Post/Author/DateTime	Post
denise_rpga 12-09-06, 01:28 AM	When designing adventures always consider what the lowest character is that will be playing the module. Playing the second CC module with 4 first level characters we had a terribly hard time and had one death from the fighter type with a *greatsword* that had power attack and a really high BAB. There was no way that the fighter couldn't *not* kill one of the characters if he hit. Not everyone is powergamed to the max and one would consider that CC characters are biased more towards the 'roleplaying' side than towards the 'min maxed' side of the game with the emphasis on skills and learning.
Butterface 12-09-06, 02:02 AM	If you have a problem with an adventure, you should contact the author privately, rather than airing your grievance on the public forums. All this is likely to do is annoy the factionmaster.
smerwin29 12-09-06, 09:33 AM	No problem. One thing I have said many times on these boards and elsewhere, and will certainly say again 100 times before the campaign conclusion, is that the DM has explicit permission to tweak the adventure to fit the party power level and composition. Writing encounters appropriate for the wild variation of party composition and skill is nigh impossible, so the DM has to help out in that regard. I also understand that the CC adventures are expected to be a little more "roleplaying-oriented" than your average adventure, but that does not mean that characters should not be effective in combat situations. If I lower the total number of ELs the party faces, and then they walk into an Expedition module, it would get ugly very quickly. That said, you will continue to see CC mods focus on tricks, trap, puzzles, and role-playing, even moreso in future adventures. I ran CC 2 several times for parties of level 1 characters, and I did have one death. Death happens. I am not the kind of person who thinks that it has to happen 25% of the time or anything like that, and I try to avoid it if possible, but where there is reward there has to be risk. On a strictly game-development level, a single martial opponent with the capacity to deal lots of damage can be very difficult for a first-level party. However, even that sort of encounter generally has weaknesses that the PCs can exploit, especially arcane casters, which I assumed would be prevalent. Comments like this are always welcome, although if there is anything in your comments that might give people information about the adventure (spoilers), please send me a private message or an email at crimsoncodex@hotmail.com. In terms of the considerations you speak of, you can rest assured that I have written enough adventures that I do consider this and many other things when I develop an adventure. Sometimes people might think my considerations were incorrect, and sometimes they are indeed incorrect, but the consideration is always there--sometimes to the point where I torture myself trying to make things perfect when nothing can be perfect, especially given the parameters we are writing under. Thanks, Shawn Crimson Codex Factionmaster Designer of module in question
indel2001 12-09-06, 12:32 PM	I just want to say ditto to Shawn's comments. I've worked with Shawn on several modules and can attest that he is always concerned about presenting a balanced module. He isn't interested in TPKs (except when HE'S judging) and isn't looking to make adventures where PCs have impossible challenges. As a player, I've experienced modules where my favorite monk character was totally ineffective. Sometimes it's the module itself. My monk was savagely killed by a construct he didn't have a hope in Hades of hitting....and the monk was the primary fighter type in the party. Some modules are just going to suck for some PCs. That said, I know Shawn welcomes feedback - positive and negative - so I'm sure he's glad to hear from you. But as others have said, please keep your public posts spoiler free and send potentially spoiler questions and critiques to designers privately.
dreamwolf 12-10-06, 09:45 AM	Besides, the adventure did have a lower level version of that character available. I used the alternate version for a party of level 1 characters and while she knocked our warforged artificer out, she didn't kill anyone.
raalynthslair 01-07-07, 02:36 PM	Besides, the adventure did have a lower level version of that character available. I used the alternate version for a party of level 1 characters and while she knocked our warforged artificer out, she didn't kill anyone. As a home GM I love warforged in the party. If you get into that situation on accident you have a wonderful target because unless to drop them below -10 they are easily saved after the fight since they are just "inert." Very handy "soaker" for that baddie to hit - and generally this gets the party to maul the guy giving me time fudge some stuff and let their combined beat-down to crush the guy (and often I'd fudge the damage roll to begin with if I can).
KShaver 01-09-07, 12:41 PM	Besides, the adventure did have a lower level version of that character available. I used the alternate version for a party of level 1 characters and while she knocked our warforged artificer out, she didn't kill anyone. Aye, I do remember most of the encounters havings several different ELs available. As said it falls to the GM to make the encounter appropriate for the players involved, even if he has to custom some encounters himself. Overall the CC is far from the worst as far as combats go, though some of its puzzles are very challenging.
KShaver 01-09-07, 12:51 PM	As a home GM I love warforged in the party. If you get into that situation on accident you have a wonderful target because unless to drop them below -10 they are easily saved after the fight since they are just "inert." Very handy "soaker" for that baddie to hit - and generally this gets the party to maul the guy giving me time fudge some stuff and let their combined beat-down to crush the guy (and often I'd fudge the damage roll to begin with if I can). A little off topic, but I'll say something here because I ran into a similar scenario over the weekend. We had a WF who was used as a 'freebie' target, though much of that was his own doing. The problem was the WF didn't bring much healing with him and we had no arcane caster, by soaking as many hits as he did he soaked up almost twice as much healing as a true living character would have. The party had to spend a lot more down time because of this, which fortunately the module allowed for, many don't. He also didn't get much play in because he spent long periods of time unconscious because he simply wasn't worth reviving in the middle of combat. A bit of rambling, but it has a point...That is to sum it all up: watch who you are hitting and make sure that though they seem like a nice target that by concentrating on them you don't hurt the party more then if other characters who should have been taking the hits took them.
indel2001 01-09-07, 09:18 PM	Overall the CC is far from the worst as far as combats go, though some of its puzzles are very challenging. Well said. CC isn't Total Party Kill focused. We're Total Patience Kill... or Totally Pointless Konfuse...
Harliquinn 01-10-07, 12:56 PM	The focus on puzzles, thinking, knowledge, and secrets is one reason I have Crimson Codex as my primary faction. I've come to enjoy the others as well for the little things that make them unique. Blackwheel has Tragar and the very military feel to it. Cabal has a lot of intra-faction intrigue. Covenant has a 'fighting the demons within' focus currently. That said, I do hope that there is more to be done with some of the 'no game mechanic' story objects for the Codex and other factions. The ones that say "This may have an effect later." are foreshadowing some subfactions or other goodies within the Codex. Harli
bertman4 01-16-07, 05:02 PM	I was the judge at this table. I did run the lower level version. It didn't matter. The only difference it made was attack +7 vs attack +8. Using a masterwork greatsword (2d6+3, minimum 5, maximum 15) plus power attack, you are easily going to down a 1st level PC if not outright kill them. I don't know about you guys but Crimson Codex PCs have been more brains than brawn. That means Wiz and Rog. And at 1st level, your AC is not that great. You're going to get hit, and you're going to die, which is exactly what happened. If I had to do it again, I would probably substitute a longsword for level 1 PCs. Bertman
Istaran 01-16-07, 07:16 PM	I played in this adventure with a group of level 1s. I don't recall running afoul of any high BAB great sword wielders. I can think of at least one encounter that might have potentially included one, but which we roleplayed our way out of with conciderable ease. That has been my experience with all the CC modules: you can skip an awful lot of combat by realizing that you dont have to fight everything that moves. I can think of at least one case in each CC module that easily could have lead to combat if we'd chosen to go that way, but which we -easily- talked our way out of without even resorting to rolling diplomacy checks. As others have mentioned, CC's flavor lends itself to brains-over-brawn type parties. From what I've seen, BWC is more prone to dungeon crawling or otherwise slamming head-first into enemy forces. CoS is more likely to use stealth to manipulate a fight than to avoid one altogether. The optional fights I noticed judging CoL were of the "these stat blocks are here in case the PCs are really stupid and insist on getting themselves killed" variety. Didn't even need to think of a way around them: you avoided them by default. If a CC member is getting killed by easily avoidable combat, either the judge cheated them out of their chance to avoid or the players at the table are failing to use their brains the way they should be. This is CC: we emphasize puzzles and thinking: that includes not only traps, secret doors, riddles, prophecies, etc. but also thinking your way out of unnecessary confrontation.
smerwin29 01-16-07, 07:18 PM	Your thoughts on this, as Denise's were, are appreciated and respected. I was aware during the development, and the writing, and the playtesting of the adventure that this encounter was the main threat of the adventure. I was aware that even without power attacking, Gris'Eld was a potentially deadly foe. In the two playtests I ran, neither party lost a PC. In fact, in two playtests, she only got to swing her sword once. I've run the adventure almost a dozen times now, and I have had one PC death in that encounter. If there is a misconception out there that Crimson Codex PCs should not be able to handle combat, let me clear that up right now. The PCs should be smart, knowledgeable, clever, sneaky, and all those other traits, but they should also be able to handle very dangerous combat situations. I am doing my best, and will continue to do my best, to keep in mind that the PCs are not necessarily going to be the tweaked-out killing machines they might otherwise be as people make choices to fit the Faction. But there is going to be danger, there is going to be PC death in combat, and there will be situations were running away might be preferable to death. Comments, feedback, and constructive criticism are always welcome. I am always willing to talk about design choices or anything else that is on people's minds. But I also admit, begrudgingly, that I am not perfect and will make mistakes. Sometimes even more than one per year. But just on even-numbered years. Thanks! Shawn
Rewth 01-17-07, 10:14 AM	just small addition... bear in mind that PC's within the codex are Serpents. Mages/bards/rogues that can't handle themselves in high risk situation never elevate out of the Tomes/Spectres. The Serpents are the elite few within hte faction that can be relied upon to get themselves out of the trouble the Codex willingly and regularly puts them in. they should expect thier lives to be high risk. additionally, care should be taken to make sure any party of adventurers is well balanced... a front line combatant, a "fixer", a divine cater and an arcane caster. if you've got 6 players then fill the two other slots accordingly. but this is why the Take one fo the Team rule exists. if your party comes together and its nothing but mages and other fragile types, you should encourage them to consider swapping out to a fast play just to be on the safe side.
Randall Montgomery 01-17-07, 11:36 AM	As has been stated before, it's kind of crazy to not have at least one character in a party who's capable of front-lining, even if this is the Codex and we're all about brains over brawn. I personally play a Paladin of the Silver Flame who sees it as his job to protect all the really smart people in the party, and make sure they use their great intellect in a morally correct manner. ;) Remember, all faction flavor text aside, this is D&D, and combat is an integral part of the game. Be prepared for it, or suffer the concequences.
lordtiberiusfoxx 01-17-07, 01:23 PM	Any given D&D character is made for combat on class features alone. Rogues have sneak attack. Arcane spellcasters have, well, spells. All classes can use a weapon. I've run several Codex adventures for my group, and I've told them to tweak their characters for problem solving. So they max out a knowledge or two, and take feats like research or investigate instead of power attack. (And the player playing the barbarian put his two points into literacy) Is that a huge difference? Not really. My experience has been the party has been nigh invulnerable because of dragon shamen. We had three. With fast healing, DR, and energy shield, EL +3 encounters were stomped on. On the other hand, regardless of faction, 1st level characters are squishy. That's why Codex I wasn't as deadly as any Greyhawk intro mod I've EVER seen. But still, in any game with first level characters, someone can die from a stray critical hit from kobold #5. But that's why we have action points. If you're using action points to add to attacks, reconsider your stratagy. Autostablizing is your friend. With the level kick almost here, we won't have to worry about this issue any more. Honestly, the factionmaster isn't trying to kill PCs; he's trying to challenge them, and that's pretty apparent to me. So this issue should resolve itself. Tiberius Foxx