Greyhawk: Welcome to the Age of Worms - or how campaigns can die

[DM_Jeff]

Howdy. I have no exacting mechanical advice based on the OP's play sessions, nor is this an excuse for Paizo. Hopefully it won't become a 4e bash either.

To be fair I have not DM'd Age of Worms. I ran Paizo's Shackled City, all the way through from 1st to 20th level. It was very, very tough. My players loved the challenge, and none of them were casual gamers by any means. While running it I read all sorts of posts about how Paizo's adventures err on the tougher side of challenges. I read about entire parties being killed over and over. My group went through the whole thing with the same PCs. Two died and had to be raised. Near TPK's were there, but they always pulled through.

3.x is filled with options and it is vast. I would not have it any other way. This however mirrors what the OP said with AoW being killer, and then Morrus letting us know the opposite with his group. In both cases the words of the day are: "Dungeon Master". It falls on the DM, I have discovered, to tweak encounters based on their player's characters. Don't cry foul yet - PCs can't be expected to have every ability or weapon to deal with any situation anytime. That's just silly, and is what it sounds like they're doing with 4e, I haven't seen it but read plenty so I don't know this as fact.

So with 3.x is this a feature or a bug?

Sometimes I let the tough encounters stand. This never means I constantly 'downgrade' the monsters to my party, but I do keep an eye out for hotspots that I can foresee causing a problem and adjust them. A DM needs to be on top of the game, not just look at stats and run them static like a solid steel cast (IMO). Instead they need to have the flexibility to know when to twist and turn and still get to the same conclusion: I gave my player's a real run for their money and scared the cr@p out of them without killing them over and over.

So, the above question: Feature or bug? Neither. It's a feature for DM's who like to be actively involved in adventure tweaking and creation. It's a bug for DM's who think all D&D rules should be so straight and exacting that everything should be able to be run out of the box. Well, when that day comes there will be no need for a DM. I know a few posters who would say 'good'. Most everyone I've gamed with would never want such a strict system and enjoy the personal touch a DM can bring to his table.

Sory for the longness and all.

-DM Jeff

 

[Ipissimus]

I think it's more of an inherent design flaw with high level play in 1E, 2E and 3E. High level play vs. big bads tend to go one of two ways: near-instant monster death or near-instant TPK. Or, a third option, both sides grind away at each other without any particular resolution for hours then one side will snap.

Can't speak for 4E but killing save or die effects is a step in the right direction.

But yeah, having run alot of Paizo dungeons, I found I had to tweak everything to reflect my PC's abilities. There are just some encounters you look at and you know they're a TPK waiting to happen or your PCs will just walk all over the monster in 2 rounds.

Your party sounds like it was hampered by a lack of effective glass cannons. Not knowing the Fang Dragon would've also been nasty, you really need to hit a Dragon's weak point with high damage output spells that work on the Dragon's weakness (eg hitting reds with cold spells).

But yeah, I have to agree that 3E is more about optimizing characters. That's never been a problem for my group, since they're already munchkins that way (not that there's anything wrong with that IMO, just a different style of play).

 

[DwarvenDog]

SPOILERS:




In Mustrum's defense, this particular dragon had self-buffing magic items that should have raised its CR by 1 or 2 points. It has: a +5 amulet of natural armor, a +5 ring of resistance, and a ring of evasion. If you are of the mind that a dragon should be allowed to spend its "triple-standard" treasure on self-buffing magic items, then I guess this is okay. I can't really figure out at what point a monster with treasure becomes an NPC with equipment. It seems kind of fuzzy to me, and is just one more way of skewing the CR system.

In your particular case, you explain that you've got your three fighter-types right up in the Dragon's face trading blows. With an AC 5 points higher than what's expected (not to mention the shield/mage armor combo suggested in the writeup) and nobody working to dispel those buffs, of COURSE things are going to get nasty. And you are correct that CON drain in the heat of battle is a serious problem that will only get worse. Until reading this post, I was under the impression that a HEAL spell fixed ability damage/drain. I re-read the spell and, well, it doesn't. So I learned something here today.


Now in the Designer's defense, your particular party seems a little sub-optimal in terms of standing up to the full attack of most CR15+ monsters, not just this one dragon. 2 multiclass warrior/rogues, a duskblade, and an uber-cleric. (with the bard and cleric as backup/followers). You appear to be lacking real battlefield control, any kind of artillery, and an actual tank. Maybe you make up for them in other areas but it's not apparent in your post. Can you post some of your group's strategies for taking on threats at this level?


I suspect that getting out of the AP with this particular character mix was a good idea at this point, as your group had already become negatively predisposed to the modules. But I think it would be helpful for your group to figure out exactly where the pain points were and work to fix them for your next campaign.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

SPOILERS:




In Mustrum's defense, this particular dragon had self-buffing magic items that should have raised its CR by 1 or 2 points. It has: a +5 amulet of natural armor, a +5 ring of resistance, and a ring of evasion. If you are of the mind that a dragon should be allowed to spend its "triple-standard" treasure on self-buffing magic items, then I guess this is okay. I can't really figure out at what point a monster with treasure becomes an NPC with equipment. It seems kind of fuzzy to me, and is just one more way of skewing the CR system.

The ring of Evasion is a nice one. I didn't know that.

In your particular case, you explain that you've got your three fighter-types right up in the Dragon's face trading blows. With an AC 5 points higher than what's expected (not to mention the shield/mage armor combo suggested in the writeup) and nobody working to dispel those buffs, of COURSE things are going to get nasty. And you are correct that CON drain in the heat of battle is a serious problem that will only get worse. Until reading this post, I was under the impression that a HEAL spell fixed ability damage/drain. I re-read the spell and, well, it doesn't. So I learned something here today.


Now in the Designer's defense, your particular party seems a little sub-optimal in terms of standing up to the full attack of most CR15+ monsters, not just this one dragon. 2 multiclass warrior/rogues, a duskblade, and an uber-cleric. (with the bard and cleric as backup/followers). You appear to be lacking real battlefield control, any kind of artillery, and an actual tank. Maybe you make up for them in other areas but it's not apparent in your post. Can you post some of your group's strategies for taking on threats at this level?

The Bugbear seemed like a very good tank to me, actually, thanks to a nice natural armor bonus. I don't think a Fighter would have had a better bonus (in fact, I remember writing up a heavy defensive fighter for 17th level, and he had a similar AC).
The Duskblade can also tank, if absolutely necessary, thanks to Combat Expertise, but even his AC wasn't enough.

I don't know the usual tactics, since I missed too many sessions in that campaign.
But I suppose they look something like this:
Rogues get into flanking positions or tumbling through enemy squares to get sneak attack damage (not that the Bugbear needed that, he only has something like 3d6, and is using a keen falchion). The Duskblade typically approached with Combat Expertise up, and then used spells like scorching ray or vampiric touch together with his attack. He has little problems with Spell Resistance this way. He often uses swift fly or quick-casted dimension doors to move in a good position.
If healing is required, the Clerics step in. With Empowered, Maximized Cure LIght Wounds and the occassional Heal or Mass Heal, there is no way hit point damage can really hurt us. Unless the enemy needs only one round to kill a character, even with all kinds of defensive magic and armor up. Or the enemy has an uncounterable attack form, like, say, 2d6 points of Con drain that nothing can heal during a combat.

But the typical tactic didn't work so well here, since everybody needed to fly to get to the Dragon, and we couldn't approach easily with all spells ready.
What we needed was something that could survive a full attack or someone that could one-shot kill the Dragon. And I am not convinced such a character exists.

Except. I think I see one possible strategy: Find someone with Forcecage. I think that would have stopped the Dragon totally. (No Save, No SR, right?)

I suspect that getting out of the AP with this particular character mix was a good idea at this point, as your group had already become negatively predisposed to the modules. But I think it would be helpful for your group to figure out exactly where the pain points were and work to fix them for your next campaign.

Well, we're already using the Savage Tides AP (with another DM), and we are using another set of suboptimal classes there. Warlock, Dragon Shaman, Druid and Rogue.
(But I think we got a big benefit - we're using 28 point buy and get an extra feat! Woot!)
We noticed that we can go on basically forever, unless we hit a real powerful enemy, when we lack any ability to overcome our "average" offensive values.

On a good day, a 10th level Warlock deals 5d6 points of damage. On a bad day, he deals 5d6 points of damage. If he really tries hard, he deals 5d6 points of damage. If he acts reluctantly and conserves his powers, he deals 5d6 points of damage. (I think you get the pattern )

I suppose that's a good example why the 4E design team combined at will, per encounter and daily abilities for all classes...

I think we could change a lot if we just played the Cleric/Fighter/Rogue/Wizard set-up. But we played that already a lot in 3E, and what's the point of all the classes if we only play these four?
I mean, if we'll go to 4E, I suspect we will also use these four classes, but I really hope that after 4-8 years, we will be allowed to break from that pattern without sucking or extreme cheese-cake. But I admit, I won't count on it.

 

[billd91]

Well, we're already using the Savage Tides AP (with another DM), and we are using another set of suboptimal classes there. Warlock, Dragon Shaman, Druid and Rogue.
(But I think we got a big benefit - we're using 28 point buy and get an extra feat! Woot!)
We noticed that we can go on basically forever, unless we hit a real powerful enemy, when we lack any ability to overcome our "average" offensive values.

Never sell the dragon shaman short. He may not have a heck of a lot offense, but his vitality aura has saved my group's cleric-less party in Shackled City a lot of healing worries. They are a real party endurance builder.

I mean, if we'll go to 4E, I suspect we will also use these four classes, but I really hope that after 4-8 years, we will be allowed to break from that pattern without sucking or extreme cheese-cake. But I admit, I won't count on it.

You can, to a certain degree, but you have to realize that some things will be harder. And, with a reasonably good charisma, the leadership feat with a cohort makes up for a lot of group support. The mystic theurge and rogue cohorts in my Classic Modules campaign are making things a LOT easier for the main party in terms of buffs and making for a flanking partner with the party's main roguish character (who's more cleric than rogue, but still pretty formidable).
We all know that the character classes have certain skills and powers. If parties don't take steps to figure out where they have weaknesses and adjust for them, they open themselves up to a lot of unnecessary headache (and raise deads).

 

[Neil Bishop]

I think the composition of your party is the big problem notwithstanding how difficult some parts of Age of Worms can be. The inclusion of the druid in your second party should help greatly. They can fill most roles and the rest of the party can just be there to fill up the numbers.

 

[Greylock]

Btw, all the Dungeon APs were playtested. Not extensively for months or years by a wide variety of players and groups across the world, but they were playtested. As much as your average adventure by any other major publisher.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Just noted an error. The Savage Tides campaign consists of a Druid, Warlock, Dragon Shaman and a Paladin, not a Rogue. (Easy to confuse the two, eh? )

Never sell the dragon shaman short. He may not have a heck of a lot offense, but his vitality aura has saved my group's cleric-less party in Shackled City a lot of healing worries. They are a real party endurance builder.

It's perfect for after combat healing, but I am not convinced it will make a difference in short-term area. Though, he now has something like Lay on Hands, that probably chances stuff again.

You can, to a certain degree, but you have to realize that some things will be harder. And, with a reasonably good charisma, the leadership feat with a cohort makes up for a lot of group support. The mystic theurge and rogue cohorts in my Classic Modules campaign are making things a LOT easier for the main party in terms of buffs and making for a flanking partner with the party's main roguish character (who's more cleric than rogue, but still pretty formidable).
We all know that the character classes have certain skills and powers. If parties don't take steps to figure out where they have weaknesses and adjust for them, they open themselves up to a lot of unnecessary headache (and raise deads).

Leadership was used in the party. Unfortunately. We had a Cohort Cleric, a Cohort Ranger and a Cohort Bard. They were definitely useful. (Without the Bard, hitting would have been even worse). The Cohort Ranger though was no longer among us, as she was, due to the level differences and lower wealth, more a liability then anything useful.

 

[Shazman]

It's hard to determine what a good, balanced encounter or adventure in 3.5 is. There is a huge disparity between power levels and tactics of groups. Some parties have a cleric, figther, rogue, and wizard, and charge in blindly. Other parties have a cleric/ radiant servant with divine metamagic cheese, a barbraian/warblade/frenzied berzerker, a rogue/swordsage, and a wizard/archmage with many reserve feats and use excellent tactics. Another factor is dice rolls. Nothing can compensate for lousy rolls. The CR isn't very consistant especially at high levels. There are too many variables to say for certain what a good encounter or string of encounters is. Even so, that dragon seems a bit under -CRed.