I tried the 4 player standard, what a mess...

[Mistwell]

So your rogue characters starts out with a premonition about his first major opponent in a fight?

No, your rogue character should be built to mesh well with his group. If his group is light on being able to do damage, he needs to be able to compensate.

What I posted was not specific to that first fight. As I said, it's a common rogue tactic (one of the top 3) to use a reach weapon. The only thing that build was specific to, was doing a lot of damage with a reach weapon.

As a 1st level rogue I wouldn't be excited about any strategy that has me standing next to a creature that does 2d8+7 damage - and the rogue had to burn a feat just to fight the thing on it's own terms.

The feat they are burning is a feat they SHOULD be burning, and not just for that fight. Using a reach weapon is a common rogue tactic for ANY battle. And I said that in my post. The rogue has a choice - range, or melee. And even range has to be short range. So if it is melee, you generally choose either two weapon fighting or reach. Reach was the choice for this build, because the needs of the party seemed to dictate the rogue needed to get scrappy in melee combat, and it's better to fight from 10' with a rogue than right next to your opponent.

IMO the sensible conclusion is that the ogre is simply under-CRed. I hope that the CR system wasn't designed with the assumption that you'd be mining non-core books for feat combos and strange weapons

Exotic weapon proficiency is from the PHB. I didn't "mine" a non-core book for a "strange" weapon. Great spear or heavy polearm are weapons that have appeared in all editions of D&D, and are "normal" military style weapons. A spiked chain is a heck of a lot more exotic than a friggen polearm!

(BTW - how is it that the weight of a "great polearm" is somehow equivalent to a greataxe but the pole is significantly longer. Isn't there a basic physics issue there? or is it just about selling splatbooks and should I expect a "great great polearm" to do 3d6 damage next?)

I think you are being silly now. It was THE FIRST expansion book. We are not talking about some long hidden secret suppliment published down the line as power creep pours in and another edition approaches. We are talking about the most basic, very first additional book issued after the core books came out. A book that almost everyone uses in their game, in the very least because it issued the "no experience point penalty for prestige classes" rule for 3.5.

I think you are exagerating for effect, and it's not helpful. A big spear or polearm isn't all that unusual. Nor is it even optimal. It's just a common build. You can sub in another big reach weapon of your choice and you still should do fine. Heck pick up a ranseur or guisarme or glaive or halbred right from the PHB if you feel the 2hp average extra damage done by the exotic weapon vs. the martial weapon is too much (I don't think it is, but you seem to think it is). Heck even a longspear is't that far off, and it's a simple weapon!

 

[bento]

I recall negative reviews of this module because of the Ogre encounter. The math was bad (in both the 3.0 MM and the module), IIRC.

I ran it and found it went too long with too many "same" encounters with kobolds. A few of the rooms at the end are kinda neat, like the room where blood washes across like a giant tidal wave. And the screaming. And the giant chicken-man BBEG.

I'm not sure it's one that a DM can just pick up and run. Adjustments should be made - for instance there's one large section where having turn undead will make the difference between survival and TPK.

Maybe Mike Mearls (the module's author) can stop by and provide his insight to the ogre problem?

 

[Raven Crowking]

All I remember are "special" and "extraordinary" powers, each being worth a certain bonus XP based on the creature's raw HD.

Attacks that caused large amounts of damage (seperately or together) could be "special" or "extraordinary" depending upon the degree of damage done. While I don't have it in front of me, I'll check to be sure, but I recall quite well the bit about minimum damage in terms of actual numbers.

Basically, I don't recall the 1e XP system being nearly as well thought out as it seems you're suggesting - and if it were I wonder why it wasn't adopted for 3e (or even 2e).

Because something wasn't used in later editions doesn't mean it was bad. Not every change made from 1e to 2e, from 2e to 3e, or even from 3.0 to 3.5 was a jewel. IMHO, some of the changes made were bad ideas altogether. (An example from 3.0 to 3.5 is weapon size; Arcana Unearthed gives a much better model for this same thing.)


RC

 

[gizmo33]

I think you are exagerating for effect, and it's not helpful. A big spear or polearm isn't all that unusual. Nor is it even optimal.

Actually I'm not exaggerating - a reach weapon that does the same damage as a greataxe seems to go contrary to physics.

Other than that, I hear what you say about polearms being a common rogue tactic. Seems a little contrary to the archetype of the rogue now being that of the pole-armed fighter in the group, but I suppose that's what folks want.

 

[gizmo33]

Because something wasn't used in later editions doesn't mean it was bad.

I agree that not every change in 3E represents an improvement - but that's not where my skepticism comes from. I just recall from my actual use of the 1e experience system that the results were often as troublesome as the 3E situation with the ogre. Ultimately, the core issues haven't changed as far as computing monster power - it's just a complicated problem in either edition. If 1E has some sort of wisdom in this area, I would think you could scale/adapt it to 3E variables. Then again, having played 1E for a long time, I just don't recall the system being there that you're describing (but then again the 1e DMG is a huge book).

 

[Felon]

Actually I'm not exaggerating - a reach weapon that does the same damage as a greataxe seems to go contrary to physics.

Not really. There's no mathematical formula in any physics textbook that accounts for what damage a D&D weapon does. Weapon damage is an abstract game concept, not a simple mass-to-length ratio, and it can be claimed to stem from a variety of factors.

 

[Vocenoctum]

I agree that not every change in 3E represents an improvement - but that's not where my skepticism comes from. I just recall from my actual use of the 1e experience system that the results were often as troublesome as the 3E situation with the ogre.

I remember a few dragon mag's that had systems trying to capture "appropriate challenge" in the same way that CR does. None were any more accurate than CR, IMO, but I can't say that CR is any better.

 

[Raven Crowking]

I agree that not every change in 3E represents an improvement - but that's not where my skepticism comes from. I just recall from my actual use of the 1e experience system that the results were often as troublesome as the 3E situation with the ogre. Ultimately, the core issues haven't changed as far as computing monster power - it's just a complicated problem in either edition. If 1E has some sort of wisdom in this area, I would think you could scale/adapt it to 3E variables. Then again, having played 1E for a long time, I just don't recall the system being there that you're describing (but then again the 1e DMG is a huge book).

I'll have my hands on the 1e DMG tomorrow.....If I can get away with it at work I'll quote the relevant section then.

 

[MerricB]

I'll have my hands on the 1e DMG tomorrow.....If I can get away with it at work I'll quote the relevant section then.

While you're doing that, have a look at the rules for modifying XP depending on the ratio of monster strength to PC strength.

Cheers!

 

[mearls]

Maybe Mike Mearls (the module's author) can stop by and provide his insight to the ogre problem?

It's been years since I looked at the module, but IIRC the party knows going in that they're up against an ogre holed up in the cave. Most groups I've heard about fall into one of two camps: they either prepare for the ogre and kill it easily, or they don't and die or get knocked around. A lot of groups hit it with sleep and then simply killed it, regardless of their approach.

When I designed it, I imagined that the "correct" strategy would be to lure the ogre outside and cut him to ribbons. He also rants for a round, allowing smart PCs to ready spells or fall back. The ogre likely plays out as a tough single fight, followed by rest, then a foray into the dungeon.