|
I have been running a converted 3pp 1e adventure path for the last few years and now that the PCs are in the mid levels a lot of the enemies in the written adventure have escape clauses like 'teleport' written into their tactics, but 2e seriously nerfed most such options. Are there any spells/options left in this edition that make a good 'escape to fight another day' abilities for what are supposed to be recurring enemies? So far my best idea is to use Translocate to escape the immediate fight then spend ten minutes hoping the party does not find them and casting the Teleport ritual. Anything else?
Rally Point doesn't need line of sight and is available a spell Rank earlier.
Still has the range of 120 feet though, so it isn't going to be the inescapable escape that you are hoping it will be.
The player-facing options like this have pretty much all been removed. Disengaging from combat is notoriously hard in PF2. On both sides.
Which means that it is something that you need to work out with your players about how to handle. On the player side, if they want to escape a battle that they are losing, transitioning it to a skill challenge like a chase scene works well. On the GM side, there is nothing wrong with being above board about the idea that the enemies may have escape plans and quickly triggerable contingency teleports available that aren't generally available to the players.
Nothing wrong with simply keeping those PF1 style Teleport abilities on the PF1 creatures either.
I would just explain to the players that you're playing a converted adventure, and you need to add back some things that were removed for the game to make sense. I see two options:
1) My preference: just unnerf teleport as part of the conversion process. You're playing an AP that expects the unnerfed version already; it's fine. Casters will get stronger, yes, but teleport is generally a net benefit to the party's power as opposed to just the caster's power; it's easier to buy items, escape, etc.
2) Consider creating a spell, permanent item, or consumable with an effect similar to Rally Point with a much longer range, one that lets a single person mark a location with maybe 10 miles and teleport back to that location for the next (whatever makes sense) hours as a 3A activity. It's honestly fine to make it available to the players, too; just make it an expensive, high level item or a high rank spell that the enemy casts from a scroll. If it can only ever take a single person, it's too restrictive for party use unless it can be used four times, which solves most of the playerside balance problem.
One example of this that already exists: Headbands of Translocation. 1/day, teleport to the owner of the matching headband provided they're within a mile.
Flamboyant Thief from NPC Core has Dramatic Exit, which is non-magical but compresses a lot of actions so it feels less like cheating.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
On of PF2 design rules is that enemies don't use the same rules as PCs. So if you want your BBEG to Teleport to safety, just do it. As long as it's obviously a story based ability and not a gotcha ability.
I like recurring enemies. One of my favorite one is Olric from Blake and Mortimer. I'd love to once have such a character in a campaign, the mercenary who always works for the next BBEGs and who always manages to run away because he's not the actual enemy.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yep, what SuperBidi said.
Don't constrain your NPCs based on player facing rules.
Perhaps the NPC has a variant of the teleport ritual that allows them to spend the 10 minutes of ritual time in advance and only needs 1 round of combat action to activate. With a drawback that the specific ritual only works to teleport them to a place they've been before, and only to one specific place (which is to say each time the ritual is used it takes them to the same location). Perhaps the ritual requires the user to have a specific object to activate the ritual, that could be disarmed or stolen before use (so the PCs narratively have a way to be able to stop the NPC from escaping when the story eventually says they should do so).
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Whatever the merits of separating the design principles of PCs and monsters in general, I don't think it ever sounds great to say, "the villains need the cool toys they lost in the conversion from PF1E, but you don't. They can escape, but you can never follow them even if you want to or know where they're going."
Maybe your players take that better, but to me and mine, that's just a way to mechanically railroad the game. If the enemy can be guaranteed an escape with nothing the players could even conceptually do to stop it (like, say, counterspelling a teleport), why even have the fight? What's the point of an interaction without much live agency?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Escapes are difficult to force because players have agency. As WoM suggests, a guaranteed escape undermines player agency...which IMO undermines the game and the GM/Player social contract.
If the enemy needs to escape to fight another day, they need to be or have a clone, followers that will Raise them, or an identical twin (etc). Even 1st ed DnD with all its instant escapes and DM plot control often used these tricks in modules. Plus there's the pain of losing the boss's loot! (No, seriously, it hurts, and will often drive players to extremes to catch them more than the plot does.)
Also consider trap doors or a door which opens instantly when they run toward them, but lock behind them automatically, a wave of fresh enemies that guard the escape route (pre-balanced!), or many other solutions that speak of a cunning enemy rather than a "GM says they have to live" enemy. (Not that the results are different...)
And take care that the players feel like there's a victory, not a draw or even loss because the enemy attempting to escape succeeded at their goal. So thwarted plan, big treasure looted, NPC saved, some goal where the enemy's the obstacle, not the target...yet.
ETA: I'd forgotten until a second after I posted that you're running published adventures...so make of it what you can. I've found 3PP often lack such finesse and simply brute force a route (with much reason to, given the amount of directions a party could otherwise take which a published adventure can't dare cover). But take ownership for the sake of player agency. I've left a campaign because the GM didn't do that for a campaign path with predetermined outcomes. Why's my PC here if all the story needs are her stats?
I have been running a converted 3pp 1e adventure path for the last few years and now that the PCs are in the mid levels a lot of the enemies in the written adventure have escape clauses like 'teleport' written into their tactics, but 2e seriously nerfed most such options. Are there any spells/options left in this edition that make a good 'escape to fight another day' abilities for what are supposed to be recurring enemies? So far my best idea is to use Translocate to escape the immediate fight then spend ten minutes hoping the party does not find them and casting the Teleport ritual. Anything else?
I've seen it a couple of times where the BBEG has been given Translocate to escape, but only at level 4 and of course the encounter is in a dungeon with no line of sight.
Translocate at level 5 - a one mile no line of sight teleport - should be an easy escape. As long as you remember to teleport into complex terrain with multiple hiding places.
But if you are lower level try
Time Jump level 3.For sure it is just free moves but the players have no chance to observe your movement and can't react. In the right situation it can work.
Disruptive Transfer level 3. They do see you leave but if you travel through a small gap or a grate there may be no reasonable opportunity to chase you.
It is essentailly the same as transforming into a tiny animal to escape. Which you could do as well. Shrink works fine from level 2.
Obviously you are going to have to plan for this, with some interesting terrain.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Whatever the merits of separating the design principles of PCs and monsters in general, I don't think it ever sounds great to say, "the villains need the cool toys they lost in the conversion from PF1E, but you don't. They can escape, but you can never follow them even if you want to or know where they're going."
It doesn't have to be "never". As I said, it depends if it's used for the story or just for gotcha moments.
For example, if the PCs stumble on a crime scene at the beginning of the adventure, it's nice to have the BBEG escaping from it so the PCs can put a face (or roleplay, voice) on him. There's a lot of funny roleplay interactions that can then emerge from this knowledge. Knowing that the mayor is the assassin but without any proof nor motive can lead to excellent dialogues. And you can even add a twist with a twin brother or dominate spell to congratulate your players if they managed to go through the adventure without resorting to cold blood murder.
So I disagree. Plot armor is not a bad thing if it's used for the enjoyment of the table.
On of PF2 design rules is that enemies don't use the same rules as PCs. So if you want your BBEG to Teleport to safety, just do it.
I agree it is a design decision in PF2. It has some merits in simplicity.
But in general I like for the game to be consistent on both sides.As long as it's obviously a story based ability and not a gotcha ability.
What is the difference between those?
I mean I'm happy for GM controlled actors to have access to level inappropriate resources and have made preparations that I would never let the players have. But I don't like to cheat or use different rules of physics. If the BBEG is restrained and can't get his teleport spell off, then I let the players have their win, adjust the plot, and move on.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What is the difference between those?
The main difference is based on the story. If the players have their win, then you are certainly at the end of the adventure and you don't want to teleport the villain away as it would just rob the players of their victory.
But if you just want the villain to make an appearance and run away, or if the ever teleporting villain is either a gimmick or an element to take into account to catch him, then you don't want the PCs to have their win, at least not before the final confrontation. And in that case you'll use plot armor (teleport or whatever) so the villain survives.
There are numerous adventures using plot armor, it's a classic storytelling tool. It can even be generalized to the plot itself (there's actually a conversation about plot vs common sense that speaks about that). As a GM, you sometimes have to protect your plot as otherwise the adventure would just be a disappointment.
I think reoccurring BBEGs can be important to a story. If you constantly fighting a slew of new faces it can feel a bit disjointed and your never develop a true antagonism with an individual NPC.
By having an NPC escape or come back, through whatever means, it can develop a nemesis for the party.
Where would Batman be without his reoccurring enemies? Or most any superheroes?
Exactly!
But I prefer for that to not use the BBEG but a lieutenant. Very often, having the BBEG escaping feels like a failure when an always escaping lieutenant is much more fun.
Exactly!
But I prefer for that to not use the BBEG but a lieutenant. Very often, having the BBEG escaping feels like a failure when an always escaping lieutenant is much more fun.
I can agree with that. Supposing that the PCs don't encounter the "head" BBEG until the very end, and the lieutenant is the one that the PCs encounter frequently.
Bonus points if the BBEG and Lieutenant aren't puppy kicking evil but relatable individuals who had understandable goals but chose a route littered with questionable deeds to achieve the ends. Maybe their goal is actually saving the world from same insanely powerful threat...but they were willing to do anything to achieve the power necessary to do so.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That's one reason APs often use an organization as the BBEG, perhaps with a figurehead whose proxies the party can fight. "Oh, we've killed this unique lieutenant of the BBEG's. That oughta hurt." Moreso if that NPC had a specific role/ability the organization loses. "No more X's are going to serve them anymore." (Perhaps because X's are too weak to toss against the party anyway or have been run dry plotwise, but still.)
Not that the figurehead's always visible, but sometimes, like in the Dragon's Demand megamodule, the villain overshadows everything even when offstage. Even fighting completely unrelated villains it's for the sake of fighting the dragon. (And the dragon doesn't make any appearances when the party might get lucky prematurely.)
The point being one can feature a recurring adversarial element without any escaping going on. Putting all one's plot eggs in one BBEG basket doesn't jive well in RPGs where plot armor can lean toward heavy-handed authorial (GM) interference. "Because I'm Batman!" doesn't fly (except in certain genres I suppose.)
Speaking of which, I don't necessarily enjoy Batman having recurring villains (and have long hated the Joker being his primary adversary with such better ones in his gallery). It's just with decades of churning out content, it's quite difficult not to resort to it. Many "new" villains would resemble the old too much anyway or fall into the flavor-of-the-month trap. While I've heard of tables that blitz through material (i.e. Gygax's original players), how much story does an RPG villain need to occupy/cover for?
ETA: I'd only intended a brief note re: Claxon's comment...
Batman, unlike most adventurers, doesn't usually kill or maim his recurring villains. Villains need to be able to obtain distance and cover more consistently, or to work through proxies or cheat mechanisms like monkey's paw revive curses, lich-style revival, conjuration by cultists, etc.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Batman, unlike most adventurers, doesn't usually kill or maim his recurring villains. Villains need to be able to obtain distance and cover more consistently, or to work through proxies or cheat mechanisms like monkey's paw revive curses, lich-style revival, conjuration by cultists, etc.
Batman doesn't kill his adversaries for personal "moral" reasons.
So it gives them opportunities to escape again and again. I actually consider it a moral failing of Batman, these enemies are clearly repeatedly causing massive harm and forms of incarceration don't work. In my opinion, death should practically be required for many of the villains.
But not doing so does give an easy way to explain how they keep coming back.
In our table top games, you have to give the NPCs a convenient method or escape or resurrection.
Batman stuff...
There's a great dialogue between Jason Todd (long after the Joker "killed" him) and Batman re: killing the Joker as a uniquely irredeemable murderer who will perpetually escape and kill.* Batman played the moral card, but Todd pressured Batman into revealing he feared killing at all, even the Joker, because then he wouldn't be able to stop killing the others too. He had to bottle that vengeance in. Powerful stuff, that is if one chooses to ignore that Batman has killed many times albeit nearly all in his earliest incarnations. And kills non-human sapient beings often (as has no-kill Spiderman).
*I'd posed this situation to a pacifist, and they'd struggled to grasp the premises of irredeemable and guaranteed-escapes, which isn't a knock against him because we're not in comic book with plot paradigms.
---
In a combat-kill RPG w/ player agency, comic book and real world sensibilities just don't factor in unless the players buy into it too, and that'll vary too much for simple solutions.
If your group enjoys your story telling then let your npcs do what they need to within the context of the story.
If you don't have that trust with your players then wait for it to happen naturally with random bad guy 47 who becomes the returning bad guy because of chance. Players will likely accept some fudging of things after random chance has had its say once or twice, it becomes a shared spontaneous story element and people tend to enjoy that.
If your group enjoys your story telling then let your npcs do what they need to within the context of the story.
If you don't have that trust with your players...
then I'm going to find other players.
I understand some people (players) may not trust someone new to them, but the group I play with has been friends for a long time, and we generally trust each other to not intentionally try to cause an unfun situation for anyone, so we offer leeway with each other when it comes to story telling.
If I have a new player that isn't willing to give me the benefit of the doubt, then I would ultimately say my game isn't the place for them.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...wait for it to happen naturally with random bad guy 47 who becomes the returning bad guy because of chance. ...it becomes a shared spontaneous story element and people tend to enjoy that.
I have had these kinds of NPCs, and they do add to the RPing.
That guy whose morale broke so he escaped? Yep, you'll see him again, likely in a different role as the first didn't work out well for him.Had several prisoners among many who stepped up to accept equipment to fight on the flanks of the PCs in an escape. Most maybe hit one enemy, but one guy rolled several nat 20s so obviously he got a name, and labeled with an implied level of ability in the eyes of PCs (even if the players knew better). While of course he didn't join the party itself, he joined their team in a back-at-base capacity.
The inverse is true with BBEGs that fall early. That just means they weren't really the BBEGs, right? Not big enough, nor bad enough. Even if statistics & plan/intent would've said otherwise, the dice & fate disagreed. (And wouldn't the GM have to advance them anyway to keep pace?)
Sounds trite to say "Roll with it" or more specifically "Roll with the rolls", yet gotta advocate what works.
As far as villains go, Reginald Vancaskerkin did it best.
I typically hand the villains Rank 5 translocate in the form of a scroll or wand. Its amazing how many devils and fiends has this spell innately.
Outside of some rather niche preparations it is impossible for your average party to catch up to someone thats now 1 mile away in an unknown direction. Possibly to a getaway vehicle, Teleportation circle, Portal or other instant teleport feature that has been prepared in advanced,
The players might even stumble upon the portal/circle layer in a deactivated or destroyed condition that might even be possible to restored either trough Awaken Portal or other method.
I'm currently running an AP with a lot of demons, and boy under ideal circumstances with Translocate they are unkillable. There's a reason these adventures need to say "this enemy fights to the death," because if the Roru didn't he would be halfway to Absalom by the time he hit 1/3rd hit points. To stop it you would need to prep counterspell and translocate themself to counter it. You can get some good fleeing distance with 120 from the low level demons, but basically all of them from level 6 or higher have 5th rank translocate to just warp out.
The Sakorian Scar is probably still infested with demons because they are so slippery and hard to catch.
I don’t think players need a guaranteed chance of success in every scenario they face to ‘have agency’. A no win scenario is a thing. And how you react to it is still agency.
And forcing the big bad to flee is still a victory.
I don’t think players need a guaranteed chance of success in every scenario they face to ‘have agency’. A no win scenario is a thing. And how you react to it is still agency.
And forcing the big bad to flee is still a victory.
That's all context dependent. Sometimes, like in the horror genre, survival means you won, yes, (at who knows what cost). But in a light, escapist genre, that's a draw or even loss. Expectations change responses.
Similarly, if you force a BBEG to flee, undermining their plans, then that's a victory (except for that whole RPG "losing BBEG's equipment/loot" aspect). But if the BBEG's plans are to escape, then no, there's no victory in them succeeding because your goal was (probably) to catch/kill them. Ex. It's more important for Bond to stop Blofeld's plans than kill Blofeld (and escaping mastermind villains in the spy genre's kinda a trope). While letting a serial killer escape will probably feel like utter failure, especially if the PCs didn't unmask them or save anyone. Or like in Seven, where the cops "win", but the villain wins far more. Powerful as a movie, and the MCs have plenty of agency, but in an RPG that conclusion would reflect PC failure despite even catching the BBEG.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In a meta sense, the players via PCs are pitting their agency vs. the agency of the baddies exemplified in the BBEG. (Plus other obstacles, hopefully tied to that main conflict or subplot). So if the BBEG plays an "I'm immune to your agency" card to auto-escape (which means auto-win if that was their primary goal), that feels different than an "I'm capable of escape/made plans" card even if the results resemble each other.
IMO, the NPCs ability to escape should be accounted for in their capabilities-budget (which includes favorable terrain, henchman, etc.). For example, I had a speed focused PC in PFS1, and chased down several escaping villains, one a BBEG who would've escaped (and likely would've killed me if he'd tried, shhh). That was very satisfying as I'd invested a lot in doing exactly that. If an otherwise normal NPC out of nowhere became faster simply so they could escape, that'd be gross. But if chasing say a Quickling, I'd tip my hat to the superior speedster, as their abilities do reflect a steep cost to getting such speed.
Similarly if a party came built to catch a BBEG, with spells and counterspells invested in that at a cost to direct combat abilities, it'd be gross to overwrite that with a casual, "Nah, BBEG escapes".
On the flip side, if the players/PCs are negligent, like perhaps they're told the BBEG has an escape boat and they don't address the boat or chasing on water, then maybe a BBEG meant to be caught does get away, maybe along with important clues/resources the PCs have to struggle without. I'd be offended too if a GM handwaved it so we caught them anyway despite our errors. That victory would be hollow, even if we otherwise won the battles.
In short, "Your abilities don't work here" or "Your agency's being overwritten by the plot" are terrible GM tricks, while "BBEG paid good gold from their equipment budget/invested key spell slots/etc. to do X and I'll still give you a chance to stop them if you've invested in countering X" feels legit.
then I'm going to find other players.
I understand some people (players) may not trust someone new to them, but the group I play with has been friends for a long time, and we generally trust each other to not intentionally try to cause an unfun situation for anyone, so we offer leeway with each other when it comes to story telling.
If I have a new player that isn't willing to give me the benefit of the doubt, then I would ultimately say my game isn't the place for them.
I think this is a big issue talking about peoples experiences and norms playing TTRPGs. Some people play with the same people for years, others are in and out of games all the time.
If a new player comes to your game and has had many bad experiences with trust for GMs, then you need to earn their trust.A lot of us simply don't have long time groups, and it takes a while to get comfortable in a group and understand peoples dynamics and boundaries, never mind if people are compatible at all. Even if people get along well, one persons idea of fun might not be another's.
To the topic at hand, there is an anti teleport grapple in the wrestler archetype. So even your perfect railroad "by the rules" can fail. Thus it's better to make sure it fits in with your story and expectations for your group before you pull it off.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think this is a big issue talking about peoples experiences and norms playing TTRPGs. Some people play with the same people for years, others are in and out of games all the time.
If a new player comes to your game and has had many bad experiences with trust for GMs, then you need to earn their trust.
A lot of us simply don't have long time groups, and it takes a while to get comfortable in a group and understand peoples dynamics and boundaries, never mind if people are compatible at all. Even if people get along well, one persons idea of fun might not be another's.To the topic at hand, there is an anti teleport grapple in the wrestler archetype. So even your perfect railroad "by the rules" can fail. Thus it's better to make sure it fits in with your story and expectations for your group before you pull it off.
I'll address the bolded and say, depending on when they join the campaign that may or may not be possible. But I'm not going to do anything "special" to earn someone's trust because I don't think that's really how trust is built. A player just has to be with the group and go through the situations and build that relationship.
It does mean that we may enter before this kind of situation where the NPC boss is going to get away before that trust has been built and I'm not really sure what can be done about it, other than to say "trust me" and "ask the other players".
You shouldn't have to do anything, that's what being trustworthy is about. If all your other players vouch for you then even if someone comes in after all foreshadowing has been done then that should be enough.
It does seem however that many people who are used to playing with people they know don't know what it's like playing with random people online. Most of the "horror stories" type bits tend to come from those situations. Many of them are so crazy you might not believe them, but many new and especially younger GMs(and players) just don't have the knowledge and experience to understand the social contract.
It's something I've noticed where people who are in their safe and secure friend groups are all on the same page so have a different outlook then someone who has learned to be weary of new groups where they might not be able to get on that same page. One would likely view the OPs question as an unnecessary means to accomplish a plot hook, while the other likely would question if the motivation is to pull one over on their players.
It does seem however that many people who are used to playing with people they know don't know what it's like playing with random people online. Most of the "horror stories" type bits tend to come from those situations. Many of them are so crazy you might not believe them, but many new and especially younger GMs(and players) just don't have the knowledge and experience to understand the social contract.
I totally get that and agree, that's why I honestly have never considered playing with "randoms" because figuring out if they understand the "social contract" in the way I do and working through that awkwardness is just not something I'm up for at the age of 40.
Heh, I'm older and don't have a choice. So I've been noticing all the... social and psychological differences and issues people have. While fascinating it's not conductive to good group dynamics. Such is life though.
Sorry for the tangent.
Finding a good group to game with is incredibly challenging, especially as an adult where making new friends is a Herculean task (managing work, children, and a myriad of responsibilities).
However, I abide by "no gaming is better than bad gaming". Meaning that if I'm not having fun and getting what I want out of it, I'm not going to do it.