How are melee characters expected to deal with flying creatures?

[Destil]

You know, this is something 4E fixed in my book. Fliers are supposed to be powerful. Remember all the messed up high CR melee only monsters in 3E? The ones everyone's solution for was "flying for everyone and ranged it into dirt" from 5th level on? There's a reason you won't find flying effects before paragon tier generally.

The most likely could have errored on the side of caution with the effective ranges of flying opponents in the heroic and early paragon tier and things would have been a bit better balanced, but I can't really see it as a huge issue.

 

[lukelightning]

Why isn't there anybody concerned how easily your ranged focused Dragon hunting party get slaughtered in random pub fights, seeing how much more common pubs are compared to Dragons ?!

Step one: Tell the players the battle will involve a blue dragon.
Step two: Surprise! The Blue Dragon is the name of a rowdy pub!

 

[keterys]

I actually totally agree that I prefer the players not flying all over the place. I actually prefer the monsters not flying all over the place too, but Hover seems to be given out as candy. More Altitude Limits, Overland Flight, and Clumsy Flight says me

I was reading an adventure last night to see how I'd convert it to 4e, and one section reminded me of this discussion. There's a part where if things go wrong for the PCs, they face an unbeatable threat from all sides. So it says something like 'The PCs should have no way of winning against so many enemies, so will likely be forced to flee to safety via teleportation.'

Presumably in 4e terms you make it a SC to break through and escape, or just have the enemy attack in waves, taking 10 minutes or so to gather together for a huge final wave (long enough for a ritual casting, anyhow), but the 'Over our heads, gah, insta flee' is something that has largely been lost I think.

 

[KarinsDad]

I was reading an adventure last night to see how I'd convert it to 4e, and one section reminded me of this discussion. There's a part where if things go wrong for the PCs, they face an unbeatable threat from all sides. So it says something like 'The PCs should have no way of winning against so many enemies, so will likely be forced to flee to safety via teleportation.'

I seriously dislike adventures with these types of elements in them. It reminds me of many of the 1E adventures where the power of the foes were sometimes totally random (archdevils in one room with orcs in the next).

My take is that if the designer of an adventure cannot make the adventure flow relatively smoothly without having a TPK in the wings, then that designer shouldn't be designing adventures. IMO. It's one thing to challenge the PCs. It's another to have a setup like this which will definitively happen in many DM's games, just because of the wide diversity of player actions (and dice rolls) in a game. It's some type of game designer power trip and should be discouraged by people refusing to buy such crap products.

 

[keterys]

Well, it's only if the PCs really screw things up. Basically they choose to go to a place they know is filled with people who would kill them if they do the wrong thing... then if they do the wrong thing, the people try to kill them.

Either way, I'm willing to give Paizo the benefit of the doubt on this particular one and not call it a crap product. They're just making an assumption that either the PCs will not screw up or will, at 10th or so level, have an escape option available.

Something that's a lot less likely in 4e, in general. Which is the part that actually interested me.

 

[KarinsDad]

Either way, I'm willing to give Paizo the benefit of the doubt on this particular one and not call it a crap product. They're just making an assumption that either the PCs will not screw up or will, at 10th or so level, have an escape option available.

It just seems to me that products that are designed for the PCs to fail (and to even get TPKed) will result in failure for some groups of players. I don't consider intentionally TPK design like this to be "fun".

Not too unlike some of the WotC adventures where the designers do not take into account the actual game guidelines with respect to foes, treasure, etc.

Case in point: Irontooth in Keep of the Shadowfell (which similar to your example above, is a scenario which is poorly designed to have many DM's games have a TPK).

When a company does this, we should not reward them by buying their product. IMO. We should hold them to a standard that results in challenging adventures, but not ones with a strong possibility of TPKs.

As a side note, adventure modules should either not hand out treasure and have the DM assign treasure based on his campaign, or it should hand out treasure as per the DMG guidelines. This too, to me, is an adventure design flaw when treasure is screwed up. Not all DMs have the time to read all of the posts on message boards to find out which adventures have issues and which do not.

 

[keterys]

I'd imagine that some groups of players do, in fact, fail. I'd certainly hope so, even. Isn't that a feature, though?

What does that really have to do with the ability to get out of dodge when need be in prior editions that is much more difficult within 4e? That 4e requires far more strict regulating by the DM on what tactics they can take and how forcefully they need to steer their players? I... suppose... that might be the case. Certainly if I run this adventure I'd have to at least allow a skill challenge or combat method of escaping, even if they can't face them all.

Of course, if they persist in facing them all, despite obvious overwhelming force arrayed against them, not taking the option to escape... I imagine they'd die, having made their decision. I'd hope that both the threat of death is present _and_ that player decisions matter.

 

[KarinsDad]

I'd imagine that some groups of players do, in fact, fail. I'd certainly hope so, even. Isn't that a feature, though?

Not if it is designed as that to be a strong possibility.

Consider it a matter of probability. There are 100 thousand 4E groups playing the module (in the case of 4E adventures). With a normal distribution of player ability, drive, character design, etc., some small percentage of groups will have a TPK with any above average difficulty encounter. But when that percentage becomes high (which it did for H1), then there is a design flaw.

It's not a feature when a significant majority of groups have a TPK or near-TPK, it's only a feature when a very small minority of groups have this occur.

What does that really have to do with the ability to get out of dodge when need be in prior editions that is much more difficult within 4e? That 4e requires far more strict regulating by the DM on what tactics they can take and how forcefully they need to steer their players? I... suppose... that might be the case. Certainly if I run this adventure I'd have to at least allow a skill challenge or combat method of escaping, even if they can't face them all.

I would drastically change the adventure. 4E is not design at early Paragon level to have the PCs teleport out of Dodge.

Of course, if they persist in facing them all, despite obvious overwhelming force arrayed against them, not taking the option to escape... I imagine they'd die, having made their decision. I'd hope that both the threat of death is present _and_ that player decisions matter.

It depends on the group. If I had played with a DM who had never thrown overwhelming forces at us ever, I would be a bit surprised when 40 foes was not 40 minions (or possibly 39 minions and 1 normal foe).

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Hmm... actually my group only consisted of 3 players at Lvl 1 when they attacked irontooth and survived (ok, i gave them their lvl 2 utility powers when they were brought down before the last 3 kobolds)

the fight would have been easy if they had retreated in the middle of the fight. And with a controler (the role they lacked) it would have been even easier.

Fact is: fleeing is and should be an option when facing overwhelming odds. This is part of the fun. Alternatively surrender is another option which can be fun sometimes. Even when it happens the first time. Maybe an insight check or perception or int chack can be allowed to recognize them as overwhelming odds.

 

[jedrious]

A dragon is -mighty- in their element. Not all adventures automaticly put -every- monster in their element. And you can have a desert without having it be the sahara. Like, every desert in North America, for example. Desert != a featureless sea of sand.

*Looks outside to double check that the baren desert with only Joshua trees(i.e. no cover whatsoever provided) and houses to break up the featureless sea of dirt (there is a difference between sand and dirt), double checks the map to make sure California is still located in North America*

Um, Lucy, you got some esplainin to do here, deserts are horrible places to find somewhere to hide from aerial notice.