Which is why you don't build them by the rules. You give them 18s in their mental stats, if you need to, if your BBEG is supposed to be Cunning, wise and charismatic. Hell, Building an NPC "by the rules" is really only useful as a time saving measure (and it's only that, because the Bestiary gives next to nothing, besides their not too helpful table, on what the expected stats and abilities for CR X creatures are). I've never built a BBEG 'by the rules' because he's not cannon fodder for the PCs to beat up and go home, he's the big bad of the campaign (or at least the arc). As such, he gets Boosts to HP, the ability to attack multiple times per round, either as having multiple spots in the Initiative list, or simply having a lot of triggered abilities, and tactically interesting abilities. This is all in addition, of course to the standard "Use mooks, terrain, ect" stuff.The real challenge is what is the Fighter supposed to be doing that Monster+Template+Level isn't going to do?
Speaking of which, it really has to chap your ass when you make the Fighter characters by the rules and monsters get jacked mental ability scores just for the lulz.
Mechanically and at-table results, that is clearly the way to go.
Dungeons and Dragons 3.5/Pathfinder does NOT do Character Class villains well or Solo combats well.Which was a great strong point for wait for it...wait for it...Dungeons and Dragons 4th Edition. Yeah, I said it!
You won't find me arguing. On the DM's side of the table, 4e did a lot of things really well. As a player, however, it had it's problems.
|
Okay, point by point response to Ashiel's CR 8 creature analysis, followed by some of my own. Note: I'm aware Ashiel is comparing these things to the 18th level Warrior, not a Fighter, but the comparisons mostly stand (barring the 18th level Warrior having a lot more HP).
The Nabasu has...
- Comparable AC bonuses (lower overall but higher touch ACs)
I'm not sure that's equivalent at all, touch AC doesn't actually come up that often. Especially in non-elemental forms (which, as you note below, are already stopped by Energy Resistance most times).
- Lower HP / Saves, but DR 10/material or alignment; Immunity to death effects, electricity, paralysis, and poison; Resist acid, cold, and fire 10; and Spell Resistance 19.
Vs. spells you have a distinct point...but Cold Iron is cheap, and you're frankly expected to have it by this level. It might cost a +1 or +2 to hit and damage fom using a non-magic weapon, but it's not the actual bulwark DR 10/good or DR 10/admantine is. So...I'd say that's a wash.
- Much, much better movement options. It's base speed is better and it has a natural fly speed of 60 ft. It also has the ability to greater teleport at will, giving it unbeatable potential mobility.
It is indeed more mobile, I won't dispute that.
- It's attack routine is similar in chances to hit (it has three attacks at +15, contrasting the +17/+12/+7 routine), and while it's damage per successful hit is lower it has the option of delivering vampiric touch spells through its claw attacks (and the spell is not consumed on a miss).
Vampiric Touch delivery is a Standard Action, you can't do it as part of a Full Attack. It's a solid option...but an action consuming one. And, as a spell-like, potentially provokes AoO.
- It has superior tactical options. The Nabasu can one-shot an entire party with mass hold person at DC 21 (which is higher than the monster chart for those at home watching) if their will saves aren't in their favor and can do so as an ambush tactic (the spell range is 180 ft.). They can potentially summon more enemies and blind parties with deeper darkness, or hurl objects around with telekinesis. Three times per day they have a ranged touch attack at +12 to hit that inflicts 1d4 negative levels on a target from up to 55 ft. away. If they ambush an enemy they get an extra +7 average damage (of 2d6) on each of their attacks that hit from sneak attack.
Well, yes. This has to do with being a spellcasting monster. Of course it has more options. No one, I think, and certainly not I, has argued that Fighters have as many options in combat as full casters or equivalent monsters.
- If the above wasn't enough, they have powerful custom abilities in the form of Death Stealing Gaze and Consume Life, allowing it to inflict negative levels in an AoE as a free action, which can potentially buff it significantly (adding +1 to most everything it has including caster level and an additional +10 HP) which depending on where it attacks the party may be a given (for example, if the Nabasu attacks the party near a group of normal people, it's likely going to inflict horrible collateral damage on the first round and buff itself while also taking its actions).
Nabasu get...weird. And actually start seriously breaking CR guidelines with enough Consume Life. I won't argue that a CR 8 Fighter can match a fully buffed Nabasu...but neither can any other CR 8 anywhere.
The Dig: The simple fact of the matter is that the Nabasu is overall more dangerous than the CR 8 warrior. Even when counting the warrior's equipment, his overall combat routine relies entirely upon being a superior martial combatant and being able to strait out survive incoming attacks by soaking damage while threatening opponents who would ignore him. Even still, unless equipped with a potion of fly or similar, a single wind wall and fly will ruin his offensive routine, while peppering him with attacks is going to lead to him being unable to full-attack effectively (which means that a quickrunner's shirt is almost required if you want him to be a significant threat to even a 6th level party.
A Quick Runner's shirt is also cheap as hell. And all this is only true for some parties, a party of primarily melee characters with ridiculous saves (Paladins and Barbarians, say) will almost certainly stand toe-to-toe with the Fighter and shrug off the Nabasu's ranged options, forcing it to engage in melee as well (which it's not as good at).
A Fighter in his place would have no prayer whatsoever and would be completely invalidated the moment the party decided to drop any pit spell, charm person, or just decided beat through him (the warrior at least is tanky enough and deals enough burst damage that simply running him over isn't a strong option).
This is all true to some degree (though that potion of fly really helps). It is also almost all true for the Giant Slug, Dire Tiger, Gorgon, Triceratops, Mohrg, or many other CR 8 monsters.
The Erinyes...
Second verse similar to the first!
Since you picked a very similar monster (Evil Outsiders have some serious commonalities)...this is unsurprising.
- We have an opponent that has lower HP but a pesky DR (it's only bypassed by Good-aligned attacks which means most groups are going to need to buff upon encountering it to overcome DR instead of just drawing a material weapon), and lots of resistances and immunities, complete with another SR 19.
Indeed yes. And her DR matters, to boot.
- Like the Nabasu it has superior mobility and the ability to greater teleport around at will.
Totally.
- Like the Nabasu it attack routines are only slightly worse than the warrior's from a physical attack perspective, but those routines combo effectively with their increased mobility (their flight capabilities can easily allow them to ambush and full-attack the bank-ranks of a group while ignoring the soft-cover provided by any front-liners, likewise their ability to move anywhere they please with greater teleport makes them more dangerous as support since they can ambush stragglers who aren't well defended).
Erinyes are very nasty. I'll not deny...but all the stuff you list? An archery Fighter with a Potion of Fly (or who happens to be a Strix) can do almost as well.
- Like the Nabasu, the erinyes has a wider variety of offense that is harder to deal with than the CR 8 warrior. In addition to see in darkness and constant true seeing (which nullifies the benefits of things like blur, displacement, mirror image, makes them immune to phantasmal killer, and allows them to ignore lighting conditions) they also have minor image for creating ambushes and/or concealment, a fairly powerful single-target fear effect (DC 19, higher than the monster chart) which inflicts the shaken condition on a successful save and the panicked condition on a failed save (this will automatically remove someone from the fight on a failed save and since fear effects stack, even succeeding on two saves in a row means you're out of the fight). Finally one of their most amusing offensive tactics is the AoE unholy blight which allows them to pound parties with a 20 ft. radius non-elemental AoE that hits good-aligned characters for 5d8 damage and save vs sickened, and neutral characters for half as much, which when coupled with its 220 ft. range allows the erinyes to sport some very nasty unblockable chip-damage. And of course, the erinyes can often summon a pair of Bearded Devils for poops and giggles.
Yup, lots more options, going back to that whole 'monsters that cast' thing.
Again comparing to our CR 8 warrior, the warrior is definitely no more dangerous than the erinyes except in its limited specialization (that specialization being "soak some more damage and get a full-attack off").
And, again, you're comparing it to one of the most powerful and versatile of the CR 8s. Though not as bad as a buffed Nabasu, I admit.
The Stone Giant...
The first thing that springs up here is that the basic stone giant is naked but it has plenty of unaccounted for treasures, so wearing some leather armor is definitely an option.
Yeah, probably.
- The stone giant demonstrates another failing of the "monster chart" and that is it doesn't account for things like Reach at all. The stone giant has a natural speed of 40 ft. and reach of 10 ft. If it wields a reach weapon (such as a longspear) then it has a massive 20 ft. reach and a safe-attack zone of 10 ft. thanks to its pair of slam attacks. If the giant has a potion of enlarge person then things are going to get ugly.
That's possible. Note its lack of Combat Reflexes however.
- The stone giant has less HP / saves than the warrior and is its fatal flaw which helps make up for its massive reach and attack routine.
Well, according to your discussion of my Fighter build, it's saves are suicide and the PCs will simply take it out with a single spell...
- The giant's melee routine actually matches the warrior's in accuracy (I gave the warrior a mwk weapon bringing him to +17, which the giant would also have +17 with a masterwork weapon) and deals similar damage without power attacking (2d8+12 = 21 average damage vs 1d8+19 = 23.5 average damage), though the giant can power attack for an additional +9 damage against low-AC opponents (whereas the warrior is already power attacking because without using power attack his damage output is only 1d8+4 or an average of 8.5 damage).
Again, true. The Stone Giant does some serious damage.
- While the giant has fewer iterative attacks with its weapon it also sports a pair of slam attacks that can be used as secondary attacks to bring its attack routine to +16/+11/+11/+11 assuming the giant is using its legs to perform the slam attacks at 1d8+4 (the slam attacks don't call out a specific limb that is required to perform them).
Since it's attack line specifically lists the Slams as not available while it wields it's weapon...I'm gonna have to argue that they are in fact assigned to its arms. Otherwise they'd be listed as part of the attack routine.
As a brute the giant is also comparable to the CR 8 warrior though it's a fight that's is a little different in terms of tactics and individual strengths. Another thing that's worth pointing out is that when I was building the CR 8 warrior I designed him specifically to be more dangerous, choosing a longsword so he could wield it even if grappled, two-handing it for best power-attack routines, giving him blind-fight to make it less likely to one-shot him with glitterdust or blindness/deafness or any cloud or light-affecting spells, and gearing all of his feats towards improving his saving throws and resiliency. While the giant has an absolutely terrible feat selection (seriously, who spends a feat on greatclubs when you've already got proficiency with longspears, clubs, maces, and shortspears?), and if given a similar feat selection and equipment loadout would look even more like the warrior.
Yes...and be higher CR, since you have changed it's stats to make it more effective. That's how monster stat-blocks work.
A giant dropping the weapon proficiency feat, point blank shot, quick draw, and precise shot and picking up lightning reflexes, improved initiative, improved iron will, and lunge or improved lightning reflexes, and then wielding a masterwork longspear while wearing some leather armor or masterwork studded leather armor would still be the same CR but it would round the encounter out better (the giant's AC would be 25, and while it's average damage would drop by 1 point it would increase its reach, and be heartier).
Okay, y'know what, you're right. These articular changes don't raise CR. They just make there absolutely no reason to close into melee with the Giant. You pick it off at range, or with spells, casually. Again, how dangerous this actually is depends heavily on your articular party makeup.
Once again, a "CR 8 Fighter" has nothing on what the bestiary already gives. It is nothing more than a speed bump pinata with no tactical capability outside of whatever its equipment allows, making it pretty much inferior to any other core martial or just throwing NPC levels on an enemy.
Ah! And here we come to the part I can actively disprove. You are cherry-picking monsters (very possibly unintentionally), having, for two of your three examples grabbed what are probably the two most dangerous CR 8s in the original Bestiary. Let's look at some of the other CR 8s, shall we? I'll compare them to the Fighter I modified. For clarity.
Dire Tiger:
-Vastly lower AC. Like a silly amount lower.
-Slightly higher HP (though much lower than your Warrior), no resistances or immunities, better Fort and Reflex save, but a truly abysmal Will Save that really is a suicidally awful weakness.
-Mobility-wise, it has a Speed of 40 and Pounce. That's it. Pounce is wonderful, but duplicatable for most practical purposes with a Quick Runner's Shirt, for a single encounter anyway.
-Much better offense, I admit, damage-wise. Which it needs, since it'll probably last all of a round with those defenses.
-No options, tactically speaking, except Stealth followed by Pounce. Seriously, it's not equipped for much of anything else.
That...doesn't look like as bad a comparison, does it? Let's try another:
Young Green Dragon:
Ooh, a Dragon. Clearly this will be more powerful.
-Significantly lower AC.
-Lower HP. Equivalent saves (they're lower, but by only a point here and there), Acid Immunity and immunity to sleep and paralysis, but that's it, and all are well known, and thus pretty easy to work around.
-Admittedly much better mobility sans a Potion of Fly. Somewhat better even with the Potion, but only somewhat, since high Fly speed is pretty much it.
-Probably better offense, but without Pounce or something like a Quick Runner's Shirt, it's hard to bring to bear, and, with its weak defenses, a bad option for it to do so anyway.
-In terms of tactical options, it has a breath weapon, which is very nice, and an advantage over the Fighter, but not usable every round by any means, and puts it well within bow-range (and remember those weak defenses)...and a DC 12 Entangle. Yeah, that last bit's worthless.
So...again, better offense, debatably more mobility, worse defense. Better off than the Tiger, but still, not looking like a 'Fighters are useless' sorta thing. Heck, a Strix Fighter with an archery focus is probably more dangerous, as he has almost all the Dragon's strengths and few of it's weaknesses if built properly.
Giant Slug:
-AC significantly lower.
-HP slightly higher. Utterly meaningless DR (it requires slashing or piercing).
-Abysmal saves. Okay, Fortitude is okay, but the others are just terrible. Immune to acid and mind affecting stuff. The second is relevant, but the first less so, since it's pretty easy to figure, and not the most common damage type either. Oh, and it has a +0 Reflex save, so anything with one of those ends it.
-Worse mobility.
-Worse damage, though only slightly.
-Tactical options are nonexistent, except for having a 15 foot reach, which is nice I guess.
The Fighter wins this one hands down. Better in almost every respect.
Triceratops:
-AC lower.
-HP bit higher.
-Wonderful Fortitude, equivalent Reflex, awful Will. Noimmunities or other defenses.
-Identical mobility, since it has Speed 30
-A slightly better attack. Powerful Charge for significantly more damage.
-Surprisingly, actually has tactical options, with bull rush and trample on the table. Nice.
Very similar to the Tiger, though a less severe version of the attack/defense disparity, better offense but worse defense than the Fighter. Of course, weak will save and no ranged attacks are pretty severe weaknesses to have...
I could go on, but this seems a reasonable sample, so I'll just walk along to the...
Conclusion:
Not all the monsters in the Bestiary have the advantages you list over the Fighter. Some do, but others most certainly don't. Making the Fighter a perfectly valid threat at the listed CR. Is a level 9 Fighter probably the most powerful CR 8? No. Is it the weakest? No. That makes it a valid threat.
Now, I'm not saying the Fighter is the most powerful PC class. It's generally not even close...which will inevitably make it not the most badass possible thing of its CR...but it's solid, and very workable. Which, combined with being of a CR equal to APL+4 makes a pretty solid BBEG.
Especially at PC wealth and with enhanced stats (both accounted for in CR, obviously).
Does your definition of BBEG include mostly a solo encounter or a group encounter? Because by itself... a fighter isn't very good at dealing with groups, IMHO at least.
|
|
Does your definition of BBEG include mostly a solo encounter or a group encounter? Because by itself... a fighter isn't very good at dealing with groups, IMHO at least.
Honestly? Nothing does that well by itself against groups. Action economy is brutal. Wizards might be able to do area-effects, but they're also less able to stand up to focused fire (though Mirror Image can buy them a round or so).
But ideally, yeah, a Fighter (like any BBEG) will have minions to back him up. At higher levels, a 7th level Bard is a great little addition. Even once he's dead Haste + Good Hope keeps right on chugging...
Does your definition of BBEG include mostly a solo encounter or a group encounter? Because by itself... a fighter isn't very good at dealing with groups, IMHO at least.Honestly? Nothing does that well by itself against groups. Action economy is brutal. Wizards might be able to do area-effects, but they're also less able to stand up to focused fire (though Mirror Image can buy them a round or so).
But ideally, yeah, a Fighter (like any BBEG) will have minions to back him up. At higher levels, a 7th level Bard is a great little addition. Even once he's dead Haste + Good Hope keeps right on chugging...
Ok, in this case, then maybe a group of fighters (your usual team of weapon specialists) could work as a BBEG, the G now stands for Group.
You could have a group of mercenaries made of war veterans who discovered a power that made them linked to each other, like a template that grant Hivemind. With that, they always move and attack together and they are always encountered together... or separated if they want to ambush the PCs.
Does your definition of BBEG include mostly a solo encounter or a group encounter? Because by itself... a fighter isn't very good at dealing with groups, IMHO at least.Honestly? Nothing does that well by itself against groups. Action economy is brutal. Wizards might be able to do area-effects, but they're also less able to stand up to focused fire (though Mirror Image can buy them a round or so).
But ideally, yeah, a Fighter (like any BBEG) will have minions to back him up. At higher levels, a 7th level Bard is a great little addition. Even once he's dead Haste + Good Hope keeps right on chugging...
Casters are fine. They have minions. No, caster BBEG is going to be without some summoned/bound/animated/simulacrum/golems, because there is just no reason for them to be alone when their class features create minions for them.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Once you explained the method to your madness I've easily see your side.
You use the loophole of the bestiary to override normal CR ideals; so no houserules but looks funny.
I wonder if the Adept rules work as well.
Is an 18th level Adept a CR 8 challenge as well?
Malock the White, CR 8 BBEG
Heroic Medium humanoid (human) Adept 18; Init +7; Perception +19;
AC 20 (+6 armor, +2 dexterity, +1 deflection, +1 natural)
Hp 135 (18d6+54+18), Fort +6, Ref +6, Will +11; Speed 20 ft.;
Melee Morningstar +11/+6 (1d8+/19-20) or Ray + (Effect)
Str 12, Dex 14, Con 16, Int 11, Wis 16, Cha 10;
BAB +9, CMB +10, CMD 22;
Feats Toughness (1), Improved Initiative (B), Power Attack (3, [-5, +10]), Empower Metamagic(5), Extra Traits (7), Light Armor Proficiency (9), Medium Proficiency (11), 3 feats free;
Skills points?
Traits: Magical Lineage, Free Trait
Spells: 0th: 3, 1st: 3+1, 2nd: 3+1, 3rd: +1, 4th: 2, 5th: 1
Prepared: 0th (Touch of Fatigue, Detect Magic, Guidance), 1st (Bless, Protection from Good, Command, Obscuring Mist), 2nd (Web, See Invisibility, Mirror Image, Resist Energy), 3rd (Lightning Boltx1, Bestow Cursex2, CSW x1), 4th (Polymorphx1, Empowered Lightning Boltx1), 5th (Healx1)
Equipment: Breastplate, Ring of Protection +1, Amulet of NA +1With Heal he can be restored for round 2 of the fight (more easily if I added Favored Class hp but NPC I still believe shouldn't get those).
I only added some bare minimums because I'm really not a Spellcaster guy.
I've used adepts much like this one with great results. In fact I was just talking with another friend of mine last night about this subject (he also laughed at the prospect of a Fighter-BBEG, because his response was basically "Why would you? I use Fighter NPCs when I want my party to level faster") and he remarked at how much he really enjoyed using adepts (especially as necromancers since their caster level allows for a lot of undead without them throwing around high-tier spells).
The biggest edge that adept NPCs have is their caster level is strong. This means they use low level spells powerfully, like Ilja pointed out, they can get 10d6 lightning bolts around CR 4.5 (a 10d6 lightning bolt is an average of 35 damage, save halves) which is a pretty impressive "big gun".
However, when not using them as a APL+2-3 encounter in that way (because low-level PCs are way more fragile) they work really well. Since their save DCs aren't based on caster level and instead based on their key ability + the level of the spell, adept spells tend to still be on the mediocre side in terms of save DCs, and I don't really have an issue with a CR 5 adept chucking a 10d6 lightning bolt at DC 13+casting stat when a CR 5 basilisk can just one-shot anyone within 30 ft. without trying (and assuming average HP, even a wizard with a +1 Con will have 25 HP at 5th level which makes the likelihood of one-shotting the wizard pretty low since the wizard has to both fail their saving throw vs a fairly low DC and then the 10d6 needs to inflict slightly above average damage; so our d6 squishy actually has a better chance of surviving this big attack than say...a CR 4 tiger pounce).
It's also worth noting that when it comes to NPC classed enemies, whether or not you give them standard or heroic point buy is a big deal. For example, normal NPCs are built on 3 point buy (this is mentioned in the Getting Started chapter where it explains ability score generation and later confirmed on the Creating NPCs page where the normal arrays are built on 3 point buy) while heroic NPCs are like PCs and built on 15 point buy.
As a result, this generally means that most of an NPC-classed character's oomph is going to come from their base statistics and you may wish to reserve the heroic point buy for exceptional individuals and BBEGs as a general rule. :)
Now me personally, while I think NPC classed NPCs (or hybrid PC/NPC classed NPCs) can make really good solo-encounters I'm generally far more fond of using lower-CR mixed groups (as is pretty evident from the encounter building articles on my blog), so if I was building a CR 8 encounter, instead of dropping a single tough CR 8 warrior into the mix, I'd probably drop a pretty tough CR 5-6 warrior, and then a smattering of low-CR adepts, warriors, and maybe the odd PC or hybrid NPC, or some animals (I love animals and beasts like wardogs or tigers in mostly humanoid encounter).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
(1) There is no need for a Fighter BBEG. Other classes could fill the same role.
(2) There is no difficulty in making a Fighter BBEG. I can give him whatever stats, level and equipment I want. I can make him strong enough to kill a PC every time he does a full-round attack. I can have him followed around by invisible casters who buff and heal him as he fights and who magically move him into position to make full attacks. I can give him a pet kraken or an army of gelatinous cubes. I can give him a defensive position surrounded by complicated traps. Will he still lose? Probably. He's a bad guy. They usually do.
(1) There is no need for a Fighter BBEG. Other classes could fill the same role.
(2) There is no difficulty in making a Fighter BBEG. I can give him whatever stats, level and equipment I want. I can make him strong enough to kill a PC every time he does a full-round attack. I can have him followed around by invisible casters who buff and heal him as he fights and who magically move him into position to make full attacks. I can give him a pet kraken or an army of gelatinous cubes. I can give him a defensive position surrounded by complicated traps. Will he still lose? Probably. He's a bad guy. They usually do.
There is a difficulty in making a Fighter BBEG, at least if you want them to be well... threatening. The fight between a single caster and an BBEG with help in this very thread shows that.
I can make him strong enough to kill a PC every time he does a full-round attack.
Which means exactly squat against smart players. I pitted my party of 4th-level players against a 10th-level dual-wielding fighter AND her pirate crew, and the PCs dominated simply by making sure the captain never once got a full attack in.
It's not really hard to do.
I can make him strong enough to kill a PC every time he does a full-round attack.Which means exactly squat against smart players. I pitted my party of 4th-level players against a 10th-level dual-wielding fighter AND her pirate crew, and the PCs dominated simply by making sure the captain never once got a full attack in.
It's not really hard to do.
Was that fighter a two-weapon warrior, dervish of dawn or mobile fighter? THat woudl help more htan one attack per round. DOes he have stand still? or step up and strike? lunge?
Also what was the crew? a couple of drag combat maneuver or bull rush could have done the trick. Not to mention spells.
I can make him strong enough to kill a PC every time he does a full-round attack.Which means exactly squat against smart players. I pitted my party of 4th-level players against a 10th-level dual-wielding fighter AND her pirate crew, and the PCs dominated simply by making sure the captain never once got a full attack in.
It's not really hard to do.
Was that fighter a two-weapon warrior, dervish of dawn or mobile fighter? THat woudl help more htan one attack per round. DOes he have stand still? or step up and strike? lunge?
Also what was the crew? a couple of drag combat maneuver or bull rush could have done the trick. Not to mention spells.
I believe it was this character.
I believe it was this character.I can make him strong enough to kill a PC every time he does a full-round attack.Which means exactly squat against smart players. I pitted my party of 4th-level players against a 10th-level dual-wielding fighter AND her pirate crew, and the PCs dominated simply by making sure the captain never once got a full attack in.
It's not really hard to do.
Was that fighter a two-weapon warrior, dervish of dawn or mobile fighter? THat woudl help more htan one attack per round. DOes he have stand still? or step up and strike? lunge?
Also what was the crew? a couple of drag combat maneuver or bull rush could have done the trick. Not to mention spells.
What was your tactic? because the guys is not build to have the most chances of having a lot attacks.
Never had a chance to develop a tactic really. The party Vanaran monk climbed the enemy ship's mast to get a better view of the combat when he encountered her along the yardarm. She 5-foot stepped in and attacked. The monk deflected with crane wing, countered with crane riposte, tripped her with Improved Trip, kicked her twice more with Greater Trip and Vicious Stomp. Since she had only made one attack, she used her move action to stand up which got her punched in the face. On the monk's turn, he bull rushed her off the yardarm, causing her to fall 60 feet, landing on the deck prone. He used his move action to swing down after her, landing deftly next to her.
Seeing that most of her crew had been swept away by the other PCs, she took the total defense action and successfully stood up on her turn, taking only one minor hit from one the PCs. The monk tripped her again on his turn and the entire party got AoOs against her from Greater Trip, then the monk got another from Vicious Stomp.
It was horrible what they did to her after that.
Never had a chance to develop a tactic really. The party Vanaran monk climbed the enemy ship's mast to get a better view of the combat when he encountered her along the yardarm. She 5-foot stepped in and attacked. The monk deflected with crane wing, countered with crane riposte, tripped her with Improved Trip, kicked her twice more with Greater Trip and Vicious Stomp. Since she had only made one attack, she used her move action to stand up which got her punched in the face. On the monk's turn, he bull rushed her off the yardarm, causing her to fall 60 feet, landing on the deck prone. He used his move action to swing down after her, landing deftly next to her.
Seeing that most of her crew had been swept away by the other PCs, she took the total defense action and successfully stood up on her turn, taking only one minor hit from one the PCs. The monk tripped her again on his turn and the entire party got AoOs against her from Greater Trip, then the monk got another from Vicious Stomp.
It was horrible what they did to her after that.
Well, tat coudl have been avoid with lunge (a feat every TW weapon guys should have) but it also seems he have a lot of bad luck. Personally, for fighters I always tend to take the favored class bonus to have more CMD agaisnt trip and grapple.
That monk build seems interesting, any link?
Edit: Not to mention that is a fighter/rogue with 8 wis u.u
Edit 2: I can not think on any monk build htat have crane riposte and greater trip at level 4.
I misremembered the pirate's level, so I may have been off with the PCs' level as well.
You can have all the crane feats by level 2 if you are a human master of many styles.
I misremembered the pirate's level, so I may have been off with the PCs' level as well.
You can have all the crane feats by level 2 if you are a human master of many styles.
I know, but then no maneuver master for greater trip before level 6. Either way, if the BBEG did not have a plan A;B and C, and his abilities do not sinergy well with her crew, it shoudl not be a surprise she get beaten.
If I recall, the monk had fighter levels too.
Since she had only made one attack, she used her move action to stand up which got her punched in the face.
Sounds like a tactical error. A level 10 fighter should still be able to hit a level 4 monk with the -4 penalty for fighting from prone.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Okay, point by point response to Ashiel's CR 8 creature analysis, followed by some of my own. Note: I'm aware Ashiel is comparing these things to the 18th level Warrior, not a Fighter, but the comparisons mostly stand (barring the 18th level Warrior having a lot more HP).
Okay, here we goooo! *Mario voice*
I'm not sure that's equivalent at all, touch AC doesn't actually come up that often. Especially in non-elemental forms (which, as you note below, are already stopped by Energy Resistance most times).
I was in an 8th level game last night, Reign of Winter, and our group won a difficult encounter pretty much solely due to touch-attacks. Our opponent was well buffed with an AC that was slightly above 30 (so we couldn't even land normal attacks until after debuffing her with conditions such as entangle and fatigue), and her saving throws were so stellar that getting stuff to stick to her was kind of a joke.
Meanwhile, touch attacks in general are super common. They are found on a wide variety of spells (acid arrow, scorching ray, vampiric touch, shocking grasp, ray of enfeeblement, ray of exhaustion, ghoul's touch, chill touch, touch of idiocy, enervation, bestow curse, etc), a number of strong tactical equipment options (alchemical weapons and nets), and things like alchemist bombs (the encounters we've been having lately would be going sooooo much smoother if we had an alchemist to nuke down everything).
Vs. spells you have a distinct point...but Cold Iron is cheap, and you're frankly expected to have it by this level. It might cost a +1 or +2 to hit and damage fom using a non-magic weapon, but it's not the actual bulwark DR 10/good or DR 10/admantine is. So...I'd say that's a wash.
A lot of that has to do with campaign expectations and how skilled the players are at the game portion of things. For example, if the GM gives no direct hints that they need to purchase cold iron weapons and they haven't been fighting things at lower levels that needed cold iron weapons then they can easily be caught unawares. Likewise, should those weapons be removed from their possession (such as via sundering, shatter, or some other method such as at-will telekinesis).
I'm a big proponent of golf-bagging explicitly because of DR like this.
Vampiric Touch delivery is a Standard Action, you can't do it as part of a Full Attack. It's a solid option...but an action consuming one. And, as a spell-like, potentially provokes AoO.
Yeah, you can, it just requires some setup which is made trivial in most cases by the Nabasu's heightened mobility. It's called holding the charge, and it means the Nabasu can use its Vampiric Touch SLA and simply not deliver it right now. Then at a later time it can deliver it with a touch attack OR as part of an unarmed attack (including natural weapons). What's even better is that if he delivers it as part of an unarmed attack the effect is not expelled on a missed attack (only when it actually lands). See Combat Chapter.
Well, yes. This has to do with being a spellcasting monster. Of course it has more options. No one, I think, and certainly not I, has argued that Fighters have as many options in combat as full casters or equivalent monsters.
But I would argue that does make them far less suitable as a BBEG or even a significant threat. There are too many ways to dismantle and invalidate them and few ways for them to adapt to circumstances, party dynamics, etc. That makes them very weak as a BBEG and arguably weak as anything other than a meat-shield for more important NPCs.
Given the fact that unless you desire to produce treasure pinatas they are also highly underwhelming it generally means they also lack the resilience to avoid simply being CC'd and dismantled at the party's general leisure. And if you slap PC wealth on them, then not much changes other than you're having the party fight with the villain's pocket book and reap tons of treasure afterwords.
Nabasu get...weird. And actually start seriously breaking CR guidelines with enough Consume Life. I won't argue that a CR 8 Fighter can match a fully buffed Nabasu...but neither can any other CR 8 anywhere.
Fortunately I was only considering it gaining 1 buff from that unless it was also escaped and came back. Every 2 points it gains with Consume Life equates to +1 CR according to its ability, so I was commenting on the ability with the expectation that it would probably one-shot some other 1 HD NPC as collateral damage, buff itself, and risk giving the PCs a negative level. Even without the +1 buff gain, it still threatens to give all the party -5 HP and -1 to all attacks, saves, skill, ability checks, and caster levels, which I think is pretty significant (especially if it's already softened up some of the PCs with a well placed enervation).
A Quick Runner's shirt is also cheap as hell. And all this is only true for some parties, a party of primarily melee characters with ridiculous saves (Paladins and Barbarians, say) will almost certainly stand toe-to-toe with the Fighter and shrug off the Nabasu's ranged options, forcing it to engage in melee as well (which it's not as good at).
I agree that Paladins and Barbarians are better suited to fighting it. I also agree that quick-runner shirts are cheap, but I also would mention that they aren't available in core either, which means a lot of people may simply not be using them or be aware of them (a quick-runner's shirt is pretty much a plus for any martial creature with an Int score of 3+ and a treasure value).
That said, I'm not convinced that the Nabasu's ranged options are so easily shrugged off. It's telekinesis for example is a formidable ranged combat option allowing it to inflict damage from relative safety by hurling objects at the party. Alternatively if its victims fail a Will save it can target their items with it and hurl them around too. Within 45 ft. enervation combined with its high BAB is a near guaranteed method of inflicting 1d4 negative levels on his target.
Erinyes are very nasty. I'll not deny...but all the stuff you list? An archery Fighter with a Potion of Fly (or who happens to be a Strix) can do almost as well.
Two words. Dispel magic. Actually wait, two more words, wind wall. Other two words include things like silent image or tiny hut. In fact fire wall is a pretty good bet too unless the arrows being shot can take the heat. Things that make shooting at the party kind of a pain (whereas the erinyes kind of laughs and just starts bombing the party for 5d8 points of damage with a long-ish range AoE).
The cost of the potion of fly still bugs me a bit but that's more or a personal preference thing so it's really a non-issue and is a good point. *thumbs up*
In regards to the Stone Giant...
Well, according to your discussion of my Fighter build, it's saves are suicide and the PCs will simply take it out with a single spell...
I agree with this, and I mentioned the Stone Giant's defenses as being its fatal flaw. To give an example why its bad saves are bad, I've been playing in Reign of Winter on Fridays under a great GM. At one point we encountered some giants...
Now the GM remarked mid-way through the fight that he was amused because it would seem that the writer of the AP had assumed that the Dancing Hut was going to do the lion's share of the fighting since we were being overran in a glade by a bunch of CR 9 giants. Except, to his amusement, that wasn't what was going on at all...
We were tearing the giants apart and the giants could scarcely do anything. My psion just tossed ectoplasmic sheen (grease) during most rounds, greasing their weapons, the ground, the works. We were having little trouble kiting them around, debuffing them, and then tearing them to shreds when they were at a disadvantage. Touch attacks and saving throw-targeting low-level effects being the crux of our initial tactics. Our party's dual-wielding melee guy, antipaladin, and our recently acquired bloody-skeleton medium white dragon pretty much cleaned up in melee, while our 3/4 BAB archer was harassing a few of them.
Heck, when they turned to flee, we pursued them until we just decided to let the last one escape out of mercy (because we would have caught him and we would have killed him).
So I fully agree that the stone-giant's saves are pretty much horrible. But like the otherwise naked warrior, if equipped with feats that aren't antithetical to the stone giant's strengths, and its treasure value used for items fitting an intelligent humanoid (in much the same way the warrior or fighter would) it's a bit less suicidal. The biggest reason the warrior I posted had decent saves was because it's base saves weren't so bad, and I gave him the saving throw boosters and the improved saving throws (because I expected that he would be on the receiving end of a CC effect and he needs to have a buffer against at least one good CC to pose a threat).
I noted that the same was true for the giant (a little armor, slightly more realistic feat choices, a few trinkets) and then the giant was more respectable.
Yes...and be higher CR, since you have changed it's stats to make it more effective. That's how monster stat-blocks work.
Put simply, no, that is not how monster statblocks work. Changing a couple of feats and swapping weapons does not change the CR of the monster. Never has.
Okay, y'know what, you're right. These articular changes don't raise CR. They just make there absolutely no reason to close into melee with the Giant. You pick it off at range, or with spells, casually. Again, how dangerous this actually is depends heavily on your articular party makeup.
Sure there is. The adjustments that I suggested for the giant were along the lines of the same kind made for the warrior and there's still plenty of reason to get into melee. The difference is that many of the feats that the giant had initially did it no favors (point blank shot + precise shot don't really help with rock throwing very much, especially since rock throwing is their long range option for when they haven't effectively closed to melee, likewise burning a feat to use a greatclub is just downright stupid when they're already proficient in maces, spears, morning stars, staffs, and normal clubs).
The replacements didn't make them much more dangerous in melee for martials, but it did make them less likely to be one-shot by any ol' Reflex or Will-targeting spell (charm person has become something of a running gag as a giant-buster in several of my groups), and the slightly adjusted armor values favors martials since they can still reliably hit the giant effectively (at 8th level you've got 8 BAB, easily +4 to +6 from ability scores, at least a +1 from masterwork weapon, which is between 13-15 unbuffed).
It makes it more difficult to kite / CC the giant which makes martial superiority a bigger deal. For example, a core martial doesn't really feel much of a change in terms of the giant's offensive prowess (changing to a simple weapon such as a club/staff, spear, or longspear doesn't change the giant's offensive strengths vs martials much sans the reach, but since as you noted they still only get 1 AoO on an incoming martial it won't change much), and the addition of leather armor and better saves doesn't really matter, but it can matter a bit more to archers and casters who would otherwise kite / CC the giant easily.
Ah! And here we come to the part I can actively disprove. You are cherry-picking monsters (very possibly unintentionally), having, for two of your three examples grabbed what are probably the two most dangerous CR 8s in the original Bestiary. Let's look at some of the other CR 8s, shall we? I'll compare them to the Fighter I modified. For clarity.
Dire Tiger:
-Vastly lower AC. Like a silly amount lower.
-Slightly higher HP (though much lower than your Warrior), no resistances or immunities, better Fort and Reflex save, but a truly abysmal Will Save that really is a suicidally awful weakness.
-Mobility-wise, it has a Speed of 40 and Pounce. That's it. Pounce is wonderful, but duplicatable for most practical purposes with a Quick Runner's Shirt, for a single encounter anyway.
-Much better offense, I admit, damage-wise. Which it needs, since it'll probably last all of a round with those defenses.
-No options, tactically speaking, except Stealth followed by Pounce. Seriously, it's not equipped for much of anything else.That...doesn't look like as bad a comparison, does it? Let's try another:
A dire tiger is a different kind of encounter, and not the BBEG kind. A dire tiger (tigers in general in fact) are shock encounters. They are a living glass cannon. Tigers and dire-tigers follow this routine:
1. Ambush party and standard-action charge.
2. Reduce one member of the party to a smear on the ground.
3. Promptly get torn apart or flees unless dealing with a very squishy set of targets.
Not BBEG material either, and it's all offense (it's offense is amaaaaazing). Worst case scenario for the party the tiger murders a PC, wins initiative and then skirts back off into the jungle to do it again later.
The Nabasu, Erinyes, and Giant were a bit more honest I felt as each of those could be a CR 8 BBEG. They had the cognitive function and tactical capability to actually try to be a BBEG.
Young Green Dragon:
Ooh, a Dragon. Clearly this will be more powerful.
-Significantly lower AC.
-Lower HP. Equivalent saves (they're lower, but by only a point here and there), Acid Immunity and immunity to sleep and paralysis, but that's it, and all are well known, and thus pretty easy to work around.
-Admittedly much better mobility sans a Potion of Fly. Somewhat better even with the Potion, but only somewhat, since high Fly speed is pretty much it.
-Probably better offense, but without Pounce or something like a Quick Runner's Shirt, it's hard to bring to bear, and, with its weak defenses, a bad option for it to do so anyway.
-In terms of tactical options, it has a breath weapon, which is very nice, and an advantage over the Fighter, but not usable every round by any means, and puts it well within bow-range (and remember those weak defenses)...and a DC 12 Entangle. Yeah, that last bit's worthless.So...again, better offense, debatably more mobility, worse defense. Better off than the Tiger, but still, not looking like a 'Fighters are useless' sorta thing. Heck, a Strix Fighter with an archery focus is probably more dangerous, as he has almost all the Dragon's strengths and few of it's weaknesses if built properly.
I didn't mention a dragon because dragons are kind of a class of their own when it comes to D&D Monsters. I'd really recommend trying to find a 3.5 copy of the Draconomicon from WotC which is a really good look at dragons, their resources, and how they're not quite your usual breed of D&D enemies. It's also just a generally fun read for anyone who likes dragons.
That said, I think you might be selling the green dragon a little short. The entangle SLA is significant because the AoE on it is actually really enormous (it's a 40 ft. radius which means it is actually 80 ft. from one side to the other) and even if you don't become entangled the entire area becomes difficult terrain and can attempt to entangle you on multiple rounds. Dragons in general are exceptionally good at hit and run tactics cast spells as sorcerers (and even without a caster level they can activate wands and such if they are on their spell list). In general, every fight with a dragon can be a little different depending on what the dragon is using, but a few immediate things spring to mind.
The green dragon's feat selection is...weird. It qualifies for flyby attack but has Cleave for seemingly no discernible reason (cleave is a useless feat on a dragon). Merely by giving it flyby attack the dragon it excels at hit and run. A 40 ft. cone from an aerial vantage translates to a rather big AoE while the creature is moving around at 200 ft. / round. This combos fairly nicely with the ability to drop Entangle spells from up to 760 ft. away while flying around, forcing opponents to use ranged attacks.
If encountered in its native environment and not airborn, the green dragon has both water breathing combined with a good swim speed and woodland stride. Seeing as they live in temperate forests their environment is innately part of the encounter as they can freely move through the difficult terrain and undergrowth of forests and move through rivers, streams, lakes, and so forth. In these environments the dragon is poised to make top use of its stealth and mobility while minimizing a party's ability to fight back.
The green dragon is an entirely tactical encounter - not a brute force encounter - even before factoring in treasure drinkers like wands and such.
Giant Slug:
-AC significantly lower.
-HP slightly higher. Utterly meaningless DR (it requires slashing or piercing).
-Abysmal saves. Okay, Fortitude is okay, but the others are just terrible. Immune to acid and mind affecting stuff. The second is relevant, but the first less so, since it's pretty easy to figure, and not the most common damage type either. Oh, and it has a +0 Reflex save, so anything with one of those ends it.
-Worse mobility.
-Worse damage, though only slightly.
-Tactical options are nonexistent, except for having a 15 foot reach, which is nice I guess.The Fighter wins this one hands down. Better in almost every respect.
If it makes you feel any better I think the giant slug is a joke too. :P
Triceratops:
-AC lower.
-HP bit higher.
-Wonderful Fortitude, equivalent Reflex, awful Will. Noimmunities or other defenses.
-Identical mobility, since it has Speed 30
-A slightly better attack. Powerful Charge for significantly more damage.
-Surprisingly, actually has tactical options, with bull rush and trample on the table. Nice.Very similar to the Tiger, though a less severe version of the attack/defense disparity, better offense but worse defense than the Fighter. Of course, weak will save and no ranged attacks are pretty severe weaknesses to have...
I could go on, but this seems a reasonable sample, so I'll just walk along to the...
Once again this doesn't strike me as BBEG material, but again it looks like you're just comparing numbers, which is nice but the tricerotops is like a panzer. It's mode of operation is pretty simple, charge in and plow someone for big damage, then trample over the melee for more damage, if applicable, charge again.
Unfortunately the dinosaur has some errors in its statblock. It has the Improved Critical feat and it isn't tied to any attack (including its gore attack with is not listed with a 19-20 threat range), so that feat literally is doing nothing and isn't even legal in that regard (I don't think you take take Improved Critical if it's not keyed to a weapon). A better option would probably be Vital Strike or heck even Fleet (the +5ft. speed feat as funny as that is), or Toughness, or Improved Natural Armor, or Improved Natural Attack (bringing its 2d10 to 4d8 I believe). Same with Improved Bull Rush which is pretty useless and doesn't do much for its trampling (Ability Focus - Trample would be a good alternative).
Like the tiger, the tricerotops has kind of a single but powerful shtick that it sticks to and I likewise didn't find it BBEG material (this goes without saying for the slug).
Not all the monsters in the Bestiary have the advantages you list over the Fighter. Some do, but others most certainly don't. Making the Fighter a perfectly valid threat at the listed CR. Is a level 9 Fighter probably the most powerful CR 8? No. Is it the weakest? No. That makes it a valid threat.
Now, I'm not saying the Fighter is the most powerful PC class. It's generally not even close...which will inevitably make it not the most badass possible thing of its CR...but it's solid, and very workable. Which, combined with being of a CR equal to APL+4 makes a pretty solid BBEG.
Especially at PC wealth and with enhanced stats (both accounted for in CR, obviously).
Most of the CR 8 creatures you compared solely for their pound for pound numbers without taking into account the finer aspects of an encounter with them based on their ecology and non-numerical abilities (such as the woodland stride and aquatic supremacy of the green dragon). Each of these is more than worthy of the CR 8 mantle.
I still do not believe that treasure pinata is worthy of that mantle.
Lotsa stuff
More stuff
First off, I hate rush loads. I have barely had time to sleep and eat the last few days. So I haven't abdicated my position (although I agree that the setup was stupid, the reasoning inane and her tactics are beyond foolish. Honestly, I just tossed out some cliched crap because I didn't want to waste time on that when I had so little as it was to create the characters, which it looks like I should have spent FAR more time on. Hey, BBEGs can have bad days too, right?), although I did run off and whimper in a corner for a while after reading that second round beating I just took. I don't see anyway that I can win this fight, although honestly, you can lose a fight and still win your objective. To wit:
Shelob fails both saves, as does Mullosc. The greataxe fighters don't even have a chance at making those saves. They are all caught in the blasts. The flyers and archers should be out or range, as they were strung out fairly good and scattered to avoid just such an attack. They all turn to the boiling blackness and begin crying out in horror and rage, but do not attempt to enter or attack, although the flyers do break off their search pattern to begin circling the blackness, calling out to those within while scanning the skies about them.
Query: While dazed, can a person speak coherently? If not, things will go very badly here, although either way they're going horrible to begin with.
|
|
I believe it was this character.
I'll just take a moment and note that that character is...significantly poorly designed as an actual threat for PCs, his HP is only a bit more than half what it should be as a CR 11, his AC four points low, his attack a couple of points low when TWF, his damage is solid...but only when Sneak Attacking and TWF. His saves are abysmal...in short that's just a poorly designed character (as Paizo NPCs sometimes, though by no means always, are).
Using a poorly designed character as a barometer for what decently designed ones can do is bad policy. I can put that character up to par on almost all of that with some equipment changes and swapping out a Racial Trait...but sans that sort of modification, it's a problem.
EDIT: I'll respond to Ashiel in a while.
Eh don't sweat it Joex The Pale, your situation was an inherently losing one. There was a thread back on the GitP forums (admittedly 3.5) were a level 13 Wizard had a 50/50 chance of beating a level 20 Fighter. Those 50% of Fighters who did win were essentially using their superior Wealth By Level to pretend to be level 20 casters. So really a Level 20 v. 20 even with support is pretty much a doomed proposition.
Now mind you if I were going to submit a Fighter for this challenge with support, he would basically be using UMD to fake being a caster, as would all of his supporters. That might actually stand a realistic chance against a Level 20 caster. At the very least, it would be a more optimal way to approach the challenge.
Edit @ Deadmanwalking - Once they lose, everything can be dismissed as "poorly designed". A rather poor argument to make I think.
To have some variations in the BBEG?The real challenge is what is the Fighter supposed to be doing that Monster+Template+Level isn't going to do?
Half of my point is there isn't much variation that you can find in a BBEG that's not available through some other more mechanically sound channel as a GM.
One of the things that make fighters "special" is they theoretically get big numbers without lots of buffing (though core martials tend to have better numbers overall so this idea is kinda meh). When numbers are their game rather than lots of cool stuff to do with them, there's little that they bring to the table to make them stand out as an interesting BBEG other than what you add in or would be available through any general brute.
Contrast to my mini-BBEG Captain Scurvy the Pigmy Pugwampi Pirate. He is a diminuitive pugwampi ranger, his animal companion and trusty steet Skitters the warf rat, and his high sailing gang of gnoll pirates known as "Scurvy's Sea Dogs". A feisty little scallywag, he has run aground with the party a few times and always slipped away bidding them a jolly fairwell and better luck next time!
|
|
Edit @ Deadmanwalking - Once they lose, everything can be dismissed as "poorly designed". A rather poor argument to make I think.
Uh...when almost every single numerical measure of power is significantly less (-4 AC, -65 HP, -2 or more on all Saves, -2 to hit) than the CR expectations, I don't think 'poorly designed' is an unfair characterization...
Best take it up with Paizo then since that is definitely a CR 11 challenge.
Edit @ Deadmanwalking - Once they lose, everything can be dismissed as "poorly designed". A rather poor argument to make I think.
The expectation is to the player actually wining their fights, or does the BBEG spellcaster never lose?
That depends entirely on how many spellcasters the PCs have to work with and how realistically the GM roleplays the BBEG spellcaster. Because "Jackie! Listen to Uncle! Magic must magic."
I do not recommend a realistically played spellcasting BBEG against a party of martials for the end of campaign. I would recommend a half-caster like an Alchemist or Summoner. Unless the players are ok with the PCs having a very small chance of victory. Because sometimes the best stories are ones of failure.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Since she had only made one attack, she used her move action to stand up which got her punched in the face.Sounds like a tactical error. A level 10 fighter should still be able to hit a level 4 monk with the -4 penalty for fighting from prone.
First, the NPC was CR 11, not level 10. Second, I suspect the PCs were a little higher in level than I initially stated. Third, it's rather difficult to hit anything with an AC well over 30.
First, the NPC was CR 11, not level 10. Second, I suspect the PCs were a little higher in level than I initially stated. Third, it's rather difficult to hit anything with an AC well over 30.Since she had only made one attack, she used her move action to stand up which got her punched in the face.Sounds like a tactical error. A level 10 fighter should still be able to hit a level 4 monk with the -4 penalty for fighting from prone.
I am sorry RD, But your story is not believable until you correct som statements. I will ask for hte monk build cause until somebody show the build it is almost safe to assume the monk/fighter have to have been of at least level 7 (for the BAB for greater trip).
First, the NPC was CR 11, not level 10. Second, I suspect the PCs were a little higher in level than I initially stated. Third, it's rather difficult to hit anything with an AC well over 30.Since she had only made one attack, she used her move action to stand up which got her punched in the face.Sounds like a tactical error. A level 10 fighter should still be able to hit a level 4 monk with the -4 penalty for fighting from prone.I am sorry RD, But your story is not believable until you correct som statements. I will ask for hte monk build cause until somebody show the build it is almost safe to assume the monk/fighter have to have been of at least level 7 (for the BAB for greater trip).
I only have the current build on hand, which is level 9.
I'm starting to think he may have been 6th at the time. I'll ask the player next chance I get. Maybe he will remember what level he was at the time.
Coincidentally, Skull & Shackles has a fighter BBEG.
I'm surprised you think the bulk of games see the majority of action at lvl 8-12? At least in my local gaming scene most PF games take place below lvl 10 and rarely make it above lvl 8.
Actually, about a year ago or so, one of my new players asked me to GM a game for her and a couple of friends who'd never played before. The big bad was a human fighter who had taken over an abandoned tower and reinforced it as a fortress for his army of half-orc fighter mooks.
His goal was the sacrifice of the last heir to the tower on a certain night with a certain dagger, which would somehow imbue him with demonic power to help him take over the kingdom. He was a finely tuned killing machine with no mercy, but only if he thought you were worth his time. Mostly, he just unleashed the hounds. We never got to finish the adventure, so they did not get to have the Big Showdown with him.
It would have been tough. He was a pretty darned good bad guy. Sort of something Northern, Saxon-ish name, with a bit of something from a Frazetta painting to him. Lots of heavy, black armor. Wielded a maul.
Lets turn things on their heads...
When was the last time a 3/4 Spellcaster was the Big Bad Evil Guy?
I think mechanically speaking, a mid to high level Bard would be
a bigger challenge for PCs than a fighter. Seriously.We had the No Caster/Full Caster Scuze Me While I Whip This Out
at CR 20. It ALWAYS happens in threads like this.But how about something more reasonable and relevant to where the bulk of games see the majority of the action, 8-12 level?
How about a CR 12 or 13?
I bet the Alchemist, Bard, Inquisitor or Summoner would all give
a Fighter 12 or Fighter 13 a run for the money in combat
and bring a bunch of other ways to hurt the PCs that are beyond
fighting in the dungeon or the palace or something.
Actually I've had a lot of success with 3/4 classes as major antagonists, or with hybrid or multiclassed NPCs. As a general rule of thumb most of the 3/4 classes tend to be well rounded which makes them well suited for being a primary antagonist and keeping them flexible and adaptable.
Bards, Psychic Warriors, Psychic Monks (found on my blog), and Alchemists are all quite fun. Though I haven't used an inquisitor as an antagonist they look as though they too would be amusing.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't want to step into the mathematical crossfire going on, but since the "no mechanical justification for leadership" thing has cropped up again...
Should I make my NPCs roll off-screen to justify their achievements? Does the town blacksmith need to make Craft checks if I want there to be weapons and armor available for purchase? By the same logic, does a BBEG's master plan require a series of Intelligence rolls to formulate, followed by numerous Diplomacy checks against the DCs needed to make their minions Helpful? If I want the PCs to encounter a town ransacked by said minions, is it necessary to play out the attack beforehand, complete with Profession (Soldier) rolls to properly coordinate?
Mechanics are only relevant in terms of how the PCs interact with everything else. Granted, this doesn't mean mental Attributes are meaningless; a spellcaster might raise his eyebrows if one Touch of Idiocy reduces a mastermind to a vegetable with minimal damage. But narrative questions like "how did he rise to power?" don't need to be answered with numbers.
Follow-up: more and more I'm seeing this as a good argument for the old-fashioned ways before Skills became a big deal. A character's ability to locate hidden treasure or negotiate with uncooperative NPCs was based on the player's ability to describe what they did rather than a bonus and a roll. These two methods have equal merit in my eyes, but things like this definitely cast the alternative in a better light.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There is no reason why a 7th or 8th level Fighter would be a better Charismatic Warlord than an Incubus Fighter 1.
No, there isn't.
I want to make this clear: I'm not arguing that a 0-HD race, single-classed, Fighter is a better main villain, mechanically, than a monster given Fighter levels. They are not. I'm not arguing they're the most powerful class, or the 'best' to mechanically represent a BBEG . They are not (I'd actually be inclined to argue that Bards and Wizards are the 'best').
All I am arguing is that a properly designed Fighter is an acceptable threat of its CR, and certainly buildable with the necessary skills to believably rule, and thus, at a few levels over the PCs, a valid BBEG if you want to use it as such. Not just a speed-bump or 'treasure pinata'. That is all.
Heck, the BBEG of the first Pathfinder game I ever played was a Fighter (admittedly, we were like 8th level, and he was thus 12th or so, I think...this was a while ago). A couple of PCs almost died (and one did die) in that fight, and we barely managed to defeat him. This is a thing that can happen and works. That's all I'm saying.
There is no reason why a 7th or 8th level Fighter would be a better Charismatic Warlord than an Incubus Fighter 1.No, there isn't.
I want to make this clear: I'm not arguing that a 0-HD race, single-classed, Fighter is a better main villain, mechanically, than a monster given Fighter levels. They are not. I'm not arguing they're the most powerful class, or the 'best' to mechanically represent a BBEG . They are not (I'd actually be inclined to argue that Bards and Wizards are the 'best').
All I am arguing is that a properly designed Fighter is an acceptable threat of its CR, and certainly buildable with the necessary skills to believably rule, and thus, at a few levels over the PCs, a valid BBEG if you want to use it as such. Not just a speed-bump or 'treasure pinata'. That is all.
+1
If you include CR 11 monsters and Level 12 Casters to accompany that 13th level fighter, there remains a very legitimate problem that the henchmen upstage the BBEG.As solo combatants, Fighters don't work. As solo combatants, almost nothing in Pathfinder "works."
You pretty much say it. Solo encounters do not work well in PF, that is why spellcaster BBEG have, by purely by DM fiat, all the money of the world to have golem, all their enemies have failed against their mind control, all the time and corpses of the world to make the army of undeads, the same for simulacrum and bind outsider.
(not to mention taht simulacrum and bind outsider are the kind of thing that get nerfed/banned by the DM in most games).
I repeat my offering again. Choose a CR and I desing an boss like final encounter where the BBEG is a fighter. As the main problem people seems to have are at higher levels then it coudl ranger from cr 11 to cr 20.
|
|
Lets say a 9th level party. A 13th Level Fighter is a Speed Bump against a 9th Level "Standard Party" of Full Divine Caster ("Cleric),
Full BAB Combatant ("Fighter"), Full Arcane Caster ("Wizard") Skills and Abilities/Three-Quarters Caster Class ("Rogue").Almost any class is unless they are casting somehow, the more magic the better. Specifically, Arcane magic. That is just a fact.
The least versatile combatant in the weakest thing to do in the game
will get stomped by a Standard Composition party with by-the-book WBL.If you include CR 11 monsters and Level 12 Casters to accompany that 13th level fighter, there remains a very legitimate problem that the henchmen upstage the BBEG.
As solo combatants, Fighters don't work. As solo combatants, almost nothing in Pathfinder "works."
Edit:
Brute combat falls off a CLIFF in Pathfinder. It is not sufficient past double digit level play.
Linear Combat, Quadratic Casting.
Uh...I mentioned action economy as an issue for any single villain. So...let's call it a CR 12 Fighter (say, 11th level with the Advanced Simple Template and PC WBL) and two CR 7 people for backup (say, 8th level standard NPCs). They're not gonna overshadow him because, well, CR 7 as compared to CR 12. We'll call it a melee Cleric and buff-focused archer Bard. That'll...definitely make a workable big-bad group, and it's very clear why the Fighter is in charge, and should make a very interesting encounter for your aforementioned 9th level party.
If you like, and are willing to stat up a 9th level party, we can even try out this scenario...though it's unlikely to prove anything.
EDIT: Screwed up math.
|
|
I repeat my offering again. Choose a CR and I desing an boss like final encounter where the BBEG is a fighter. As the main problem people seems to have are at higher levels then it coudl ranger from cr 11 to cr 20.Go for it, make it CR12. I will even post a character for use in it in advance. To make things even easier I have also kept him PFS legal. 20 point buy, no crafting, no more than one permanent combat pet, standard WBL.
** spoiler omitted **...
Uh...how are you getting +4 to Save DCs on Conjuration? Your Feats only grant +2, and I'm not seeing anything else that raises them.