Savage Tide AP not intriguing me

[Shade]

I prefer the higher level adventures to the lower level adventures, so capping it at 12 would not be appealing to me.

Ditto. I'd rather start at 6th level and skip all the "I got killed by a stray cat" levels.

 

[Arnwyn]

Part of the problem is that the CR system falls apart once you require too many monsters. In other words, I am much more suspcious about the "real CR" of an encounter with 8 CR 12 creatures than I am for 1 CR 18 monster. Adding more combatants to an encounter tends to slow down play, make the foes more vulnerable to area of effect attacks, and lower the "gear" below interesting thresholds.

I thought the EL/CR system was supposed to be robust up to 12 creatures? (At least, according the the DMG as well as IME).

Oh, and as with a few others, I'm not all that interested in a 1-12 AP, since I'm more interested in higher-level published adventures (since they're a pain to create, I'm a time-strapped DM, and there's a reason I'm paying Paizo for Dungeon). I do, however, like the "1 adventure per level" idea, and wouldn't complain with a 6-17 (or 5-16) level AP...

Wouldn't complain at all.

 

[gizmo33]

Dungeon magazine not only makes good high-level adventures, they also show me basically what sort of things need to be done to keep the players interested and challenged.

Many of Dungeon's high level adventures IMO are low-level adventures with class-levels tacked on to all of the monsters. They're still interesting but in a lot of cases there seems to be no substantial difference between a 3rd and 13th level adventure. I don't really blame Dungeon for this, there are no standards or guidelines when it comes to monster demographics. It seems to bother no one that a pirate ship full of orcs and a pirate ship full of 8th level fighter orcs sail the same seas - the only rationale for the existence of the second one being that the DM knows that the PCs are 13th level.

For example, I recently looked at running "Twisted Run" from #129, which IMO is one of the more extreme examples of this. There's a whole clan of 9th level goblin rogues!? Maybe there's just a time when designing a 17th level adventure means you have to say goodbye to the beloved goblin rogue.

I use a lot of software to generate stats so it's not a big deal for me to go through and reset the adventure for a lower-level and the demographics of my campaign world. This makes me more interested in the design and flavor than the particular levels or stats. Alot of the elements of the adventure are virtually random anyway (traps, magic items) and lower level equivalents can be easily substituted. "Save the world" plots are pretty easily replaced with "save the village" plots, and that's about the only thing that many high level adventures have plot-wise to distinguish them from lower level adventures.

I imagine you could do the opposite and upgrade lower-level adventures. The only thing extra to do is keep an eye on the "plot breaking" higher level spells. Imagine the Caves of Chaos where the humanoids are working on an Armageddon Device. PCs must infiltrate the caves and destroy the device. Each of the humanoids is a 15th level fighter.

 

[ericlboyd]

Many of Dungeon's high level adventures IMO are low-level adventures with class-levels tacked on to all of the monsters. They're still interesting but in a lot of cases there seems to be no substantial difference between a 3rd and 13th level adventure. I don't really blame Dungeon for this, there are no standards or guidelines when it comes to monster demographics. It seems to bother no one that a pirate ship full of orcs and a pirate ship full of 8th level fighter orcs sail the same seas - the only rationale for the existence of the second one being that the DM knows that the PCs are 13th level.

So, admittedly putting words in your mouth, this strikes me as an argument for introducing "threats from beyond" at higher levels. When the PCs are 1st-10th level (arbitrary threshold), there is an equilibrium among the NPCs of the world. The pirates, thieves guild, wizards' guild, rampaging etc. are all in rough harmony, leading to an equilibrium in which the PCs adventure.

Once the PCs cross the campaign world "threshold", they are now more powerful than the "default powers". To compensate, we have to:

1) Have the PCs "by chance" stumble across pirates/monsters/etc. who happen to be much stronger than the norm. This leads to the lack of realism you point out.

2) Have the PCs go somewhere else where the average power level is higher. This also lacks some amount of realism. (Why hasn't the more powerful region come to dominate the less powerful region, leading to an equilibrium across the wider region?) The normal solution is to throw them into another world (Underdark, another plane, the Far Realms, etc.) which presumably wouldn't reach an equilibrium with the low level world. This leads to the "boredom" of extraplanar threats.

3) Have a "threat from beyond" that is significantly more powerful than the status quo "invade". This is basically the same extraplanar threat, but played on the PCs home turf. This also leads to the "boredom" of extraplanar threats.

No real solution here, but these are some of the tradeoffs.

--Eric

 

[cildarith]

Which is in and of itself an interesting question. Is there a desire for a less epic campaign out there? Perhaps one that goes from 1st to 12th level over the course of a year, and focuses more on one level = one adventure?

That would be fantastic, James. Please consider it.

 

[Matchstick]

I'm ambivalent, namely because I'm so sick and tired of pirates.

Yep, same here. It just feels too derivative of Pirates of the Caribbean, like they decided to ride the publicity coattails as it were. I would have been much happier seeing something I felt was more original.

Which is in and of itself an interesting question. Is there a desire for a less epic campaign out there? Perhaps one that goes from 1st to 12th level over the course of a year, and focuses more on one level = one adventure?

Absolutely. I'd love to see something like that. I'd maybe try a little higher level span, like 5-15, or 3-12 or something along those lines. But I think a level per adventure mini-path would be very cool.

 

[GlassJaw]

1) Have the PCs "by chance" stumble across pirates/monsters/etc. who happen to be much stronger than the norm. This leads to the lack of realism you point out.

2) Have the PCs go somewhere else where the average power level is higher. This also lacks some amount of realism. (Why hasn't the more powerful region come to dominate the less powerful region, leading to an equilibrium across the wider region?) The normal solution is to throw them into another world (Underdark, another plane, the Far Realms, etc.) which presumably wouldn't reach an equilibrium with the low level world. This leads to the "boredom" of extraplanar threats.

3) Have a "threat from beyond" that is significantly more powerful than the status quo "invade". This is basically the same extraplanar threat, but played on the PCs home turf. This also leads to the "boredom" of extraplanar threats.

No real solution here, but these are some of the tradeoffs.

For Dungeon mag, yes, one of these options is required. However, the idea that the "equilibrium" becomes unbalanced after level 10 is usually the catalyst for turning to a lower-magic/lower-power system. Again, I know this is not a solution for Dungeon but in a lower-magic/power campaign, I don't have to choose one of the above options.

It was also the basis for an idea that Wulf and I had about expanding what is currently levels 1-10 across 20 levels. You keep the timeline of a campaign the same but you preserve the "sweet spot" throughout the entire duration.

 

[gizmo33]

So, admittedly putting words in your mouth, this strikes me as an argument for introducing "threats from beyond" at higher levels.

Yea, I pretty much agree with your analysis above. I'm not sure "threats from beyond" is the only possibility, but it's one of the few that I can think of. It's fairly common in my campaign for higher level PCs to travel solo or in smaller groups. So you can use a dungeon that's 4 levels lower than the PC level if it's a solo adventure.

I also don't completely object to the "pirate ship full of 8th level fighters" situation as long as the flavor text and context makes is plausible. IMO "kingdom-level" situations and "village-level" situations ought to be different, yet I often see adventures where an 18th level necromancer comes out of nowhere and manaces a village.

So "threats to the kingdom" is also an option for high level characters. That doesn't have to be the same thing as "save the world" type plots, as the stakes, rather than saving the world from total destruction, could be securing some political advantage. Granted, that's not the stuff of high fantasy, (and is maybe too campaign specific) and perhaps not coincidentally I can't think of an example of what I mean.

I also think that the rules could be tweaked, and I'll admit upfront that I'm not a fan of the 3E power up. If an efreeti granted me a wish, I'd wish that 3E was designed so that people were saying "I think 6 mooks of CR X is too tough for EL Y" rather than the other way around. If lots of low-level monsters really were the EL that they were supposed to be, say for example that 8 1st level fighters were a 7th level monster, then it would be pretty easy to design scenarios for higher level people that easily fit the DMG demographics. A high level pirate ship would just have more of the same type of pirate.

I'm of the "build a castle at 9th level" school of high-level adventuring, so the 3E way of doing things is a weird to me anyway. I don't think it's something that Dungeon Magazine could change on it's own. As long as character advancement follows a linear time-line, it makes sense that they provide adventures for a linear range of levels, even if it's an epic level caves of chaos.

 

[Vocenoctum]

This is an excellent example. I absolutely agree that 9 unique Slave Lords is much more interesting than a single pit fiend. However, that's only half the story. The trade-off is 9 stat blocks vs. 0 stat blocks and whether the adventure gets more interesting because of the added word count. In 3.5e, I would probably recommend 3 unique Slave Lords as a good compromise, as the stat blocks are so darn long.

I understand your point. My preference would be that there be less detail among the casual encounters for instance, and the bosses and sub-bosses be the detailed threats. In regards to slave lords, I'd rather have their stat-blocks scattered over multiple adventures, so you can still feel detail, but don't have it become overwhelming.

So, the casual encounter is made more complex by using 23 jackalopes from the MM, vs using the 24 tusked fiendish were-jackalope that must be statted out, and save the room for important figures.

I also think Dungeon could coordinate things a little bit sometimes, providing a monster that sees multiple use in the dungeons of that issue. (For instance, a single monster in the low level, but a pack in the mid level), using the same stat block and referencing the same issue.

Also, it may go against the grain, but I wouldn't mind if some of the stat-blocks were truncated down to combat info, ignoring a lot of details that aren't important to the direct use. Unless there's some campaign reason.

I mean, if Kyuss only fights for 3 rounds, we don't need all his stats in the magazine. You could put them online if you wanted to be generous, but that's not required. Hard to judge what will be needed of course, but it's a space saver.

 

[Vocenoctum]

Which is in and of itself an interesting question. Is there a desire for a less epic campaign out there? Perhaps one that goes from 1st to 12th level over the course of a year, and focuses more on one level = one adventure?

I like the idea, but I'm not sure it has to be a full year. It's not like you start them January and run to December anyway.

The first adventures always have something of a brutal feel to them because of the pace, though I've liked all three AP's first adventure. A 9 episode AP isn't a horrible thing, level 1-12 or level 1-10 could fit within easily enough.

What I think would be fun, is to give the AP's more modularity. Each adventure is capable of standing alone, but it'd also be neat if you had an "ending" at say, Adventure 6, so that it's a complete campaign by itself, which can also be continued into higher levels if so chosen. Also providing an intro for the remaining arc.