Combat balance in mythic gameplay - Ongoing campaign coverage


Wrath of the Righteous

551 to 600 of 731 << first < prev | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | next > last >>

I'm interested in the fight against the Herald. Seems pretty tough.


I am curious how the fight against the Wardens is gonna go down. The module seems to indicate that facing all at once is a TPK situation, but as your entire campaign has pointed out, the bad-guys have no contingencies for the sheer power of Mythic damage capabilites. Nonetheless, the action economy on the enemies' part should at least make it an interesting fight.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Piccolo Taphodarian wrote:
I'm interested in the fight against the Herald. Seems pretty tough.

For the Herald, maybe. ^^

Anyway, since I am not about to play too godmode, the other wardens will join the fight on round two, regardless which warden the group decides to attack first. So I think it'll be a curbstomp, as always.


I too have six players and even though I'm only midway through book 3, I've already reached the "Only x more sessions before this is over". I've thrown in the upgraded statblocks, your changes to mythic and thrown out almost all of the as written tactics (save for some story-based ones). I've been GMing since the tail end of AD&D but I just can't get an appropriate challenge into this AP. I'm just glad that my sessions are twice as long as yours (I'm a community organizer and set my own schedule and my players have Tuesdays off or also have non-standard worktimes) so it will be over soon.


I hear you. Between the new ACG classes, the barbarian and paladin, and the mythic number inflation, it's nearly impossible to create a challenge. I stopped running anything but mythic encounters in module 2. Non-mythic encounters are a waste of time.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Hm, not to create a long off-topic thingy (although, OTOH, who cares?), but you really think that the ACG classes are better than the classes we already got? I mean, outside of the Arcanist. None (other than the Arcanist, who is top tier with Wizards and Sorcerers) of them stood out to me as being nearly as powerful as a Paladin or Inquisitor.

Anyway, I'm off to bed. This afternoon after I get up (night shifts really mess up the sleeping cycle), it's preparation for tomorrow and the next campaign. It might be that I won't be ready with my homebrewn campaign if the sixth module finishes as quickly as this one. :-/ I'll probably have to talk with the group about that, maybe discuss if they want to do another AP. I'd rather do that than mess up my first homebrewn campaign in more than half a decade by doing it half-assed.

Silver Crusade

@Piccolo Taphodarian: I mentioned this already, but your players would destroy this AP as written, even if you double everything or worse.

Of course you have capable optimizers and are unwilling to nerv anything, but that is you call.

@magnuskn: The ACG classes have great potential, and are very fun to play, but I agree Paladins and Rangers are already enough to destroy it.


Well... many of the ACG classes are probably in the Tier 4 - Tier 3 range, so on a whole, they are often equally as powerful, or more so, as many of their predecessors.


magnuskn wrote:

Hm, not to create a long off-topic thingy (although, OTOH, who cares?), but you really think that the ACG classes are better than the classes we already got? I mean, outside of the Arcanist. None (other than the Arcanist, who is top tier with Wizards and Sorcerers) of them stood out to me as being nearly as powerful as a Paladin or Inquisitor.

I imagine fortification can mess up the Slayer and Swashbuckler. Absent fortification, they are quite vicious damage dealers requiring no buff time that can't be countered with dispel magic. That makes them very powerful.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Err, no. Using precision damage makes them very vulnerable to running into the plethora of conditions where said precision damage does not apply. Trust me, I played a Swashbuckler at level 15 for two months. Every second fight (at the very least), I ran into opponents in poor light conditions, with magical concealment, in fog and so on.

The Swashbuckler also suffers from his poor saves, which are only partially mitigated by the Charmed Life class feature. The Slayer at least is better in this regard and is overall the better class in terms of versatility.


magnuskn wrote:
Err, no. Using precision damage makes them very vulnerable to running into the plethora of conditions where said precision damage does not apply. Trust me, I played a Swashbuckler at level 15 for two months. Every second fight (at the very least), I ran into opponents in poor light conditions, with magical concealment, in fog and so on.

Umm, I know that a lot of people on the forums think otherwise, but (unless I am mistaken) the only type of precision damage that is actually affected by lighting or concealment is the sneak attack. Precise Strike only says that it doesn't work on enemies that are immune to critical hits. It doesn't say anything about concealment like sneak attack does.

Scarab Sages

magnuskn wrote:
Err, no. Using precision damage makes them very vulnerable to running into the plethora of conditions where said precision damage does not apply. Trust me, I played a Swashbuckler at level 15 for two months. Every second fight (at the very least), I ran into opponents in poor light conditions, with magical concealment, in fog and so on.

You did not have Shadow Strike at level 15?


As a player I really got a very different impression than many people in this thread.

Maybe it is because we are just Level 6 Tier 1 but the 2 encoutners we had were very tough - and I don't think they were Mythic monsters (i think an incubus and some cultists in a destroyed temple).

Our GM told us about new stats, an increased difficulty and so on due to a discussion at the paizo forums.

I am all for a challenge but currently my paladin goes down in every fight and I think the difficulty is a little to much.
And to be honest - IMO challenges are part of the game but also is triumph and beating the sh** out of enemies. So, some easy encounters have to be there to feel "mythic".

Edit, the group:
20 pt buy
Fighter (free hand i think with aldori dueling sword, Guardian)
Paladin of Iomedae (Champion & Marshall)
Wizard/Conjurer (archmage)
Witch (archmage)


magnuskn wrote:

Err, no. Using precision damage makes them very vulnerable to running into the plethora of conditions where said precision damage does not apply. Trust me, I played a Swashbuckler at level 15 for two months. Every second fight (at the very least), I ran into opponents in poor light conditions, with magical concealment, in fog and so on.

The Swashbuckler also suffers from his poor saves, which are only partially mitigated by the Charmed Life class feature. The Slayer at least is better in this regard and is overall the better class in terms of versatility.

Why can't they at some point consolidate rules. You have to look all over the damn book to find a specific ruling. The elimination of precision damage due to concealment is written in the environment section for darkness. Why not put it under every ability or at least under concealment.

That weakens them quite a bit as concealment is easy to come by at higher level. Glad they completely eliminated this rule in 5E D&D. Too many things to keep track of in the game now.


Well, I learned something today.

Granted, I think I'm probably just going to houserule it away, though. It's already tricky enough to get precision damage without a bazillion environmental conditions nixxing it, and too many classes that rely on it have no other dependable method of using their class abilities or even dealing damage.

Silver Crusade

Arthun wrote:

As a player I really got a very different impression than many people in this thread.

Maybe it is because we are just Level 6 Tier 1 but the 2 encoutners we had were very tough - and I don't think they were Mythic monsters (i think an incubus and some cultists in a destroyed temple).

Our GM told us about new stats, an increased difficulty and so on due to a discussion at the paizo forums.

I am all for a challenge but currently my paladin goes down in every fight and I think the difficulty is a little to much.
And to be honest - IMO challenges are part of the game but also is triumph and beating the sh** out of enemies. So, some easy encounters have to be there to feel "mythic".

Edit, the group:
20 pt buy
Fighter (free hand i think with aldori dueling sword, Guardian)
Paladin of Iomedae (Champion & Marshall)
Wizard/Conjurer (archmage)
Witch (archmage)

Sorry, but as a player of this AP, what the hell are you doing here reading this?

I know which part of the adventure you are playing at, and without spoilers, those aren't the toughest fights in this adventure even if some fights are really quite easy.

Your party composition might not be perfect for this part yet, with two arcane casters, and I suspect little in combat healing fights can be quite deadly at those levels.
Of course some options are better than others for this AP, personally I think Paladin archers are always a very potent option, especially against mobile enemies like demons.

And we really have not idea if and how your GM runs this adventure as written, nearly everybody has houserules in some aspect or another. That said most people start to complain at/after the third adventure (about mythic that is, the later half of the adventure you are playing has GM complaints entirely separated from many complaints related to mythic).


Sebastian Hirsch wrote:

Sorry, but as a player of this AP, what the hell are you doing here reading this?

I know which part of the adventure you are playing at, and without spoilers, those aren't the toughest fights in this adventure even if some fights are really quite easy.

Your party composition might not be perfect for this part yet, with two arcane casters, and I suspect little in combat healing fights can be quite deadly at those levels.
Of course some options are better than others for this AP, personally I think Paladin archers are always a very potent option, especially against mobile enemies like demons.

And we really have not idea if and how your GM runs this adventure as written, nearly everybody has houserules in some aspect or another. That said most people start to complain at/after the third adventure (about mythic that is, the later half of the adventure you are playing has GM complaints entirely separated from many complaints related to mythic).

I read many of magnus' posts and, as far as i remember right now, i have not seen very concrete information on the path in this thread. Maybe i've read the right/wrong pages. Also, I'm the one with the AP subscription in the group so I guess there are easier ways for me if I wanted to spoiler mysfelf about the AP ;)

I am sorry if I have offended you in some way because the "what the hell" is kind of "strong - or I am mistaken because english is not my mothertongue :(

I do thank you for the information concerning what people think about when mythic starts to get to overpowered. I don't think we have any special houserules for mythic yet.


Piccolo Taphodarian wrote:
magnuskn wrote:

Err, no. Using precision damage makes them very vulnerable to running into the plethora of conditions where said precision damage does not apply. Trust me, I played a Swashbuckler at level 15 for two months. Every second fight (at the very least), I ran into opponents in poor light conditions, with magical concealment, in fog and so on.

The Swashbuckler also suffers from his poor saves, which are only partially mitigated by the Charmed Life class feature. The Slayer at least is better in this regard and is overall the better class in terms of versatility.

Why can't they at some point consolidate rules. You have to look all over the damn book to find a specific ruling. The elimination of precision damage due to concealment is written in the environment section for darkness. Why not put it under every ability or at least under concealment.

That weakens them quite a bit as concealment is easy to come by at higher level. Glad they completely eliminated this rule in 5E D&D. Too many things to keep track of in the game now.

Can you link that to me? I've checked the concealment and vision sections, and neither of them mention anything about about precision damage.

EDIT: AH! Found it. The environmenal rules actually only say that creatures that are *blinded* lose their precision damage. Simple concealment doesn't stop it.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

getting a bit worked up aren't you Sebastian:)
this adventure path seems to do that to people, which when you consider the AP is about Demons and their incredibly circuitous plans for world domination, seems like they did it on purpose;)


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Artanthos wrote:
magnuskn wrote:
Err, no. Using precision damage makes them very vulnerable to running into the plethora of conditions where said precision damage does not apply. Trust me, I played a Swashbuckler at level 15 for two months. Every second fight (at the very least), I ran into opponents in poor light conditions, with magical concealment, in fog and so on.
You did not have Shadow Strike at level 15?

Oh, yes, I did. Doesn't help against Total Concealment, which shows up more than you'd think at that level.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Session of October 14th 2014:

Four players in attendance.

Alright, we are back on track for "mythic makes the life infinitely easier for players and makes it almost impossible for the GM to challenge them". Also, rolling a one on a massive damage hit sucks.

The players, with the help of Alderpash, designated Igramalash' prison as the best location to fight the five wardens, having been warned that attacking one of them would bring the others to the fight almost immediately (because fighting those five one-on-one, as the adventure suggests, is an auto-win for the party). The party greater teleported to the deep containment wards and freed Igramalash via Antimagic Field. After the giant punted the Sorcerer against the next wall, it died pretty quickly to a critical hit from the Samurai's legendary weapon. Foe-biter sucks.

The other four wardens teleported in and Uffrandir died to the first hit, due to a massive damage hit for 150+ damage and a rolled one on the fortitude save. Ylleshka went up to the three melee guys and hit them all three for something like 150 damage with her full attack. In return, she herself got another foe-biting crit from the Samurai, which took her out of the fight. Inger-Maggor then also got critted out of existance by the Paladin via foe-biting (sensing a theme here?) and then Svendack ate another critical arrow to the face (after getting greater dispelled, so that her Fickle Winds wasn't on anymore), with another rolled one on the fortitude save.

The rest of the session consisted of plundering hoards and the vault and the party finished by teleporting to the Herald.

Yeah, well. We'll have to take a break for two weeks, since next week at least three people aren't there and the following week I have an important appointment coming up, so we'll return at the beginning of November.

In other news, since said important appointment most probably will mean that I have to relearn the basics of French over the next half year intensively, I've decided to postpone my homebrewn campaign until I am sure that I'll even live in the same city anymore after May of next year. We'll start another AP after Wrath, which either will be Reign of Winter, Shattered Star of Skull & Shackles.

Silver Crusade

Arthun wrote:
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:

Sorry, but as a player of this AP, what the hell are you doing here reading this?

I know which part of the adventure you are playing at, and without spoilers, those aren't the toughest fights in this adventure even if some fights are really quite easy.

Your party composition might not be perfect for this part yet, with two arcane casters, and I suspect little in combat healing fights can be quite deadly at those levels.
Of course some options are better than others for this AP, personally I think Paladin archers are always a very potent option, especially against mobile enemies like demons.

And we really have not idea if and how your GM runs this adventure as written, nearly everybody has houserules in some aspect or another. That said most people start to complain at/after the third adventure (about mythic that is, the later half of the adventure you are playing has GM complaints entirely separated from many complaints related to mythic).

I read many of magnus' posts and, as far as i remember right now, i have not seen very concrete information on the path in this thread. Maybe i've read the right/wrong pages. Also, I'm the one with the AP subscription in the group so I guess there are easier ways for me if I wanted to spoiler mysfelf about the AP ;)

I am sorry if I have offended you in some way because the "what the hell" is kind of "strong - or I am mistaken because english is not my mothertongue :(

I do thank you for the information concerning what people think about when mythic starts to get to overpowered. I don't think we have any special houserules for mythic yet.

Don't worry I am not angry, at all I tend to apologize ahead of time even if what the hell is a strong statement, I considered what the abyss for a short time, but found it a little bit too one the nose ^^.

The reason why I am not particularly happy when players read threads like this is, that I and a couple of other posters tend to demonstrate our arguments with rather detailed posts about the adventures in question.
Some posts, like the ones showcasing the rather absurd damage output some moderately well done characters can dish out, aren't very troubling - even if I can't help myself to provide countermeasures.

More troubling are discussions about topics, where we discuss about what is actually in the adventure, what enemies can deal with certain tactics, what percentage or enemies in the AP are immune to a witches slumber hex( and how many encounters this ruins) or how much slayers and swashbucklers will suffer from the encounter design.

Frankly I think players deserve to be protected from that, I have played APs, where I had read the adventure years before. My memory was quite hazy, but it really wasn't ideal.

And yeah, quite a number of people who have participated in the playtest and GM this campaign are very unhappy, especially since there MA is a diamond in the rough.


Matrix Dragon wrote:
Piccolo Taphodarian wrote:
magnuskn wrote:

Err, no. Using precision damage makes them very vulnerable to running into the plethora of conditions where said precision damage does not apply. Trust me, I played a Swashbuckler at level 15 for two months. Every second fight (at the very least), I ran into opponents in poor light conditions, with magical concealment, in fog and so on.

The Swashbuckler also suffers from his poor saves, which are only partially mitigated by the Charmed Life class feature. The Slayer at least is better in this regard and is overall the better class in terms of versatility.

Why can't they at some point consolidate rules. You have to look all over the damn book to find a specific ruling. The elimination of precision damage due to concealment is written in the environment section for darkness. Why not put it under every ability or at least under concealment.

That weakens them quite a bit as concealment is easy to come by at higher level. Glad they completely eliminated this rule in 5E D&D. Too many things to keep track of in the game now.

Can you link that to me? I've checked the concealment and vision sections, and neither of them mention anything about about precision damage.

EDIT: AH! Found it. The environmenal rules actually only say that creatures that are *blinded* lose their precision damage. Simple concealment doesn't stop it.

To me it is not blindness, it is a lack of ability to see what you are hitting. That leads me to believe concealment works against it. The entire idea behind precision damage is hitting a vital target on the opponent. That darkness ruling as well as the ruling that anything immune to sneak attack affects precision damage leads me to believe Precise Strike is affected by similar conditions.

I won't fault you for choosing to run it the other way given the lack of clarity by Paizo with them putting rulings all over the place to figure out how it works. It should be consolidated and written under a precision damage entry clearly stating what does and does not stop precision damage. Blur and similar concealment spells effectively make one immune to sneak attack. You could easily extrapolate that to mean it affects Precise Strike as well given the idea behind both are the same.

Can you really argue from a conceptual perspective that Precise Strike would work any differently than sneak attack?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Skull & Shackles would be a lot of fun with a larger party, is easy to tweak or add onto, and only advances to 14th level so it doesnt have as many high level issues as the other two might, also that still allows you to use RMD! In your homegrown campaign


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I'm leaving that up to the group... my personal preference would actually go towards Shattered Star, because I liked the AP very much in many places. Even if it is very dungeon heavy. With Skulls & Shackles, the problem is more with the ship-to-ship combat system, about which I am quite wary. It is a Paizo sub-system after all and I know quite well by now how well those always function in their first iteration. :-/


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

fair enough:)
i use the ship to ship combat sparingly:)
you can't go wrong with any of the 3, i agree on Shattered Star, i very much want to go through that one myself, but as you said its not my decision alone:)


We just did Reign of Winter (right before Wrath) and it was greatly enjoyed on both sides. One thing thattwo of my players found annoying, however, was the Geas-like Mantle of the Black Rider which more or less forced you to follow the plot. They were kind of keen on exploring some of the exotic locales you visit (especially during Rasputin must Die) and felt railroaded.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I think I'll have less problems with the railroady aspect of that AP, my players can roll with that. I'm looking at the two AP's, and I'll probably just take Skull & Shackles out of the running myself, since I don't feel any excitement for it. So it'll be down to RoW and SS.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

Just finishing up S&S campaign myself (GF ran it for me after we finished WotR), and I can say you truly do not need ship combat. I think we used it once, maybe twice, and only then because it was something I really wanted to do. The only time it really matters is Adventure 2, and you can just have the pilot and the gunners roll a few skill checks and call it a day instead. The more relevant subsystem is Fleet combat, which comes into play for adventures 5 and 6, and is much harder to skip. I think it is a somewhat better (though similar) version of the mass combat rules, since the damage is no longer tied to the die roll, so it's not as swingy. I really enjoyed those sections.

Overall, I would recommend S&S, just because there's a much larger non-combat component than I'm used to (admittedly with only 2+ AP's worth of experience), and it never dragged too badly (worst was probably the first part of Adventure 4, but the second half made up for it). That being said, if you aren't excited for the theme, stay away, since it is covered head to toe in its theme.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Thank you for the info. The main problem with S&S for me is mainly that it seems to be missing any "this is excellent!" moments. I read all three AP's through years ago, given how I was looking to GM them one day, and in SS and RoW are both some extremely solid books and very cool character moments. Like "that trap" in SS and, well, all of module five in RoW. :D

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8

RoW has some of my all time favorite NPCs.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook Subscriber

RoW will challenge your party, especially the first book. I will warn you - I've seen several people claim Book 2 is a cakewalk, while book 3 is once again rather nasty. I do know that my own group meets only maybe monthly, so I eliminated half of the "journey" aspect of Book 2 and consolidated other elements as well. In short, I kept only those encounters that were either thematic or continued the story itself.

Interestingly, I decided to use Mythic with RoW. I've not run into your problems with Mythic, but there are two factors behind this: first, the group is only 2nd Tier, and it seems Tier 3 is where the trouble begins. Second, half the group is using the PRD for the game (the Skype contingent), and of the other half, two are rank amateurs whom I provide suggestions for when leveling up, and the third hasn't really done anything with his cleric that could be considered power gaming.

I still suggest RoW. It is a lot of fun, especially with the dark faerie tale aspect. :)


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

While I'll give myself a vote, I'll leave the final decision up to the group... I personally can't decide, since both AP's have excellent moments. Overall SS has better modules, but RoW has module five (best Paizo AP module ever) and the first two modules also seem excellent.

I'll probably add RotR to the proposals, given that I actually own the collectors edition, it just is in use with the GM of my second group... we have just begun the last module and with this two week hiatus, it may even be that we finish at the same time I'd begin GM'ing the new AP.


Spent many hours putting together a fight progression for the Ivory Sanctum since my players got their hands on a scroll of wish (I generate random settlement magic items and keep them on each cities Google Doc with Knowledge local DCs for finding them) and then wished themselves into Xanthir's presence. This was triggered by Xanthir's retrievers kidnapping Sosiel Vanic as he was giving the opening benedictions for an Ascendance Day festival in Drezen. They swaggered through the Vang + Jerribeth + mook demons fight where we ended. So I began counting squares and movement speeds for all the various minions and allies that were beating taloned feet towards Vang's chambers for what was going to be a drag out fight and I just... couldn't... do it anymore. I literally felt a sense of dread at the thought of another session, so I folded the campaign. It was just not fun anymore. It's technically on hiatus pending a deep rewrite of the mythic rules. I picked up Iron Gods and added a new character creation house rule to our wiki page: Mythic characters must first have their character sheets eaten by a GM. Within several hours, the character sheet will be returned and the player will be able to make a new character. This house rule is in effect pending a rewrite of the mythic rules.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Well, I am literally finishing the campaign by not giving a crap about balance anymore, so I am not judgemental at all. :p


2 people marked this as a favorite.
magnuskn wrote:
Well, I am literally finishing the campaign by not giving a crap about balance anymore, so I am not judgemental at all. :p

If Magnus were the GM in a game with Paizo as his PCs...

Silver Crusade

I think someone needs to see this situation as a call to action and write a mythic adventure, that is solid enough to challenge mythic characters.

I already have a vague idea about a high level module, where the players start at relatively high levels, and gain temporary mythic powers... and the entire adventure lasts only 24 hours (thus the party has to make harsh judgement calls, when and how often they can use an hour to recharge).


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I would be very interested to see that, if only on an academic level.

Nice idea with the earth elemental mountain. ^^


I think the main obstruction to such a thing is, I have to say it, the XP Budget. So long as that restriction is in place, the majority of such efforts will be hamstrung by the need to keep encounters to relatively add up to the expected amount of experience for that particular section/module/quest.

If you could start the module or adventure with a disclaimer saying "It is highly recommended that you not use experience as the method of progression for this adventure, but rather grant the players levels and tiers at the appropriately-marked events" and support that by not listing the "XP ZZZ,ZZZ" line in ANY statblocks, you could probably pull it off. Someone could, at least.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Orthos wrote:

I think the main obstruction to such a thing is, I have to say it, the XP Budget. So long as that restriction is in place, the majority of such efforts will be hamstrung by the need to keep encounters to relatively add up to the expected amount of experience for that particular section/module/quest.

If you could start the module or adventure with a disclaimer saying "It is highly recommended that you not use experience as the method of progression for this adventure, but rather grant the players levels and tiers at the appropriately-marked events" and support that by not listing the "XP ZZZ,ZZZ" line in ANY statblocks, you could probably pull it off. Someone could, at least.

Or, maybe the could forgo the idea that a single printed adventure needs to have 20+ encounters in it, settle for something like 12-15 encounters that are difficulty-based, and concentrate the rest of it on story. Wouldn't have to change the XP budget at all, then . . . only the expectations of how many actual encounters a single adventure should have in it.


JohnnyfiveUnAlive wrote:
Spent many hours putting together a fight progression for the Ivory Sanctum since my players got their hands on a scroll of wish (I generate random settlement magic items and keep them on each cities Google Doc with Knowledge local DCs for finding them) and then wished themselves into Xanthir's presence. This was triggered by Xanthir's retrievers kidnapping Sosiel Vanic as he was giving the opening benedictions for an Ascendance Day festival in Drezen. They swaggered through the Vang + Jerribeth + mook demons fight where we ended. So I began counting squares and movement speeds for all the various minions and allies that were beating taloned feet towards Vang's chambers for what was going to be a drag out fight and I just... couldn't... do it anymore. I literally felt a sense of dread at the thought of another session, so I folded the campaign. It was just not fun anymore. It's technically on hiatus pending a deep rewrite of the mythic rules. I picked up Iron Gods and added a new character creation house rule to our wiki page: Mythic characters must first have their character sheets eaten by a GM. Within several hours, the character sheet will be returned and the player will be able to make a new character. This house rule is in effect pending a rewrite of the mythic rules.

I feel for you. The level 8 Swashbuckler in my group is doing 121 point crits at 8th level with a 15-20 crit range. The barbarian has over 200 hit points and can go to -60 or so. The archer has the Inquisitor Bane ability with Mythic Arcane Strike for one use of Mythic Power. Yet the monsters are held in check with the weak mythic templates that don't compare to the player options. Not to mention an entire party of mythic PCs against one, maybe two, mythic creatures is ridiculously imbalanced in favor of the PCs.

The amount of work I have had to put in to make these encounters even somewhat challenging is way, way too much. I'm getting burned out writing statistics trying to figure out where the line is. Mythic Adventures is an epic fail on a level I haven't seen from Pathfinder to date. I can usually handle most rules Paizo puts out. I haven't been able to handle mythic without feeling a deep sense of burnout.

Silver Crusade

Welcome to the burnout club Piccolo, you were warned, but I get that most GMs aren't willing to takea challenge like this lying down ^^


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

we'll see how he feels after book 4, thats when the Burnout Really sets in:)


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook Subscriber

Here, Piccolo, the Simple Tough Mythic Template. It's a simple one but should help.

Multiply the monster's hit points by 20.
The monster has Fortification of 50% (50% of all criticals fail outright - you could just also rule every other critical hit fails to make it easy and not dependent on the whims of the dice).
In return the Monster is unable to do any form of critical hit.

The end result will be a tough monster that dishes out damage but is unable to do massive amounts of damage that would one-shot the PCs.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Your group is an outlier Piccolo from what you've said. However, your point is correct as we all know. And ya, it didn't get really pointless until book 4.


Seannoss wrote:
Your group is an outlier Piccolo from what you've said. However, your point is correct as we all know. And ya, it didn't get really pointless until book 4.

It's an outlier for most Pathfinder groups. It's the group I've always been able to run. I ran them through Kingmaker with five characters and four henchmen with rolled stats and artifact weapons. I had no problem creating challenging encounters with a reasonable amount of work. This is beyond anything I've had to do before in terms of writing encounters. They have too many options whether it's the casters able to pull out the perfect spell, the insane crits, and general number inflation that isn't compensated for.


Tangent101 wrote:

Here, Piccolo, the Simple Tough Mythic Template. It's a simple one but should help.

Multiply the monster's hit points by 20.
The monster has Fortification of 50% (50% of all criticals fail outright - you could just also rule every other critical hit fails to make it easy and not dependent on the whims of the dice).
In return the Monster is unable to do any form of critical hit.

The end result will be a tough monster that dishes out damage but is unable to do massive amounts of damage that would one-shot the PCs.

Did you read how I designed Soltengrebbe? Already added more to him than any of the available templates.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
sub-creator wrote:
Or, maybe the could forgo the idea that a single printed adventure needs to have 20+ encounters in it, settle for something like 12-15 encounters that are difficulty-based, and concentrate the rest of it on story. Wouldn't have to change the XP budget at all, then . . . only the expectations of how many actual encounters a single adventure should have in it.

I am thinking this is the way to go, I am just coming up on Staunton in book 2, I know I am behind but maybe just take out all the under CR'd fights and add their CR to other more storyish fights.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Well, next week the regular gaming starts again. This week I was at an important job interview, which took all day... let's see if something comes of it.

Grand Lodge

What about re-designing parts that have lots of monsters to be great obstacles that make the players think outside the box? I know that Magic pretty much solves anything and the abilities for Divine/Arcane to cast any spell does suck.

Maybe limiting those cast any spells are limited to only those they know for arcane (this doesn't make any diff to a spontaneous caster). Divine I am not to sure how to limit that ability.

551 to 600 of 731 << first < prev | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Adventure Path / Wrath of the Righteous / Combat balance in mythic gameplay - Ongoing campaign coverage All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.