Here's my first question. Every one of the premades has 3-4 +1 magic items - a weapon, their armor, and a misc. neck or cloak. In comparison, my group is coming up on 3rd level now, and only four of the five characters have a magic item. Am I being too stingy?
Maybe the gear is required because the encounters in the adventure are ridiculously hard. Here are some examples:
Encounter #6 - 4 x Dolgrim Warriors
Show
Dolgrim Warriors are L4 Skirmishers with 53 HP. Their key power is Double Actions. At the start of combat you roll two initiative checks, and the warrior takes a full turn on each initiative.
They have pretty standard attacks (+8 vs AC), so they have the potential to burst down any PC while using double actions to stay away from melee. If I play this correctly, they are going to do an average of 30-40 points of damage to a single character the first turn.
Dolgrim Warriors are L4 Skirmishers with 53 HP. Their key power is Double Actions. At the start of combat you roll two initiative checks, and the warrior takes a full turn on each initiative.
They have pretty standard attacks (+8 vs AC), so they have the potential to burst down any PC while using double actions to stay away from melee. If I play this correctly, they are going to do an average of 30-40 points of damage to a single character the first turn.
Am I being too stingy?
Yep. You need to reread the DMG's recommendations before your players realize just how stingy you've been. ;)
As to thoughts on the adventure, I wish I could give feedback. I haven't seen it though, and imagine I won't anytime soon.
One 3rd level, one 2nd level, and one 1st level. Then they also get GP equal to the gold value of a 1st level item (520 gp, I believe).
Starting character gear is about on par with how much equipment a character should get by leveling.
Are you using the treasure parcel system? There should be about 12 divisions of treasure per adventuring level of the party. You can combine divions into larger sets (like have the sum total for a major quest reward be 6 divisons of treasure for that level). Each division, or parcel, gives you guidelines as to what should be in it, like magic items and x amount of GP or whatever.
When PCs make a character higher than first level, including 2nd level, they get to pick 3 magic items.
One 3rd level, one 2nd level, and one 1st level. Then they also get GP equal to the gold value of a 1st level item (520 gp, I believe).
This is, by the devs' admissions, a formula best used for PCs level 5 or higher. It will put a lower-level PC a little ahead of where they need to be. That said, your (bendrago's) PCs are way behind the curve.
Are you using the treasure parcel system?
Clearly not.
You should dig into this and get them caught up in this regard as soon as possible. Things will turn lethal very quickly if you don't get them properly equipped.
Scanning through that, there are 12 items (some are pretty mediocre) plus a couple of potions in the whole adventure, which will take them to level 3. So that should have significantly more to keep up with the recommendations from the DMG.
Here's my first question. Every one of the premades has 3-4 +1 magic items - a weapon, their armor, and a misc. neck or cloak. In comparison, my group is coming up on 3rd level now, and only four of the five characters have a magic item. Am I being too stingy?
If I remember correctly, a party of five 3rd level adventurers should have received one 6th level item, two 5th level items, two 4th level items, two 3rd level items and one 2nd level item, plus gold by 3rd level. That's total, not each. So everyone should have an item, three characters should have two items, and everyone should have made enough money to pick up a first level item or so.
Scanning through that, there are 12 items (some are pretty mediocre) plus a couple of potions in the whole adventure, which will take them to level 3. So that should have significantly more to keep up with the recommendations from the DMG.
The 12 Treasure Parcels per level that Akon mentioned above would not all include magic items.
Twelve magic items is just right for a 3-level adventure. The paradigm is four magic items per level for a party of 5, if I remember correctly.
The 12 Treasure Parcels per level that Akon mentioned above would not all include magic items.
Twelve magic items is just right for a 3-level adventure. The paradigm is four magic items per level for a party of 5, if I remember correctly.
To clarify - the adventure (H1 - Keep on the Shadowfell) is supposed to take the characters from level 1 to level 3. In the whole adventure, there are a total of 12 magic items, and that assumes the characters find every one of them.
So it sounds like the adventure should have more like 25-30 items (5 or 6 per players x 5 players).
*** SPOILERS START HERE ***
you can type "sblock" to do this more efficiently, using brackets instead of quotations.
Encounter #6 - 4 x Dolgrim Warriors
Show
This is indeed supposed to be an extremely hard encounter. Once it's over, you've got the Blood of Khyber to give you the benefit of an extended rest; as such, it's expected that you're going to need to burn through your resources and have a chance to restore fallen allies after the fight.
This is of course the key point. It's NOT a wargame - it's a story. The dolgrims don't know the capabilities of each PCs and aren't telepathically linked; it's not as if they can pause to compare notes about who they want to attack. They're not super-intelligent, don't have a dolgaunt guiding them, and they are after all the foot soldiers of madness, not Valenar or Dhakaani elite. If a single player walks into the room and draws their attention, naturally they'll all attack him. But if two players come in at the same time, I wouldn't necesarily have all the dolgaunts attack the same person. Again, a Dhakaani strike force would certainly have quick coordinated ways for a commander to draw fire onto a single target - but different opponents should have tactics reflecting their nature. So you CAN do 30-40 points to a single character, but you don't HAVE to.
While they aren't as disciplined as Dhakaani and only have an 8 Int, the dolgrims aren't idiots, and once battle has been joined I would have them behave in a tactically competent manner - teaming up to flank, using the terrain to their advantage, etc. It should BE a tough fight... but given that it's a secure location with the chance to get an extended rest right after, as long as someone survives you can recover.
If I play this correctly, they are going to do an average of 30-40 points of damage to a single character the first turn.
This is of course the key point. It's NOT a wargame - it's a story. The dolgrims don't know the capabilities of each PCs and aren't telepathically linked; it's not as if they can pause to compare notes about who they want to attack. They're not super-intelligent, don't have a dolgaunt guiding them, and they are after all the foot soldiers of madness, not Valenar or Dhakaani elite. If a single player walks into the room and draws their attention, naturally they'll all attack him. But if two players come in at the same time, I wouldn't necesarily have all the dolgaunts attack the same person. Again, a Dhakaani strike force would certainly have quick coordinated ways for a commander to draw fire onto a single target - but different opponents should have tactics reflecting their nature. So you CAN do 30-40 points to a single character, but you don't HAVE to.
While they aren't as disciplined as Dhakaani and only have an 8 Int, the dolgrims aren't idiots, and once battle has been joined I would have them behave in a tactically competent manner - teaming up to flank, using the terrain to their advantage, etc. It should BE a tough fight... but given that it's a secure location with the chance to get an extended rest right after, as long as someone survives you can recover.
How would you rule this? The artificer is the character trapped inside and he uses his thunder armor at will. He could target himself as the party member and the darkness would be the adjacent target. It is a push one after effect. Would you rule it like a firecracker going off in someone's hand or what else? That is what I tried but the dm disallowed it.
Also, our dm ruled that the minute we set foot in the room it flowed toward us. It attacked the front rank warforged and paladin and then clouded to the other side of the party (still at the opening to the room) and action pointed to attack the weaker artificer and invoker at the other end sending both into the interior. The insubstantial only came into play when the invoker got out, the paladin did use his daily, but his paly mark never came into play. I do not believe the radiant was played as full damage either.
Without that one encounter I would rate your adventure very strongly Keith but either my dm played it way wrong or wizards edited it miserably.
So it sounds like the adventure should have more like 25-30 items (5 or 6 per players x 5 players).
KoS is about right for raw numbers, though it can be problematic if the gear in it isn't helpful for your group.
It's 4 magic items for 5 characters over the course of a level, plus enough money to buy 2 more of their level. So... at 3rd level they should have 8 to 16 magic items depending what stuff they found useful and spent their money on.
Show
I think I gave too much weight to the tactics recommendations as printed for this encounter. By falling back to the north to stay out of melee as long as possible, then immediately trying to move into flanking positions they just dealt out too much damage too quickly.
The PCs contributed to this situation by entering the room cautiously, and giving the dolgrims only a single target (the fighter) to shoot at for the first round. I didn't reveal that the dolgrims could take a second action until they hit their second initiative point, so it's possible the PCs would have done it differently.
This is indeed supposed to be an extremely hard encounter. Once it's over, you've got the Blood of Khyber to give you the benefit of an extended rest; as such, it's expected that you're going to need to burn through your resources and have a chance to restore fallen allies after the fight.
This is of course the key point. It's NOT a wargame - it's a story. The dolgrims don't know the capabilities of each PCs and aren't telepathically linked; it's not as if they can pause to compare notes about who they want to attack. They're not super-intelligent, don't have a dolgaunt guiding them, and they are after all the foot soldiers of madness, not Valenar or Dhakaani elite. If a single player walks into the room and draws their attention, naturally they'll all attack him. But if two players come in at the same time, I wouldn't necesarily have all the dolgaunts attack the same person. Again, a Dhakaani strike force would certainly have quick coordinated ways for a commander to draw fire onto a single target - but different opponents should have tactics reflecting their nature. So you CAN do 30-40 points to a single character, but you don't HAVE to.
While they aren't as disciplined as Dhakaani and only have an 8 Int, the dolgrims aren't idiots, and once battle has been joined I would have them behave in a tactically competent manner - teaming up to flank, using the terrain to their advantage, etc. It should BE a tough fight... but given that it's a secure location with the chance to get an extended rest right after, as long as someone survives you can recover.
I think I gave too much weight to the tactics recommendations as printed for this encounter. By falling back to the north to stay out of melee as long as possible, then immediately trying to move into flanking positions they just dealt out too much damage too quickly.
The PCs contributed to this situation by entering the room cautiously, and giving the dolgrims only a single target (the fighter) to shoot at for the first round. I didn't reveal that the dolgrims could take a second action until they hit their second initiative point, so it's possible the PCs would have done it differently.
How would you rule this? The artificer is the character trapped inside and he uses his thunder armor at will. He could target himself as the party member and the darkness would be the adjacent target. It is a push one after effect. Would you rule it like a firecracker going off in someone's hand or what else? That is what I tried but the dm disallowed it.
It's a DM's decision; I can see the argument ether way. So I wouldn't say your DM was wrong. However, personally, I'd have allowed it. Again, my goal as a DM is rarely to slaughter the group, so if they come up with a creative, cinematic solution I'd like to run with it. The idea of the darkness engulfing the artificer, and then being scattered away as his armor explodes around him, seems very cinematic to me.
I'd also definitely allow a PC to either help an adjacent engulfed PC escape as a move action (using Athletics against the darkness and leaving the PC adjacent to the darkness) or to grab the PC as a standard action against the defense of the darkness, but then being able to use a move action to run, dragging the grabbed character.
Show
Which is essentially exactly as it's written, so that's not necessarily your DM's fault. I take some blame here for making my tactics section too long; in order to keep the encounter to one page, they had to cut it down. But as I said, I didn't want it to be a lethal toe-to-toe fight. It's supposed to be a creepy "the darkness comes alive around you - can you escape?" scene. Radiant damage should be full damage, though.
Also, our dm ruled that the minute we set foot in the room it flowed toward us.
Which is essentially exactly as it's written, so that's not necessarily your DM's fault. I take some blame here for making my tactics section too long; in order to keep the encounter to one page, they had to cut it down. But as I said, I didn't want it to be a lethal toe-to-toe fight. It's supposed to be a creepy "the darkness comes alive around you - can you escape?" scene. Radiant damage should be full damage, though.
It is an interesting encounter, but it could have used some toning down I think and still accomplished the same effect.
... but it seems to miss a key part of player psychology that they will fight to the death just about any time. I have never seen PCs run from something except in certain circumstances where I basically told them to do so.
*Shrug* If you view it as "running away", yes, many players don't like to be perceived as cowards. *I* don't like running away from a fight, and I've died as a result on multiple occasions. But there's a difference between running away and using the environment to your advantage... the tactical retreat, if you will. Facing an unknown entity on its hostile home turf when you could gain considerable tactical advantage by simply getting into the light isn't heroic, it's stubborn. If the fighter insists on going toe to toe with everything he encounters, never backing down, never considering clever ways to deal with powerful foes, he will die in my campaign; he needs to use his brain as well as his sword, or if he's too stupid to do so (the raging barbarian, for example), he needs a smarter character to help guide his blade. Get into the light. Regroup. Evaluate the threat and decide whether there's a sensible way to engage it, or whether it's a battle not worth fighting.
As written, the encounter is deadlier than I intended, because the THREAT is not supposed to behave in a tactically sound manner; it's not capable of making judgements about the PCs (which one will have the hardest time escaping? What's the best square to get as many at once?). But I do expect the PCs to use their brains if they want to survive this. And hey, Indiana Jones has to get away when Bellaq has him outnumbered. The Fellowship of the Ring has to flee from the Watcher in the Water. When you're facing the Vashta Nerada there's only one thing to do - run (incidentally, I hadn't heard of the Vashta Nerada when I wrote this adventure, but it's essentially what this thing is). It's part of the noir - you may be a hero, but that doesn't mean you're going to win every fight or that every battle is worth fighting. As the ECS says, one of the things that defines Eberron is that "Stories don't always end well."
There may have been a better way to represent the concept. But it was never supposed to be something easily beaten - or something that has to be beaten. It's more like the Watcher in the Water than an orc or a balrog; you don't need to fight it, you just need to get out of its reach.
I feel such encounters work better with higher level parties, as the margin for error is great enough that when you figure out something is probably not possible to fight you have the HP and powers remaining to actually get away. Early heroic tier is very 50/50 for me when doing this sort of thing.
I know from the numerous groups of people I have DMed for that PCs will frequently not retreat from something: most PCs try to kill things (even if it doesn't make sense for them to do so).
Certainly. And I don't have any issue with PCs trying to kill it even if there's no need to do so. I'm just saying that it's stupid to do that IN THE DARK. As I said, I've been killed on multiple occasions because I wouldn't retreat. But each time, my party at least did our level best to approach the situation in a sensible manner. We didn't RUN when perhaps we should have. But we also didn't stand toe to toe with the superior opponent and just hope the dice would go our way. If I encounter a fire-resistant beast in a pit of flame, I'm not going to stand there in the fire taking damage every round and hoping that I'll somehow get out of it. I'm going to get out of the pit as soon as I can and find other ways to engage the beast, or shoot into the pit from a distance.
The key to me is the sense of danger. I don't like killing PCs. But if PCs can win every fight without actually thinking about it, what's the point in playing? Like I said, at my table you WILL have to think about the situation. I don't expect PCs to run like scared babies at the first sign of trouble. Who wants to play that character? But I do expect them to realize when they are in bad terrain and to try to improve their odds.
Given the level of the party and the creature itself, there isn't a lot of room for error before it turns into a certain TPK. For example if it gets a hold of the defenders or eats a leader, it can end up with the party being unable to retreat or effectively have someone slowly digested to their doom.
Certainly. That's where my previous quotes come in...
Show
I'm a big proponent of letting people burn action points to perform actions that don't quite fit the rules but make cinematic sense. I also have a house rule in which I may offer a PC the chance to burn a healing surge to push an attack roll/Athletics check he just misses by a point or two when it's a life-or-death situation - the adrenaline surge that lets him go that extra inch. There should be costs and consequences, whether it's action points, healing surges, or something else. Death should always be a danger. But at the end of the day, I approach D&D as a story I am creating with the players as opposed to a wargame I'm playing against them. My goal is to create a challenging situation for them, something that feels exciting and dangerous, something where victory feels like it has meaning because defeat was a possibility. But I don't NEED to win. If the PC is engulfed, I want the PCs to feel that they have to find a way to get him out because he will die if they don't. I WANT them to feel that if they stand and fight, they may all die. But if they are smart, if they respond to the threat with clever ideas and come up with a plan to try to save the trapped character ("Throw five sunrods in! If it doesn't like light, maybe that will at least distract it for a second!"), I may very well fudge a roll or two in their favor. On the other hand, if they simply charge in blindly and stubbornly assume they are immortal, they'll soon find out that they aren't.
If you get a character engulfed who just can't escape, it's a question of whether you're willing to bend the rules to help them. Personally, I'd let someone using a sliding power (the artificer's Thundering Armor, the sorcerer's lightning and thunder powers) to push the darkness OFF of someone its engulfed. Per my original tactics, radiant attacks draw its fire, and I'd consider having it release someone to go after the enemy if it's struck with radiant damage.
I'd also definitely allow a PC to either help an adjacent engulfed PC escape as a move action (using Athletics against the darkness and leaving the PC adjacent to the darkness) or to grab the PC as a standard action against the defense of the darkness, but then being able to use a move action to run, dragging the grabbed character.
I'm a big proponent of letting people burn action points to perform actions that don't quite fit the rules but make cinematic sense. I also have a house rule in which I may offer a PC the chance to burn a healing surge to push an attack roll/Athletics check he just misses by a point or two when it's a life-or-death situation - the adrenaline surge that lets him go that extra inch. There should be costs and consequences, whether it's action points, healing surges, or something else. Death should always be a danger. But at the end of the day, I approach D&D as a story I am creating with the players as opposed to a wargame I'm playing against them. My goal is to create a challenging situation for them, something that feels exciting and dangerous, something where victory feels like it has meaning because defeat was a possibility. But I don't NEED to win. If the PC is engulfed, I want the PCs to feel that they have to find a way to get him out because he will die if they don't. I WANT them to feel that if they stand and fight, they may all die. But if they are smart, if they respond to the threat with clever ideas and come up with a plan to try to save the trapped character ("Throw five sunrods in! If it doesn't like light, maybe that will at least distract it for a second!"), I may very well fudge a roll or two in their favor. On the other hand, if they simply charge in blindly and stubbornly assume they are immortal, they'll soon find out that they aren't.
The thing is many DMs do treat combat a bit like a wargame, or take tactics sections too literally (which is often discussed on another board I frequent) and forget that roleplaying should apply to monsters: not just PCs. If everything fights like it's a game of warhammer it's a bit disconcerting, especially when PCs roleplay in ways that mean they don't make the most tactically "best" decisions every combat. If I wanted to play Warhammer I would :P. So in fact I do agree entirely with what you say, it's just the reality of the situation that gives me a bit of pause.
If I encounter a fire-resistant beast in a pit of flame, I'm not going to stand there in the fire taking damage every round and hoping that I'll somehow get out of it.
Funny story, I've seen one of my groups chase an immobilized solo that could not possibly harm them into dangerous terrain for the sheer sake of hitting it. Despite the fact it was incapable of doing anything to them where it was. Of course there wasn't much of a threat presented to my players at the time either, but it was pretty comical image.
That was such good times.
The thing is many DMs do treat combat a bit like a wargame, or take tactics sections too literally...
And again, the tactics section here essentially says to do the exact opposite of everything I'm suggesting. Hence all my posts, because I expect a DM to assume he SHOULD trust the tactics in encounter - and it this case I'm saying "Don't touch it! It's EVIL!"
Now the thing is that I know this. So I'll adjust the adventure accordingly if running it.
Also. I'll probably never kill the players in something like the second encounter of this adventure.
I probably won't kill players by anybody other than one of the major characters in my adventure or campaign.
You "don't like"? You understand that the game is constructed to be balanced for parties with more magic items than you "like" right?
We play the D&D we like to play. And we enjoy it more with less magic items than the DMG tells us to use, especially at lower levels.
We've never had balance issues stemming from this.
But if your players go for it, then yeah, no reason not to play the game you all want to play.
"Don't touch it! It's EVIL!"
Best movie ending, ever!
From my experience, if you want PCs to run from anything, you really got to sell how unbeatably awesome something is. It takes some real effort on the DM's part to make players realize that something is not 'level-appropriate XP' but 'walking TPK.'
I probably won't kill players by anybody other than one of the major characters in my adventure or campaign.
Gotta be careful to not let on you're doing that; the DM for one of my groups told us on more than one occasion, "I won't let you die unless you do something really stupid, or if it's a major conflict." At this point, the tension from 'unimportant' battles was totally eliminated.
Obviously. It's not done to cripple the players. I could give them all 100 extra magic items, but it wouldn't change how strong they were compared to who they're fighting.
Give it a few levels and it will. When the first defense "spikes" occur they will start noticing when they are missing even level enemies greater than 50% of the time. Anything beyond that it just gets worse rapidly.
If you use enemies of a lower level often I can see it maybe not being a problem.
Just finished the adventure last night. Overall it was a great adventure. My biggest problem was the skill challenge at the end.... Arcana DC 10? The Bard in my group couldn't fail it......
Huh. I set it at 15, myself.
Give it a few levels and it will. When the first defense "spikes" occur they will start noticing when they are missing even level enemies greater than 50% of the time. Anything beyond that it just gets worse rapidly.
If you use enemies of a lower level often I can see it maybe not being a problem.
Well obviously I balanace every encounter so it fits the player's level of power. But at level 15 we still don't experience imbalance.
And again, the tactics section here essentially says to do the exact opposite of everything I'm suggesting. Hence all my posts, because I expect a DM to assume he SHOULD trust the tactics in encounter - and it this case I'm saying "Don't touch it! It's EVIL!"
What do people think about this encounter for a Level 3 party of:
* Halfling Barbarian (has Iron Armbands of Power)
* Human Cleric (has Icon of the Silver Flame, Chainmail of Sacrifice +1)
* Half-Orc Ranger and tiger(cat) (has a relentless spiked chain +1, sylvan hide armour +1)
* Half-Elf Dragon Sorcerer of House Lhyrandar (has bloodthread armour +1, wyrmtooth dagger +2)
They also have the chance to buy some magic items between now and when I run Khyber's Harvest.
Is it still too hard? Could I safely run it using Keith's suggested tactics?
I've been struggling to find the right balance in difficulty, some encounters they've found easy are
They absolutely thrashed this encounter
They were level 1:
* 3 Bullywug Muckers (Level 1 brutes)
* 2 Human bandits (Level 2 Skirmishers)
* 3 Bullywug Muckers (Level 1 brutes)
* 2 Human bandits (Level 2 Skirmishers)
I have to say, they did astoundingly well until the Living Darkness. No one died, but one very smart Artificer player temp HP'd the crap out of himself. But the fight literally used up all their resources. I think one member of the party still had a daily, and they had just rested up to full in the room before...so I allowed two uses of the Blood of Khyber rest.
Now, the reason they had to fight it was that while they were all running away, it grabbed one of them and he was unable to break free. The bonds are strong with this party, so they weren't going to leave him to be devoured by an unknown darkness. So they fumbled and stumbled and tried desperately to vanquish something they couldn't see that took half damage from all of them except our Avenger (who did the vast majority of the damage and dealt the killing blow). It seems like the fear that this encounter is meant to evoke is there...but that if someone gets bad rolls consistently, that someone is dead unless the party is there to help, and if they're there to help, they're not running away.
Also, what Dungeon Tiles set(s) does this module use?
Thanks.
EDIT: Thought of more questions: If the party runs away from the Living Darkness, should they be awarded any XP? Also, I will probably have a party of 3 or 4 instead of 5 PCs. What do you guys think the best way to scale down the encounters is? Should I reduce the levels of the enemies, the number of enemies, or both?
Quick question: I'm planning on running this as an intro session to Eberron sometime in the next few weeks. Does anyone have any suggestions on how to use this adventure as the beginning of a campaign? I don't have the ECG yet, so I'm not sure what resources I might have to run a low-Heroic campaign based around the daelkyr.
Also, what Dungeon Tiles set(s) does this module use?
Thanks.
Lost Caverns of the UNderdark and Caverns of Carnage, as well as the double sided tile provided with the printed adventure.
Lost Caverns of the UNderdark and Caverns of Carnage, as well as the double sided tile provided with the printed adventure.
The first encounter uses Ruins of the Wild...
Is there an error with the map for this adventure? As shown, the trap in Encounter 4 can simply be walked around. I'm prepared to remove the "diamond" shaped area, put the trap in the corner of the corridor, and put the alcove to one side as the description indicates, but I wanted to make sure I wasn't missing something.