| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This involves both mechanical and narrative elements. Narratively, they want something that is less like a videogame and more like a book or TV series. Less ‘looting’ and grinding fights for XP, more story and character and that kind of thing. A lot of this is up to the players and GM obviously – people like Evil Lincoln have advised me that the ‘grindier’ aspects of the Adventure Paths can be cut and XP awarded for other things. Essentially, it boils down to ‘if this was a TV series or a book, would I show this?’ They want fights, but they want emphasis on other things too. As a GM, I want to encourage negotiation, or even running away as legitimate options, rather than just fighting everything out. Table-time is important, and I don’t want to waste it having to explore every last corner of a dungeon so as to get every last scrap of XP.
Well first off, I thankfully no longer have this problem. I dont use XP anymore, instead I decide the approximate pace of my game that I want, and then inform the players roughly how often they are going to level up. IE, if I want the players to start at 1st level, and face final enemy in a CR16ish encounter, then I probably want them to be around level 12-13. Thats 11-12 levelings. If I want to play say once a month for a year, I tell them they will level approximately once a session.
For money, I use a homebrew alternate system that replaces the vast majority of magic items with innate bonuses. Magic items are rare, and are effectively priceless. There are no +x items, and each item is unique. Players generally only get a few over their lifetimes, and buying or selling one is akin to trying to sell or buy a Picasso painting in the modern world. Sure you can do it, but it requires very specific efforts.
All of this removes the grindiness of xp and gold. Gold becomes more of a flavor item, as it doesnt relate directly to personal power as it does when magic items are for sale. It might have indirect effects (bribing people, highering spies etc) but the paladin who doesn't want to loot the dead isn't punished for it.
There’s also the matter of scaling things, as PF is very balanced with its specific challenges for every level and exact amount of magic item bonuses, etc. Obviously, PF is a very stats-driven game and this appeals to most of its players. But –narratively – characters shouldn’t really know their experience level? Do goblins just disappear from the game world when they are no longer a level-appropriate threat for the PCs? If a 20th level character gets into a bar-room brawl, are all his opponents a level-appropriate challenge? Do only 20th level pickpockets try to steal from him when he goes to the market?
The answer is...sort of. It doesnt have to be. You can have throwaway encounters that are a synch for the players as they get stronger to make them feel more powerful. Sometimes I even just let everyone narrate how they beat the tar out of the backroom thugs they run into in town when they are higher levels. And luckily, normal enemies dont have to disappear. You can add levels to a goblin to make it a threat at any level. And I especially like the relatively new monster codex for this. It provides some great options for lots of classic monster races. Its a great tool to keep those classic monsters coming back later on.
But I definately think players as they get stronger SHOULD encounter things that were once a challenge and are no longer so they get that sense of progression.
One thing that D&D5 tried to do is flatten that curve a little, with its lack of Wealth By level and ‘bounded accuracy’. I was looking to run a very low-magic game, where items appear about as frequently as in most fantasy novels, rather than a Diablo-type game where the defeat of any NPCs gives the players a big sack of level-appropriate magic items. Magic items will exist, but they will be rare and valuable – even the humble +1/+2 items will give you a bonus you won’t get anywhere else.
There won’t be any stat-boosting items and I was going to keep statistic raises topped out at 20, to encourage more organic-looking characters.
So I guess my question is really about adjusting encounter levels for the PCs, yes? PF assumes you will have the correct booster items at each level, choose the ‘right’ feats and abilities, max your main stat and put your stat raises in that one. Whereas we’ll be looking at characters that resemble earlier editions of D&D like Dragonlance or something.
As there’s no protective magic items and only basic armour, that should keep ogres and things a threat even at slightly higher levels, I assume. Some damage is going to get through, even on high HP characters?
Be VERY careful with something like this. Its not just a matter of having slightly higher or lower crs. You will have to be very careful with what you throw at the players (particularly in terms of special abilities. ACs and to hit bonuses.
Armor class for players basically stops scaling if you dont have magic items. It becomes static, but to hit bonuses do not. You will basically be allowing trolls to remain a threat and make it so players literally cannot face higher cr foes, who when they hit on everything but a 1, crush even the hardiest of pcs.
If you want to limit magic items, you can use internal bonuses. If you want to put a cap on the math, you need to look up something called E6. Basically it caps out the class level progression at level 6 (or level 8). This prevents the balooning numbers, and after the level cap you advance only with feats, and possibly a few class abilities.
That is pretty much the only way you can accomplish what you want. As it stands your current plan simply wont work after a while, probably around 10th level, with problems arising between 6th and 8th level.
Narratively, the adventure paths are basically a channel into which you put a 1st level character and it comes out the other end as a 17th level one, at which point you retire it and do it all again with another AP. I wanted to keep some of the characters between the various stories, even if that means they are higher level, if possible.
Like I said, look into E6. One dm in my group has had a game going for almost 4 years now running through numerous adventures using the E6 rules. The normal system simply cant support what you are looking for.
For example, running the initial AP for Runelords for higher-level characters is going to be overly easy, even with few magic items and non-optimised characters. To a degree, I think this is okay; they will expect to thrash the goblins, although these same goblins are dangerous to the townsfolk... And throwing around high-level magic is liable to endanger the townsfolk even more. I can obviously increase the power of Nuala and the other notable NPCs so that they at least present a challenge – I think the book even suggests that. I will keep magic items that are appropriate to the story, such as if the adventure revolves around the recovery of a magic sword or whatever. But not items that just give the correct mechanical bonuses that the NPCs are supposed to have.
Thats an option, but not really a good use of the material. You will create alot of work for yourself. If you want to, go ahead, but this is almost going to be more difficult then writing your own adventure.
With regard to running things like Skull & Shackles as a second AP, I think I’d best just treat the whole thing as a sandbox. If they kill Harrigan and most of the other pirates straight away, take the ship and skip most of the first module, so be it. Likewise, if they take out the Hurricane King and other Shackles NPCs early, they still have to contend with the Chelish invasion and everything. They’ll just do it all out of order, what would be a ‘New Game Plus’ equivalent in a videogame.
You might want to check out the 3rd party product, Razor Coast. That is meant to be a fairly large, mid level sandbox pirate adventure. You will have a much easier time with that kind of story then you would with a paizo ap.
Is there anything else I need to be aware of, running this style of game? I should add that everyone is just picking character stuff based on what seems ‘cool’, so there won’t be any optimising of stats, feats, class abilities etc.
Keep in mind that in a game like pathfinder, deliberate de-optimization (IE choosing things that are not very effective, but cool) is as much a problem as overoptimization. For instance it may be cool to give your witch the hex that lets them locate children by smell, but that is a character resource spent on something that wont help the party. Which means you will be able to contribute less then a witch that picked a useful hex. There are flavorful but useless options in the game. And while choosing a few usually isnt a problem. If you dont keep an eye on it, it can become a real problem.
I think my biggest piece of advice if you go through with your plan is dont plan to be able to use CR at all. Be aware of what the numbers your players have, to hit bonuses, armor class, saves, skill bonuses etc. Plan your encounters directly against that. The CR system will effectively be useless to you very quickly. Whenever you want an encounter to be challenging, you will have to look directly at the numbers your players have, and choose/design your enemies and challenges accordingly
Yes, you could say that we won’t really be playing PF at all, and that we may as well play an earlier game system anyway. But we’ve liked the feel of the game, the adventures and the plots, and I think it’s worth a try to amend a few things to our tastes.
I would take a long hard look at E6 or E8. It may be a far easier way to adapt pathfinder to your desired play style. And no I dont think you have to go play another game. But I think you should be aware you are creating ALOT of work for yourself, and potentially going to create serious issues in your game if you are not very careful.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
At the end of the say, I was kind of wondering aloud if 3.5 allowed you to run a game that felt like a novel or movie rather than a session of Diablo. The answer to that question might just be 'no', I appreciate that. It might just be easier to convert everything to 1st or 2nd edition D&D, or even 5th, where these elements matter less, and just preserve the plots.
Of course it is. The question isn't really if it is possible but how difficult.
A good chunck of what you are talking about, roleplaying, dialog, building relationships is outside the mechanics of the system. You can do them, but by their very nature they are free flowing and require investment and effort beyond the mechanical game rules.
Nothing in Pathfinder prevents this, however I have noticed that in mechanically heavy systems, people often become so focused on the mechanics that they don't do it. Partly I think that is because there are so much mechanics that you focus on them, and partly I think it because in some instances the mechanics actually get in the way. No point in making a rousing speech in character if it is only a roll on my diplomacy skill that matters. Overcoming these things for a more immersive experience is doable, but it is a challenge.
E6 has already been mentioned. There are also numerous ways out there that replace the big 6 static bonus magical items, including some in the new unchained book. These things can help you get to more of the low magic feel you want. Obvious though, the more you change the more work it is if you want to use an AP. Trading out magic items for an innate bonus system is probably easiest, and if that is all you did an AP would still work just fine. With E6 you will probably have to make major changes to the stat blocks of the last 3 books, but the plot and storyline should still be pretty doable.
I think on balance the APs I have read through are pretty cinematic and have a lot of opportunity for good roleplay beyond just the numbers, but you and your group will have to make an effort if that is what you want.
That is pretty much the only way you can accomplish what you want. As it stands your current plan simply wont work after a while, probably around 10th level, with problems arising between 6th and 8th level.
I was certainly looking to tweak the numbers, and get rid of things like DR, unless it's part of the plot they have to find magic to kill a particular creature that's resistant. But I don't mind if creatures like giants or dragons give even heroes pause, and cause people to be wary of attacking them without a plan.
Like I said, look into E6. One dm in my group has had a game going for almost 4 years now running through numerous adventures using the E6 rules. The normal system simply cant support what you are looking for.
I'm likely missing something, but wouldn't a PC who tops out at level 6 be in a worse place than a 20th level one with minimal items? Apologies if I'm missing something obvious.
The problem with going to level 20 is that it has really wierd effects on balance due to item dependance.
A wizard isn't hurt that much by no items. They can still get their +5 inherent, can pick up temporary bonuses with the bull's strength line etc. They can still cast time stop and maze and suffocate and all the other crowd pleasers. They can get all the utility they need via spells.
A fighter can't take on a CR3 shadow. They also are royally screwed against something like a dragon without clustered shot and a huge amount of archery feats.
Stopping at level 6 prevents most of this. Piling on more feats doesn't actually change the power of characters greatly (not when higher level feats still aren't available). It makes a difference, sure, but not an extreme one. Because there isn't a great deal of difference between a level 6 character and a level 6 character with 5 bonus feats, there isn't too much opportunity for severe imbalance to creep in.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Thanks for responding.
Problem is, that works in a no-magic world like Conan, but not in a LotR style world where there are _some_ magic items that do boost your fighting skills. Even if not everyone gets them.
My world does have magic items and some of them do boost fighting skills. Particularly there are magic weapons. They dont give you +x, but they might be flaming, or keen, or agile or whatever. Which can boost your abilities, but they also dont have to scale. If I get a scaling +x bonus inherenently, I dont need a +1 keen sword early, and then trade it for a +2 keen sword later.
Having a whole tribe of 20th level goblins might break immersion though. Maybe some of them could be a challenge, yes. And as you say, if everything simply levels up around you, what's the point in levelling up? If every 20th level fighter goes to market and haggles with a 20th level merchant, gets his pocket picked by a 20t level urchin and in a bar brawl with 20th level thugs.
Doesnt have to be a whole tribe. But they could have a pair of legendary hero brothers who are higher level. And maybe they dont get involved in every conflict in the area, but when they heard about the pcs slaughtering their bretheren they come to town. Like I said, I still have throwaway encounters, but I also allow for challenging encounters on occassion from unexpected sources.
I was certainly looking to tweak the numbers, and get rid of things like DR, unless it's part of the plot they have to find magic to kill a particular creature that's resistant. But I don't mind if creatures like giants or dragons give even heroes pause, and cause people to be wary of attacking them without a plan.
I'm likely missing something, but wouldn't a PC who tops out at level 6 be in a worse place than a 20th level one with minimal items? Apologies if I'm missing something obvious.
Basically E6 does what you want, but it does it in a structured way (I actually recommend E8 for pathfinder). Players still advance slowly with new feats, but they never get the raw numbers of higher levels. What that does is keep them in a measurable place in the CR system. An 18th level character with no magic items is really hard to guage against monsters in the bestiary. An E8 character with 6 additional feats is an 8th level character with a few extra boosts. I know about where that goes in cr. It means you max out probably at around CR 14 challenges (preferably not a single cr 14 creature though) that can be taken straight on, but thats ok. They can take on higher challenges with lots of advanced warning, planning, and possibly finding specific aids in game.
The point of Ex is to say, yes your progression is curbed, but I know precisely where the numbers top out, and where you are, and can plan my adventure accordingly using the tools the game gives me. If you cut out magic items but keep progressing to higher levels, you can no longer use the in game tools.
Genuine question: if so many of these options exist that are not useful, why are these included in splatbooks by Paizo? If these are simply 'trap' choices that weaken the character through not choosing the correct option, why is this done? Is the game really intended to be a 'puzzle' of sorts where people taking a general feat are punished? Why even include something that was not ever intended to be an option?
Because an npc or pc can take one or two of them to be flavorful without drastically hurting their ability. In addition, its about being able to build a world, and fleshing it out, even if that means the game isn't perfect. So for instance, evil fairy tale witches should be able to hunt children. But since everyone follows the same rules in pathfinder, an npc witch is built like a pc witch. Which means she has hexes. So child scent is a hex you can give an evil witch to allow her to hunt children without a dm handwave.
Basically, paizo, particularly with their campaign setting has slightly favored the rules connecting to whats going on in the world, over making a perfectly balanced game. So you might 'feel' like a character is more connected to the flavor of what they are doing, but it might not be perfectly balanced. Other games focus on narrative, or game balance, rather then rules being strongly associated with their in world effects.
The example I always give is the succubus. A succubus should (in lore) be able to enthral people. But save or lose mental spells can be a real pain in game because when used against the party, they basically say, roll a die and if you fail, stop playing the game with us. Pathfinder kept with the potentially harsh game wise, but well connected to world lore way. 4E chose to make such abilities far less potent (allowing effectively a 50-50 save against it every round in definately. The problem is, that means a succubus could barely enthral a commoner for a few minutes, let alone a pc.
Obviously not everything falls on the extreme, most things are in between, but thats the kind of design choices you have to make with stuff that may not be great 'game' options, but are important 'world building' options.
Yes, that seems about right. I was kind of intending to use the plots and situations but ignore the official stats, depending on what battles were meant to be challenging and which were not. Some fights were clearly intended to be 'boss fights' at whatever level, but goblins and minions shouldn't be.
At the end of the say, I was kind of wondering aloud if 3.5 allowed you to run a game that felt like a novel or movie rather than a session of Diablo. The answer to that question might just be 'no', I appreciate that. It might just be easier to convert everything to 1st or 2nd edition D&D, or even 5th, where these elements matter less, and just preserve the plots.
In the end it depends on what you mean like 'book' or 'novel' vs diablo. As I told you, I've managed to run pathfinder games with minor tweaks without having to toss out the listed encounters in APs and to curtail CERTAIN gamist ideas (like loot everything that isnt nailed down, and disposable magic swords). But the idea of scaling challenges that eventually leave lower level challenges obsolete doesnt really work.
Effectively in 3.x and pathfinder you are playing 3 games. Levels 1-8ish are lord of the rings/game of thrones. Levels 9-14ish are lesser super heroes like certain xmen or spiderman. Levels 15ish-20 are justice league dc or the avengers. The level you play at should affect the scope and challenge of your story.
Regular street thugs dont threaten the justice league, or iron man. But they do threaten the watchmen. Same goes for 3.x and pathfinder. Based on the scope of story you want, choose your levels, or at least how high you will level up.
Thats why E8 is so good for many games, because many people want the lord of the rings or game of thrones story. That system keeps the players in that close to reality range of ability, danger, and challenge.
Problem is, that only simulates a no-magic world, not a low-magic one. You can play Conan that way, but not Bilbo, because he gets Sting, Thorin gets Orcrist, and the other dwarves don't get anything.
Like I said, it doesn't have to. In my game, thorin totally gets orcist, and a magic cloak, and maybe one more thing over the course of the hobbit. Players in my game get magic items. Often they get them early. The difference is they only get a few, and they keep them over the course of their career.
Example, duelist type fighter in one game, was given very early on, a Named Keen Rapier, gifted by a noble whose life he saved. It had a history, a description, I even pulled art and created a card with the story on it. he had this through the whole campaign and got a few other items as well. And it was valuable through the whole story, because he got the +x to hit as he leveled instead of through items.
E6 doesn't appeal to the players, alas. They want to play Conan or Grey Mouser or whatever. It's the reliance on armfuls of gear they don't want. And yes, the ones playing fighters or rogues are absolutely fine with how the mages are going to be much more powerful than them without gear.
E6 doesnt rely on gear. It can be altered exactly the same way the normal game can be altered. The difference is simply that the math tops out at a certain point. You can then choose encounters based on that and actually make use of what is in the bestiary.
Theres no reason you cant be conan or the grey mouser in an E8 game. Heck it models it far better then the normal pathfinder rules do.
I think it's doable, it just needs me to change the stat blocks, and be able to modify them on the fly if necessary. Hard work, as you say but if that's what they want.
Up to you, I know I am sort of pushing hard, but I am simply hoping to provide you with tools to make the kind of game you want in pathfinder. I definately think it can be done. You just have to adjust a few preconceptions.
There are also numerous ways out there that replace the big 6 static bonus magical items, including some in the new unchained book. These things can help you get to more of the low magic feel you want.
Problem is, that only simulates a no-magic world, not a low-magic one. You can play Conan that way, but not Bilbo, because he gets Sting, Thorin gets Orcrist, and the other dwarves don't get anything.
You can certainly still have Sting and Orcrist. Instead of Sting being a +1 dagger, it might be a keen dagger. Orcrist might be Keen and Bane (Goblin). There are still plenty of choices for magical weapons, it is just that the '+' isn't part of them, it is part of a character so that having a magic weapon becomes 'nice' not 'necessary.'
You might also want to think about restricting classes to get some of the feel you want. If you ban the 9-level casting classes, and instead have them run things like Bards, Inquisitors, Magus and Warpriests you won't have the caster-martial disparity as much.
Effectively in 3.x and pathfinder you are playing 3 games. Levels 1-8ish are lord of the rings/game of thrones. Levels 9-14ish are lesser super heroes like certain xmen or spiderman. Levels 15ish-20 are justice league dc or the avengers. The level you play at should affect the scope and challenge of your story.Having played early editions of D&D, I can't really agree with that, but I see where you're coming from. Even Justice League and the Avengers still have Batman or Black Widow, don't they? Batman can still be 20th level without super-strength or being bulletproof.
I am merely talking about how the game plays in 3.5 and pathfinder, not early editions, but even early editions, the 'real' people topped out at around 6th level. And both batman and black widow, while they dont have 'super powers' are no where near human. Black widow picks up an alien rifle and kills 5 people with it. Batman has gotten punched by darkside and lived (someone who can literally knock down mountains). Even the 'normal' people are not normal.
The same way a 20th level fighter isnt a normal person. He isnt particularly fantastic or superpowered, but he's well outside the range of human ability. Batman might not have super strength, but he has his 'magic' toolbelt. And he has super intelligence. He can do things far in excess of what character more tied to reality can do. Something like the Watchmen (besides dr manhattan) would be the equivalent of like 6th level characters, where batman and superman, while very different, are both 20thish level characters in their own way.
You dont have superman, batman, and green lantern take on watchmen style stories of roughing up street thugs, it just doesn't work. They need bigger scope stories with more potent villians, and lesser enemies are trivial. This is more or less how pathfinder actually runs as you level.
Unchained ho.
Automatic Bonus Progress rules let you avoid the absolute need of having your characters be geared head to bottom in magical equipment since the needed bonus stats are now gained by level. This system also keeps magical items in the game, but they lose the boring number stuff and is mostly just special abilities. Like, there will still be flaming swords but flaming sword will always be special and not replaced by flaming sword + 2.
Limited magic and Esoteric spell components is also a system to make magic feel less casual to use.
Now the question how much these were playtested is anyone's guess, but they should fit easily enough into any AP and let you both be high level and still keep a sense of drama and tension up. Hopefully.