Post/Author/DateTime	Post
budleiser 12-28-06, 09:59 AM	Man. So many posts that complain about how hard certain monsters are. That some mods are hard. If your not power built the mods can be to tough. What on earth are people complaining about? I pray for these "hard mods". The only thing worse than playing a mod for 4 hours and not feeling challenged at all is playing an investigation mod. I for one feel there is not nearly enough PC death. If DM's are pulling punches they need to stop. In a world where death is not always permament I expect people to die more often. And while I'm on a rant, we need more traps. Make them useful, have the trap go off and the bad guys rush in. What good is a trap if you can just stand around and heal after it. Theres no point in avoiding it, disarming it, or safely triggering the trap if you can just tank it and heal up. We need to see some good no save stat nerfing traps. If it has spikes give it poison with high DC.
LGMoses 12-28-06, 10:04 AM	I'm about to run an investigation mod but its a year 6 so shhh.... This is LG baby, we play for keeps. As for traps, you can look on the aspects of a balanced party thread and see that most people don't seem to think rogues are necessary. This means that people aren't taking traps seriously enough cuz they aren't challenging.
Britt 12-28-06, 10:23 AM	Don't play one of my or Sam's mods without a trap person. I love traps and make sure you regret not having a trap person :)
LGMoses 12-28-06, 10:30 AM	Everyone, when your characters are dead remember to thank Budleiser. :hoppingma
budleiser 12-28-06, 10:33 AM	Everyone, when your characters are dead remember to thank Budleiser. :hoppingma Yes they should! Remember to thank me everytime you have fun playing a mod because it was actually challenging instead of a cake walk.
LGMoses 12-28-06, 10:38 AM	:ghosted: The mods I've played have been pretty good actually, I'm talking about regional mods. I've been running and there has been a party death at the last two sessions. One was just cuz the player was trying to hurry and an enemy got in a critical at a bad time for him. A dinosaur ate the other person. I'm about to run my first core module though but its that kind you hate :bounce:
kenobi65 12-28-06, 10:59 AM	Remember to thank me everytime you have fun playing a mod because it was actually challenging instead of a cake walk. Let's make a distinction between "challenging" and "impossible", OK? I don't think anyone has an issue with the former. It's the latter that rankles people.
blood_kite 12-28-06, 11:19 AM	Like the mod that starts at APL 8 with a incorporeal undead with a touch AC of 32, spell resistance, in a wild magic area.
gomeztoo 12-28-06, 11:37 AM	Personally I think it would be more intersting if a scenario had a chance for the PCs failing - which is something entirely different form having PCs die. So a mod where there is a possibility you DON'T save the princess - even (or perhaps especially) if you slaughter everything in the mod.
Herrbard 12-28-06, 11:54 AM	Personally I think it would be more intersting if a scenario had a chance for the PCs failing - which is something entirely different form having PCs die. So a mod where there is a possibility you DON'T save the princess - even (or perhaps especially) if you slaughter everything in the mod. Come to Veluna. We have a year 6 mod where the possibility of failure is very real, you can survive and end up with no gold for the mod. As far as the possibility of death? I currently have no LG character above second level due to permanent/multiple deaths. Keoland kicks my backside four times in three weeks on two characters, so I have no gold left to get raised on those two characters (level 4 and level 6). A core mod leaves my body un-recoverable, so there goes my level 10. In five weeks of Cons and slot 0s during Late October/November, I'm out of characters! I think the campaign is plenty tough!
Sieylianna 12-28-06, 01:01 PM	I for one feel there is not nearly enough PC death. If DM's are pulling punches they need to stop. In a world where death is not always permament I expect people to die more often. Are you talking about regional, meta-regional or core modules? There have been plenty of deaths in Veluna and VTF modules. I've been at a table with a PC death for three cons in a row (2 VTF and 1 Veluna). Some of that was with kindly judges or there would have been several more deaths. Ed
Samwise 12-28-06, 01:15 PM	How does a high character death rate translate to more fun? I know I don't have fun when PCs die, whether they are mine, my teammates, or people I am running for. Why must the default for the adventures be challenging to the mega-tweaked PCs? Instead of repeated death being the consequence for anyone who doesn't eke every ounce of power from their character design, maybe boredom and cakewalks are the consequence for anyone who overplays the system and make a character that requires specific DM planning to challenge.
budleiser 12-28-06, 01:41 PM	How does a high character death rate translate to more fun? How does never dieing or even come close to dieing present any kind of drama, suspense, worry, relief, or challenge. Atleast with a high death rate you can sit down for 4 hours and expect some kind of excitement. Why must the default for the adventures be challenging to the mega-tweaked PCs? I didn't say "These mods are not a challenged for my mega tweaked pc" because my PC is not nearly optimal. Instead of repeated death being the consequence for anyone who doesn't eke every ounce of power from their character design, maybe boredom and cakewalks are the consequence for anyone who overplays the system and make a character that requires specific DM planning to challenge. I don't think boredom and cakewalks should be the consequence for an ok character. Im not someone who sat on the D&D optimization forum looking for tricks and combos through feats, spells items and what not. In the end I took an entire level hit rather than reroll, and switched a 14str, 14dex,14con, 16cha rogue into a warrior class. Optimal I am not, mods easy they are.
LGMoses 12-28-06, 01:53 PM	yes, give us your character build and let us judge. I'd like to see it. I'm just curious.
budleiser 12-28-06, 01:55 PM	Are you talking about regional, meta-regional or core modules? There have been plenty of deaths in Veluna and VTF modules. I've been at a table with a PC death for three cons in a row (2 VTF and 1 Veluna). Some of that was with kindly judges or there would have been several more deaths. Ed Im talking about all POU accessible mods. Core, regional, metaregional, speical, interactive, intro you name it.
Simpi 12-28-06, 02:16 PM	In the end I took an entire level hit rather than reroll, and switched a 14str, 14dex,14con, 16cha rogue into a warrior class. Optimal I am not, mods easy they are. What you mean by re-rolling? I assume you are referring to conversion here someway. Sampo Haarlaa Naerie Triad
budleiser 12-28-06, 02:18 PM	What you mean by re-rolling? I assume you are referring to conversion here someway. Sampo Haarlaa Naerie Triad No I mean by making a completely new character. A "Reroll" in the LG sense.
budleiser 12-28-06, 02:27 PM	yes, give us your character build and let us judge. I'd like to see it. I'm just curious. 14 Str 14 Dex 14 Con 8 Int 8 Wis 16 Cha Rogue 1 Mounted Combat My original fun idea was a halfling rogue who touch attacked for sneak damage and used the mount for ride-by if they looked tough, or just 40ft movement for flanking. But then I talked it over and it was going to be really hard to find the wand of shocking grasp etc. Marshal 1 (It was either Marshal, Sorcerer or bard I guess to make use of the 16 CHA) Motivate Dex Marshal 2 Ride By Attack, Motivate Attack BAB 1 finally! Fighter 1 Spirited Charge Finally my character is doing something. Fighter 2 Power Attack Now I feel useful Ranger 1 Skill Focus Handle Animal Need the handle animal skills to qualify for beastmaster Beastmaster Dire Bat Marshal 3 Aura for Charging
LGMoses 12-28-06, 02:33 PM	1. In what situations can you reroll? 2. I didn't know you could sneak attack with a shocking grasp?
Samwise 12-28-06, 02:39 PM	How does never dieing or even come close to dieing present any kind of drama, suspense, worry, relief, or challenge. Atleast with a high death rate you can sit down for 4 hours and expect some kind of excitement. Quite easily. As I've said several times, the art of the DM is not in killing PCs, but in creating the illusion of iminent death. With a high death rate, you can sit down for 15 minutes and expect to end the adventure prematurely because somebody dies in the first encounter. I can't think of anything more boring than that. I didn't say "These mods are not a challenged for my mega tweaked pc" because my PC is not nearly optimal.[quote] You mentioned complaints about adventures being too hard because of character design. There has to be some reason you are never challenged. [quote]I don't think boredom and cakewalks should be the consequence for an ok character. Im not someone who sat on the D&D optimization forum looking for tricks and combos through feats, spells items and what not. In the end I took an entire level hit rather than reroll, and switched a 14str, 14dex,14con, 16cha rogue into a warrior class. Optimal I am not, mods easy they are. You don't need to sit in on those forums to have a superior character. And you still haven't addressed whether adventures must be killers for people with utterly average characters. And yes, boredom and cakewalks are the inevitable result when you design over the level intended for any game and are faced with set situations. There is no way around it. That is why people don't like MM III and MM IV critters. They are designed with more than the core stuff, so their CRs are not in line with the CRs of older creatures, or with low level PCs limited to the PHB. Designing an adventure to challenge every possible group that might ever sit at an LG table is extremely difficult. If you increase the difficulty so a combat is challenging to one type of group, it may well become utterly lethal to another type of group.
Britt 12-28-06, 02:40 PM	Motivate Dex That's part of why you think everything is easy. Going first == Winning.
budleiser 12-28-06, 02:41 PM	1. In what situations can you reroll? 2. I didn't know you could sneak attack with a shocking grasp? wow didn't think I would confuse people with the reroll comment... You can make a new character anytime. You can't carry anything over like gold or xp. Sigh I will never slang again. And yes you can sneak attack with touch spells and alchemical items. In fact the sneak damage is the same as the original damage. So it would all be electrical damage. Very nasty if you run into someone vulnerable.
echoota 12-28-06, 03:03 PM	Honestly, I hate challenging mods and seeing anyone die is a huge turn off for me. Real life is filled with far too many challenges as is, and so I look to D&D to give me a cathartic experience of power. I've immensely enjoyed my wizard character with a high DC, I've played in a few games now where I shut down encounters in one or two rounds with color spray. That won't last forever but I've enjoyed it so far. I've avoided DM's that have a reputation for being hard and much prefer the softball DMs. My character is supposed to be a hero doing amazing things and they should be easy to pull off, not painfully difficult. If it does get difficult it becomes annoying and irritating. Ultimately I want every encounter to be like Neo when he becomes the One and effortlessly takes down Agent Smith. I'd be quite happy if that repeated itself over and over again. I want to be the one who defines the narrative and not the other way around. I suspect if my main character ever permanently died I'd probably have to step away from LG for awhile. All that energy and effort put into the character all going down the drain would just put too much of a bad taste in my mouth.
budleiser 12-28-06, 04:22 PM	Honestly, I hate challenging mods and seeing anyone die is a huge turn off for me. Real life is filled with far too many challenges as is, and so I look to D&D to give me a cathartic experience of power. I've immensely enjoyed my wizard character with a high DC, I've played in a few games now where I shut down encounters in one or two rounds with color spray. That won't last forever but I've enjoyed it so far. I've avoided DM's that have a reputation for being hard and much prefer the softball DMs. My character is supposed to be a hero doing amazing things and they should be easy to pull off, not painfully difficult. If it does get difficult it becomes annoying and irritating. Ultimately I want every encounter to be like Neo when he becomes the One and effortlessly takes down Agent Smith. I'd be quite happy if that repeated itself over and over again. I want to be the one who defines the narrative and not the other way around. I suspect if my main character ever permanently died I'd probably have to step away from LG for awhile. All that energy and effort put into the character all going down the drain would just put too much of a bad taste in my mouth. Remember the Adam Sandler movie when the kid is playing a foreigner with a deck of cards. The kid would show his hand of random cards and say "I win!"
rockondon 12-28-06, 04:43 PM	I like to be scared when I'm a player. It brings excitement to the game. The fear of death does not have to be the only fear to cause this excitement however: curses, diseases, energy level drain are all great ways to strike fear into the hearts of your players. Not to mention a rust monster would send my top character running ;) I play with smart players and dumb players. Nearly every bard I've seen sings but refuses to do anything else in battle - no bows no flanking no aid another, nothing. Other players are cocky, ignore opportunities to buff themselves, come unprepared, etc. When I GM I have no qualms about killing players that play foolishly, and I usually take it easy on characters that play smart but are going down due to bad die rolls. As they are now, the modules are usually soft enough that players can get away with not knowing the rules about what you can and cannot do in combat. You survive the encounters anyway so why bother reading the books if you don't need better tactics? --Don
kegdrainer 12-28-06, 05:06 PM	You of all people should know my track record there Bud.:D One killed in his first battle (Raging Orc w/Great Axe, An intro to boot), One killed by an evil cleric (Crit at 2nd) plus Eldon killed by a Hill Giant (but in all fairness, I should have taken a 5' step after I tripped it, @ 2nd level) and a Gnoll, @ 3rd, 1st Interactive, The local group calls him Kenny) Almost bought it at the last interactive but I kept the Grell from taking off with us due to the weight (Enlarged) The problem I find is trying to have fun with the games but find that you need to min/max in order to survive, since you can end up at a 4 player table and get clobbered.
zigspatty 12-28-06, 05:35 PM	There is a great deal of enjoyment to be had simply in sitting down to play a fantasy game with a group of friends (or future friends). It's fun to interact and accomplish group goals (find the mcguffin, rescue the princess, protect the cargo, even deliver the message). It's even fun to do your best to accomplish the goal, but end up running for your life because your group simply can't beat the guardian of that treasure hoarde But it's really NOT FUN to die most of the time. It puts a big damper on things when someone dies - especially if the death was the result of overpowered monsters, unfair situation, a save or die spell that required a 20 to beat, or some other difficult circumstance. I understand that sometimes dice roll badly, and characters sometimes do foolish things, so that death is always a possibility. But even a relatively low level character can represent a great deal of time and effort by a player. Fourth level may mean more than a dozen 4 hour games, the purchase of a special binder, hours spent organizing spell lists and planning purchases or future character development, as well as joining metaorgs or reading up on your character's region. But death at 4th level is likely to be permanent and could mean not being able to play with those friends any more. Sure, a brilliant tactician may be able to cakewalk some mods. That's fine with me. Many players are new to the game, or average tacticians. Should brilliant tactics be REQUIRED to enjoy the game? If the game is so easy for you, build a less optimal character, or join me at the table with the war priest who charges everything, or the player that needs to be reminded of his character's abilities. Table dynamics alone is often sufficient challenge. Patty
jhorred 12-28-06, 06:04 PM	Man. So many posts that complain about how hard certain monsters are. That some mods are hard. If your not power built the mods can be to tough. What on earth are people complaining about? I pray for these "hard mods". The only thing worse than playing a mod for 4 hours and not feeling challenged at all is playing an investigation mod. I for one feel there is not nearly enough PC death. If DM's are pulling punches they need to stop. In a world where death is not always permament I expect people to die more often. And while I'm on a rant, we need more traps. Make them useful, have the trap go off and the bad guys rush in. What good is a trap if you can just stand around and heal after it. Theres no point in avoiding it, disarming it, or safely triggering the trap if you can just tank it and heal up. We need to see some good no save stat nerfing traps. If it has spikes give it poison with high DC. 3 of my 4 characters have died. One I had to restart from scratch as it's not worth raising a level 2 character. I think there is enough death in the game.
LachlarlanIII 12-28-06, 06:19 PM	3 of my 4 characters have died. One I had to restart from scratch as it's not worth raising a level 2 character. I think there is enough death in the game. It may be worth Reincarnating one though.
DeimosGandymede 12-28-06, 06:46 PM	There is also a large difference between home groups and PUGs. Home groups tend to be designed to work well together, and everyone knows everyone else's characters. 6 random people in a PUG have a much harder time working as a cohesive unit. "How was I supposed to know your Sorcerer style character could sneak attack?" etc. Perhaps YOUR DM is pulling punches? I know, even in our home brews, we play for keeps. The DM holds no punches. As it should be. However, because everyone knows each other's abilities, quirks, and play styles, we tend to do alright. (Occasional death here and there, but that is to be expected). Remember, it is the job of the DM to make your adventure challenging, and if you feel you are not being challenged enough, then perhaps a friendly conversation with your GM is in order. =) -MW-
Sutro 12-28-06, 08:09 PM	Like the mod that starts at APL 8 with a incorporeal undead with a touch AC of 32, spell resistance, in a wild magic area. LOL Blood. I've played that mod. Things were looking bad and our valiant warmage stepped forth to combust, just knowing that wild magic was going to turn it back on him and he would explode. The DM rolled the wild magic and... mass heal. The undead went SPLODEY. -Sutro
budleiser 12-28-06, 10:31 PM	There is also a large difference between home groups and PUGs. Home groups tend to be designed to work well together, and everyone knows everyone else's characters. 6 random people in a PUG have a much harder time working as a cohesive unit. "How was I supposed to know your Sorcerer style character could sneak attack?" etc. Perhaps YOUR DM is pulling punches? I know, even in our home brews, we play for keeps. The DM holds no punches. As it should be. However, because everyone knows each other's abilities, quirks, and play styles, we tend to do alright. (Occasional death here and there, but that is to be expected). Remember, it is the job of the DM to make your adventure challenging, and if you feel you are not being challenged enough, then perhaps a friendly conversation with your GM is in order. =) -MW- I wish that were so easy to explain away. But we have 4 reliable DM's and 6+ secondary DM's and a group of about 30 or so rotational players and get about 8-10 mods a month I'd say. So we have a solid group in town. But its not like a home game where you know each others tactics (unless its obvious) We of course lose old players, or they just stop coming for awhile. And we get new players popping in all the time. And we have our share of players that umm... you can expect to umm... not make the optimal choice. (Trying to say that as nice as possible) "Remember, it is the job of the DM to make your adventure challenging" hmm no have to slightly disagree on that one. A DM's job in a LG sense is to run the mod as written. Thus it's more the authors job to create a challenge. Which is what I complain about.
budleiser 12-28-06, 10:37 PM	That's part of why you think everything is easy. Going first == Winning. You know I poke fun at people for taking improved initiative. But I will give a nod to motivate dex. Sometimes I could feel a big effect, going first means sooner or later if someone higher than BadGuy in the rotation drops him we did shave off one attack. Is it really THAT big of a boost? Can you really place all the difference on being scared of death and defeat, instead of yawning while winning, simply on going first?
budleiser 12-28-06, 10:48 PM	I think just for fun next time, ill try and solo the mod. Which is actually hard to attempt, if you get those obvious ambushes. Because you don't know exactly where it will happen, just that it will. But next time we know the monsters are behind door #2 I wanna say "Wait wait, I don't want you guys to get hurt. Im going to go in and kill everything. Wait here until I get back." "No, I must face him alone!"
Britt 12-28-06, 10:55 PM	Is it really THAT big of a boost? Can you really place all the difference on being scared of death and defeat, instead of yawning while winning, simply on going first? Yes, yes it is that big of a boost. I've had a lot of experience with PC marshals and playtesting critters with high Init. Going first makes an insanely huge difference.
NiTessine 12-28-06, 10:58 PM	Personally I think it would be more intersting if a scenario had a chance for the PCs failing - which is something entirely different form having PCs die. So a mod where there is a possibility you DON'T save the princess - even (or perhaps especially) if you slaughter everything in the mod. Agreed. Especially in areas with less players, character death in a high-level module can set back the entire group's high-level module schedule, especially if it's a permanent death. In Naerie, we were still six months ago in a situation where, if any one of five specific characters bit the dust, nobody would be able to play APL 8 except online. This would have been incredibly frustrating. While the epic heroics of those levels often require the party to succeed or perish - Wind Reaping comes to mind, as the finest total railroad I've had the pleasure to play - care should be taken to balance the odds. On the flip side of the coin, the next module in the series was such a frustrating experience that one of our players quit LG because of it and another one now refuses to play above APL 6. Thanks to the power creep, characters built sticking close to the core rules or just not particularly optimised are in dire straits against certain monsters that are allegedly their level. I think Miniatures Handbook is actually one of the worst offenders here. One of the most frustrating combats that I've fought in Living Greyhawk was against a thaskor, and Simpi here likes to bring out the magma hurler as a prime example of a woefully under-CR'd monster. I think that while combat should be challenging and the possibility of character death should exist, the deck should never be stacked so that non-powergamed characters are likely to perish. Also, especially in higher-level modules, there should occasionally be the opportunity for the PCs to show that they really are a notch above the average mook, a chance to "let it all hang out". Encounters reminiscent of Grima Wormtongue's henchmen trying to stop Gandalf, Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli in the Golden Hall, where the heroes just sort of wipe the floor with them in the background, or the Duros bounty hunters coming after the group on Nar Shaddaa in Knights of the Old Republic II - a bit of snappy dialogue, then fade out and fade in on them interrogating the last survivor. I'm not saying that this should be a regular feature, but it is something I'd like to see even once or twice. Failure to complete an objective is much more interesting, I think, than character death. The AR entries are cooler, and you get an opportunity to learn from your mistakes. There's an opportunity for character growth - and not just for the characters. I know of at least one group that totally botched an investigation because they decided to lounge around and wait for the next encounter instead of trying to figure out the problem. Turns out, the next encounter was the DM handing them ARs with no gold, no xp, and no favours. No module should be a cakewalk, but there are other ways than combat to challenge the party. Character death doesn't even need to be a threat in the module. I know of one very fine adventure that requires one to have ridiculously bad luck to even come close to dying. Nevertheless, it is a fine little module. I think that what I'm trying to ask for with all this is balance. A single module cannot cater to everyone, but a 20-module annual lineup can. Different types of modules and encounters all have their place in the game, but care must be taken not to completely alienate players or destroy their characters, simply because the game kinda needs both to go on.
budleiser 12-28-06, 11:12 PM	Yes, yes it is that big of a boost. I've had a lot of experience with PC marshals and playtesting critters with high Init. Going first makes an insanely huge difference. In all honesty I would have liked to give up that aura for a different one once I understood my character better. I had to take another level of marshal just to fix that oops.
Lomiat 12-28-06, 11:20 PM	1) Going first. Going first is the difference between targeting all the bad guys with a single area-effect spell for save-or-die before they split up and PCs might be affected OR having a PC drop after s/he's targeted by a full round of bad guy stuff. Anyone or any group that can reliably go first effectively gains "auto surprise" against the other side. If you think about it that way, you understand how much of a difference it really makes. There's a reason several threads on several boards all bemoan the existence of auto-surprise situations, and there's a reason authors include surprise rounds when possible: Though combat in D&D doesn't find characters slowed by the damage they take, it still finds that situations tend to "cascade." In a tough encounter, the PCs merely find themselves slightly underfoot and have to work hard to gain the momentum. In an easy encounter, though things may start on the level, the PCs quickly gain the upper hand and momentum, and once they have it (eliminating threats one at a time, or negating monster's combat options), the rest of the fight tends to go much easier. 2) Level-appropriate combats. I agree with NiTessine that characters should "feel" their level. They should adventure with trepidation at low levels and heroic confidence at high levels. As someone who tries to write adventures to accomodate this belief, I expect that one of the major reasons we rarely see modules that play to the PCs' sense of level is that such modules are more difficult to frame and tend to turn lengthy. They require that the author not only work on the encounters that lead to monster entries and/or stat blocks but that the author additionally plot out one or more other encounters that account for the APL spectrum and how such PCs might react. High-level untiered encounters are one thing; when they're present, low-level PCs realize things are scary, and high-levels might be able to take them. However, writing untiered encounters at different ELs presents a slightly different challenge; you have to make the story strong enough and immutable enough that the PCs' actions won't screw up the whole adventure. Yet at the same time, you want the PCs' actions to matter. And therein lies the conundrum. It is one that can be resolved, but it takes more effort than most authors seem willing to expend.
Japangirl 12-28-06, 11:26 PM	]Is it really THAT big of a boost? Can you really place all the difference on being scared of death and defeat, instead of yawning while winning, simply on going first? Yes, yes it does matter that much. I know I seem to be repeating Britt, but it's so huge! Bad guys are flatfooted (yay sneak attacks!), you can position yourselves without worrying about AoOs, and in many cases, you can kill the BBEG before s/he ever gets to full attack someone. Said full attack can often be at +20, power attacking for 15, doing 4 attacks a round and potentially doing 150+ hp of damage, or it can be a +47 grapple check with a Swallow Whole or Constrict ability against some poor soul. Or a Blasphemy, or an Evards Black Tentacles, or various other nasty spells. Once at APL 10, combats end in two rounds most of the time, or something is going terribly horribly wrong for the PCs.
paigeoliver 12-29-06, 12:56 AM	I think there are far too many player deaths, especially combined with regions and modules doing things to actively try to keep characters from being resurrected, or to make the deaths unrecoverable, or baiting the characters into jail sentences. You know why that isn't fun? Because those things can have huge real-life financial impacts on the players. I save my money, take my days off work, spend hundreds of dollars to go to a convention, then have both my characters ruined or destroyed first day of the convention, and then be unable to continue playing from there because the remaining convention schedule can't be done with a new character. Or, I drive a goodly distance to a game day, only to have my highest level character ruined there, and I have a convention coming up the next week, that I have already paid for, but now can only play 2 of the 9 slots for lack of a higher level character. Most of those issues could actually be removed by making sure ALL modules supported APL 2. The fact that they don't means that character deaths/loss can mean hundreds of dollars of wasted money by players. I hear it said that things like jail sentences, inability to raise characters without connections, and the like are for "flavor" reasons, or to show players they can't just do whatever they want. But in reality it means that "Hey, you know that $250 you already spent for that convention next week??? Guess what, now you can only play one module there. That will teach you!!!!".
Samwise 12-29-06, 02:29 AM	Writing an adventure for 4 APLs is difficult enough. Writing one for 6 APLs pushes it to the edge. More importantly, adventure concepts do not scale well across every level. Yes, you can write them with multiple tracks for different APLs, but then you actually have two or three different adventures, and that has its own problems. As for a character a death at a convention, that can also be solved by playing the adventures with the highest minimum APL first so you will be able to play any others with another character. It can also be solved by a convention making sure it has adventures for APL 2 in the later slots. As for a game day killing a high level PC the week before a con, the easiest solution for that is not to use such a PC for a week or month or whatever before a convention you paid so much to attend. Otherwise you would need a total ban on character deaths as even the level lost could make your PC ineligible to play in certain events. No chance of death, and no other consequences would be just as bad as more character deaths.
LCJJohnson 12-29-06, 03:24 AM	I agree that there should be something for low level characters in every slot at a con. A few weeks ago I requested just that of the con coordinator for Owlcon, where I'll be DMing. A new player could play an APL 2 in every single slot. But you're right, the same is not true of all cons. If we're lucky maybe con coordinators will see this and get a clue. LCJJ
TWG_Prometheus 12-29-06, 08:24 AM	So the original poster has a Motivate Dexterity build that goes first regularly and hits with Spirited Charge from a Dire Bat, so they think things are too easy? Let's see...you fly at low levels, have a massive attack typically triggering before the NPCs can go...and claim that your character is underpowered because you have a 16 Charisma with Marshal levels in the build? Sheesh.
budleiser 12-29-06, 08:32 AM	So the original poster has a Motivate Dexterity build that goes first regularly and hits with Spirited Charge from a Dire Bat, so they think things are too easy? Let's see...you fly at low levels, have a massive attack typically triggering before the NPCs can go...and claim that your character is underpowered because you have a 16 Charisma with Marshal levels in the build? Sheesh. Don't misquote me I never claimed to be underpowered. I said my build was not optimal, nor near optimal.
jhorred 12-29-06, 01:35 PM	Going First can definately be a huge advantage. My wizard managed to go first after our party party spotted some bad guys hiding in ambush. Between a good damage roll and most of the bad guys failing their saves for the ensuing fireball, the GM proceeded to remove the sad bad guys from the table and continued on to the next part of the mod. (Of course, one of the other party members had been asking him if he had great arcane powers the whole mod, so my wizards asked him it those were great enough.) Regional variance with character death. I think the penalty for dying is high enough that we don't need Triads to take steps to make it difficult to bring back characters. I'd make me reluctanct to come play in a region that required a favor to get raised if I die. If I die before I get a chance to gain one of the favors then I'd be out a character. I'd hope that unrecoverable deaths would be few and far between as alot of time and money too is put into building up our characters. Reincarnating my scout was an option. I looked into it, but the LGCS is fairly restrictive on when you can have that cast on your character. I could have had it done as I could have paid for a scroll or reincarnate and had the druid in the party cast it on me. But I figured that as I had just made 2rd level that I'd just start over. My character is the mate of my girlfriends character so we figured that she drug his corpse back to the Phostwood and he was returned to life there. (Of course as a brand new character with 0xp and starting gold. Just a little background to explain why his mate is 1 level higher.)
JustSix 12-29-06, 02:16 PM	Failure to complete an objective is much more interesting, I think, than character death. The AR entries are cooler, and you get an opportunity to learn from your mistakes. There's an opportunity for character growth - and not just for the characters. I know of at least one group that totally botched an investigation because they decided to lounge around and wait for the next encounter instead of trying to figure out the problem. Turns out, the next encounter was the DM handing them ARs with no gold, no xp, and no favours. No module should be a cakewalk, but there are other ways than combat to challenge the party. Character death doesn't even need to be a threat in the module. I know of one very fine adventure that requires one to have ridiculously bad luck to even come close to dying. Nevertheless, it is a fine little module. I couldn't agree with you more. Maybe it's my background as a player in mainly home campaigns, but character death should never be a goal -- and should only happen in the case of PC stupidity or bad DMing. I invest a lot of time in my characters, developing backgrounds and roleplaying their quirks, to have them die is a major blow. In fact, the constant spectre of PC death is one of my only complaints about the RPGA. Roleplaying, in my opinion, should be about developing your character and having fun. Where's the fun in facing a raging, great axe-wielding, half-orc barbarian who can wipe away half your hp on an average damage roll? However, including more opportunities for the PCs to fail is a great idea. It encourages roleplaying, and paying attention to the module. It also hits PCs right where it REALLY hurts: GP and XP (without having to lose a level or go into massive debt).
jhorred 12-29-06, 06:09 PM	...but character death should never be a goal -- and should only happen in the case of PC stupidity or bad DMing. or lucky crits, like the one which took Tahlvinyr.. poor guy only had 13 hit points when he took that 32 point arrow. (DM rolled 8,7,8 for damage.)
LGMoses 12-29-06, 09:18 PM	Going First can definately be a huge advantage. My wizard managed to go first after our party party spotted some bad guys hiding in ambush. Between a good damage roll and most of the bad guys failing their saves for the ensuing fireball, the GM proceeded to remove the sad bad guys from the table and continued on to the next part of the mod. (Of course, one of the other party members had been asking him if he had great arcane powers the whole mod, so my wizards asked him it those were great enough.) Regional variance with character death. I think the penalty for dying is high enough that we don't need Triads to take steps to make it difficult to bring back characters. I'd make me reluctanct to come play in a region that required a favor to get raised if I die. If I die before I get a chance to gain one of the favors then I'd be out a character. I'd hope that unrecoverable deaths would be few and far between as alot of time and money too is put into building up our characters. Reincarnating my scout was an option. I looked into it, but the LGCS is fairly restrictive on when you can have that cast on your character. I could have had it done as I could have paid for a scroll or reincarnate and had the druid in the party cast it on me. But I figured that as I had just made 2rd level that I'd just start over. My character is the mate of my girlfriends character so we figured that she drug his corpse back to the Phostwood and he was returned to life there. (Of course as a brand new character with 0xp and starting gold. Just a little background to explain why his mate is 1 level higher.) I'm still looking how raise dead is done where I'm from. But I just want to say that raise dead should be hard to get. Death should be seen as permanent.
Redfist 12-30-06, 03:12 AM	Also, I support them doing this. We're the Yeomanry and we're not hte most magically advanced society. It should be very difficult to have a person raised from the dead. Death should NOT be seen as temporary, EVER. As a player who travels a lot for work and has the priveldge of visiting many regions, I'd have to disagree for 2 reasons: 1. Magic may be rare in region X, but a cart+horse+driver can be purchased to take the corpse to another region (or Greyhawk). Having a TU/cost penalty would be appropriate, but flat out denying it denies the reality that region X does *NOT* exist in a vacumn. 2. You are just begging out of region players to *NOT* visit your cons. Why would an out-of-region player who obviously doesn't have region influence want to risk permanent death simply because they don't happen to have pre-established history (influence) there. It's nuts. I understand the need/benefit for regional flare, but having such a player unfriendly result makes no sense. Maybe some region should say "Hey, we don't have blacksmiths. No weapons can be bought here!" It's just as silly IMHO.
Simpi 12-30-06, 03:34 AM	As a player who travels a lot for work and has the priveldge of visiting many regions, I'd have to disagree for 2 reasons: 1. Magic may be rare in region X, but a cart+horse+driver can be purchased to take the corpse to another region (or Greyhawk). Having a TU/cost penalty would be appropriate, but flat out denying it denies the reality that region X does *NOT* exist in a vacumn. But note that raise dead only works for 1 day/caster level. Even going a relatively small geographical distance to find the suitably high level cleric might be a stretch. Of course, in this age and day resurrection is freely available (even for debt) in core modules. Some regions cap the divine spells at 5th level divine spells. Heck, in our region there is no-one else than high priest of Zilchus who can actually cast resurrection and being a Zilchan, he is not one to return you to life unless cash is paid in front :D Sampo Haarlaa Naerie Triad
CdrcJsn 12-30-06, 03:56 AM	Of course, in this age and day resurrection is freely available (even for debt) in core modules. Some regions cap the divine spells at 5th level divine spells. Heck, in our region there is no-one else than high priest of Zilchus who can actually cast resurrection and being a Zilchan, he is not one to return you to life unless cash is paid in front :D Sampo Haarlaa Naerie Triad Regional differences indeed...it's hard to spit in the Pale without hitting 3 priests. If you spit in the bushes, you're likely to hit either one of the new Pholtan druid order members or the renegade outlawed druids. Rogues on the other hand...
Redfist 12-30-06, 11:00 AM	But note that raise dead only works for 1 day/caster level. Even going a relatively small geographical distance to find the suitably high level cleric might be a stretch. Gentle Repose could be used and cast by a 3rd level cleric (5th level wizard) -vs- a 9th level cleric being needed for Raise Dead.
MatBlack 12-30-06, 12:59 PM	killing PCs is easy. if your complaint is that you're not having fun because you're not dying often enough, than there are some pretty simple solutions. stop wearing armor and carrying weapons, make bull-rush attempts on the ogres, center you fireballs on yourself. or you could just play up as high as you are able to. or you could simply limit yourself to only using rules items from the PHB. if your complaint is that you aren't having fun because other people aren't dying enough, well, that's not really a valid complaint to make. also, just because your character happens to be sitting at, say, about 105% of the normal effectiveness for his level when you COULD have pumped him to around 120%, does not make that character non-optimal. for instance, i have a 4th level bard/marshal/cleric of corellon/ranger with a +32 Diplomacy (+34 in Highfolk regional scenarios). i can stop most combats by talking as a full-round action and moving the opponents from hostile to unfriendly. in fact, i don't think that i can't NOT move them from hostile to unfriendly, even with the penalties. now, granted, i could have built that character so he would currently have a +35 Diplomacy, but that hardly makes him a non-optimized character. GMing for a home group or regular game day group is immeasurable easier than judging at cons, because you play week in and week out with roughly the same player base, and you know what they expect from a game as far as challenge level, and can adjust your style accordingly. con tables, on the other hand, generally are made of a diverse number of players of differing play styles who have, more likely than not, not spent a lot of time playing together. as for running the mods exactly as written, anyone who's spent even a small amount of time judging for LG knows that just isn't the way it goes. the only thing that you can regularly count on from a group of players is that will find some course of action that's not covered in the mod. when writing a mod, it is impossible to predict every course of action a party is going to want to take, much less account for every possible combination of party composition and character classes that might possibly play the mod. writing interesting combats is much harder (and hopefully, much more appreciated) than writing deadly combats. that being said, if you really can't find a way for your characters to get killed more often, come on up to ConFlict in the Vesve in late July, and we'll give it our even best (all in good fun, of course :) )
LGMoses 12-30-06, 11:11 PM	As a player who travels a lot for work and has the priveldge of visiting many regions, I'd have to disagree for 2 reasons: 1. Magic may be rare in region X, but a cart+horse+driver can be purchased to take the corpse to another region (or Greyhawk). Having a TU/cost penalty would be appropriate, but flat out denying it denies the reality that region X does *NOT* exist in a vacumn. 2. You are just begging out of region players to *NOT* visit your cons. Why would an out-of-region player who obviously doesn't have region influence want to risk permanent death simply because they don't happen to have pre-established history (influence) there. It's nuts. I understand the need/benefit for regional flare, but having such a player unfriendly result makes no sense. Maybe some region should say "Hey, we don't have blacksmiths. No weapons can be bought here!" It's just as silly IMHO. I've removed my post because I haven't been able to confirm any of the information and wish to preserve the integrity of my region. If that post may have damaged my region's reputation at all then I am deeply grieved :( But it should be noted that as I understood it the players at the table can chip in thier influence points to raise a comrade. Once again. I htink it is very important that in this campaign we keep magic as not being a business. It shouldn't be like a raise dead assembly line in the temple.
honeynuggets 12-31-06, 01:35 PM	Man. So many posts that complain about how hard certain monsters are. That some mods are hard. If your not power built the mods can be to tough. . I think the real problem behind this phenomenon is that modules are being published without appropriate "encounter start distance" details. So what happens is that some DMs just start everyone within 30ft of each other and give the NPCs a surprise round while other DMs just start everyone roughly on opposite sides of a standard battlemat even when the NPCs get a surprise round. In the former case, modules are lethal and in the latter case they are too easy.
draxynnic 01-01-07, 06:00 AM	I think the best solution here is the view expressed that over 20 modules, just considering Cores, it is possible to please everyone, even if you can't do it for one. However, where possible without providing spoilers, modules should state what sort of audience they're aimed towards. For instance, there was one 595 module in my former metaregion that, thanks to a very blunt warning, I refused to play (I didn't want to risk a perma-death on my only character at the time that was really suited for APL10-minimum modules) and ended up eating the module for another group. Even with the players having carefully constructed a table and playing pretty smart, there was one character that only survived the second encounter due to wearing an Amulet of Health looted from the first encounter. And the third encounter nearly took out the wizards even after the biggest nasty in that encounter rolled a natural 1 on a hit that caused exactly 50 points of damage (the first time it had taken damage). However, with the warning, it was fair - they knew what they were going into. If that module hadn't had the warning, though... On the other hand, another 595 I ran in my new metaregion pitted an APL10 party against a small fort. The bad guys started on the back foot after the monk and the heavy hitting fighter were both D-Doored straight to the battlements and cut down the archers on the walls, and it went downhill from there. The players greatly enjoyed having the chance to cut loose and demonstrate what high-level characters could do. Anyway, the basic moral is that there's no problem with hard modules - but not EVERY module should be a killer, and those that are should be given a warning so that people know to avoid those modules when it just isn't worth risking having a character die. That way, people who want the challenge can get it, while people for whom losing a character really would be a disaster can know what to avoid. Personally, I think in-depth investigation modules could also stand to have a warning so people know that such modules might benefit from being given a little extra time to run, but that's another issue. On winning initiative: To beat a dead horse, it really can be a lifesaver. I've seen modules where Group A had a cakewalk while Group B nearly got wiped, simply on the initiative rolls. At risk of going into another war story, I had one game a couple of years ago where we ran into a cave troll at APL6 (someone even pulled out the "Oh, they have a cave troll" line). Winning initiative with my fighter - the only tank of the group - and not knowing the cave troll's special rolls, I nervously took the chance to close while it was flat-footed, went full expertise, and hoped that the rest of the party would take it down before it got in a lucky rend. It wasn't until I looked up the critter afterwards and saw the words "pounce" and "rake" on top of that that I realised that if it had gone first, it would be missing on a 1 and would have had half of it's attacks left after smearing my elven fighter across the walls. Assuming it didn't go straight for the squishies in the first place - it was coming from the side, so it had a choice. It really can be a lifesaver, and not necassarily for the person with the faster reactions - and when you can give it to everyone, like with Motivate Dexterity, that's a lifesaver for everyone. Even if it doesn't mean you get to do it yourself, when it affects the whole party, it increases the chance of one of your allies pulling the proverbial teeth of something that would otherwise kill half your party - and you may never realise how close you were to disaster unless you run the module yourself or otherwise gain access to knowledge of what you just faced.
Genghis Cohen 01-01-07, 12:18 PM	Man. So many posts that complain about how hard certain monsters are. That some mods are hard. If your not power built the mods can be to tough. What on earth are people complaining about? I pray for these "hard mods". The only thing worse than playing a mod for 4 hours and not feeling challenged at all is playing an investigation mod. I for one feel there is not nearly enough PC death. If DM's are pulling punches they need to stop. In a world where death is not always permament I expect people to die more often. And while I'm on a rant, we need more traps. Make them useful, have the trap go off and the bad guys rush in. What good is a trap if you can just stand around and heal after it. Theres no point in avoiding it, disarming it, or safely triggering the trap if you can just tank it and heal up. We need to see some good no save stat nerfing traps. If it has spikes give it poison with high DC.Did you ever play SHE5-05 Eye of the Storm? Every table that I know of that played it suffered at least one death, and most suffered more than one.
copper_wyrmling 01-01-07, 01:01 PM	Did you ever play SHE5-05 Eye of the Storm? Every table that I know of that played it suffered at least one death, and most suffered more than one. Not my table! :) Of course, thanks to the vagaries of convention mustering, I was playing a L14 cleric in an APL 10 mod... which helped a LOT. (Otoh, the party without her was APL 8 - levels ended up something like 14/10/9/8/6.) She did have to fight the final encounter essentially solo, after the rest of the party figured out that they couldn't touch the BBEG, and didn't have much in the way of buffs / debuffs - thankfully, they were wise enough to get out of the way, so she didn't have to spend actions on rescue. I do think that EL15 encounters at APL 10 are a bit much though, unless the mod has a warning on it. I have trouble seeing how a normal APL 10 table was expected to kill that thing - although admittedly, we were on a rescue mission, so we may not have needed to kill it to get full rewards.
Japangirl 01-01-07, 01:10 PM	Did you ever play SHE5-05 Eye of the Storm? Every table that I know of that played it suffered at least one death, and most suffered more than one. Our table got really really lucky on that one (at APL 14, there were two of the BBEGs you see at APL 10, and they were both advanced). No one died though! My rogue is now thoroughly convinced that the gold dust that wizards can create is the most awesomest spell ever.
Genghis Cohen 01-01-07, 01:20 PM	Not my table! What about the other tables that went off at that con? Our table got really really lucky on that one (at APL 14, there were two of the BBEGs you see at APL 10, and they were both advanced). No one died though! My rogue is now thoroughly convinced that the gold dust that wizards can create is the most awesomest spell ever.Yeah, that glittery stuff is cool.
copper_wyrmling 01-01-07, 01:41 PM	What about the other tables that went off at that con? There weren't any. Why do you think we had two people playing four levels out of tier? :P Even at APL 10, the creature is advanced, by the way - fortunately my cleric had fought them before (she actually has a certed medal for it), so she didn't waste too much time trying to figure out what their abilities were. But as I said, I don't think the encounter was appropriate (maybe at higher APLs, but not at 10); I have trouble seeing how a normal APL 10 table was supposed to win it. Yeah, that glittery stuff is cool. Amen.
budleiser 01-01-07, 01:46 PM	Did you ever play SHE5-05 Eye of the Storm? Every table that I know of that played it suffered at least one death, and most suffered more than one. Was that a min APL10 mod? There were a bunch of tables of it at WIPOU, but by the time I hit level 8 I ran out of TU's. I would have gladly played up, but I try not to take half when I can. Since it matters for the thread in general here is what I have played: ULP6-03 Flesh and Mettle (Klein) ULP6-IN3 Two if by Sea (Klein) SHE5-04 A Cup O'erturned (Klein) SHE6-04 A Book Unburned (Klein) ULP6-05 Family Troubles (Klein) ULP5-01 Storms Over The Azure Sea (Klein) Cor5-07 Rings Within Rings (Klein) ULP6-04 Mixed Messages (Klein) ULP6-01 Written in Stone (Klein) Shadows of The Dread Spiral (Klein) GRM6-IN3 The Depths of Haradaragh (Klein) COR5-03 Atonement (Klein) ULP5-03 Mind Games (Klein) COR5-17 Times Tide on Bright Sands (Klein) COR5-08 Clipping Wings (Klein) COR5-11 Dark Deceit on Bright Sands (Klein) ULP5-08 Flotsam and Jetsam (Klein) ULP5-07 The Canticle of Fate (Klein) CORS4-02 Here There Be Dragons - Home Play (Klein) COR5-02 Voice of Reason (Klein) ULP5-09 Traveling Tales (Klein) ULP5-06 Signs and Portents (Klein) CORS5-02 Mines of the Eye (Klein) SHE5-06 A Study in Contrasts (Klein) COR5-18 Kusnir (Klein) SHE5-03 The Prophet's Voice (Klein) COR5-16 Here Comes the Sun (Klein) ULP4-04 Ring of Death (Klein) COR4-15 War of the Dust (Klein) Cor4-18 It Never Rains in Nyrond (Klein) Crystal Caverns of the Cairn Hills (Klein) Cor5-20 Phantoms On Bright Sands (Narvyk) Cor5-09 Gateway to Bright Sands (Narvyk) Cor5-13 Price of Power (Narvyk) Cor5-19 Retribution (Narvyk) Cor5-12 Return to the Undercity (Narvyk) Cor5-05 Marked Man (Narvyk) ULP6-02 Hook Line and Sinker (Narvyk) ULP5-04 Persuasion (Narvyk) Cor5-04 Desecrators of the Lords Tomb (Narvyk) ULP5-IS2 Mildowneys Magnificent Menagerie (Narvyk) ULP5-IS4 Irony (Narvyk) COR5-06 Blood On Bright Sands (Narvyk) COR4-19 That which was not meant to be known (Wulfson) COR4-11 Crimson Thorns (Wulfson) COR4-06 Duke of the Dust (Beowulf) COR4-14 Sympathy for the Baatezu (Beowulf) COR4-09 A Tiger? In Ahlissa? (Beowulf) Tropical Intrigue (Beowulf) Shedding Scales (Beowulf) ULP5-IS3 curtain call (Beowulf) Heartless (Beowulf)
Genghis Cohen 01-01-07, 01:52 PM	Was that a min APL10 mod? There were a bunch of tables of it at WIPOU, but by the time I hit level 8 I ran out of TU's. I would have gladly played up, but I try not to take half when I can.Yeah, it was a minimum APL10 table. It was the second toughest CY595 mod that I played after KEO5-06 Tale of Two Lions. That was so tough that free True Resurrections were built into the mod.
budleiser 01-01-07, 01:57 PM	Yeah, it was a minimum APL10 table. It was the second toughest CY595 mod that I played after KEO5-06 Tale of Two Lions. That was so tough that free True Resurrections were built into the mod. If I had known that I would have taken half and played up from level 7.
Dr.Cornelius 01-01-07, 07:35 PM	OK - I am starting to see why some players think LG mods are too easy - certain optimized builds and tactics are much, much more effective than the equivalent level of iconic Fighter, Rogue, Cleric & Wizard party. For example the Slienced Tanglefoot Bag in a reasonably well-prepared party is enough to shut down (or at least seriously inconvenience) an opposing spellcaster of much higher level. Average Player: That last module was really tough - we barely survived the EL+5 Wizard and his minions. The Optimizer: Really? It was a walkover for our party. Average Player: How? The Optimizer: Well we had a Marshall along with Motivate Dex, so we won initiative and went before the evil Wizard. Our Cleric cast Silence on the Beastmaster's Tanglefoot Bag and the Beastmaster on Dire Bat flew over the Wizard and proceeded to tangle him in Silence. After that it was a mop-up. Average Player: Guess I am not spending enough time on the optimization boards. Mod Author: How am I supposed to design a Mod that will challenge a fully optimized ubėr-party and not TPK a typical party?
smerwin29 01-01-07, 07:45 PM	Mod Author: How am I supposed to design a Mod that will challenge a fully optimized ubėr-party and not TPK a typical party? The best answer I have been able to come up with is to write the encounters to challenge an iconic party (with maybe one prestige class at higher levels) played by experienced players. Then count on the DM to be able to run combats in such a way that less-experienced players are not wiped out, but experienced players are challenged. The folks with all the broken combinations doing 1000 points of damage in a round with ACs of 70 have already took their challenge and had their fun in creating the character, so they will just have to not be challenged during the adventure. The campaign is too big and the audience too diverse to ever be able to please everyone. As a writer, the best you can do is write a fun adventure for the players and the DM, playtest as thoroughly as possible to eliminate any major flaws, and take all comments with good humor. Shawn (author of a mod or three . . . this week)
Dr.Cornelius 01-01-07, 07:55 PM	My rogue is now thoroughly convinced that the gold dust that wizards can create is the most awesomest spell ever. Right. A failed Glitterdust save breaks a lot of encounters. Given the ubiquity of Glitterdust, one wonders why the monsters of Greyhawk have not adapted. It would make sense for most advanced monsters, especially in high APL mods to at least have the Blind-Fight feat or a Ring of Counterspells or some other way to deal with the inevitable dust...
CdrcJsn 01-01-07, 08:47 PM	For example the Slienced Tanglefoot Bag in a reasonably well-prepared party is enough to shut down (or at least seriously inconvenience) an opposing spellcaster of much higher level. This probably won't work with a lot of judges. What piece of the tanglefoot bag did you cast the silence on? If an object with a spell breaks, some judges consider the spell gone, while others will let it continue working on the biggest piece left. Silence is an emanation. That means if you cover it up (cast a spell on a pebble, hide it in your pocket) then the spell is basically suppressed. An outer piece of tanglefoot bag that had silence cast on it would most likely be covered in goo, suppressing the silence. Much more reliable (i.e. less table variation) to simply cast the silence effect on the ground near the wizard. Sure it won't allow the silence to be mobile, but more judges will allow the tactic. Of course, readying to cast silence on the floor near the wizard to interrupt his spell is often better since the bad guy wastes an action and a spell slot.
Hariman 01-01-07, 10:54 PM	Come to Veluna. We have a year 6 mod where the possibility of failure is very real, you can survive and end up with no gold for the mod. As far as the possibility of death? I currently have no LG character above second level due to permanent/multiple deaths. Keoland kicks my backside four times in three weeks on two characters, so I have no gold left to get raised on those two characters (level 4 and level 6). A core mod leaves my body un-recoverable, so there goes my level 10. In five weeks of Cons and slot 0s during Late October/November, I'm out of characters! I think the campaign is plenty tough! Welcome to Keoland! Roll initiative. As a Keolander, I agree. We shouldn't be worrying about TPKs every single mod. It's no fun if your character can't survive. I've gotten my booty kicked by keoland mods. I DIED in Forest of Ribbons (Keoland Regional.), but that mod was notorious for being a killer mod. Study of Contrasts (A sheldomar valley metaregional) wouldn't have killed me, if I'd been 4th level in APL 4 instead of level 2 in APL 4. Investigative and RP mods provide breaks from the tedium of nothing but combat intensive mods. My preferred type of mod mixes both RP and Battle. Here Comes the Sun is an excellent example of that type of mod. Gateway to Bright Sands is another. Neither is excessively hard, but they are still challenging. Hariman PS: Always bring your A-game to Keoland, should you ever visit. Keoland and Sheldomar Valley mods are TOUGH. Be prepared to face dire challenges and NEVER play above your level if you can help it.
Japangirl 01-02-07, 01:17 AM	I've never been to Keoland, but overall the Sheldomar Valley mods haven't struck me as overly difficult. I've only played the year 5 and 6 ones though. Iuz metaregionals seem to give my parties more trouble.
rockondon 01-02-07, 05:19 AM	A simple solution would be putting warnings on the mods. If you make it nasty to challenge the powergamers, slap on a warning. Around where I live I'm quite comfortable playing up a couple levels in a COR mod, those are pretty soft, but a VTF mod can kill people pretty easy.
Ramacass 01-02-07, 08:26 AM	Man. So many posts that complain about how hard certain monsters are. That some mods are hard. If your not power built the mods can be to tough. What on earth are people complaining about? I pray for these "hard mods". The only thing worse than playing a mod for 4 hours and not feeling challenged at all is playing an investigation mod. I for one feel there is not nearly enough PC death. If DM's are pulling punches they need to stop. In a world where death is not always permament I expect people to die more often. And while I'm on a rant, we need more traps. Make them useful, have the trap go off and the bad guys rush in. What good is a trap if you can just stand around and heal after it. Theres no point in avoiding it, disarming it, or safely triggering the trap if you can just tank it and heal up. We need to see some good no save stat nerfing traps. If it has spikes give it poison with high DC. If you want to be challenged come to Perrenland. I'll be running a mod next week at apl 4 where there are 3 combat encounters the first ECL 6 followed by ECL 5 and finally ECL 7. I'd give you're mounted halfling a run for his money. I play in a group of 4th and 5th level characters and everyone has died once. I think the danger is plenty fine. Maybe you play at tables that soft ball the badies?
gomeztoo 01-02-07, 08:59 AM	While not a tough mod when it comes to PC deaths, I think Immortal Longings (now retired) was quite a challenge. We played it at APL 12 with levels 9/9/9/10/14/15. Despite the presence of some really tough spellcasters, and two frontline fighters that despite low level had a load of hp, we failed the module. No deaths - we just failed to stop mister V from doing his thing. A combo of bad luck (we placed the NPC druid at a spot that proved to be inconvenient), bad choices (forgot I had the Travel domain when we got webbed), and tough opposition (when people cast timestop you know you are going to have issues). It was a cool fight, but unfortunately we were set up to fail from the start. The first fight (where we spent six rounds *finding* the bad guy as he was casting spells at us) was also pretty nerve wrecking.
GrahamWills 01-02-07, 09:13 AM	Doesn't it seem a little ironic that someone who has built a specialized character to be effective in combat at the expense of role-playing is complaining that they are effective at combat? I play non-optimised characters (Monk/Ranger/Wolflord and Warmage/Marshal with a familiar ...) and I find the mods on average sufficiently challenging for average characters. When I play with a group that is over-APL, combat tends to be easy. When I play under-APL, or with only 4 players, it tends to be hard. I would hate to think I *had* to play an optimized character to have fun, and suggesting that the game be slanted towards that seems selfish for the builders of optimized characters. There are three elements to roleplaying games: The GAME, which is where you follow rules, build effective characters (optimized, if you like) and do the crunchy numbers thing. The GAME part says your wizard must be a grey elf, and your fighter must dip barbarian. The ROLE part is where you take up a character's role and make decisions that make sense for a realistic character in Greyhawk. The ROLE dictates that your Fighter never takes barbarian because he's better than those low-down, illiterate, dirty, dime-a-dozen scum. The third part is the PLAYING part which is where you make the experience fun for everyone and smooth over cracks in the rules and round of your character's role so it works in the group. If you are a pure gamist, your optimized characters will cake-walk combat, which is the most rules-y part of the game. If you are bored with this, then consider that you might not actually be a pure gamist and might want to play a role. Effectively you have made a bad build. Your build has concentrated too much on the GAME and not enough on the ROLE and so you haveless fun PLAYING. Solution: Fix your bad build. Get religion and take a level of cleric. Get in tune with nature and become a druid. Take a walk on the dark side and Hexblade a level or so. Do whatever it takes to make your character balanced.
Mortepierre 01-02-07, 10:36 AM	I play non-optimised characters and I find the mods on average sufficiently challenging for average characters. When I play with a group that is over-APL, combat tends to be easy. When I play under-APL, or with only 4 players, it tends to be hard. I would hate to think I *had* to play an optimized character to have fun, and suggesting that the game be slanted towards that seems selfish for the builders of optimized characters. Amen! There are still people playing non-optimized PC in LG because they're in for the story, not the xp or the gold. Mods from my meta-region are deadly enough as they are, thank you.
budleiser 01-02-07, 10:40 AM	Amen! There are still people playing non-optimized PC in LG because they're in for the story, not the xp or the gold. Mods from my meta-region are deadly enough as they are, thank you. I'll have to pay closer attention and see if meta-regional adventures are more dangerous than POU adventures. If thats the case I might push for more SHE mods. I thought about titling the thread "POU Mods..." but alot of CORs are still too easy, and I don't know if POU is high on the danger curve or if were an easy region to survive in. What do others think of the POU?
budleiser 01-02-07, 11:23 AM	Doesn't it seem a little ironic that someone who has built a specialized character to be effective in combat at the expense of role-playing is complaining that they are effective at combat? I play non-optimised characters (Monk/Ranger/Wolflord and Warmage/Marshal with a familiar ...) and I find the mods on average sufficiently challenging for average characters. When I play with a group that is over-APL, combat tends to be easy. When I play under-APL, or with only 4 players, it tends to be hard. I would hate to think I *had* to play an optimized character to have fun, and suggesting that the game be slanted towards that seems selfish for the builders of optimized characters. There are three elements to roleplaying games: The GAME, which is where you follow rules, build effective characters (optimized, if you like) and do the crunchy numbers thing. The GAME part says your wizard must be a grey elf, and your fighter must dip barbarian. The ROLE part is where you take up a character's role and make decisions that make sense for a realistic character in Greyhawk. The ROLE dictates that your Fighter never takes barbarian because he's better than those low-down, illiterate, dirty, dime-a-dozen scum. The third part is the PLAYING part which is where you make the experience fun for everyone and smooth over cracks in the rules and round of your character's role so it works in the group. If you are a pure gamist, your optimized characters will cake-walk combat, which is the most rules-y part of the game. If you are bored with this, then consider that you might not actually be a pure gamist and might want to play a role. Effectively you have made a bad build. Your build has concentrated too much on the GAME and not enough on the ROLE and so you haveless fun PLAYING. Solution: Fix your bad build. Get religion and take a level of cleric. Get in tune with nature and become a druid. Take a walk on the dark side and Hexblade a level or so. Do whatever it takes to make your character balanced. So you think that making a good character (for battle) makes them useless for roleplaying? Wow. See I always thought roleplaying came from people. Boy was I wrong. I need to hurry and make a less optimal character so I can roleplay better. :rolleyes:
trollbill 01-02-07, 12:35 PM	There are a lot of factors that go into the challenge level of a module. Here are only a few I can think of off the top of my head. 1) Whether a module writer knows how to cheese monsters and likes to. 2) Whether a player knows how to cheese characters and likes to. 3) Whether a DM is good with tactics. 4) Whether the DM made a mistake that made the mod too easy/hard 5) Whether the writer made a mistake in the mod that made it too easy/hard. 6) Whether a particular creature is CRed innaccurately. 7) Whether there are circumstances that make the encounter easier or harder. 8) How good of a player you are. 9) How good of a player the rest of your party is. 10) Party makeup for each particular mod. 11) How many people you actually have in your party. 12) Whether or not the DM softballs when the going gets too rough. 13) State of mind of the DM at that moment. 14) State of mind of the player(s) at that moment. 15) How much Metagaming the player(s) indulge in. 16) Luck These are just a few of the incalcuable variables that can figure into character death. Given all that, I don't expect any mod writer to able create an adventure that is equally challenging for all participants. Thus, some of the responsibility for the challenge level lies with the DM. It is, to some degree, their job to 'adjust' the module to be challenging for the given group. (Here I am not talking about actual changes to the adventure, but slight adjustments in tactics, how much leeway is given to players, how subtle NPC hints may be, etc.) Even then, all responsibility cannot be laid at the DMs' feet as even a good DM can't make an adventure equally challenging for everyone at a table if there is a noticible disparity in player/character quality of the participants. In the end, each player is responsible for his own enjoyment. Just as a DM should 'adjust' an adventure for what best suits the players/characters he is DMing, a player should adjust his playstyle/character to match the level of challenge he likes. I am a very experienced player (been playing since 1974) and have documented power gaming credintials. So I realize my playing is going to be well above that of the average player. I adjust accordingly to make the experience more challenging. If I find things are going too easy, I sit back and let other players take the lead at challenging parts, concentrating more on role-playing while keeping an eye out for making sure less experienced players don't die and genuinly bad players don't get the party killed off. If I find things are getting rough, I get more serious, cut back on my RPing, focus more on my tactics and start taking more charge of the group to coordinate tactics. Over the years, both Wizards and the RPGA have settles on a level of difficulty that is considered the most fun for the 'average' player. So changing it to accomodate either weaker or stronger players is a bad idea. My advice to you, Bud, is to stop looking for ways everyone else can make the game more enjoyable for you, and start looking for ways you can make the game more enjoyable for yourself. When all is said and done, you will experience the most fun from the game when you do this. :) On a slight side note, I just got back from Janus Jubilee. I didn't see any character deaths (though I dropped my own daughter's character down to -9 thanks to her having The Emnity of the White Trident Tribe on one of her ARs). But my own Sor7 no longer has a left hand (and Regeneration doesn't fix it), I saw another 11th-level character perminantly lose 30,000 gp worth of equipment, and saw one character avoid a perminent, serious vulnerability to sonic attacks by a single die roll. Dying, can be preferable compared to some of the things I have seen on ARs given how easy it usually is to get raised.
GrahamWills 01-02-07, 12:49 PM	So you think that making a good character (for battle) makes them useless for roleplaying? Wow. See I always thought roleplaying came from people. Boy was I wrong. I need to hurry and make a less optimal character so I can roleplay better. :rolleyes: No, making a character OPTIMIZED for combat makes them LESS capable at roleplaying. A bad player will be useless at combat with an combat-optimized character; a bad player will be useless as roleplayign with a roleplaying-optimized character. Reverse for good characters. Numbers HELP, they do niot DETERMINE. But yes, your optimized dire bat beastmaster will not have the fun feats and skills that enhance your ability to roleplay. Will you have a good profession to use in town? An instrument you can play in downtime? Will you have average or better charisma so people actually talk to you? Will you be a member of meta-orgs that require skills or classes you didnt pick up on your way to uber-dom? I assumed that anyone reading this thread would not think that a good player is good despite the numbers and a bad one bad despite them. I think that in this forum you have to assume at least a modicum of intelligence. I wrute accordingly
JohnduBois 01-02-07, 12:56 PM	Let's everybody take a deep breath, keep the conversation friendly and civil, and cut back on the flaming. I was greatly enjoying this thread (as a player, an author, and an editor) until the thinly veiled personal attacks started coming. Please keep to the issues.
WizO_Shadow 01-02-07, 12:58 PM	I'm at work just browsing through and I wanted to put my $.02 in. Thank you. Seriously! I'm tired of hearing how people got to X level without a scratch. 90% of my characters, if not more, die by level 3. Yeah, most of my party hasn't learned that you don't go up and knock on the bad guy's front door demanding a surrender. I love traps! Not auto-kill ones but ones you have to think and be creative to get out of. There needs to be more traps than a poisoned dart coming your way. A volley of them by iron golem kobolds with flesh grafted over them would be awesome. "Why didn't the fireball take them out!?... Oh no! Incoming!". ok, gtg, at work Renee Shadow Man. So many posts that complain about how hard certain monsters are. That some mods are hard. If your not power built the mods can be to tough. What on earth are people complaining about? I pray for these "hard mods". The only thing worse than playing a mod for 4 hours and not feeling challenged at all is playing an investigation mod. I for one feel there is not nearly enough PC death. If DM's are pulling punches they need to stop. In a world where death is not always permament I expect people to die more often. And while I'm on a rant, we need more traps. Make them useful, have the trap go off and the bad guys rush in. What good is a trap if you can just stand around and heal after it. Theres no point in avoiding it, disarming it, or safely triggering the trap if you can just tank it and heal up. We need to see some good no save stat nerfing traps. If it has spikes give it poison with high DC.
copper_wyrmling 01-02-07, 02:24 PM	To the original poster: if you want to get more challenge out of LG mods, find a group of people who ALSO want more of a challenge. Buy riding dogs to artificially boost your APL. Find a GM who will agree to use every dirty tactical trick they can think of (within the rules) to kill your characters. Then play some games, preferably ones that have a reputation for lethality, and see how you go: I hope you have fun :) I do understand your perspective: I prefer modules with challenging combats myself, provided I have a good team of players, but not everyone likes them, and there are ways to make modules more challenging for your group without trying to get the entire campaign changed. You may find modules become tougher for your beastmaster at higher APLs, when the encounters start assuming that PCs can fly, and so the enemies may take steps to counter it. In one of the tougher LG mods I've played, Lost But Not Forgotten (sadly now retired), I don't think your dire bat, or any other animal companion, would've been present for ANY of the encounters - getting to the first one involved posing as prisoners to infiltrate an Iuzian prison, getting to the later ones involved sneaking past Iuzian guards into an underground complex and then falling down a narrow shaft. The first encounter in that module involved a high-level wizard with substantial backup, in an Unhallow + Dimensional Anchor so the PCs couldn't teleport but the bad guys could, and the wizard was casting Forcecage and had his familiar imbued with Walls of Force. We were so lucky we had a sorcerer with Disintegrate... and many people thought that the other encounters were even harder. I deliberately avoid building my LG characters at quite the maximum allowed power level. I think my two high-levels are at about the right power level for LG at the moment - neither of them have suffered a PC death at their tables, or failed a module, for about the last six levels. They're strong contributors in most circumstances, and are happy to play up, but neither of them overshadow the rest of the party generally, although they have areas of expertise where they really get to shine. There are tricks that I deliberately avoid (the easiest example being CL-boosted Holy Word), because I feel that they remove that balance. But yes, your optimized dire bat beastmaster will not have the fun feats and skills that enhance your ability to roleplay. Will you have a good profession to use in town? An instrument you can play in downtime? Will you have average or better charisma so people actually talk to you? Will you be a member of meta-orgs that require skills or classes you didnt pick up on your way to uber-dom? I think you're mixing up the issues. You seem to be defining "roleplaying" as something like "playing a social character who gets along with people and has contacts all over the Flanaess", i.e. a bard. Sure, the dire bat beastmaster is probably not going to fill THAT role - but why would he? "Roleplaying" and "being the party face" are entirely different things. The latter is a well-defined role just like medic, tank or trapfinder. The bard who goes into a city, says, "I roll Gather Information, seeking answers to these questions, I get 37", is advancing the party's progression through the module in pretty much the same way as a rogue rolling a Disable Device check on a trap, and neither involves much roleplaying. You can roleplay a dedicated defender of nature who abhors cities and civilization and is gruff and unfriendly with others until they prove themselves; they probably DON'T play an instrument or have a profession they can use in town (just Survival ranks to live off the land), and they don't WANT most people to talk to them. One of the best roleplayers I've ever seen plays an extremely shy half-elf arcane archer who refuses to answer to his own name (which is "Fred", thanks to his mother trying to make him seem as human as possible) and who bought a ring of invisibility at the earliest opportunity - "The Ranger" is hilariously funny in roleplaying situations, but his feats are the usual ones for a fairly optimized archer. A character's feats and skills do not determine their roleplaying potential. (Warning: Copper is about to use her wild mage as an example again. Sincere apologies for any thread derailment that follows.) My sorcerer's feats are Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, Magical Aptitude (required for Wild Mage PrC), Sculpt Spell, Empower Spell. That's pretty close to the standard LG "power" recommendations for a boom sorcerer. Pretty much all her skill ranks are dedicated to qualifying for prestige classes, apart from Concentration and Use Magic Device. If you just look at her feats, she's pretty generic, and her spell selection is chosen for its ability to get her through LG mods. What she IS, as a character, is an anti-slavery activist who has posed as a Scarlet Brotherhood agent and turned down several recruitment offers by the Brotherhood, a worshipper of the god of freedom and liberation, a descendant of at least three dragon varieties (red, copper, silver), and the mother of a half-dragon child. She is linked through dreams and visions to many of the other sorcerers of the Flanaess, and to an ancient Flan city from the distant past. She has been trained in Ur-Flan techniques for dealing with spirits, been infused with the powers of undeath by touching an Ur-Flan artifact, and she shares her mind with an ancient Flan ghost. She is also a member of the Perrenland arcane guild, and the co-owner of a successful casino chain in Perrenland. I generally describe her as something along the lines of "my crazy necromantic dragonkin wild mage" - and if you can't see the roleplaying hooks in that mess, you're not trying ;) In her case, she is ALSO a decent secondary face, since she has a very high Charisma score, a circlet of persuasion, and the Friendly Face spell. But really, most of her weirdness comes from what's happened to her over the years, not anything in her build. In her downtime, she runs her casino chain, goes on teleport holidays around the Flanaess ("Hmmm... I wanna be somewhere with a beach. And palm trees. I imagine my ideal beach, and teleport blindly - I'll get a similar location eventually!" ;) ), and uses her sculpted fireballs to clear snow from around people's houses in her currently very wintry homeland. She's also a member of a touring band in Perrenland - she supplies the dancing lights, ghost sound and flute accompaniment (she's not very good at the flute, but is pretty enough to make up for it). I'm sorry, but I can't help but laugh at the thought that you can judge a PC's roleplaying potential from their feats, stats, skills and class levels. I don't see any trade-off between combat effectiveness and roleplaying potential; both are a matter of how much the player is willing to put into it.
gomeztoo 01-02-07, 02:53 PM	Hold On! You never told me Az owns a casino!
copper_wyrmling 01-02-07, 03:24 PM	Hold On! You never told me Az owns a casino! Azrien is the co-owner of the Norgald & Azrien Casino chain in Perrenland - Norgald gave her half ownership as a reward after she designed a wheelchair for him ;) (It flies! And has spiked flaming wheels! And a siren! And fluffy dice! And... so on :P)
rockondon 01-02-07, 03:35 PM	No, making a character OPTIMIZED for combat makes them LESS capable at roleplaying. There's no correlation between optimised/non-optimised and roleplaying. I play with some people that are optimised and many that aren't, in general the optimised ones happen to be better roleplayers. If you think having a lot of ranks in certain skills makes you a good roleplayer, you are definately a poor roleplayer. When someone makes a mediocre character and never opens his mouth he's a poor roleplayer. When someone makes an optimized character and never opens their mouth they're a poor roleplayer. The character doesn't matter, the person playing it does. My female cleric with 6 int and 8 chr and no skills is awesome to roleplay. She flirts with everybody (gets rejected by all of course), says and does stupid things, burps, farts, and a million other RP things. Oh yeah but she's got 18 str so I guess I'm a bad roleplayer :rolleyes:
LGMoses 01-02-07, 04:06 PM	i just want to say that roleplaying has no correlation to flapping your gums IMO.
gomeztoo 01-02-07, 04:26 PM	Norgald gave her half ownership as a reward after she designed a wheelchair for him ;) (It flies! And has spiked flaming wheels! And a siren! And fluffy dice! And... so on :P) I bet you forgot the hand brake :P
Munkwunk 01-02-07, 04:28 PM	A simple solution would be putting warnings on the mods. If you make it nasty to challenge the powergamers, slap on a warning. Personally, I think this sets a bad precedant. If "killer authors" (are allowed to make their mods hyper-deadly just because they're allowed to justify it with a warning, then it's going to scare a lot of people out of playing those mods. Fewer mods means fewer XP means slower character advancement. I've actually seen one mod in my region that essentially had a warning label; a lot of people didn't play it at all because they were afraid of the author's reputation for difficult encounters and those of us who did were the ones who brought our A-games to the table and walked all over it. To tie that in with the rest of the thread: I don't think that made our game any more enjoyable just because it was supposed to be a "deadly module". It also proves that a well-optimized table who is prepared for a challenge can walk through even the difficult encounters, and we have no right to complain that soemthing was "too easy" just because we're being tactically minded. While it is true that a rules-optimized character doesn't mean he sacrifices roleplaying (each character does have their own personality after all) it does mean that the character hasn't taken (m)any "flavor" feats/skills which means they're likely going to have an easier time of walking over encounters. For example: a half-orc barbarian who takes Skill Focus (Intimidate) at first level won't get Power Attack until 3rd at the earliest, which is going to off-set his feat progression quite a bit. However, he's probably going to have good reason to use the Intimidate skill in the future, meaning he'll get to throw in that dash of flavor to certain roleplaying encounters but will take a (small) hit to his overall combat effectiveness, especially at higher levels. Presently, Living Greyhawk modules vary greatly on their estimated challenge levels, so it's hard to make "flavor" choices in place of "optimized" choices because, really, nobody wants to get their character killed half way through a convention only to lose a level, drop an APL, and not be as capable of making the table he's signed up (and paid) for. I guess what I'm really trying to say is that we shouldn't complain about mods being "too easy" when we try to build characters in an optimized way, because even authors who try to write challenging adventures won't necessarily be able to challenge players who really strive to "win". And I think it's a very slippery idea to ask authors to even *attempt* to challenge power gamers because it really leaves out the rather large group of people who are just there to play and have fun in a social setting without having to worry that their character might be lost forever.
rockondon 01-02-07, 04:37 PM	Personally, I think this sets a bad precedant. If "killer authors" (are allowed to make their mods hyper-deadly just because they're allowed to justify it with a warning, then it's going to scare a lot of people out of playing those mods. Fewer mods means fewer XP means slower character advancement. I see your point. But nastier mods often have better access. Take interactives for example, the odds of you dying (or worse) is way higher, but the access and favors are usually top notch. Even without those favors and access, if I have a group of tactical players with me that day I like the challenge of a tough mod.
zigspatty 01-02-07, 05:11 PM	But nastier mods often have better access..... Even without those favors and access, if I have a group of tactical players with me that day I like the challenge of a tough mod. And if you don't?! Mustering frequently has players ending up at entirely different tables than what they signed up for. (7 players at the your table and that table needs a ___ (whatever you've got)...) You'll probably make some new friends, maybe even teach or learn a trick or two and hopefully have a pretty good time.... Interactives just as frequently have poor access (or no access at all). (Of course, opinions of access vary by what the player is seeking.) I'd sure hate to count on great access to make up for a character death.... of course the cost of a raise dead could really crimp adventure access purchases. I love interactives for other reasons - extra lethality is an aspect I could easily do without. Patty
Genghis Cohen 01-02-07, 06:20 PM	There's no correlation between optimised/non-optimised and roleplaying. I play with some people that are optimised and many that aren't, in general the optimised ones happen to be better roleplayers. If you think having a lot of ranks in certain skills makes you a good roleplayer, you are definately a poor roleplayer. When someone makes a mediocre character and never opens his mouth he's a poor roleplayer. When someone makes an optimized character and never opens their mouth they're a poor roleplayer. The character doesn't matter, the person playing it does. My female cleric with 6 int and 8 chr and no skills is awesome to roleplay. She flirts with everybody (gets rejected by all of course), says and does stupid things, burps, farts, and a million other RP things. Oh yeah but she's got 18 str so I guess I'm a bad roleplayer :rolleyes:I completely agree with this. I find that I roleplay less with my less optimized characters. Why? Because I have to concentrate more on the game mechanics to hold my weight. When I play my optimized Badlands Dwarf Barbarian mutt with a charisma of 5 who worships Wenta, I have a lot of fun - as do the other players at the table (its important to avoid roleplaying at the expense of other people's fun.) When I'm in the mood, and its not a critical part of the mod, I have him interrupt the party diplomat so that he can diplomatize just like a beer guzzling Dwarf with a charisma of 5.
GrahamWills 01-02-07, 06:23 PM	There's no correlation between optimised/non-optimised and roleplaying. I play with some people that are optimised and many that aren't, in general the optimised ones happen to be better roleplayers. If you think having a lot of ranks in certain skills makes you a good roleplayer, you are definately a poor roleplayer. I think a good roleplayer takes ranks in skills because they fit a character concept. In general though, my experiences and yours are different. It might be that I have played and run a lot of systems and seen the difference rules make to roleplaying. D&D is pretty weak at the role part of roleplaying -- nowhere near the levels of Dogs in the Vineyard or even CoC. It even lacks a fate point mechanism for dramatist players such as Living force provided (pretty much the minimal dramatist mechanism). So rather than another round of opinions, let me conclude by suggesting that for D&D my thesis might be more tenuous than for most RP systems -- tenuous to the point where the main effect of "being a good player" dominates all other effects. Within LG, I personally have found more quality roleplaying from players who COULD design optimized characters, but did not (or built their second character as a "roleplaying character") than those that went ahead and built the optimal character. However YMMV, and so it may be that the truth is generally otherwise. However, I would still say that if you are complaining that mods are too easy, and that limits your enjoyment of LG, then I would suggest concentrating more on roleplaying and less on optimization. If you were complaning that mods are too hard and you die all the time -- I'd suggest the reverse. Balance in all things and perfect yourself (my main is a monk, mostly).
Sieylianna 01-02-07, 07:08 PM	It's amazing how many people think loud and obnoxious equates to role-playing. Ed
LGMoses 01-02-07, 07:40 PM	It's amazing how many people think loud and obnoxious equates to role-playing. Ed ditto
Genghis Cohen 01-02-07, 08:11 PM	It's amazing how many people think loud and obnoxious equates to role-playing. EdSnarky comments aside, playing a boisterous character is just as much roleplaying as playing a diplomat. I play both types of characters, and I enjoy taking a stab at diplomacy with my 5 charisma dwarf just as much as I do with my (Triad approved) noble (since birth) diplomat (who got a 39 on a diplomacy check in an intro mod.) The dwarf is more challenging diplomat. While reflexively criticizing people for combat optimized builds is always acceptable, I rarely hear of people criticizing min/maxed "roleplaying" builds. I've seen people with diplomacy builds just say "my character does diplo-speak," and roll a die.
solbergb 01-02-07, 08:58 PM	Personally I think it would be more intersting if a scenario had a chance for the PCs failing - which is something entirely different form having PCs die. So a mod where there is a possibility you DON'T save the princess - even (or perhaps especially) if you slaughter everything in the mod. I've had that happen three times on my main character and have had plenty of close calls with objectives as well as deaths. I've had it happen about as often as I've had deaths. Failure is certainly an option, even without deaths. I think BK mods (at least the Y5 ones I played last year) do this especially well - present PC's with situations where it is not at all clear what the "right" thing to do is...and then have consequences. But...we only actually failed one mod through not handling the challenges in about 10, and in one case my other party members wussed out and took the easy path, which had severe consequences in a later game for my character. You want it as a possiblility, but not super common, because actually people usually feel awful when they fail an objective, far more so than just a death.
solbergb 01-02-07, 09:11 PM	As a side note, roleplay is orthoganal to your build. Neither have anything do do with the other...unless you try to roleplay stuff your character isn't mechanically capable of doing. I wanted my monk to be a thespian. He's got ranks in perform/acting, enough to overcome his low charisma. He joined a bardic college and eventually became an instructor, but after achieving his master-work (and getting a perform check of 40 without magical assistance) he's exited the theatre, although he gives advice to street performers from time to time. His style also made use of his considerable acrobatic and martial talents, and the comedic elements of a half-orc sometimes doing the protagonist role in a human/pholtan society. I wouldn't roleplay him as somebody talented at theatre without the perform checks to back it up, and when he starts talking about Pholtus I check my current kn religion roll to see how accurate his current attempt at "Teaching" really is". (sadly he is a much better performer than he is a religious instructor) Other elements though are independent of the build. Unlike many of my other characters, he matured really fast - starting as an adolescent, rapidly maturing to kind of "college student" level, then reaching the kind of self-confidence that only a master of a trade usually gets after 10 years of work...because he's a half orc. His life is over in about 40 years. He matures a lot in 3-4 years, and his goals change. My elf, by contrast, is pretty much the same now as when he began with respect to personality, aside from a bit more pride in his prowess with a bow than he had at the outset. He knew he was a good enough archer to be a hunter, but fighting demons and devils and what-all was gonna take practice. He's getting competent at that, but his daughter keeps getting into situations with bigger and bigger critters that he hasta shoot, and that means he's gotta keep grinding at this archery thing until she gets adventuring out of her system. For him 2-3 years is an eyeblink in his lifetime, and he started out pretty mature, he'd raised a kid etc before becoming an adventurer. My dwarf and gnome are similar, except both are kind of adolescents and stuck there (dwarf is greedy, fearless and kind of oblivious to folks that aren't like him, gnome is a self-centered "emo" type) and are unlikely to change without a life-shattering experience that might mature a real adolescent. Normal adventuring won't do it. They are all "optomized' to fit my mental image of them. Sometimes this means they're also pretty darn good at certain types of combat, but they've all got strengths and weaknesses. I get ideas from theoretical builds sometimes, but until a personality emerges and demands to be played, they just sit on the shelf. When the personality does emerge, it usually varies a bit from the iconic way you'd build such a character, although some are fairly close (my archer is darn close to one of the 3 approaches to building an arcane archer in LG with current feat/race/build options, varying really only in skill emphasis and equipment choices and my preference for quickdraw and improved crit over multishot and improved rapid shot).
solbergb 01-02-07, 09:19 PM	Is it really THAT big of a boost? Can you really place all the difference on being scared of death and defeat, instead of yawning while winning, simply on going first? It isn't initiative. It isn't the "uber" build. It's being smart enough to use the silence spell against spellcasters. You'd be amazed how many parties with bards, favored souls and clerics don't seem to think to use silence to shut down the caster who's hammering them, or who has just been grappled and is about to dimension door out. It sometimes even happens to good players. There were 3 clerics, all of who I *know* rack silence routinely who endured round after round of very high level spells in a battle interactive because they were thinking with their muscles - they got excited by the danger level and busted out their top level spells, forgetting to counterspell the enemy 18th level cleric with silence when he popped out each round from the etherial plane to do something awful. Unless the spellcaster drops every single caster of silence in the party before they get to go, or readies to prevent all of their spellcasting the entire encoutner is just as easy if the cleric rolled a "1" on initiative and has an 8 dexterity. The only diff is a bit of out of combat healing, or maybe undoing a bad effect on whomever did get zapped. There is no defense against a party not having PLAYER skills. They'll suck no matter how good their builds are. Usually they'll learn by example. After getting mauled by many spellcaster encounters they'll see a player use silence to shut down a caster who can't easily move out of the area and they'll start using that tactic later. Most folks learn pretty early, when silence is a first tier spell. Those that learn always have at least a scroll of it handy, and for many clerics that's a spell that never leaves their spells prepped and sometimes even gets a quicken slot.
rockondon 01-02-07, 09:31 PM	It's amazing how many people think loud and obnoxious equates to role-playing. I've never met anyone who feels that way. Although a loud obnoxious person with non-optimal skills would satisfy some people's definition of a good role-player. A buddy of mine, Chris, is the best RPer I've ever seen. Each of his 4 characters has their own psychological profile, accent (one also has a lisp, I believe), and backgrounds. He follows a character concept completely and usually comes up with an optimal build. When he runs modules, each NPC has a distinct attire, manner, accent and personality as well. The monsters are described beautifully and the wounds you inflict are too. When he plays with new people he starts off by writing each of their character's names, race, class and any relevant details that helps him interact. If he attempts a diplomacy, he includes the gist of the argument he's using to sway the person. He is soft spoken, is not an attention-getter, and he's always talking in character to other PCs and drawing them into RPing with him. Playing with a guy like this makes a module come alive. ...and then there's people that think they're good at RPing because they spread out their skills. :rolleyes:
clannagh 01-02-07, 09:38 PM	Just a general comment on roleplaying as discussed above. When I run mods I am pretty specific about what counts as roleplaying in terms of the roleplay XP award. Interacting "in character" with the NPC's, problem solving "in character" , roleplaying the encounters including combat and basically interacting with all or any aspects of the current mod "in character" IS roleplaying. Creating entire tangental sidetracks to go shopping etc can count here providing the character doesnt do it every game (see below). The following do NOT count in my games. - a funky build that has interesting character quirks including unusual skills (craft beer, profession pole dancer etc etc) as this is good character BUILDING for roleplay but not roleplaying for XP reasons - quirky unusual or more often annoying traits that are repeated every game (always gets drunk, collects body parts of enemies, always insults gnome PC's etc etc) roleplaying to a rote formulae is not rewarded with XP - metagaming definitely kills off roleplay XP -
solbergb 01-02-07, 10:20 PM	Clannagh kind of summed up what I think about for roleplay xp as a DM. To me it is tied to how the character interacted with the module, from a roleplay standpoint, not really how much fun the player and character were to have at the table. Character traits can be the seed of roleplay. They just aren't roleplay by themselves. To take a couple of my character actions in modules last year. - a funky build that has interesting character quirks including unusual skills (craft beer, profession pole dancer etc etc) as this is good character BUILDING for roleplay but not roleplaying for XP reasons Normally Perform(acting) does nothing, it's a character trait, not roleplay. But if the character uses reputation earned by it (yes, perform scores of 30+ give you more than local reputation if you ever achieved it with a significant audience), or association with a prestegious performing arts metaorg it to score points with the local street-performers or uses his expertise to berate the thugs attempting to simulate a mugging to ambush PC's on their lack of convincing mock-battle skills and demonstrate how they SHOULD have done it, that's roleplaying BASED on a character trait. - quirky unusual or more often annoying traits that are repeated every game (always gets drunk, collects body parts of enemies, always insults gnome PC's etc etc) roleplaying to a rote formulae is not rewarded with XP Lusting after forbidden knowledge is a character trait independent of mechanics, not roleplay. Voluntering to take ownership of the library of forbidden knowledge that has multiple bad-guy groups sending out assassins and features a cursed undead guardian by jumping up and down on a floor that might or might not survive such abuse by a fullplate/tower shield dwarf going "ooh, Me Me, pick me!" when the cursed undead guardian is asking if anyone will accept the risk of owning it, interrupting him before he gets to the downside...yeah, that's roleplay. Agree that metagaming does mess with roleplay. Which is why, for example, it is "good roleplay" when a party of 14th level people are attacked by a few relatively weak monsters and bring out the same boom they'd bring out if those same monsters had, say, lots of non-associated class levels in monk or were powerful demons using illusion to disguise themselves as weak monsters. The PLAYERS were pretty sure this was supposed to be a walkover. The CHARACTERS treated it as deadly serious. That's "roleplay" by choice of combat mechanics. Not normally what you usually think about, and yes, ripping that poor things in half with hundreds of points of damage once all the buffs were running and the fighters started blenderizing was ugly. Usually, being attacked on the road is serious business.
Mattastrophic 01-02-07, 10:33 PM	There's actually a very easy solution to the "Mods are too easy" argument: -Fix the APL system. Characters receive rewards equal to either their level or APL played. No 50% penalties. Players can do whatever APL they want. If an L10 plays APL 14, he'll get the same rewards as APL 10, but he'll have the extra challenge, which satisfies those who are looking for one. -Matt
Mattastrophic 01-02-07, 10:34 PM	Normally Perform(acting) does nothing, it's a character trait, not roleplay. But if the character uses reputation earned by it (yes, perform scores of 30+ give you more than local reputation if you ever achieved it with a significant audience) Wow, I so wish that were true. My Virtuoso was hitting +60 there for awhile, but never got any love... -Matt
Japangirl 01-03-07, 12:51 AM	Does it count as good roleplay when my very loquacious CN halfling with 14 Int/10 Cha argued comparative morality with a NG Rainbow Servant for the entire module after he stopped me from CDG'ing a captured opponent? It was his first time in the BK :). The wizard gave us our own Tenser's, so he didn't have to hear it anymore :D.
budleiser 01-03-07, 01:13 AM	There's actually a very easy solution to the "Mods are too easy" argument: -Fix the APL system. Characters receive rewards equal to either their level or APL played. No 50% penalties. Players can do whatever APL they want. If an L10 plays APL 14, he'll get the same rewards as APL 10, but he'll have the extra challenge, which satisfies those who are looking for one. -Matt God I would love that. The downside to playing up outside my APL range is that there also had to be people above the APL to carry it up. In plenty of fights I certainly felt like I carried my weight (But not that fight with the Vampires, I can't carry weight when Henry turns them to dust so fast) I would LOVE such a system, and if people always recieved their APL for reward low level characters would not want to be carried through APL 12+.
TallGuy 01-03-07, 03:46 AM	There's actually a very easy solution to the "Mods are too easy" argument: -Fix the APL system. Characters receive rewards equal to either their level or APL played. No 50% penalties. Players can do whatever APL they want. If an L10 plays APL 14, he'll get the same rewards as APL 10, but he'll have the extra challenge, which satisfies those who are looking for one. There's an easier solution, which doesn't mean you have to change the rules for everyone... Ask your GM to pull out all the stops. Tell him to eek out every advantage he can, no matter how hard he thinks you're doing. And tell him to not stop doing so until the session is over (either 'cause everyone is dead, or 'cause all the monsters are). There's a lot of room in the rules for (very) smart tactics on the GMs part, and I can usually eek out a TPK out of most encounters to begin with. I can usually (almost always, but some scenarios are harder) keep the players at the edge of their seat for suspense. If YOU think it's not hard enough, tell your GM to start playing smarter and give you a better challenge. Bas Vermeulen
MatBlack 01-03-07, 09:07 AM	While reflexively criticizing people for combat optimized builds is always acceptable, I rarely hear of people criticizing min/maxed "roleplaying" builds. I've seen people with diplomacy builds just say "my character does diplo-speak," and roll a die. on the other end of that, i once spent almost five minutes of a mod roleplaying my diplomat's "diplomacy check" to control a crowd. the GM simply said, "they aren't listening to you." a minute later, he turns to the dwarf barbarian and calls for a diplomacy check for the same situation, with no assistance from anyone else. in a later encounter, i tried the "i use diplomacy" approach instead. that didn't work either, and the dwarf barbarian again had to make the diplomacy check without assistance. during combats, the enemies would often ignore the obvious combatants (like the dwarf barbarian), wade through numerous attacks of opportunity, ignore opportunities for full attacks and their own attacks of opportunity just to reach the non-melee characters and try and kill them. the point, i guess, is that the whole roleplaying vs. rollplaying debates amounts to almost nothing in an environment where your judge is likely to be randomly determined and will likely have an entirely different take on what constitutes a "good game" than you, the rest of your table, or even your last judge. it's just the nature of the beast.
gomeztoo 01-03-07, 09:25 AM	The DM needs to be willing to deal with such things - a good DM would. I recall playing Witch Hunt, and having very good use of my Diplomacy. I managed to calm the crowd in the starting encounter, and, more importantly, convinced the vampire druid to not take out her anger on the populace. I didn't roll well, but I guess my chars sympathy for the vampire's plight, and her wording it to her, was of considerable significance. Understanding what goes on in a scenario can be key to success or failure. Whether you have the right skills for the job or not.
MatteBlack 01-03-07, 12:21 PM	Man. So many posts that complain about how hard certain monsters are. That some mods are hard. If your not power built the mods can be to tough. What on earth are people complaining about? I pray for these "hard mods". The only thing worse than playing a mod for 4 hours and not feeling challenged at all is playing an investigation mod. I for one feel there is not nearly enough PC death. If DM's are pulling punches they need to stop. In a world where death is not always permament I expect people to die more often. And while I'm on a rant, we need more traps. Make them useful, have the trap go off and the bad guys rush in. What good is a trap if you can just stand around and heal after it. Theres no point in avoiding it, disarming it, or safely triggering the trap if you can just tank it and heal up. We need to see some good no save stat nerfing traps. If it has spikes give it poison with high DC. I play in Bissel and frequently dip into the Sheldomere Valley, Keoland and Core mods. Each region certainly seems to have it's own style and level of challenge. I have been pretty happy with the level of PC death I have seen. My group is generally constructed of veteran players who play well-rounded characters that may include rp/investigation skills. It seems alike all you need is a powergamed character or an "RP" character with a good head on your shoulders to survive. An indelicate player with a powergamed character can pretty much bumble through stuff or or a more realistically built character/player who is thinking can avoid alot of pain. I am fine with the challenge level since I i don't have the most tweaked character on Oerth. If you do have have a powergamed one don't come crying to me. You "won" the game congrats. Please don't start scaling for the powergamer or else you'll close the game to the rest of the players. Lee
trollbill 01-03-07, 02:32 PM	It's amazing how many people think loud and obnoxious equates to role-playing. Ed Considering about 80% of the adventuring population of Greyhawk has an 8 Charisma (or less), I'd say this is perfectly accurate. :bored:
kenobi65 01-03-07, 02:44 PM	Considering about 80% of the adventuring population of Greyhawk has an 8 Charisma (or less), I'd say this is perfectly accurate. :bored: I must be pulling up the curve on that one...my 3 PCs have Charismas of 15 (Paladin), 16 (Warmage), and 16 (Bard).
LGMoses 01-03-07, 02:50 PM	I've only got 1 pc rite now with AR's on him because I usually judge but I have 2 back ups on hand that both have average to great charisma scores. A wizard and a bard. My "main" is a barbarian with 6 cha tho so it sets off that balance. I made him when I first heard about the pointbuy system and wanted to prove that an 18 is possible.
solbergb 01-03-07, 02:58 PM	Wow, I so wish that were true. My Virtuoso was hitting +60 there for awhile, but never got any love... -Matt They're true if your GM runs with it. As ours did (we introduced ourselves and my character broke disguise to reveal himself as a famous Palish thespian who performed Standing in the Light in CY594) and the GM had the characters react appropriately. If your judge doesn't care...well, all NPC interactions are less fun.
solbergb 01-03-07, 03:00 PM	Does it count as good roleplay when my very loquacious CN halfling with 14 Int/10 Cha argued comparative morality with a NG Rainbow Servant for the entire module after he stopped me from CDG'ing a captured opponent? It was his first time in the BK :). The wizard gave us our own Tenser's, so he didn't have to hear it anymore :D. That was so much fun. The module itself was kind of a railroad, but you two were providing entertainment for the whole table. That rainbow servant was halfling too...and opposite gender. Yeah, Olivia was like "Would you two get a room!" In her experience such passion in arguing usually leads to other things... (which promptly made both of you mad at her...but not so mad you wouldn't ride her discs over the snow)
solbergb 01-03-07, 03:05 PM	Other quotes from that game that I use to sum up the BK player attitudes I encountered: "Where are we" Judge: "Furyondy" "Sweet. We go a bit off the road, dig a hole and bury all those heads we've been saving in our bags of holding" It appears to be std practice in the BK to collect heads to prevent "speak with dead" and make ressurections harder. But you need to bury the heads outside of the BK to prevent retrieval.
NiTessine 01-03-07, 04:15 PM	It appears to be std practice in the BK to collect heads to prevent "speak with dead" and make ressurections harder. But you need to bury the heads outside of the BK to prevent retrieval. Ah. Over here, we shove the heads (and, if we have time, the entire bodies) through a shadow cache in some suitable remote and unlikely location and forget about them. As I recall, we disposed of an evil wizard's familiar in the same manner, some months ago. I love that spell.
kenobi65 01-03-07, 04:21 PM	It appears to be std practice in the BK to collect heads to prevent "speak with dead" and make ressurections harder. But you need to bury the heads outside of the BK to prevent retrieval. That'll stop raise dead, all right, but not an actual resurrection. Compare: While the spell closes mortal wounds and repairs lethal damage of most kinds, the body of the creature to be raised must be whole. Otherwise, missing parts are still missing when the creature is brought back to life. The condition of the remains is not a factor. So long as some small portion of the creature’s body still exists, it can be resurrected, but the portion receiving the spell must have been part of the creature’s body at the time of death.
solbergb 01-03-07, 04:26 PM	yeah, well, then Iuz is out 10k instead of a 3rd level spell from a low level minion. It's the same principle as locking your door. You won't stop a determined intruder but it keeps most folks out.
kenobi65 01-03-07, 04:33 PM	yeah, well, then Iuz is out 10k instead of a 3rd level spell from a low level minion. It's the same principle as locking your door. You won't stop a determined intruder but it keeps most folks out. Yup...it keeps the mooks silent, but won't stop a determined resurrection attempt.
trollbill 01-03-07, 04:41 PM	I must be pulling up the curve on that one...my 3 PCs have Charismas of 15 (Paladin), 16 (Warmage), and 16 (Bard). Well, yes, the average gets pulled up because the remaining 20% all have 14+. ;)
Reylance 01-03-07, 04:47 PM	Considering about 80% of the adventuring population of Greyhawk has an 8 Charisma (or less), I'd say this is perfectly accurate. :bored: Let's see.... 11 12 14 12 10 18 <- divine grace 14 <- divine grace 12 10 8 8 16 <- divine grace 8 8 10 6 15 <- sorcerer 8 An average of 11 1/9. (11 4/9 with items included)
clannagh 01-03-07, 05:11 PM	It may be worth Reincarnating one though. Several of our local GM's are very good at either total party kills (no one left to recover bodies) or single deaths with no res or raise dead possible. Locally we have permanently lost characters by: - being dragged into lava that destroyed the body - being swooped and carried off by vrocks - eaten alive by animated plants - fallen from great heights into an area where the GM labelled recovery "impossible" generally in our area death is taken more seriously because the Gm's make it very hard for you to come back
jhorred 01-03-07, 05:29 PM	Several of our local GM's are very good at either total party kills (no one left to recover bodies) or single deaths with no res or raise dead possible. Locally we have permanently lost characters by: - being dragged into lava that destroyed the body - being swooped and carried off by vrocks - eaten alive by animated plants - fallen from great heights into an area where the GM labelled recovery "impossible" generally in our area death is taken more seriously because the Gm's make it very hard for you to come back Remind me not to go where you are.....;)
kenobi65 01-03-07, 05:46 PM	Let's see.... You've got 18 LG PCs? I was going to say, "you need to get a hobby"...but, this *is* your hobby. :D
Japangirl 01-03-07, 06:35 PM	Considering about 80% of the adventuring population of Greyhawk has an 8 Charisma (or less), I'd say this is perfectly accurate. :bored: My chars have 10 (rogue), 8 (wizard, druid), 16 (warmage), and 17 (bard). I never play the warmage 2 or the druid 1 though. On average, my chars have (8+8+10+16+17)/5 = ~12 Cha score. That was so much fun. The module itself was kind of a railroad, but you two were providing entertainment for the whole table. That rainbow servant was halfling too...and opposite gender. Yeah, Olivia was like "Would you two get a room!" In her experience such passion in arguing usually leads to other things... (which promptly made both of you mad at her...but not so mad you wouldn't ride her discs over the snow) The snow was cold! Besides, that way we could concentrate on the arguing and not on keeping up with the doublins. And it was very convenient for getting over the chasms in the floor (I think I remember chasms in the floor on that mod . . . )
clannagh 01-03-07, 06:54 PM	My chars have 10 (rogue), 8 (wizard, druid), 16 (warmage), and 17 (bard). I never play the warmage 2 or the druid 1 though. On average, my chars have (8+8+10+16+17)/5 = ~12 Cha score. My highest are my human Atroan Friar and Gabby my female gnome Paladin of Velnius both on CHA 14. My lowest are my dire eagle mounted wood elf archer (she is good looking enough but a bit of wench) and my badlands dwarf (hey his a dwarf fighter .. its the battle scars) both on CHA 8. Personally I do not have an issue with CHA 8 on fighter classes when the race has a CHA penalty .. its in character.
Genghis Cohen 01-03-07, 07:17 PM	on the other end of that, i once spent almost five minutes of a mod roleplaying my diplomat's "diplomacy check" to control a crowd. the GM simply said, "they aren't listening to you." a minute later, he turns to the dwarf barbarian and calls for a diplomacy check for the same situation, with no assistance from anyone else. in a later encounter, i tried the "i use diplomacy" approach instead. that didn't work either, and the dwarf barbarian again had to make the diplomacy check without assistance. during combats, the enemies would often ignore the obvious combatants (like the dwarf barbarian), wade through numerous attacks of opportunity, ignore opportunities for full attacks and their own attacks of opportunity just to reach the non-melee characters and try and kill them. the point, i guess, is that the whole roleplaying vs. rollplaying debates amounts to almost nothing in an environment where your judge is likely to be randomly determined and will likely have an entirely different take on what constitutes a "good game" than you, the rest of your table, or even your last judge. it's just the nature of the beast.That's a big problem with diplomacy in LG. Many GMs don't know how to adjucate it properly. Building a character for diplomacy means living with constant table variation. While you should never be allowed to have a character insult an NPC and make a successful diplomacy check (a 60 should fail in that situation,) you should be rewarded for good roleplaying if it fits in the game mechanics and scenario parameters. Not only is there the GM variable, but many mods either don't accomodate diplomacy, or in rare circumstances, only allow diplomacy to solve a problem. I don't know if this can ever be fixed in a living campaign.
honeynuggets 01-03-07, 08:13 PM	There's an easier solution, which doesn't mean you have to change the rules for everyone... Ask your GM to pull out all the stops. Tell him to eek out every advantage he can, no matter how hard he thinks you're doing. And tell him to not stop doing so until the session is over (either 'cause everyone is dead, or 'cause all the monsters are). There's a lot of room in the rules for (very) smart tactics on the GMs part, and I can usually eek out a TPK out of most encounters to begin with. I can usually (almost always, but some scenarios are harder) keep the players at the edge of their seat for suspense. If YOU think it's not hard enough, tell your GM to start playing smarter and give you a better challenge. Bas Vermeulen I believe this to be partly correct. A good DM knows how to make a situation more challenging without making it unrealistic. Telling a DM to pull out all the stops is asking for trouble because many will interpret that to mean they can ambush your party with a pack of amazingly stealthy ogres. Your party will get within 30 ft of these ogres then you will roll Spot to act during the surprise round! Either way in one move action they will be on top of you. Ideally, writers would be forced to maximize the tactical advantages in all encounters, especially the ones with INTelligent foes. Like this... I just picked a LG adventure at random...I'm looking at an encounter that pits a CR4 Ghast against an APL4 party. The adventure just says this ghast is prowling the village for victims and that if the party investigates something or other, they will encounter him. It also says that the Ghast will flee back to it's shop(where it worked when living) if Turned. 99% of the time a DM will read this and just place the ghast and the party 30-60ft apart on the open road and the party will probably mow it down. The ghast has INT 13 though. So it's smart enough to not engage a powerful looking group without some advantages. Looking at the stat block, I suggest this tactic... The Ghast is prowling so it is Hiding + Move Silently. At 120ft both groups make a Spot check to Notice each other modified by distance. Odds are only the Ghast will notice the party. The Ghast looks for a corner the group will pass by, Climbs +9 onto a first story roof and Hides again with Cover bonus. When the group passes underneath they make their Stence saves and the Ghast drops down on the last party member for a surprise round. Jump +9 to negate falling damage. With the rest of the group around the corner, it can choose between continuing if things are going very well, attacking then fleeing or a double move flee back to it's shop. The PCs pursue eventually. It's shop should have narrow isles and dark rafters above where the ghast could be hiding, but doesn't. Instead, it heads into a small door in the floor with steps leading down into a cellar. Since it has darkvision, you can infer that it loves the dark and has some way of ensuring that it is difficult to keep mundane light sources like fire lit. Maybe it broke the pipes to water container on the roof so that water drips through the floor boards like rain, then, while heading up against the roof of the cellar, it dumps a bucket of water on the torch holder then drops down for another attack. etc.
budleiser 01-03-07, 08:56 PM	I believe this to be partly correct. A good DM knows how to make a situation more challenging without making it unrealistic. Telling a DM to pull out all the stops is asking for trouble because many will interpret that to mean they can ambush your party with a pack of amazingly stealthy ogres. Your party will get within 30 ft of these ogres then you will roll Spot to act during the surprise round! Either way in one move action they will be on top of you. Ideally, writers would be forced to maximize the tactical advantages in all encounters, especially the ones with INTelligent foes. Like this... I just picked a LG adventure at random...I'm looking at an encounter that pits a CR4 Ghast against an APL4 party. The adventure just says this ghast is prowling the village for victims and that if the party investigates something or other, they will encounter him. It also says that the Ghast will flee back to it's shop(where it worked when living) if Turned. 99% of the time a DM will read this and just place the ghast and the party 30-60ft apart on the open road and the party will probably mow it down. The ghast has INT 13 though. So it's smart enough to not engage a powerful looking group without some advantages. Looking at the stat block, I suggest this tactic... The Ghast is prowling so it is Hiding + Move Silently. At 120ft both groups make a Spot check to Notice each other modified by distance. Odds are only the Ghast will notice the party. The Ghast looks for a corner the group will pass by, Climbs +9 onto a first story roof and Hides again with Cover bonus. When the group passes underneath they make their Stence saves and the Ghast drops down on the last party member for a surprise round. Jump +9 to negate falling damage. With the rest of the group around the corner, it can choose between continuing if things are going very well, attacking then fleeing or a double move flee back to it's shop. The PCs pursue eventually. It's shop should have narrow isles and dark rafters above where the ghast could be hiding, but doesn't. Instead, it heads into a small door in the floor with steps leading down into a cellar. Since it has darkvision, you can infer that it loves the dark and has some way of ensuring that it is difficult to keep mundane light sources like fire lit. Maybe it broke the pipes to water container on the roof so that water drips through the floor boards like rain, then, while heading up against the roof of the cellar, it dumps a bucket of water on the torch holder then drops down for another attack. etc. Will you write us some POU mods please?
Mattastrophic 01-03-07, 09:10 PM	Problem with this is that it doesn't solve the "Mods are too easy" problem at all. And I've encountered some very bad, very playerkilling, very antagonistic DMs who would go so far as to blatantly insult my tactics and my characters, and I refuse to play under these guys again. No way I'm baiting any of these beasts by asking for the stops to be pulled out. I'd rather choose to play my L12 at APL 16 instead. -Matt There's an easier solution, which doesn't mean you have to change the rules for everyone... Ask your GM to pull out all the stops.
Samwise 01-03-07, 09:36 PM	The ghast has INT 13 though. So it's smart enough to not engage a powerful looking group without some advantages. Looking at the stat block, I suggest this tactic... The Ghast is prowling so it is Hiding + Move Silently. At 120ft In a village? That's the other side of the village, but OK. both groups make a Spot check to Notice each other modified by distance. Odds are only the Ghast will notice the party. The Ghast looks for a corner the group will pass by, Climbs +9 onto a first story roof and Hides again with Cover bonus. When the group passes underneath they make their Stence saves and the Ghast drops down on the last party member for a surprise round. Sorry, no. Ghast stench affects people at 10 feet. The first person to get within 10 feet of the ghast will have to make a save, triggering the encounter. Jump +9 to negate falling damage. With the rest of the group around the corner, See above. The rest of the party will be right behind the person just affected by the stench. Assuming the ghast jumped down next to the PC he attacked, assuming nobody insisted on playing a Feign Surprise card, and assuming nobody made the DC 14 + die roll to spot the ghast from 20 feet away before the stench affected anyone, we now go to initiative. it can choose between continuing if things are going very well, attacking then fleeing or a double move flee back to it's shop. With a +3 initiative modifier the ghast might actually win initiative. If it doesn't, it get swarmed by the group and cut to pieces. If not, it can double move all it want, but unless there is a very "conveniently" placed corner for it to constantly duck around, the archer is going to start lighting it up big time. That is assuming the barbarian doesn't just run it down, or the spiked chain guy with combat reflexes didn't kill it when it jumped down and tried running away at the start of the encounter. The PCs pursue eventually. Barring some really bad luck on the part of the PCs, the ghast won't make it off the street. What exactly makes that encounter tougher than the ghast rushing the PCs on a surprise round then getting brutally slaughtered anyway?
rockondon 01-03-07, 10:24 PM	I would have put the ghast 15ft up so that the first PC doesn't smell him, then have him jump on whoever is in the middle, probably getting the entire party in the stench. Or for extra fun you could make the ghast 200lbs and 30ft up, then jump the one in the middle and have that PC and the ghast each take 3d6 dmg. Odds are pretty good that someone in the party would still make their spot check though.
TallGuy 01-04-07, 09:51 AM	Problem with this is that it doesn't solve the "Mods are too easy" problem at all. And I've encountered some very bad, very playerkilling, very antagonistic DMs who would go so far as to blatantly insult my tactics and my characters, and I refuse to play under these guys again. No way I'm baiting any of these beasts by asking for the stops to be pulled out. I'd rather choose to play my L12 at APL 16 instead. Sure it does. It just means you have to know who to ask (or perhaps use slightly different wording). Personally, if a party is having the run of the scenario, I'll play my NPCs or monsters just a bit smarter. Don't provoke that AoO when you don't have to, choose the spell that will probably affect that fighter type or rogue, and play smart. If a group is having problems, I'll probably ease up on the tactics a bit, or at least just enough to keep 'em on the edge of their seat instead of their characters dead on the floor. Your GM can too. Bas Vermeulen
honeynuggets 01-04-07, 11:11 AM	Sorry, no. Ghast stench affects people at 10 feet. The first person to get within 10 feet of the ghast will have to make a save, triggering the encounter. It's true that the first person would probably halt when they smelled the stench, but unless someone Spots the Ghast hiding with cover, I don't think initiative is rolled. It would be the same as if the first person triggered a gas trap. No init. Thought the rest of the party would try to go around the stench and maybe provide the ghast with an opportunity. The rest of the party will be right behind the person just affected by the stench. Assuming the ghast jumped down next to the PC he attacked, assuming nobody insisted on playing a Feign Surprise card, and assuming nobody made the DC 14 + die roll to spot the ghast from 20 feet away before the stench affected anyone, we now go to initiative. Again, pretty sure that being affected by the Stench does not constitute an attack. Imagine if the Ghast were unaware of the party due to line of sight being blocked and one of them walked into the Stench radius. Both parties would be unaware of each other though the PC would realize she had just entered an area with an awful smell. The PC would not know how far ahead the smell continued for either. The Stench simply does not require any action by the Ghast. In my example, the Ghast drops down on the last party member to pass by. It waits at a corner the party wants to pass in order to get to their destination. If the party goes the long way around, the Ghast will cut them off at another corner or path between houses if possible.
honeynuggets 01-04-07, 11:13 AM	I would have put the ghast 15ft up so that the first PC doesn't smell him, then have him jump on whoever is in the middle, probably getting the entire party in the stench. Or for extra fun you could make the ghast 200lbs and 30ft up, then jump the one in the middle and have that PC and the ghast each take 3d6 dmg. Odds are pretty good that someone in the party would still make their spot check though. This guy has the creativity to make a great DM. Power Slam Ghast tonight on WWF!
kenobi65 01-04-07, 11:28 AM	Again, pretty sure that being affected by the Stench does not constitute an attack. Note that the ghast's stench ability is listed as a "special attack" in its entry in the Monster Manual. So, I think you can expect some argument on that regard.
honeynuggets 01-04-07, 12:14 PM	Note that the ghast's stench ability is listed as a "special attack" in its entry in the Monster Manual. So, I think you can expect some argument on that regard. Some DMs would rule that it was an attack. Which is why it is important for adventure writers to give very detailed "Tactics" info for encounters so all DMs apply consistent challenge. I think an adventure writer could specifically state that combat does not begin until a PC hears or sees the ghast without the situation being deemed unfair.
Samwise 01-04-07, 01:54 PM	In my example, the Ghast drops down on the last party member to pass by. It waits at a corner the party wants to pass in order to get to their destination. If the party goes the long way around, the Ghast will cut them off at another corner or path between houses if possible. Leaving aside the question of it being an attack or not, why would you expect the party to blithely ignore having to make a Fort save and just keep walking around? The fact is, the party is now aware that something is up, and will take measures to counter it. Eventually, someone is going to make that spot check, and your whole encounter devolves into a time wasting exercise in rolling dice. Writing extensive text for tactics would just waste space in the adventure.
honeynuggets 01-04-07, 03:11 PM	Leaving aside the question of it being an attack or not, why would you expect the party to blithely ignore having to make a Fort save and just keep walking around? The fact is, the party is now aware that something is up, and will take measures to counter it. Eventually, someone is going to make that spot check, and your whole encounter devolves into a time wasting exercise in rolling dice. Writing extensive text for tactics would just waste space in the adventure. I don't know why you choose to present an argument without providing specific examples. If you think the party would do something besides make one round of Spot checks then change route, let me know what (and try not to metagame). Since the sickness lasts an average of 7 minutes, the ghast's objective is to try and get as many of the party Sickened without being detected before the first Sickened person gets better and then make a quick ambush and retreat back to it's shop lair. So it's not like the party is going to wander around wasting time as you imply. Alternatively, the ghast could simply jump on top of the last person in the group from a hiding spot on a roof and then try to finish them off or retreat back to it's shop lair where it has more advantages like narrow spaces and darkness. Either way, there are lots of fair ways to make encounters challenging without bumping up the CR or letting non-stealth oriented creatures get close to a party before being noticed. The trick is for the writer to include the tactics in the adventure so that the experience reamins more constant among players.
codyknotts 01-04-07, 04:23 PM	While the writer was being creative, the obvious is that the moment the players either all have to fail a spot check (unlikely) or then all fail the fort save (the fighters make it) and hence we enter combat and the Ghast dies quickly at that APL. Creativity will only go so far and of course lest anyone forget that the stink the Ghast creates means that if there is ONE animal companion then encounter again does not work (Scent and all) The problem was a weaker than anticipated monster for APL and without altering the encounter it was poor writing. Nothing makes an encounter more boring than a non-challenge monster or ecounter. Too much of that happens. BTW if Roleplay is to matter than writers need to make non-combat parts of modules matter. Most fighter types sleep till they have something to do. BTW (2) Remember this is like movies, we didn't watch the charcters in Lord of the Rings have their morning constitutional or cook (except for one scene that lead to a fight) It just doesn't matter much.
Alpha_Nerd 01-04-07, 04:38 PM	My take on the whole "Mods are too Easy" to "stop optimizing" is that years 2-4 were so deadly in the BK people had to start optimizing to make it past level 6, and now writers are trying to make it easier so non-munchkin'd characters can survive put people with their level 10 character that had to be optimized to get to 10 cakewalk them. It's a lot faster to change from deadly to normal mods then it is to get a character retired.
LachlarlanIII 01-04-07, 04:42 PM	Leaving aside the question of it being an attack or not, why would you expect the party to blithely ignore having to make a Fort save and just keep walking around? The fact is, the party is now aware that something is up, and will take measures to counter it. Eventually, someone is going to make that spot check, and your whole encounter devolves into a time wasting exercise in rolling dice. Writing extensive text for tactics would just waste space in the adventure. I believe the PHB/DMG states Saves and Spot/Listen checks are supposed to be rolled by the DM because of these particular situations. In your above case, the DM should secretly roll Fort saves for everyone affected. Then, he should give a short description "The air around this area is particularly putrid. <name of pc(s) affected by stench>, you feel very sick to your stomach." This tells the PCs that something is strange about the area, but doesn't immediately tell them there is a Ghast in the area. In many cases when the DM says "make a spot check" some players will immediately enter metagame mode and begin having their PCs act as if something's fishy. Good roleplayers won't, but not every player is a good roleplayer.
LGMoses 01-04-07, 04:44 PM	I believe the PHB/DMG states Saves and Spot/Listen checks are supposed to be rolled by the DM because of these particular situations. For example: As a PC you aren't supposed to know you've just been infected with Filth Fever. That's what Heal checks are for. In many cases when the DM says "make a spot check" some players will immediately enter metagame mode and begin having their PCs act as if something's fishy. Good roleplayers won't, but not every player is a good roleplayer. I normally would agree with what you say but it doesn't stick to this case. The fort save in question is from a ghast. The ghast's undead smell is so strong it makes people ill. So you'd notice that.
trollbill 01-04-07, 04:46 PM	I normally would agree with what you say but it doesn't stick to this case. The fort save in question is from a ghast. The ghast's undead smell is so strong it makes people ill. So you'd notice that. Yes, but would it be noticable over the normal smell of gamer funk?
LachlarlanIII 01-04-07, 04:54 PM	Yes, but would it be noticable over the normal smell of gamer funk? It would, but would it be noticable over that of a plague-corpse pile. Perhaps the town where the example Ghast has set up shop is victim to a virulent plague. Around just about every corner are piles of corpses. If the Ghast assailed the PCs while in the vicinity of one of the piles, the PCs wouldn't know if the smell was from the rotting dead or from the Ghast.
trollbill 01-04-07, 04:59 PM	It would, but would it be noticable over that of a plague-corpse pile. Perhaps the town where the example Ghast has set up shop is victim to a virulent plague. Around just about every corner are piles of corpses. If the Ghast assailed the PCs while in the vicinity of one of the piles, the PCs wouldn't know if the smell was from the rotting dead or from the Ghast. Well, one mod I played recently solved this problem by making the Ghasts, Lacedon Ghasts. The PCs couldn't smell them until they stood up in the waist-deep water of the pounding surf of the shallow reef the PCs had to cross to get to a shipwreck.
honeynuggets 01-04-07, 05:42 PM	I believe the PHB/DMG states Saves and Spot/Listen checks are supposed to be rolled by the DM because of these particular situations. In your above case, the DM should secretly roll Fort saves for everyone affected. Then, he should give a short description "The air around this area is particularly putrid. <name of pc(s) affected by stench>, you feel very sick to your stomach." This tells the PCs that something is strange about the area, but doesn't immediately tell them there is a Ghast in the area. In many cases when the DM says "make a spot check" some players will immediately enter metagame mode and begin having their PCs act as if something's fishy. Good roleplayers won't, but not every player is a good roleplayer. I collect some basic data from players at the start, including their spot and listen modifiers. I roll out in the open and do spot and listen for them so they don't know what I am rolling. In the example I gave with the ghast hiding on roofs or ledges where the players are going to pass by...he's going to lie flat and gain improved cover, +10 Hide, plus his natural +9 Hide so it's not given at all that the PCs will spot him.
kegdrainer 01-04-07, 06:42 PM	One thing might be to check with the players before the mod starts to see what they have ran up against. Limit it to Dragons, Elementals and Undead (maybe throw in Giants). That should keep them guessing as to what they are up against and if there is a player that has encountered them, you can throw in 'Your nose picks up a smell that you remember" or "Your heart gets a sinking as you see a XXX coming right at you". If they have not seen it before, then they should not be using player knowledge. Now for real fun, take a look at Cityscape. If the ghast is in the Tannery section of town, they will have a harder time of noticing the smell with all of the others.
clannagh 01-04-07, 07:15 PM	If they have not seen it before, then they should not be using player knowledge. Within limits .. for example I would give an int 24 character with 5 or more ranks in knowledge nature basic knowledge of common standard animal types from the PHB without rolling. To say "sorry you may have an Einstein intellect and extensive studies in nature but you do not recognise a badger unless you saw one before" is just silly.
kegdrainer 01-04-07, 08:02 PM	Within limits .. for example I would give an int 24 character with 5 or more ranks in knowledge nature basic knowledge of common standard animal types from the PHB without rolling. To say "sorry you may have an Einstein intellect and extensive studies in nature but you do not recognise a badger unless you saw one before" is just silly. Yes, I agree, if you have the skill to back it up. However, when a player says "use X against them", if their character has never ran into them before and does not have the skill, that is player knowledge.
rockondon 01-04-07, 08:08 PM	I've often wondered about "player-knowledge" vs "character-knowledge" If a player has never encountered a ghast before, its not unlikely that he has shared a beer with another bragging adventurer that did. And even if you never met anyone that has fought one, if you go into the line of work of 'adventurer' one would think you would do at least some research on some of the monsters you might find out there. If a GM did allow player knowledge into the game - it would promote metagaming. BUT, the GM could also use it against them. If the PCs see the shadowy reflection of some orc with a headress with imitation snakes your metagamers would likely start fighting blind - making the encounter much more difficult than it has to be. There are many ways a GM could fool PCs into mistaking one monster for another. Maybe that ghast was a ghoul with a moldy steak in its pocket spewing out an aroma of maggotty goodness and the fort save is for nausea not sickness. ;)
Samwise 01-05-07, 01:45 AM	I don't know why you choose to present an argument without providing specific examples. If you think the party would do something besides make one round of Spot checks then change route, let me know what (and try not to metagame). I wanted to demonstrate to you how easy it is to "beat" an encounter when you are not playing an adventure. 20/20 hindights on tactics and design is easy. Writing it is the hard part. Since the sickness lasts an average of 7 minutes, the ghast's objective is to try and get as many of the party Sickened without being detected before the first Sickened person gets better and then make a quick ambush and retreat back to it's shop lair. So it's not like the party is going to wander around wasting time as you imply. Except no party is going to just blithely wander around as the members get sickened. Further, being sickened isn't being incapicitated. It is a minor penalty that will barely slow a group down. Either way, there are lots of fair ways to make encounters challenging without bumping up the CR or letting non-stealth oriented creatures get close to a party before being noticed. Yes there are. Except here you are relying on the party to act in a set manner, and not make any Spot checks. What happens when they do? You are right back to the encounter happening at 120'. Or the ghast wins initiative, flees, is pursued to the store, is cornered (something that is remarkaby easy in a store), and cut down, with no hit and run tactics possible. The trick is for the writer to include the tactics in the adventure so that the experience reamins more constant among players. Except no two parties are the same, so any set of tactics will rarely be universally applicable.
clannagh 01-05-07, 02:13 AM	Except no two parties are the same, so any set of tactics will rarely be universally applicable. My GM observation is that mods with over strict tactics that limit GM freedom tend to result in both walkovers and near TPK's often at the same gamesday with different parties. This is often because the mod makes assumptions about party composition.
Samwise 01-05-07, 01:40 PM	My GM observation is that mods with over strict tactics that limit GM freedom tend to result in both walkovers and near TPK's often at the same gamesday with different parties. This is often because the mod makes assumptions about party composition. That too. More than a round or two of tactics are usually a waste anyway unless there's an overpowering reason to expect the bad guy to last that long. Just keep it simple, and let the DM do his job.
rockondon 01-06-07, 02:17 PM	I've spent the last few days writing a module. For the biggest encounter, I was thinking of writing in something like: "If the party seems particularly strong, monster X will employ tactics such as a, b, c, and d. Otherwise, he attacks normally" That way the GM has some flexibility on how to challenge various parties. another idea I had was "If the PCs defeat encounter 2 in three rounds or less, bad guy X brings out the big guns and sends 5 monsters after them the next day. If the PCs defeat encounter 2 takes more than three rounds, bad guy X figures 3 of those monsters should be enough to send at the party. An even more radical idea I had would be something like: "If you think the party can handle it, bad guy X also has an elemental gem and uses it the first round..." If they are willing to take the higher risk, they get more access to stuff (the gem was just an arbitrary example) I like the idea of providing better flexibility to GMs, but I'm not sure I like the idea of rewarding optimizing players with better access and chance for monster exp.
Puggle Halfwine 01-06-07, 08:22 PM	If a GM did allow player knowledge into the game - it would promote metagaming. BUT, the GM could also use it against them. I actually used this in a now retired Perrenland module. At low APLs (2-8), the PCs encountered a creature which was described to them as a large, bulbous creature with a dozen eyestalks protruding from it, a huge, gaping maw and a single central eye just above the mouth. The module gave knowledge checks to identify the beholder and all, but strangely the creature was emitting a loud buzzing noise. As the monster was struck, the PCs got a will save- it was just an illusion.... but the illusion was covering a giant wasp in a bag, which subsequently attacked the PCs instead (at higher APLs it was more than one wasp). If captured alive, the final bad guy (a crazed gnome illusionist) would rant and rave about how he had heard stories of the ferocious "bee-holder" and was infuriated that his powerful minion didn't work... When that module ran, the reactions from the players were generally something akin to: "... are you SURE this is APL 4?!" followed by, "... I hate you..."
budleiser 01-06-07, 08:46 PM	stories of the ferocious "bee-holder" Oh thats awful. Puns really hurt, especially this one.
_m_ 01-07-07, 11:30 PM	budleiser, i have a far worse problem. one of my characters is imune to death. for some reason, despite multiple times of being on -9, or being trapped alone, or falling from the sky, or being smoted by a god... the little guy just refuses to ever be dead. it promotes a feeling of invulnerability, and the idea that all mods are too easy because he never dies. even once when he WANTED to die, he was the only party member to survive a save. and for the reference, that trap killed 4 out of 6 party members, and critically injured 1 of the others... so not all traps are 'cake'.
clannagh 01-07-07, 11:51 PM	budleiser, i have a far worse problem. one of my characters is imune to death. for some reason, despite multiple times of being on -9, or being trapped alone, or falling from the sky, or being smoted by a god... the little guy just refuses to ever be dead. it promotes a feeling of invulnerability, and the idea that all mods are too easy because he never dies. even once when he WANTED to die, he was the only party member to survive a save. and for the reference, that trap killed 4 out of 6 party members, and critically injured 1 of the others... so not all traps are 'cake'. well could have been worse ... not all prismatic spray effects are lethal .. remember the higher level party got autoresetting wail of the banshee :)
_m_ 01-07-07, 11:56 PM	well could have been worse ... not all prismatic spray effects are lethal .. remember the higher level party got autoresetting wail of the banshee :) true, 1 guy copped 4 wails at the same time, 4 times in a row. though 1 got turned 2 stone, 1 hit another plane, 1 died from static damage, 1 nearly died from static damage, 1 got removed some other way, i forget how... and alvin passed with a nat 20... and julian is invulnerable. kind of funny watching a 2 inch high dragon survive a trap that kills 4 lvl 10's :D
chesspiece 01-09-07, 10:50 AM	another idea I had was "If the PCs defeat encounter 2 in three rounds or less, bad guy X brings out the big guns and sends 5 monsters after them the next day. If the PCs defeat encounter 2 takes more than three rounds, bad guy X figures 3 of those monsters should be enough to send at the party. An even more radical idea I had would be something like: "If you think the party can handle it, bad guy X also has an elemental gem and uses it the first round..." If they are willing to take the higher risk, they get more access to stuff (the gem was just an arbitrary example) I like the idea of providing better flexibility to GMs, but I'm not sure I like the idea of rewarding optimizing players with better access and chance for monster exp. Spoiler-free: The Circle did that in the Red Hand of Doom Adaptation. I don't expect this would work in most LG modules since this is the sort of bump you'd expect between APL tiers. It affects the EL (+2) & XP (+60) of the one encounter. "[enemy]: As per designers' notes (page __), you may consider making [enemy] a ________ instead of a _______, if the party is particularly tough and capable." No MadLibs please. :)
budleiser 01-09-07, 11:48 AM	"Crocodile Dundee: As per designers' notes (page 666), you may consider making Crocodile Dundee a Khumat instead of an Aussie Level 4, if the party is particularly tough and capable."
Madfox11 01-09-07, 12:09 PM	Spoiler-free: The Circle did that in the Red Hand of Doom Adaptation. I don't expect this would work in most LG modules since this is the sort of bump you'd expect between APL tiers. It affects the EL (+2) & XP (+60) of the one encounter. Credit were credit is due, but the adventure does so and the Circle merely incooperated it. Note though that due to balance reasons, you could do this in an adventure, it would not increase the xp earned. I would also make very sure the author had some very specific set of circumstances under which the new conditions would apply. I trust most of the DMs to adjucate "a hard" fight fairly, but there are a few people that would always opt to select the more difficult version even though there was no reason what so ever. You know, people who accidently use the higher APL version (even now that they are in totally different appendixes) or who suddenly roll very high. The last nearly killed my character, simply because the DM never even realized that while the fight was very challenging for the group we never *****ed or panicked about it even though it was one die roll away from a TPK (I still wonder how he missed that 3 PCs where disabled in the first 2 rounds, and the 4th was at 10% of his total hp and only the 5th was never threatened).
budleiser 01-10-07, 04:54 PM	I wish some of these regional mods could be made available out of region. It would cost extra TU's but then we could see what these killer mods everyone is talking about and see if region X really has it harder than region Y or if its just a "flag" waving contest.
solbergb 01-10-07, 05:03 PM	If a regional mod isn't run by a regional judge, you're not getting the regional flavor right. The regional system is good that way. I've also noticed when traveling that it's also very good to have a majority of "locals" at the table, but that's often harder to do when attending "catchup" conventions near the retirement age of modules, where all the locals have already played, unless you stick to low APL's and play with the newer local players.
clannagh 01-10-07, 05:20 PM	i agree .. i have played out of region fiesta slots and often the entire party is standing around looking confused until the Gm looks stuff up and says "oh .. i see in .. BK/iuz/urnst/inset-region they have an ongoing thing where .... " the way to do it is travel that way you get the regional fluff the way its meant to be run as for the original poster .. maybe its true you are just a leet player and are too good for LG :)
budleiser 01-10-07, 06:58 PM	as for the original poster .. maybe its true you are just a leet player and are too good for LG :) Bah. Sadly all the tales of my immense grandeur are false. Accusations of roll-playing a toon are but a scape goat for the weak minded.
_m_ 01-10-07, 07:12 PM	Bah. Sadly all the tales of my immense grandeur are false. Accusations of roll-playing a toon are but a scape goat for the weak minded. well you need to work harder then! tales of ALVINS deeds are all understated and insufficient. whats the point in rocking if no1 knows about it? *grin*
Mystical_Tutor 01-11-07, 01:39 PM	I for one feel there is not nearly enough PC death. If DM's are pulling punches they need to stop. In a world where death is not always permament I expect people to die more often. IMHO equating PC death with challenge is quite crass. Using PC death as some kind of twisted yardstick to gage the quality of an adventure, to me, completely misses the original point of D&D. For one that uses that for their satisfaction counter, I suggest they focus their time on MMORPGs like EQ, WOW and to a lesser degree D&D Online. They can die there to their hearts content. The one thing that puts D&D home games and to a slightly lesser degree LG, ranks above MMORPGs is the banding of a party together to use their strengths in harmony to face and overcome a challenge. Designing modules to accomplish this, to me, to be a fantastic accomplishment and I am held in awe at some of them I have played. The most challenging ones not only risked my life but made me think and try to gain insight to the story or situation. As someone alluded to above, success verses failure can be much more rewarding than living verses dying. I certainly support your right to your opinion but I really think it is misguided and based on false premises
Mystical_Tutor 01-11-07, 01:45 PM	I for one feel there is not nearly enough PC death. If DM's are pulling punches they need to stop. In a world where death is not always permament I expect people to die more often. IMHO equating PC death with challenge is quite crass. Using PC death as some kind of twisted yardstick to gage the quality of an adventure, to me, completely misses the original point of D&D. For one that uses that for their satisfaction counter, I suggest they focus their time on MMORPGs like EQ, WOW and to a lesser degree D&D Online. They can die there to their hearts content. The one thing that puts D&D home games and to a slightly lesser degree LG, ranks above MMORPGs is the banding of a party together to use their strengths in harmony to face and overcome a challenge. Designing modules to accomplish this, to me, is a fantastic accomplishment and I am held in awe at some of them I have played. The most challenging ones not only risked my life but made me think and try to gain insight to the story or situation. As someone alluded to above, success verses failure can be much more rewarding than living verses dying. I certainly support your right to your opinion but I really think it is misguided and based on false premises Gary Adkison
_m_ 01-11-07, 05:10 PM	the thing i don't get, bud, is why you thiink it's hard for a dm to kill a party. in any mod, any dm could kill any number of players without any trouble. i mean CMON... its a DM!!! its basically god. why would you want dm's thinking they win by killing players? dont get me wrong, i much prefer touch-n-go near death hard games... but i dont want the dm thinking she has to try and beat us.
viceregal 01-11-07, 08:56 PM	I find most mods have *something* in them that make them challenging - whether is it trying to figure out what the h*ll is going on in the investigative mod through to "Player-that hits a touch ac of 47 (reaching for the damage dice) ...DM - that's a miss etc". Cores, metaregionals, regionals, specials, interactives etc all have their different flavours and (usually) levels of challenge. If you have say a party of 5 level 11 chars and get to choose to play at 10 or 12 ... regionals (assuming the party is known and you work fine etc) most likely up, meta-regionals down, cores depends on the blurb, specials definitively down and interactives who cares you won't be with that same group for very long anyway and you get the same xp either way! Many if not most modules I have played tend to blend in with eachother but others still stand out (for both good and bad reasons) in my mind. An encounter where the other four PC's get confused (and end up in two sets of one on one combat) and I get to take on the BBEG by myself and manage to get past/through a critted harm, a finger of death, two dispel magics, a critted inflict critical wounds (other stuff two but those were the highlights) all from an invis high AC opponent and the feeling of utter relief when over (and the *not* relaxed during part!) - nearly dying twice just from the hps (helm of glorious recovery and multiple false lifes (one using the last breath (or whatever the card is called that lets you do a standard action as you go down) and the whole table rooting for you to make that save vs the save or die spell that if you fail is likely to mean a tpk etc ...... *that* encounter will stay with me for a long time! LG mods are fine - they *have* to be generic enough for all levels and the triads/circle etc get to check them out and (hopefully) fix anything too obnoxious (thinking broken if legal CRs etc). If you make a PC that tromps over everything and if you wanted to you could solo the mod then you have already won your 'game' and now get to play it out. Someone mentioned earlier that you had to focus on your own responsibility for your game .... if you are bored with the roll play see what you can do to create a role with it that will give you interest. If you cant then save that char for specials etc and make yourself a new one (your re-roll) that gives you the level of satisfaction re danger that you like! Warren
budleiser 01-11-07, 11:28 PM	An encounter where the other four PC's get confused (and end up in two sets of one on one combat) and I get to take on the BBEG by myself and manage to get past/through a critted harm, a finger of death, two dispel magics, a critted inflict critical wounds (other stuff two but those were the highlights) all from an invis high AC opponent and the feeling of utter relief when over (and the *not* relaxed during part!) - nearly dying twice just from the hps (helm of glorious recovery and multiple false lifes (one using the last breath (or whatever the card is called that lets you do a standard action as you go down) and the whole table rooting for you to make that save vs the save or die spell that if you fail is likely to mean a tpk etc ...... *that* encounter will stay with me for a long time! See where are these encounters? Everyone comes here to argue. And yet here it is, the encounter you remember. The one that stands out in your mind. And look, look how much fun that is. That's all im asking for is a chance to have encounters like this. What region was this in?
clannagh 01-11-07, 11:38 PM	See where are these encounters? Everyone comes here to argue. And yet here it is, the encounter you remember. The one that stands out in your mind. And look, look how much fun that is. That's all im asking for is a chance to have encounters like this. What region was this in? you missed the key phrase " An encounter where the other four PC's get confused " it wasnt the mod that was hard it was the party/DM combo made it hard
Mystical_Tutor 01-12-07, 02:14 PM	but i dont want the dm thinking she has to try and beat us. I really hear that. How many times have I seen the DM/GM step out of that role and step into the role of an opponent. No longer a guide to a challenging experience but now an antagonist that seeks to complicate everything the players try and do, and make fools out of them by insuring that it is clear he/she knows more about their characters then they do sigh.
LGMoses 01-12-07, 04:24 PM	I really hear that. How many times have I seen the DM/GM step out of that role and step into the role of an opponent. No longer a guide to a challenging experience but now an antagonist that seeks to complicate everything the players try and do, and make fools out of them by insuring that it is clear he/she knows more about their characters then they do sigh. yes... I have seen this before.... :(
DarkKnight 01-13-07, 12:08 AM	Man. So many posts that complain about how hard certain monsters are. That some mods are hard. If your not power built the mods can be to tough. What on earth are people complaining about? I pray for these "hard mods". The only thing worse than playing a mod for 4 hours and not feeling challenged at all is playing an investigation mod. I for one feel there is not nearly enough PC death. If DM's are pulling punches they need to stop. In a world where death is not always permament I expect people to die more often. And while I'm on a rant, we need more traps. Make them useful, have the trap go off and the bad guys rush in. What good is a trap if you can just stand around and heal after it. Theres no point in avoiding it, disarming it, or safely triggering the trap if you can just tank it and heal up. We need to see some good no save stat nerfing traps. If it has spikes give it poison with high DC. Might I suggest that you play in other regions. Perhaps you can try the Shield Lands or Iuz Metaregional mods. Death and traps all over the place.
jhorred 01-15-07, 12:58 PM	yes... I have seen this before.... :( I've seen it before and I no longer play in that home game...
_metz_ 01-16-07, 08:30 PM	Man its easy to kill players, its not so easy to keep em alive lol plus its not about death and destruction etc, its about roleplay, seriously, go play Warhammer 40,000 or World of Warcraft or soemthing if you want that... ROLEPLAY GAME PEOPLE
_m_ 01-16-07, 08:52 PM	Man its easy to kill players, its not so easy to keep em alive lol plus its not about death and destruction etc, its about roleplay, seriously, go play Warhammer 40,000 or World of Warcraft or soemthing if you want that... ROLEPLAY GAME PEOPLE *hug*
RLWilde 01-16-07, 09:54 PM	We need to see some good no save stat nerfing traps. If it has spikes give it poison with high DC. Too easy, and too easily remedied. How about... DC 20 + 3*APL save, for 1 level drain per character class the character has? Make it an AoE effect so it gets everybody. Cannot be disarmed, bypassed, dispelled, or otherwise avoided in any way. NOW we're talking tough...
Japangirl 01-16-07, 10:23 PM	Or we could not auto-kill PCs, how about that? It's a game, let's keep it fun. Autodeath is not fun.
_m_ 01-16-07, 10:55 PM	Or we could not auto-kill PCs, how about that? It's a game, let's keep it fun. Autodeath is not fun. i really luv u sumtimes. so perfectly worded. i was just about to say that exact phrase. no really, i was.
Japangirl 01-16-07, 11:21 PM	i really luv u sumtimes. so perfectly worded. i was just about to say that exact phrase. no really, i was. Suuuure you were. I believe you . . . *rolls Sense Motive* . . . drat, I might actually believe you! Umm, yeah, let me get back to you on that!
_m_ 01-16-07, 11:52 PM	Suuuure you were. I believe you . . . *rolls Sense Motive* . . . drat, I might actually believe you! Umm, yeah, let me get back to you on that! *waits patiently* *avoids pc death (hey, i'm on topic, dont shoot me) * *revels in good bluff skill* ...
rockondon 01-17-07, 02:41 AM	if all mods were increased then people would be forced to optimize. so then characters would look pretty much the same. I like the idea of some mods being more challenging than others and including warnings in the blurb.
Divine Dwarf 01-17-07, 06:35 PM	first off. whatever. I've cake-walked mods playing up in the past, and I've had bad tables suffer at the correct apl even with decent class variety. The biggest baddest 1/2 orc, spiked chain Devoted Defenders with 36 strengths and combat reflexes declaring each other as their devoted charge, are still weak against a fiendish Huge air elemental with too high SR for the party sorceress. I think, the sentiment you're hitting on was truer in the past, but now monsters are getting 75% hp and libris mortis has changed the RSoP cheese from absolute to occasional (vs. undead). I have judged for 5 years and been a 'kind judge' to all. I never killed anyone in that time. In the last 2 weeks, I've killed 2 pcs, who didn't die from stupidity. The dice fell. things have changed. People play LG for a number of reasons: 1) some people aren't socially capable of getting invited to a home game, so they must rely on LG for a overcoming a collective action problem. 2) some people think it's a never-ending RPG opportunity. 3) some people (perhaps Budleiser) think they're really good at building ideal/optimized PCs who can't fail and the beauty/challenge of LG is doing so, building the indestructible PC. 4) some people want to be 1/2 elf bards. (why, I can't possibly know). Other people spend 3-4 rounds buffing and think their characters are great because they always survive every mod, but the rest of the party is pulling the load for them, since they don't get around to dealing damage until the fight is over. while you may have honestly felt LG has been a cakewalk thus far, I can only speculate that you play with a decent group of powergamers, with a friendly judge and don't play UP every mod for more gold and XP. If this isn't the case, my apologies, but that will get harder if your judge runs monsters correctly. either way, it just comes off as arrogant and condescending to mere mortals who build characters that die. maybe an irrecoverable character death will change your perspective? some people role-play things totally unlike themselves. other people role-play what they wish they were. some people don't role-play at all, but simply want to be the toughest most survivable cool guy. these tend to be immature younger gamers who fail to understand teamwork or control their egoes. they then post that mods are too easy and other people don't know how to make good characters, without understanding that not everyone min-maxes, and when they don't, it's not because they're stupid but because they made other choices for their own reasons. (although there certainly are some people who make horrible characters who contribute nothing to a party). /shrug
Divine Dwarf 01-17-07, 06:43 PM	"For example the Slienced Tanglefoot Bag in a reasonably well-prepared party is enough to shut down (or at least seriously inconvenience) an opposing spellcaster of much higher level." Our local rules lawyer said that this does NOT work as once the tanglefoot bag is thrown it is destroyed and no longer emits silence. I'm not sure I agree with this, but if the PCs are using suck gimmicks, and getting away with it and cake-walking mods, while playing up, the judge can rule it doesn't work. Most mods have ambushes and surprise rounds, so that optimized Marshal with Motivate dex party doesn't go first, PERIOD. yes, yes, you'll say FEIGN SURPRISE. well don't worry, that one will go away too. especially since WoTC reprinted it and sent out old rewards cards. for 3 years I never had FEIGN SURPRISE< now I have 3 in the last mailing. LOL. this thread should be deleted.
Lord Yod 01-17-07, 08:33 PM	Most mods have ambushes and surprise rounds, so that optimized Marshal with Motivate dex party doesn't go first, PERIOD. I've heard horror stories about auto-surprise ambushes, but by the rules they can't exist. I've seen PC's with better than +30 spot checks, which means most of the time they can start an encounter from over 100 feet away. If I was playing a PC like that, and the judge didn't allow a spot or listen check, I'd have to appeal it. And the marshal's aura is up all the time. Though of course that WOULD make mods more deadly. :) this thread should be deleted. Why? Budleiser has a valid complaint, one that I mostly agree with. In the last 6 months or so I've only played 3 mods that really challenged the party I was in. (And that's including a core special with a 4 person party at APL)
Istaran 01-17-07, 08:43 PM	I find the character deaths obnoxious as it can easily represent the loss of months of effort, in many cases forcing me to start over. Sure, character death is not always permanent, but I've seen it be permanent more than 50% of the time. When it's not permanent, it is still a huge set back. A random thought that many people may disagree with: it'd be cool if most mods had some way of permanently setting back your character to a small degree, which you needed to avoid. Some mods have such things. My caster of many things has a permanent -2 on charisma based skills with certain groups. Another char had a permanent -2 HP for doing something stupid. If every mod had a reasonable chance of doing permanent badness to your char without killing them, it would probably help keep people on their toes and give some of that challenge factor you wanted. Especially if it was designed so that it's hard not to accumulate little minuses here and there. You would tend to walk away at the end with gold, exp, and access going up, while the scars of your adventures whittle away at you. Just a thought.
Lord Yod 01-17-07, 08:59 PM	A random thought that many people may disagree with: it'd be cool if most mods had some way of permanently setting back your character to a small degree, which you needed to avoid. Some mods have such things. My caster of many things has a permanent -2 on charisma based skills with certain groups. Another char had a permanent -2 HP for doing something stupid. If every mod had a reasonable chance of doing permanent badness to your char without killing them, it would probably help keep people on their toes and give some of that challenge factor you wanted. Especially if it was designed so that it's hard not to accumulate little minuses here and there. You would tend to walk away at the end with gold, exp, and access going up, while the scars of your adventures whittle away at you. Just a thought. This is a great idea! One of my buddies has a PC afflicted with something like that(mod's still available so no more detail), and he became a LOT more fun to play after it happened. Before it was 'I'm a fighter with a greatsword, ho-hum', now it's 'I'm an afflicted fighter with a greatsword, and I still rock!'
Hariman 01-18-07, 12:53 AM	I find the character deaths obnoxious as it can easily represent the loss of months of effort, in many cases forcing me to start over. Sure, character death is not always permanent, but I've seen it be permanent more than 50% of the time. When it's not permanent, it is still a huge set back. A random thought that many people may disagree with: it'd be cool if most mods had some way of permanently setting back your character to a small degree, which you needed to avoid. Some mods have such things. My caster of many things has a permanent -2 on charisma based skills with certain groups. Another char had a permanent -2 HP for doing something stupid. If every mod had a reasonable chance of doing permanent badness to your char without killing them, it would probably help keep people on their toes and give some of that challenge factor you wanted. Especially if it was designed so that it's hard not to accumulate little minuses here and there. You would tend to walk away at the end with gold, exp, and access going up, while the scars of your adventures whittle away at you. Just a thought. Ooh, the -2 HP mistake. I've got a sorcerer who really feels that mistake. As for a direct response to your post, Istaran. Having a potential -2 to something, or penalty with so and so in every mod would eventually ruin unlucky characters. Also, newer players would likely be scared off when another player mentions the myriad of penalties from a couple of failed mods. Now don't get me wrong. I've got a character with a favor that gives penaties like that, but it also grants free standard upkeep in a certain town. Other penalties/curses I've seen aren't in every mod, but they are common enough that I don't want to see many more of them. Plus, many of the ones that I have seen are pretty rough. A select few are very harsh, under certain circumstances. As a general reply, I see death pretty frequently here in Keoland. There's been at least one or two deaths a month where I game. But very few are permanent. I'm betting that the players who find LG too easy are either preparing their characters for slugfests, or planning ahead for harsh encounters. Or both. Of course, you probably just had better luck than I did. Herman PS: If you want something really TOUGH to play, something that harkens back to oldschool "bring a backup for your backup" D&D, try Dave Arneson's Blackmoor. It is a 32 point buy campaign that is much more difficult than LG. I found Blackmoor to be too tough for me. (My character died TWICE in my first adventure.) But thrill seekers who like a challenge beyond the levels of LG will probably love the gritty, rough word of DAB. And it's Core Only. So you're really in for a challenge.
LGMoses 01-18-07, 01:20 AM	I"m with Hariman, cumulative -2's and what not are a relaly really really bad idea. I don't have enough really's for how bad of an idea. It is just a really bad idea and should be dismissed far more quickly than I could write this post. I think death/dismemberment is plenty of threat for my characters in the mod. I don't need little nickle-and-dime penalties clogging the works. If you want to see how your character is different, just look at his AR's and think about all of the stuff he's done. Noone else is exactly like him. You've got different items than everyone else, everyone!
clannagh 01-18-07, 01:26 AM	I"m with Hariman, cumulative -2's and what not are a relaly really really bad idea. I don't have enough really's for how bad of an idea. It is just a really bad idea and should be dismissed far more quickly than I could write this post. I think death/dismemberment is plenty of threat for my characters in the mod. I don't need little nickle-and-dime penalties clogging the works. If you want to see how your character is different, just look at his AR's and think about all of the stuff he's done. Noone else is exactly like him. You've got different items than everyone else, everyone! Especially if the justification is that eventually some chance will come to remove the accumulated set of cursed items penalties disfavors notices and the like. You can guarantee you will either play the mod in question with a different character or just maybe be forced to move regions before the "fixit" mod becomes generally available :) It's annoying to have to virtually retire an otherwise viable character with good access because a string of bad disfavors have accumulated.
budleiser 01-22-07, 10:01 AM	I find the character deaths obnoxious as it can easily represent the loss of months of effort, in many cases forcing me to start over. Sure, character death is not always permanent, but I've seen it be permanent more than 50% of the time. When it's not permanent, it is still a huge set back. A random thought that many people may disagree with: it'd be cool if most mods had some way of permanently setting back your character to a small degree, which you needed to avoid. Some mods have such things. My caster of many things has a permanent -2 on charisma based skills with certain groups. Another char had a permanent -2 HP for doing something stupid. If every mod had a reasonable chance of doing permanent badness to your char without killing them, it would probably help keep people on their toes and give some of that challenge factor you wanted. Especially if it was designed so that it's hard not to accumulate little minuses here and there. You would tend to walk away at the end with gold, exp, and access going up, while the scars of your adventures whittle away at you. Just a thought. Lol. I also have a permanent -2 to hp. :) Well just to let everyone know I died yesterday. I got raised. And I don't really mind that im set back a level. It would have been better if I went from 9 back to 8 instead of 8 to 7. Since now I can't get full gold at APL10. And yet I still stand by my statement, mods are to easy. Let me explain HOW I died. So were standing in the corridor to the big baddie, I took command of his Huge Skeleton Ettin, who thanks to a level drain trap now has 50+ bonus HP's. ;) We let the Ettin beat down the door, until it whittles it down until we see adamantine. So I move up and roll 20 on unlock the judge says "as you open" "No I did not open the door" "Huh?" "I unlocked it. Ettin open the door and attack enemies." So the Ettin opens the door and the wizard's ready goes off. 20ft Burst Evard's Black Tendrils. I've heard how nasty these things are. And boy are they. It has a +15 to grapple vs my +9 escape artist. It also grapples the Ettin. (Who also has a +15) And catches every *important* member of the party. So most of us get stuck for a long time. One person manages to break free and tries to do stuff. The Ettin gets free and tries to go after the wizard but can't because Flying+Invisible. Eventually I make my way out of it and mount my Bat. A couple of turns later the judge realizes he forgot to roll damage for the tendrils (none of us have faced it before so we didn't know it dealt damage)... and proceeds to roll all 4-5 rounds worth of grapple checks and damage for those who were stuck in it before..... Putting me at 3 HP. 1 or 2 rounds later the wizard magic missiles me into -12.
trollbill 01-22-07, 11:31 AM	Well, Bud, you do need to consider a few factors. 1) For reasons of obvious practicality, challenges in LG are written with the average player in mind. 2) You are using a power build. While it isn't an uber-munched power build, it is still a power build, making the character above average in power level. 3) You are ranked as one of the top 50 D&D Miniatures players in the entire world. This means your tactical combat abilities are far above that of the average player, DM and even module writer. Bearing the above in mind, it should be no surprise to you that you have an easier time than the average player. I have similar problems. We should not expect LG to raise its standards just to make the two of us happy. It’s the majority they should always be concerned about. Instead, if we are disappointed with the level of challenge, we should be looking for individual ways of raising that challenge level rather than broad reaching ones. Lol. I also have a permanent -2 to hp. :) Got that beat. I'm missing my left hand and it refuses to grow back even with a Regenerate. Well, I suppose that's one way of making things more challenging for me.
smerwin29 01-22-07, 11:45 AM	Well just to let everyone know I died yesterday. I got raised. And I don't really mind that im set back a level. It would have been better if I went from 9 back to 8 instead of 8 to 7. Since now I can't get full gold at APL10. And yet I still stand by my statement, mods are to easy. Let me explain HOW I died. [snip] A couple of turns later the judge realizes he forgot to roll damage for the tendrils (none of us have faced it before so we didn't know it dealt damage)... and proceeds to roll all 4-5 rounds worth of grapple checks and damage for those who were stuck in it before..... Putting me at 3 HP. 1 or 2 rounds later the wizard magic missiles me into -12. I think people have mentioned it in the past in this thread, but this makes the point better than anyone ever could. Mods are usually much easier when the DM runs the encounters incorrectly. I know the mod you are talking about, and I played it with what I would consider a table of PCs of average power. We were all out of the spell in the first round, and by the end of round 3 had everything dead (again). When people say that the challenge level has as much to do with how the DM runs the adventure as the adventure itself, this is what they are talking about. And this is not to put down the DM: everyone makes mistakes. But a DM who makes every effort to challenge the PCs can make the adventure much, much more difficult than one who runs it differently or misses rules. Shawn
CrystalBlue 01-22-07, 11:49 AM	First, I'll give you some advice. And then I'll rant to you...cause I so love to rant to people after my precious character died. There should have been no damage rolled. The judge's JOB is to know what something does. And even if he knows, he pulls out the book that the spell is in (or the appendix in the mod). If he didn't do that, then screw his BBEG's damage. Cause I've almost always seen judges disallow PC's doing that. "Oh, I forgot to add in my fire damage. Let me roll that..." "You can roll it, but I'm not counting it. You don't remember to roll your correct damage, that's your problem, not mine." And on the fact of PC deaths, I've been lucky up till now with my characters. However, I will never EVER think that death is just a so-so set back. There are a lot of problems associated with it. The first is money. It sucks up money like nobody's bussiness. And I'm not saying it shouldn't. But if you want more PC deaths, no one would have any money. Everyone would horde it all in case they accidentaly died. The second part of being dead is that you go back a level. And that's REALLY bad if you're just about to level. That's almost a full level back, and then halfway down the next. That could be a half a year's worth of time and effort you spent on it. And the last problem is...you don't know if you're gonna get raised. Will your body be recoverable? Will you be able to find someone that can raise you in time? Remember, you can only stay dead for a number of days equal to the caster level of the person raising you. Maybe you won't find someone in time. Maybe you were dissintegrated. Death should only happen for two reasons. 1.) When the PC is being very, very dumb 2.) The mod or story calls for it. In my case, the mod called for it. I picked a fight and lost. I knew ahead of time that I would lose. But it was story driven and I accepted it. But that doesn't mean I wasn't disapointed and depressed. You can call me whatever names you wish, and you can berate me all you like budleiser...but it was so unfair that I don't want to play that character anymore. No, I'm not a poor sport or a sore loser. The whole encounter before my death was unfair. Our party was outnumbered. We had a 6, 4, 2, and 1 at APL 4. That wasn't much we could do. And I took one for the team and shouldn't have. Death in D&D should NEVER happen. Ever. And if you think that, then go write auto-kill mods designed for level one characters...seeing as how you think it's so much damn fun.
Mystical_Tutor 01-22-07, 11:50 AM	Well just to let everyone know I died yesterday. I got raised. And I don't really mind that im set back a level. That's the attitude I like. I play the game to enjoy challenges and intellectual exercise. My character gets dropped a level--it just gives me more time to play before the rocking chair captures him/her. I don't play or seek to play optimized PCs. I want to take one that has some specific challenge and see just how much I can do with it. I haven't done the half-orc paladin yet but I intend to as well as a Wiz with armor. When my son bought TSR that is one of the visions he had after playing D&D from the beginning was to open up the gates of imagination and let people be what they wanted to be. The fact that all character death is not permanent is a snivel concession as far as I am concerned (though I completely support it in home games where a dynamic of the game is that it is important for the *Players* to stay together). On the other hand, and to the comment about permanent (as permanent as anything can be in LG) nicks in character stats/abilities. I think that is a very interesting concept and worthy of more investigation and implementation by the movers and shakers in the D&D community. I would not like it in many cases but it certainly could up the challenge factor for my PC.. LOL! Bottom line for me. Create a challenge for yourself, then enjoy it.
kenobi65 01-22-07, 11:55 AM	When my son bought TSR... Hey, wait a minute... ::looks at sig line:: Interesting...
smerwin29 01-22-07, 12:21 PM	Death in D&D should NEVER happen. Ever. A while back, one of the RPGA HQ people quoted one of the people at WotC R&D as saying something to the effect that a D&D character is expected to die once every n levels, by the design of the game. I don't remember the exact number that n equals, but it was something like 4. It might have been 3 or 5, but it was something in that area. It is part of the game. You don't have to like it, but it is. Shawn
CrystalBlue 01-22-07, 02:19 PM	That just...makes very little sense. I guess I can understand that characters die, but I'll never do it to a PC unless it's unavoidable. I guess the way I said it was too harsh and narrow. I'll clarify: Death should never happen to a PC if they've played their best and there is a way, DM intervention or otherwise, to save the PC. But seriously...designing a game so the PC's should be expected to die? How fair is that, really?
Britt 01-22-07, 02:26 PM	But seriously...designing a game so the PC's should be expected to die? How fair is that, really? In a system where death is not permanent and really only costs you some XP and GP, quite fair. Even more so when you are expected to have a certain level of GP at a certain level of XP. If the game is designed around the assumption that you will die, that will impact the GP:XP curve plans. If characters then don't die, their personal GP:XP curves are different than the assumption of the game design. In that case, you WANT and NEED PCs to die sometimes. Sure, you should do so completely within the rules and accomplish this death rate by using the appropriate challenges relative to character strength; but, deaths should be happening occasionally.
smerwin29 01-22-07, 02:43 PM	It's not a question of fair or unfair. It is a question of the assumptions of the game. D&D is different things to different people, but in the grand scheme it is a game that is both about tactical decisions (from its wargaming past) and about storytelling (from its obvious roots in the fantasy fiction that spawned it). From the wargaming perspective, it is a game with a winner and a loser. D&D did do something revolutionary in that it changed the way games were looked at, with the twist that it was an ongoing game where there didn't have to be a clear winner or loser. Indeed, many people avoided the game when it first came out (and still don't "get it" today) because their limited imaginations can't conceive a game where there isn't a way to win, in the traditional sense of that word. But the other parent of the game, fantasy fiction, even with its introduction of storytelling as one of the goals of the game, is ripe with death--even death of the "main heroes." You can't escape it, even if fantasy writing. I don't think "Tomb of Heroes" was written with the idea that death should never happen to a PC if they've played their best. Just the opposite. "You stick your head in the dark sphere? Nice knowin' ya!" But it is still considered a classic and a favorite from the man who was integral in creating the game. The problem is we have one extreme of people who consider PC death the only legitimate measure of a challenging game. If PCs aren't dropping like flies, it isn't challenging and mods should be harder, because to them there needs to be losers for there to be winners, and the losers are the ones who die, proving that because they haven't died their PCs are the winners. On the other extreme you have the people who treat a PC death like it is real death: something to be avoided at all cost, with 5 steps of dealing with it when it does happen, with a lot of emphasis on anger--even though there are elements within the game (raise dead spells and the like) to allow the PC death to be little more than a speed-bump on the road of heroics. I would say a majority of the players of the game, in the RPGA or out, understand that it is a game of both strategy and storytelling, that you win when you have a good time and share a good story (both in combat and out), and that PC death is just another chapter in another story. Shawn
Samwise 01-22-07, 02:55 PM	I think another problem with that default assumption is that D&D 3.5 was designed on that basis, but D&D 3.5 plus tons of add on books don't work that way. Just compare the threat differences between most MM critters to "enhanced" PCs to that of MM II and III critters to PHB only PCs and of "no-limits Limited" NPCs to "AR access only Limited" PCs. I think perceptions of the swings of power balance back and forth between these extremes, and how it very much affects game play is an element in how character deaths are perceived.
CrystalBlue 01-22-07, 03:33 PM	I think it should be noted that the Fantasy World = Raise Dead issue not be played up like it's the answer to the problem. Remember, we're talking about adventurers here. Most average joe's that die...just die. They don't get brought back all the time. So the preception of the characters should be the same. You all are swinging around the death card like it's another joy-ride. My characters do not think of death as just a little speed-bump. It's a very big catastrophy. When it happens, the character and player should both look back and ask what went wrong. Why did they die? Could it have been avoided? Is it worth it coming back to life? Read the views that Complete Divine has for the afterlife. Most people that die and go on to the afterlife really don't want to come back. And most of the time, it's a very mentally and emotionally stressful situation. After a few raise deads, a PC should be boardering on psychotic from all of the planar shifting he's doing. This is why my PC's aren't going to just get back up, brush themselves off, and continue on. They're going to change, and so should every raised PC. It leaves scars on you that don't come off.
Britt 01-22-07, 03:39 PM	CrystalBlue: This is one of the exact reasons death should be a part of the game. As Shawn highlighted, this game encompasses storytelling, and what you listed are all extremely powerful storytelling tools. For those that don't like the storytelling aspect, they brush themselves off and continue like nothing ever happened; and for them, the existence of death is necessary to enable the tactical sense of the game. For those that like the storytelling, death is a tool they can use. For those that like neither, well, what do they like? :)
smerwin29 01-22-07, 03:44 PM	I think it should be noted that the Fantasy World = Raise Dead issue not be played up like it's the answer to the problem. Remember, we're talking about adventurers here. Most average joe's that die...just die. They don't get brought back all the time. So the preception of the characters should be the same. You all are swinging around the death card like it's another joy-ride. My characters do not think of death as just a little speed-bump. It's a very big catastrophy. Agreed, as long as you can separate your character's reaction from your own. When my own primary PC died, I roleplayed what that death did to him very dramatically. But I am not him. When it happens, the character and player should both look back and ask what went wrong. Why did they die? Could it have been avoided? Is it worth it coming back to life? Agreed, as long as you can separate your character's reaction from your own. What went wrong? My PC strongly believes that he was spending too much time on learning to fight instead of devoting his life to his deity (took a level of fighter instead of staying a cleric). What went wrong? I rolled a 1 when trapped in a cloudkill. It happens. One is expected game mechanics; the other is telling a story based on those mechanics. Read the views that Complete Divine has for the afterlife. Most people that die and go on to the afterlife really don't want to come back. And most of the time, it's a very mentally and emotionally stressful situation. After a few raise deads, a PC should be boardering on psychotic from all of the planar shifting he's doing. This is why my PC's aren't going to just get back up, brush themselves off, and continue on. They're going to change, and so should every raised PC. It leaves scars on you that don't come off. Agreed, as long as you can separate your character's.... I think you get the idea. You can choose to roleplay the mental effects of the raise dead on your PCs any way you want--just as you can roleplay your PC any way you want. That doesn't change the fact that the game itself expects PC death. Shawn
CrystalBlue 01-22-07, 04:07 PM	So what you're saying is...no matter how hard I try and what precautions I take...that death is inevetable a certain amount of times during my life? That, every 4 levels, I should horde my gold and wait for the one time for me to die, and then try to get another 4 levels and then die. It just sounds so cold and calculated. Like...they don't expect us (or want us) to survive passed a certain point. And don't worry. My pompos wood elf just got a wake-up call...his mood will be dramatically changing now that he died.
Japangirl 01-22-07, 04:17 PM	It's expected to die, not required. I have a 14, a 6, and a 3 and of them, only the 3 has died yet. Admittedly, the 14 has only not died because of some really really nice DMs, but still . . . I seem to be beating the odds. I guess halflings really are lucky!
Britt 01-22-07, 04:19 PM	No, that's not at all what I'm saying. I played several characters in LG and in home games. I played a fighter up to 18th, a spymaster up to 13th, a grey elf monk to 6th, and several other characters up to around 3rd, all in LG and all without ever dying. I've rarely ever died in home games or other campaigns either. Some people's characters will die more often than others, whether due to quality of tactics, luck, or some other factor. What I am saying is that from a game design standpoint, there should be some average death:level ratio overall. This will suck a specific amount of gold out of the party coffers over time and keep the party gp:xp curves about right. If you have a higher or lower death:level ratio, you're going to have either more or less gold in the party than the DMG assumes for the particular level. This are all out-of-character design decisions that are important to balancing the game. Now, in a worldwide campaign like the RPGA runs, the issues are different. You don't always have the entire party chipping in to raise someone and you start getting different effects from particular death:level ratios. I'm sure there is some appropriate average target ratio to accomplish what the core system attempts, but I'm also pretty sure that it's going to be different than the ratio the core system advocates. I'm also positive that there will be different issues associated with death:level ratios in our campaigns than there would be in a home campaign.
CrystalBlue 01-22-07, 04:46 PM	Yeah...that's actually the money issue I was talking about. A party that adventures and pools their gold has a much better chance at affording a raise dead or even a rez for one character. But each character stand-alone doesn't have the GP gain to buy equipment, maintain their current equipment, AND pay for all the deaths they'll have in their 'lifetime'. And I do know that there are favors that lessen the amount of gold you have to pay for a particular raise dead, at around 5000 gp...if you're keeping your gear up to date, wouldn't be affordable by anything less then a 5th or 6th level. Not without having to sell your equipment to get it done.
Bob_the_Theurge 01-22-07, 04:47 PM	No, that's not at all what I'm saying. I played several characters in LG and in home games. I played a fighter up to 18th, a spymaster up to 13th, a grey elf monk to 6th, and several other characters up to around 3rd, all in LG and all without ever dying. I've rarely ever died in home games or other campaigns either. Some people's characters will die more often than others, whether due to quality of tactics, luck, or some other factor. What I am saying is that from a game design standpoint, there should be some average death:level ratio overall. This will suck a specific amount of gold out of the party coffers over time and keep the party gp:xp curves about right. If you have a higher or lower death:level ratio, you're going to have either more or less gold in the party than the DMG assumes for the particular level. This are all out-of-character design decisions that are important to balancing the game. Now, in a worldwide campaign like the RPGA runs, the issues are different. You don't always have the entire party chipping in to raise someone and you start getting different effects from particular death:level ratios. I'm sure there is some appropriate average target ratio to accomplish what the core system attempts, but I'm also pretty sure that it's going to be different than the ratio the core system advocates. I'm also positive that there will be different issues associated with death:level ratios in our campaigns than there would be in a home campaign. In LG, "Death" can be a rewarding experience. I'm 14th level in less than 90 AR's, because I never died and I've played up quite a bit. I've got a monetary net worth of probably 50,000 GP less than some friends of mine who are lower level, but have "died" a few times and come back with half-price or free Raise Dead favors. The only thing that keeps me close to their same power level is careful usage of Create Wondrous Item for the important stuff like stat bump items, and almost half my TU's went to that feat last year, and probably the same will happen this year. I've seen characters die many times. I lost one of my lower level characters last year to it, permanently, stranding me with two 10+ characters and one 1st-level character to work with right now, because my only other mid-level is tied up in Red Hand of Doom and is a Bright Sands character. Is there too much death? Our local triad have publicly stated that they want to see the higher-level characters in our region die more often. So the non-munchkinny PC's die, and the munchkinny PC's don't. Where's the fun in that? All it does is cause an arms race as everyone tries to munchin out their PC's even more to face the munchkin'ed enemies that are specifically designed to kill munckin'ed PC's and therefore will completely destroy a non-munchkinned PC without a second thought. I'd rather see characters that are characters, not an entire campaign full of Munchkins, and if they start designing the campaign to kill PC's, then all we will get is more munchkinning and the problems of elitism "well you're suboptimized because you didn't take X/Y/X side classes, what are you stupid" and so on will just get worse, not better.
pedr 01-22-07, 05:11 PM	On the money front, our local group has a presumption that, unless specified before the module begins, all players will contribute equally to the cost of raising dead, at least if the PC's third level or higher. Death's too expensive (particularly at between 3rd and about 8th? level) for one character to have to shoulder the entire burden. I heartily commend this to other groups which play regularly together!
CrystalBlue 01-22-07, 05:16 PM	I think Bob summed up one of my non-roleplaying reasons for hating more player deaths. Thank you. It's power inflation. If you raise the encounter level or base challange rating of the game to try and kill off or beat the powered players, you'll just get players that will abuse the system and make super-powered characters. Then, the DM's and authors will see this, think they need to increase the encounters some more. And then it's just a vicious spirel up to Uber-judge Vs. Uber-player. In LG, the main combat encounters usually run around 1-3 ECL higher then the APL of the group. That means that an average group or table of 4-6 people should run through 30-50% of their HP, consumables, and magic spells per encounter. The problem is that this is assuming an iconic build of characters. Fighter, rogue, wizard, cleric, and two others to fill in. Plus, it's not taking into account the watered down builds that don't get powerful till later, like Arcane Trickster, Mystic Theurge, and things like that.
clannagh 01-23-07, 01:01 AM	I think Bob summed up one of my non-roleplaying reasons for hating more player deaths. Thank you. It's power inflation. If you raise the encounter level or base challange rating of the game to try and kill off or beat the powered players, you'll just get players that will abuse the system and make super-powered characters. Then, the DM's and authors will see this, think they need to increase the encounters some more. And then it's just a vicious spirel up to Uber-judge Vs. Uber-player. In LG, the main combat encounters usually run around 1-3 ECL higher then the APL of the group. That means that an average group or table of 4-6 people should run through 30-50% of their HP, consumables, and magic spells per encounter. The problem is that this is assuming an iconic build of characters. Fighter, rogue, wizard, cleric, and two others to fill in. Plus, it's not taking into account the watered down builds that don't get powerful till later, like Arcane Trickster, Mystic Theurge, and things like that. You basically can get an arms race if your not careful. This sort of thing is discussed a lot in historical games like "flames of war" .. basically if the german players start taking Tigers the russian playes only take KV's and then the small Anti Tank guns do not work so the germans take 88's etc etc and you end up with a game that is historically crazy (way more big stuff than actually existed at the time on a given front) and unbalanced against armies without the "big stuff" In D&D the historical accuracy is not an issue but in the end the same result happens people power build characters and kill mods .. so teh mods get harder .. so people then complain about wanting access to restircted stuff to power build even more outrageous characters
clannagh 01-23-07, 01:08 AM	First, I'll give you some advice. And then I'll rant to you...cause I so love to rant to people after my precious character died. There should have been no damage rolled. The judge's JOB is to know what something does. And even if he knows, he pulls out the book that the spell is in (or the appendix in the mod). If he didn't do that, then screw his BBEG's damage. Cause I've almost always seen judges disallow PC's doing that. "Oh, I forgot to add in my fire damage. Let me roll that..." "You can roll it, but I'm not counting it. You don't remember to roll your correct damage, that's your problem, not mine." This happened to one of my level ones. It was only a level one with two games up but that was beside the point .. the Gm rolled damage for a dwarven waraxe critical and only rolled 2D10 for a total of 22 or so damage (the character was 14 HP so dropped to -8) instead of three dice. he looked suprised when i said he was on -8 and then said I forgot one dice and rolled again to kill him outright. Now .. as i said it was only a level one and was highly unlikely to stabilise in time to survive after dropping so far below zero ... but its the principle .. the GM forgot to roll a dice, why does he get to roll it later when we don't.
Britt 01-23-07, 01:46 AM	Now .. as i said it was only a level one and was highly unlikely to stabilise in time to survive after dropping so far below zero ... but its the principle .. the GM forgot to roll a dice, why does he get to roll it later when we don't. I'm not saying I would do this, at least not to a level one, but I can give you reasons why. For one, DMs have to track a lot more than PCs and it is inevitable that mistakes are made. It is unreasonable to force the same level of care PCs are expected to take tracking only their own actions to a DM that has to track multiple NPCs that they only run for that adventure, initiative, tactics for a group, what the PCs are doing, etc etc. Two, at that level, many DMs will allow a player to roll another die when they forget.
Britt 01-23-07, 01:47 AM	Power creep/arms races are within our power to control as authors and reviewers, and it is something we are very aware of. This happened quite a bit in years 3 and 4, but has been scaling back the past couple of years.
rockondon 01-23-07, 01:58 AM	easy fights are boring. I love it when the BBEG can potentially wipe out one of the PCs in one round. I love it when the 2nd or 3rd wave of baddies rolls their way in after a round or two of combat. I love the fear of death, the fear that makes adventuring fun. Every second friday I play local mods with dozens of other people, most of which don't know the rules very well and don't really care to - its always some regional or core mod they're playing so people can get away with not knowing how to move in combat or how their character works - its not like they're going to die because of it. Why trouble yourself by learning rules or contemplating tactics when such things aren't necessary to succeed? Just move your fig where you want and do what you want and if the GM says you can't then do something else. I don't fault people for thinking that way, so long as they're having fun that's great. But I want more. I like mods that force us to use tactics, punish people for making bad choices in character development, beat the crap out of our party, force us to use our resources, force us to use teamwork. I like to roleplay as much as the next guy, but deep down...I want a combat that can kick our ass. I wanna feel proud we beat that BBEG.
Mystical_Tutor 01-23-07, 02:25 AM	I am really having a hard time believing some of the things I am reading in this thread. Are there some of you that would actually enjoy the game if there was no possibility of PC death? Where would the challenge be? How would you ever be a hero? The picture I get when I think of it is a picture of holding hands while skipping down the path in ruby red slippers singing "off to see the wizard". I don't think there are enough riddles, traps, political plots or worlds to save that your interest could be maintained if you knew your little Bobo was never actually in danger. He would simply make his little trips through the dungeons, cities and wilds of where ever, meeting new and interesting people and killing them to return home safely at the end of his shift. Ok this assumption may be wrong for some people. And, for those of you that could enjoy the game that way, please stop reading this post and skip on to those that argue against PC death. However, if you agree that a game must have a challenge to be worthy of your attention, wouldn't you agree that for the possibility of death to be strong enough to be believable, there must occasionally be a PC death? Doesn't it also follow then that for this to become personal there needs to be times when you KNOW that little Bobo came THAT CLOSE to buying the farm? Without that belief, I propose that you would soon lose interest in the game. The beliefs mentioned above can not exist without PC deaths. Therefore, D&D/LG etc. can not exist without PC deaths. So, because PC death must be good for the game, why not yours?
gomeztoo 01-23-07, 03:53 AM	They're going to change, and so should every raised PC. It leaves scars on you that don't come off. I at least agree with htis statement. Death should impact a PC. I persoanlly hate my PCs dying, not so much for the level/gold loss, which, for a player, is an inconvenience, but because there is a bit of rationalizing as to why and how they then get raised, and how it impacts them. My first PC death in LG (Adonyee) caused her to change dramatically. She was resurrected, and the person that came back was different - mentally and physically different - from who had died. I don't do this every time (in fact, when Nesalia died she didn't even notice - but she's insane), but somehow making death a speed bump in levels is a cheapening of the death itself. I hardly ever see PCs mourn the death of other PCs. From a roleplaying view, death is a bit hard to incorporate in the game unless you really don't come back (which, in general, we'd rather not). Compare it to the effect in "Time's Tide": one PC needs to stay in the past to make the mission succeed. Logically, they won't ever come back. But ofcourse the scenario provides a means, and most players know this. While, when you think of it, such PCs should really be lost - otherwise, what is the sacrifice? Edit: I realize death is (and should be) part of the game. I would like to see some emotion roleplayed at times though. It is too often treated as a game mechanic 'in game'. And, of course, I would have liked it a lot more if my PCs' deaths had been heroic, instead of bad luck or a dumb team tactic... (though I guess Nesalia keeping herself the practice target for the Erinyess archer, rather than sick it on someone else, might have been heroic enough... at least it ment the rest of the team survived).
kenobi65 01-23-07, 11:40 AM	Compare it to the effect in "Time's Tide": one PC needs to stay in the past to make the mission succeed. Logically, they won't ever come back. But ofcourse the scenario provides a means, and most players know this. When we played that one, my paladin was insistent that he'd be the one to give up his place for the princess. Actually, my original idea was that I'd have one of the other PCs coup de grace me, then bring my dead body back (the magic only allowed 6 people through, it didn't say anything about a dead body) and have me raised. (Hey, it's how Arrias would think...) The DM was a little incredulous, and I think he gently steered me towards just staying behind ("but I don't *wanna* be a man-scorpion!").
Britt 01-23-07, 11:44 AM	I was playing my Rary sympathizer druid with a paladin that blindly followed whatever Karistyne said. I tried to stay behind on the condition that the paladin promise to give her over to Rary, but he wouldn't do that. Instead, he said he'd stay behind on the condition that everyone else (but me) promise to take her to Karistyne. As soon as we got back, I promptly convinced everyone else to ignore the paladin's "dying" wish and give the girl to Rary. I was so proud of my character :D
NiTessine 01-23-07, 12:34 PM	Huh. We never thought about the political dimension at all. When it sunk in that there was an excess individual, it was every man for himself. We rolled initiative, and everyone jumped in on his go. I grappled and dragged in the girl, while our ranger was left behind. The possibility that things would happen as they did with the ranger never entered our minds, and when, several months later, a dusty figure staggered out of a side alley in Hardby and punched out the paladin, we were all very surprised, both IC and OOC. We'd all figured he'd get hosed in some manner, like losing a year's TUs or all of his equipment, or something.
Samwise 01-23-07, 01:01 PM	Our table almost had a fight over who got to stay behind. The paladin PC refused to let anyone else sacrifice himself. The dilletante PC demanded a "Tale of Two Cities" moment. The monk said he was the least relevant of the party (he was 1st level playing up) and said he stay while the rest of the party escaped. We finally settled on a die roll. In contrast, another table had two deaths in the final encounter, and I was stunned for a moment as I realized that as written, they needed to kidnap a random bystander to escape.
Cardinal Teplin 01-23-07, 01:16 PM	I am really having a hard time believing some of the things I am reading in this thread. The beliefs mentioned above can not exist without PC deaths. Therefore, D&D/LG etc. can not exist without PC deaths. So, because PC death must be good for the game, why not yours? As am I. If you want more PC deaths, why not build weaker PCs? If it's fear of death and real challenge, then a weaker PC is both more more likely to die and much more of a challenge.
gomeztoo 01-23-07, 02:56 PM	The DM was a little incredulous, and I think he gently steered me towards just staying behind ("but I don't *wanna* be a man-scorpion!"). Heh, no coercion with my waste druidess, who got dreamy eyes just imagining seeing the Bright come into being. She loves the Bright Lands, and was very upset with Rary's apparent attempts to undo its beauty. Knowing she was powerless to stop an archmage, she planned to stay behind, so that at least during her life time, the desert wouldn't change (incidentally becoming the first Walker of the Waste). She had nothing to go back to, and apparently one player was dissapointed because my PC had the 'best story' - I later realized his PC had wanted to stay behind too. I felyt a bit stupid as I never fathomed other PCs might have wanted to do so - with the exception of the over-romantic-savinf-the-princes--if-it-costrs-me-my-life Valjan, but I has solved that by pushing the princess into his arms so he toppeled into the pool :) I originally planned to actually stay behind and (thus) retire her. However, the favors are quite cool and I do wish to finish the series. It makes me doubt on whether I should bring her back or not. I will let my final decision depend on the APL of the next Bright Lands table.
kenobi65 01-23-07, 03:01 PM	She had nothing to go back to, and apparently one player was dissapointed because my PC had the 'best story' - I later realized his PC had wanted to stay behind too. I felyt a bit stupid as I never fathomed other PCs might have wanted to do so - with the exception of the over-romantic-savinf-the-princes--if-it-costrs-me-my-life Valjan, but I has solved that by pushing the princess into his arms so he toppeled into the pool :) Chuckle...let's just say that there wasn't anyone else at my table who was too keen on the idea of staying behind, so I didn't have to fend off any other self-sacrificial types. Besides, I figured it was the paladin-esque thing to do. :)
cycloptic_squirrel 01-23-07, 03:11 PM	I was playing my Rary sympathizer druid with a paladin that blindly followed whatever Karistyne said. I tried to stay behind on the condition that the paladin promise to give her over to Rary, but he wouldn't do that. Instead, he said he'd stay behind on the condition that everyone else (but me) promise to take her to Karistyne. As soon as we got back, I promptly convinced everyone else to ignore the paladin's "dying" wish and give the girl to Rary. I was so proud of my character :D Moments like this are priceless. Oddly enough, I think the some of the mods I enjoyed most are the ones where my character was really ****** off, especially if it was through the actions of another PC. About Time's Tide in particular... we didn't realize that someone had to be left behind. We all thought the last guy lost his PC forever. I was very reveilved both in and out of character, as I was having massive guilt, both in and out of character. The table I DMed had the princess and last PC jump through together, both holding the flower. I rolled dice, turns out the last guy was left behind with the flower, and he had already sent his equipment through. Six months later, Lady Karistine was suprised on her balcony by the sudden appearance of a dirty, naked halfling pirate offering her a flower.
ithardin 01-23-07, 03:32 PM	I am a big fan of being challenged, and I know on several occasions I (and my PC) thought our entire party was hosed...only to have us pull our collective butts out of the fire. My main PC (7th level rogue) played an Iuz meta-regional at APL 12. I only agreed to do this when I saw that there was a 15th level sorcerer and a nice Dwarven fighter/cleric who let me stand behind him. The entire module I kept saying to myself "I am GOING to die, I AM going to die, I am going to DIE." I did get to -6 thanks to my deciding I could sneak attack a Vrock and get away with it...but I lived (thanks to my wonderful companions). It was one of the most enjoyable tables I have ever been at. However, the most enjoyable table I have ever been at involved no combat at all.
Cardinal Teplin 01-23-07, 06:24 PM	I often enjoy games that don't feature combat. They are very hard to write - or more specifically very hard to write well. When they work, they work well, but I'm not convinced that they're the best model to follow for LG.
viceregal 01-23-07, 06:41 PM	We ended up having a debate between two of us as to which of us would be left behind - ended up doing a dice roll and then finally the DM figured out that if both of us *wanted* to stay behind then that was ok so we both did! :D
Istaran 01-23-07, 07:00 PM	My favorite mods of all time are the local annual interactive "The Night Where Nothing Happens". If you die in one of those, I will be shocked and amazed, yet they are among the most difficult mods to actually succeed in. You need a good party mix, clever players and more than a bit of luck. They are also the only interactives I've played in that are worth taking twice as long and getting half xp/gp. As others have commented here, fear of death is not a prerequisite for challenge. More mods should work on making things palpably difficult to succeed at even when your own death is not immanent. It might also be nice to have a clearly labelled subset of mods that are brutally lethal to give the power gamers something to do. Maybe we could call them "Core Specials" or some such thing. That way those of us who want to play the game with suboptimal characters and not die so often can steer clear of them.
KarmaInferno 01-23-07, 07:01 PM	Not everyone likes ZOMG HARDCORE EXTREMO MODE all the time. I remember playing in an adventure in another campaign back in the day where we literally did not leave the tavern we started the game in. Was one of the best damn roleplaying experiences I'd ever had. Do I like the life-or-death adventures occasionally? Yes. It's fun sometimes. But character death rates should never, ever be a mark of what makes a game a success. Never. -karma roleplaying extremist
Sieylianna 01-23-07, 07:46 PM	Chuckle...let's just say that there wasn't anyone else at my table who was too keen on the idea of staying behind, so I didn't have to fend off any other self-sacrificial types. Besides, I figured it was the paladin-esque thing to do. :) I played it and ran it four times. Let's just say that two of the tables abandoned the princess and didn't have to worry about anyone staying behind. At one of the other tables, the centaur vounteered to stay, but had the party cut off one of his ears so they might be able to resurrect him in the future. Edl
Hariman 01-23-07, 08:33 PM	Huh. We never thought about the political dimension at all. When it sunk in that there was an excess individual, it was every man for himself. We rolled initiative, and everyone jumped in on his go. I grappled and dragged in the girl, while our ranger was left behind. The possibility that things would happen as they did with the ranger never entered our minds, and when, several months later, a dusty figure staggered out of a side alley in Hardby and punched out the paladin, we were all very surprised, both IC and OOC. We'd all figured he'd get hosed in some manner, like losing a year's TUs or all of his equipment, or something. Yeah, Time's Tide was fun. My party had a self sacrificing paladin. Who, ironically, was the only one to die (and get rezzed) during the adventure. I didn't really like the "3 encounters in 3 hours" setup though. I like mods that challenge PCs without taking the easy road of using multiple encounters to burn up spells/consumables. I like RP mods too, but an RP mod can be ruined by a bad RPer or a so-so DM. I'm not a fan of "WTF?!? They have THAT as our enemy at APL 4, AGAIN?!?!?!?" moments. (Death or fate worse than death resulted from that moment, but I can't talk about it. It's a year 6)
Japangirl 01-23-07, 10:34 PM	I'm not a fan of "WTF?!? They have THAT as our enemy at APL 4, AGAIN?!?!?!?" moments. (Death or fate worse than death resulted from that moment, but I can't talk about it. It's a year 6) I'm not terribly fond of certain things that keep showing up at APL 12 and 14 recently either :ahem: but hopefully they will stop showing up soon. It's one of those things "oh it looks like THAT? No need for knowledge rolls, we've already fought those advanced, non-advanced, two at a time, we know how to kill these!"
_m_ 01-23-07, 10:42 PM	No need for knowledge rolls, we've already fought those advanced, non-advanced, two at a time, we know how to kill these!" or alternatively... we know how it kills us.
Japangirl 01-23-07, 10:48 PM	or alternatively... we know how it kills us. Sigh. Yes. That too.
LGMoses 01-24-07, 12:13 AM	I'm not a fan of "WTF?!? They have THAT as our enemy at APL 4, AGAIN?!?!?!?" moments. (Death or fate worse than death resulted from that moment, but I can't talk about it. It's a year 6) I imagine trolls at apl 4 would = a bad time. Is that a similar thing?
Hariman 01-24-07, 01:23 AM	I imagine trolls at apl 4 would = a bad time. Is that a similar thing? Something bad enough that I'll be avoiding mods by that author. I really can't say anymore without risking spoilers. I think that LG is actually a little too tough. Mainly because too many mods have auto surprise encounters, enemies with the terrain advantage and consistently optimized weapon choices for the enemies. The fiendish template, spiked chains, and large crit range/multiplier weapons are used TOO often. You'd think that all of the NPCs were min/maxers who wanted nothing but crit damage and perfect optimization.
rockondon 01-24-07, 01:39 AM	judging from some of the posts I've read I get the impression that some regions have far tougher modules than others.
LGMoses 01-24-07, 01:44 AM	judging from some of the posts I've read I get the impression that some regions have far tougher modules than others. I bet thats true. I know our region has tougher mods than the norm. I try to run so my players are dead on apl if not slightly over when it comes to regionals. I got to run one more core mod then I can do some apl 2 regionals.
gomeztoo 01-24-07, 03:14 AM	We ended up having a debate between two of us as to which of us would be left behind - ended up doing a dice roll and then finally the DM figured out that if both of us *wanted* to stay behind then that was ok so we both did! :D We actually realized that possibility after the game was over. By then everyone except Voa was already back home. It might be interesting to note, btw, that when we arrived in the past Voa had already decided to not go back - *before* realizing someone had to stay behind... Anyway, I think death is something that should be able to happen, but if it happens this should be because of: - bad luck (DM rolls high, players roll low) - stupidity (refusing to use the proper weapon, hindering your team) - bad stategy/misjudgement (standing in the wrong spot at the wrong time) but imo it shoudln't be a given (as in : let's stuff the scenario with APl +5 encounters so we'll be certain PCs will die). In general (with some exceptions), given fair luck and reasonable tactics, PCs should survive (even if struggling). Death should be dicated by circumstance, not by design.
copper_wyrmling 01-24-07, 07:56 AM	Yeah, Time's Tide was fun. My party had a self sacrificing paladin. Who, ironically, was the only one to die (and get rezzed) during the adventure. Hee. We had a three-way fight over who got to stay behind. My low-level sorcerer wanted to stay because she loved the Bright Sands and was insatiably curious and wanted to see how they'd formed (draconic gnome, Wis 8, fluent in Flan, Endure Elements as a known spell). The centaur wanted to stay to protect his people and help them adapt to the new environment. The paladin wanted to stay because she felt she had a duty to protect the rest of us. I still can't believe that the paladin - the only one of the three who didn't speak Flan and had no protection against heat - somehow managed to win the argument. My sorcerer sent her off with an Endure Elements spell and a hastily scribbled page of common Flan phrases, and is still making offerings in her memory whenever she comes across a temple of Mayaheine... Regarding the topic of the thread: after a couple of years of GMing with no PC kills, I've killed three PCs in the last six months :weep: One was sheer player silliness (a L8 warmage playing up to APL 12 who stayed on the ground rather than taking advantage of a Mass Fly spell, so that she could cast a metamagicked spell, when facing two gargantuan behirs within charge range), and I didn't feel bad about that. The other two were both sheer bad luck - a x3 crit on a L4 fighter playing up to APL 6, and a spell where I rolled 53 damage on the first 10d6 :eek: I haven't actually killed any PCs due to broken / overpowered NPCs, at least not directly: players seem to be fairly good at neutralizing abilities that scare them.
garyjohnson 01-24-07, 03:47 PM	I am really having a hard time believing some of the things I am reading in this thread. Are there some of you that would actually enjoy the game if there was no possibility of PC death? Where would the challenge be? How would you ever be a hero? The same way characters can be heroes in, say, a supers game - the characters are faced with the risk of defeat, not death. In D&D, defeat in combat tends to be synonymous with character death: for example, the default type of damage with the great majority of attacks is lethal. In the HERO system (my preferred supers game system), the default type of damage is (in D&D terms) subdual - the villains knock you out, rob the bank, and leave. As a thought experiment, consider how the following story element would go using D&D versus using the HERO system: The heroes confront the villains, who use their superior teamwork to defeat the heroes in combat. The heroes recover, learn from their opponents, and use their new-found teamwork to defeat the villains in a rematch. In the supers scenario, the villains knocked out the heroes, then the heroes knocked out the villains in the rematch. All the heroes needed was some time to recover. In the D&D scenario, the villains killed the heroes, then the heroes killed the villains in the rematch. The heroes needed resurrection magic. As is usual in these matters, YMMV. Cheers, Gary Johnson
clannagh 01-24-07, 06:02 PM	We actually realized that possibility after the game was over. By then everyone except Voa was already back home. It might be interesting to note, btw, that when we arrived in the past Voa had already decided to not go back - *before* realizing someone had to stay behind... Anyway, I think death is something that should be able to happen, but if it happens this should be because of: - bad luck (DM rolls high, players roll low) - stupidity (refusing to use the proper weapon, hindering your team) - bad stategy/misjudgement (standing in the wrong spot at the wrong time) but imo it shoudln't be a given (as in : let's stuff the scenario with APl +5 encounters so we'll be certain PCs will die). In general (with some exceptions), given fair luck and reasonable tactics, PCs should survive (even if struggling). Death should be dicated by circumstance, not by design. Our party had multiple PC's wanting to stay but the GM ruled that by his reading of the mod only one could stay .. and further more rather than allowing the party to decide who stayed adjudicated the decision based on his perception of which character had the best "role play" reason to stay.
Herrbard 01-24-07, 08:01 PM	Our party had multiple PC's wanting to stay but the GM ruled that by his reading of the mod only one could stay The mod does state (and the NPC who told you about it should have told you) that the same number of people that went into the pool had to come back again. No more, no less.
clannagh 01-24-07, 08:06 PM	The mod does state (and the NPC who told you about it should have told you) that the same number of people that went into the pool had to come back again. No more, no less. ah .. I see So for more than one PC to stay you would need to find more NPC's willing to go forward .. which may not be possible. That makes more sense.
rockondon 01-24-07, 09:13 PM	I'm sure it wouldn't have been hard to find a local that was willing to become a time traveller ...especially considering the new visitors in town.
solbergb 01-24-07, 11:14 PM	Heh..times tide. I played the "Race card" to stay behind. I was asherati and my secret motive was I didn't want to go in the pool again for fear of drowning, but my claimed motive was that I had to stay behind to teach my people how to survive in their new forms...eg do NOT worshop anyone but Geshtai. You will become sand. Don't get wet. REALLY don't get immersed. I mean it about Geshtai. It isn't just because I'm her cleric To turn on the brightness, it's kind of like holding your breath in reverse. Sandswimming is easier than actual swimming. Just dive in and kick... etc...
solbergb 01-24-07, 11:16 PM	Heh..times tide. I played the "Race card" to stay behind. I was asherati and my secret motive was I didn't want to go in the pool again for fear of drowning, but my claimed motive was that I had to stay behind to teach my people how to survive in their new forms...eg do NOT worshop anyone but Geshtai. You will become sand. Don't get wet. REALLY don't get immersed. I mean it about Geshtai. It isn't just because I'm her cleric etc... I figured I was retiring the character when I argued for it. When I ran it it usually caused a big argument about who stayed behind. Usually the best guy at escaping from a city in chaos won the argument.
Hariman 01-24-07, 11:18 PM	The same way characters can be heroes in, say, a supers game - the characters are faced with the risk of defeat, not death. In D&D, defeat in combat tends to be synonymous with character death: for example, the default type of damage with the great majority of attacks is lethal. In the HERO system (my preferred supers game system), the default type of damage is (in D&D terms) subdual - the villains knock you out, rob the bank, and leave. But I've encountered some REALLY ham handed uses of nonlethal damage in mod writing. One incident had the party knocked out and then the enemies captured by the watch. I'd have rather had an easy encounter instead of the above APL "setup" encounter that did happen. The other time is a year six, so I can't really talk about it. Other times, in another mod, getting knocked out wasn't that bad. But in the other mod, you woke up in jail and had to fight your way out. It really depends on the writer.
Dr.Cornelius 01-25-07, 01:02 AM	Compare it to the effect in "Time's Tide": one PC needs to stay in the past to make the mission succeed. Logically, they won't ever come back. But of course the scenario provides a means, and most players know this. I had a different take on the mission - my understanding was that it was not necessary to remove the girl from her time line in order to succeed. And I just don't buy the people who say their character had a "roleplaying" reason for staying behind. They took a calculated risk that their character was highly unlikely to be permanently removed from the game and that the reward would outweigh the downside. I believe most players who chose to stay behind were hoping for interesting or powerful access or favors. So, in effect, the choice was a trap which punished such players. And rightly so.
clannagh 01-25-07, 01:14 AM	I had a different take on the mission - my understanding was that it was not necessary to remove the girl from her time line in order to succeed. And I just don't buy the people who say their character had a "roleplaying" reason for staying behind. They took a calculated risk that their character was highly unlikely to be permanently removed from the game and that the reward would outweigh the downside. I believe most players who chose to stay behind were hoping for interesting or powerful access or favors. So, in effect, the choice was a trap which punished such players. And rightly so. I wouldnt say every player. We have one player who refuses to play her characters in any way other than doing the "right thing" at all times. She voluntarily pays a lot of gp every AR for supporting a collection of "orphans" her character has acquired. In one mod she handed over the major plot item to the big bad evil guy because he threatened a child and she felt it was better to fail the mission than risking the child in combat.
Samwise 01-25-07, 01:39 AM	And I just don't buy the people who say their character had a "roleplaying" reason for staying behind. They took a calculated risk that their character was highly unlikely to be permanently removed from the game and that the reward would outweigh the downside. I believe most players who chose to stay behind were hoping for interesting or powerful access or favors. So, in effect, the choice was a trap which punished such players. And rightly so. You might not, but some players will make a purely role-playing choice to sacrifice themselves in an unrecoverable death just because it is heroic and that is their character concept. The people I played with made a decision based on their character concept, and because they play each adventure as part of a team, however randomly thrown together. The person who would up staying behind didn't lose his character and wound up with some random bonuses for taking one for the team. And rightly so.
Dr.Cornelius 01-25-07, 01:43 AM	The person who would up staying behind didn't lose his character and wound up with some random bonuses for taking one for the team. And rightly so.Are we talking about the same mod? In the one I am thinking about, the "reward" was losing 20 TUs.
Samwise 01-25-07, 02:00 AM	Are we talking about the same mod? In the one I am thinking about, the "reward" was losing 20 TUs. We are talking about one adventure here, Time's Tide on Bright Sands. And I suggest you read that AR again.
Stormydoom 01-25-07, 03:41 AM	I had a different take on the mission - my understanding was that it was not necessary to remove the girl from her time line in order to succeed. And I just don't buy the people who say their character had a "roleplaying" reason for staying behind. They took a calculated risk that their character was highly unlikely to be permanently removed from the game and that the reward would outweigh the downside. I believe most players who chose to stay behind were hoping for interesting or powerful access or favors. So, in effect, the choice was a trap which punished such players. And rightly so. The favour given by times tide was not a punishment. Being chosen was an alright favour, but no character at the table would get the favour of shemaya which gave a one time time stop if no-one stayed behind. Roleplaying wise: It was well worth the TU sacrafice for my Paladin and now he feels he's accomplished something for the greater good. Real Reason: I agree with you that it was kind of a trap for someone at the table to stay behind, and I ate the cheese, but the reward was a good one. I as a player knew either something really good was going to be given to my paladin or I would have to lose my paladin. So I decided on my player greediness. But who wouldn't take a chance for something that might be worthwhile? I've seen a TPK averted thanks to the timestop favour so the favours provided by a players sacrifice are nice one time boons that can save your characters life.
gomeztoo 01-25-07, 08:17 AM	So, in effect, the choice was a trap which punished such players. I don't think it punished players, even not with the TU penalty. It only sucks if you play the scenario in year 6 with not enough TU to, after the penalty, play the remaining year 6 parters. You get a way cool favor in return, and I agree that migth have been expected. But my choice was driven by a simple desire of my character to be part of the Bright Desert's past. I haven't decided if she comes back yet (to make a last desperate attempt to stop Rary form 'destroying' her wastes), or if she stays in the past (and become part of history). It is likely to depend on the APL of the next Bright Sands mod, because the other elligable PC to play in the series is level 10, and has a disfavor of Karistyne.
Madfox11 01-25-07, 08:32 AM	Considering I know several players sacrificed their PCs permanently in the core special Hanging Glacier, which resulted in a permanent removal of said character (and it was pretty clear from the context of the adventure) I know for a fact that players do make such decisions based on role-playing.
Munkwunk 01-25-07, 12:39 PM	And I just don't buy the people who say their character had a "roleplaying" reason for staying behind. They took a calculated risk that their character was highly unlikely to be permanently removed from the game and that the reward would outweigh the downside. I believe most players who chose to stay behind were hoping for interesting or powerful access or favors. So, in effect, the choice was a trap which punished such players. And rightly so. My wife plays a wizard of Zagyg who is, as her worship of said deity might suggest, a bit titched in the head. She is also a loremaster and craves "occult lore" as Zagyg does, so any opportunity she has to do something crazy with hopes to learn something from it, she does so. So when it came time for us to discuss who stayed behind, she made it clear that she really did want to do this because her wizard, with maxed out ranks and Skill Focus in Knowledge (history), desperately wanted to stay in the past to learn more. The paladin was arguing that he was the goody-two-shoes and should sacrifice himself nobley for the sake of the party, blah, blah. Everyone else was wanting to know whether or nto permanent character loss would result. To make a long story short, my wife's character stayed behind purely for roleplaying reasons. It did turn out to benefit her in part (a bonus to Knowledge (history) that only a few characters like hers could appreciate) but the 20 TUs meant no more gaming for that character for the rest of th eyear, which made her miss out on a few retiring story arcs which she had started with that same character. It did feel like that TU cost was a major punishment for doing something very much in character for her. Rewards or no, 20 TUs is a fate worse than death.
gomeztoo 01-25-07, 12:54 PM	Zagyg folllowers are not 'titched'. We are chosen (we are not always consulted about the choice, though).
Britt 01-25-07, 01:18 PM	So what did she do when she had to spend all that time with her deity not existing? That would have been interesting. She could have gone and found Xagig Yragerne and told him he was going to become a god!
gomeztoo 01-25-07, 01:23 PM	So what did she do when she had to spend all that time with her deity not existing? That would have been interesting. She could have gone and found Xagig Yragerne and told him he was going to become a god! Just because Zagyg doesn't exist yet doesn't mean he'll stop talking to you in your head... even if it aren't exactly spells he's granting. I wonder about that though: If this is the case, would not some clerics have lost their divine powers when they went back in the past? Or would another deity (i.e. Boccob) substitute?
Britt 01-25-07, 01:49 PM	I figured Boccob would have filled in.
Japangirl 01-25-07, 05:23 PM	If we are going to speak about AR favors that aren't good things, let's talk about . . . oh crap, it's a year 6 mod after all. Never mind, nothing to see here . . .
Hariman 01-25-07, 05:32 PM	If we are going to speak about AR favors that aren't good things, let's talk about . . . oh crap, it's a year 6 mod after all. Never mind, nothing to see here . . . I know which one you mean. I hate it too. And we can't even talk about it or we risk getting in deep trouble for spoiling an adventure.
LGMoses 01-25-07, 11:30 PM	I remember a certain mod that only charged you 52 TU"s if u killed a random commoner in a bar. A "clerical error" would have u released after a years time.
gbuchold 01-26-07, 05:37 PM	And I just don't buy the people who say their character had a "roleplaying" reason for staying behind. They took a calculated risk that their character was highly unlikely to be permanently removed from the game and that the reward would outweigh the downside. I believe most players who chose to stay behind were hoping for interesting or powerful access or favors. So, in effect, the choice was a trap which punished such players. And rightly so. To throw in my Time's Tide story, it was the sixth mod I'd ever played in LG. From what I'd been hearing, I assumed character death and retirement were extremely common (apparently, in my region, they are) and when my paladin decided to stay behind he figured - as did I - that his last few hours would be spent in agony and that would be the end of that. Imagine my surprise when the DM described to the party that waiting for them at the tower with Shemaya was an exceedingly dirty and hirsute paladin. So, to sum up, start buying it. Some people actually do roleplay in LG. Also, having a permanent set of bonuses in desert (and tundra) terrain has paid off more than once, so I don't know if I'd go so far as to call it a 'trap.'
kenobi65 01-26-07, 05:49 PM	So, to sum up, start buying it. Some people actually do roleplay in LG. Indeed. My paladin stayed behind because that's what a paladin of Heironeous would do; that's it. To have done anything else would have been contrary to the precepts of his faith, and the personality of the character. While I figured there would probably be some mechanism to somehow "rescue" my PC, I wasn't counting on it, and I certainly wasn't expecting anything positive out of it. If that would have been the end of Arrias, it would have been the way he'd want to go.
ragecage79 01-26-07, 05:58 PM	Indeed. My paladin stayed behind because that's what a paladin of Heironeous would do; that's it. To have done anything else would have been contrary to the precepts of his faith, and the personality of the character. That's funny! IIRC, when I played this one, the paladin of Heironeous was the first to jump back. (Guess he was a little unnerved by the prospect of his god not even being born yet.) My paladin of Bahamut stayed behind and took one for the team on the (almost) consensus that of the table of noble divine characters, mine had the god that was most likely around that long ago. Plus he has an 8 Int and an 11 Wis, so he's not the brightest knife in the shed... or is that sharpest bulb in the drawer? Something like that.
awroe 01-27-07, 04:38 PM	My Asherati Druid stayed behind in Time's Tide because he'd just seen the birth of his people, and because he figured he would be the best able to survive in the desert, what with being able to burrow under the sand and all. Imagine his surprise when he found that he had become adept at fighting desert creatures, dispite not intending to surface anywhere near them. He only assumes they must all have learned how to sand swim too to follow after him.
budleiser 01-29-07, 07:47 PM	rockondon easy fights are boring. I love it when the BBEG can potentially wipe out one of the PCs in one round. I love it when the 2nd or 3rd wave of baddies rolls their way in after a round or two of combat. I love the fear of death, the fear that makes adventuring fun. Every second friday I play local mods with dozens of other people, most of which don't know the rules very well and don't really care to - its always some regional or core mod they're playing so people can get away with not knowing how to move in combat or how their character works - its not like they're going to die because of it. Why trouble yourself by learning rules or contemplating tactics when such things aren't necessary to succeed? Just move your fig where you want and do what you want and if the GM says you can't then do something else. I don't fault people for thinking that way, so long as they're having fun that's great. But I want more. I like mods that force us to use tactics, punish people for making bad choices in character development, beat the crap out of our party, force us to use our resources, force us to use teamwork. I like to roleplay as much as the next guy, but deep down...I want a combat that can kick our ass. I wanna feel proud we beat that BBEG. ------------ Mystical Tutor I am really having a hard time believing some of the things I am reading in this thread. Are there some of you that would actually enjoy the game if there was no possibility of PC death? Where would the challenge be? How would you ever be a hero? The picture I get when I think of it is a picture of holding hands while skipping down the path in ruby red slippers singing "off to see the wizard". I don't think there are enough riddles, traps, political plots or worlds to save that your interest could be maintained if you knew your little Bobo was never actually in danger. He would simply make his little trips through the dungeons, cities and wilds of where ever, meeting new and interesting people and killing them to return home safely at the end of his shift. Ok this assumption may be wrong for some people. And, for those of you that could enjoy the game that way, please stop reading this post and skip on to those that argue against PC death. However, if you agree that a game must have a challenge to be worthy of your attention, wouldn't you agree that for the possibility of death to be strong enough to be believable, there must occasionally be a PC death? Doesn't it also follow then that for this to become personal there needs to be times when you KNOW that little Bobo came THAT CLOSE to buying the farm? Without that belief, I propose that you would soon lose interest in the game. The beliefs mentioned above can not exist without PC deaths. Therefore, D&D/LG etc. can not exist without PC deaths. So, because PC death must be good for the game, why not yours? Gary Adkison I'm so glad you guys posted and share some of my feelings. From the posts I've been reading I was afraid I had started playing Kittens and Playgrounds; not Dungeons and Dragons.
Haro 01-29-07, 07:57 PM	While I figured there would probably be some mechanism to somehow "rescue" my PC, I wasn't counting on it, and I certainly wasn't expecting anything positive out of it. If that would have been the end of Arrias, it would have been the way he'd want to go. I have an alternate story to tell. My Suloise Conjurer/Alienist (Scarlet Brotherhood member) had a teleport memorised and knew if things got too scary, there was plenty of the Flanaess to crush under the heel of the Suel. By the time it got around to 595CY, Perrenland would have been populated by pale skinned fair haired people... Now that's the way he wanted to leave the campaign! Joe
clannagh 01-29-07, 08:00 PM	danger is one thing .. assured death regardless of the effort is another my level 4 paladin went to -8 was healed -6 was healed again -8 and hit while unconscious (monster rolled 2 and missed) and finally got up and smacked it down .. scary but fun .. and if she dies well it was in a good cause and hopefully she would have got to come back a little battered but OK but i have played many many many mods where the player deaths have nothing to do with poor builds or bad tactics or even bad dice rolls .. the mod appears almost designed to kill characters regardless of how well built the character is or how well it plays .. those are the mods people complain about .. multiple will save or dies with DC's above 20 are not challenging for example, its a lottery on whether you roll a one or not i feel I am picking up a certian arrogance here .. the attitude seems to be "people that complain about broken mods are just poor players with badly built characters and poor tactics and MY characters would have survived fine and in fact been somewaht bored " .. this is simply not the case .. some mods are actually broken and kill characters regardless of how well built the character is or how well played
Haro 01-29-07, 08:15 PM	danger is one thing .. assured death regardless of the effort is another i feel I am picking up a certian arrogance here .. the attitude seems to be "people that complain about broken mods are just poor players with badly built characters and poor tactics and MY characters would have survived fine and in fact been somewaht bored " .. this is simply not the case .. some mods are actually broken and kill characters regardless of how well built the character is or how well played I hope this doesn't come across as arrogant then when I tell you that almost every death I've ever seen at a table, the pc if not the entire party had a chance to retreat when it got scary and chose not to. Players seem to have a built-in expectation that they are indestructable or that the DM will softball them. Then they get a look on their face which says 'when I stepped into that flank , I just never ever thought they would sneak attack me'. I have never seen a pc death that was unavoidable. The flow on effect is that players seem to think they were punished if they miss out on item access or a few xp and attribute the amount of fun to the amount of gp/xp earned. If an encounter is too tough, what's the better solution, death or not getting full gp/xp? If you have a problem with death, (like all but one pc of mine) then run away and live to fight another day. A good DM may even find a way to rerun the encounter if it is possible within the framework of the scenario. Joe
clannagh 01-29-07, 08:26 PM	I hope this doesn't come across as arrogant then when I tell you that almost every death I've ever seen at a table, the pc if not the entire party had a chance to retreat when it got scary and chose not to. Players seem to have a built-in expectation that they are indestructable or that the DM will softball them. Then they get a look on their face which says 'when I stepped into that flank , I just never ever thought they would sneak attack me'. I have never seen a pc death that was unavoidable. The flow on effect is that players seem to think they were punished if they miss out on item access or a few xp and attribute the amount of fun to the amount of gp/xp earned. If an encounter is too tough, what's the better solution, death or not getting full gp/xp? If you have a problem with death, (like all but one pc of mine) then run away and live to fight another day. A good DM may even find a way to rerun the encounter if it is possible within the framework of the scenario. Joe Well i can think of one example at APL 6 (where the GM refused to use a battle map) and the player in question in the second round was shooting with a bow at what he believed to be 100 foot distance from what was supposedly a rogue plant (something like +25 to grapple) and was charged (and told to "see" the plant he needed to be in its charge range and tehrefore if he shot at it he was far closer than 100') grappled and dropped (and stabilised at -9 by a favor) before being killed outright shortly afterwards. The plant then retreated and "hid" and the remainder of the party were unable to spot it despite regular spot rolls in excess of 25) The creature would disappear for several full rounds before reappearing to grab a new victim and disappear again. the only reason it was not a TPK was the last PC simply run away when the other 5 were gone. The GM ruled that being a carnivorous plant it would "eat" all the bodies and therefore no raise deads etc were permitted.
Haro 01-29-07, 08:55 PM	Well i can think of one example at APL 6 (where the GM refused to use a battle map) and the player in question in the second round was shooting with a bow at what he believed to be 100 foot distance from what was supposedly a rogue plant (something like +25 to grapple) and was charged (and told to "see" the plant he needed to be in its charge range and tehrefore if he shot at it he was far closer than 100') grappled and dropped (and stabilised at -9 by a favor) before being killed outright shortly afterwards. The plant then retreated and "hid" and the remainder of the party were unable to spot it despite regular spot rolls in excess of 25) The creature would disappear for several full rounds before reappearing to grab a new victim and disappear again. the only reason it was not a TPK was the last PC simply run away when the other 5 were gone. The GM ruled that being a carnivorous plant it would "eat" all the bodies and therefore no raise deads etc were permitted. Having run the mod you are talking about several times, I can tell you that your GM should be shot. The encounter is difficult (infamous perhaps) but the way he ran it borders on disgraceful. Modules cannot account for that level of poor administration by a GM. Joe
_m_ 01-29-07, 09:59 PM	Having run the mod you are talking about several times, I can tell you that your GM should be shot. The encounter is difficult (infamous perhaps) but the way he ran it borders on disgraceful. Modules cannot account for that level of poor administration by a GM. Joe it was more than disgracefull. aside from that blatantly incorrect situation, the plant had not the movement he gace it, had 20 less hide than he gave it, and couldnt rehide. whats worse, much worse in fact, was that he TPK'd our entire areas high level characters. It crippled the advancement of the entire place. Alvin and Eowimia are the only 2 survivng original toons from around here, and only because we didnt play that game. It made playing any high level games impossible. suffice to say, no1 has played a single game with him since.
rockondon 01-29-07, 10:27 PM	...stuff I can think of one time when the GM pulled out a gun, shot most of the players at the table, raped one guy's sister, ate some mother's baby, then filled all the mailboxes on the block with anthrax. I blame the writers because they didn't include it in the mod that the GM is not allowed to do these things. Setting the sarcasm aside, I do agree with you on some things. I hate it when you enter an area then suddenly are called upon to make a save vs slay living or similar. If I'm fighting a balor and I get decapitated, I can understand that because at least I had a (slim) fighting chance. I lost a level but hey, at least I have a great encounter to talk about later. But if the PCs are just walkin around and some trap kills us, that's a pretty lousy way to die. I could do without death traps in modules. Incidentally, where we play we have a rule. What the GM says goes, and if he makes a mistake in a mod we still play by his mistake, and maybe after we'll learn what we should have done. However, if his mistake results in the death of a PC, that death can be undone. GM mistakes should not result in the loss of a PC.
Japangirl 01-30-07, 01:08 AM	But if the PCs are just walkin around and some trap kills us, that's a pretty lousy way to die. I could do without death traps in modules. So make sure you include a trapfinder/disabler! :) Unfindable traps aren't cool, but just traps? Meh. That's what rogues/scouts are for. A Wail of the Banshee trap is much much better than a 17th level caster who can cast that spell at a party, because of the tactical advantages an actual person in a combat situation has. Traps are perfectly valid encounters in mods. And if rogues are scarce in your region, well, that sucks for you but people should still write in traps.
Dr.Cornelius 01-30-07, 02:26 AM	I hope this doesn't come across as arrogant then when I tell you that almost every death I've ever seen at a table, the pc if not the entire party had a chance to retreat when it got scary and chose not to. Yes - it does come off as arrogant. What mods have you played? By and large encounters in core mods have ample retreat opportunities, but many regional/metaregional encounters are specifically designed to prevent retreat. I can provide specific examples and links to posts on this forum if you like. Please get your facts straight.
Dr.Cornelius 01-30-07, 02:32 AM	it was more than disgracefull. aside from that blatantly incorrect situation, the plant had not the movement he gace it, had 20 less hide than he gave it, and couldnt rehide. whats worse, much worse in fact, was that he TPK'd our entire areas high level characters. It crippled the advancement of the entire place. Alvin and Eowimia are the only 2 survivng original toons from around here, and only because we didnt play that game. It made playing any high level games impossible. suffice to say, no1 has played a single game with him since.You have just hit on one of the biggest problems with LG - it only takes one jackass GM to screw up an entire weekend convention or a campaign.
Haro 01-30-07, 04:34 AM	Yes - it does come off as arrogant. What mods have you played? By and large encounters in core mods have ample retreat opportunities, but many regional/metaregional encounters are specifically designed to prevent retreat. I can provide specific examples and links to posts on this forum if you like. Please get your facts straight. I've never seen a pc death that wasn't preventable. It's an observation that happens to be fact yet apparently I'm arrogant for stating it? How arrogant is asking me what mods I've played as if I have just discovered LG? Apart from the fact you have no idea what my experience level is (plenty, thanks for asking) the two regions and metaregions I regularly play in have never in my playing or judging experience had an unavoidable encounter that the party couldn't in any way escape from reasonably at that APL. I include the ridiculous demon encounter in IUZ 4-01 Doraaka in that assessment as well. Unless my sarcasm meter is way off, pull your head in. I hate taking troll bait but your condescending tone befouls the air around me. Joe
Dr.Cornelius 01-30-07, 04:55 AM	... never in my playing or judging experience had an unavoidable encounter that the party couldn't in any way escape from reasonably at that APL.Lets agree to disagree on that specific point. IMHO some encounters are deliberately designed to be inescapable. I will concede that it is possible that some or all of the encounters in question were not written or intended to be inescapable, but were run that way.
Haro 01-30-07, 07:30 AM	Lets agree to disagree on that specific point. IMHO some encounters are deliberately designed to be inescapable. I will concede that it is possible that some or all of the encounters in question were not written or intended to be inescapable, but were run that way. That sounds fair. :)
Sieylianna 01-30-07, 08:02 AM	I've never seen a pc death that wasn't preventable. It's an observation that happens to be fact yet apparently I'm arrogant for stating it? That may have something to do with the fact that you haven't played all that much (judging from your join date). I've seen boxed text ambushes by assassins at least 4-5 times, including one module where you are ambushed on your way to learn what your mission is. (Unless the assassin rolls a 1 on his acttack roll - it happened to my benefit once - you're going to be making a death attack saving throw and they generally target the unarmored people). I've seen fireballs at APL 2. I've seen an EL 25 encounter at APL 16. If you haven't run into one of these modules yet, then you've been lucky (although many of these were older modules). Ed
Mortepierre 01-30-07, 08:02 AM	Traps are perfectly valid encounters in mods. And if rogues are scarce in your region, well, that sucks for you but people should still write in traps. In a home game, yes. In a LG session supposed to end after 4 hours, no. Once players run into a trap, you can bet they'll go into "search mode" for the rest of the mod. In essence, things crawl to a virtual stop. You, as a DM, know that they just encountered the one and only trap in the module. Yet, you can't tell them to please stop examining every flagstone and hurry up. No, apart from traps on doors and containers, I consider them a waste of time (not to mention the fact that when you do encounter a trap, the Disable Device's DC is so high no rogue could hope to match it at APL 2-6)
Haro 01-30-07, 08:32 AM	That may have something to do with the fact that you haven't played all that much (judging from your join date). If you haven't run into one of these modules yet, then you've been lucky (although many of these were older modules). Ed Sigh...the join date. So that's why I'm being treated like a noob. I actually joined in early 2003 but for some weird reason one day the forum just stopped recognising my username. So I reregistered with the same username and here we are. I'm a regional writer, rpga convention coordinator and regular DM. I've played everything available since 592CY. I've seen enough modules to feel qualified to comment. Now, do I get the job? :-) I'll make a guess that your assassin comments may reference A Tiger in Ahlissa? I believe the author has come out and clarified his intention wasn't actually what came out in the final edit. I did have to use a reroll favour or die in that encounter though... A Balor with +5 full plate and a few tough buddies in a year 5 Iuz mod were incorrectly calculated at EL 20 and put in at APL 16 but that's the worst I've seen. I'm not saying I haven't seen encounters somewhat like what has been described, I'm saying I'm yet to see a pc die in an unavoidable situation. Any deaths have come from staying a round too long, failing a save (in combat or by triggered trap) or by x3 crit. Joe
Cardinal Teplin 01-30-07, 09:27 AM	Sigh...the join date. So that's why I'm being treated like a noob. Nah, its because it's not very clear what you're saying. I'm not saying I haven't seen encounters somewhat like what has been described, I'm saying I'm yet to see a pc die in an unavoidable situation. Any deaths have come from staying a round too long, failing a save (in combat or by triggered trap) or by x3 crit. So... save or die is avoidable? At what point should avoidance have kicked in? Run away from every situation that looks like it might be save or die? Or wait 'till someone fluffs a save and then tell them that, in hindsight, they should have been more careful? I'm really not clear what you mean by 'unavoidable'. The most natural meaning is that, had the player made more sensible choices, they wouldn't have died. Or to put it another way, any death is the player's fault. If fluffing a save kills the character, it's hard to say it was a player choice that led to that death, any more than a monster getting lucky with multiple crits is a player choice. Maybe you could explain what you mean by 'unavoidable'?
blood_kite 01-30-07, 11:11 AM	I remember one low-APL mod where TPK seemed to be the intended outcome. All fights were inside someone's head. You couldn't get out unless you won all three fights. All three fights were against flying opponents with innate invisibility, DR, poison, and fast healing. When you hurt them they would back off long enough to fully heal. Even if you had spells that could see invisible they could just back off and wait for the spells to expire before resuming their hit-and-run attacks. The mod writer seemed to design the mod so that only one tactic would effectively work. If you didn't figure out the tactic they would whittle you down one by one. You couldn't retreat because that meant being stuck in someone's mind forever and having your character removed from the campaign. We were level 3.4 playing down to APL 2 with a fairly balanced party and still got reduced to 1 poisoned character trying to fight the last one.
rockondon 01-30-07, 11:23 AM	I'm saying I'm yet to see a pc die in an unavoidable situation. Any deaths have come from staying a round too long, failing a save (in combat or by triggered trap) or by x3 crit. And the PC could have avoided those how exactly, by staying at the inn and refusing to go on quests? You can wave bye bye to your credibility. Your argument has nothing to stand on.
KarmaInferno 01-30-07, 12:34 PM	Any deaths have come from staying a round too long, failing a save (in combat or by triggered trap) or by x3 crit. Joe "Staying a round too long", okay, I can see that as overestimating your abilities. But failing a save or getting critted? How are those "avoidable situations"? Are we expected to always have a fatespinner in our back pocket to counter those? -karma
Japangirl 01-30-07, 12:48 PM	In a home game, yes. In a LG session supposed to end after 4 hours, no. Once players run into a trap, you can bet they'll go into "search mode" for the rest of the mod. In essence, things crawl to a virtual stop. You, as a DM, know that they just encountered the one and only trap in the module. Yet, you can't tell them to please stop examining every flagstone and hurry up. No, apart from traps on doors and containers, I consider them a waste of time (not to mention the fact that when you do encounter a trap, the Disable Device's DC is so high no rogue could hope to match it at APL 2-6) My rogue always takes 10 searching. We're wandering around in the woods? Searching for pit traps and other various "natural" traps. We're walking into a house? Searching for traps, taking 10. My rogue is paranoid and wants very much to live. Anywhere we go, she's taking 10 searching for traps, looking 10 feet in front of her. Admittedly, this is much easier at higher levels with two magic items that ensure she will find any magical trap up to level 12ish spells (epic), but she did that starting at APL 6 or so when her search check wasn't nearly that high. It slows down play some, but the difference between single moving and double moving doesn't slow the party to a crawl either. You assume the party only starts searching for traps *after* they've been hit with one, but that simply shouldn't be the case. Anyone who can find traps should be looking for them in situations they think they might appear, which includes all dungeon crawls and generally all doorways, altars, stairs, secret doors, long hallways, and just generally anywhere you expect to actually set a foot down/walk past/touch/open. And yes, Disable Device checks are pretty high. They stay high (at APL 14, a DC 32 Disable Device check isn't easy because you can't take 10, even with Tactile Trapsmith and full ranks a level 14 character likely only has +25ish, without the feat it's about +21). But just knowing the trap is there is a huge advantage (you can jump over the pit, have someone Dispel Magic the trap, summon an animal to take the damage, etc). Because of that, I think traps are a perfectly valid option for mod writers and don't slow play very much, if at all. As for the dying and running away part of this thread, well, I've seen overconfidence get people killed and I've seen inability to run get people killed. Sometimes there is a way out, but only if you leave party members' bodies behind, and for many PCs and players that is simply not an acceptable option. In one recent mod, we did win a very tough fight but the only reason we didn't run away is that we couldn't get close enough to Plane Shift out together because the monsters had a grab-people-and-fly-off-with-them ability. We were on another plane and we weren't going to leave people like that; unrecoverable death just plain sucks.
Sieylianna 01-30-07, 01:09 PM	I'll make a guess that your assassin comments may reference A Tiger in Ahlissa? I believe the author has come out and clarified his intention wasn't actually what came out in the final edit. I did have to use a reroll favour or die in that encounter though... A Balor with +5 full plate and a few tough buddies in a year 5 Iuz mod were incorrectly calculated at EL 20 and put in at APL 16 but that's the worst I've seen. My druid did meet the assassin in Ahlissa and even made the spot check, but had a lousy initiative roll. Followed by a 1 on the death attack saving throw. Fortunately, I was able to survive through use of a "Not this Time" card. I was actually referring to a couple of Veluna and VTF modules. In one, there are three assassins which ambushed the party on your way to the meeting introduction. Fortunately, my gray elf wizard rolled well. She eventually went to wearing a mithral chain shirt to look less like a wizard. Another of the modules seemed to have suffered in the translation from French to English. (It appeared that a lot of flavor text became environmental factors which weren't included in the calculated EL). Ed
thorinXXX 01-30-07, 01:09 PM	I've had three character deaths, and two of them could be considered 'avoidable'. 1) 3rd level Ro/Ftr playing APL 4. On a rowboat when a giant croc attacks. Dropped to -8 in the surprise round and grappled. Then dragged off to be eaten on the next round. 2) 5th level Pal playing APL 8 special mission to help two people remove a curse. Ruined the surprise round by detecting evil. Charged ogre to save badly wounded ally and ate an AOO. Took 30 in one hit. On the ogre's turn it attacked me doing 30 more with one hit. I was dead before I could act again and there were no criticals. I didn't have to assist an ally, so I guess that counts as 'avoidable'. 3) 7th level Pal (he got better) playing APL 6. Vampire and minions while under water. We finished off the minions easily, but by the time we realized that we could not take the vampire 3 f the 5 PC's were down. I held off the vampire so that the sorcerer could get away. I could have gotten away if I had chosen to let it take out the sorcerer instead, so I guess that counts as 'avoidable'.
Haro 01-30-07, 03:40 PM	"Staying a round too long", okay, I can see that as overestimating your abilities. But failing a save or getting critted? How are those "avoidable situations"? Are we expected to always have a fatespinner in our back pocket to counter those? -karma They are avoidable because the character puts him or herself in a situation that allows for that to happen. When adventuring, you know that you are going to have to make saves in combat or that enemies roll 20's too or even that the ancient ruins you are plundering may have a trap. Making saves and absorbing crits are in the job description of an adventurer. It's an occupational hazard. So yeah, I think when you choose to be in combat with a raging orc barbarian with a greataxe, you take onboard that receiving a crit is a distinct possibility or when chasing down those Vecna cultists, they might defend themselves by putting you in a save or die situation. I'm not saying stay at the inn but surely at some point, when a PC has slaughtered countless NPCs encounter after encounter over his career, that he may have gotten reckless and failed a save or stuck his chin out and had it rearranged by an axe. Unavoidable to me is, sitting in an inn at the start of the adventure and having APL +4 NPCs pick on you for no apparent reason. Unavoidable is when not seeking danger or looking to act counter to 'the bad guy's' plans, you are set upon in a situation where you can't reasonably retreat or surrender. Fair enough, some Veluna or VTF mods may have these situations. I can only comment on Core, Iuz, NMR, Perrenland and Ratik scenarios and I just haven't seen it. Joe
Cardinal Teplin 01-30-07, 04:18 PM	They are avoidable because the character puts him or herself in a situation that allows for that to happen. When adventuring, you know that you are going to have to make saves in combat or that enemies roll 20's too or even that the ancient ruins you are plundering may have a trap. Ah... so avoidable in the sense of 'you don't have to be on this adventure, you could go home and stay in bed'. Right. This is somewhat of a tangent I'm afraid. People have been talking about whether or not adventures are too survivable (or not survivable enough). So death in this sense is related to whether you can keep yourself alive on an adventure, not whether or not you had a choice to adventure in the first place. I'm not sure your point is actually all that relevent... That said, there are of course plenty of mods where going on the adventure is not optional for the characters involved. One regional mod started with being death attacked by an assasin in a crowd, a trick that was later repeated for the 'A tiger? In Ahlissa?' mod. And of course, Onnwal at one point declared conscription, making certain adventures compulsory for male characters.
KarmaInferno 01-30-07, 04:50 PM	I think when you choose to be in combat with a raging orc barbarian with a greataxe, you take onboard that receiving a crit is a distinct possibility or when chasing down those Vecna cultists, they might defend themselves by putting you in a save or die situation. So your issue is NOT with "failing a save" or "getting critted", it is with "deciding to put yourself in a risky situation". That is a seperate issue. You can be the guy in the back of the party walking along some random road, getting charged from surprise, and dying because you rolled a 1 on your fort save when the attacker critted you for more than 50 points of damage. Does that count as "avoidable"? I don't think so. "Avoidable" to me is placing yourself in or remaining in a dangerous position by choice. Whether you get critted or fail saves is incidental. Conversely, to me "unavoidable" is any situation where you are placed in danger and nothing you do could change or have prevented the situation. It's about choice. A crit or failed save is something that happens as a result of a random die roll, not choice. It is separate from the choices made that led up to the crit or save. -karma
Haro 01-30-07, 05:01 PM	Ah... so avoidable in the sense of 'you don't have to be on this adventure, you could go home and stay in bed'. Look, this tangent came from someone taking one sentence from one earlier post I made. It has then gone on a tangent about the definition of unavoidable to a tangent about making saves etc. It was a minor point that someone seized upon and not worth the time that's been spent on it. To put this to rest, I've stated what I think is unavoidable and it isn't directly a comment on whether mods are too hard or not. I believe by and large that party composition determines the difficulty of play (composition of characters and players both). If one of my PCs dies from a crit or failed save, I won't cry that I couldn't have avoided it. An adventurer is a professional busybody and the law of averages will catch up with him one day. I know I've doled out more crits and made more NPCs make saves than I've had to. When your time comes, it comes. Now enough. PM me if you want to continue the tangent. Joe
gomeztoo 01-31-07, 03:00 AM	That said, there are of course plenty of mods where going on the adventure is not optional for the characters involved. I remember one Ekbir mod where you start out in prison on accusation of murder, and the next moment you are escaping... When I realized that I switched PCs (still in the hook's boxed text so the DM allowed it) - loosing my fancy bard (who'd pine away in prison) for my freshly designed rogue PC. A few players had some issues with that hook... but it turned out pretty ok for me.
Lupo 01-31-07, 03:26 AM	I remember one Ekbir mod where you start out in prison on accusation of murder, and the next moment you are escaping... When I realized that I switched PCs (still in the hook's boxed text so the DM allowed it) - loosing my fancy bard (who'd pine away in prison) for my freshly designed rogue PC. A few players had some issues with that hook... but it turned out pretty ok for me. i wouldn't describe said module's start as a "hook" it resembled more a wrecker's ball :D and it hadn't made the hook more gracile that we played a somehow adapted version of an intro :P ciao martin m.
gomeztoo 01-31-07, 04:01 AM	I fancy that was a problem. If you play a brand new PC, as I did (and an ķn of jail/out of jail'rogue too), it makes a good intro. I guess similar to 'Escape from Scant'. With a 3rd lvl char is doesn't work so well. Otoh, you have to admit that it is pretty cool to still be wanted in one Ekbir province for murder... especially after giving the entire army the finger. Of course I then had to play a lvl 1 for the next four mods at APL 4... surprisingly enough there were at least two such ocacsions where my PC was among the last one standing in one of the more nasty encounters (through shere luck, obviously).
frupton 01-31-07, 04:58 AM	I remember one low-APL mod where TPK seemed to be the intended outcome. All fights were inside someone's head. You couldn't get out unless you won all three fights. All three fights were against flying opponents with innate invisibility, DR, poison, and fast healing. When you hurt them they would back off long enough to fully heal. Even if you had spells that could see invisible they could just back off and wait for the spells to expire before resuming their hit-and-run attacks. The mod writer seemed to design the mod so that only one tactic would effectively work. If you didn't figure out the tactic they would whittle you down one by one. You couldn't retreat because that meant being stuck in someone's mind forever and having your character removed from the campaign. We were level 3.4 playing down to APL 2 with a fairly balanced party and still got reduced to 1 poisoned character trying to fight the last one. I believe I've played this one at APL4, and it was also a toughie. Our party was also fairly well balanced and solid for the APL, but DM could have easily TPK'd us if he had wanted to.
clannagh 01-31-07, 05:27 PM	There is also the case of running too soon :) There are a couple of ex-players (father and son) from this region that eventually no-one would play with. As soon as a fight got tough or the main tank went down they instantly scarpered off "brave Sir Robyn" style leaving the rest of the table to survive or die. Needless to say their characters survived fine but they ran out of gaming opportunities.