Too much combat: problems with Pyramid of Shadows

[Jack99]

Thanks for the thread, I was considering running part of Pyramid of Shadows but wasn't sure about how to advance it.

Cadfan, you said best of the H series... I agree with you on H1/H2 (haven't played 3 yet) but how do you compare that to the P series?

Well, I ain't Cadfan, but IMO the P series are far better than any of the H serie. P1 in really good, and P2 is just the best by a mile. YMMV OFC

 

[vagabundo]

I thought this blog post (from yesterday's front page news) did an excellent job of coming up with some twists to the encounters and created some variety for running Pyramid.

I know I'm going to try a few of them out.

The harpy and the sahaugins cooperate - but why? They don't have to eat! They do it because there's some satisfaction to be gained, either in killing or in cooperation itself. The ettin and the charnel lord work together for the same reason.

Ewwwwwww. Now that's just grosss..

This module should be renamed: H3, The Pyramid of Swing

Good blog, though.

 

[Dimitris]

I'm currently running Pyramid of Shadows, the third of the Wizards 4e adventures. It has a nice set-up, interesting locations, a great hook, and, despite all that, is falling rather flat.

Why is this? Well, in this writer's opinion, it's due to the incessant combat encounters with little chance for a change of pace.

Now, I'm not against combat in D&D. Most of my campaigns feature a great deal of combat. It's just that, in this instance, the adventure just seems to be combat, combat, combat and more combat. Now, I'll be the first to admit that we're still on the first level of the dungeon, and we've mostly been exploring north and west (away from the groups that might actually talk to the PCs), but given we've had two 4+ hour sessions of nothing but combat in this area, it's a fair amount of time spent.
..

Hi Merric. My opinion is that if you choose a system with the emphasis in combat, most probably the products you will get, will emphasize in combat as well.

I hope that WotC designer will understand eventually your point. If the combat is all we want then we could just play DDM.

Dimitris

 

[Jack99]

Hi Merric. My opinion is that if you choose a system with the emphasis in combat, most probably the products you will get, will emphasize in combat as well.

I hope that WotC designer will understand eventually your point. If the combat is all we want then we could just play DDM.

Dimitris

D&D is a combat focused game. Has always been. If you are playing it differently, you are a minority. WotC doesn't cater to minorities. That's what the 3PP's are for.

 

[Dimitris]

Do you think that to be with the majority is always the best choice ?
I prefer to be where I would like to be.

In my campaigns we have set up battles with 300+ miniatures (Merric remembers, he had some photos in his site ). It was fun. But when I make a survey (after 85 sessions) on what sessions my players enjoyed the most, the combat sessions were not within the top-5.

Dimitris

 

[Jack99]

Do you think that to be with the majority is always the best choice ?
I prefer to be where I would like to be.

Of course. I am not saying one should aim for being with the majority. I am simply pointing out that WotC has to cater to the majority, considering their position.

In my campaigns we have set up battles with 300+ miniatures (Merric remembers, he had some photos in his site ). It was fun. But when I make a survey (after 85 sessions) on what sessions my players enjoyed the most, the combat sessions were not within the top-5.

Notice I never really said anything about my personal preferences. IMO there is no right or wrong way to play D&D, but that doesn't change the fact that D&D is a game centered around combat. Does that mean that some might not prefer otherwise? Hell no. And while I love combat, there are many other aspects of D&D I enjoy a lot as well. Just as an example, we played 5 hours last night, and there was no combat at all. Just roleplaying with a few skill checks here and there.

 

[FourthBear]

A related point is with terrain and special effects: not every combat needs to have them. Some times, the players like being able to maneuver their characters so they can actually use their abilities.

I've whined about this in the past, but in the H modules I think there's far too much use of terrain and special effects that hinder PCs (especially when the opponents are unaffected by them). I would welcome more terrain and objects in the encounters that the PCs can exploit to speed combat along.

 

[Rechan]

Of course. I am not saying one should aim for being with the majority. I am simply pointing out that WotC has to cater to the majority, considering their position.

Even if it's the majority, too much of anything is never good.

Which is PoS's problem. The PCs are stuck in the same dungeon for 3 levels. Every room is a fight.

There's no lull, no opportunity to go back to town, no to and fro. There's also not that intriguing a quest. It's three levels of "Fetch this".

It's like being inside a house where every room is different in some interesting way. Even if each room is interesting in its own right, if you're locked inside that house, eventually you're going to want to get out and go outside.

 

[Obryn]

Hi Merric. My opinion is that if you choose a system with the emphasis in combat, most probably the products you will get, will emphasize in combat as well.

I hope that WotC designer will understand eventually your point. If the combat is all we want then we could just play DDM.

Dimitris

Hooray! Edition bashing! Just what we needed!

...Anyways, IMHO it's not the system, it's the format.

Trust me - many of the latter-era 3.5 delve-style adventures, like Expedition to the Demonweb Pits, were basically big encounters strung together. Heck, I know of some players who've said that's all there is to some Paizo adventure paths (like Age of Worms), too. If your adventure is designed as a series of combat encounters, it can easily turn into ... a series of combat encounters. No matter the system.


I've just started running Pyramid, but I think it has some great potential for role-playing opportunities. It does, though, take some work due to its no-escape-from-the-dungeon setting. I found the pages on negotitation and factions very helpful, and I plan on using them as much as possible.

-O

 

[Rechan]

Hooray! Edition bashing! Just what we needed!

Not to put words in dude's mouth, but he said system, not edition. D&D, no matter the edition, is combat centric.