I am lazy. But now that I have the Monster Builder it's kind of easy to redo the stats for everything in CORM 1-1. I think this is OK under DME; the effects generally aren't more significant than adding or subtracting a level from each monster. Opinions to the contrary are welcome, though!
Either way, here are a bunch of stat blocks. In general the minions stop being complete roadkill, although they're certainly still minions; a few monsters get more hit points; some defenses are raised and a couple are lowered. I think it'll make the module more challenging without being overwhelming.
But now that I have the Monster Builder it's kind of easy to redo the stats for everything in CORM 1-1. I think this is OK under DME; the effects generally aren't more significant than adding or subtracting a level from each monster.
The CCG 1.9 guidelines do not allow for swapping or modifying monsters. Adding or subtracting a level is not really modifying a monster (by the rules) as much as adjusting its difficulty in a generally predictable manner. DME has changed its wording to prevent the type of work many of us did to early mods (including CORM1-1) because that type of change is a violation of what the RPGA is trying to do and it poses risks to both player enjoyment and the WotC and RPGA image.
I looked at your Ectr 1 changes, and they look to be ok. They are roughly more than a 2-level increase over the spread of things, but the current state of the game probably supports that. However, by doing this you are denying the party more XP (which they could use to offset other failures) and you are taking a bit more risk.
By my read, this is not supported by DME. It isn't that you are doing a bad job in this one instance, perhaps, but it is this type of risk that has caused a revision of DME to more carefully protect both players and the company/organization.
For instance, look at the mistakes that can be made when authors and playtesters and admins all pitch in. Trust me when I say that those mods would be all worse without that process. Lots of things are toned down (or up) as a result of the process. The process is not there at all when you use DME. Thus, DME aims to have a very controlled way in which you alter encounters.
And, just to contrast, the types of changes you have made are the kinds of things no author is allowed to do, with the exception of making such a change to a single monster (and that must be approved at the proposal stage of the process, very early on!).
(I really need to work on that DME guide of mine... it needs a massive rewrite)
I looked at your Ectr 1 changes, and they look to be ok. They are roughly more than a 2-level increase over the spread of things, but the current state of the game probably supports that. However, by doing this you are denying the party more XP (which they could use to offset other failures) and you are taking a bit more risk.
I'd argue that I'm not actually denying them XP insofar as the new versions of the monsters are built to spec -- the existing CORM 1-1 monsters are fairly underpowered. E.g, a level 1 Skirmisher has 16 + Con hit points, whereas CORM 1-1 has level 1 Skirmishers with 16 hit points period.
That said, yeah, it probably is more than a two level boost from the monsters as written. So perhaps not within scope of the new DME rules.
CORM 1-1 is a pretty cool adventure with a nice setup and a fun twist. I find it suffers somewhat from having been an early adventure; in particular, the monsters are a touch weak for whatever reason. (I've heard it's because it was written before the rules were finalized, but I dunno, it's just a rumor.)
I wrote CORM1-1. Rumor confirmed.
There were no appropriate shadow monsters for a low-level adventure, so I had to make some up. HQ is really edgy about any new monsters, but they couldn't deny my point. So they nerfed everything horribly. Still, better to err on that side and let DMs scale it up.
I am lazy. But now that I have the Monster Builder it's kind of easy to redo the stats for everything in CORM 1-1. I think this is OK under DME; the effects generally aren't more significant than adding or subtracting a level from each monster. Opinions to the contrary are welcome, though!
Yes, do it! But call it a MYRE, or play with a home game crowd so you don't have to worry about anyone calling you out on improper DME.
Another thing you can do is lift the town setting, and drop it into any MYRE. Ad your own adventure. I know CORM 1-1 has been reskinned (and replotted) at least once.
Either way, here are a bunch of stat blocks. In general the minions stop being complete roadkill, although they're certainly still minions; a few monsters get more hit points; some defenses are raised and a couple are lowered. I think it'll make the module more challenging without being overwhelming.
Looks good. I'm glad you like the adventure enough to make it better. ;D
Yes, do it! But call it a MYRE, or play with a home game crowd so you don't have to worry about anyone calling you out on improper DME.
Ha! That was my other clever plan but I was being coy about saying so, since I dunno if that's considered kosher or not. But yep, that's the obvious way to get serious DME these days.
If I did that I'd reskin it a lot, move it out of Cormyr maybe -- a lot of stuff like that to avoid people getting confused.
I wrote CORM1-1.
And its a good mod in terms of the plot and set up of the mod.
I think it gets an underserved reputation due to the problems with the monsters, and they are mostly solved by adding "Insubstantial" to the shadow critters as it fits them just fine.
I've never had a problem with CORM1-1. Quite the opposite. It has really fun elements and is a perfect mod to run for a new group. I love having a few easy mods that I know will be fun for just about any party. CORM1-1 in particular seems to do a great job of having something for several PCs to identify with. Maybe it's the obelisk, maybe the knight, maybe the beer, maybe the goth mayor, but every time 2-3 of those have been evocative to the tables I've run.
Remember, adjusting difficulty is one of the easiest things you can do. The hard part is just our DM mentality. Personally, it took me a lot of work in the first months of LFR to switch from my LG "as it is written, so be it" mentality when it came to mod difficulty. The new paradigm is "fun". If the table wants harder, that is really easy to do. Uplevel the monsters in under a minute, run the encounter.
Uplevel the monsters in under a minute, run the encounter.
Well that's true if you have a DMG on hand and the time to look up the rules for levelling the monsters so they provide an apporpirate challenge.
You might as well just add "Resist: Insubstantial" to the monsters - they remain easy to hit and their HP track in with other monsters much better then.
Resist insubstantial is not something you can add with DME. (Sure, unofficially, with friends that are replayers and who you know and who say "go for it", go for it. But, if running CORM1-1 with people you don't know, I really do like the new DME rules).
Every DM should understand upleveling and downleveling. It is really simple:
For every level, increase/decrease:
· Attack rolls, defenses, and AC by 1
For every two levels, increase/decrease:
· Damage by 1
Add Hit points for each level, base on role:
· Skirmisher, Soldier, Controller: 8
· Lurker, Artillery: 6
· Brute: 10
Example:
To increase/decrease a soldier, add 10 HPs for each level.
To increase/decrease an Elite controller, add 16 HPs (twice 8) for each level.
You can basically summarize it to being that: for every level add 1 to attacks and all defenses, then add 8 HPs. If you add two levels, do that again and then add 1 to damage. That's really easy.
There are a few special cases, such as insubstantial (roughly -2 HPs/level). For Elites, you give twice the standard amount plus its Con. For Solos, a solo has HPs = 8*(level+1), plus con. If level 10 or lower, multiply result by 4. If level 11 or higher, multiply result by 5.
And its a good mod in terms of the plot and set up of the mod.
I'll echo this! I really enjoyed CORM1-1 as well.
You can basically summarize it to being that: for every level add 1 to attacks and all defenses, then add 8 HPs. If you add two levels, do that again and then add 1 to damage. That's really easy.
You know it is really easy, if you know the rules off by heart for doing it. (I know everything but the HP values for example.)
It is also really easy if you know before you start the module that you need to level the monsters and have had a chance to do it.
It is, on the other hand, a huge pain in the butt when you walk into the games day, and they hand you the module to run cold, and then half way through the first encounter when you go to check the bloodied value of a monster you find it is dead.... which is how I got to run this module.
This module simply needs the creatures to be "updated" - it is really that simple.
Like all the first (and some of the second) batch of modules need the Skill Check DCs updated to bring them in line with the current rules. (I'm still reminding DMs that 1-1 modules need that, and to check the DCs for 1-2 ones...)
It is ultimately a pity that these things are not being fixed.
If it's helpful for anyone, I had previously discussed in another thread the ways in which the creatures are off...
I'd actually advise against just making them insubstantial. While it would counteract the hp difference, certainly, it's generally frustrating for players and doesn't make up for the lack of actual damage from the creatures.
Oh I get the mechanical issues with Insubstantial, but with the low hp and the lack of weakening etc in the encounter the monsters will die just as fast as a normal monster of their level. The other thing is insubstantial fits the way the shadow creatures are described in the module.