DM seeks validation

[billd91]

Basic point here is the wandering monsters is 1e/2e, not 3e and Pathfinder is much closer to 3e than any previous game. The other comments of what 1e wandering monsters were supposed to be even in older editions is they are not killing machines, but methods of using up needed spell slots, taking away hit points - basically weakening the party so they are less prepared to face the encounters of given dungeon.

<snip>

I'm not trying to tell you how to run a game, but if you want wandering monsters then go play 1e/2e, where it belongs. Pathfinder is intended as a balanced game. Wandering monsters, unless used to use up resources is not balanced and does not belong in Pathfinder.

I completely and utterly disagree. One common complaint about play in the 3e era is that parties aren't put under enough pressure from wandering monsters and other time-related issues leading to the 15 minute adventuring day.
Wandering monsters have a place in all editions of D&D and are a tool for the DM to use to help control the pace of the game in both play time and adventure flow.

 

[Dark Mistress]

I would say it was a combination of things.

1) multi class characters tend not to be as strong as there level typically.
2) Encounters are set up for 4 characters, your group had 3.
3) The encounter being 1 CR higher and max HP would have been challanging to a typical party, except yours was a bit under powered twice over.
4) Add in the error on the bleed rolls.

Other things could have been a factor but I think those are the 4 primary reasons by what you have said. Now that doesn't mean you did a bad job as a DM. It looks like you slightly misjudged things a bit. It happens to everyone from time to time. My opinion is live and learn, just learn from the experience. Thats the best way to get better and better.

This of course is just my own personal opinion.

 

[BaldHero]

Ok, thanks for all the replies.

All i have to go on is punctuation, so if i misread your post don't take it personally.

Whenever i say "I don't know what you are saying but it is making me angry!"
I am not in fact getting angry. It's a phrase we use in my group/circle a lot to indicate that we disagree.

Before this thread goes into some sort of off tangent bit about Wandering Monster or not to Wandering Monster, let me fill in a couple of blanks.

I read the section on gestalt. It specifies it is one way to compensate for not having enough players at the table. Silly me trusted this statement.

The party was given the opportunity to surrender, by a devil that they all knew had only 1 hp. None of us wanted a tpk, and i made them well aware of the fact that they had really been putting a hurt on the devil.

I told them the bad guy was almost dead, the last player character up was almost dead, and chose not to surrender. That was my kind way of giving them a chance to live through the encounter after it had gone sorely against them.

Third, even though they were seriously gimped, they still almost killed the thing. If they had been rested, and using their skills and abilities instead of forgetting about them, they would have walked all over this beastie. He would have been the challenging speed bump he was intended to be, and we would have moved on...The APL/CR/EL issue would have been moot. Those three characters would have smeared the cr 5 guy in about four, maybe five rounds. Especially given that they were in such tight quarters.

I have already conferred with all three players, and they all agree we bury those characters and move on to what we play next. They agree they would have done the same if they were in my place. Our style and trust levels, as well as general sense of forgiveness when it comes to this sort of thing is pretty easy going. I am lucky in that regard.

Whatever it is, we will include wandering monsters, and we will prolly get them from a chart relevant to the setting that encounters take place in.

With that said, the wandering monster, and the need or lack of need for one is something that is not defined by what edition of the game you play, is it?

Am i to understand that Wandering Monsters are only valid tools in editions prior to 3? That seems odd to me.

Again thanks though for all the feedback.

 

[ruemere]

Wandering monsters and random encounters are tools. It's up to you how to use them.

For example, this is the way I engage random stuff in my games:
1. Create a bunch of random events before session.
2. Assemble document with statblocks and event writeups.
3. Create random schedule of events.

Since I produce this prior to actual play, I have total control over possible problems (I can abandon an encounter, or bump it up a bit, or change it altogether). It's still random, but it is ready to use and potential threats are easier to manage.


Regards,
Ruemere

 

[gamerprinter]

I completely and utterly disagree. One common complaint about play in the 3e era is that parties aren't put under enough pressure from wandering monsters and other time-related issues leading to the 15 minute adventuring day.
Wandering monsters have a place in all editions of D&D and are a tool for the DM to use to help control the pace of the game in both play time and adventure flow.

I didn't say not to build an encounter to hit the party during their 15 minutes of rest. When I say "Wandering Monster chart" I'm referring to 1e/2e's lists of possible encounters which are usually just pulled from the MM, and not determined based on appropriate balance. Create one or more specific monsters that could show up during a rest break, but ensure that the monsters chosen are built for balance, a challenge to affect a party's resources, not as a random killing machine.

So the GM will make a roll whether the preselected monster shows up during a break.

I agree that parties should be affected by more hardships between major or dungeon based encounters. I disagree that it should be random, but specifically built for balance, just like every other being in the module.

I'm saying eliminate the "Random" and make it specific.

GP

 

[Mon]

I completely and utterly disagree. One common complaint about play in the 3e era is that parties aren't put under enough pressure from wandering monsters and other time-related issues leading to the 15 minute adventuring day.
Wandering monsters have a place in all editions of D&D and are a tool for the DM to use to help control the pace of the game in both play time and adventure flow.

This.

On topic... the party didn't rest? You chose an above-CR opponent? Sounds like all involved have some share of the blame.

Don't feel bad, this sort of thing happens from time to time.

I'd just have them wake up as prisoners or something and move on with the game from there.

 

[Mon]

Nothing to see here.

 

[BaldHero]

This.

On topic... the party didn't rest? You chose an above-CR opponent? Sounds like all involved have some share of the blame.

Don't feel bad, this sort of thing happens from time to time.

I'd just have them wake up as prisoners or something and move on with the game from there.

Not a shred of shame or guilt here, on either side of things.
They were pressing their luck and knew it. I picked a poor time to learn about the Infernal Bleed.

We have already moved on to prepping for our Kingmaker AP.
It will be swell.

Mon is right, move along.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

The monster was too powerful
The bleed was read wrong
The party was being pretty thick.

It's everyone's fault

 

[Beginning of the End]

Basic point here is the wandering monsters is 1e/2e, not 3e and Pathfinder is much closer to 3e than any previous game.

Where are you getting that wacky idea?

(a) Stop fetishizing balance.

(b) You might want to try reading the rulebooks. Wandering Monsters are covered on pg. 77 of the 3.5 DMG. Wandering Monster tables start on pg. 324 of the Pathfinder Bestiary.

IMO, the game is more exciting when the world doesn't exist to pamper the PCs. One of my favorite gaming memories remains hiding in a ditch praying that the beholder we saw floating through the woods a few hundred feet away wouldn't spot us.