Show
First off, unless I horribly missed something, the PC's don't earn their first milestone until after the last combat encounter. I'm certain the author intended it this way, but both as a player and a DM this seems like an exploit. It's especially cheesy since the Team Monster get two action points each fight.
As most groups will I think, we took path C. Maddening Gaze was absolutely infuriating to the PCs. It turns off almost all of their cool tricks. I think most P2 groups will have tools available to shut it down, but it will prove to be a challenge.
The main monster in the second encounter was really well designed. I ruled that he could threaten through the hex portals - not sure if that was intended. However, a character with the right skills can make really good use of the pool.
There was a lot of debate about the big decision at the end of the module. I let them know the parcel and XP consequences of their choice, because I felt it wasn't right to do so otherwise.
All in all I thought it was a good P2 mod. However, I think a lot of players will complain about the milestone function. I also tend to be in favor of P2 mods being very challenging, but not everyone agrees with me on this.
First off, unless I horribly missed something, the PC's don't earn their first milestone until after the last combat encounter. I'm certain the author intended it this way, but both as a player and a DM this seems like an exploit. It's especially cheesy since the Team Monster get two action points each fight.
As most groups will I think, we took path C. Maddening Gaze was absolutely infuriating to the PCs. It turns off almost all of their cool tricks. I think most P2 groups will have tools available to shut it down, but it will prove to be a challenge.
The main monster in the second encounter was really well designed. I ruled that he could threaten through the hex portals - not sure if that was intended. However, a character with the right skills can make really good use of the pool.
There was a lot of debate about the big decision at the end of the module. I let them know the parcel and XP consequences of their choice, because I felt it wasn't right to do so otherwise.
All in all I thought it was a good P2 mod. However, I think a lot of players will complain about the milestone function. I also tend to be in favor of P2 mods being very challenging, but not everyone agrees with me on this.
Show
As most groups will I think, we took path C.
Show
Maddening Gaze for many is a party killer if the Shadow Hulk wins initiative.
Maddening Gaze (minor 1/round; at-will) ? Gaze, Psychic
Close blast 5; targets enemies; +22 vs. Will; the target does nothing on its turn except attack its nearest target, moving if necessary (save ends). A target makes only basic attacks while under this effect.
In many cases, if the hulk wins initiative (like it did in our fight) he walks up to the party, gazes and assuming the DM rolls higher than a 5 to hit he takes away pretty much everything the party can do to counter it. I can counter stun/daze/immobilize/etc with powers because I've come to expect those in Paragon mods.
But this power is worse. PCs can't move out of the death box. They can't heal. They can't use a second wind to heal (and possibly get a saving throw). They can't use powers to give other people the ability to make saves. They can't ready. Many characters won't have an effective attack. All of their tactical options are taken away.
If the hulk doesn't win initiative, you can get out of the death box and might have chances to counter it. In our case our DM was taking it easy on us and 2 people weren't affected, he spread out damage and let our cleric use a Immediate Reaction healing (because it wasn't her turn) that she had. We were playing high, but most of us were level 17 and we had an effective party, so it was appropriate. If the DM had not soft-balled it, it probably would have been a TPK.
The whole "this is a skill challenge but it doesn't count towards a milestone" is just annoying and has no justification in the rules. Losing the extra action point just makes the last encounter go longer, losing the extra daily item power can really hurt. It felt like the author was saying "f*** you, I'm going to cheat to make the mod tougher".
Maddening Gaze for many is a party killer if the Shadow Hulk wins initiative.
Maddening Gaze (minor 1/round; at-will) ? Gaze, Psychic
Close blast 5; targets enemies; +22 vs. Will; the target does nothing on its turn except attack its nearest target, moving if necessary (save ends). A target makes only basic attacks while under this effect.
In many cases, if the hulk wins initiative (like it did in our fight) he walks up to the party, gazes and assuming the DM rolls higher than a 5 to hit he takes away pretty much everything the party can do to counter it. I can counter stun/daze/immobilize/etc with powers because I've come to expect those in Paragon mods.
But this power is worse. PCs can't move out of the death box. They can't heal. They can't use a second wind to heal (and possibly get a saving throw). They can't use powers to give other people the ability to make saves. They can't ready. Many characters won't have an effective attack. All of their tactical options are taken away.
If the hulk doesn't win initiative, you can get out of the death box and might have chances to counter it. In our case our DM was taking it easy on us and 2 people weren't affected, he spread out damage and let our cleric use a Immediate Reaction healing (because it wasn't her turn) that she had. We were playing high, but most of us were level 17 and we had an effective party, so it was appropriate. If the DM had not soft-balled it, it probably would have been a TPK.
The whole "this is a skill challenge but it doesn't count towards a milestone" is just annoying and has no justification in the rules. Losing the extra action point just makes the last encounter go longer, losing the extra daily item power can really hurt. It felt like the author was saying "f*** you, I'm going to cheat to make the mod tougher".
I wrote the module. I assure you no cheating was involved.
Shadow Hulk
While I didn't design this particular encounter (it was the only one I didn't design), I thought it was pretty fun and decided to leave it as is with only minor tweaks (and a big change to the map). The trick is to close your eyes to avoid its gaze and then spread out so that it can't catch everyone in the blast. Two playtest tables that employed this tactic provided very positive feedback on the encounter. Two other tables complained that it was too frustrating, and the DMs mentioned that they felt the players used poor tactics. However, I can see how a team can get trapped for a while if the DM decides to spam the gaze and it keeps hitting. Remember though that the frustration level of the encounter rests on the shoulders of the DM moreso than the author - if I run an adventure and a creature is doing something that's really frustrating the players, I might take a break for a round or two and let them regroup.
community.wizards.com/lfr/go/forum/view/...
I think these forums are being decomissioned. I'm sure one of the VCLs can clarify.
We ran CORE 2-8 this past weekend.Show
First off, unless I horribly missed something, the PC's don't earn their first milestone until after the last combat encounter. I'm certain the author intended it this way, but both as a player and a DM this seems like an exploit. It's especially cheesy since the Team Monster get two action points each fight.
As most groups will I think, we took path C. Maddening Gaze was absolutely infuriating to the PCs. It turns off almost all of their cool tricks. I think most P2 groups will have tools available to shut it down, but it will prove to be a challenge.
The main monster in the second encounter was really well designed. I ruled that he could threaten through the hex portals - not sure if that was intended. However, a character with the right skills can make really good use of the pool.
There was a lot of debate about the big decision at the end of the module. I let them know the parcel and XP consequences of their choice, because I felt it wasn't right to do so otherwise.
All in all I thought it was a good P2 mod. However, I think a lot of players will complain about the milestone function. I also tend to be in favor of P2 mods being very challenging, but not everyone agrees with me on this.
ShowThe trick is to close your eyes to avoid its gaze and then spread out so that it can't catch everyone in the blast. Two playtest tables that employed this tactic provided very positive feedback on the encounter.
ShowThe trick is to close your eyes to avoid its gaze and then spread out so that it can't catch everyone in the blast. Two playtest tables that employed this tactic provided very positive feedback on the encounter.
I wrote the module. I assure you no cheating was involved.
Shadow HulkWhile I didn't design this particular encounter (it was the only one I didn't design), I thought it was pretty fun and decided to leave it as is with only minor tweaks (and a big change to the map). The trick is to close your eyes to avoid its gaze and then spread out so that it can't catch everyone in the blast. Two playtest tables that employed this tactic provided very positive feedback on the encounter. Two other tables complained that it was too frustrating, and the DMs mentioned that they felt the players used poor tactics. However, I can see how a team can get trapped for a while if the DM decides to spam the gaze and it keeps hitting. Remember though that the frustration level of the encounter rests on the shoulders of the DM moreso than the author - if I run an adventure and a creature is doing something that's really frustrating the players, I might take a break for a round or two and let them regroup.
Shadow HulkThe trick is to close your eyes to avoid its gaze and then spread out so that it can't catch everyone in the blast.
We have to remember that as our PCs ascend levels, their challenges will ascend as well. Even a nominally intelligent monster/ guard can be trained against paragon- and epic-tiered foes. A shadow hulk could quite feasibly be trained by its handlers to gaze at everything and move away from unaffected threats.
I've run this adventure multiple times, and each time is a bit different. Players that choose to alpha strike and blast away get nuked. Players that play wisely, move around, and use maneuvering tactics tended to do better; much better, in fact!
That a table earns an AP every combat is a bit cheesy, and in my opinion as player and DM requires that combats step up and ramp up the difficulty. The MM3 changes were great and I look forward to more trap/ creature/ terrain symmetry in the future.
Best, all!
I have to agree with Dave here: most of the LFR parties I've run games for *looks at Dave, very pointedly :p * tear up the games.
We have to remember that as our PCs ascend levels, their challenges will ascend as well. Even a nominally intelligent monster/ guard can be trained against paragon- and epic-tiered foes. A shadow hulk could quite feasibly be trained by its handlers to gaze at everything and move away from unaffected threats.
I've run this adventure multiple times, and each time is a bit different. Players that choose to alpha strike and blast away get nuked. Players that play wisely, move around, and use maneuvering tactics tended to do better; much better, in fact!
That a table earns an AP every combat is a bit cheesy, and in my opinion as player and DM requires that combats step up and ramp up the difficulty. The MM3 changes were great and I look forward to more trap/ creature/ terrain symmetry in the future.
Best, all!
The problem is ...
Show
is that if the hulk wins initiative, there is no option for the PCs to "move around". If the monster hits everyone in the party, they are SOL. All they can do is make a basic attack against the closest target (our DM interpreted this as closest monster, but we even had to discuss that). If the other monsters move in, the hulk stays in the backround blasting away, never getting hit but removing virtually all tactical options for the group.
This is an incredibly "swingy" combat. If the hulk doesn't win initiative, the party has options. If the hulk wins initiative, it's almost certainly a TPK unless the DM "fudges". With reach 2, it just steps close enough to hit everyone in the death box, and then steps back after the rest of the monsters close in. Even if the hulk doesn't win initiative, if the PCs don't know to move out of the starting area (highly likely if the fron-line defenders don't win initiative), they still have no options after the first round.
is that if the hulk wins initiative, there is no option for the PCs to "move around". If the monster hits everyone in the party, they are SOL. All they can do is make a basic attack against the closest target (our DM interpreted this as closest monster, but we even had to discuss that). If the other monsters move in, the hulk stays in the backround blasting away, never getting hit but removing virtually all tactical options for the group.
This is an incredibly "swingy" combat. If the hulk doesn't win initiative, the party has options. If the hulk wins initiative, it's almost certainly a TPK unless the DM "fudges". With reach 2, it just steps close enough to hit everyone in the death box, and then steps back after the rest of the monsters close in. Even if the hulk doesn't win initiative, if the PCs don't know to move out of the starting area (highly likely if the fron-line defenders don't win initiative), they still have no options after the first round.
The tactics are clearly spelled out in the mod. The arguments presented here are the equivalent of complaints when the author spells out in the tactics "the fliers are starving, so charge into melee combat to engage the PCs" and the table DM chooses to ignore the tactics and use what they choose to be their interpretation of "optimal tactics" for the monsters. This is a DM problem, not an author problem.
The creature in question is not an author creation, it is part of the core game. If you think it's power is too powerful, please go to the errata forums and request that this be changed.
In this case, the creature was appropriate for the environment, and the author provided specific encounter-specific rules to mitigate PC frustration. If the DM decides to take the framework provided by the author and ignore suggestions and Wheaton's Law, then the players should take that issue up with the DM.
I appreciate all the work authors do. I really wanted to enjoy this mod. But it is too reliant on luck of the dice and will IMHO result in many, many TPKs with the players left with no legitimate tactics and leaving the DM with the choice of killing the party or ignoring the abilities of the monsters.
Allen.
I think that's an overreaction. Too often on these forums, I see people throw their hands in the air when an encounter has a powerful element of PC control and shout "this isn't fair" or "this will lead to too many TPKs."
Some encounters are going to be tough. Some creatures are going to frustrate some players. It's the nature of the game. I have yet to see a TPK in LFR. I know they happen from time to time, but let's face it, it's rare. I have confidence that the vast majority of even average parties that face this encounter (1 in 3 chance) will find ways to defeat it.
I don't know if this was intentional, but it seems appropriate that the "worst" choice PCs could make also results in a harder fight. Not that any of the choices were good (hence why it was an interesting moral dilemna), but option C results in the worst outcome for Elturgard and also feels like the "easy way out" (stand on the sidelines and "keep your hands clean").
As far as the milestone thing goes.... I agree with the author and others that it is acceptable and good to not have every tiny little encounter count towards a milestone. In LFR we have been extremely spoiled with action points for essentially every fight (plus potentially 1 or 2 ad. co. APs). I have played through about 15 levels of published 4e adventures and in those games we learned to use action points sparingly and only when we needed them because we weren't guaranteed to have action points available for every fight.
The DMG says "When characters reach milestones, they get action points. Action points help balance the depletion of character resources (expended daily powers and healing surges) by providing a new resource that can help characters adventure longer before taking an extended rest." If no resources were spent, it's entirely legitimate for an encounter to not count towards a milestone.
The creature in question is not an author creation, it is part of the core game. If you think it's power is too powerful, please go to the errata forums and request that this be changed.
The creature is not a core creature...
Show
The original creature is a Solo in MM with a power designed to make it able to fight a Solo fight. Changing a Solo into an Elite needs to eliminate whatever the R&D people used to make the Solo capable of taking on an entire party by itself as that's not what Elite creatures are supposed to do. There's a reason that the Core Elite version of the creature only Dazes as the minor at-will. While target is less effective than ally, if the party loses initiative against the hulk, then they're likely to be grouped up in blast 5 formation and only have allies as potential targets.
Try running the encounter where the assumption is that the party loses initiative to the Hulk and is in the start area. This should be a reasonably common outcome unless members of the party have optimized around initiative - a character with a 22 Dex and who is level 17 only has a +14 as an example and that's less than the Shadow Hulk. Look at the description of the playtesting - two groups had lots of trouble with the encounter and their DM reported poor tactical play and two groups found it fun, but challenging.
I'd be really curious to find out how those four groups did with initiative...I'd be willing to bet money that the two groups who found it challenging, but fun had at least a third of their party beat the Hulk's initiative and then moved away from the start area before it went. The two who didn't either lost initiative or didn't have people move significantly out of the start area.
Our playtest group didn't play that encounter, but I sent some notes about how that encounter was risking a TPK with a lot of groups. I'm not 100% certain that I went into the Solo vs. Elite problem or the initiative one, but I'm not surprised to hear that feedback from people who played the mod.
Try running the encounter where the assumption is that the party loses initiative to the Hulk and is in the start area. This should be a reasonably common outcome unless members of the party have optimized around initiative - a character with a 22 Dex and who is level 17 only has a +14 as an example and that's less than the Shadow Hulk. Look at the description of the playtesting - two groups had lots of trouble with the encounter and their DM reported poor tactical play and two groups found it fun, but challenging.
I'd be really curious to find out how those four groups did with initiative...I'd be willing to bet money that the two groups who found it challenging, but fun had at least a third of their party beat the Hulk's initiative and then moved away from the start area before it went. The two who didn't either lost initiative or didn't have people move significantly out of the start area.
Our playtest group didn't play that encounter, but I sent some notes about how that encounter was risking a TPK with a lot of groups. I'm not 100% certain that I went into the Solo vs. Elite problem or the initiative one, but I'm not surprised to hear that feedback from people who played the mod.
Encounters should not rely on author suggestions to function properly. The base assumption should be is that the DM may or may not have had time to fully prep the mod. Author suggestions should be to then move away from the middle. I've seen a lot of mods where the DM can miss a really tiny note and then the combat goes really awry. And especially when the DM played the mod, thought the combat was not too difficult, and therefore didn't have the tactical issue requiring the suggestion in the 1st place.
Your statement infers that the encounter doesn't function properly. My assertion is that the encounter functions exactly as intended. Again, I did not design this particular encounter, but I do like it and made a conscious decision to leave it as is and simply provide a few suggestions to the DM. I agree wholeheartedly with Lori - average PCs have plenty of ways to defeat the encounter.
I also disagree that the base assumption made by an author should be that the DM may or may not have had time to fully prep the mod. I always assume that a DM has read everything I've written, and go above and beyond to underline, embolden, or otherwise make stand out any portions that I, my reviewers, or my playtesters determine to be particularly important. I will never write an adventure that assumes that a DM may not have time to fully prep.
The author's responsibility is to provide the tools and framework with which a DM can tell a story and facilitate a fun experience for the players. The DM's responsibility is to make it happen. I know it's easy to blame an author because DMs will always vary but an author does not (and lord knows, I've learned some valuable lessons from many encounters I've designed that could have been improved). I don't write in a vaccuum - I collect a lot of feedback from reviewers, editors, friends, playtesters, even my non-gamer girlfriend who has surprisingly insightful remarks. Your opinion and your experience is but one of many. I put a lot of stock into the feedback I receive from tables where the DM prepared well and did an excellent job running the adventure. I put a lot less stock into feedback I receive from tables where the DM clearly didn't prepare well, missed something in the adventure, or generally didn't seem to do a good job running the adventure (this stuff is usually quite obvious from reading the comments of the DM and the players).
However, one thing that I did was rule that if the monster in question was dazed, it, like most creatures, would try to use a standard action rather than a minor. I am well aware that was a tactically inferior decision, but I felt the PC's efforts to daze the monster under difficult circumstances thould be rewarded.
It was a challenging fight, but while the party was bloodied a few times and I think I came close to dropping a character or two, the only time someone went to zero hit points they were immediately resuscitated by a Berranor's Salve. Again, while most leaders won't have that option, PC's who are in P2 should have some more tricks at their disposal.
I'll be seeing this from the players side of the screen this weekend, DM'd by someone I inflicted this module on, so it will be interesting to see how my point of view shifts.
I also disagree that the base assumption made by an author should be that the DM may or may not have had time to fully prep the mod.
+1. It's the DM's job to fully prep the mod. If the DM does not, then take issue with your DM. If for whatever reason, you understand that the DM has not had a chance to properly prepare, then you should expect a less-than-optimal experience.
Teacher's don't write tests assuming that some students may not have had time to fully study/prepare for the test - though I've sat through some parent conferences accused of "unfair" tests because the student had an extracurricular activity the night before and didn't get a chance to study.
The author's responsibility is to provide the tools and framework with which a DM can tell a story and facilitate a fun experience for the players. The DM's responsibility is to make it happen.
Quoted For Truth.
I wish everyone in the LFR community viewed LFR adventures as "a framework from which a DM can provide a fun experience for a group of 4-6 players" than "an adventure that must be run RAW to provide consistent and comparable outcomes between tables." When people embrace the former and not the latter, they tend to have much less to complain about.
[I suspect the benchmark that Globals and Writing Directors use is the former, not the latter, based on the boiler-plate text at the beginning of every adventure.]
Expecting that DMs will have a mod dissected as clearly as a grad student should have his course material does is, well, silly. DM's are volunteers with jobs and families just like the authors are, and their skill sets vary.
I want to point out that I don't think anything like that happened here. I was very clear on what DKay was putting out in the mod. I think he did an excellent job communicating everything I needed to know as a DM from a combat standpoint. (I was a little unclear on how the PC's returned from the adventure, but I managed that alright.). The complaints from the players at my table had nothing to do with preperation - they had to do with features of the module, such as Maddening Gaze or the milestone issue.
More over the weekend, questions (or rants and ravings) very welcome but possibly best in PM.
In this case, the creature was appropriate for the environment, and the author provided specific encounter-specific rules to mitigate PC frustration. If the DM decides to take the framework provided by the author and ignore suggestions and Wheaton's Law, then the players should take that issue up with the DM.
I appreciate that the author included an encounter-specific house rule to deal with this creature, and I think it's appropriately emphasized so that all DMs should be aware of this rule.
Not making it explicit that the author needs to tell the PCs that there is a house rule governing this combat, however, makes that incredibly less useful. This is the sort of the thing that needs to be made explicit that the players need to be specifically told that they can do this.
Because, let's be clear, the encounter-specific rule is not found in the core rules. Even leaving aside the issue of whether the action the PCs are allowed to take has the effect the module says (which many DMs will have been ruling consistently that it does not), the house rule allows the PCs to do something explicitly disallowed in the core rules (choose to do something during the 'start of your turn' phase, needed because they won't be able to take any actions on their turn).
Unfortunately, if the house rule is announced, it's blatantly obvious what to do.
Show
"What, you mean I can choose to be immune to getting hit again by the main control effect frustrating me and be at -5 to attack my friend, at the cost of granting combat advantage for a round? I'm not a moron; of course I'm going to do that!"
Encounters should not rely on author suggestions to function properly. The base assumption should be is that the DM may or may not have had time to fully prep the mod. Author suggestions should be to then move away from the middle. I've seen a lot of mods where the DM can miss a really tiny note and then the combat goes really awry. And especially when the DM played the mod, thought the combat was not too difficult, and therefore didn't have the tactical issue requiring the suggestion in the 1st place.
Your statement infers that the encounter doesn't function properly. My assertion is that the encounter functions exactly as intended.
A good author designs an interesting encounter. A great one designs an encounter that anticipates problems and automatically adjusts. Your encounters, when run by a prepped DM, are often extremely challenging and good, but are fall off a cliff horrible when a DM doesn't get your intent.
Let's continue with the example from SPEC1-3 P1:
Show
That's the tactical note letting the DM know what to do, so as to keep the melee PCs involved in the early rounds. Nothing else. In the section saying what to do if the combat goes long, it doesn't mention anything about making sure the ghosts are engaging the PCs in melee. It is not at all implausible to have a DM make the mistake of going, "Ok, I'll shoot them for the first couple of rounds and then make a decision." - which means the melee PCs don't get to do a whole lot for the first couple of rounds. That's frustrating, even if the PCs have options as their ranged options mean they're taking OAs or they're metagaming to ready for the Ghost Captain's action. And I'm saying this from the PoV that in both times I've played this mod, the DM had the Ghosts hang back - one of which had at least 2, maybe 3 playtesters at it.
Turn the crossbow attack into a recharge 4-6. Add a tactical note that a well-prepped DM can and should make that into an at-will, but to make sure something is giving the melee characters something to do. For the well-prepped DM, exact same encounter as you designed. Exact. Not a difference. For a DM who didn't interpret the hidden meaning, they'll keep it as a recharge 4-6 and therefore avoid grind and go towards intent by authorial fiat. The Ghost Captain will still be just as challenging, but the encounter as a whole will engage the whole party irregardless of the prep time of the DM instead of being dependent on the prep time of the DM.
The watchful ghosts prefer to get in melee with their targets but are equally skilled with their crossbows.
That's the tactical note letting the DM know what to do, so as to keep the melee PCs involved in the early rounds. Nothing else. In the section saying what to do if the combat goes long, it doesn't mention anything about making sure the ghosts are engaging the PCs in melee. It is not at all implausible to have a DM make the mistake of going, "Ok, I'll shoot them for the first couple of rounds and then make a decision." - which means the melee PCs don't get to do a whole lot for the first couple of rounds. That's frustrating, even if the PCs have options as their ranged options mean they're taking OAs or they're metagaming to ready for the Ghost Captain's action. And I'm saying this from the PoV that in both times I've played this mod, the DM had the Ghosts hang back - one of which had at least 2, maybe 3 playtesters at it.
Turn the crossbow attack into a recharge 4-6. Add a tactical note that a well-prepped DM can and should make that into an at-will, but to make sure something is giving the melee characters something to do. For the well-prepped DM, exact same encounter as you designed. Exact. Not a difference. For a DM who didn't interpret the hidden meaning, they'll keep it as a recharge 4-6 and therefore avoid grind and go towards intent by authorial fiat. The Ghost Captain will still be just as challenging, but the encounter as a whole will engage the whole party irregardless of the prep time of the DM instead of being dependent on the prep time of the DM.
Let's continue with the example from SPEC1-3 P1:
Let's continue with the example from SPEC1-3 P1:
I think that's an overreaction. Too often on these forums, I see people throw their hands in the air when an encounter has a powerful element of PC control and shout "this isn't fair" or "this will lead to too many TPKs."
My experience:
Show
The problem is that if you are hit by the gaze attack, you can take no actions other than a basic attack on your turn. The PC can move to close with the nearest target to get in range. That's it. We were not given the option to close our eyes (my wife's been prepping it and she missed it too). PC's should not have been able to close their eyes if under the effect of the gaze since the power very specifically states that you can take no other actions than attack.
There is no chance to give other people saving throws. There is no chance to move out of the death box once you've been hit. You can't close your eyes or take any action to intentionally blind yourself or party members. In our party the cleric was the one with the highest will, she was hit on a 5 or better.
Our fight went like the following...
Round one: the hulk wins initiative, walks up and does a minor hit 3 out of 5 characters. The DM could have had the hulk double move and minor to get the whole party, he was being kind. He then pounds on the fighter with reach. The rest of the monsters move up so that they are closest (and blocking us in to the death box) and beat up the fighter. The affected party members do some inneffective attacks because, well, they have no options on what their attack will be. The sorcerer in the back tries to attack but can't risk moving into the death box because he's at the low end of initiative order and if he gets hit by the gaze attack we're all dead. The wizard teleports out into the room and tries to daze the hulk. She misses.
Round two: the death hulk gazes again and hits the same 3 PCs and pounds on the fighter. We do a couple of ineffective attacks again and the rest of the bad guys pound on the fighter, dropping him to 0. The DM is nice and let's the cleric cast Berranor's Salve. The sorcerer does some damage, but not enough. The wizard dazes the hulk.
Round three: the DM decides the hulk will not use his gaze attack because he's dazed, even though it is it's most powerful attack. Because the hulk didn't use the gaze we can actually move tactically, my fighter can activate a stance, we can heal, we have a chance. Because the DM used "stupid" tactics.
Assuming the hulk had gazed again and the DM rolled attack higher than 3 on the gaze attack, the next round would have seen my fighter inneffectvely doing unarmed attacks from prone. All the monsters can focus on the cleric and ignore the fighter crawling around biting ankles since Berranor's Salve is a reaction that happens after he dropped to zero, fell prone and dropped his weapon.
Next round just depends on luck of the dice. The wizard is out of daze attacks. If the hulk rolls better than a 4 on his gaze attack, the cleric still can't heal anyone but is now a logical target for the bad guys. With everyone focusing on her, she probably drops by the end of the round. She might get one melee basic attack in. It gets worse from there.
I cannot think of much we could have done differently. The sorcerer or the wizard could have tried to give another PC a save, but there's no guarantee it would have worked and it would have left them in the death box.
According to the way the power is written, if the hulk had simply double moved to get us all or had continued to gaze it probably would have been a TPK unless he missed. Maybe the sorcerer and wizard could have taken out the hulk in time. But the people in the zone of no-action had no options.
Even as a defender, my character has ways (other than cards) to counter immobilize/stun/daze at least for a round. I can give myself saving throws. I can heal myself. I couldn't do any of that. The cleric couldn't heal or grant saves. Nobody could draw potions or switch weapons, etc.
It felt like a situation where the DM had to use obviously stupid tactics to not kill the party. With the right party and/or different dice rolls we would have been ok. It's a very "swingy" combat depending on just a couple of dice rolls and on the DM softballing the combat.
The problem is that if you are hit by the gaze attack, you can take no actions other than a basic attack on your turn. The PC can move to close with the nearest target to get in range. That's it. We were not given the option to close our eyes (my wife's been prepping it and she missed it too). PC's should not have been able to close their eyes if under the effect of the gaze since the power very specifically states that you can take no other actions than attack.
There is no chance to give other people saving throws. There is no chance to move out of the death box once you've been hit. You can't close your eyes or take any action to intentionally blind yourself or party members. In our party the cleric was the one with the highest will, she was hit on a 5 or better.
Our fight went like the following...
Round one: the hulk wins initiative, walks up and does a minor hit 3 out of 5 characters. The DM could have had the hulk double move and minor to get the whole party, he was being kind. He then pounds on the fighter with reach. The rest of the monsters move up so that they are closest (and blocking us in to the death box) and beat up the fighter. The affected party members do some inneffective attacks because, well, they have no options on what their attack will be. The sorcerer in the back tries to attack but can't risk moving into the death box because he's at the low end of initiative order and if he gets hit by the gaze attack we're all dead. The wizard teleports out into the room and tries to daze the hulk. She misses.
Round two: the death hulk gazes again and hits the same 3 PCs and pounds on the fighter. We do a couple of ineffective attacks again and the rest of the bad guys pound on the fighter, dropping him to 0. The DM is nice and let's the cleric cast Berranor's Salve. The sorcerer does some damage, but not enough. The wizard dazes the hulk.
Round three: the DM decides the hulk will not use his gaze attack because he's dazed, even though it is it's most powerful attack. Because the hulk didn't use the gaze we can actually move tactically, my fighter can activate a stance, we can heal, we have a chance. Because the DM used "stupid" tactics.
Assuming the hulk had gazed again and the DM rolled attack higher than 3 on the gaze attack, the next round would have seen my fighter inneffectvely doing unarmed attacks from prone. All the monsters can focus on the cleric and ignore the fighter crawling around biting ankles since Berranor's Salve is a reaction that happens after he dropped to zero, fell prone and dropped his weapon.
Next round just depends on luck of the dice. The wizard is out of daze attacks. If the hulk rolls better than a 4 on his gaze attack, the cleric still can't heal anyone but is now a logical target for the bad guys. With everyone focusing on her, she probably drops by the end of the round. She might get one melee basic attack in. It gets worse from there.
I cannot think of much we could have done differently. The sorcerer or the wizard could have tried to give another PC a save, but there's no guarantee it would have worked and it would have left them in the death box.
According to the way the power is written, if the hulk had simply double moved to get us all or had continued to gaze it probably would have been a TPK unless he missed. Maybe the sorcerer and wizard could have taken out the hulk in time. But the people in the zone of no-action had no options.
Even as a defender, my character has ways (other than cards) to counter immobilize/stun/daze at least for a round. I can give myself saving throws. I can heal myself. I couldn't do any of that. The cleric couldn't heal or grant saves. Nobody could draw potions or switch weapons, etc.
It felt like a situation where the DM had to use obviously stupid tactics to not kill the party. With the right party and/or different dice rolls we would have been ok. It's a very "swingy" combat depending on just a couple of dice rolls and on the DM softballing the combat.
Show
For all of the skill challenges, the moderate to hard DCs are used. For the "a" and "b" versions, most PCs are going to be at a -5 penalty (at least, all of my paragon level PCs would be). The "c" version that we played has a group challenge that is very likely to fail (bluff and stealth being the only options and probably the 2 skills the majority of PCs will be bad at). The consequences are not inconsequential as they range from lost healing surges to the bad guys knowing that we're coming.
Are we just setting the precedence that from now on, all challenges are "inconsequential"? Or is it just level 1 skill challenges?
For all of the skill challenges, the moderate to hard DCs are used. For the "a" and "b" versions, most PCs are going to be at a -5 penalty (at least, all of my paragon level PCs would be). The "c" version that we played has a group challenge that is very likely to fail (bluff and stealth being the only options and probably the 2 skills the majority of PCs will be bad at). The consequences are not inconsequential as they range from lost healing surges to the bad guys knowing that we're coming.
Are we just setting the precedence that from now on, all challenges are "inconsequential"? Or is it just level 1 skill challenges?
A good author designs an interesting encounter. A great one designs an encounter that anticipates problems and automatically adjusts. Your encounters, when run by a prepped DM, are often extremely challenging and good, but are fall off a cliff horrible when a DM doesn't get your intent.
Let's continue with the example from SPEC1-3 P1:... -SNIP-
We're starting to get into personal attack territory here. Before you can decide the difference between being a good author and a great author, you need some experience as an author (and I'm not talking about co-writing an LG adventure). "Your encounters" is a blanket statement I'd prefer you didn't make. I always try new things - some work and some don't. As stated earlier, the shadow hulk encounter is not one of my encounters, but that's really beside the point.
Furthermore, SPEC1-3 has nothing to do with this discussion, and as another poster has pointed out, SPEC1-3 was my second LFR adventure and I've learned quite a few lessons since then.
If you have so many problems with my authoring ability, then why did I waste so many hours helping you with your writing auditions?
I read over the skill challenge of the mod and had a question. What does "inconsequential encounter" mean? To me, it means either there is no consequence to failure or that the odds of failure are inconsequential. I don't believe the skill challenges meet either one of those.Show
For all of the skill challenges, the moderate to hard DCs are used. For the "a" and "b" versions, most PCs are going to be at a -5 penalty (at least, all of my paragon level PCs would be). The "c" version that we played has a group challenge that is very likely to fail (bluff and stealth being the only options and probably the 2 skills the majority of PCs will be bad at). The consequences are not inconsequential as they range from lost healing surges to the bad guys knowing that we're coming.
Are we just setting the precedence that from now on, all challenges are "inconsequential"? Or is it just level 1 skill challenges?
A good author designs an interesting encounter. A great one designs an encounter that anticipates problems and automatically adjusts. Your encounters, when run by a prepped DM, are often extremely challenging and good, but are fall off a cliff horrible when a DM doesn't get your intent.
Let's continue with the example from SPEC1-3 P1:... -SNIP-
We're starting to get into personal attack territory here. Before you can decide the difference between being a good author and a great author, you need some experience as an author (and I'm not talking about co-writing an LG adventure).
Show
It is not a personal attack to state that Solos should not be converted into Elites without removing their action economy abilities - it is 4e design guidelines. When you violate the guidelines, then you need to go above and beyond to prevent what happened to Allen in the mod where you violated the guidelines.
In this case, the creature was appropriate for the environment, and the author provided specific encounter-specific rules to mitigate PC frustration. If the DM decides to take the framework provided by the author and ignore suggestions and Wheaton's Law, then the players should take that issue up with the DM.
I appreciate that the author included an encounter-specific house rule to deal with this creature, and I think it's appropriately emphasized so that all DMs should be aware of this rule.
Not making it explicit that the author needs to tell the PCs that there is a house rule governing this combat, however, makes that incredibly less useful. This is the sort of the thing that needs to be made explicit that the players need to be specifically told that they can do this.
Because, let's be clear, the encounter-specific rule is not found in the core rules. Even leaving aside the issue of whether the action the PCs are allowed to take has the effect the module says (which many DMs will have been ruling consistently that it does not), the house rule allows the PCs to do something explicitly disallowed in the core rules (choose to do something during the 'start of your turn' phase, needed because they won't be able to take any actions on their turn).
Unfortunately, if the house rule is announced, it's blatantly obvious what to do.Show"What, you mean I can choose to be immune to getting hit again by the main control effect frustrating me and be at -5 to attack my friend, at the cost of granting combat advantage for a round? I'm not a moron; of course I'm going to do that!"
I'm using SPEC1-3 P1 to illustrate the problems of relying on the DM reading the notes as it was written by the same author. Yes, he may have done more detail in CORE2-8, but the problem is that many DMs do not read that detail exhaustively or they play the encounter tactically in a way not suggested by the Author. Yes, maybe they're not supposed to do that. But the reality is that they do and enough bad experiences by one author's mods will suggest to players that the problem is with the author, not the DM.
That might not be fair. But I've seen that happen with dkay's mods already.
And yet other players specifically go out of their way to play mods with dkay's name on them because they find the adventures interesting, well-written, challenging, and fun. Maybe it's just a difference in play-style/preference. It's not possible for any author to write a mod that is going to appeal to absolutely every player in existence.
I'm using SPEC1-3 P1 to illustrate the problems of relying on the DM reading the notes as it was written by the same author. Yes, he may have done more detail in CORE2-8, but the problem is that many DMs do not read that detail exhaustively or they play the encounter tactically in a way not suggested by the Author. Yes, maybe they're not supposed to do that. But the reality is that they do and enough bad experiences by one author's mods will suggest to players that the problem is with the author, not the DM.
That might not be fair. But I've seen that happen with dkay's mods already.
And yet other players specifically go out of their way to play mods with dkay's name on them because they find the adventures interesting, well-written, challenging, and fun. Maybe it's just a difference in play-style/preference. It's not possible for any author to write a mod that is going to appeal to absolutely every player in existence.
The problem is not whether the mods appeal to every player. The problem is the why. dkay's mods should appeal to a very large section of the LFR player base. When run properly, they're challenging and fun.
But the who it appeals to is not based on dkay's writing skills(which are considerable), it is based mainly on how lucky you are as a player to get a DM who is willing to put the time in it, hopefully gets what dkay is trying to do in an encounter, and doesn't miss any notes. There are some mods of his that I've liked a lot on one playing and hated on a different playing, solely because of how a DM interpreted what they were supposed to do in an encounter.
And this is not a problem of the encounter itself, it is a problem of how willing dkay is to make sure that poorly prepped DMs won't mess up his encounters.
As an example - let's say the author's note was included in the power description instead of as an author's note. There's no reason that couldn't have happened - it was a brand new creature.
Now instead of it being a house rule, it is RAW. No poorly prepped DM can miss this. It is no longer a solo monster dressed in elite clothing. The encounter isn't changed. And it is clear cut if things go bad what happened. "What, you didn't read the power?"
As an example - let's say the author's note was included in the power description instead of as an author's note. There's no reason that couldn't have happened - it was a brand new creature.
We are not allowed to do this. There are very specific rules on how stat blocks have to be written. We can't add notes within the power description.
Maybe this will change with the LFR reboot.
As an example - let's say the author's note was included in the power description instead of as an author's note. There's no reason that couldn't have happened - it was a brand new creature.
We are not allowed to do this. There are very specific rules on how stat blocks have to be written. We can't add notes within the power description.
Maybe this will change with the LFR reboot.
That wouldn't have been a note. It would have been a detail of the effect on the character. Along the lines of Brash Assault or Avenging Flame, where the target has two choices, both of which have good and bad effects.
Something like this:
Show
Maddening Gaze (minor 1/round; at-will) ? Gaze, Psychic
Close blast 5; targets enemies; +22 vs. Will; the target does nothing on its turn except attack its nearest target, moving if necessary (save ends). A target makes only basic attacks while under this effect.
Special: The target can choose to close their eyes as a free action at the start of their turn until the end of their turn. The target is then treated as though they were blind, and ignore the effects of this power for their turn.
Close blast 5; targets enemies; +22 vs. Will; the target does nothing on its turn except attack its nearest target, moving if necessary (save ends). A target makes only basic attacks while under this effect.
Special: The target can choose to close their eyes as a free action at the start of their turn until the end of their turn. The target is then treated as though they were blind, and ignore the effects of this power for their turn.
As an example - let's say the author's note was included in the power description instead of as an author's note. There's no reason that couldn't have happened - it was a brand new creature.
We are not allowed to do this. There are very specific rules on how stat blocks have to be written. We can't add notes within the power description.
Maybe this will change with the LFR reboot.
That wouldn't have been a note. It would have been a detail of the effect on the character. Along the lines of Brash Assault or Avenging Flame, where the target has two choices, both of which have good and bad effects.
Something like this:ShowMaddening Gaze (minor 1/round; at-will) ? Gaze, Psychic
Close blast 5; targets enemies; +22 vs. Will; the target does nothing on its turn except attack its nearest target, moving if necessary (save ends). A target makes only basic attacks while under this effect.
Special: The target can choose to close their eyes as a free action at the start of their turn until the end of their turn. The target is then treated as though they were blind, and ignore the effects of this power for their turn.
As an example - let's say the author's note was included in the power description instead of as an author's note. There's no reason that couldn't have happened - it was a brand new creature.
We are not allowed to do this. There are very specific rules on how stat blocks have to be written. We can't add notes within the power description.
Maybe this will change with the LFR reboot.
That wouldn't have been a note. It would have been a detail of the effect on the character. Along the lines of Brash Assault or Avenging Flame, where the target has two choices, both of which have good and bad effects.
Something like this:ShowMaddening Gaze (minor 1/round; at-will) ? Gaze, Psychic
Close blast 5; targets enemies; +22 vs. Will; the target does nothing on its turn except attack its nearest target, moving if necessary (save ends). A target makes only basic attacks while under this effect.
Special: The target can choose to close their eyes as a free action at the start of their turn until the end of their turn. The target is then treated as though they were blind, and ignore the effects of this power for their turn.
I read over the skill challenge of the mod and had a question. What does "inconsequential encounter" mean? To me, it means either there is no consequence to failure or that the odds of failure are inconsequential. I don't believe the skill challenges meet either one of those.Show
For all of the skill challenges, the moderate to hard DCs are used. For the "a" and "b" versions, most PCs are going to be at a -5 penalty (at least, all of my paragon level PCs would be). The "c" version that we played has a group challenge that is very likely to fail (bluff and stealth being the only options and probably the 2 skills the majority of PCs will be bad at). The consequences are not inconsequential as they range from lost healing surges to the bad guys knowing that we're coming.
Are we just setting the precedence that from now on, all challenges are "inconsequential"? Or is it just level 1 skill challenges?
Why not? The creature didn't exist before the mod, so the power is a new power - in effect, the power itself is being put into the stat block...
I actually didn't know it was a new creature. We're not allowed to design new creatures without special permission, so when it was handed to me, I assumed it was out of the book. I had remembered seeing Dungeon Mags with Young Shadow Hulks and the like, so I figured it was one of those. To be honest, I should have done the due dilligence to double-check, but I likely let it slip in lieu of all of the other work I was doing with the module. I pulled Krishna in for help on that one encounter specifically because I was trying to write CORE2-8 and CORE2-10 (three rounds) all around the same time.
Why not? The creature didn't exist before the mod, so the power is a new power - in effect, the power itself is being put into the stat block...
I actually didn't know it was a new creature. We're not allowed to design new creatures without special permission, so when it was handed to me, I assumed it was out of the book. I had remembered seeing Dungeon Mags with Young Shadow Hulks and the like, so I figured it was one of those. To be honest, I should have done the due dilligence to double-check, but I likely let it slip in lieu of all of the other work I was doing with the module. I pulled Krishna in for help on that one encounter specifically because I was trying to write CORE2-8 and CORE2-10 (three rounds) all around the same time.
That explains a lot - I spotted the other creature with an issue for you, but I figured you had gotten permission for it.
Show
The Adolescent Shadow Hulk is indeed a downgraded Shadow Hulk i.e. a "new" creature. This fact was communicated, but as Dave indicated he had a lot on his plate so I am not very surprised he missed that fact. I did also communicate with one of the globals editing and made very sure I was within the bounds of what was allowed/advisable. None of the powers were "new" though. It was a changed existing creature, an extended re-skin.
So why a shadow hulk? Because it has an original and fairly nasty control effect. An effect that is balanced by one of its own abilities. If you look up the base creature in for instance the compendium you will note the following in its "Grabbing Double Attack" : "...The shadow hulk cannot make any other attacks while grabbing a creature.". In short, as long as it is grabbing someone it cannot use its gaze attack.
I envisioned a situation in which the Shadow Hulk would use its gaze, grab someone and try to eat them. As long as the Shadow Hulk is kept occupied, the gaze is no longer an issue, allowing the players to spread out. This was written into my tactics which positioned the Shadow Hulk as a simple pet of the jailers. Its low INT score reinforces this. All in all a nasty creature to aid in putting the PC's off balance at the start, but one that is manageable.
If you read the encounter now, you will find that the "Grabbing Double Attack" was changed. It now reads "...The shadow hulk cannot make any other claw attacks while grabbing a creature.". This obviously makes a big difference. Combined with a shortening of the tactics section it makes the encounter quite a bit meaner than originally intended. Although I will admit I did not intend for it to be a friendly stroll through the meadows in the first place.
The Adolescent Shadow Hulk is indeed a downgraded Shadow Hulk i.e. a "new" creature. This fact was communicated, but as Dave indicated he had a lot on his plate so I am not very surprised he missed that fact. I did also communicate with one of the globals editing and made very sure I was within the bounds of what was allowed/advisable. None of the powers were "new" though. It was a changed existing creature, an extended re-skin.
So why a shadow hulk? Because it has an original and fairly nasty control effect. An effect that is balanced by one of its own abilities. If you look up the base creature in for instance the compendium you will note the following in its "Grabbing Double Attack" : "...The shadow hulk cannot make any other attacks while grabbing a creature.". In short, as long as it is grabbing someone it cannot use its gaze attack.
I envisioned a situation in which the Shadow Hulk would use its gaze, grab someone and try to eat them. As long as the Shadow Hulk is kept occupied, the gaze is no longer an issue, allowing the players to spread out. This was written into my tactics which positioned the Shadow Hulk as a simple pet of the jailers. Its low INT score reinforces this. All in all a nasty creature to aid in putting the PC's off balance at the start, but one that is manageable.
If you read the encounter now, you will find that the "Grabbing Double Attack" was changed. It now reads "...The shadow hulk cannot make any other claw attacks while grabbing a creature.". This obviously makes a big difference. Combined with a shortening of the tactics section it makes the encounter quite a bit meaner than originally intended. Although I will admit I did not intend for it to be a friendly stroll through the meadows in the first place.
It turns out that I didn't run the mod at our game day (my wife did) and it was a killer mod that would have been a TPK if she had run it as written.
Show
She decided that the hulk wouldn't use it's dominating gaze if it was dazed.
Anyway, we played this mod and loved it. Thanks, Dave!
Wow, I have to wonder why I have turned down writing assignments recently...
Which is too bad, considering that Scout's Honor is far and away the most fun LFR mod I've ever seen. We could really use more of your modules, Alphastream.
Thanks, JRedGiant1. I appreciate that. It takes a lot of hard work to write and it was done with a lot of help, including Dkay's. Very few of us have the skill or energy to write as much as he does. In addition to writing his own adventures he helps on a bunch of other adventures. There really aren't too many other people in his league.
Thanks for the kind words, Teos! Hopefully the first few epic mods will change your mind about the campaign and its structure, and you'll come around to writing something for Season 2 or 3 (especially when you see where the story is going)!
Thanks, JRedGiant1. I appreciate that. It takes a lot of hard work to write and it was done with a lot of help, including Dkay's. Very few of us have the skill or energy to write as much as he does. In addition to writing his own adventures he helps on a bunch of other adventures. There really aren't too many other people in his league.
Thanks for the kind words, Teos! Hopefully the first few epic mods will change your mind about the campaign and its structure, and you'll come around to writing something for Season 2 or 3 (especially when you see where the story is going)!
I hope so. Teos = quality writing.
Thanks, JRedGiant1. I appreciate that. It takes a lot of hard work to write and it was done with a lot of help, including Dkay's. Very few of us have the skill or energy to write as much as he does. In addition to writing his own adventures he helps on a bunch of other adventures. There really aren't too many other people in his league.
Thanks for the kind words, Teos! Hopefully the first few epic mods will change your mind about the campaign and its structure, and you'll come around to writing something for Season 2 or 3 (especially when you see where the story is going)!
Looking forward to where you are going Dave. If you ever need a spellchecker(or playtest group) for those epic mods let me know ;)
Encounters should not rely on author suggestions to function properly. The base assumption should be is that the DM may or may not have had time to fully prep the mod. Author suggestions should be to then move away from the middle. I've seen a lot of mods where the DM can miss a really tiny note and then the combat goes really awry. And especially when the DM played the mod, thought the combat was not too difficult, and therefore didn't have the tactical issue requiring the suggestion in the 1st place.
Your statement infers that the encounter doesn't function properly. My assertion is that the encounter functions exactly as intended. Again, I did not design this particular encounter, but I do like it and made a conscious decision to leave it as is and simply provide a few suggestions to the DM. I agree wholeheartedly with Lori - average PCs have plenty of ways to defeat the encounter.
I also disagree that the base assumption made by an author should be that the DM may or may not have had time to fully prep the mod. I always assume that a DM has read everything I've written, and go above and beyond to underline, embolden, or otherwise make stand out any portions that I, my reviewers, or my playtesters determine to be particularly important. I will never write an adventure that assumes that a DM may not have time to fully prep.
Really, so what happened at Gen Con this year? All the DMs got the mods like 5 minutes before running them. Your statement is false, every DM does not have time to fully prep a mod, particularly at the biggest Con of the year.
However, that doesn't make my statement false. I turn my adventures in on time, and put a lot of my personal time into making sure I do so. I will continue to assume that DMs will take the time to properly prep them, and do what I can to help them in doing so. As a writing director, I will also expect the same of my authors.
Really, so what happened at Gen Con this year? All the DMs got the mods like 5 minutes before running them. Your statement is false, every DM does not have time to fully prep a mod, particularly at the biggest Con of the year.
As Dave points out, this is a separate issue. (And one we all agree needs addressed.)
Looking to authors to solve the problem by "writing in a style that assumes the DMs will not get a chance to properly prepare" is the worst possible way of dealing with the problem. Making sure DMs get adequate time to prepare is the solution we would all like to see.
This means, the responsibility of the authors is to submit their writing on time and to meet all deadlines. Staying on schedule increases the chances that adventures will be released on time (or close enough) so that judges (including those at major cons) have an appropriate amount of preparation time.
Looking to authors to solve the problem by "writing in a style that assumes the DMs will not get a chance to properly prepare" is the worst possible way of dealing with the problem.
And has not been suggested by anyone...the suggestion is to write in a style where if the DM is prepped, the encounter is exactly as intended. If the DM is not prepped, then they don't get access to the full encounter. I'm not saying this should be done in general, but specifically with hard control encounters that revolve around DM notes to pull them back if they go wrong.
The actual encounter did something almost identical to this, though not with the same intent. I'm not sure that it was legal to do, but the encounter did it...
Show
In the extra challenge section, it offers the option to modify the creature's power - PCs affected by the shadow hulk’s gaze must attack their nearest ally, rather than their nearest target. Which is the Solo's power. The encounter could have functioned perfectly well by leveling the Elite 12 Shadow Hulk which dazes as its minor to 16/18. Then in the DM notes, strongly suggest changing the power to what was listed in the mod and specify why.
The actual encounter did something almost identical to this, though not with the same intent. I'm not sure that it was legal to do, but the encounter did it...ShowIn the extra challenge section, it offers the option to modify the creature's power - PCs affected by the shadow hulk’s gaze must attack their nearest ally, rather than their nearest target. Which is the Solo's power. The encounter could have functioned perfectly well by leveling the Elite 12 Shadow Hulk which dazes as its minor to 16/18. Then in the DM notes, strongly suggest changing the power to what was listed in the mod and specify why.
ShowHad I wanted the encounter to use daze, I would have used the elite Young Shadow Hulk. Obviously I did not want the encounter to use daze with or without DM suggestions... Instead I wanted to use the solo's "attack nearest ally" effect. It is more fun, daze gets pretty boring in higher paragon, and a little harder to defend against. Of course as stated in my other post I also balanced that against other features...
I agree that it would have probably worked out better in a situation where a DM is less prepped , but it would have lessened the encounter IMO.
ShowHad I wanted the encounter to use daze, I would have used the elite Young Shadow Hulk. Obviously I did not want the encounter to use daze with or without DM suggestions... Instead I wanted to use the solo's "attack nearest ally" effect. It is more fun, daze gets pretty boring in higher paragon, and a little harder to defend against. Of course as stated in my other post I also balanced that against other features...
I agree that it would have probably worked out better in a situation where a DM is less prepped , but it would have lessened the encounter IMO.
If you look closely, you'll notice that all of the criticism on the forums comes from players with no writing experience
So this isn't criticism?
Authors tend to be more constructive and diplomatic with their feedback to one another (and that feedback is usually much more valuable). Let's try to be constructive and stop beating a dead horse.
I had stopped. Someone decided to misquote me without attribution and then claim that it was the 'worst possible way of dealing with the problem' - I think I was quite diplomatic in response.
Just be careful when you step over the line between feedback and criticism - it doesn't do any good when you overdo it. After all, it's easy to criticize, especially when you haven't done any of the work yourself.
If you look closely, you'll notice that all of the criticism on the forums comes from players with no writing experience. Authors tend to be more constructive and diplomatic with their feedback to one another (and that feedback is usually much more valuable). Let's try to be constructive and stop beating a dead horse.
I've avoided posting in this thread because you already know of my dislike of CORE 2-10 (I read the mod, and I take back nothing I said), but that's one hell of conclusion you're drawing about your critics, and it makes it very clear that no matter how right they might be, you're going to ignore them because you're the Epic Writing Director and you know better than us peons (see, I can make ridiculous conclusions too).
Just because myself, and others, aren't Published WotC Writers doesn't mean we don't have experience with things like game balance, encounter design, or the RPGA. I don't know your entire background concerning writing for D&D and I'm not about to try comparing our relative experience, likewise, you don't know ours (other people on the forums) unless we choose to put it in our Sig.
I think it's funny that you argue against adding text to a creature's stats, when this creature already has added text, you changed the name, hp, attack bonuses, damage, and stats. But creating a "new" monster happens all the time in LFR mods, Unfettered Kraken comes to mind instantly, so I have no issue with adding a template to another monster. In this specific case I think your modification is a bit unfair by RAI that not just damage but also the action type, occurance (at-will, encounter, daily, recharge), effect, and duration of effect are supposedly dependent on level. P2 Low is much different from a P2 High with PCs that could be playing P3.
I also take strong issue with the Skill Challenge that's not a "significant challenge" The guidelines in the DMG for not counting an encounter toward a milestone say that it needs to be 2 levels or lower than the PCs. There's specific rules for creating Skill Challenges that allow for you to change the level of the encounter, making the DCs all lower, or increasing the failures required, thus making it "not a challenge" as you intended. A Difficulty 1 Challenge is equivalent to 1 monster of the same level, by the logic that your skill challenge doesn't count toward a milestone, you could just as easilly throw monster after monster from surprise with some nasty effect (Shadow Hulks maybe) and the PCs would never reach a milestone because none of those creatures are actually a "significant challenge" (please note: I'm not advocating this, I'm pointing out the absurdity of an equal level encounter not counting toward a milestone especially with the new, higher, DCs.)
As you say, you have gotten away with stuff
Heh, you totally missed my point. I'm staying away from that one.
Just because myself, and others, aren't Published WotC Writers doesn't mean we don't have experience with things like game balance, encounter design, or the RPGA. I don't know your entire background concerning writing for D&D and I'm not about to try comparing our relative experience, likewise, you don't know ours (other people on the forums) unless we choose to put it in our Sig.
DaveK could have chosen better wording, but if you feel somebody is being unfair, don't react in a similar fashion. I sincerely doubt you think DaveK means only Published WotC Writers have a right to comment. For one thing, he never said published WotC writers, for another, people who have followed many of the adventure discussions know that most of the blatent complaints are indeed made by players who NEVER read the adventure and which are based on misconceptions and DMs running the adventures wrong. Furthermore, when talking about players, in general people are NOT talking about DMs. The DMG in the Essential line actually reminds people about this fact in a paragraph on its own. Players are the people who run a PC. Obviously, todays player is often yesterday's DM, but again, many of the unfounded complaints have often been made by people who only play. Dave also never said they have no right to complain, he says that in his experience authors give more useful critism, which is likely true, albeit a bit difficult to judge.
I think it's funny that you argue against adding text to a creature's stats, when this creature already has added text, you changed the name, hp, attack bonuses, damage, and stats. But creating a "new" monster happens all the time in LFR mods, Unfettered Kraken comes to mind instantly, so I have no issue with adding a template to another monster. In this specific case I think your modification is a bit unfair by RAI that not just damage but also the action type, occurance (at-will, encounter, daily, recharge), effect, and duration of effect are supposedly dependent on level. P2 Low is much different from a P2 High with PCs that could be playing P3.
In regards to CORE2-8 DaveK and ImaginaryFriend dealt with the question several posts ago. Dave apparently missed the modifications which I thought I and ImaginaryFriends had mentioned to him. A mistake has been made, and admitted, and on retrospect this probabably could have been done better. Give it a rest. Like Dave asked, lets not keep hitting the dead horse.
As for monster design in general, changing names has only done after DMs on these boards complained loudly about how confusing it was not to do so when monsters got reflavored, let alone when themes and templates were added. Changing a name btw is not changing a monster, and Dave never said that changing names was problematic. Themes and templates are all part of the core rules, and are and have always been perfectly viable within LFR. Similarly, authors are allowed to changes energy types. When DaveK talks about new monsters it goes beyond this. The end boss in CORE2-8 is a new monster, and it has been approved by R&D.
I also take strong issue with the Skill Challenge that's not a "significant challenge" The guidelines in the DMG for not counting an encounter toward a milestone say that it needs to be 2 levels or lower than the PCs. There's specific rules for creating Skill Challenges that allow for you to change the level of the encounter, making the DCs all lower, or increasing the failures required, thus making it "not a challenge" as you intended. A Difficulty 1 Challenge is equivalent to 1 monster of the same level, by the logic that your skill challenge doesn't count toward a milestone, you could just as easilly throw monster after monster from surprise with some nasty effect (Shadow Hulks maybe) and the PCs would never reach a milestone because none of those creatures are actually a "significant challenge" (please note: I'm not advocating this, I'm pointing out the absurdity of an equal level encounter not counting toward a milestone especially with the new, higher, DCs.)
Talking about a dead horse... Once again, the argument DaveK (which I and others agree with) is that a complexity 1 skill challenge gives the same xp as defeating ONE monster of that level in a fight. Since facing a single monster equal to the level of the PC in a fight is NOT a significant challenge, then nor could that complexity 1 skill challenge be one. If you honestly feel that a complexity 1 skill challenge is just as draining on the resources as a fight against 5 equal level PCs than you are playing a different game as I and it becomes hard to have a good discussion.
As you say, you have gotten away with stuff
If you feel that way, then you missed the point. With the exception of the specific monster in this adventure, Dave has not gotten away with anything. He has operated within the rules as set down, getting permission from those in charge when he did take a step away from it. If you have a problem with it, direct your anger at the globals who approved the things.
Show
First off, with this "close your eyes" discussion, is it a free action to close your eyes and to open your eyes? Can you close your eyes as an interrupt to the hulk's attack then open your eyes after it? If you close your eyes, shouldnt it last for the round?
Also, for Vessen to attack through the hex portals does he need a portal next to him and a portal next to his target? Or does he just need one portal next to the target to attack through it?
Also, can you actually do a knowledge check on something that never existed before till now? Going strictly on the rules, if you make the higher knowledge check you get everything.
Is there anything else I should look at when running the combats?
Also, for Vessen to attack through the hex portals does he need a portal next to him and a portal next to his target? Or does he just need one portal next to the target to attack through it?
Also, can you actually do a knowledge check on something that never existed before till now? Going strictly on the rules, if you make the higher knowledge check you get everything.
Is there anything else I should look at when running the combats?
Hey, I am running this mod on Saturday and I had some questions as to how the abilities of some of the monsters work.ShowFirst off, with this "close your eyes" discussion, is it a free action to close your eyes and to open your eyes? Can you close your eyes as an interrupt to the hulk's attack then open your eyes after it? If you close your eyes, shouldnt it last for the round?
Also, for Vessen to attack through the hex portals does he need a portal next to him and a portal next to his target? Or does he just need one portal next to the target to attack through it?
Also, can you actually do a knowledge check on something that never existed before till now? Going strictly on the rules, if you make the higher knowledge check you get everything.
Is there anything else I should look at when running the combats?
Show
Spatial Lock would prevent the Sharn from opening new portals, even outside the reach of the zone of teleportation magic negation? I had a PC death due to the Sharn being in that zone creating 2 portals outside the zone then walking up next to me and crit killing me in two hits. (Not to open up the argument that giving monsters magic item crit dice is a terrible mistake again - or am I?)