General RPG DiscussionDiscussion of all RPGs and non-system-specific topics. DM/GM/player issues, settings, etc. Rules discussion belongs in one the forums below.
Yep, and IME, few campaigns just used the elite array as-is. Most Wizards started with a 16+ - and higher if you go outside the PHB. Just looking at one common non-PHB book, Sun Elves from the 3e FR setting have INT bonuses and no EL. (Heck, if you're running FR, you might as well throw the utterly insane Spellcasting Prodigy feat in there, too.)
So we're looking at IME a minimum DC 25 against level 6 spells, and at least a 27 for level 8 spells. And probably a point or two higher. Like I said upthread, it's rock-paper-scissors; just pick the right defense against most creatures.
-O
At that level, a dragon is still going to make most of their saves. If you put four CR 12 dragons against four 16th level characters, you will get an "average" encounter. four CR 15 dragons will be a challenging encounter. An adult red dragon is CR 15. It has For +18, Ref +13, Will +17 and SR 21. Assuming they don't heroism on themselves or whatever, it can make DC 27 over half the time for Fort, about a fourth of the time for reflexes, and half the time for Will. A fourth of the time, any given spell will fail to beat their SR. If the four PCs open up with game-ending spells, generally two of them will be out of action after a round. At that point, the party can begin to explore what it's like grappling with a dragon or being breathed on.
That's pretty formidable... especially considering we haven't permitted the dragons to select feats or cast spells.
I believe if you look inside those modules, you'll usually find a line that says something to the effect of "Recommended for 6-8 characters levels X to Y" Particularly in 1e modules.
That's true, but it doesn't help you while you're shopping for adventures. I checked the one I referenced- it was in the "Notes to the DM" section of the module. FWIW, it was I4- which with I3 & I5 (the Deserts of Desolation series) were designed for 6-8 PCs.
Quote:
I'll have to dig out my 3e DMG, but, I'm pretty sure the line is there somewhere that the assumption is 4 PC's, 1 fighter, cleric, wizard and rogue (or variations thereof).
For clarity, my source was the 3.5 MM and DMG.
Quote:
Something I would point out here too. You're saying that you regularly had 6 encounters per day. The standard assumption is 4. That's not exactly breaking limits here.
That's a 50% increase in encounters. Going proportionately the opposite direction would mean 2 combats/day.
Whether that's actually a significant difference or not would require a statistical analysis that, frankly, probably will never be done.
However, my gut instinct tells me that while a 25% increase (here, +1 combat/day) might well be within foreseeable tolerances for the system, winning that additional combat (getting to 6/day) would be a severe stretch for most parties.
While it was not the norm for us to get to 6 combats/day, on those occasions when we got that far (or rarely, even further) between rests, we 1) usually won the encounter, and 2) rarely suffered any significant casualties*.
* Again, we had only 1 death in the entirety of RttToEE...several close calls, yes, but only 1 death. In that group, we haven't experienced more than 2 deaths in any of the last 3 campaigns, and like I said, its the same playstyle over and over.
At that level, a dragon is still going to make most of their saves. If you put four CR 12 dragons against four 16th level characters, you will get an "average" encounter. four CR 15 dragons will be a challenging encounter. An adult red dragon is CR 15. It has For +18, Ref +13, Will +17 and SR 21. Assuming they don't heroism on themselves or whatever, it can make DC 27 over half the time for Fort, about a fourth of the time for reflexes, and half the time for Will. A fourth of the time, any given spell will fail to beat their SR. If the four PCs open up with game-ending spells, generally two of them will be out of action after a round. At that point, the party can begin to explore what it's like grappling with a dragon or being breathed on.
That's pretty formidable... especially considering we haven't permitted the dragons to select feats or cast spells.
I think I'll let all the other posts speak to this and others with specific examples.
A high-level foe succeeding vs. a save-or-die/save-or-suck half the time is nevertheless a considerable upgrade from pre-3e.
At that level, a dragon is still going to make most of their saves. If you put four CR 12 dragons against four 16th level characters, you will get an "average" encounter. four CR 15 dragons will be a challenging encounter. An adult red dragon is CR 15. It has For +18, Ref +13, Will +17 and SR 21. Assuming they don't heroism on themselves or whatever, it can make DC 27 over half the time for Fort, about a fourth of the time for reflexes, and half the time for Will. A fourth of the time, any given spell will fail to beat their SR. If the four PCs open up with game-ending spells, generally two of them will be out of action after a round. At that point, the party can begin to explore what it's like grappling with a dragon or being breathed on.
That's pretty formidable... especially considering we haven't permitted the dragons to select feats or cast spells.
Dragons were picked to be tough for their CR in 3.5E and a CR+3 multi-opponent dragon encounter is about as nasty as it gets. A party in such a situation will lose members if they do not use every resource.
My only comment is who is doing the best in this scenario:
1) The Fighter trying to full attack with a bow?
Assume 27 Str, a strength +1 holy bow and an 18 dex with +5 arrows (possibly provided by the cleric using greater magic weapon). He does 1d8 + 5 (magic) + 8 (strength) +2d6 (holy) per arrow with attacks of +25/20/15/10 (hitting on a 4, a 9, a 14 and a 19). That';s 1.9 hits per round (assume 2 so we don't worry about crits) for about 50 points per round. He can drop a dragon in about 5 rounds (253 hit points, we'll round up).
If there are range increments invovled then this is not good and he'll be soaking 14d10 breath weapons while sniping.
2) The cleric firing off a destruction spell as a readied action as the dragons close (likely DC around 27) with a 95% chance to hit AC 8, a 75% chance to beat SR (assuming no magic item or feat that helps) and a 40% chance to kill it outright. If it saves it averages 35 damage which isn't bad. That's hititng the tough save for a CR equivalent creature and is a reasonable spell for an 16th level cleric to have one or two copies of in core.
3) We'll skip the rogue -- this type of encounter does not play to his strengths (flanking under these conditions is brutal).
4) The wizard might have an ideal 8th level spell: maze looks promising if the party is lucky.
Low level spells (that could be prepared) are also interesting: Resiliant sphere might actually take a dragon out until their allies are defeated. Even at DC 24 (for a lower level spell) it has a 75% chance to break SR and a 50% chance to take a dragon out of the fight for 160 rounds. It's close range but still better than what the fighter can do (range increment for a composite longbow is 110 feet), range for this spell is 65 feet.
Notice that this is a 4th level spell targeting a weak save (the classic wizard trick).
Hold Monster has a range of 260 feet, assume DC 25 so a 75% chance to break SR and a 35% chance to drop a dragon from a great height.
Now in core, with bonus feats, a wizard (having limited feat choices) is likely to have spell penetration. No wizard will have all of these spells prepared . . . but they are likely to have some of them (the low level save or suck that targets reflex is an especially common choice) and all of them are better actions than the fighter's attacks at stopping a dragon.
Or even compare to damage spells. Hit all 4 dragons with horrid wilting (requires them to be grouped). 1 will resist. 2 will save for 28 hp of damage. 1 will fail and take 56 hit points of damage. That's an 8th level spell gone -- whereas repulsion (save or suck) will keep half the dragons out of breth weapon range (a lower level spell with a much more effective outcome).
So one of my best gaming buddies is a stubborn guy who I have been playing RPGs with for over two decades. I have a great time with him, and would feel like I was missing something if he wasn't involved in my gaming group.
He loves D&D, but is really skeptical about 4E, and says that his main sticking point (other than the fact that he feels it's too much like an MMORPG) is that Wizards and other spellcasters have been 'neutered' by the new system.
I'm just learning the 4E system, and have never seen a character over 3rd Level in play....How can I speak to this, and what arguments could I use to at least get him to give the system a look-see?
This is a common problem. My gaming group stopped gaming since last thanksgving because half of us could not abide 4e. We were a great group, played off of each other well, but I could not get my heart into running 4e because it did not give me the versatility I liked.
Out of our group of 5, one does not table top anymore, gave it up and sticks to MMO's, 2 play 4e with another group, and myslef and one other play short campaigns of alternity or 3rd edition, but nothing epic like I used to run.
So it is quite possible you won't play D&D together anymore, though there are other games. The 2 that broke off to play 4e still want me to Run M&M so we can still game but we will not play D&D ever again since they do not like 3rd edition and I do not like 4e. Maybe we'll be able to compromise with Dragon Age, who knows.
It is not necessarily stubborness though. When my friends went for stints playing Blood Bowl I sat out. I just did not want to invest time in games I tried and did not like.
I don't know if 4e has changed with the PHB2 run as I have not looked at it. MY friends tell me it has, but it will still be to far from the D&D I am used to.
The next effect is that it is pretty easy to feel useless when you are the one playing the Fighter and to have your fun ruined because of the "anything you can do, I can do better" effect of the Wizard.
From the DM side, it's also difficult to plan adventures around that kind of power. Unless you absolutely don't care where your adventures head, you're always playing a balancing act of "carefully lead the PCs where you want them to go without letting them realize you are leading them." That is easily destroyed when the PCs have hundreds of abilities at their disposal that you might not even expect. I've seen a game destroyed and a DM get really annoyed simply by a well prepared 2e spellcaster.
After playing D&D for over 25 years with hundreds of people I have yet to meet anyone that felt they were not having fun because they were "only" a fighter.
If a DM has proper system mastery, the well prepared caster is never a problem.
That's true, but it doesn't help you while you're shopping for adventures. I checked the one I referenced- it was in the "Notes to the DM" section of the module. FWIW, it was I4- which with I3 & I5 (the Deserts of Desolation series) were designed for 6-8 PCs.
Heh. The fine print gets ya every time.
Quote:
For clarity, my source was the 3.5 MM and DMG.
In all honestly, I checked and I think you are totally right. I'm not sure where I got the idea that the party was balanced that way. Probably one of those things you read on forums and just assume is truth. Learn something new every day.
Quote:
That's a 50% increase in encounters. Going proportionately the opposite direction would mean 2 combats/day.
Whether that's actually a significant difference or not would require a statistical analysis that, frankly, probably will never be done.
However, my gut instinct tells me that while a 25% increase (here, +1 combat/day) might well be within foreseeable tolerances for the system, winning that additional combat (getting to 6/day) would be a severe stretch for most parties.
While it was not the norm for us to get to 6 combats/day, on those occasions when we got that far (or rarely, even further) between rests, we 1) usually won the encounter, and 2) rarely suffered any significant casualties*.
* Again, we had only 1 death in the entirety of RttToEE...several close calls, yes, but only 1 death. In that group, we haven't experienced more than 2 deaths in any of the last 3 campaigns, and like I said, its the same playstyle over and over.
What would you attribute your lack of PC death to? I'm totally not trying to be snarky here. When I ran the World's Largest Dungeon (which is pretty similar to RttToEE) I was whacking a PC about every 3 sessions. I had one player, by the end of 80 sessions of the campaign, on his SIXTH PC.
How did you manage it? Could it have been the DM? Did your DM roll in the open (I know that increased my lethality considerably)?
__________________ Currently running: Sufficiently Advanced over Maptool. Soon to change. If you'd like to join in a short 3-8 session campaign for various systems, drop by our forums.
I double-dog-dare you to make your game sound super cool without comparing it to other editions. - paraphrased from Umbran.
Last edited by Hussar; 30th October 2009 at 06:15 PM..
In the group that went through RttToEE? 1 DM, 7 regular players. There were 2 guys who joined briefly, but only for a few sessions.
Almost no NPCs were included in the party- 1 ally (for 3 combats), mp hirelings, no mounts, no companions, and my PC lost his familiar in the 2nd session. The single-classed Wizard didn't have a familiar, nor did the Rog/Sorc. There were 2 draft horses that were frequent rally points (a la Richard the Sorcerer's battlecry here).
The party was 1 Wizard, 1 Diviner/Ftr/Rgr/Spellsword, 1 Ftr/Clc, 1 Rog/Sorc, 1 Monk, 1 Fighter, 1 Brb/Drd. We finished at level 11. No PC had more than 4 divine casting levels. The Rogue had only 1 or 2 Sorc levels. He was also the single PC who died, but was brought back by an NPC.
Seven players is an APL of ~+2. Did you DM double the number of monsters in each encounter to make up for your large party size?
I think I figured out why your play experience is so different from that of some other players: It seems, most of your fights had a low EL for your APL/party size. In other words, you were making things challenging by having many encounters in a day, rather than doing a few encounters that have an EL of party level +3 or more (after adjusting for party size).
While I think that your way of playing is the most fun way to play 3.5 (as long as you keep munchkins under control), this is not how most adventures were designed (Paizo is the worst culprit here). In the typical Paizo adventure, meaningful fights are EL=APL+3 and up. And IME, the PCs have a high chance of TPKing in these fights unless every character goes "all in".
After playing D&D for over 25 years with hundreds of people I have yet to meet anyone that felt they were not having fun because they were "only" a fighter.
I've met people who were annoyed that they were only a fighter. Our experiences differ. I've met a number of them. Often, the people in question didn't speak up to let their opinions be known. But we used to discuss the game in between sessions a lot. We had no lives to speak of.
So, often the talk was about "I feel like I'm not useful to the party. I'm just there to be the meat shield and hold off the enemy until the Wizard fireballs them all and kills them. Then, I'm supposed to roleplay my low intelligence so that the Wizard who is roleplaying his high intelligence can figure out the answer to all the riddles and puzzles. Then I have to roleplay my low charisma and be dumb and not very friendly...so I avoid talking to people in social situations. Meanwhile, the Bard or the Cleric does all the talking. What do I do that is useful and recognized better than everyone else other than have more hitpoints?"
The answer given was normally, "Well, we need a fighter. Otherwise the rest of us would die. So, you can't switch characters."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mournblade94
If a DM has proper system mastery, the well prepared caster is never a problem.
As for "proper system mastery"....I have no idea what that is anymore. One person's complete mastery is another's "Not yet ready to DM."
One of the examples I always use to demonstrate this was a time where the DM decided to create an ongoing villain for the group in a combination 1e/2e game we had. It was a female Wizard. We were supposed to meet this Wizard when she used Projected Image to create an image of herself while hiding in a well hidden secret chamber nearby. The Wizard was supposed to threaten us, attack us with spells through the image and then teleport out if we lived.
What ACTUALLY happened was that the player who was playing OUR Wizard immediately guessed that it was a Projected Image. The rest of the party ran up to her in order to attack. He hung back. The enemy created an illusion of falling rocks on us and most of us were pinned, believing the illusion. He, on the other hand, looked for secret passages.
The DM got a really worried look on her face and said "Why?". He said "Because the range on Projected Image is short. She has to be around here somewhere. Like in a secret room connected to this one."
She told him that he couldn't see any secret doors because this one was really hard to detect. He cast some spells to detect secret door, I can't remember which one. There was a brief argument over whether the spell could detect it. The description of the spell was consulted. He found the secret room, opened it and surprised the enemy who had no idea she would be found. She then pointed a Rod of Disintegration at our Wizard, figuring she could finish him off and teach the player a lesson for being a little TOO crafty. The Wizard said "I use my ring of telekinesis to grab the rod out of her hand." The DM insisted he couldn't do that...the description of the ring was looked up...It was decided that it DID work that way...The player won initiative and then used the ring to grab the rod. Then the DM said, "Fine, you get a rod. But she's high enough level to just teleport away and nothing you can do will kill her in one round." The player considered this and said "You're right. Does the wand at least have the command word written on it?" She said yes. Then he used the rod to disintegrate the enemy. He won initiative because the time to activate a Rod is much faster than casting a 5th level spell.
Then the DM complained that we needed to end the game there because she didn't have anything else planned out. Her entire adventure hinged on that Wizard surviving. And to add insult to injury, the player asked where the Wizard's spellbook was and the DM said "Not here, she left it elsewhere" and the player went on a tirade about how "No Wizard leaves their spellbook out of reach, besides, we had evidence that she'd been here for multiple days and she had been casting spells during that time. She needed her spellbook to rememorize the spells." Until the DM was forced to agree, that yes...the spellbook was in the room. Which he then promptly picked up and due to the XP for GP rule from 1e gained 4 levels just by picking it up(he convinced the DM that each spell in the book should be assigned the GP value of a scroll of that spell, since they essentially WERE scrolls).
And that was a problem that a simple Ring of Telekinesis and a spell to detect secret doors caused. One could say that the DM didn't have proper system mastery in that she didn't expect someone to figure out that the Wizard was hidden nearby, have a spell to detect secret doors, followed by the ability to disarm a powerful magic item and make plans accordingly. But she had no real reason to think that those combination of things would happen. Plus, she had enough system mastery to think of using a Projected Image instead of putting the enemy in the same room with us.
__________________ Majoru Oakheart
Secret Attorney of the Guidelines for the <Sorry, you didn't make the DC 20 Perception check, and you don't have another minor action to try again. Next time try finding an Elf to stand nearby you.>
What ACTUALLY happened was that the player who was playing OUR Wizard immediately guessed that it was a Projected Image. The rest of the party ran up to her in order to attack. He hung back. The enemy created an illusion of falling rocks on us and most of us were pinned, believing the illusion. He, on the other hand, looked for secret passages.
The DM got a really worried look on her face and said "Why?". He said "Because the range on Projected Image is short. She has to be around here somewhere. Like in a secret room connected to this one."
She told him that he couldn't see any secret doors because this one was really hard to detect. He cast some spells to detect secret door, I can't remember which one. There was a brief argument over whether the spell could detect it. The description of the spell was consulted. He found the secret room, opened it and surprised the enemy who had no idea she would be found. She then pointed a Rod of Disintegration at our Wizard, figuring she could finish him off and teach the player a lesson for being a little TOO crafty. The Wizard said "I use my ring of telekinesis to grab the rod out of her hand." The DM insisted he couldn't do that...the description of the ring was looked up...It was decided that it DID work that way...The player won initiative and then used the ring to grab the rod. Then the DM said, "Fine, you get a rod. But she's high enough level to just teleport away and nothing you can do will kill her in one round." The player considered this and said "You're right. Does the wand at least have the command word written on it?" She said yes. Then he used the rod to disintegrate the enemy. He won initiative because the time to activate a Rod is much faster than casting a 5th level spell.
Then the DM complained that we needed to end the game there because she didn't have anything else planned out. Her entire adventure hinged on that Wizard surviving. And to add insult to injury, the player asked where the Wizard's spellbook was and the DM said "Not here, she left it elsewhere" and the player went on a tirade about how "No Wizard leaves their spellbook out of reach, besides, we had evidence that she'd been here for multiple days and she had been casting spells during that time. She needed her spellbook to rememorize the spells." Until the DM was forced to agree, that yes...the spellbook was in the room. Which he then promptly picked up and due to the XP for GP rule from 1e gained 4 levels just by picking it up(he convinced the DM that each spell in the book should be assigned the GP value of a scroll of that spell, since they essentially WERE scrolls).
And that was a problem that a simple Ring of Telekinesis and a spell to detect secret doors caused. One could say that the DM didn't have proper system mastery in that she didn't expect someone to figure out that the Wizard was hidden nearby, have a spell to detect secret doors, followed by the ability to disarm a powerful magic item and make plans accordingly. But she had no real reason to think that those combination of things would happen. Plus, she had enough system mastery to think of using a Projected Image instead of putting the enemy in the same room with us.
But it could have been avoided by the DM simply placing a "lock" on the secret door at any time. When the Knock spell was cast, the Wizard teleports out. A 3 silver dead bolt could have saved the adventure. Safety first, kids.
Ironically, that kind of thing is why all epic wizards are liches as well. Plus, well prepared wizard always wins. The gm did a slight fail in not using infinite gm powers to counter well prepared wizard. Just as planned is rather good. Perhaps an explosive runes hidden on the secret door trigger? That way the other wiz would have warning to pull the rod and ready an action, ignore init and omgpwning the other one?
It is not necessarily stubborness though. When my friends went for stints playing Blood Bowl I sat out. I just did not want to invest time in games I tried and did not like.
.
I can understand not liking 4E (or 3E or 2E or any XE really) but not liking Blood Bowl is like not liking oxygen. That's just crazy man!
__________________ "Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel." - Samuel Johnson 18th century English author.
It is true that you can do a lot to customize monsters to avoid some of these issues. But I was curious how the basic SRD creatures did and it is amazing how poorly they do.
If we go beyond the PHB, there is a 4th level spell that is a swift action that gives +10 to penetrate spell resistance: Assay Spell Resistance (Sor/Wiz 4). It lasts one round/level so you cast it once and your target is reduced in defenses for the rest of the combat.
Our Marilith has a spell resistance of 25; after Assay Spell Resistance it is 15 and a 16th level caster will pierce it on a 2+. Even the mighty Balor, at SR 28, needs only a 2+ from a 16th level caster using this spell.
Even within the PHB, the wizard goes through on a 9+, less if she invested in spell penetration, greater spell penetration and a robe of the archmagi.
The best a Mohrg can do is 28 HD by the SRD, with a weak Fort Save that is
a +9 (no con bonus) and he needs a mircale to save. If we did allow a 44 HD Mohrg (as CR 16 monster) it'd have a +15 Fort Save (needs an 11+ to save) and 286 hit points. Save or die still looks awful tempting . . .
3.5 disintegrate does what, 32d6 on a failed fort save at 16th level. About 16x7=112 hp damage. Failing that 11+ weak save means the monster loses a lot of hp, but still less than half its hp.
Sounds like the DM above was railroaded by the player, not the other way around.
Finding the projected image/secret door? Clever.
Rules-lawyering the ring/rod/disintegrate? Discourteous.
Badgering the DM into the spellbook and extra XP? Jerkish.
__________________ "Conversely, I'm amazed at the number of people queueing up to tell people that don't like 4e that they are wrong. Why can't people just agree to disagree, and get on with actually playing the game?" --Delericho
If there's one dragon, it's a solo monster.
If there's five dragons, they're standard monsters.
If there's a dozen dragons, either most of them are minions or your DM is tired of the campaign.
--Lizard
I think I figured out why your play experience is so different from that of some other players: It seems, most of your fights had a low EL for your APL/party size. In other words, you were making things challenging by having many encounters in a day, rather than doing a few encounters that have an EL of party level +3 or more (after adjusting for party size).
This is the key to why it works differently. Most encounters of EL=Average Party Level or lower are actually so easy that they don't use up significant resources. The book says that EL=APL should use up 20% resources. In a good group they don't use up anywhere near that amount.
Most EL=APL encounters can be defeated entirely by non-casters without using any magic items. The worst that happens is that the party is forced to use a couple of charges of their Wand of Cure Light Wounds at the end of the combat. 4 charges from one of 3 Wands the party is carrying is less than 1% of the party's resources.
It's only due to slight variations on luck and the difficulty of individual monsters that parties have to cast any spells at all against encounters of this difficulty. It gives the Wizards the freedom to just stand there was delay for the entire encounter without worry.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harlekin
While I think that your way of playing is the most fun way to play 3.5 (as long as you keep munchkins under control), this is not how most adventures were designed (Paizo is the worst culprit here). In the typical Paizo adventure, meaningful fights are EL=APL+3 and up. And IME, the PCs have a high chance of TPKing in these fights unless every character goes "all in".
Some people feel like encounters at the EL=APL level are a little too easy. If you don't have to cast any spells at all, where is the difficulty? You might as well not bother spending the 30 minutes running the combat because it's easier to mark 20 damage on the fighter and say you win. At least, that's how a lot of players feel. My friends included.
You need to use EL=APL+3 or higher encounters for it to feel like you needed to use a real amount of resources to survive. It feels like a fight for your life if you needed to cast 2 disintegration spells and 3 fireballs in the same combat while at the same time the Cleric needed to cast a Heal, 2 Cure Critical Wounds and a Cure Serious.
This is when we have the most fun...it feels like we ALL need to pull together and use our abilities or we'll lose. Which is why fighting more than 2 or 3 combats of that difficulty a day were next to impossible. Sometimes more than 1 was next to impossible.
__________________ Majoru Oakheart
Secret Attorney of the Guidelines for the <Sorry, you didn't make the DC 20 Perception check, and you don't have another minor action to try again. Next time try finding an Elf to stand nearby you.>
3.5 disintegrate does what, 32d6 on a failed fort save at 16th level. About 16x7=112 hp damage. Failing that 11+ weak save means the monster loses a lot of hp, but still less than half its hp.
It's true that Disintegrate is not an instant kill in this situation. But it's notable that it's still really effective despite deliberate attempts to pick creatures that are hard to drop (and don't exist in the core rules). Allow the wizard a couple of other options out of core too and matters don't necessarily improve.
There are other spell choices (reverse gravity followed by pincushioning) but disintegrate is so universally useful I feel safe assuming it's a prepared spell at these levels.
But I'll gladly concede that, if the DM really focuses on avoiding "save or die" spells, it is possible to create encounters and creatures that are hard. But it's concerning that the core material out of the book fares so poorly.
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
