Wrath of the Righteous - A Failed AP


Wrath of the Righteous

1,101 to 1,150 of 1,282 << first < prev | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
grandpoobah wrote:
Then again, we're already seeing book 3 of Iron Gods this week, so maybe WOTR is yesterday's news....

Most probably. The devs have stopped paying attention to the board for months now. It all kinda feeds into my perception that Paizo is kind off just running in front of the lion of game mechanic problems they have created, by pushing out new products as fast as they can.

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
magnuskn wrote:
grandpoobah wrote:
Then again, we're already seeing book 3 of Iron Gods this week, so maybe WOTR is yesterday's news....
Most probably. The devs have stopped paying attention to the board for months now. It all kinda feeds into my perception that Paizo is kind off just running in front of the lion of game mechanic problems they have created, by pushing out new products as fast as they can.

They're putting out APs at a rate of about 1/month. Just like they've done for the last 7+ years. The pace hasn't changed.

-Skeld


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Skeld wrote:
magnuskn wrote:
grandpoobah wrote:
Then again, we're already seeing book 3 of Iron Gods this week, so maybe WOTR is yesterday's news....
Most probably. The devs have stopped paying attention to the board for months now. It all kinda feeds into my perception that Paizo is kind off just running in front of the lion of game mechanic problems they have created, by pushing out new products as fast as they can.

They're putting out APs at a rate of about 1/month. Just like they've done for the last 7+ years. The pace hasn't changed.

-Skeld

What I mean is that the developers are introducing new rules (Mythic Adventures, ACG, upcoming stuff, prior sub-systems in other AP's) which are not suffiently tested, often function clunkily at best and won't get erratae'd/FAQ'ed for years. And that they are just forging ahead with this approach and are leaving a mess behind them. AP's are of course unchanged, but many of them have suffered from those badly developed sub-systems in the past and probably will in the future.

Grand Lodge

Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
magnuskn wrote:
Skeld wrote:
magnuskn wrote:
grandpoobah wrote:
Then again, we're already seeing book 3 of Iron Gods this week, so maybe WOTR is yesterday's news....
Most probably. The devs have stopped paying attention to the board for months now. It all kinda feeds into my perception that Paizo is kind off just running in front of the lion of game mechanic problems they have created, by pushing out new products as fast as they can.

They're putting out APs at a rate of about 1/month. Just like they've done for the last 7+ years. The pace hasn't changed.

-Skeld

What I mean is that the developers are introducing new rules (Mythic Adventures, ACG, upcoming stuff, prior sub-systems in other AP's) which are not suffiently tested, often function clunkily at best and won't get erratae'd/FAQ'ed for years. And that they are just forging ahead with this approach and are leaving a mess behind them. AP's are of course unchanged, but many of them have suffered from those badly developed sub-systems in the past and probably will in the future.

Some of your points I sort of agree with, while others I don't agree with. I'm glad you clarified your statement, however.

-Skeld


2 people marked this as a favorite.
magnuskn wrote:
Skeld wrote:
magnuskn wrote:
grandpoobah wrote:
Then again, we're already seeing book 3 of Iron Gods this week, so maybe WOTR is yesterday's news....
Most probably. The devs have stopped paying attention to the board for months now. It all kinda feeds into my perception that Paizo is kind off just running in front of the lion of game mechanic problems they have created, by pushing out new products as fast as they can.

They're putting out APs at a rate of about 1/month. Just like they've done for the last 7+ years. The pace hasn't changed.

-Skeld

What I mean is that the developers are introducing new rules (Mythic Adventures, ACG, upcoming stuff, prior sub-systems in other AP's) which are not suffiently tested, often function clunkily at best and won't get erratae'd/FAQ'ed for years. And that they are just forging ahead with this approach and are leaving a mess behind them. AP's are of course unchanged, but many of them have suffered from those badly developed sub-systems in the past and probably will in the future.

Having seen multiple conversations between you and, for instance, James Jacobs, I don't see anything he could contribute to this thread that would satisfy you or make you happy.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Skeld wrote:
magnuskn wrote:
Skeld wrote:
magnuskn wrote:
grandpoobah wrote:
Then again, we're already seeing book 3 of Iron Gods this week, so maybe WOTR is yesterday's news....
Most probably. The devs have stopped paying attention to the board for months now. It all kinda feeds into my perception that Paizo is kind off just running in front of the lion of game mechanic problems they have created, by pushing out new products as fast as they can.

They're putting out APs at a rate of about 1/month. Just like they've done for the last 7+ years. The pace hasn't changed.

-Skeld

What I mean is that the developers are introducing new rules (Mythic Adventures, ACG, upcoming stuff, prior sub-systems in other AP's) which are not suffiently tested, often function clunkily at best and won't get erratae'd/FAQ'ed for years. And that they are just forging ahead with this approach and are leaving a mess behind them. AP's are of course unchanged, but many of them have suffered from those badly developed sub-systems in the past and probably will in the future.

Some of your points I sort of agree with, while others I don't agree with. I'm glad you clarified your statement, however.

-Skeld

I think it would be reasonable for Paizo to stop a bit, maybe delay product a bit, take a few weeks and take a hard look at the current state of the game. And of course take care of some FAQ issues and Errata.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
MMCJawa wrote:
magnuskn wrote:
What I mean is that the developers are introducing new rules (Mythic Adventures, ACG, upcoming stuff, prior sub-systems in other AP's) which are not suffiently tested, often function clunkily at best and won't get erratae'd/FAQ'ed for years. And that they are just forging ahead with this approach and are leaving a mess behind them. AP's are of course unchanged, but many of them have suffered from those badly developed sub-systems in the past and probably will in the future.
Having seen multiple conversations between you and, for instance, James Jacobs, I don't see anything he could contribute to this thread that would satisfy you or make you happy.

Well, since he can't really promise things which go against company policy, of course. Still, it is a bit sad to see that the devs stop paying attention to their older AP's so quickly. Well, if they turn into a walking disaster like this one (for reasons enumerated very often by now by very many different GM's), I can kinda understand not wanting to touch it with a ten foot pole.

Grand Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
magnuskn wrote:
MMCJawa wrote:
magnuskn wrote:
What I mean is that the developers are introducing new rules (Mythic Adventures, ACG, upcoming stuff, prior sub-systems in other AP's) which are not suffiently tested, often function clunkily at best and won't get erratae'd/FAQ'ed for years. And that they are just forging ahead with this approach and are leaving a mess behind them. AP's are of course unchanged, but many of them have suffered from those badly developed sub-systems in the past and probably will in the future.
Having seen multiple conversations between you and, for instance, James Jacobs, I don't see anything he could contribute to this thread that would satisfy you or make you happy.
Well, since he can't really promise things which go against company policy, of course. Still, it is a bit sad to see that the devs stop paying attention to their older AP's so quickly. Well, if they turn into a walking disaster like this one (for reasons enumerated very often by now by very many different GM's), I can kinda understand not wanting to touch it with a ten foot pole.

It's a bad assumption to say that because none of the devs have posted to this thread in a while, they are ignoring it. We don't know what they do or don't read without posting. I read lots of thread I never post to.

Also, James said that he thought the Mythic rules didn't accomplish what he hoped they would and that he was disappointed with the way the AP turned out overall. He even thanked everyone for the feedback and requested that it continue.

Like MMCJawa, I'm not sure there is anything James could do that would satisfy you, so why continue to engage? That's a conclusion James may have reached as well.

-Skeld

Silver Crusade

Skeld wrote:
magnuskn wrote:
MMCJawa wrote:
magnuskn wrote:
What I mean is that the developers are introducing new rules (Mythic Adventures, ACG, upcoming stuff, prior sub-systems in other AP's) which are not suffiently tested, often function clunkily at best and won't get erratae'd/FAQ'ed for years. And that they are just forging ahead with this approach and are leaving a mess behind them. AP's are of course unchanged, but many of them have suffered from those badly developed sub-systems in the past and probably will in the future.
Having seen multiple conversations between you and, for instance, James Jacobs, I don't see anything he could contribute to this thread that would satisfy you or make you happy.
Well, since he can't really promise things which go against company policy, of course. Still, it is a bit sad to see that the devs stop paying attention to their older AP's so quickly. Well, if they turn into a walking disaster like this one (for reasons enumerated very often by now by very many different GM's), I can kinda understand not wanting to touch it with a ten foot pole.

It's a bad assumption to say that because none of the devs have posted to this thread in a while, they are ignoring it. We don't know what they do or don't read without posting. I read lots of thread I never post to.

Also, James said that he thought the Mythic rules didn't accomplish what he hoped they would and that he was disappointed with the way the AP turned out overall. He even thanked everyone for the feedback and requested that it continue.

Like MMCJawa, I'm not sure there is anything James could do that would satisfy you, so why continue to engage? That's a conclusion James may have reached as well.

-Skeld

Just give him and everybody else, who is running this AP the time to actually finish it. An open wound needs some time to close and heal.


I'm running this AP currently and we are Book 4. We are finding it fun but I'm definitely putting lot work modifying encounters. It seems to me that encounter CRd are set for non mythic PCs. I mean if the party is APL 14 +3 for 6 mythic tiers the encounters for should be CR 16-20 but I'm finding the encounters are CR 13-16. So I find my self adding template and class levels to boost the CR of fights as well as increase the numbers where applicable to increase the CR of the encounter by 3 to 4. Seems to work well so far.


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

Yep, that sums it about up. If there was one thing to really shake my faith in the company, this AP and Mythic Adventures was it.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook Subscriber
magnuskn wrote:
Yep, that sums it about up. If there was one thing to really shake my faith in the company, this AP and Mythic Adventures was it.

Its funny, I actually like mythic adventures, to a point, and I like this adventure, and I don't feel any faith shaking really occurred, but when the two were brought together they just don't work. For the reason we all have seen that the encounter design just doesn't match the CR to the power level of the party.


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

I'm a bit too tired this evening to start over the ranting about basic math and all that again. ^^


4 people marked this as a favorite.

On the one hand, I understand your pain, magnuskn.

On the other, I'm seeing more of what others are complaining about: A multitude of low-CR encounters vs. high-level PCs. In my opinion, a CR-3 encounter is not worth running. It's not going to challenge PCs, and it's going to waste precious game time that could be better spent roleplaying or running "real" fights.

Yet throughout the latter half of Book 2 and most of Book 3, that's exactly what the PCs are facing: A horde of CR-3 (or more) encounters, even if you completely ignore mythic.

It's embarrassing.

But it's not an indictment of mythic, it's an indictment of encounter design in this particular AP. The encounters are ludicrously easy, even for non-mythic PCs. Only the boss fights have any meaning.

I can agree that mythic exacerbates the problem by giving any optimization-minded PC a handful of howitzers to play with, but when even the non-optimized PCs are mopping the floors with the enemy without using any mythic stuff at all, the encounters are just too easy.

So as I posted previously, I just threw a CR-appropriate encounter at my group (6 drake riders). I didn't do anything mythic. I didn't change any rules or apply any templates. I just upped the encounter to match their CR. And it was a hard, hard fight for them.

So yes, "Mythic" is yet another rule set that allows PCs to break things. And it's one of the worst in terms of how easy it makes it to break things. PCs almost actively have to choose not to be effective.

But for this particular AP, I'm finding the CR levels of the encounters are the issue, not the mythic rules.

Ask me in a couple of books...


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

Yeah, wait a couple of books. That will make a difference.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

OK, we had our first "stupid damage event" of the campaign. The 12/5 fighter burned 6 mythic surges to do 804 hit points in a single round.

The casters aren't even coming close, though the sorceress' maximized mythic fireball that did 100 to everyone over a wide area did more damage total.

Yeah, we've started Book 4, and damage output is just getting silly. Single creatures aren't a challenge any more...

EDIT: And I'm still seeing the low-CR thing. All the CRs are 11, 12, and 13, and my PCs at 12/5 are theoretically "Level 14.5". Where are the CR 14 and 15 encounters?

Anyway, we're planning on limiting everyone to 2 mythic surges per round to see whether that calms things down a bit...


Perhaps have a kind of strain/burn-out rule? The more mythic power you go through, the more damage you do to yourself. Like having your skin crack and energy bleed out because your still mortal body can't handle overclocking.


NobodysHome wrote:

EDIT: And I'm still seeing the low-CR thing. All the CRs are 11, 12, and 13, and my PCs at 12/5 are theoretically "Level 14.5". Where are the CR 14 and 15 encounters?

Anyway, we're planning on limiting everyone to 2 mythic surges per round to see whether that calms things down a bit...

i hate to tell you (although i'm sure you already know:-) but the too low CR is gonna be the look of it for the rest of the campaign, i myself was extremely disappointed with the encounter structure of the latter half of WotR

an example

:
in book 6 when the party is level 18-19/tier 9 most of the encounters are rated CR18-20! how is that even going to challenge a party comprised of the three stooges using sub-optimal tactics
sorry thats been irking me for a while now:-)

edit: my other WotR pet peeve

:
All the Coloxus Demons! i get Deskari has a theme he's going for, but you'd thing after so long and after the party is 10 levels above them he'd stop sending out the foppish flies but there you are, book 6 blasting thru them, as clerks even! at 18th level and beyond there is no way they should be swatting flies, much less refer to the page to find the stats and discuss their tactics, book 6 needed more war and less Bordello in my view

again sorry for the tangent, i hope Tangent doesn't sue me for infringing;-) i have enough potential lawsuits to worry about, seeing as how i forgot to collect permission slips for the slumber party last weekend;-)


2 people marked this as a favorite.

*eyes captain yesterday*


Cyborg Aragorn is my new look:-)
i cant help myself, I might have a problem:)


I've already houseruled that you can only use 1 mythic point per round, period for any reason. Was that too harsh?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I will say wrath is a great story (even with the flaws) and MA is a great GM resource, you can do dark, scary things by giving monsters mythic abilities, and there's great player stuff, its just overshadowed by the foe-biters and mythic vital strikes


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

1 mythic point/round may be too harsh as augmented spells cost at least two mythic points. Like most things I think it should have been controlled by mythic tier; maybe one mythic point spent per two tiers.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
GM Niles wrote:
I've already houseruled that you can only use 1 mythic point per round, period for any reason. Was that too harsh?

I agree with the others; the problem is augmented mythic spells or fighter abilities that take 2 surges; you'd kind of knock them out.

That one per two tiers Seannoss suggests sounds ideal.

Thanks, Seannoss! Stealing that right now!


Good idea Seannoss! My party is currently only T1 so I haven't run into mythic spells.


captain yesterday wrote:
NobodysHome wrote:

EDIT: And I'm still seeing the low-CR thing. All the CRs are 11, 12, and 13, and my PCs at 12/5 are theoretically "Level 14.5". Where are the CR 14 and 15 encounters?

Anyway, we're planning on limiting everyone to 2 mythic surges per round to see whether that calms things down a bit...

again sorry for the tangent, i hope Tangent doesn't sue me for infringing;-) i have enough potential lawsuits to worry about, seeing as how i forgot to collect permission slips for the slumber party last weekend;-)

i guess i should explain my joke better, last week some guy on a different thread said he couldn't game with kids at the table without getting thrice signed permission slips and liability waivers lol sorry should've explained that:)


3 people marked this as a favorite.
James Jacobs wrote:
Which is sort of par for the course, it feels like... the higher level things get, the more they need playtesting, but the less folks seem interested in playtesting them.

Let us know this sort of thing!

I had no idea at all that you guys had any greater, or even equal interest in the higher end of mythic playtesting until I read this post, two years later.

Looking back at the mythic playtest adventure feedback forum, the only posts from Paizo that I can find saying awesome, we need more of this particular kind of feedback, are in response to low level games and non mechanical feedback. Several of the higher level adventure feedback reports that did get started went unacknowledged, and the poster evidently gave up and left.

I would never have guessed you guys wanted more of this specific type of feedback. Heck, I was in a position to provide, playing in a high level party's mythic playtest, and I left with an impression you guys had mostly cared about other things.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Steal away!

I have always thought that mythic tier should be used more, or be used as a regulator for as many mythic abilities as possible.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Just finished up this AP as a player and mythic got nuckin futs pretty quick and our GM tried everything to make it work. He eventually got frustrated and crunched all the main battles in book 5 & 6 into 1 session. He split our party of 6 into teams of 3 to simultaneously attack Baphomet and Deskari. Baphomet didn't last 1 initiative pass and the barbarian one hitted Deskari with a crit. Just for extra fun he threw Orcus at us at the end...also lasted under 1 round. All of this at level 16 tier 7 (8 end of game)

The story is solid but mythic turns this into a Monty Python Adventures in Math.

I also tried incorporating this into the AP I ran- Ways of the Wicked with similar effect. Everyone gets kill-buttons, everyone ends up unsatisfied.

Before my last Wrath game I was browsing at the epic monsters from my old 3.5 book and was thinking just maybe this could work but have come to the firm belief that it just can't. In my opinion - Epic 3.5 was a failure and so is mythic.

Pathfinder got it right the first time by capping it at 20.


NobodysHome wrote:
GM Niles wrote:
I've already houseruled that you can only use 1 mythic point per round, period for any reason. Was that too harsh?

I agree with the others; the problem is augmented mythic spells or fighter abilities that take 2 surges; you'd kind of knock them out.

That one per two tiers Seannoss suggests sounds ideal.

Thanks, Seannoss! Stealing that right now!

Is it the surge # or feats that are 'always on' or last for 10 rounds?

I have a thread going in pathfinder general trying to come up with fixes if you are interested - limiting surges wouldn't stop mythic vital strike as it's 'always on' for instance, the math makes this feat way out there in power land - once you take it - you do more damage on your minimum hit than you *could* have done on a maximum hit prior to it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
captain yesterday wrote:
I will say wrath is a great story (even with the flaws) and MA is a great GM resource, you can do dark, scary things by giving monsters mythic abilities, and there's great player stuff, its just overshadowed by the foe-biters and mythic vital strikes

I happen to agree that WotR is a great story.

It is also a great illustration why MA should never have existed. You see, WotR is a great story, but it also pretty typical for your high-level DnD story. There is no meaningful difference in its scale from The Age of Worms, and The Savage Tide deals with a bigger threat, with a bigger, more spectacular endgame. All the Mythic rules had done is adding an additional layer of complexity to mechanical resolution, without changing the sort of stories you can tell. As DnD at two-digits levels is already too complex to the point of becoming a chore, the impact of MA is strictly negative.


I think the fear was that a CR 30 creature was too powerful for four level 20 adventurers to face. So either they could use nerfed Demon Lords, add plot coupons (aka artifacts) to fight the Demon Lords, or add Mythic to enhance the characters.

The problem was that Mythic did too much, especially as Paizo cut corners. If they had either not had Mythic Feats or had crafted Mythic-only Feats that didn't replicate existing Feats, then a third of the problems with Mythic would have been negated. If they had crafted Mythic-only spells that were not reliant on the character being a spellcaster who possessed the spell? Another third of the problems could have been avoided. Finally, they forgot about Action Economy. Adding extra actions by having most of Mythic be Swift or Immediate Actions that allowed players to ignore movement phases and the like ended up creating a significant problem where spellcasters could easily cast two spells a round (or possibly three if they worked at it) and warriors and the like could run up to an enemy, get an attack in, and then get an entire full action of attacks as well. And then an extra attack if they had Mythic Haste. And yet another attack if they burned Mythic to get an extra standard action.

I like Mythic. I added it to my two campaigns. I have not run into half of the problems most people have because no one has Mythic Power Attack or the like. But you know something? I'm very strongly tempted to keep the players at two Mythic Tiers. Because I keep hearing "the third tier is when things become broken."


I just IM'ed this to one of my players, and I think it says it all very succinctly:

(3:48:05 PM) NobodysHome: I'm halfway tempted to just have Nocticula come along as an NPC because hey, it would entertain her, and it wouldn't make the fights any easier...
(3:48:18 PM) NobodysHome: And I like her mini.
(3:48:22 PM) Player3: LOL

I was looking at Book 6 and seeing... CR 14 encounters. What?

Same old, same old.

The group has agreed to let me start using Sc8rpion's stat blocks. It's gotten that bad. First AP we've ever had to do that.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Don't forget Pyralisia.... Inside?
because every gm knows the best place to stick an

:
evil phoenix
is inside:p


1 person marked this as a favorite.

You know, maybe Hathor and Cthulu should come along...


NobodysHome wrote:
You know, maybe Hathor and Cthulu should come along...

I'll be throwing 5-6 PCs at ~19th level 5th Tier against Cthulu. We'll see how that goes!


Depending on class make up they either win extremely hard or just regular hard


CWheezy wrote:
Depending on class make up they either win extremely hard or just regular hard

Class makeup would be:

- Paladin of Sarenrae
- Master Spy Rogue (scout)
- Sorcerer (arcane bloodline)
- Monk/Inquisitor/Barbarian/Bard
- Heavens Oracle
- Druid (this one is off-and-on as to whether he shows)

I will also say this: I'm intending to give Cthulu that mythic feat that makes him immune to smiting, and am teetering as to whether I want to also make him immune to critical hits (albeit, not sneak attack damage, cuz that would totally screw the rogue). Still determining how I wish to play that one, because I know the Monk/Inquisitor/Barbarian/Bard halfling is also very reliant on crits for damage potential.


NobodysHome wrote:

You know, maybe Hathor and Cthulu should come along...

i'm going to assume you mean Hastur, however i like the image of Cthulhu and Hathor, the CG Egyptian cow goddess of the Sky and Dancing tag teaming a bunch of power tripping mythic demigods:)

Someone, somewhere, hopefully will see this and turn it into a cartoon or incredible stupidly ridiculous Youtube clip:)

edit: i finally found an avatar the somewhat looks like myself:)


Tangent101 wrote:
I think the fear was that a CR 30 creature was too powerful for four level 20 adventurers to face. So either they could use nerfed Demon Lords, add plot coupons (aka artifacts) to fight the Demon Lords, or add Mythic to enhance the characters.

So for those of you with experience with this AP and its combats, would a CR 30 creature be too powerful for four level 20 PCs with appropriate WBL? I have no experience with this AP (but have been following this thread) and I have no interest in Mythic, but I wonder if removing mythic powers makes the endgame of this AP impossible? I had plans to throw level 20 PCs (and I have 6 PCs with 25-point builds) against Orcus at the endgame of my homebrew campaign is why I am asking. Thoughts?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
captain yesterday wrote:
NobodysHome wrote:

You know, maybe Hathor and Cthulu should come along...

i'm going to assume you mean Hastur, however i like the image of Cthulhu and Hathor, the CG Egyptian cow goddess of the Sky and Dancing tag teaming a bunch of power tripping mythic demigods:)

Someone, somewhere, hopefully will see this and turn it into a cartoon or incredible stupidly ridiculous Youtube clip:)

edit: i finally found an avatar the somewhat looks like myself:)

No; no. I *TOTALLY* meant the cow god! Er... yeah!

My avatar looks just like me! Except for the blond hair, the stick-thin arms, the stick-thin legs, and the ability to create anything remotely akin to music...


2 people marked this as a favorite.

At least once a month someone assumes im Jesus, happens more around Christmas and Easter.
i have plans involving Easter, a church, a robe, and saying hi to a random old person but my wife says no:(


Dosgamer wrote:
Tangent101 wrote:
I think the fear was that a CR 30 creature was too powerful for four level 20 adventurers to face. So either they could use nerfed Demon Lords, add plot coupons (aka artifacts) to fight the Demon Lords, or add Mythic to enhance the characters.
So for those of you with experience with this AP and its combats, would a CR 30 creature be too powerful for four level 20 PCs with appropriate WBL? I have no experience with this AP (but have been following this thread) and I have no interest in Mythic, but I wonder if removing mythic powers makes the endgame of this AP impossible? I had plans to throw level 20 PCs (and I have 6 PCs with 25-point builds) against Orcus at the endgame of my homebrew campaign is why I am asking. Thoughts?

I haven't actually built classes for it but after looking at the final encounter of this AP I'm certain its possible to build a level 20, non-mythic 4-man party with appropriate WPL that could defeat it. You'd need to avoid the weaker classes since they'd be deadweight and you'd also need some good teamwork but it's definitely doable.

Add in two more characters and make them all 25-point buy would make it much easier. If you allow it, allowing them to cast Ascension for a tier of mythic also would make the fights easier if they're struggling.


Lyra Amary wrote:


So for those of you with experience with this AP and its combats, would a CR 30 creature be too powerful for four level 20 PCs with appropriate WBL?........

That will depend on your players, and the specific monster.


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

It depends if you allow some mythic spells as written. If you do, Deskari starts out by casting Mythic Time Stop and squishing the most vulnerable members of party.

There are some nuclear options on the menu in mythic gameplay. Normally both parties (players and GM) decide they want to take those off the table, because using them means that the fights are decided by whom wins initiative. If only one side has those options available, you need to be able to step back from using them as the GM. That includes things like Mythic Time Stop and Mythic Augmented Meteor Swarm.


Well you can't hurt other creatures during time stop, so maybe not?

Silver Crusade

"Wow, much rage, posts long!"


magnuskn wrote:

It depends if you allow some mythic spells as written. If you do, Deskari starts out by casting Mythic Time Stop and squishing the most vulnerable members of party.

There are some nuclear options on the menu in mythic gameplay. Normally both parties (players and GM) decide they want to take those off the table, because using them means that the fights are decided by whom wins initiative. If only one side has those options available, you need to be able to step back from using them as the GM. That includes things like Mythic Time Stop and Mythic Augmented Meteor Swarm.

Does Deskari have mythic tiers? I thought he was a CR 29 demon lord? Assuming he doesn't have any mythic powers, would 4 level 20 PCs be able to defeat him do you think?

Spoiler:
PCs would have to have access to epic weapons to bypass his DR and regeneration in order to effectively kill him, I suppose. Without epic weapons they could only defeat him.

Thanks!


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

All demon lords are mythic if you fight them in the Abyss. So the answer to the mythic part is maybe.

I'm willing to bet that 20th lvl PCs can beat anything in the game. However the real answer is who knows. There are only an infinite number possibilities in play style, builds and wealth (especially at that level) so its impossible to answer that.


I thought that one of the purported "fix" options for this AP was to run it without mythic? Just curious if that would fall apart at the end if Deskari couldn't be beaten by 20 pb, average or higher WBL, PCs (assuming competent players as level 20 play is likely demanding for any player and DM). Thanks!

1,101 to 1,150 of 1,282 << first < prev | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Adventure Path / Wrath of the Righteous / Wrath of the Righteous - A Failed AP All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.