Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="uzirath" data-source="post: 8276141" data-attributes="member: 8495">I probably should have said &quot;scaled up&quot; because I was taking mostly low-level D&amp;D adventures and using them with more capable 250-point DFRPG parties. I often run games for new players, though, so PCs are rarely run optimally. (A 250-point combat monster played by a veteran is much scarier than one played by a novice!) In Saltmarsh, I recall beefing up Sanbalet to have a wider selection of spells. In the caves, there were more foes with better weapons, armor, and tactics. I also added ledges above where difficult-to-hit archers could rain pain down on the party. When I'm scaling the other way, I tend to reverse these types of moves. I might remove ranged attackers or make them easier to spot. I reduce the number of opponents, or reduce the damage resistance of their armor, or give them weaker weapons. That last is a useful technique in any GURPS variant because cutting and impaling attacks can quickly kill a lightly armored PC. So a &quot;low-level&quot; monster might have a club (or just its fists) instead of an axe or spear.For traps and such, it depends on the expected lethality of the campaign. In general, though, I avoid traps that would likely insta-kill a PC if they didn't notice it. So I'll avoid traps that would do enough damage to force most otherwise healthy PCs to make multiple death checks. I adjust this according to the skills of the group and, again, the expected deadliness of the adventure. If they're taking on the Tomb of Horrors, they get what's coming to them if they get too curious about that demon mouth.Like [USER=6788045]@InexplicableVic[/USER], I'm looking forward to the release of Crypt of Krysuvik and subsequent &quot;low level&quot; adventures to provide worked examples of these ideas.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="uzirath, post: 8276141, member: 8495"] I probably should have said "scaled up" because I was taking mostly low-level D&D adventures and using them with more capable 250-point DFRPG parties. I often run games for new players, though, so PCs are rarely run optimally. (A 250-point combat monster played by a veteran is [I]much[/I] scarier than one played by a novice!) In [I]Saltmarsh[/I], I recall beefing up Sanbalet to have a wider selection of spells. In the caves, there were more foes with better weapons, armor, and tactics. I also added ledges above where difficult-to-hit archers could rain pain down on the party. When I'm scaling the other way, I tend to reverse these types of moves. I might remove ranged attackers or make them easier to spot. I reduce the number of opponents, or reduce the damage resistance of their armor, or give them weaker weapons. That last is a useful technique in any GURPS variant because cutting and impaling attacks can quickly kill a lightly armored PC. So a "low-level" monster might have a club (or just its fists) instead of an axe or spear. For traps and such, it depends on the expected lethality of the campaign. In general, though, I avoid traps that would likely insta-kill a PC if they didn't notice it. So I'll avoid traps that would do enough damage to force most otherwise healthy PCs to make multiple death checks. I adjust this according to the skills of the group and, again, the expected deadliness of the adventure. If they're taking on the Tomb of Horrors, they get what's coming to them if they get too curious about that demon mouth. Like [USER=6788045]@InexplicableVic[/USER], I'm looking forward to the release of [B][I]Crypt of Krysuvik[/I][/B] and subsequent "low level" adventures to provide worked examples of these ideas. [/QUOTE]

Verification