Hi people, I'm GMing a group of 5 heroes and, while I saw the amazing work Joey Virtue did, I was thinking if would be possible to not change the ecounters but leaving the group 1 level behind their normal advancement.
They are all experienced players except for one who is very new to the game, their characters are made with a PB of 20, I can consider to boost them to 25 in case, and their HP are "rolled" with the PFS rule, so that everyone of them has a good amount of HP.
What do you think? Would it case problems or is it doable?
I was thinking of this because I don't like to play at high levels much and, at the same time, it would save me a lot of time not changing every encounter.
|
Hey there AsterITA,
Are you running your game using XP? If so, the party should lag behind naturally due to splitting the XP 5 ways. That said, 1 additional party member doesn't actually increase your party's CR / APL calculation. If you think the increased PB and HP are enough of an increase to warrant the rest of the CR increase, then setting their level-up markers one level ahead will do.
If you're not running XP, following the book's milestones should minus a level should be fine, especially if you have experienced players. My group of exclusively new players (6 of them) is managing the AP fine with most encounters run at CRs 2 higher than normal.
If you find at times 5 players one level lower is throwing something off, you can make very subtle, low-effort alterations, like modifying a creature's listed tactics.
It is certainly doable, but your casters are gonna be feeling it. While martials will largely just be a little weaker numerically, casters will often be a spell level behind which greatly reduces some of the tools they can bring to bear. For example, a cleric in the party won't have access to the same level of condition removal. If you are playing with spontaneous casters who already have delayed spell levels compared to their prepared counterparts, this problem will be further exacerbated.
If you're not running XP, following the book's milestones should minus a level should be fine, especially if you have experienced players.
This is exactly what I had in mind, if they should have some problems I'll consider to change something in order to help them.
It is certainly doable, but your casters are gonna be feeling it. While martials will largely just be a little weaker numerically, casters will often be a spell level behind which greatly reduces some of the tools they can bring to bear. For example, a cleric in the party won't have access to the same level of condition removal. If you are playing with spontaneous casters who already have delayed spell levels compared to their prepared counterparts, this problem will be further exacerbated.
I see that the casters may have problems with the lack of that level, I'll try and see how they'll manage, if I should see that their options are too limited I'll reconsider this level behind thing.
Thanks for your help!
Just add mooks. It'll help with the main problem in RotRL combats which is action economy (especially in boss fights) though you might occasionally find the map a bit of a squeeze.
Just remember that APs are calibrated for a party of four 15-point-build and not-very-optimised characters (run by not-very-experienced-players). Changing the party/player make-up from that formula will change the combat dynamics.
As you already know, there are numerous suggestions on the forums here for how to boost the encounters. Here are some of my personal favourites ...
The addition of extra minions to boost various boss' action economies. E.g., I gave Xanesha a will-o-wisp minion in her lair; both my groups hated that one. :)
Consider changing certain bosses to different classes. E.g., change Nualia from F/C to Warpriest.
Consider swapping out some monsters' feats for more useful ones. E.g., all my glabrezu demons now have Quicken Spell-Like Ability (Mirror Image) instead of Great Cleave, plus another useful feat instead of Cleave. (This is a personal pet peeve of mine; PF nerfed the Cleave feats from 3.5, so I always look for alternatives to them.)
Consider just giving all foes maximum hit point - and then swap out any Toughness feats for more useful ones.
If running with benchmark XP, I would not hold the party back by one level.
Also, with regard to adding extra minions to boss fights - note that a few maps are erroneously given a 5-foot scale where they should instead have a 10-foot scale. Just look at what monster(s) are where, and figure it out logically. E.g., in the final battle would those storm giants be doing balancing acts on small platforms, or are those platforms really bigger? One of the Arkhryst/Freezemaw maps is also too small.
I was suggest against it
I would suggest against it
If running with benchmark XP, I would not hold the party back by one level.
We are using milestones for advancing with levels, I never liked to use XP.
Since you all agree that holding them back one level is a bad choice I'll use your other suggestions: adding mooks, boosting HP, change feats/spells.
Thank you all for your feedbacks!