Does anyone have experience rewriting published adventures to avoid classes, spells, etc. you didn't like? I haven't had much success doing that, but I don't have much practice. Encounter balance would be the hard part, I'd think (and have been my problem when I've tried).
I would imagine it depends totally on the source material. Simply swapping out a couple NPCs or some spells, easy. Converting Expedition to the DemonWeb Pits to PathFfinder, then totally changing every drow, spider and demon to dwarves and haflings? Pretty dang time consuming.
Depends on what and how much you don't like. Swapping out an item or two is simple enough. Swapping classes can be simple or complex depending on the situation.
I have been finding that unless I have very much beginner players, I have to heavily modify the serious encounters anyway.
The setting feeling, random, annoyance, and minor encounters I leave alone even if they are too easy.
But once my players get even a little bit of experience at the game system, they build characters that will just stroll through the encounters that the author intended to be difficult.
If my players are pretty good at their system mastery. Then entire sections of published material will just be boring. I really have to massively step those up.
Then you get to some of these guys who are real experts at the system. To be honest, if they are really working on their optimizing, I don't really feel qualified to GM for them.
So I really find that completely regardless of whether I was trying to avoid a class or not, I need to re-write quite a bit anyway. When I re-write though, there are some classes that I tend to avoid simply because they are so difficult for me to run in conjunction with all the other NPC's. I did one not to long ago with a summoner that was going to town on summoning monsters. That became a huge hassle for me. I will not be doing that too often I can assure you. Especially not at high levels.
Probably the easiest way we could give advice is if you post specifically what you are running and what you want to avoid.
IN SPOILERS PLEASE!!!
I will also say that one of the things I found made my job easiest to make a challenging but not overpowering encounter was to set it up in waves. Ex:
Starts with the set piece battle on the river bridge with a group a gnolls trying to stop the PC's crossing.
After 2 rounds the skeletons stand up in the river and start shooting crossbows at the PC's. The gnoll cleric had placed them there when setting up the ambush.
After another 2 rounds, 4 gnolls riding hyenadons charge in behind the PC's trying to squash them against the initial gnolls.
After another 2 rounds the gargoyle that they made a deal with flies over and starts dropping alchemist fire/acid/ice on the party from high above.
If the PC's try to escape into the river, they find the Gnoll cleric has been summoning alligators.
Now when I set this up, I was pretty sure it was too powerful for the PC's. However, all I have to do is stop having waves show up. In this case they never saw the alligators or gargoyles. I also dropped the qty of mounted gnolls from 4 down to just 2.
Like they said, it depends on how picky you are.
Switch NPCs of an offending class with an NPC of the same CR of a different class. It's probably best to keep the theme of the NPC the same. (e.g. If you're running a "no guns" campaign, replace the Gunslinger with a crossbow-specialized Ranger. If you've ruled there are no Summoners, replace a summoner NPC with a Wizard (conjurer).)
Just keep the CR of the new NPC the same, modify the NPC's tactics as necessary, and you should be good to go.
Likewise, if there's a spell included that you don't allow or just don't like, swap it out for one of the same spell level.
The more you "don't like" the more work on you. My question is why are you running something that you don't like? Why don't you like certain "classes"? While I don't like everything unless it's a great imbalance I run it like it is. Sometimes you can just go with the flow while making the flavor different. Don't like witch, call her a wizard done.
Does anyone have experience rewriting published adventures to avoid classes, spells, etc. you didn't like? I haven't had much success doing that, but I don't have much practice. Encounter balance would be the hard part, I'd think (and have been my problem when I've tried).
I've swapped out spells I don't like, usually it is only doubling up on something else on their list or picking something that comes to mind easily (fireball, summon monster X, etc.). It has never been a big deal for balance or time to do so.
I've never chosen not to use a published class in a module. I have made up NPCs to use though and it should be roughly the same process. Go with the same level/CR as your rough guide for game balance. Using an existing stat block such as from the NPC Codex can be a huge time saver. Building from scratch is an option but a more significant time sink.
For swapping something out from a module I'd try to go thematically similar for my swaps. So if you don't like gunpowder in D&D and there is a gunslinger in your module if I were you I might go with an archer (or crossbowman, or slinger) build or the 3.5 warlock (or the pathfinder 3pp updates). This will keep their role more the same while their flavor changes to something you prefer for your game.
Similarly feel free to reskin descriptions if that is all that bugs you. If it is a gunslinger describe him as a drow hand crossbowman and use the given gunslinger stats.
|
In my experience with the Aps a lot of work.
While I get the aps are for beginniers the design of the major encounters is very poor. Unless the players don't know what they are doing even a group that is slightly optimized can defeat almost every encounter imo. An example is in one of the APs the group has to defeat large creatures in a fort. Sounds good does it not. Problem is the fort is sized for medium creatures and the large sized creatures are at a disadvantage. I did not realize how much until I ran the encounter. No modifications to the structure nothing. If I ever run that AP again I would have to rewrite it completely. Same AP different module where a BBEG is in a room to be confronted by the PCS. A whole bunch of spells that needed to be removed. No crowd control spells.
I might run another AP or two. After that I'm done with them. If i have to spend that much time reworking the ap I might as well save my money and make my own adventures. The stand alone modules just feel better designed. Minor reworking for them. So far I have not used 3pp so I can comment on those. I do recommend a beginning DM limit the first AP or two to core classes. As some classes just ruin a AP. I had a Gunslinger in my Rise of the Runelords game I'm running. I had to double in some cases triple the hp as it was a turkey shot. Alchemist as well have to be handled carefully. As the status effects from their bombs can make or break a encounter.
I'm not sure why you need to rewrite APs. Exactly what don't you like?
Generally my issue is with the players being too powerful and having to reduce the power of the PCs (or buff the NPCs) for the AP as written. But rewriting things because "I don't like them"? I haven't experienced that. Things have happened that I don't like, but usually because of player actions, not because of the AP itself. I've never really had a problem with the flavor supplied in an AP.
In my opinion they don't normally use classes or spells in such a way that I would consider it abusive or problematic. Quite the opposite, usually they are quite underpowered compared to where they could be. Which is okay because the PCs are supposed to win.
Can you give us an example of your gripe?
|
|
I keep the overall story of the APS which I like. It's the encounters and more often than not the design of major npcs. So far I'm running Rise of the Runelords. The only module that did not require a major rewrite of encounters and BBEGs is module 5. If I did not my group would walk over the encounters as written. I'n not a novice DM. Nor my group major optimizers. In one of the modules a major encounter deals with a npc buried for years. The npc has Craft Arms and armor as a feat. Yet he only has +1 equipment. Sure I could give him better equipment. A the same time it seems like a waste of a feat imo. Buried for years and only crafts +1 equipment. Give the npc at least +2 items or even one +3. It's also not helped with the CR system also not working very well. Again it assumes the group is a bunch of complete novices. I ran a encounter where a fourth level group easily defeated a Flesh Golem.
The PC are supposed to win while also being challenged. Otherwise it gets boring for both sides. My players are not afraid to tell me if a major encounter is too easy or too hard.