/ancients beings exist in the world in the books with most if not all of the powers undefined. PC's would have no chance to skill or divine the origin of the mysterious cause . . . Because the rule or spell does not exist. There are mysteries in a fantasy world that should exist, period.
What I am trying (probably poorly) to point out, is that the thread is about balancing the game within the fabric of the game world. The thread is not about finding reasons that the suggestions should not work.
Thanks.
Also, silmulacrum = a bloody, mutilated, dead horse that has been picked over by a host of scavengers. It stinks and is covered in flies and wriggling maggots. Please let's just burn the corpse and move on.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You are confusing fiat and being the DM. Not everything the DM does is fiat. Fiat is only when the DM does not use the rules. Planning encounters is not fiat. Having high enough leveled BBEGs using Unhallow + Dimensional Anchor is not fiat. Having a DM say "The castle is protected by mysterious wards that prevent you from teleporting there." is fiat. On the surface both of these situations seem similar as the PCs are prevented from teleporting to the warded area. The difference is that one situation has a set of spells that can be identified via spellcraft, and countered via Hallow (ie. is working within the game rules). The other situation has no spellcraft dc, underlying spells, or ways to counter it (ie, working via fiat).
My point is that while the world can be used to help maintain balance, the amount of balance it can maintain is very low. Your argument Amatsucan_the_First appears to be that "GM Fiat can balance the game" not the "balance within the game world". The problem with your position of "mysteries should exist period" is that they interact very poorly with the actual rules. That is not to say that you can't have mysteries, but you need to accept that such mysteries are simply a Legend Lore away from being solved.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Rudolf:
I've never created a game world where magic was as prevalent as the one you describe. My method has always been to have magic be very rare (except for the PCs, who are special).
But I am loving the ideas you've put forth, which allow for all the high level magic, and at the same time integrate it into the game world in very interesting ways. Next time I create a new campaign, I may need to steal many of your ideas and try out a high-magic world for the first time. :)
Legend Lore tells PC that divine/otherworldly/ancient being granted boon. Done. No solving mystery through game defined rules. Still a mystery.
My point is that this is a thread about offering suggestions about how to maintain balance THROUGH the game world. The thread is not about tearing the suggestions down. Game world is all DM fiat and really that is mostly what any post here that stays to topic will be about.
Sorry if you think I am offering offence, but I am just tired of almost every thread being hijacked for the same old tired arguments. Nothing new I guess. It is pretty much why I stopped following the boards a long time ago. Oh well . . .
Good luck all and thanks to those whom posted to this thread with consideration to the OP intent. Sorry I did not (darn low will save bonus anyways!)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"...the divination brings legends (if any) about the person, place, or things to your mind. These may be legends that are still current, legends that have been forgotten, or even information that has never been generally known."
"If you have only detailed information on the person, place, or thing...the resulting lore is less complete and specific. If you know only rumors...the resulting lore is vague and incomplete (though it often directs you to more detailed information, thus allowing a better legend lore result next time)."
Funny. Doesn't seem to say 'immediately ruins all mysteries' anymore than simulacrum says 'mimicked genies have wishes' In fact, it seems set up to encourage adventures based on its results, to go discover the mysteries. Guess that 'ruins' bit must be something made up by the deadhorsebeating crowd. Go back to the simulacrum threads, Anzyr. Stop trying to derail this one. You're offering nothing better than "you can't do that," which is A) wrong, and B) rude.
Everytime I have an NPC hit another NPC without making an attack roll, I'm using fiat. But you're mad if you think I'm going to roll out an offscreen battle, or in some cases, an onscreen one that the PCs haven't gotten to interact with yet.
I'm not sure if you didn't bother to read the spell, or if you are deliberately posting misinformation, but quite frankly you are incorrect regarding Legend Lore, Kain Darkwind. (If you disagree with me about how a spell works please thoroughly read it as you have likely missed something.)
Lets see what Legend Lore has to say:
If you have only detailed information on the person, place, or thing, the casting time is 1d10 days, and the resulting lore is less complete and specific (though it often provides enough information to help you find the person, place, or thing, thus allowing a better legend lore result next time). If you know only rumors, the casting time is 2d6 weeks, and the resulting lore is vague and incomplete (though it often directs you to more detailed information, thus allowing a better legend lore result next time).
Oh wow, so... if I use Legend Lore with only rumors... I get information that will let me recast Legend Lore and get the detailed information version which explicitly "provides enough information to help you find the person, place, thing". Also note that you can then recast Legend Lore a third time you get the full effect of the spell as follows:
These may be legends that are still current, legends that have been forgotten, or even information that has never been generally known. If the person, place, or thing is not of legendary importance, you gain no information. As a rule of thumb, characters who are 11th level and higher are "legendary," as are the sorts of creatures they contend with, the major magic items they wield, and the places where they perform their key deeds.
So unless what you are looking for is not CR 11, or involves someone who is not level 11+, Legend Lore absolutely will thoroughly reveal the mystery.
What I am offering to this thread Kain Darkwind is the rules. Truthfully your attitude of "It works cause I declare it so" is much much less helpful than my suggestions as to how one might actually prevent scrying and teleporting while remaining in the rules. If you do not like the Pathfinder rules, the good news is there are other games you can play. If nothing else you can always freeform RP and then you will not need to worry about any rules. Maybe its just me, but when I play a game I prefer to follow the game's rules.
A younger son who thought they had legally inherited the throne, and then were told a few days later, wait, no, sorry.
One war later, and the law was changed.
Cool idea.
Anzyr, if you would bother to read both of our posts, you might notice that what I posted is cropped from the same rules you quoted. The pertinent points, since I didn't care about casting times. However, you have demonstrated a notable lack of reading comprehension regarding those rules, so it isn't entirely surprising that you would do so regarding my post as well. In short, you either restate what I've stated, but in a disagreeable manner, or you make up quotes that I did not say, imply nor infer.
I'm actually not going to derail the thread with a rules debate about legend lore anymore than I'm going to with one about simulacrum. Your inability to respect this thread's purpose is already clear. If you would care to discuss legend lore, you can start a thread about it, or you can be wrong without a discussion, it's no matter to me.
Considering that my breakdown correctly states that a set of 3 Legend Lore's will reveal exactly what the mystery is, my version correctly portrays the full scope of Legend Lore's power. As far as I can see my suggestions for what spells can actually be used as part of the game world to help explain the world. If you wish to rely on making stuff up instead of the rules that is your prerogative. My posts have been exceedingly on topic, mostly pointing out the problems with attempting to balance the game through the world (Jackie! Listen to Uncle! Magic must fight Magic.) and made suggestions for spells that would help.
Considering that my breakdown correctly states that a set of 3 Legend Lore's will reveal exactly what the mystery is, my version correctly portrays the full scope of Legend Lore's power. As far as I can see my suggestions for what spells can actually be used as part of the game world to help explain the world. If you wish to rely on making stuff up instead of the rules that is your prerogative. My posts have been exceedingly on topic, mostly pointing out the problems with attempting to balance the game through the world (Jackie! Listen to Uncle! Magic must fight Magic.) and made suggestions for spells that would help.
It's true that 3 legend lore spells could significantly reveal a lot of information on a legend... but it's also true that it doesn't necessarily do so nor does it make it easy. Even without contending with the 2d6 week casting time for rumors, 1d10 days for more detailed information, the spell specifically says that it often provides enough info for the caster to help find the legendary person, place, or thing, often offers enough wiggle room to disallow the advancement of information. It also says the info may help the caster find what it takes to cast a more specific spell, but that may be an adventure all to itself.
Saying that a set of 3 legend lore spells reveals exactly what a mystery is would be a gross simplification of what the spell can do and the complications that are involved.| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This was an interesting thread, and I thank the on-topic contributors. Sad that the rules lawyers got a hold of it :(
This was an interesting thread, and I thank the on-topic contributors. Sad that the rules lawyers got a hold of it :(
It's an outgrowth of the 3.0/3.5 boards I think - and particularly the Char Op boards, where the goal for many is not to enjoy the game but rather to 'beat' it or 'break' it. That some things fall outside of their control is something they weren't ever very good at accepting. Those boards were definitely the first place I remember seeing people arguing they should be able to freely bind genie's, make simulacrums of things for free wishes or being with unbeatable regeneration, and so forth without ever paying a cost or anything associated with it. Hard sticklers for the exact text of the rules as written and nothing else. The kind who expect to always have access to magic items they want, spells they want, and so forth. People who cry foul when there isn't a friendly wizard around the corner to sell them high level spells out of his spellbook at cost or when they go multiple levels without being able to visit a magic item shop to customize their equipment.
In any case, a few other ideas.
Weather
As Kain notes, weather is one of those silent killers that is too often ignored in the game, especially at the low to mid levels, and even into the higher end stuff depending on party makeup and resource use. If nothing else it is rather resource depleting, and really makes you appreciate the value of things like endure elements and even mild cold resistance. It's an aspect of the rules that a lot of GMs sort of gloss over.
Difficult Terrain / Undergrowth / Sight Limitations
This is one of those things that also tends to get ignored which makes a huge difference in party strength and ability. Last year my 14th level party was all but completely stymied by fighting in a jungle against an enemy with significant ability to see through underbrush and move through undergrowth, even though most of the enemies were much lower level. Though the party was able to bull through most of the attacks and wasn't ever really in danger, it was incredibly frustrating to have enemies snipping in the forest then running in such a way that we couldn't catch up or in many cases see them. This is also true underwater.
Seriously, heavy undergrowth costs 4 squares of movement AND provides concealment with a 30% miss chance. In a dense forest the range of detection is 20-120 feet. Period. End of story, regardless of your magic. Outch. Even in light forests the ranges can be really low.
|
|
Anyone that can cast legend lore (and face it, that's not many people) are going to be famous/wealthy/powerful themselves.
Which means they are capable enough to say:
A) no thanks, keep your money
B) I've been paid off already
C) You don't work for my faction, why should I work for yours?
They're also perfectly able to manipulate the PCs, to get what they want.
If you're going to have a game world, you need to know what people are doing and what they want. You can't just have monsters living in caves waiting until the players arrive.
Cool thread! There's a lot of great ideas here. I don't think that control over a setting necessarily *will* make the game balanced, but it certainly can be used to curb a lot of the more illogical excesses that PCs will go through. "You're casting Dominate on the king, are you? Ok, but as you'll see, politics is a pretty dangerous game. Oh, and you're going to have to make sure the Enchanters' Guild doesn't find out what you did. They take a very dim view of people using Enchantment to meddle in politics too blatantly-- draws waaaay more attention than they're comfortable with."
I think one interesting point that's been raised has been the DM fiat vs. a more subtle interpretation of the setting. I think that the DM has limited ability to enforce class balance through the setting, especially without it being obvious that this is what is going on. If EVERYBODY seems to be packing rocks enchanted with silence to hamper wizards or there are hurricanes everywhere to cut down on flying then it can seem like casters are being punished for having played casters. But you can do things that limit people in realistic ways that preserve the logical consistency of the world. The Dual Fortress is partly shunted into the Astral Plane due to a magical experiment gone wrong, so teleportation is going to be risky because of Astral storms. The powerful Selmachas is only too happy to do your bidding after you've cast Planar Binding on him and beat him in a Charisma check-- except you didn't win the check and he's only pretending to be your lackey as long as it suits him. Most of the times the spells will and should work as advertised, but even throwing a monkey wrench or two into the plans every now and then makes the PCs careful and prevents spamming a single effective set of abilities.
I find the important thing that distinguishes this from DM fiat is that it makes logical sense in the context of the world. Personally, I view fiat as a situation in which the DM states something happens that the player could not have reasonably predicted. Fiat has more of a "because I said so" feel to me, which is how I interpret fiat from just DMing. But usually you can make most situations work, I feel, by just interpreting abilities effectively. There's nothing in the spell description of Legend Lore that says it tells you exactly where, say, the Holy Spear of Alkirk is located. If you do all of your research, know things about the Spear, and cast Legend Lore, then what they'll most likely get it something like "Seek ye out the place upon which the sun never sets", not "Dude, just go to the Tree of Worlds. It's at the top". And even then... 3 castings of Legend Lore? At 2d6 weeks per cast if you know nothing at all about the thing you're asking about? So possibly 12-24 weeks of doing nothing but "routine" activities? "Ok, but for the next 3 sessions you can't cast any spells or make any attacks or difficult skill checks. You *might* be able to prepare spells, but no scribing scrolls or crafting items. Have fun!" And that's even leaving out the fact that the Order of Alkirk might be able to use their own divinations to see if somebody is seeking out the Spear and might track you down to try to disrupt your spell. They have 8 weeks to do it.