My party (APL10) are having a terrible time with the higher level encounters. Here is my most relevant example:
Half Dragon Battle Mage, Advanced 1 (CR8), against an APL9 party with an invisible Accuser Devil (CR3) stealing their weapons.
The Dragon flew into the air, and cast spells. The players just whacked at it every turn, until it finally died. As a DM, I expected them to debuff him, dispel his mage armour and use targeted attacks to damage stats like DEX to drop his AC. (1 guy did go for the Wings, which was cool)
I think it's correct to build encounters expecting players to drop the stats of an enemy before taking it out, but is this really the case in your own experience?
If I make anything with an AC at or over 18, I get complained at. And if does something special, like the Swashbuckler parrying a Critical hit successfully, I get more complaints. For weeks after in the case of the Swashbuckler.
But as a DM, my minions are never disarmed, sundered and only very rarely hit by enfeebling rays and such. So combat is just WHACK WHACK WHACK.
How do I encourage PC's to treat their characters like the multi-faceted tools they are instead of just clubs? (None have played characters above L8 until meow.)
Going after stats is not normal and not nearly as easy as it was in 3.5. I had a build based around it, but I never used it because I knew the GM would not like it.
If they have debuff spells many parties will use them. Maybe they are just inexperienced or not used to a certain playstyle. You may have to give them advice during or in between sessions to see if they are willing to take it. If not they may just prefer the way they are playing.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you don't mind the complaints maybe you could try using debuffs against the PCs to see if they learn those tactics. A better approach might be to let somebody else run and lead people towards better tactics by your example as a player.
|
AC 18 is a joke indeed. Anyway, I tend to agree with Devilkiller in showing them with your npc, as it is way more fun to do so. "So you had a longterm buff today? dispel magic, it's gone!...you have a very nice and expensive weapon? Sunder...and it's gone!"
Granted, sundering equipment depending of your players could throw them into a tantrum or they would just accept it was a better tactic from the enemy. I'm lucky to have understandable players about that.
edit: Essentially just saying your enemies in general have nothing to lose in an encounter, unless something weird happen, the players will usually defeat them, so actually making them waste resources is the best way to soften them up for the big encounter.
Sit down and talk with them about varying up their tactics. The fact that they are complaining at party level 9 about AC 18...I don't know.
At level 9 full BAB characters will have a to hit of probably 9 BAB + 5 STR + 1 weapon. So +15 to hit. Even if using power attack they will still have a +13 and hit an 18 on a 5 or more. That's an 80% chance to hit. They really should be complaining. Their iterative attacks still have a 55% chance to hit.
If nothing else, start using debuff spells and abilities on your players until they get the picture. If they complain point out that they have these options through the use of spells and class abilities, assuming your players have made a diverse class selection.
|
|
Don't obsess about sunder. In the PF universe, it doesn't make a lot of sense to sunder stuff.
Compared to the real world, PF magic gear is both more powerful and more valuable. Any monster, NPC or PC interested in treasure would be foolish to destroy it.
Also, it's not even such an effective tactic. It's not all that easy to sunder armour and weapons, because they have a lot of hit points and hardness. Without specialized gear, it's not going to happen in a single hit. And if you're spending multiple actions to sunder gear, you're not actually achieving any advantage compared to just straightforward violence. Also, people with good arms and armour also tend to have good CMD, so you're not guaranteed to actually hit with your sunder vs. fullplate. Again, unless you have specialized gear. But then you've been spending a lot on specialized gear, and then you fight a monster with natural armor and attacks, and none of your specialized gear or tactics work.
"Oh, but can't you sunder spell component pouches?" you think? You can, but that means that you're in melee with a spellcaster that you can actually hit. Spellcasters tend to defend themselves with miss chance or just by not being in melee with monsters, so this isn't super-common. And a second spell component pouch costs only 5gp.
Tactically speaking, sunder is a trap. It's unreliable and unprofitable.
---
There are maneuver-debuffs that can work. Disarming is faster than sundering (vs. weapons) because you only need to hit once. Tripping is pretty good if you can handle the size limits. But the gold is in grappling.
Grappling requires some serious specialization, but it takes many opponents by surprise. It makes spellcasting very hard, stops fast-moving opponents, and it stops opponents who rely on the superiority of 2H weapons.
|
I'll add another voice to those calling for teaching the players by having the enemies use the tactics you want them to learn. I had a group of players that absolutely refused to help one another flank enemies, so I sent a pair of air elementals (who delayed and prepared attack actions as well) that would use their flying ability to always flank their chosen target.
Ten charges on their most precious item from a single fight, the lone CLW wand that they had managed to find earlier in the campaign, and they finally started positioning themselves to attack the enemy and put the hurt on.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So, look, obviously, talking to the players is the best step, but it bugs me whenever I see threads like this and most of the advice is "teach them how to play right (i.e. how you want to play)." Have so many of you failed to considered that they might be playing the way they enjoy best? Who are you to teach them the "proper" way? What if they enjoy just smashing stuff until it falls down? What if they have no fun debuffing first?
There's no "correct" way to roleplay, so, at least consider that they are having fun as is and the real issue is incompatibility of style between PC and GM.
But...they defeated the Dragon mage. That's not what I would define as 'having trouble'.
They'll continue until it stops working. My advice: run a published adventure, and when they complain, just say "that's what's in the mod".
So, look, obviously, talking to the players is the best step, but it bugs me whenever I see threads like this and most of the advice is "teach them how to play right (i.e. how you want to play)." Have so many of you failed to considered that they might be playing the way they enjoy best? Who are you to teach them the "proper" way? What if they enjoy just smashing stuff until it falls down? What if they have no fun debuffing first?
There's no "correct" way to roleplay, so, at least consider that they are having fun as is and the real issue is incompatibility of style between PC and GM.
I agree with you to an extent. However, when the players cry foul because the enemy doesn't want to just stand there and duke it out, that is supposed to be part of the challenge of the game. Not all problems are supposed to be solved by just smashing. Otherwise you would need only one class, barbarian.
I think it is valid to play creatures and NPCs intelligently and use their abilities effectively. If the players cannot cope with this using the same tactics, it should teach them a lesson. It is good to grow and expand beyond smashy-smash. I'm not saying they shouldn't be allowed to have fun doing smashy-smash, but recognizing that it can't work all on it's own in all situations is fair to ask.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Here's the problem with using tactics in Pathfinder: It's almost always the worse choice.
Debuffing? Why would you bother? There are some good, reliable debuffs in the game, but the large majority of them are going to be either terribly unreliable (poisons, for example) or spells that are SoL/D, and those have a tendency to just... fizzle.
Slow is an incredibly potent spell, but there is a reason most Wizards leave that one on the shelf and prepare Haste instead; Haste won't be saved against.
The typical argument against sunder is bad. Things aren't just destroyed when they're sundered - they're broken. Broken things are still valuable, but they don't work as well while they're broken.
Seems like a good idea, right?
Except the good argument against sunder is that it costs quite a bit of character investment to be reliable, and actually sundering a thing requires more than a single hit in most cases. Which means multiple rounds just to give a small penalty. Which means it's generally not worth it.
Tripping is very powerful, but most GMs are not going to spend their week stating out a bunch of humanoid NPC enemies for the party to fight (kudos to those GMs who are so dedicated!)
No, instead most GMs will turn to the trusty Bestiary which means monsters which tend to come in all sorts of shapes and sizes, sometimes with multiple legs.
It's a VERY uphill battle. Usually not worth the effort. (Yeah, it's nice that Mr. Lore Warden decided to be a tripper, but the gargantuan dragon just doesn't care.)
Grappling tends to have all the same problems that tripping does. If you play the class JUST RIGHT to be a grappler, you can pull it off. If you're just using it as a tactic, it's more than likely going to fail you most of the time.
Disarming only works when the enemy has things to disarm. Remember how most GMs pull from monsters? Monsters that tend to use natural attacks/spell-like abilities/etc instead of manufactured weapons?
Yeah, it's another losing strategy for the most part. (Great when it works, just hardly works.)
When it all comes down to it, the most successful strategy for any encounter is going to be, "buff up and beat it repeatedly."
It's a pretty boring and unimaginative playstyle, but that's how Pathfinder rolls. Unfortunately.
My solution is to build encounters where defeating them whack whack whack ends up in tears but doing it With smart play is smooth and efficient. (An encounter With the fabled kobolds, or a Group that uses closed rankeds, Tower Shields and the Shield wall feat)
Dropping hints and pulling the right questions from Your players With some guidance would go a long way.
This only if you feel that the type of game needs to change. Whack whack is sometomes what People want/need. You however are also part, not a servitor of Your players but one more. Fun for all.
As an example a Group i play With was very straight forward. After usimg a character of mine differently when i was a player and rewarding another's alternative plan thinking when i was a GM has really evolved strategy for us at the table.
Good Luck.
So, look, obviously, talking to the players is the best step, but it bugs me whenever I see threads like this and most of the advice is "teach them how to play right (i.e. how you want to play)." Have so many of you failed to considered that they might be playing the way they enjoy best? Who are you to teach them the "proper" way? What if they enjoy just smashing stuff until it falls down? What if they have no fun debuffing first?
There's no "correct" way to roleplay, so, at least consider that they are having fun as is and the real issue is incompatibility of style between PC and GM.
Agreed. But if the GM doesnt have fun the game will soon enough stop being fun.
Bored/unhappy GM = dead game.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So, look, obviously, talking to the players is the best step, but it bugs me whenever I see threads like this and most of the advice is "teach them how to play right (i.e. how you want to play)." Have so many of you failed to considered that they might be playing the way they enjoy best? Who are you to teach them the "proper" way? What if they enjoy just smashing stuff until it falls down? What if they have no fun debuffing first?
There's no "correct" way to roleplay, so, at least consider that they are having fun as is and the real issue is incompatibility of style between PC and GM.
While pathfinder is a role playing game, not everything is about role playing. Tactics and strategy are also just as much part of the game. When a player refuses to use any tactics even when his character would know better that is not role playing that is just bad tactics.
A party of first level characters ignoring tactics can be considered role playing the inexperience of their characters. A party of 10th level characters doing the same is actually a classic example of bad role playing. Keep in mind that the vast majority of people are supposed to be under 5th level. With an average character level of 10 this party is supposed to be the toughest group in the kingdom. 11th level and beyond is supposed to be world class characters. They should be experience battle hardened veterans at this point no rookies still wet behind the ears.
If the players are not good at tactics the GM may want to start making suggestions until they learn some basic tactics. If they are not interested in learning any kind of tactics then the GM needs to decide if he is ok running a game on easy mode. If not let the players know that and maybe one of them can take over as GM.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Rather than punishing them with encounters that require tactics, my malicious thought is to go the other way. Full-on Monty Haul. Have every enemy courteously walk up in single file without any armour to die swiftly to their hands, and dispense convenient piles of gold when they collapse. They don't want a challenge? Don't give them a challenge. See how long it takes them to get bored.
And if that doesn't work, slowly lose more detail. NPCs that dispense missions get more and more robotic in their voices and actions. The lands become less and less detailed, until it's nothing but bland forests, plains, roads, and rivers with only towns and dungeon entrances around. Trap them in the worst example of old-school Eastern RPGs.
Then, and only then, reveal that they can only escape this nightmare realm through the use of the tactics and challenge they so reviled.
If players like a certain thing, I don't see a problem with giving it to them. A table of my players makes bad decisions constantly and aren't very strategic. If I play my monsters with reasonable strategy, the PC's just die. They are adults with lives and don't need me to teach them "better strategy". They want their challenges within a certain framework.
Your folks want 18 AC and no spell resist? No problem. There are lots of mathematical ways to balance encounters with variables they will interact with. Double the attacks, damage and turns of monsters they encounter while stripping away all of the monster's traditional defenses.
Turn the rocket tag into nuke tag and see if they like it. If it's a big hit, sit down with a couple of monsters and grind out the math to figure out what the hp and damage value of their defenses are and then replace them with better offense.
Most things can be broken down into damage given and taken in Pathfinder.
I don't understand why they can't hit things with AC 18 at level 10. Is there no one in the party with full BAB? I mean I run for three party's and while they all use debuffing to an extent their primary tactics include buffing and beating the rocket tag style. I'm running to AP's and a super dungeon and my players are cruising through like those are a joke. So it seems to me that your players tactics should be the most successful tactics they can have. I'm not sure how they are struggling, could you elaborate? Are they having issues hitting monsters? Are they poorly optimized?
|
|
If a level ten character has trouble hitting 18 AC... they had to have made horrible choices in character building. Horrible, horrible, horrible choices.
First 'boss' I ever fought in Pathfinder had 21 AC, flight, fast healing, DR/Cold Iron. It was freaking bull, but darn it if I didn't make sure every single character I made after that had a cold iron and a silver weapon right out of the gate, with ranged options as well.
If a level ten character has trouble hitting 18 AC... they had to have made horrible choices in character building. Horrible, horrible, horrible choices.
You're absolutely right, my Lvl 10 Wizard had a better then even chance of hitting an AC 18.
How are they having a problem?
First 'boss' I ever fought in Pathfinder had 21 AC, flight, fast healing, DR/Cold Iron. It was freaking bull, but darn it if I didn't make sure every single character I made after that had a cold iron and a silver weapon right out of the gate, with ranged options as well.
If cash is an issue, I've found that his can wait until Lvl 3.
So, look, obviously, talking to the players is the best step, but it bugs me whenever I see threads like this and most of the advice is "teach them how to play right (i.e. how you want to play)." Have so many of you failed to considered that they might be playing the way they enjoy best? Who are you to teach them the "proper" way?
But there is nothing wrong with pushing them to "up their game."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Another thought:
I have had GM's before that didn't allow debuffs to work like the should. For some reason no matter how much debuffing was applied it never seemed to have an affect.
Did these players have that sort of conditioning in the past?
Also (and again) all the debuff and battle field control in the world will not kill the enemy. At the end of the day you still have to but lead in the target. As why delay and waste resources on stuff that is still going to lead you to simply killing the enemy?
If you want them to use less than lethal tactics you need to have your foes use and expect the appropriate responses from those tactics.
For example I have had my NPCs disarm PCs before and expected them to surrender then (typically this would be guards that weren't really wanting to kill and were willing to let the PCs simply walk away if they would). If an NPC had been hit with stinking cloud and it worked on the majority of them they would surrender, and so forth.
Showing that these sorts of effects can have the response the players desire can help cause them to use them more often.
|
|
If a level ten character has trouble hitting 18 AC... they had to have made horrible choices in character building. Horrible, horrible, horrible choices.You're absolutely right, my Lvl 10 Wizard had a better then even chance of hitting an AC 18.
How are they having a problem?
First 'boss' I ever fought in Pathfinder had 21 AC, flight, fast healing, DR/Cold Iron. It was freaking bull, but darn it if I didn't make sure every single character I made after that had a cold iron and a silver weapon right out of the gate, with ranged options as well.If cash is an issue, I've found that his can wait until Lvl 3.
So, look, obviously, talking to the players is the best step, but it bugs me whenever I see threads like this and most of the advice is "teach them how to play right (i.e. how you want to play)." Have so many of you failed to considered that they might be playing the way they enjoy best? Who are you to teach them the "proper" way?But there is nothing wrong with pushing them to "up their game."
Nope, I faced this monster at the end of the first Pathfinder session I played in. It had a negative energy channel too. And a wizard's going to be targeting saves or a touch AC, which is often lower, but I hope you knew that already.
If a level ten character has trouble hitting 18 AC... they had to have made horrible choices in character building. Horrible, horrible, horrible choices.You're absolutely right, my Lvl 10 Wizard had a better then even chance of hitting an AC 18.
How are they having a problem?
Yeah, I'm gonna third this. My 5th level fighter (who, granted, had a starting 20 strength (18+2 from race)) with just a nonmagical masterwork weapon has +13 to hit. By level 8 and still no magic anything, she'll have +17 and therefore only miss AC 18 on a natural 1, and when she catches up to this party at 10 it'll be +20 to hit.
My bard at 10th level had +10 to hit before buffs. With the standard buffs up it was +15, and this is still without factoring in magic weapons and belts.This being an issue is very puzzling.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Nope, I faced this monster at the end of the first Pathfinder session I played in. It had a negative energy channel too. And a wizard's going to be targeting saves or a touch AC, which is often lower, but I hope you knew that already.If a level ten character has trouble hitting 18 AC... they had to have made horrible choices in character building. Horrible, horrible, horrible choices.You're absolutely right, my Lvl 10 Wizard had a better then even chance of hitting an AC 18.
How are they having a problem?
First 'boss' I ever fought in Pathfinder had 21 AC, flight, fast healing, DR/Cold Iron. It was freaking bull, but darn it if I didn't make sure every single character I made after that had a cold iron and a silver weapon right out of the gate, with ranged options as well.If cash is an issue, I've found that his can wait until Lvl 3.
So, look, obviously, talking to the players is the best step, but it bugs me whenever I see threads like this and most of the advice is "teach them how to play right (i.e. how you want to play)." Have so many of you failed to considered that they might be playing the way they enjoy best? Who are you to teach them the "proper" way?But there is nothing wrong with pushing them to "up their game."
Elyrium had a lingering mental impact on many a party. It's okay. Counseling can help you mitigate this trauma.
;)
Ghosts.
I just need to point out that the original Runelords publication came out before the witch class existed, so she had to be Something other then a witch. In the revised version she may well be a witch. That being said, sorry my guess was wrong. ;) was just trying to be humorous.
Mounted halflings with slings in a big open field. Depending on how badly the party is built, you might even be able to get away with making them something like 3-5th level warriors and still hit reasonably often. Shoot, then ride away, rinse and repeat. If the party has any ranged attacks or method of increasing their speed to match the enemy riding dogs then this tactic will be fairly harmless. If not, they're screwed. Given the range of a sling, any first level character with a crossbow or bow could probably out-range them.
Have some enemies attack, then run away. Make it suspicious. If the party runs in headlong then BOOM! ambush. If they do ANYTHING else then have them spot the ambush.
Shadows, b&*+*es!
Caltrops and archers. Possibly add an oil slick and tripwire if you're feeling mean. Add trip trenches (AKA difficult terrain) to prevent charges. Archers are on an elevated position for higher ground bonus.
All of this can be pulled with enemies far lower level and worse equipped than they are. They'll probably win, but the force multiplier of tactics will be a bit scary for them.
|
Dispelling actually isn't a very good proposition. You have a even chance if monster is same level as you, after that chances go down the drain. The more efficient and effective way to get rid of magical effects is to spell sunder. Attacking the stats is an all or nothing proposition. You either kill the monster outright (touch of gracelessness + calcific touch), get no loot cos he's a stone statue, or he's still at his full abilities, mebbe -3ac or so, which is pretty useless.
I prefer combat maneuvers, or just outright spells that screw stuff over.
If you want to give the players a lesson in maneuvers, have them run into a rival party. Put them up against a half orc lorewarden with a 1 lv dip in maneuver master, that is trip and disarm focus, using a reach weapon and armor spikes. Combat reflexes is a must. Give him a potion of enlarge person, full trip line feats, and improved dirty trick. The next member should be a tetori monk who goes around grabbing their casties.
Add in a wizard who fools around with glitterdust, or fear spells, stinking cloud or black tentacles (yet to see black tentacles slow a tetori down) and a neutral gnome heavens oracle into veiled illusionist playing with loathsome veil. The wizard should have an unseen servant, or invisible imp familiar told to collect all weapons disarmed by the polearm fighter,
I don't think incorps are the way to go, the only way to deal with incorps is to beat/burn them down. The OP wanted us to teach his players to do something other then hitpoint dmg. To be honest, players are not suited to do stat dmg (unless one of them is a shadow dancer with a shadow companion). But players can certainly employ debuffing spells and combat maneuvers.
And yeah, my lv 1 ranger has 17 ac. My divine casters, if they're turtling, have 20 ac at level 1.
The rival party can certainly have lower then normal ACs(lore wardens aren't known for fantastic ac anyway), since the tripper serves as a defensive barrier. Also, if you could tell me your parties composition, I could help craft the rival party better.
|
One method I've used to encourage players to up their game is to have their enemies set a very in-character Trap for Stupid. Allow clever enemies, who have observed and studied the PCs behavior over time, to set a trap for them that exploits repeatedly observed bad tactics. If the PCs demonstrate some basic smarts they won't fall into the trap. If they fall into the trap ... those are the breaks.
I can't speak for the OP, but I suspect the complaining when enemies have AC 18 is less incredibly inefficient builds, and more they hate it when they miss at all. Even if they roll a 2, it's possible they still b##@$ at the 'GM's OP characters with insane AC!' Some players just don't like dealing with any sort of adversity.
Just have them get killed by an 11th level wizard. Like scry and fry unfair tactics, contingency, greater invisibility, waves of fatigue, dazing fireball, planar binding insanity. That is only half sarcastic.
I would never put up with a group that complains about by the book stats. Your players sound like they would die in every AP published. While there are many trap debuffing options, there are some decent ones like intimidate, spells that still debuff on a failed save, spells that don't allow saves, and hexes. None of it is necessary though because buffing always works.
If your players refuse to adapt to the game you are running, it is usually a good idea to stop running it. You seem to want to use things as is from the books and not be told to water it down. Many other people also like this style. If your current group doesn't like that style I think you would be happier finding an additional group that does play in your style. I understand many groups are friends outside game and I don't like telling people not to hang out with their friends, but I also hate to see gaming ruin friendships.
One method I've used to encourage players to up their game is to have their enemies set a very in-character Trap for Stupid. Allow clever enemies, who have observed and studied the PCs behavior over time, to set a trap for them that exploits repeatedly observed bad tactics. If the PCs demonstrate some basic smarts they won't fall into the trap. If they fall into the trap ... those are the breaks.
I love doing that. If you're dumb and keep making the same mistakes, intelligent enemies are going to flee, regroup, then make a plan based on that tactic.
I once saw a game where the PCs kept facing the same core enemies with some new flunkies per encounter. the main enemy was a wizard who DD'd the core enemies out of there when the fight started to go against them. The encounters got progressively harder and harder because the enemy started defending against the party's common attacks and hitting their weak points.
I can't speak for the OP, but I suspect the complaining when enemies have AC 18 is less incredibly inefficient builds, and more they hate it when they miss at all. Even if they roll a 2, it's possible they still b$@!+ at the 'GM's OP characters with insane AC!' Some players just don't like dealing with any sort of adversity.
If the players don't like adversity at all to the point of complaining about having ANY chance of missing their foes, I think that Pathfinder is a bad choice of system for them to game with.
Possibly something diceless would be more their style.
I feel like the OP was saying the GM complains when a player has AC higher than 18, or an ability that causes them annoyances (like negating crits).
Because the very next sentence starts with, "But as a DM, my minions..."
Some quick math:
a 10th level fighter with 16 strength and a masterworked weapon, which lets face it is absolutely minimalist. Attack +14/+9, so hitting 18 on rolls of 4+ and 9+.
That's pretty much as poorly built and equipped I can see a fighter being by 10th level and having survived that long. 85% chance to hit with the first attack and 60% with the second.
So lets add in dual wielding. once again a mw weapon for the off hand, and assuming twf and itwf.
+12/+12/+7/+7, or 75%/75%/50%/50%. Odds are pretty decent of 2-3 hits per turn with that, and it requires you to build and equip your character fairly poorly. Any halfway decent optimizer on this board can get that much higher without even making an effort.
So yeah, I'm not seeing any reason to complain about an 18 ac at 10th level for a dedicated fighter.
So how about a rogue? +7/+2, let's say weapon finesse and 16 dex, plus a masterworked shortsword. +11/+6, or 7+(70%)/12+(45%). 70% is not bad odds, and once again this is hardly an optimized build here.
Right, time for muscle wizard to cast fist.
+5 BAB. 8 strength. Quarterstaff, non masterworked. The least adroit melee combatant imaginable. net of +4, or 35% hit chance. Now that's going to have a hard time hitting AC 18... except that as a wizard, if you are relying on hitting people with a stick at this level then something has already gone horribly horribly wrong.
I recommend monologuing. Have the bad guy with a high AC laugh at their attempts to hit and explain his defenses, "You shall never get past my mystic Shield spell and magically hardened plate mail!" And heck, make that an Intimidate check too.