KotS Total-Party-Kill!!

[Eryndur]

SPOILERS FOR KotS and DMG BELOW!


I was Nifft's DM for the kobold lair encounter. I had fun running the encounter, and it was pleasantly tense (at least from where I was sitting) when things came down to the wire.

So, using hindsight, it's easy for me to say that the encounter worked, no (permanent) harm done. That said, the encounter is definitely unbalanced, and without the clever use of immobilizing gluepots, a TPK would have been the end of that particular session.

That said, Irontooth's stats are pretty much by the book; in this case, pp. 184-184 of the DMG, under "Creating Monsters". His hit points seem to be the main issue, but take a close look:

He's an elite brute, so his hit point total is double what a normal brute of his level (3) would be. The formula for a brute's hp is 10+Con+(level*10). That's 53 doubled, which is 106, which is exactly what he has.

Now, some of his defenses and his STR score are a little high according to the design rules, but all in all, he's a picture perfect level 3 elite brute. Totally suitable as an opponent for a 1st level party.

But you add in all these other creatures, and suddenly the encounter blossoms to level 6! The DMG specifically states that a hard encounter is anywhere from 2-4 levels higher than the level of the party. The kobold lair encounter is ONE LEVEL HIGHER than the HIGHEST difficulty an encounter should ever be (at least, according to the RAW).

If you remove the minions and keep everything else, this drops the XP total to 1000, which is spot on for a level 5 encounter for 5 1st level PCs. A level 5 encounter would still be extremely difficult to overcome, as it's at the high end of the "hard encounter" spectrum, but a TPK becomes FAR less likely. If I were to run this again, that would be my quick fix.

So, Irontooth = balanced. Encounter = unbalanced.

 

[Celebrim]

Interesting you should mention that. I'm going to be running Keep on the Borderlands for my 1st 4E game. We will see how it goes!

The one time I've ever been tempted to run 4e it was imagining converting 'Keep on the Borderlands' to 4e. It's just the absolutely perfect 4e module. It's light on story and big on huge multi-room rolling encounters with tons of minions. It's got a computer game like structure with set peices, hordes, and sub bosses leading up to a climatic big finish in the evil temple. I've previously ran KotB twice now in 1st edition for two different groups, and like every module I've thought over at length I've got all sorts of personal embellishments to make the module more interesting and believable (to me at least).

It could be fun, but I don't think it would be 'role playing' and I'm not sure it would be worth the effort.

 

[fnwc]

So my question is this:

When I run this should I:

1) Take out some minions or otherwise make the encounter easier by reducing number of opponents?
2) Reduce Irontooths stats (eg -1 to all attacks & defenses, -10 hitpoints or something like that)?
3) Have Irontooth and the second wave come in later?
4) Just run it as is and possibly kill everyone?

I'm quite concerned that my players will be quite dismayed if we go through a character generation session only for everyone to die within two sessions...

Give them some hints as they approach the waterfall, like:

"You see scores of small, reptilian footprints leading to and from the waterfall."

If you really want to hammer it into their heads (assuming the runner made it):

"Above the roaring din of the waterfall you can barely hear the cries of several reptilian creatures from within."

Or whatever.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

It could be fun, but I don't think it would be 'role playing' and I'm not sure it would be worth the effort.

Either you have fun with it, or you don't. Why is it important if it would be "role playing" or not?
Well, actually I understand your concern. I used to be (and might still be) running in the same trap.
"Hmm, my group is a little low on role-playing and immersive story-telling. But damn, do I look forward to every Saturday evening I get to play! But what if there is more, and I am missing it?"
Maybe the truth is, there isn't "more" fun. Just different fun. If you don't have fun, don't bother. If you have fun, do it.

4E (according to marketing, designers etc.) seems to be the "Fun Edition".
"Narrative, Simulation, Gamist, Role-Playing, Roll-playing, Board gaming, Video gaming, Railroading, Sandbox, Verisimilitude, Butt-Kicking, Acting, we don't care about those distinctions - the game is there to provide fun, and we tried to take all the elements that work best for that." It might not work for everyone, but don't dismiss is if you haven't tried it. (Off course, don't feel forced to try it, either. You can't be forced to have fun!)

We'll see how well that works. But I think I'll stop believing that it's important how I have fun with my role-playing games. The important thing is that I'll have fun at all. Only if I don't have fun I should play something different, or read a book, or watch a movie, or, dunno, find a girl, hang out with friends, whatever else could be fun...

[/RANT]

I think I have filled my "fun"-word-quota for this year, but I had to say this.

EDIT: Nah, I didn't. FUN fun fUn Fun fuN FUn FuN fUN

 

[Jon Wake]

It's a TPK encounter, no two bones about it. Any success goes more to luck than anything, but a disorganized group will just get punished well before Irontooth ever gets into the mix.

When people start being able to build their own characters and DMs can properly balance an encounter, then we'll really get to see how team dynamics work. This was just a 30 dollar demo, really.

 

[Magicstar]

When I ran this for my group they got trough it quite easy. The group inside wasn't warned and I even sprang the second wave 1 round early. As a side mark I have a very skilled group and they barely pulled trough it was a very tough fight, at least 3 characters went down multiple times.

Great fun seeing your party pull trough just barely.

 

[HP Dreadnought]

It could be fun, but I don't think it would be 'role playing' and I'm not sure it would be worth the effort.

If our group finds it fun, it will be worth the effort. If not, then it wasn't. That simple.

The idea of "if its not 'roleplaying' its not worth it" it ridiculous. This idea is rendered even more silly given that looking through the module I saw all kinds of roleplaying opportunities for interacting with the inhabitants of the keep, captured bandits and whatnot.

YOU DON'T NEED RULES TO ROLEPLAY!

 

[Celebrim]

YOU DON'T NEED RULES TO ROLEPLAY!

Even to the extent that this is true, this is not a logical argument for adopting a new set of rules.

 

[Goonalan]

If our group finds it fun, it will be worth the effort. If not, then it wasn't. That simple.

The idea of "if its not 'roleplaying' its not worth it" it ridiculous. This idea is rendered even more silly given that looking through the module I saw all kinds of roleplaying opportunities for interacting with the inhabitants of the keep, captured bandits and whatnot.

YOU DON'T NEED RULES TO ROLEPLAY!

Of course I agree with this, however my existing 3e and 3.5e campaigns are roleplay heavy, combat encounters are a necessity (conflict=story, a game without tough choices- attack, retreat, surrender et al is not what I signed up for, and silly to boot), my players love them (most of the time).

However my brief exposure to 4e has me on edge. My first TPK for 26 years, two combat encounters took two hours to play through, the second involved so much tactical play (counting squares and referencing each others character sheets) that it became intensely frustrating. The roleplay happened in between, and was up to the usual standard. And let me add my players and I have been through a dozen or more edition & rules system changes over the last quarter of a century, but nothing compared to our first game of 4e, except maybe Rolemaster (but that was for other reasons).

Simply put the combat mechanics/encounter were not up to it, they (for us) lacked fizz, they became very mechanical and very slow. I realise I'm a neophyte when it comes to 4e and things will inevitably get better, I just worry that my once or twice weekly five hour sessions are going to become combat heavy- we already slow play because of the rolepley aspect. I can cut out combat encounters along the way, but then I have to refigure the XP system.

If it takes the same time to play out on Sunday (my next attempt at 4e) then I may be faced by a mutiny. What I would like from this forum, and particularly regarding KTOS, is suggestions as to how I am going to fix the dilemma I am currently facing- I can't be the only person who is experiencing the above problems- can I?

Is there anyway of streamlining the combat encounters, making them less clunky- my players are action heroes straight out of the silver screen and the pages of fantasy writers first, and game players (and rollers of dice) second- not anyones fault, not even our own.

We've been sitting in the lap of luxury for a while it seems, 4e has turfed us out of our comfort zone (no bad thing), and yet the alternative it provides doesn't seem as well developed (particularly for players and DMs like us).

On Sunday there will be five players around the table that have in the past created "false" character sheets, to protect the identity of their real character class/traits/stats/whatever. That even now in the campaigns they are playing do not feel the need to share their skills/talents etc. For them its not that sort of team game, I have one player who keeps casting spells that no-one can identify- the other players have no idea what he is (class wise) and not a clue as to what he is capable of- and that works just great, for us.

I sent out copies of the Pre-gens to the players for KTOS, they're not particularly happy with that- "why should everyone else know what I've got?"

So what happens on Sunday and it turns out that their tactical prowess is, well... not up to it. Does that mean we can't play anymore? That 4e is not for us? Because that's how it appears at the moment...

And sorry again for the long winded replies, I have marking that needs to be done, and I haven't done the washing up yet etc. The problem is I'm very attached to this cruel and heroic game- I want to be able to play 4e, and be happy with it (in some form).

Er... Help, please.

 

[BlackMoria]

Goonalan:

Sounds like a very interesting group you have. The thing about the character sheets and the reference a few times to adversial goings on between the characters strikes me as odd as there seems to be a sort of rivalry or something going on between the players. But I digress.

I will try to help. As I understand it, the concern is time to run combat.

Some idea.

Determining distance - I hate square / hex counting. I assume you are using the battle maps with the module and are using a battle map or title set. Those are usually 1" squares for the grid. Stop the madness of counting squares by using a sewing measuring tape made of cloth or flexible plastic with 1" marks or 25 mm major markings. Or use thin white cord and mark off on the cord 1" increments (colored markers work great) and use different colors for the most commonly used distance - 5 inch, 6 inch (movement ranges) and 10 inches (most common ranged attack distance). Now, just stretch the cord and move the mini/token to the selected distance on the cord. Takes about three seconds to do. Instant time saver!

Rules - it is going to be slow if everyone is still unfamilar with the rules or their characters. Insist that everyone read the quick play rules, read their character sheets several time and understand their powers and feats, and ask questions before the session. If time allows and this is a new group on Sunday, actually run a sample combat prior to the session so that everyone get a feel for it, can ask their questions and resolve any issues that may come up in the actual play session.

I will post more suggestions later.