So...how DO you challenge a party above level 4?

[Corebreach]

... A competent party at any level that can cast Rope Trick can go through their four fights a day and still have at least half power left. So they don't even need to hit the 'rest' button after every fight, though they can if they want. There are also numerous means to trivialize the time spent resting and to trivialize any sort of time limit as a caster. It is not unusual, or even that uncommon to complete 1, 2, or even 3 full levels worth of adventures within half of a single in game week. And that includes research time to learn what you're facing.

Wild animals still can't get in. They can track your scent up to the spot below the opening. They can't see the opening, they can't get in even if they somehow figured out to jump 5-30 feet straight up, and even if wild animals somehow have been randomly Awakened to figure it out... how many animals can threaten a level 5+ party? None of the normal ones can. Some of the dire variety might. But 'random encounter with dire awakened animal who jumps up into your safe sleeping area' is an obvious sign your DM is power tripping because he cannot handle players having actual options ... and the game changing fundamentally every few levels instead of 'same stuff, bigger numbers'.


What these people tend to do is a Schroedinger's DM routine: instead of having honestly planned the number of monsters in a certain area, they just wait for the spellcasters to be out of daily resources and then "Two Umber Hulks jump out of the ground!", giving the mundane warriors a way to be useful.

Let's say a DM does want to "handle the game changing fundamentally every few levels". What does he do? How does he offer appropriate challenge to a party that can auto-avoid any enemy it doesn't want to fight, can auto-kill any it does (because it has casters in it), views any foils to these plans as blatant contrivances which justifiably should not be put up with for long, and whose characters gain levels at an average rate of almost one per game day?

I don't expect a complete answer. This is a huge question. Either way, this doesn't seem solvable without either using another RPG entirely or playing what is essentially a different RPG every gaming session.

[SquelchHU]

Other casters. That's it.

Of course the attacker still has a monumental advantage. That's why they blow through it in 1 day instead of 3.

[Woundwolf42]

While combat may be lions share of DDO, Its intended to be only a PART of D&D. Most new DM's tend to forget this. If gaining levels and loot are all your PC's are interested in, just hand them a copy of DDO and go find a group of people who actually want to roleplay D&D the way it was meant to be played. If you DM a game like its a PnP version of Diablo, where all your PC's do is move from one fight to the next, escalating the difficulty of the encounters, your gonna end up with massivly overpowered and very bored PC' fairly quickly. Once that happens, the only way to continue the challenge is continue the escalation til all you have left to throw at them are Dragons and the like, and suddenly the story has gone out the window and no one can tell you where the hell the dragon came from, or why were fighting it in the first place. But if you can find way to slow down thier level progression without making the game boring, you'll find they wont even notice how long its taking so long as they're having fun, and advancing thier characters thru roleplaying.

Give the party a nemisis that always manages to omehow come back or escape oblivion (liches and mages are great for this).

Get them involved in a war as generals where they dont do much actual combat therefore dont get unholy amounts of XP, award them XP based on thier tactics and strategies. Even more fun? Have them act as General on opposite sides of a war, and watch them try to outmanuver each other, the competition for who will survive to be a bigger legend in the worlds history will overshadow any greed for xp/loot they may have had before hand.

My favorite? Nudge them into the politics of the realm.

Powerful characters can come from surprisingly unpowerful stats, provided they can roleplay. Who would you fear most? The Level 14 fighter who can most definatly kick your head in, but probably wont cause you're not a physical threat, or the Level 4 Rogue who can bend the King's ear and have everything you own taken from you and your butt thrown in the stocks, simply cause it may benefit him in some how to have you out of his way?


Roleplaying seems to be a dying art these days, I've played in many PnP groups thru the years, and played with many people who play every character they roll up exactly the same way, the place thier own personality into whatever flavor of the month character they happened to min/max thier way onto paper. Hell I grouped with a guy once who played 4 completly different character builds, but you'd swear it was the same character if you saw him play. We used to call him Grant Clone #1, Grant Clone #2, Grant Clone #3, etc. No matter what he wanted us to think his character was or did, It was always Grant.

Some of the best gaming groups I ever had, no one got above level 5-7. We were so involved in the world our DM had constructed, and making our individual characters an integral part of its history that half the time, given a choice between dungeon crawling and roleplaying with NPC's to further a storyline, we'd take the storytelling all day long.

If you cant outthink your players in combat to slow them down, remove the combat. Or at least lessen it to a degree by substituting other aspect of such a vastly rich world. Improvise, Improvise, Improvise!

[Woundwolf42]

On the otherhand, if they simply refuse to roleplay you can always go a few different routes.

Make em think thier way through an adventure instead of crashing through it.

Start thinking up some seriously evil messed up traps that cant be disabled by a simple die roll cause of thier redundancy/complexity. I personally like backwards traps, traps that are only activated by going the other way in a dungeon, towards the front door. These are especially nasty if they are near a dead end or a room with an encounter. No one ever thinks about traps on a path they have already walked. Or even traps that cant be disarmed! Like an ambush at the top of a sloped hallway, and the party will have no choice to retreat down the slope due to being pelted with ranged weapons, or falling boulders. Now they are in a situation they can't simply charge ahead through without some thinking.


If they still refuse to slow down and ue thier heads instead of thier dice, you are the DM, improvise a way to humble them into thinking things through without such a severe punishment that it's obvious you are cheating. Throw them into incredibly challenging puzzles and borderline no win situations that always have at least 2 ways out, but only if they stop to think about them.

If nothing else works, its time for the humbling party, a group of NPC's who are each seperately rolled up as a PC that are intent on taking down the group for whatever reason (Bounty, People the party have wronged in someway, or even friends or loved ones of people the party may have had a hand in killing). Think of the party's weaknesses, be it their teamwork, or even individual character weaknesses. Think of a counter to each character in the player's party and add him to the humbling party. The NPC's all have the added advantage of being controlled by one person, so teamwork comes naturally to them. Having these guys hound the party and almost (but not quite) kill them a few times, and you'll most likely see a change come over your players. They will start to realize they cant brutalize thier way through these guys and start to plan ahead and work together. They will also start to roleplay wether they want to or not. As they are now getting involved with NPC's rather then simply killing them and moving on.

[Aspenor]

Other casters. That's it.

True, this is the only way to counter Rope Trick (and turns out to be a pretty hilarious way to do it and quite threatening).

PC: I cast Extended Rope Trick, we all climb in and rest for 8 hours.

DM: /rolls dice just for the hell of it
DM: In the third hour of rest, you all fall 10 feet in your sleep and land hard on the ground. You each take 1d6 damage. /rolls damage
DM: In addition to that, now, all of you make a reflex save. The air around you has burst into flame.

PC: What happened to my rope trick?

DM: Targetted dispel magic. This guy has See Invisibility. You have all been hit by Fireball in the surprise round.

PCs: ****.

However, Rope Trick has its limitations. You can't carry your Bags of Holding or Heward's Handy Haversacks into the spell, unless you think being on the Astral Plane as a level 5 is a good thing of course.

Is it a little bit of a "Angry Reactive DM" thing to do? Yes. Who cares? The game is about having fun and challenging the players. If they think they can put on cruise control and breeze everything, guess again. If I am DM and I notice you're using optimized spells and tactics, expect me to come with optimized NPC's using optimized tactics. Guess what? I can optimize better than you can, so don't start with it and I won't have to go there.

I had an optimized party recently, didn't bother me a bit. I gave them encounters above their level and rewarded at ECL experience. I threw a Shadowcraft Mage at them, that one humbled them quite a bit. I didn't kill them, I just let them know they weren't as tough as they thought.

[DireWolverine]

Other casters. That's it.

Of course the attacker still has a monumental advantage. That's why they blow through it in 1 day instead of 3.

Really? I can counter Rope Trick with one mundane fact of life.

Time limits.

If you absolutely *have* to complete your quest in 6 hours, you *can't* Rope Trick your way through nova-ing encounters. If you have to save the hostage in the next two days, and you'll have to fight your way through a dungeon filled with baddies to get to him, you can't Rope Trick after every fight or two... you'll just run out of time. And I, as a DM, have no problems whatsoever with having the party *fail* a quest, given that they were told up front that they had a time limit.

You can do the same with non-declared time limits, too; as the party dawdles it's way across the map to the quest location, Rope Tricking after every encounter or two, the villains advance their plans... making the defenses you run up against tougher, the defenders more numerous/better equipped, the traps deadlier. Get your players used to the idea that the world does not run on their schedule, and they'll respond to it by not being so cheesy.

It really all boils down to whether DM stands for 'Dungeon Master' or 'Door Mat' in your campaigns...

[Aspenor]

Really? I can counter Rope Trick with one mundane fact of life.

Time limits.

If you absolutely *have* to complete your quest in 6 hours, you *can't* Rope Trick your way through nova-ing encounters. If you have to save the hostage in the next two days, and you'll have to fight your way through a dungeon filled with baddies to get to him, you can't Rope Trick after every fight or two... you'll just run out of time. And I, as a DM, have no problems whatsoever with having the party *fail* a quest, given that they were told up front that they had a time limit.

You can do the same with non-declared time limits, too; as the party dawdles it's way across the map to the quest location, Rope Tricking after every encounter or two, the villains advance their plans... making the defenses you run up against tougher, the defenders more numerous/better equipped, the traps deadlier. Get your players used to the idea that the world does not run on their schedule, and they'll respond to it by not being so cheesy.

It really all boils down to whether DM stands for 'Dungeon Master' or 'Door Mat' in your campaigns...

+1

There are many ways around the typical "tricks" players use. It's really up to the DM whether he wants to let the players walk over him or not.

[SquelchHU]

Other casters. That's it.

Of course the attacker still has a monumental advantage. That's why they blow through it in 1 day instead of 3.

I'm quoting myself so that I can elaborate on my earlier points more clearly.

I am operating under the assumption Corebreach wants to continue playing D&D, and therefore does not want to play another system or no rule system at all. Therefore, posts that can be fairly summarized as 'Screw the rules, let's play freeform and call it D&D' are not valid or relevant. Particularly if they blatantly advocate covert cheating. You know who you are.

With that said...

First of all, the bit about 'other casters countering them'. Well, See Invisibility is a caster ability and so is Detect Magic. The latter would probably have to be an At Will SLA to be on at the right time, but warlocks are casters for the purposes of this discussion. There are some other things to counter Rope Trick but these are higher level, and also caster abilities.

I am reminded of that Jackie Chan cartoon with the grandpa that waves around some blowfish thing and his catchphrase - "Magic must defeat magic!" Level 5 is the first level it becomes obvious, and it only becomes more pronounced from there. But Rope Trick is not the only reason non casters become irrelevant. It isn't even the primary reason. It is one of many things that stem from the enemies evolving, and some of your side evolving but some not. Those that do not adapt die. Remember this statement, I'll be coming back to it.

Another important thing to consider about D&D conflicts. The attacking side has a massive advantage. Monumental even. And it only grows even larger at higher levels. This is also a thing of magic - mundane stuff plays little to no role here, and same for mundane people.

See, the shorter term buffs (anything a minute/level or lower, 10 minute/level stuff is in here at lower levels) are usable by attackers but not defenders. This is because the aggressor can accurately predict when a conflict will take place, but the defender can only attempt to be as vigilant as possible and full alert at all hours is not possible. So you have one force with long and short term buffs and the other with just long term, if that.

I say if that because D&D has this silly misconception that non casters are still credible threats beyond the first few levels, even though even a cursory inspection would prove this false. Therefore, especially if you have a DM that doesn't know better you may very well continue to find yourselves up against creatures that cannot participate in the tactical (read: magic) game and are therefore easily streamrolled. This often evokes a kneejerk response from said inexperienced DM, causing all manner of other gaming problems. But that's another topic to elaborate on if you want.

And this gap only becomes wider because more such spells become available.

How wide?

Wide enough for the same party to defeat a series of encounters that was intended to take multiple days in one, with resources to spare despite handling it poorly, then be almost as threatened by something around 10 levels lower than the first encounters. The difference? The PCs kicked ass when they were attacking and got their asses kicked when the enemy was the one attacking. Enough to almost overcome 10 full levels of difference. That's huge.

Now, Rope Trick is often overblown. People seem to believe in some fallacy where you fight once and hit the rest button with it and repeat over and over. While you can do that, and there are very few counters to it no one actually does so because it's a Catch 22 - the incompetent players don't know about it, and the competent ones don't need it.

What Rope Trick and similar spells are actually used for is to preserve campaign continuity by ensuring the PCs are not on the wrong end of attacker advantage, as getting ambushed is the surest way to a TPK. As in you could threaten your party 'less' by throwing dragons multiple levels higher at them. And dragons are rather solid as is. It is a very dangerous world, so hiding from it when not directly interacting with it is a very reasonable thing to do. Otherwise you could seriously be defeated by level 1 tactics, and that's just sad. It is also one of many examples of 'the game fundamentally changing every few levels' because while a level 1 can die to 'some random idiot sneaks into camp and slits your throat' the level 5 isn't accessible for this (Rope Trick) and the level 15 couldn't be gotten with that trick even if they chose to leave the Magnificent Mansion (Heavy Fortification = immunity to coup de grace, assassin death attack, and the entire Rogue archetype).

Now the obvious fix is to also allow non casters to evolve, but that is its own very long debate.

As is though, that's how it works.

Just imagine if the wizard in Aspenor's hypothetical situation cast anything other than a damage spell. That's TPK central right there. Party not buffed, enemy buffed, enemy opening with a decisive move? Hope you have another character ready. I wouldn't know, but I doubt even real world combat is quite that deadly. Pretty close, but not quite.

Now, since there are also people that believe in the time limit fallacy I will break this one down as well.

First, trivializing the time spent resting. The obvious choice is planes with alternate time progressions. Leave, rest, come back and it's only been 6 seconds on the Prime Material. If the time limit is so tight 6 seconds would make or break it it's far more likely something else would delay enough to fail. This is a fairly advanced tactic limited to high levels though.

Next, trivializing the time limit. Any party level 9 or higher when told to 'fight their way through the dungeon to rescue the hostage' is going to look at you funny, cast Teleport, gank anyone guarding the hostage, grab em, cast Teleport again and what do you know, your level 1 quest was completed in 12 seconds. Lower level parties won't necessarily be able to Teleport (there are ways) but 6 hours or 2 days or whatever is still more than enough time. And if you actually set the time limit tight enough to be meaningful to spellcasters you've just further reduced anyone else's ability to participate as anything they can do they take far longer to do. That's also some really tight time limits. We're talking something like 'You have 30 minutes to find and defeat the level 30 demon and his minions, or you're screwed' to the non epic party. That introduces its own set of problems.

About the best you can do is recognize and accept that past level 5 or so, non casters stop being relevant players in 1: The game. 2: The world. 3: The campaign. and have everyone operate accordingly, so that's more or less all you encounter past that point. It's still not perfect, but it does somewhat block the steamrolling. Not to mention, at any point where the rules and the setting are in conflict it reflects poorly on the setting, and by doing this you make the rules of the world follow the rules of the game. Odd as it sounds, you're promoting suspension of disbelief by doing this. And while it would be nice if non casters scaled as well to keep up, the fact is they don't and the world should reflect that.

Then there's 4th edition, which is the opposite in every way.

Level 30 is level 1 with bigger numbers. No changing fundamentally at every few levels, or at any level.

Getting ganked is not a threat, same as anything else. You can go 'afk' for several rounds in front of a mob and still not die. Instead of combat that is exceedingly deadly, you get... paintball? Which is fine as a game, but is not fine when someone tries to pass off paintball as real firearms combat.

No one gets any real abilities. You might think you do, but you don't.

And so forth. I know a bunch of people are going to latch onto this little section, but this is merely a side point for contrast and not the entire or even the main topic.

[DireWolverine]

Ah, right. I forgot who I was trying to argue with. Since shifting goalposts are meaningless, and make it impossible for me to fairly debate you, I'm not even going to try. I'll just take a cue from your name.

/squelched

[Xenus_Paradox]

http://art.penny-arcade.com/photos/674455815_tf4rD-L.jpg

[Aspenor]

Just imagine if the wizard in Aspenor's hypothetical situation cast anything other than a damage spell. That's TPK central right there. Party not buffed, enemy buffed, enemy opening with a decisive move? Hope you have another character ready. I wouldn't know, but I doubt even real world combat is quite that deadly. Pretty close, but not quite.

Now, since there are also people that believe in the time limit fallacy I will break this one down as well.

First, trivializing the time spent resting. The obvious choice is planes with alternate time progressions. Leave, rest, come back and it's only been 6 seconds on the Prime Material. If the time limit is so tight 6 seconds would make or break it it's far more likely something else would delay enough to fail. This is a fairly advanced tactic limited to high levels though.

Next, trivializing the time limit. Any party level 9 or higher when told to 'fight their way through the dungeon to rescue the hostage' is going to look at you funny, cast Teleport, gank anyone guarding the hostage, grab em, cast Teleport again and what do you know, your level 1 quest was completed in 12 seconds.
As mentioned above, a remotely competent DM will not have any of these things occur in his game.

My example was assuming a level 5 party, btw, not higher, as a higher level party would be embarassed to use Rope Trick.

Planes with alternate time progressions? Good luck getting there at level 5. Even with these in play......

I can use them better than you can when I'm DM.

Teleport? Sorry, you are not only unfamiliar with the location, but if you had the brains to try to Divine the location, you were given a false location due to defensive magic.

The sweet spot of D&D 3.5 where a competent DM can keep the caster in check lies from 5-12. Before 5 players are too weak. After 12, the game gets out of hand a little bit but a competent DM can still make it a challenge.

Although I do agree that past a certain point a non-spellcaster can't hold a candle to a spellcaster, expecting the tactics you're citing to be auto-win is false when you put a competent person behind the DM screen.

[SquelchHU]

As mentioned above, a remotely competent DM will not have any of these things occur in his game.

My example was assuming a level 5 party, btw, not higher, as a higher level party would be embarassed to use Rope Trick.

Planes with alternate time progressions? Good luck getting there at level 5. Even with these in play......

I can use them better than you can when I'm DM.

Teleport? Sorry, you are not only unfamiliar with the location, but if you had the brains to try to Divine the location, you were given a false location due to defensive magic.

The sweet spot of D&D 3.5 where a competent DM can keep the caster in check lies from 5-12. Before 5 players are too weak. After 12, the game gets out of hand a little bit but a competent DM can still make it a challenge.

Although I do agree that past a certain point a non-spellcaster can't hold a candle to a spellcaster, expecting the tactics you're citing to be auto-win is false when you put a competent person behind the DM screen.

Level 5 features quite a few of the decisive spells I mentioned. I assumed level 5 when I said that.

You correctly guessed what I meant when I said coming back seconds later. However I also specifically cited this as a high level thing, so I don't know why you would think I said it was available at level 5.

What defensive magic are you using exactly? Mind Blank is higher level than Teleport and must be cast on each and every person in there or it's possible to find you quite easily. That isn't feasible unless it's just you, or we're talking level 21+ here. Nondetection is foiled by a caster level check and has the same flaw as Mind Blank. Anticipate Teleportation covers a small area and more to the point is an emanation. If they appear on the other side of the wall relative to the target's position they cannot be anticipated because emanations are blocked by solid objects. Greater Anticipate has the same flaw and is higher level.

The only one that kind of works is Forbiddence because it covers a decent size area but is still higher level, and still requires absolutely every organization or what have you you face to have access to sixth level Cleric spells. So now not only must enemies be primary spellcasters to keep up, they must be one specific kind of caster or have access to the same.

I really do want to know what the uber spell you're using here is, because the most I could find was some people's house rules to nerf teleport. Which is nice, but irrelevant to the rules as they exist here and now.

As for the tactics I'm mentioning - auto win? Not quite. Making things monumentally easier, such that you could gain a level per game day or faster simply by storming the dungeon faster than the DM anticipated? Absolutely. And these aren't push over enemies either - I know the tricks too, and made a variety of vicious enemies (who are invariably 1-2 rounded by this tactic anyways) so it's not as if I were making the enemy easy to defeat. It helps when you really do have an answer to anything. 'What's that? You have mid 30s all saves, Evasion, Mettle, and 250 HP? No save, I win.' And that's exactly what happens.

But see, I don't believe in cheating my players. If they perform better than expected, they get rewarded better. Simple as that. So I'm not going to nerf their XP for a battle they won or whatever simply because I did not like the way they won it. Hell, I won't even not like the way they won it - if they win, they win, and that's awesome. They worked for it, so why would I be adversarial and cheat them out of their accomplishment? It's not as if I'm treating some melee guy that does only 75 damage a round as a valid level 20 challenge or anything.

Now back to the Teleport thing. One thing that actually does stop it is no longer using any site based adventures. If it's 'go to x and do y' ditch it now, because the going to x part means divinations will make a joke of it. This is another example of the game fundamentally changing every few levels - you can no longer have the enemy or the adventure occur at a static location. They need to be moving around. Just like you do. Luckily the system already encourages you to keep moving as things like settling down in a home cost money that is not being spent on new magic items, causing you to be less effective than you should be.

On another side tangent, this is one of the many ways you can tell the people at Pathfinder have no idea what they were doing about anything at any time. One adventure they produced involves 'walking around in swamps, helping some meaningless backwater village for no reward of worth' and if the PCs try to leave the DM is encouraged to try to trap them with environmental effects, another involves 'being trapped in a snowstorm in some village and being forced to help them out' and still another is basically incoherent in its writing and frequently contradicts itself, but thinks that a bunch of humanoid non caster mercenaries who are at most your level - 6 can threaten you at all.

All of these are at least level 9. The last one is level 15. And they actually think these are level appropriate challenges that won't be laughed at and/or solved in 12 seconds. Or that the PCs are walking at all at level 9+. They certainly are not when they don't want to be!

In fact most of what they write is clearly written under the assumption they think higher level = bigger numbers, and that's it. And when it is made painfully apparent to them there's more to it than that they step in and arbitrarily nerf your real options because they can't handle it. Which makes me wonder why all the people that like it don't just play 4th edition, since it at least was written with that paradigm in mind.

[Aspenor]

I'd like to know your stunning spells for level 3, just out of curiosity of what you think is powerful. Yeah, I know fireball is not exactly as powerful as most players like to think (wizards have better things to do usually). I am really just interested in seeing if the spells you speak of align with my personal favorite Level 3 spell.

What I was talking about was not specifically blocking teleport, but rather magical obfuscation of divination magic. Mordenkainen's Private Sanctum protects from both scrying and detect thoughts for all those inside 30 ft cubes/level. Locate Object and Locate Person do no more than give a directional sense for the subject's location, making them virtually useless for gaining the information needed to accurately teleport.

Teleport requires familiarity, it is blatantly stated so in the description. Unless the DM is incompetent and bringing characters to the same locations over and over again, it is going to be useless. In my campaigns, you would never know where you were going to teleport if you tried this stupid manuever.

Greater teleport is slightly more problematic, but not insanely so. However, if your players make a habit of greater teleporting in places, you are a fool for rewarding them for repeating the same tactic over and over. After a few occurrences of this type, they would find their greater teleport tactic to be their demise (news of adventurer tactics gets around).

Additionally, I never penalize players for using a tactic I didn't like. As DM, however, I do have the right to adjudicate what they deserve for completing objectives. I made a conscious choice to run a high-power, high-magic and lethal campaign. I let the PC's run a little crazy, and in turn increased the ECL of most encounters since, in all reality, they were fair encounters and not causing undue trouble. They got what they deserved, not necessarily what the books said they deserved, but what I decided they deserved (which is what really matters).

[SquelchHU]

I'm not a big fan of the level 3 spells to be honest. Yeah, you can cripple parties with Slow by ensuring non casters can't even touch you and casters cannot both move and cast eliminating one of their major defenses, but most of them are Fortitude based and therefore quickly become obsolete since enemy Fortitude saves are the highest on average, and poison is one of the most common immunities. Glitterdust and Web are still admirable encounter enders though. Yes, they technically aren't dead yet, but they aren't doing anything that matters for at least a round or two and that's good enough to call them dead. Yes, you had access to these two levels ago, but I said level 5 features many encounter enders, not that they just became available.

As for the divination blocking stuff, that does cover a decent enough sized area to be worthwhile. So that would stop it. Though really none of my players ever tried the scry and fry. They used divinations for indirect information gathering, including where they needed to go then Teleported outside the complex and stormed the place with buff timers counting down. Much like a typical DDO mission actually. They could have scried some of them, and tried once or twice but they didn't go teleporting on his head afterwards. There's not a whole lot of need to when you can get more information from asking the gods about it. Merely that it is possible, and the defenses against it are extremely limited. More to the point, the fact the attacker has such a monumental advantage is what makes Rope Trick and Magnificent Mansion earn their keep, so you can hide from the world when not directly interacting with it, that way you can avoid being on the wrong side of that.

[Karavek]

There are IMO basically two ways to DM.

1. You are just a referee and narator. You plan as best you can and stick by those plans and if players out think you so be it. You are not out to get them nor are they trying to ruin your fun, things just happen and niether side exactly plans on the outcome.

THis can be rather alot of fun in a groups early days as each learns what will and wont fly within the group both in game and around the table talk. However I found as time goes on and all become comfortable the problems of the team seeming to handidly defeat any thing you throw at them rises with no end in site short of overwhelming force and a party wipe to reset things.

2. Your the DM! They are the players. And your purpose is to break thier spirit and use thier love of the game to drive them to the edge of insanity. This does not mean you cheat or stack the deck unfairly. However a well crafted villain, usually a fighter mage mix can pretty much endlessly stalk and harrass the best adventuring party.

You pretty much make an NPC villain your character and do just as any good player would do. learn how to use every facet of that characters powers fully. Combine that with him being the head evil NPC with virtually limitless rescources and the answer yes everytime you see something that says only with DM permission means your arch villain becomes your dream character and the player groups worst nightmare.

He can take many forms and be many places at once. he can be the torch bearer guiding the party down into thier first dungeon who seemingly dies to a pit trap. Later he is that inn keeper who shares a whispered tale fora few gold about a lost tower in the ancient forest. Every step the party takes is one guided not by an ally but by a foe and hence never are they safe, never are they hidden.

Scrying spells are always said to be most effective on well known targets, add in personal possessions and even possibly blood and hair and no where in the multiverse can one hide from a truly accomplished master of the arcane.

Finally the ultimate end game. That every quest the heroes have completed, each foe layed to waste and each land saved only aids thier end challenge. As they gained in power so does thier hidden patron who guides them like unwitting puppets. You spend your week inbetween each game session thinking not of how to challenge the party but how your character will use them.

The final battle then is all the more brutal as you have no interest in seeing your lovely villain fall but yet you must abide by whatever rules your group plays by in this final hour and hope that if you do indeed win its because of lucky rolls and a good plan and not because you had the deck stacked so unfairly they had no chance.(I did that a few times and whether the party knows it or not you the DM never feel good when you know you got carried away and made the fight unwinnable.)

[donfilibuster]

Without the heroes the dungeon is just a big basement.

[adamkatt]

By upping the RP to Rated "R"!

[Mairuku]

The best way to challenge a group is to make them use their brain meats instead of their fist meats.

Puzzles are a deviously simple way to stump a party. Throw in a simple logic puzzle and they'll spend at least an hour trying to figure it out. And if you make consequences, like HP loss, part of the puzzle, then they'll really wind up on the short end of the stick.

Or, throw an encounter at them that they'd never be able to overcome without cunning and intellect. One time, our DM had us end up in a ruined dwarven city facing a wall with hundreds of kobold archers on top of it. The fact that we got through there is a miracle in and of itself. Our cleric got lucky with his Dazzle spell. He he he.

Mike/Mairuku/Amere

[Borathan]

True, this is the only way to counter Rope Trick (and turns out to be a pretty hilarious way to do it and quite threatening).

PC: I cast Extended Rope Trick, we all climb in and rest for 8 hours.

DM: /rolls dice just for the hell of it
DM: In the third hour of rest, you all fall 10 feet in your sleep and land hard on the ground. You each take 1d6 damage. /rolls damage
DM: In addition to that, now, all of you make a reflex save. The air around you has burst into flame.

PC: What happened to my rope trick?

DM: Targetted dispel magic. This guy has See Invisibility. You have all been hit by Fireball in the surprise round.

PCs: ****.

However, Rope Trick has its limitations. You can't carry your Bags of Holding or Heward's Handy Haversacks into the spell, unless you think being on the Astral Plane as a level 5 is a good thing of course.

Is it a little bit of a "Angry Reactive DM" thing to do? Yes. Who cares? The game is about having fun and challenging the players. If they think they can put on cruise control and breeze everything, guess again. If I am DM and I notice you're using optimized spells and tactics, expect me to come with optimized NPC's using optimized tactics. Guess what? I can optimize better than you can, so don't start with it and I won't have to go there.

I had an optimized party recently, didn't bother me a bit. I gave them encounters above their level and rewarded at ECL experience. I threw a Shadowcraft Mage at them, that one humbled them quite a bit. I didn't kill them, I just let them know they weren't as tough as they thought.

Easy way to deal with rope trick is to let them use it, just make note of when they don't post guards for their stuff in containers they can't bring with them as well as things like their mounts and other beasts of burden.

Coming out to discover that someone walked off with the unattended goods can lead to a nice side quest or two, or just teach them a lesson they probably won't soon forget about things.

Also, use terrain, environment, and plot as ways to keep them from going to far. For instance, put them in a city that has "recently" dealt with unchecked wizards and are very suspicious of any caster while having the elite guards even having abilities tailored to dealing with them.

Terrain can play a lot, I'd set one battle inside a clocktower full of moving parts that the players had to deal with as they fought an enemy scout. Mentioning oiled gears convinced the usually trigger happy sorcerer that lobbing a fireball while inside a tower full of highly flammable stuff was a bad idea.

Environment can also work, you can even work it into the abilities of a foe. With 3.5 I turned an adventure into an experience by granting a rather deranged spirit shaman that the party was facing the ability to swap randomly between several environmental effects that would cover the entire battlefield starting the next round only to be replaced when the ability was used again or when the guy died. Just glance through the environmental books for some interesting weather effects.

[Magusrex777]

Level 5 features quite a few of the decisive spells I mentioned. I assumed level 5 when I said that.

You correctly guessed what I meant when I said coming back seconds later. However I also specifically cited this as a high level thing, so I don't know why you would think I said it was available at level 5.

What defensive magic are you using exactly? Mind Blank is higher level than Teleport and must be cast on each and every person in there or it's possible to find you quite easily. That isn't feasible unless it's just you, or we're talking level 21+ here. Nondetection is foiled by a caster level check and has the same flaw as Mind Blank. Anticipate Teleportation covers a small area and more to the point is an emanation. If they appear on the other side of the wall relative to the target's position they cannot be anticipated because emanations are blocked by solid objects. Greater Anticipate has the same flaw and is higher level.

The only one that kind of works is Forbiddence because it covers a decent size area but is still higher level, and still requires absolutely every organization or what have you you face to have access to sixth level Cleric spells. So now not only must enemies be primary spellcasters to keep up, they must be one specific kind of caster or have access to the same.

I really do want to know what the uber spell you're using here is, because the most I could find was some people's house rules to nerf teleport. Which is nice, but irrelevant to the rules as they exist here and now.

As for the tactics I'm mentioning - auto win? Not quite. Making things monumentally easier, such that you could gain a level per game day or faster simply by storming the dungeon faster than the DM anticipated? Absolutely. And these aren't push over enemies either - I know the tricks too, and made a variety of vicious enemies (who are invariably 1-2 rounded by this tactic anyways) so it's not as if I were making the enemy easy to defeat. It helps when you really do have an answer to anything. 'What's that? You have mid 30s all saves, Evasion, Mettle, and 250 HP? No save, I win.' And that's exactly what happens.

But see, I don't believe in cheating my players. If they perform better than expected, they get rewarded better. Simple as that. So I'm not going to nerf their XP for a battle they won or whatever simply because I did not like the way they won it. Hell, I won't even not like the way they won it - if they win, they win, and that's awesome. They worked for it, so why would I be adversarial and cheat them out of their accomplishment? It's not as if I'm treating some melee guy that does only 75 damage a round as a valid level 20 challenge or anything.

Now back to the Teleport thing. One thing that actually does stop it is no longer using any site based adventures. If it's 'go to x and do y' ditch it now, because the going to x part means divinations will make a joke of it. This is another example of the game fundamentally changing every few levels - you can no longer have the enemy or the adventure occur at a static location. They need to be moving around. Just like you do. Luckily the system already encourages you to keep moving as things like settling down in a home cost money that is not being spent on new magic items, causing you to be less effective than you should be.

On another side tangent, this is one of the many ways you can tell the people at Pathfinder have no idea what they were doing about anything at any time. One adventure they produced involves 'walking around in swamps, helping some meaningless backwater village for no reward of worth' and if the PCs try to leave the DM is encouraged to try to trap them with environmental effects, another involves 'being trapped in a snowstorm in some village and being forced to help them out' and still another is basically incoherent in its writing and frequently contradicts itself, but thinks that a bunch of humanoid non caster mercenaries who are at most your level - 6 can threaten you at all.

All of these are at least level 9. The last one is level 15. And they actually think these are level appropriate challenges that won't be laughed at and/or solved in 12 seconds. Or that the PCs are walking at all at level 9+. They certainly are not when they don't want to be!

In fact most of what they write is clearly written under the assumption they think higher level = bigger numbers, and that's it. And when it is made painfully apparent to them there's more to it than that they step in and arbitrarily nerf your real options because they can't handle it. Which makes me wonder why all the people that like it don't just play 4th edition, since it at least was written with that paradigm in mind.

I am sorry, but you are an awful DM. Really bad. Worse because you do not even realize it. The only way to cheat your players is to create a campaign where the rules are more important than the story. You are clearly a rules lawyer, it's sad PnP can be so much more than you give it credit for. For you, clearly earlier editions of DnD are clearly better than 4th. You are unable or unwilling to use the tools 4th edition gives. You get players to role-play and get invested by rewarding the desired behavior. Using silly game mechanics to trivialize what could be a fun and challenging adventure is the DMs fault. You do not allow, cheating them would be allowing them to do stupid things. My players always played, they adventured, they were not looking for ways to trivialize things. I always created campaigns where people wanted to do more than roll dice so rules or edition not so important.

I always laughed when I saw people running games and the rule war erupted....no no no he gets -2 on that roll, on page 187 of the Unearthed Arcana it says blah blah blah, no it doesn't, yes it does. Out comes the "book" ...Well it says..."hmmm" I thought it said... no it doesn't, it means that...Yeah that sounds like fun lol Watching people turn a heated combat where split second decisions or ideas could radically effect the outcome are instead arguing over rules. I put people on the spot, if you can't tell me precisely what you are going to do, you are hesitating, ill get back to you, sit there.

As a DM your first priority should be that everyone has fun, that is your job. I don't mean monty hall either. Challenging and failure, even death can be fun if handled properly and I would never let any rule get my way. I always considered mine and my player's time more valuable than that. I can take any game system in any edition and make a great campaign. Preferring one over the other, sure I have no problem with that. 4th edition sucks, no 3.5 sucks and 4th edition sucks, 2nd edition or nothing. All you are doing is identifying yourself as a bad player or DM IMHO.

[Magusrex777]

I'd like to know your stunning spells for level 3, just out of curiosity of what you think is powerful. Yeah, I know fireball is not exactly as powerful as most players like to think (wizards have better things to do usually). I am really just interested in seeing if the spells you speak of align with my personal favorite Level 3 spell.

What I was talking about was not specifically blocking teleport, but rather magical obfuscation of divination magic. Mordenkainen's Private Sanctum protects from both scrying and detect thoughts for all those inside 30 ft cubes/level. Locate Object and Locate Person do no more than give a directional sense for the subject's location, making them virtually useless for gaining the information needed to accurately teleport.

Teleport requires familiarity, it is blatantly stated so in the description. Unless the DM is incompetent and bringing characters to the same locations over and over again, it is going to be useless. In my campaigns, you would never know where you were going to teleport if you tried this stupid manuever.

Greater teleport is slightly more problematic, but not insanely so. However, if your players make a habit of greater teleporting in places, you are a fool for rewarding them for repeating the same tactic over and over. After a few occurrences of this type, they would find their greater teleport tactic to be their demise (news of adventurer tactics gets around).

Additionally, I never penalize players for using a tactic I didn't like. As DM, however, I do have the right to adjudicate what they deserve for completing objectives. I made a conscious choice to run a high-power, high-magic and lethal campaign. I let the PC's run a little crazy, and in turn increased the ECL of most encounters since, in all reality, they were fair encounters and not causing undue trouble. They got what they deserved, not necessarily what the books said they deserved, but what I decided they deserved (which is what really matters).

This is someone who understands what it means to be a good DM.

[Aspenor]

Other painfully obvious things that add challenge, even in a "storm the castle" tactic:

Traps (particularly magical in nature)
Intelligent enemies
Spellcasters
Well-chosen foes

This is, of course, only a short list.

[SquelchHU]

I'd post the thread necromancy pic, but I don't feel like digging it out. Did you really just necro the thread for that? Really? *sigh* Fine.


I am sorry, but you are an awful DM. Really bad. Worse because you do not even realize it. The only way to cheat your players is to create a campaign where the rules are more important than the story. You are clearly a rules lawyer, it's sad PnP can be so much more than you give it credit for. For you, clearly earlier editions of DnD are clearly better than 4th. You are unable or unwilling to use the tools 4th edition gives. You get players to role-play and get invested by rewarding the desired behavior. Using silly game mechanics to trivialize what could be a fun and challenging adventure is the DMs fault. You do not allow, cheating them would be allowing them to do stupid things. My players always played, they adventured, they were not looking for ways to trivialize things. I always created campaigns where people wanted to do more than roll dice so rules or edition not so important.

We've been over this. Several times. But I will give you one more chance. The rules ARE the game. They compose the entirety of it. They determine what you can and cannot do in it, from the simple such as determining if you are or are not shot by the robber to the more complex such as if you can or cannot defeat the Archlich Archiac the Archmage. All that stuff you mentioned? Not a part of D&D 3.5, D&D 4th edition, or any other system. It's a 'Let's Play Pretend Interlude'. And there's nothing wrong with that, however to pass it off as playing the game when you are definitively ceasing to play it is nothing other than wrong. You can have a 'Let's Play Pretend Interlude' in any system, a pick up match of Smash Brothers, or a hand of Poker. That still doesn't change the fact that you are actually playing (name of game here) and if all you wanted to do was play pretend, you would go do that instead (freeform roleplay).

Now, 4th edition is also an example of one of those objectively bad systems, because the rules get in the way of things the system is supposed to support and encourage. So yes, earlier editions (3.5) are better, because they get in the way less. Conversely, not using the tools 4th edition provides you is an absolute requirement to being able to tell any kind of interesting story. That of course means you are not playing 4th edition, even if you think you are and it is why all the people who claim to like 4th edition, if pressed will reveal what they actually like is freeform roleplay. This means they are ignoring the game entirely and just doing whatever the hell they want. This, if anything is the most telling proof of how bad it is - even the fans don't really play it.

But the system independent problem with that sort of person is it turns the entire game into a Mother May I contest. You are arbitrarily prevented from doing anything the DM does not want you to simply because he does not want you to do it. And at that point you might as well just leave the DM to his book writing, because your input is nil. And it is these sorts that are the worst type. As a DM, they are unable to handle creativity and cheat to avoid it. As a player they are the same, but constantly expect freebies to compensate for their lack of mechanical competence and know how. These sorts also gravitate towards 4th edition, since it gives them the higher level = same game with bigger numbers play they actually want.

The difference between systems is what those systems encourage, discourage, and support. And it is by these means they can be judged good or bad design. For example, no one would really have a problem with a system about early American colonial life not supporting the Swashbuckler archetype. That's not the point of the game. If a game like 7th Sea doesn't do it, then that is a bad system and you should find another system to swing around on ropes and say Arr a lot in.

What gets me though is I originally thought you were being facetious and using well veiled sarcasm for the sake of humor. Unfortunately, it seems you are serious. That's a pity, because if you were just putting me on, you really had me going there.

But back to Aspenor, because even though we do not always agree he does present valid points.


Traps (particularly magical in nature)
Intelligent enemies
Spellcasters
Well-chosen foes

Two things. First, what traps? At low levels traps are still a threat, but past that no one really cares. There are other problems with traps as well, but I will cover those in my thread.

Second, to ensure we are on the same page what is the longer list you use?

Other than that, I agree and do the same.

[Lleren]

For some you use roll play, for others you use role play.
As long as the group you are playing with is having fun, you're doing a great job.

If being the DM means having to know and "exploit" the rules better then your players, then you are likely in a losing proposition.

[Aspenor]

Two things. First, what traps? At low levels traps are still a threat, but past that no one really cares. There are other problems with traps as well, but I will cover those in my thread.

Second, to ensure we are on the same page what is the longer list you use?


Like I mentioned, specifically traps that are magical in nature. Mundane, mechanical traps are more often than not found and disabled in two rounds. However, even mechanical traps used regularly force the party to slow down signficantly. If the party has to search everywhere they go, their magical buffs and defenses tick down in the process. If they don't search, they have to spend time in healing. Either way, they slow down the party and thus even longer term buffs will disappear fairly quickly. Remember, it takes a rogue 6 seconds per 5 foot square searched. Even if you assume he takes 10 constantly he will miss some traps (specifically the magic ones). He also must take the time to search, as I mentioned. Only 10 squares destroys 1 minute of the party's buffs. Also, since rolling again on a search takes another 6 seconds per square, that's even more time spent on a poor roll. Specifically they both slow the party down and force more resource expenditure, both of which should be the DM's goal.

Even at high level, a trap is not always something to be ignored completely. It will cost time and resources to amend the damage caused by them. Something that a party attempting to "storm the castle" should not have in spades (specifically time). Also, as traps only go up to CR 10, it's fairly simple to manually create traps with similar effects that scale with the party's current level.

A "castle" (or whatever it is) being stormed in such a manner should result in more difficult encounters the longer the party takes. This represents its inhabitants' ability to "call in the reinforcements."

I don't really have a "list" written out, and I don't really feel like making it any larger. The short list is plenty to accomplish the goal. I suppose, in reality, most everything that I'd come up with in a short period of time (which is all I'm going to dedicate) could fall into any of the above categories. So, if you want, just consider that "the" list.

[ddaedelus]

Let's say a DM does want to "handle the game changing fundamentally every few levels". What does he do? How does he offer appropriate challenge to a party that can auto-avoid any enemy it doesn't want to fight, can auto-kill any it does (because it has casters in it), views any foils to these plans as blatant contrivances which justifiably should not be put up with for long, and whose characters gain levels at an average rate of almost one per game day?

I don't expect a complete answer. This is a huge question. Either way, this doesn't seem solvable without either using another RPG entirely or playing what is essentially a different RPG every gaming session.

Using a different RPG doesn't really solve the problem. All RPG systems, at least the one's I've used... and I've used many... can be meta-gamed by the players if allowed.

This is an interesting thread, but I'm starting to think perhaps I don't really understand the problem. Does no one use house rules? Do so many DM's not realize the ingeniousness of their players or the abilities of their characters? It almost sounds as if people are playing with complete strangers, randomly pulling out modules, and blindly running through them without thinking anything out in advance.

Perhaps I was just lucky (I considered myself to be, at least) but I played with the same group for many many years. I knew their playstyles well and they knew my GM style equally well. I would spend weeks creating campaigns and NPCs specifically tailored to the players and their characters. I would also spend a good deal of time making certain that everyone understood the house rules I had chosen for the campaign (If I introduced a new spell, for instance, an NPC would immediately use it in a non-combat situation so that the players knew what it was and how the mechanics worked). So the problems mentioned in the OP were rarely problems.

Despite all that, sometimes I would make critical mistakes, like forgetting an item one player had that allowed him to bypass 9/10th's of the story. The difference between a good and bad DM isn't whether those mistakes are made; it's how well he recovers from those mistakes. I had my moments, :) and then... I had my other moments. :(

[SquelchHU]

Like I mentioned, specifically traps that are magical in nature. Mundane, mechanical traps are more often than not found and disabled in two rounds. However, even mechanical traps used regularly force the party to slow down signficantly. If the party has to search everywhere they go, their magical buffs and defenses tick down in the process. If they don't search, they have to spend time in healing. Either way, they slow down the party and thus even longer term buffs will disappear fairly quickly. Remember, it takes a rogue 6 seconds per 5 foot square searched. Even if you assume he takes 10 constantly he will miss some traps (specifically the magic ones). He also must take the time to search, as I mentioned. Only 10 squares destroys 1 minute of the party's buffs. Also, since rolling again on a search takes another 6 seconds per square, that's even more time spent on a poor roll. Specifically they both slow the party down and force more resource expenditure, both of which should be the DM's goal.

Ok, so we are on the same page. And you've also found the problem with traps on your own. Thing is past level 5 or so, because buff timers are ticking down the best way of handling it can best be described as a mix of 'zerg' and 'special forces tactics'. Blaze through fast, but not stupidly, and with detect magic on. You won't get the traps hidden by magic aura, but neither would the rogue so you aren't any worse off, and may be better off as your buffs will still be there. If you find anything, Dispel. It has a higher success rate than Disable Device, and puts you further away if something goes wrong. This is iffy with some of the higher end magic traps, but as you would find those with your face anyways, best to trigger them with all buffs on to minimize the damage. It is worth noting that if the DCs on magic traps were something feasibly hit by a level appropriate Rogue there would be positive incentives to slow down to try and offset the very negative incentive of losing your level appropriateness with your buff timers.


Even at high level, a trap is not always something to be ignored completely. It will cost time and resources to amend the damage caused by them. Something that a party attempting to "storm the castle" should not have in spades (specifically time). Also, as traps only go up to CR 10, it's fairly simple to manually create traps with similar effects that scale with the party's current level.

A "castle" (or whatever it is) being stormed in such a manner should result in more difficult encounters the longer the party takes. This represents its inhabitants' ability to "call in the reinforcements."

I don't really have a "list" written out, and I don't really feel like making it any larger. The short list is plenty to accomplish the goal. I suppose, in reality, most everything that I'd come up with in a short period of time (which is all I'm going to dedicate) could fall into any of the above categories. So, if you want, just consider that "the" list.

Just one more thing. 'Storming the castle' implies a site based adventure. This is exactly the sort you don't want to run at those levels, because their static location makes them easily trivialized.

Well actually two more. Yes, they should call in reinforcements. That just encourages you to hurry faster. Ideally without being detected (blaze to enemies, take them out before they can sound the alarm, repeat).

[Magusrex777]

I get what you are saying but in my opinion and this is total opinion you are missing the point. My campaigns were not “made up” dice rolls and such, it wasn’t pretend like you are suggesting. People died. I learned early on not give out poorly thought out magic items that gave players easy loopholes through good content. Spells could fail, divination can be wrong. Dieties all have enemies, they could be blocking your ability. Structure can be made to prohibit wall passing or teleport, shoot you may not even have that stuff. It is a magic worl you can do whatever you want and every single rule system I have ever seen has some passage in it telling you to do precisely that so it is IN the rules.

I rewarded good play and punished poor, but I hardly ever had to punish anything. I had people who wanted to play, they inspired me to want create hugely detailed castes and dungeons. They wanted to explore them, not “win” as fast as they could lol I say you are cheating players by simply allowing them to divine or scry where the hostage is, be teleported in and teleport out. It wasn’t clever, that was waste of everyone’s time, teaching that kind of p lay is OK is a colossal mistake. Then that is what they will always be looking to do. YOU are creating bad players by allowing that. It is like people who complain about their dog, they didn’t take the time to reward the proper behaviors then whine about it or worse, hit the dog.

[SquelchHU]

The game changes fundamentally every few levels.

If you don't like the level 1 adventure of hostage saving to be trivialized by level 9+ abilities perhaps you should play a higher level = higher numbers only system like 4th edition. Then you need not think to win. Otherwise no. You don't use site based adventures anymore if you don't want that.

[Turial]

Let's say a DM does want to "handle the game changing fundamentally every few levels". What does he do? How does he offer appropriate challenge to a party that can auto-avoid any enemy it doesn't want to fight, can auto-kill any it does (because it has casters in it), views any foils to these plans as blatant contrivances which justifiably should not be put up with for long, and whose characters gain levels at an average rate of almost one per game day?

I don't expect a complete answer. This is a huge question. Either way, this doesn't seem solvable without either using another RPG entirely or playing what is essentially a different RPG every gaming session.

I typically start introducing monsters that have beyond standard abilities like class levels or monsters who act like other monsters.

My personal favorite is the time I had a colony of were-bats who had a taste for blood running amok. You can imagine the players surprise when they showed up with stakes and wooden bonded weapons and found them selves in a colony of were-creatures.

Or a band of bandits that were using potions of illusion to make themselves look like wandering skeletons to rob the churches and monasteries of the region. Nothing like making the clerical population question their devotion to their gods than marauding skeletons that are completely immune to turning.

[Magusrex777]

The game changes fundamentally every few levels.

If you don't like the level 1 adventure of hostage saving to be trivialized by level 9+ abilities perhaps you should play a higher level = higher numbers only system like 4th edition. Then you need not think to win. Otherwise no. You don't use site based adventures anymore if you don't want that.

Actually you can and I did for over 20 years all it took was some imagination and willingness to "want" to have a good time. A person like you would not even be allowed to watch one of my sessions. This is not for you, you completely miss the spirit of it. I have gone on now to read a bunch of your posts am I am thoroughly convinced you have no idea how good PnP can be. I also think you are brilliant, extremely intelligent and you are allowing that to get in the way of having fun with your friends. Close the holes, challenge your players, reward good play.

[SquelchHU]

Actually you can and I did for over 20 years all it took was some imagination and willingness to "want" to have a good time. A person like you would not even be allowed to watch one of my sessions. This is not for you, you completely miss the spirit of it. I have gone on now to read a bunch of your posts am I am thoroughly convinced you have no idea how good PnP can be. I also think you are brilliant, extremely intelligent and you are allowing that to get in the way of having fun with your friends. Close the holes, challenge your players, reward good play.

Empty, unsupported statements that contribute nothing to the discussion but equally baseless insults.

Hint: Make your advice and your attacks on target.

Also, beating a level 1 adventure with level 9+ abilities is not bad because it is possible. It is not bad because it is quick. It is bad because it is inefficient. Just like killing 3 goblin War1s with 2 cones of cold and a phantasmal killer is.

However it is also good for the shock factor. Wake the DM up, make him realize that wasn't a serious adventure, and get him to write something level appropriate.

[Uska]

Umm what edition are we talking about? As to rope trick very few casters in my game ever aquired that spell I never gave auto spells at lvl up all spells had to be found on scrolls/spell books or researched. and while that spell wasnt banned it wasnt just found anywhere and usually the casters didnt want to be taken out of the game to research a spell they would fall behind in lvls and area as I had my parties on the move most of the time.

[RictrasShard]

Empty, unsupported statements that contribute nothing to the discussion but equally baseless insults.


Disagreeing with you is neither an insult nor an attack.

[epochofcrepuscule]

rules to DnD..


1. The rulesets are a guideline and the DM has final say.. The DM says as much.

2.a. Always state before the game starts, time moves on-whether you want to or not is your decision.
b. Also state, if you make an optimized build.. so will I, and im not restricted to the same books as you. (or if you arent as good with pure optimization threaten you will use a pun-pun build that has existed since the dawn of time)



For example in an undead campaign of mine, four people decided to optimize. At lvl 8 they were cleaning up everything nicely and thought they could get away with it, but at lvl 8 its hard to take on a optimized dread necromancer. Also, unlike whomever used the shadowcraft mage aforementioned, I slaughtered them with my undead adult dragons amongst other minions.

You can tell most optimized builds by level 5-8. Nip in the bud then. Also, if they dare challenge the DM, show them who the master behind Ao can do (for the clueless, thats the DM).

[SquelchHU]

Umm what edition are we talking about? As to rope trick very few casters in my game ever aquired that spell I never gave auto spells at lvl up all spells had to be found on scrolls/spell books or researched. and while that spell wasnt banned it wasnt just found anywhere and usually the casters didnt want to be taken out of the game to research a spell they would fall behind in lvls and area as I had my parties on the move most of the time.

3.5. I mention 4th edition only that it is an example of the higher levels = higher numbers and not more/different abilities play uncreative sorts tend to like.

[Cyr]

Let's say a DM does want to "handle the game changing fundamentally every few levels". What does he do? How does he offer appropriate challenge to a party that can auto-avoid any enemy it doesn't want to fight, can auto-kill any it does (because it has casters in it), views any foils to these plans as blatant contrivances which justifiably should not be put up with for long, and whose characters gain levels at an average rate of almost one per game day?

I don't expect a complete answer. This is a huge question. Either way, this doesn't seem solvable without either using another RPG entirely or playing what is essentially a different RPG every gaming session.

Or they could approach PnP without the strict regards to what level the PC's are that most DM's seem to use. This way no matter what tricks the PC's use there is always an element of risk. It's always a bad assumption to assume the PC's can avoid any encounter they do not like. That means you are not roleplaying the monsters and are instead having them sit in one place all the time like a bad adventure module. They might be able to avoid most encounters, particularly if they don't get involved in anything really dangerous...but that is the PC's choice to do. Some PC's have very little ambition, others like to take on big risks for greater rewards. It's all part of the fun of PnP.

Casters are great in pnp sure, but they also can be one shotted...particularly if they are caught flat footed.

The most important thing though as a DM is to use your executive power. If you really are a bad DM and know that certain spells cause serious issues for your DM'ing then say at the beginning of a campaign that these spells don't exist in your campaign due to balance reasons. The DM can use any house rules they want...if your a good DM you set these out at the beginning of a campaign.

[Vikkus]

A good way to challenge your players is to play the 'monsters' as intelligent. Not mindless enemies that rush into combat and die. Even low level Kobolds and Goblins can strain the limits of a party if played correctly. They can gang up, set traps, attack and retreat down cramped dark tunnels, etc..

A good example of this can be found in the Dragon Mountain adventure.

Also higher level villians are wise in the ways things are. They know all about how spells work and what works best in thier own defense. Remember your villian should always have the advantage if they are defending thier own lair.

Add a bit of mystery. 'Who done its' are great or friendly NPCs/Hirelings that have been traveling with the party suddenly turn on them because if a secret agenda.

Always keep your party guessing on who they can trust.

Or, send them to Ravenloft for a module or two. :) Ravenloft is great for catching your players off guard. The 'Mists' can engulf them at anytime (during battle, sleeping, traveling) and wisk them away to a strange place. Remember that the powers of Ravenloft always have a reason for taking a party. Be it some great evil or mystery that the powers want to pitt your party against.

Edit... Also, these ideas are things I used when playing Basic through 3rd edition. I don't use 4th and I am not sure how much time/room you will have to construct good storylines with that system.

[SquelchHU]

Casters are great in pnp sure, but they also can be one shotted...particularly if they are caught flat footed.

What?

To address the implied Rope Trick comment, and Vikkus' post. Most people get upset about Rope Trick. As early as level 5 you can throw up an Extended version and simply stop worrying about the level 1 challenge of a night attack. At level 9 you can do it without extend, and a 2nd level spell matters less to someone who max max 5th level than a 3rd level does to someone who has max 3rd level. But regardless, it is still very much worth it.

Now there are things that will foil it, namely Detect Magic. Thing is, while Detect Magic is a low level ability, it is also a short lived ability. So unless you have it as an at will or always on ability, you can't really patrol for Rope Tricks. By the time the enemy can reliably get a constant detect magic, well you aren't throwing up a Rope Trick on their doorstep. You're doing it at some random spot a few hundred miles away that you Teleported to. Not to mention unless you also have Dispel, you can't really do anything about it. That gives the Warlock class an unexpected use, but ultimately does not contribute much of practical use overall.

That brings me to my next point. First of all, combat in general ALWAYS favors the attacker. This isn't even up for debate - being able to choose when you engage is a massive advantage. And this advantage is all the more pronounced in D&D, where level appropriateness comes from spell buffs. So the attackers have short and long term buffs, and the defenders only have long term, if that. This means that whoever initiates the conflict has a truly massive, nearly insurmountable advantage.

So what happens if you don't use Rope Trick any time you are not actively interacting with the world, with buff timers ticking? The enemies get this advantage on YOU. And if you've ever seen just how badly a competent group of PCs utterly annihilate a dungeon simply because they buffed up and zerged the place, you have a pretty good idea of what is going to happen the moment they ever allow the enemy to do the same to them. But in case you don't, that thing is 'entire party dies in 1 round, likely before they ever even get a turn when facing anything that is remotely threatening to them'.

In short, Rope Trick doesn't break the campaign. It prevents it from being broken in one way.

[Cyr]

What?

To address the implied Rope Trick comment, and Vikkus' post. Most people get upset about Rope Trick. As early as level 5 you can throw up an Extended version and simply stop worrying about the level 1 challenge of a night attack. At level 9 you can do it without extend, and a 2nd level spell matters less to someone who max max 5th level than a 3rd level does to someone who has max 3rd level. But regardless, it is still very much worth it.

Actually I think my post was pretty clear about this. The first line spoke about DM's who think that they NEED to follow some magical level limit rules because the players are X level. I stated that is a self imposed restriction as is allowing any particular spell in your campaign. House rules are there for a reason. I'm certainly not going to debate what spells are OP in pnp and what tactics are best in pnp. It's a pointless exercise because every DM does things differently.

Oh, and actually the comment had zero to do with the rope trick spell in particular and more to do with competent DMing in general.

EDIT: After reading more of your posts in this section of the forums I am starting to think that you don't understand how important house rules are and how easy they are to implement in a fair and consistent manner. It also seems that you play a very regimented style of pnp. If you see issues with that then it's easy to change that...

[flynnjsw]

I am sorry, but you are an awful DM. Really bad. Worse because you do not even realize it. The only way to cheat your players is to create a campaign where the rules are more important than the story. You are clearly a rules lawyer, it's sad PnP can be so much more than you give it credit for. For you, clearly earlier editions of DnD are clearly better than 4th. You are unable or unwilling to use the tools 4th edition gives. You get players to role-play and get invested by rewarding the desired behavior. Using silly game mechanics to trivialize what could be a fun and challenging adventure is the DMs fault. You do not allow, cheating them would be allowing them to do stupid things. My players always played, they adventured, they were not looking for ways to trivialize things. I always created campaigns where people wanted to do more than roll dice so rules or edition not so important.

I always laughed when I saw people running games and the rule war erupted....no no no he gets -2 on that roll, on page 187 of the Unearthed Arcana it says blah blah blah, no it doesn't, yes it does. Out comes the "book" ...Well it says..."hmmm" I thought it said... no it doesn't, it means that...Yeah that sounds like fun lol Watching people turn a heated combat where split second decisions or ideas could radically effect the outcome are instead arguing over rules. I put people on the spot, if you can't tell me precisely what you are going to do, you are hesitating, ill get back to you, sit there.

As a DM your first priority should be that everyone has fun, that is your job. I don't mean monty hall either. Challenging and failure, even death can be fun if handled properly and I would never let any rule get my way. I always considered mine and my player's time more valuable than that. I can take any game system in any edition and make a great campaign. Preferring one over the other, sure I have no problem with that. 4th edition sucks, no 3.5 sucks and 4th edition sucks, 2nd edition or nothing. All you are doing is identifying yourself as a bad player or DM IMHO.

I tried to make that point once, but was laughed at. I think I will follow someone else example and just use the name as an example.

[Kaganfindel]

The rules ARE the game. They compose the entirety of it. They determine what you can and cannot do in it, from the simple such as determining if you are or are not shot by the robber to the more complex such as if you can or cannot defeat the Archlich Archiac the Archmage. All that stuff you mentioned? Not a part of D&D 3.5, D&D 4th edition, or any other system. It's a 'Let's Play Pretend Interlude'.


Yep - bad DM.

You've missed the whole point of the game. The "Let's Play Pretend Interlude" is what the game is, from one end to the other. It's the reason the rules exist. The shared storytelling isn't there to bookend the dice rolling; the dice rolling is there to enhance the shared storytelling. It's their only real purpose. This has been explicit in every edition all the way back to when "elf" was a character class.

[SquelchHU]

Actually I think my post was pretty clear about this. The first line spoke about DM's who think that they NEED to follow some magical level limit rules because the players are X level. I stated that is a self imposed restriction as is allowing any particular spell in your campaign. House rules are there for a reason. I'm certainly not going to debate what spells are OP in pnp and what tactics are best in pnp. It's a pointless exercise because every DM does things differently.

Oh, and actually the comment had zero to do with the rope trick spell in particular and more to do with competent DMing in general.

EDIT: After reading more of your posts in this section of the forums I am starting to think that you don't understand how important house rules are and how easy they are to implement in a fair and consistent manner. It also seems that you play a very regimented style of pnp. If you see issues with that then it's easy to change that...

Yes, that's right. I don't understand how important house rules are. That's why I have a whole thread dedicated to house ruling things so whole archetypes that are invalid can be relevant. :rolleyes:

The trouble is most of the people responding are not talking about house rules. They're talking about the problem being easy to fix (if you actually think anything except MAYBE the smallest problem is easy to fix, you are WRONG) or they make some empty statement that blames the DM for someone else's lack of ability to participate, or they simply do nothing but make personal attacks and trolling attempts (which is why 3 people are on my ignore list).

Now, here's how it really works.

No mechanic exists in a vacuum. Changing something also changes related things. And often these indirect changes change more than the direct and obvious ones do. In order to change things PROPERLY you need to correctly and accurately understand this interconnected web, isolate the problem as much as possible, and then fix it in a way that doesn't break anything else. Otherwise you get Pathfinder - a game that seems to do what it is supposed to do on the surface, but because none of the PROFESSIONAL designers understood this tenet of design they fixed the direct problems, and then turned around and made the overall problem worse by the indirect changes causing them to be worse off overall. Worse off meaning weaker, in the case of the already weak classes and stronger, in the case of the already strong classes. Which means all they really did is cover up all of the problems they were supposed to fix.

Now you aren't a professional designer, so I'm not going to rip you a new one for not being a skilled designer. You are not expected to be. However at the same time, I will tell you it's something you should leave to the experts, which are definitively not because otherwise you would not have made such a basic oversight.

As for the level limits, as I said. Go play a less creative game like 4th edition if you don't want whole tactics, approaches, and adventure types becoming obsolete over time. It would be easier, more effective, and less painful than trying to strip every ounce of adaptability out of 3.5, without making the system nonfunctional due to no one being able to deal with encounters anymore.

Edit: Nope. Let's Play Pretend Interlude is only what the game is when that game is freeform. And then it's not an interlude, because it's the whole thing. The rules exist to determine if the cop does or does not shoot the robber, and how badly the robber is injured by the bullet. All this talk about handwaving rules willy nilly is exactly the sort of 'I shot you!' 'No you didn't!' arguments you get when there aren't any rules. And since the whole game is the rules, and you clearly are not using the rules, you are not using the whole game. So you are playing freeform, and calling it D&D. The first part is fine, the second part is a lie.

[Uska]

3.5. I mention 4th edition only that it is an example of the higher levels = higher numbers and not more/different abilities play uncreative sorts tend to like.

I ran 3.5 some for my group and 4E for a year mainly when I run dnd now I run either orignal or 1st ed but most likely dumping all dnd for hackmaster when advanced is released as I hate to give WOTC my money.

[Riggs]

Any DM that simply accepts the rules, cheese, exploits and all, and doesnt do anything unusual to challenge a party is ....well lets say unimaginative. (Which means bad usually).

The most challenge to any party is not random wandering animals - it is other parties with magic items, spells, and thought out battle plans and reactive tactics.

Scrying - 'hey they are using rope trick'. *Builds ambush and traps*Casts dispell*party falls into pit trap and 4 fighters with spears and say a fireball - all in round 1 while sleeping.

Or the first rule of paper gaming - you can change rules you dont like, or spells, or items, or monsters.

Any DM that cant challange a party needs to spend a lot more time on tactics and strategy not random dice rolls.

[Cyr]

Edit: Nope. Let's Play Pretend Interlude is only what the game is when that game is freeform. And then it's not an interlude, because it's the whole thing. The rules exist to determine if the cop does or does not shoot the robber, and how badly the robber is injured by the bullet. All this talk about handwaving rules willy nilly is exactly the sort of 'I shot you!' 'No you didn't!' arguments you get when there aren't any rules. And since the whole game is the rules, and you clearly are not using the rules, you are not using the whole game. So you are playing freeform, and calling it D&D. The first part is fine, the second part is a lie.

People are stating that regimented DMing is to blame for an inability to challenge PC's. That is a valid statement. I among others have stated that it is both an unwillingness to adapt the rules to fit what you want as a DM and a lack of imagination in DMing the entire game world.

It is very easy to alter rules. It's hard to alter them in a large scale manner to achieve a set of goals you wish to achieve. This post was about challenge level 5+ PC's and referenced a spell rope trick. There are tons of ways to alter that spell (or just axe it completely) if a DM is not creative enough to deal with it otherwise. An alteration of a single spell does not have too many unintended consequences.

Thinking that you need to be a expert to alter any rules in dnd is probably a sign of a bad DM. It's your job as a DM to make the rules work for you. If you can't do that because you are too afraid of doing something wrong then you will never get it right.

[Corebreach]

Any DM that cant challange a party needs to spend a lot more time on tactics and strategy not random dice rolls.
Any DM that wants to challenge a party needs to know how. That means she needs to know, for a 3.5-specific example, what ginormous disparities in power the game's built-in rules create between its classes, and/or exactly what kinds of paradigm shifts occur as characters advance (as well as whether her players want those shifts, so she can choose the game system that best suits their desires).

At that point, it's academic whether the DM is adjusting individual encounters so they're appropriately challenging to the particular makeup of the party that's going to run into them or correcting for endemic design flaws in the system.

[SquelchHU]

People are stating that regimented DMing is to blame for an inability to challenge PC's. That is a valid statement. I among others have stated that it is both an unwillingness to adapt the rules to fit what you want as a DM and a lack of imagination in DMing the entire game world.

Nope. Regimented is being used in the sense of 'actually follows the rules' instead of things like 'making a door too thick to even actually open, that is locked and the rogue needs to pick it NAO, except that he failed the check and I let him do it anyways because he can't be useful on his own - he needs me to cheat for him for that'.

So let's review.

Ignoring the rules, and thus the game? Check.
Creating obviously heavy handed, power tripping scenario? Check.
Adding insult to injury because the Rogue didn't save the party because he could actually pick the lock - he saved the party because the DM was jerking everyone around? Check.

It would help if the other side came up with something better than 'freeform' or 'cheating' to oppose 'regimented'.

Further, no amount of imagination short of delusion is going to change what is. If Fighters are gimp, then that is what they are. Everyone at the table should know it, everyone in world should know it, so when you show up in the Lich's liar with a team of Cleric/Fighter/Rogue/Wizard, no one is surprised or offended when he goes after the casters first and ignores the other two. Why? Because they know the rules of their own world, those rules are consistent and not based on power tripping, and this allows the players to interact with the world in a meaningful way. This also means people will absolutely NOT regard the Fighter as a threat unless he actually is. Fix the Fighter, so that Fighters worldwide are more of a threat, and the in world take on them changes accordingly. I hope that you are not honestly advocating the worst form of advocation in the form of making a world full of delusional people that breaks suspension of disbelief right in half. Just as no one would be scared of Wizards if all they could cast was Evocations.

And it is fixing the Fighter that is adapting the rules. Hm, funny how I actually made a thread on that and other, similar matters eh? Yeah, how about those not changing things?


It is very easy to alter rules. It's hard to alter them in a large scale manner to achieve a set of goals you wish to achieve. This post was about challenge level 5+ PC's and referenced a spell rope trick. There are tons of ways to alter that spell (or just axe it completely) if a DM is not creative enough to deal with it otherwise. An alteration of a single spell does not have too many unintended consequences.

Except that I have already covered how 'removing Rope Trick' means 'first time enemies initiate combat with party, instead of the other way around everyone dies. Likely on round one before they get a turn'. And that is one spell of many, but it has wide spread consequences.

Here is an example of the absolute most change you can do without breaking something else.

Meteor Swarm. It's a 9th level spell. Its actual power is far lower of course, and it is a bad evocation spell even by the low standards applied to evocation spells.

However the primary reason for this is that it does low damage hits, fire and physical. Which means small amounts of DR reduce it to near nothing. A level 7 with a fire resist 20 can /probably/ survive a Meteor Swarm. You know, even though the caster is a minimum of 10 levels higher, and any other action, including lower level actions would have effortlessly removed the level - 10 or more creature from the field. Which says a lot about how well Meteor Swarm could (or rather could not) threaten something that isn't a practice dummy.

If you simply make it ignore all fire resistance, immunity, and damage reduction... well it still sucks. 32d6 isn't that great. But it's better than the other evocations (not that that is hard) and that in turn is helping somewhat.


Thinking that you need to be a expert to alter any rules in dnd is probably a sign of a bad DM. It's your job as a DM to make the rules work for you. If you can't do that because you are too afraid of doing something wrong then you will never get it right.

The fact you missed this very basic and direct consequence of removing Rope Trick demonstrates that you have not learned, and instead of being willing to you simply dismiss what the experts say, and go right back to trying to fix it yourself only to break it worse. Know how some people know just enough about computers, or cars to be a threat to them? Well, that's what you're doing to the game. That and making wrong statements like 'you are too afraid to do something wrong'. When the actual situation is more like 'make sure you actually fix the **** computer/car/game, and not break it worse'.

Also...


Any DM that wants to challenge a party needs to know how. That means she needs to know, for a 3.5-specific example, what ginormous disparities in power the game's built-in rules create between its classes, and/or exactly what kinds of paradigm shifts occur as characters advance (as well as whether her players want those shifts, so she can choose the game system that best suits their desires).

At that point, it's academic whether the DM is adjusting individual encounters so they're appropriately challenging to the particular makeup of the party that's going to run into them or correcting for endemic design flaws in the system.

Because he said it well.

[Montrose]

The best way to challenge a group is to make them use their brain meats instead of their fist meats.

Puzzles are a deviously simple way to stump a party. Throw in a simple logic puzzle and they'll spend at least an hour trying to figure it out. And if you make consequences, like HP loss, part of the puzzle, then they'll really wind up on the short end of the stick.


You've never played with a group of NPL vets, have you? The puzzles are the easy part.

[Ethiel]

I use one simple rule for all of my games DND or otherwise.

I was taught it the hard way by a Cyberpunk Ref.

Anything and everything that is available to the players is available to the rest of the world as well.

So even though you didn't make a gestalt psion/mage

That doesn't mean one doesn't exist to romp your socks.

by using that one rule to completely and utterly balance any size game with any or no restrictions.


In my last campaign this was shown by the million gold bounty put on the head of the only "good" character in the party.

he also happened to be the strongest and smartest, with the most HP, and I had warned the player that he was going to be a target of all of the others either individually or as a group, and it was some of the most intense role playing we have ever had and it incorporated everyone's roll playing skills as well, I.e. Listen, sense motive, diplomacy, hide, move silently, read lips, bluff, etc..

[captain1z]

Let's say a DM does want to "handle the game changing fundamentally every few levels". What does he do? How does he offer appropriate challenge to a party that can auto-avoid any enemy it doesn't want to fight, can auto-kill any it does (because it has casters in it), views any foils to these plans as blatant contrivances which justifiably should not be put up with for long, and whose characters gain levels at an average rate of almost one per game day?

I don't expect a complete answer. This is a huge question. Either way, this doesn't seem solvable without either using another RPG entirely or playing what is essentially a different RPG every gaming session.

Simple solution = Make time your encounter.

If you create a sense of urgency, that the players must get to location X or perform some action before a certain time of else all is lost, then players will find it counter productive to delay. Work it into the story, then place intelligent encounters that might delay them. You gotta have a story first otherwise the rules mongers start power gaming............. if you can successfully draw them into the story and thier characters it becomes less of a problem.

[Montrose]

Guess I'll weigh in here.

I'm not a big fan of Squelch. Or, more accurately, I'm not a big fan of the methods that he uses in order to persuade people. However, he is not incorrect.

It's clear that Squelch is quite the boolean fellow. I would even go as far as to describe him as Rorschachian, but mostly that's because I just made that word up and that makes me happy.

So, once you understand that and apply a filter of non-absolutes to his statements, you begin to understand that, fundamentally, he is correct. That is to say, his basic principles are sound.

His basic points are as such:
1. Non-casters are, in fact, very underpowered compared to casters.
2. The rules state with objectivity the immediate outcome of the actions that the PCs take
3. House rules are not core rules
4. If you are not following core rules you are not, strictly speaking, playing the same game

The point where people are sticking, by and large, is on #4. There seems to be a large amount of middle ground concerning when people feel they are or are not playing the "D&D" game.

Very few people (perhaps none, I'd have to check) are arguing that the rules, as written are balanced for casters versus non-casters. Yes - you as a DM can balance out casters and mundanes by specifically tailoring scenarios or tweaking the rules. But RAW clearly grant casters more substantially useful abilities than non-casters.

Very few people/none are arguing that there are not game mechanics tha govern PC actions. Yes - you as a DM can choose to ignore/change game mechanics as you see fit. But RAW clearly state the outcome of actions based upon character actions/skills/attributes combined with random chance (d20).

Likewise, I think it's pretty darn clear that house rules aren't core rules. This is simply A!=B.

Therefore if you step back and distill Squelch down to his core argument, he is not wrong. And if you read his proposal for fixing 1 & 2 via game mechanics, they are not terrible. Whether or not you choose to call the resulting system D&D or not is really quite academic, and (to me, at least) not worth fighting about.

[Uskathoth]

I haven't played PnP in a while but didn't 3.0 or 3.5 include an xp system (an alternate from the norm) that said, basically, the DM gives certain goals and reaching those goals gives appropriate xp, regardless of how you reach them. So rescuing the princess gives you about 30% of the xp you need to get to the next level, regardless of the manner you do it so slaughtering things isn't going to give you more xp than sneaking.

It seems like that's a pretty easy way to exert a little control on the leveling rate.

[Magusrex777]

Guess I'll weigh in here.

I'm not a big fan of Squelch. Or, more accurately, I'm not a big fan of the methods that he uses in order to persuade people. However, he is not incorrect.

It's clear that Squelch is quite the boolean fellow. I would even go as far as to describe him as Rorschachian, but mostly that's because I just made that word up and that makes me happy.

So, once you understand that and apply a filter of non-absolutes to his statements, you begin to understand that, fundamentally, he is correct. That is to say, his basic principles are sound.

His basic points are as such:
1. Non-casters are, in fact, very underpowered compared to casters.
2. The rules state with objectivity the immediate outcome of the actions that the PCs take
3. House rules are not core rules
4. If you are not following core rules you are not, strictly speaking, playing the same game

The point where people are sticking, by and large, is on #4. There seems to be a large amount of middle ground concerning when people feel they are or are not playing the "D&D" game.

Very few people (perhaps none, I'd have to check) are arguing that the rules, as written are balanced for casters versus non-casters. Yes - you as a DM can balance out casters and mundanes by specifically tailoring scenarios or tweaking the rules. But RAW clearly grant casters more substantially useful abilities than non-casters.

Very few people/none are arguing that there are not game mechanics tha govern PC actions. Yes - you as a DM can choose to ignore/change game mechanics as you see fit. But RAW clearly state the outcome of actions based upon character actions/skills/attributes combined with random chance (d20).

Likewise, I think it's pretty darn clear that house rules aren't core rules. This is simply A!=B.

Therefore if you step back and distill Squelch down to his core argument, he is not wrong. And if you read his proposal for fixing 1 & 2 via game mechanics, they are not terrible. Whether or not you choose to call the resulting system D&D or not is really quite academic, and (to me, at least) not worth fighting about.

First...Of coarse the higher you go in ALL of these games it favors the caster. it is MAGIC. If you want magic to be cool, it is powerful and extremely useful. It MUST be balanced by how you acquire it(difficult, structured, controlled), it requires concentration and incanting, components and gestures depending on the spell. More powerful casting leaves you prone, takes a full round you must rest, you get tired, exhausted. Some DMs might require you to make a roll to cast a spell when a sword is about to hit you in the face and you might even fail or have something bad happen to you when you do fail. Magic needs some drawbacks. Spells do not always go off perfectly in fantasy literature and isn't that what we are trying to recreate? I have never had a problem running High Magic campaigns even in 1st edition while making everyone in the party useful, not gimping the mage either. Creating a campaign where your PC mages are gods is foolish. All I am saying is the "rules" do not matter, no game can balance this perfectly, it is up to the players and most importantly the DM.

[Poffel]

His basic points are as such:
1. Non-casters are, in fact, very underpowered compared to casters.
2. The rules state with objectivity the immediate outcome of the actions that the PCs take
3. House rules are not core rules
4. If you are not following core rules you are not, strictly speaking, playing the same gameOk, my 2 cents...

1. In my experience, every level-based RPG rule system has a sweet spot which it is balanced for, and before and after that it doesn't work that well. For D&D, I would say that the sweet spot is from around levels 5 to 8 - before that, casters are weaker than mundane characters, and after that they become overpowered. To add insult to injury, D&D is one of the systems that seems to encourage munchkins (I once had a player in my party - a physicist - who gave me a powerpoint presentation of the way his sorcerer could develop a nuclear bomb by using household materials in a bag of holding, enchant that stuff with featherfall, reverse gravity, and niac's... that kind of stuff only happened me in D&D campaigns).

2. Yes, but with the notable exception of instant karma. A GM can forcefully balance his game in numerous ways without violating the rules. You've got a powermongering wizard that rapes the physics of the multiverse? Fine, engage the party in a large-scale fortress battle. In the first ten rounds, the wizard will spread havoc in the middle of the opposing army - and then he'll draw his d2 ceremonial dagger and stop making a meaningful contribution to the battle.

3. Core rules get changed every three years so the game developers can sell more books. If you stick with a system for some time, house rules might be more 'essential' to your game than core rules... but apart from that, of course, they have a different authorship, but that's about the only difference there is, and it counts for nothing ingame.

4. Indeed - not that that's a bad thing, except if you have guest-players or change the persons you're playing with often for some other reason. Actually, if you're not satisfied with the core rules of D&D (or any other game), you might want to check out some different systems. Although, at least in my games, usually only a small fraction of playing time is spent rolling dices, it sure is a part of RPGs I wouldn't want to miss, and if you're feeling uneasy with a specific ruleset, it might be best if you'd simply switch to another one. Even though I initially stated that every ruleset has a sweet spot regarding the level range it is balanced for, some systems cover wider ranges than others...

5. (yes, I made that one up) The beauty of PnP is that it isn't all about combat, and there are so many ways to challenge players that don't involve rolling dices...

[SquelchHU]

Simple solution = Make time your encounter.

If you create a sense of urgency, that the players must get to location X or perform some action before a certain time of else all is lost, then players will find it counter productive to delay. Work it into the story, then place intelligent encounters that might delay them. You gotta have a story first otherwise the rules mongers start power gaming............. if you can successfully draw them into the story and thier characters it becomes less of a problem.

*sigh*

The less time you have, the more quick solutions are incentivized. As magical solutions are faster than comparable mundane solutions, you only further spotlight spellcasters. Alternately, perhaps because the time limit is too low no one can solve the problem. That isn't helping. But in no case does 'lower time limit' favor 'slower solutions'.


Guess I'll weigh in here.

I'm not a big fan of Squelch. Or, more accurately, I'm not a big fan of the methods that he uses in order to persuade people. However, he is not incorrect.

It's clear that Squelch is quite the boolean fellow. I would even go as far as to describe him as Rorschachian, but mostly that's because I just made that word up and that makes me happy.

So, once you understand that and apply a filter of non-absolutes to his statements, you begin to understand that, fundamentally, he is correct. That is to say, his basic principles are sound.

Problem 1: When I mention one method, it is because one method exists. If there were multiple options I would mention them. With stuff like this, there isn't. So I mention one way and only one way and people seem to think that it is somehow 'my' way just because I said it. They're taking things personally. Would you yell at your math teacher for telling you the solution to an equation was x? Why or why not? He's just telling you as it is, same as me.


His basic points are as such:
1. Non-casters are, in fact, very underpowered compared to casters.
2. The rules state with objectivity the immediate outcome of the actions that the PCs take
3. House rules are not core rules
4. If you are not following core rules you are not, strictly speaking, playing the same game

The point where people are sticking, by and large, is on #4. There seems to be a large amount of middle ground concerning when people feel they are or are not playing the "D&D" game.

Problem 2: That isn't what I actually said. What I actually said on point 4 is this:

4: If you are not following the D&D rules you are not playing D&D.

That is for the people who are not merely changing the rules, but ignoring them entirely. Things like 'using roleplay to fix mechanical problems' which makes about as much sense as expecting your brakes to be fixed because you're talking about how cool it is to drive your car. Well, your brakes are still messed up, and so is your game. Ignoring this may help you feel better, but it won't give you a working car/game any faster.

These same people then go on to say because they're talking about how cool it is to drive their car, their car is fine... or that because they're doing nothing but playing freeform, which they call D&D D&D is fine. And no one would have any problem with the playing freeform part... it's the calling freeform D&D part people object to. This is being deceptive.

No mention was made of house rules. Clearly I have no problem with those, as I made a thread for the purposes of house ruling non functional archetypes to work. House rules must be quantified in order to discuss them, so if you say 'I got non casters to work with extensive house rules *list*' then everyone will know and understand both that the original rules were inadequate to the task, and just what was required to change that. And since they know what the facts are, those facts can be discussed. You can even have a meaningful discussion, provided that the people that show up to talk about it stay on topic and relevant. If you simply said that without the house rule quantifiers then those that know better are going to step in and call you mistaken, wrong, or lying (depending on how you present it, and how hard you persist in stating that 2 + 2 = 5) even if you are using them because no one here can read your mind.


Very few people (perhaps none, I'd have to check) are arguing that the rules, as written are balanced for casters versus non-casters. Yes - you as a DM can balance out casters and mundanes by specifically tailoring scenarios or tweaking the rules. But RAW clearly grant casters more substantially useful abilities than non-casters.

There actually are quite a few people saying this. Some in this very thread, and others like it. It is good that you don't, but there are quite a few that seem to think 'dude with sword' is valid 1-20, and that there is no need for 'Miyamuto Musashi' or whatever you would like to call competent swordsman.


I haven't played PnP in a while but didn't 3.0 or 3.5 include an xp system (an alternate from the norm) that said, basically, the DM gives certain goals and reaching those goals gives appropriate xp, regardless of how you reach them. So rescuing the princess gives you about 30% of the xp you need to get to the next level, regardless of the manner you do it so slaughtering things isn't going to give you more xp than sneaking.

It seems like that's a pretty easy way to exert a little control on the leveling rate.

Nope. You do get XP for overcoming challenges yes. And that may or may not involve killing, depending on the circumstances (sneaking past the ogre means XP if he's a guard to a vault, and the goal is to get in the vault but if he's just a random ogre then you get nothing). While that doesn't mean you're going to go dance in the forest like you would in a Final Fantasy game, it does still mean if an enemy gets in your way, the best way of dealing with them is to kill them not just for the XP, but for the loot as well.

And yes that does mean if you are supposed to fight 4 encounters in a day (and you are) and you fight 8, you advance at double the normal, already quite fast rate. Any group that can actually handle this is badass enough to deserve it.

Really, about the only way leveling slows down is with lots of downtime interludes. And most of those are simply narrated past, making it only an academic distinction as to rather it took you 2 months to go 1-20 because you were in more or less non stop action (RAW = 253 and a third encounters for 1-20, at 4/day = slightly over 2 months) or 1 year because you took a lot of time off, in which the spotlight was only on you for about 2 months of that.

I expect someone to say the obvious response to this, and completely miss the obvious unintended consequence, while insulting me for it. Do not disappoint me.

[MystDragon]

I'd post the thread necromancy pic, but I don't feel like digging it out. Did you really just necro the thread for that? Really? *sigh* Fine.



We've been over this. Several times. But I will give you one more chance. The rules ARE the game. They compose the entirety of it. They determine what you can and cannot do in it, from the simple such as determining if you are or are not shot by the robber to the more complex such as if you can or cannot defeat the Archlich Archiac the Archmage. All that stuff you mentioned? Not a part of D&D 3.5, D&D 4th edition, or any other system. It's a 'Let's Play Pretend Interlude'.

Ok - I've read enough. You, sir, don't have the imagination, creativity, or experience to be a good DM. I have DM'd at both GenCon and Winter Festival and have seen good and bad players as well as good and bad DM's.

The black & white rules are the game? Read the preface/introduction of each Player's/Dungeon Master's rulebooks from Basic D&D on through 3.5. I don't care for 4th, so I can't quote it here.

The printed rules are a guideline - D&D has within it's rules - even encourages - House Rules. So much so that a good portion of the Dungeon Master's Guide and DMG2 are about customizing your campaign. If you don't know this it speaks volumes as to your actual experience.

I have 2 words for you - Intelligent Enemies.

Difficulty providing accurate challenges beyond 4th level? Are you fricking kidding me? I wish I could invite you to one of our play sessions where you can see how immersive an experience my players have. The challenge of being a DM runs into Epic campaigns above level 20. If you can't handle players under level 20 - you should never DM as you are cheating them.

I have seen garbage DM's before and it is very easy to walk into a game as a Player and take it over. I have left DM's frustrated and beaten as a player. Some have quit. Why? Because I felt cheated that the DM did not put the effort into having a good game. I have also played with some fantastic DM's that I would not dare to try that with.

Your a rules lawyer with no imagination or creativity - fine. You better re-read the DMG I & II. While your at it - take a look at the PHB 2. Most of your postings go directly against what is in print in the rules. What a joke - you say the rules are everything when those very same rules prove you wrong?

Do you know what most of my player's reaction to rope trick would be? "You want me to climb that rope and hide out in a little magical box and leave my bag of holding, handy haversack, and mount down here unprotected? Your out of your mind, mage."

In all of my years of playing and DM'ing (since 1980) do you know how many players I have seen intelligently and effectively use rope trick? Out of hundreds of players - 1. And she used it intelligently to hide herself while out of sight because she felt the party couldn't handle an ambush. She used it so that she could then discreetly follow the party and rescue them.

In PnP every class has their usage and function - not just casters. In fact, casters are far easier to kill in PnP than they are in DDO. They need the party's protection. You know what the first thing an intelligent enemy will do? Kill the casters and the clerics to wipe out the support because it's a pain to kill the warriors while the cleric is keeping them up. Have you ever heard of tactics?

You sir, need to step back into the role of a player and get hooked up with a good, experienced DM as it sounds like you began DM'ing by reading the books and throwing yourself into it with little, no, or bad player experience.

In my games we keep a nice little journal called the "Halls of the Dead." The Halls of the Dead records all PC's deaths and there are quite a few high level names in there - many of which are casters. Casters in PnP are actually very easy to kill.

Do you think the warrior's a stupid hack n slash who just runs up to and starts hacking everything? Do you think the rogue is a tool that sits there ineffective, unable to do anything until a lock or trap appears? Do you think the cleric is a healbot? A well-played character is a beautiful and deadly adversary regardless of class. I have used every class as enemies of the party. I have created races, classes, prestige classes to give my world flavor. I have a binder containing thousands of spells and enchantments taken from 30 years of DnD - both from books, my creations, and player-created spells.

Speaking of which - the ability to create your own magic is the most powerful aspect of playing a caster in PnP, you Noob. It's what makes the wizard so powerful in PnP. You can create your own magic spells and effects that noone has ever seen before adding great flavor to your class. You can create custom magic items for you and the party to increase your strengths and minimize your weaknesses.

God - It really burns me up to see an incompetent like you call themselves a DM. I could fill pages showing even more examples of how clueless you are - but this thread has wasted enough of my time and I'm not interested in teaching you. Stick with Monopoly as what you describe is a board game, not D&D. Do all of us a favor and quit insulting a game I have been passionate about for the last 30 years.

[MystDragon]

While combat may be lions share of DDO, Its intended to be only a PART of D&D. Most new DM's tend to forget this. If gaining levels and loot are all your PC's are interested in, just hand them a copy of DDO and go find a group of people who actually want to roleplay D&D the way it was meant to be played. If you DM a game like its a PnP version of Diablo, where all your PC's do is move from one fight to the next, escalating the difficulty of the encounters, your gonna end up with massivly overpowered and very bored PC' fairly quickly. Once that happens, the only way to continue the challenge is continue the escalation til all you have left to throw at them are Dragons and the like, and suddenly the story has gone out the window and no one can tell you where the hell the dragon came from, or why were fighting it in the first place. But if you can find way to slow down thier level progression without making the game boring, you'll find they wont even notice how long its taking so long as they're having fun, and advancing thier characters thru roleplaying.

Give the party a nemisis that always manages to omehow come back or escape oblivion (liches and mages are great for this).

Get them involved in a war as generals where they dont do much actual combat therefore dont get unholy amounts of XP, award them XP based on thier tactics and strategies. Even more fun? Have them act as General on opposite sides of a war, and watch them try to outmanuver each other, the competition for who will survive to be a bigger legend in the worlds history will overshadow any greed for xp/loot they may have had before hand.

My favorite? Nudge them into the politics of the realm.

Powerful characters can come from surprisingly unpowerful stats, provided they can roleplay. Who would you fear most? The Level 14 fighter who can most definatly kick your head in, but probably wont cause you're not a physical threat, or the Level 4 Rogue who can bend the King's ear and have everything you own taken from you and your butt thrown in the stocks, simply cause it may benefit him in some how to have you out of his way?


Roleplaying seems to be a dying art these days, I've played in many PnP groups thru the years, and played with many people who play every character they roll up exactly the same way, the place thier own personality into whatever flavor of the month character they happened to min/max thier way onto paper. Hell I grouped with a guy once who played 4 completly different character builds, but you'd swear it was the same character if you saw him play. We used to call him Grant Clone #1, Grant Clone #2, Grant Clone #3, etc. No matter what he wanted us to think his character was or did, It was always Grant.

Some of the best gaming groups I ever had, no one got above level 5-7. We were so involved in the world our DM had constructed, and making our individual characters an integral part of its history that half the time, given a choice between dungeon crawling and roleplaying with NPC's to further a storyline, we'd take the storytelling all day long.

If you cant outthink your players in combat to slow them down, remove the combat. Or at least lessen it to a degree by substituting other aspect of such a vastly rich world. Improvise, Improvise, Improvise!

+1 - well said

[MystDragon]

Guess I'll weigh in here.

1. Non-casters are, in fact, very underpowered compared to casters.


I have to disagree here. I would randomly select any of my players, put them on a warrior-based class, and place them against a caster anytime.

I have seen well played warriors and rogues easily take out well played casters. I have also seen the reverse. This depends on the player, not the class.

A 20th level Wizard is a powerful adversary, but so is a 20th level Intelligent Fighter.

Edit: Just brought to mind after I posted. I remember one of my players who played a straight fighter. His character concept was that he came from a magic-distrusting community and specialized in hunting down criminal casters who were a threat to "common folk." He had an amazing back story and I let him roll with it. By 15th level he was so amazing at taking out casters that I had to really pay attention and work to provide him with challenging adversaries when he did go after casters. As a DM, that was an amazing and fun experience as he was a player who really challenged a DM's abilities.

[Aspenor]

I have seen well played warriors and rogues easily take out well played casters. I have also seen the reverse. This depends on the player, not the class.

On what terms? In a head-up PvP battle a "well played" wizard will utterly destroy any fighter, but fortunately most DMs don't allow that kind of PvP except just as a brief deviation from the actual game.

Bear in mind that I don't think that saying "no buffs at all active at initiative" are sensible terms. It's equivalent to saying "the fighter can't win so we'll give him everything possible to give him a chance."

[MystDragon]

On what terms? In a head-up PvP battle a "well played" wizard will utterly destroy any fighter, but fortunately most DMs don't allow that kind of PvP except just as a brief deviation from the actual game.

Bear in mind that I don't think that saying "no buffs at all active at initiative" are sensible terms. It's equivalent to saying "the fighter can't win so we'll give him everything possible to give him a chance."

No terms. In the terms of "buffs" you need to pull away from MMORPG mindset. Most casters only carry a few spells on them all the time as 99% of caster magic in PnP is short term and they only have so many spell slots of each level per "day." Also coupled is that Wizards must choose their spells ahead of time. Sorcerers don't have this restriction, but are severly limited in number of spells and tend to focus mostly on direct combat spells.

Now higher level mages of course are a bit more difficult as they often carry contingency magic such as Contingency and Elminster's Evasion.

Also keep in mind that disrupting a casting in PnP is much easier than in online games as well. Most of their protective magics are in rounds so it's easier to be protected if you know when and where the battle is coming. This makes surprise attacks that much more dangerous.

DnD combat and elements are heavily influenced by real world strategy and tactics. Some of the greatest books on strategy can be applied to DnD and can really affect the battle. I speak primarily of The Art of War by Sun Tzu and Go Rin no Sho (Book of 5 rings) by Myamoto Musashi (I might have mispelled his name, been awhile.) Study Winston Churchill, George Patton, etc.

Tactics alter greatly also between a prepared battlefield and a surprise battle. What does the caster do when there is a surprise attack in the middle of the night before they have prepared their spells for the day and are spent? A wise caster will be prepared for this.

I have allowed this type of Player vs. Player interaction and have seen both sides win. Keep in mind also that saving throws against magical effects are far more easily made in DnD than most video games.

One of the greatest descriptors of what each class is capable of can be found in the Epic level Handbook. Each class is capable of wonderous things. How to you win? Control the Battle. This is basic tactics for whatever class you play. Caster has improved invisibility? I have flour. The higher the caster the more dangerous the adversary - same holds true for any other classes, if played intelligently.

In PnP it is much more the player than it ever is the class statistics. I used to have a DM who got into this argument with a player - so he issued a challenge. He designed an adventure in which all of the players were on different sides of a conflict. Each side chose their champions - aka, the players and a couple of NPC's. Part of this challenge was that each of us was handed our characters the week before.

I had played with this DM for years and he knew what I was capable of - so he handed me the weakest character, a fighter who had built in disadvantages as well as being a couple levels lower than the rest of the party. There were 6 players and 4 NPC's for a total of 10 champions. Mr. Power Gamer was handed a powerful wizard - the highest level character in the party with a ton of advantages.

I won that challenge and truthfully I never got to beat the wizard. Why? Mr. Power Gamer managed to take out the paladin in that challenge. I faced him once and he ended up fleeing. He was then the second one taken out because the rogue had decided to target him from the beginning. The rogue stalked him and struck in such a way that Mr. Power Gamer didn't stand a chance. It was a beautifully designed and executed kill. I was pretty impressed when we all learned the details after the challenge. the tactics involved were excellent.

I had taken out several adversaries and then it was down to 3. The rogue, the druid, and myself. The rogue was taken out by the druid. And I was almost taken out by the druid. Truthfully - the druid was the most difficult adversary I had to beat. Mr. Powergamer? I honestly wasn't worried.

Now I'm not saying that a caster is not powerful. Of course they are. But so are the other classes. In PnP it is very easy, for example, for archers to really mess up a wizard's world. People need to remember that PnP is completly different that online video games. Online games, by their very nature, must be more linear and black & white. PnP is not. In a good group with a skilled game - PnP is just as much shades of gray as is real life. Same principles apply. It's a different different experience than MMORPG's. A skilled DM is a storyteller, a crafter of adventure, and has the abilities to role player every character who is not a PC - and roleplay them as a variety of people.

As a wizard, which I have often played, I have met many challenges. I even ended up being a party traitor and taking out the party one time - save 1 PC. That is just how the story ended up going. And for the record - that 1 PC I didn't kill was the Halfling Fighter. I just couldn't nail the little bugger down.

You cannot black and white, cut and dried, say that because he is a caster he will win - PnP just does not work that way. Now I have seen casters obliterate a party, just as I have seen other classes do the same.

Just like in real life you have stupid and smart players, you also have stupid and smart NPC's.

In 30 years of dungeon mastering and playing I can proudly state that I have killed every class with every other class. It is all in the player and the way the character is played. I am proud that I have DM'd players whose skills were simply amazing as players. As a DM I have also taught and guided players from being first-time gamers to being skilled players.

Anyone with years of quality PnP experience - the "old crowd" of DND so to speak, from a time when the coolest video game on the block was Mrs. Pac-Man and Donkey Kong, will tell you that there is a huge difference. If you allow the online mindset to guide you as a PnP player - and worse, if your DM does the same - you are truly missing an amazing experience.

[Aspenor]

No terms.

I guess I'll link this (http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19872034/A_Coreonly_Wiz_20_vs_Splatbook_Ftr_20?post_id=3384 25214#338425214) again. No terms means:
Wizard knows the battle will occur
Wizard has long terms active (he only needs one, Moment of Prescience cast immediately after preparing spells)

In your example, assuming the wizard was at least 17th level, he was an idiot.

This is not coming from the DDO mindset, at all.

A well-played wizard is not surprised. Ever.

[SquelchHU]

I am ignoring almost everything Myst Dragon is saying, because he is completely off in left field, would have a difficult time being more wrong if he tried, and is simply yet another person shifting the blame onto someone else.

However, even so there are a few things in there worth responding to.


Do you know what most of my player's reaction to rope trick would be? "You want me to climb that rope and hide out in a little magical box and leave my bag of holding, handy haversack, and mount down here unprotected? Your out of your mind, mage."

Rope Trick does not actually work that way. Try again.

Rope Trick states that 'it is hazardous to create an extradimensional space within an existing extradimensional space or to take an extradimensional space into an existing one.' but never actually makes any rules for what happens if you do. If Rope Trick did mean leaving your loot behind, the loss of which is absolutely and always a fate worse than death then Rope Trick would be a useless spell, you'd be exactly right, and I would not be arguing with you.

What's more...


The bag of holding opens into a nondimensional space.

Nondimensional =/= extradimensional.

The Haversack does not directly say what sort of space it is. Only that it is '...like a bag of holding and can actually hold material of as much as 2 cubic feet in volume or 20 pounds in weight.' And as the Bag of Holding is a non dimensional space the same thing applies.

A Portable Hole actually is an extradimensional space, and actually has rules for how it interacts with a Bag of Holding specifically.

So even if you take this vague statement to mean something bad will happen if you bring an extradimensional space into a Rope Trick it only applies if you bring a Portable Hole in - an inferior sort of storage device, and in any case the one you did NOT mention.

That means the only thing left is a mount... which is a liability anyways. You aren't missing anything.

So what actually happens in that situation is the Fighter says that, the Wizard calls him a dumbass and explains how it actually works. Actually he wouldn't know that, so he'd ask how it works and be told without being insulted. Then if he has no mount he climbs in and enjoys his safety. If he does he either does the first thing, or he stays outside with the dumb horse and gets insta gibbed by any night attacks that may occur, which is what the Rope Trickers are avoiding.


In PnP every class has their usage and function - not just casters. In fact, casters are far easier to kill in PnP than they are in DDO. They need the party's protection. You know what the first thing an intelligent enemy will do? Kill the casters and the clerics to wipe out the support because it's a pain to kill the warriors while the cleric is keeping them up. Have you ever heard of tactics?

LOL!

If you actually think casters are easier to kill you are completely hopeless. Let's see...

3.5 melee vs 3.5 casters: Marginally higher HP for the melees, but no defenses whatsoever vs all manner of different defenses, only a little of which is enough to even things out, and a lot is available so far surpassing it is trivial. AC? Useless. Saves? They're lower. Immunities, avoidance, misdirection, anything else that stops you from being hit? All spells. Hell, simply 'not having to take a full round action in melee range to do anything relevant' automatically makes casters better defensively than any non caster. Which as they can in fact cast a spell, and move more than 5 feet the same round and can in fact do this at a distance means they win the defensive contest without even trying. And before you try and say 'archers' I already covered those in my thread, and you'd do well to read it. If you're too lazy to do that (but not too lazy to continue being wrong here) suffice it to say archers are rooted in place close to the enemy if they want to do anything relevant, and this is not a meaningful difference.

Now yes, you are absolutely right that every enemy will immediately make a beeline to the real threats (casters). But that's not because it is in any way difficult to take out the melee, or because in combat healing is in any way worthwhile (in combat heals are worthwhile at levels 11-15 only, and then only as long as you can use a Heal spell every round... which is not long otherwise you are simply having one of your worthwhile party members waste their turn). It is because the real threats will seriously just KILL YOU and all your buddies if you give them a single turn.

So what actually happens is the enemies go straight for the casters. You know, like I've been saying the whole time. And those casters live, or die based on their own actions, and those of their fellow casters. What Fighter boy is doing is a complete non factor, and about the only way you are going to see the party teamwork you describe is to 1: Ignore the pile ons. 2: Have an all caster party.

By the way, even WITH house rules the non casters still cannot protect anyone else. Those do allow them to protect themselves though.


Do you think the warrior's a stupid hack n slash who just runs up to and starts hacking everything?

Absolutely. As that is all he can do, he is either doing that or nothing. Know the Fighter of most video games who simply gets the Fight command, and that's it? That's you. And sometimes 'Fight' is replaced with 'Charge' (a better fight command) or 'Trip' but you're still just spamming the same move, and if it doesn't work too bad.


Do you think the rogue is a tool that sits there ineffective, unable to do anything until a lock or trap appears?

Of course not. The Rogue actually does have other abilities. The problem with the Rogue is that all of their abilities work in non intuitive, and extremely binary ways. But when it comes combat time, the Rogue is blinking and throwing 10 sneak attack backed acid flasks a round. 110d6 (385 average) is actually enough HP damage to matter at 20, and he does proportionally less at lower levels.


Do you think the cleric is a healbot?

Of course not. He has better things to do than waste actions on in combat heals. You do though, as you wouldn't assume he wastes his turn on that, instead of damage mitigation that actually works like save or dying/losing the enemy, or even certain buffs.

Also, I must seriously question what sort of gimp ass casters are in your game. Let me guess - they think Fireball is the best spell ever?

I hate to be the bringer of bad news, but you, like most who throw around a quantity of time as if it means something have spent 3 decades doing something and learned nothing from it. Perhaps if you had been accomplishing some useful knowledge and research in that time, you would easily be able to school me. But as it is now it is you who lacks the necessary knowledge.


A 20th level Wizard is a powerful adversary, but so is a 20th level Intelligent Fighter.

Yawn. Old news.

Here's how it actually works.

Wizard wins. Period. Full stop.

The only way we even have a discussion on the topic is if the Fighter uses a feat to get an 18th level Wizard cohort. As an 18th level Wizard is not significantly weaker than a 20th level Wizard, given that they both have 9th level spells, drawn from the same pool. It could be an 18th level caster of another sort, a Cleric or Druid say. Since they're all casting from each other's lists at this level anyways. But let's say Wizard to keep it more an apples to apples comparison.

At that point there is an actual contest, as you both have the same I win instantly buttons, both have the same ability to figure out what your opponent will do, and so forth. If nothing else, initiative will determine it. Of course the actual Fighter is completely irrelevant to this discussion - either the wizard wins, or the wizard wins and the only difference is whether or not that wizard is his cohort. He's going to be effortlessly removed from the field the moment a single move is made his way. Like a common house cat really. Except less cute.

Now place the 20th level Fighter against a level 10 Wizard and we might have a somewhat interesting contest. Most likely the Wizard still wins, instantly gains 1.99 levels and a ****ton of loot, but it at least is more evenly matched.

By the way, thanks Aspenor for linking the thread that that has already been covered in. I don't really agree with that post, because doing all that to beat a Fighter is like using a tactical nuclear weapon to remove an antbed in your front yard. But overkill is still effective.


Tactics alter greatly also between a prepared battlefield and a surprise battle. What does the caster do when there is a surprise attack in the middle of the night before they have prepared their spells for the day and are spent? A wise caster will be prepared for this.

Continue sleeping in his Rope Trick while the enemy attacks... wait, what are they attacking again? The stupid fighter who refused the offer of safety against stuff like this? Darwinism at its finest.

Now if you meant they first Detect/Dispel the Rope Trick... Teleport the whole party away. The enemy is on buff timers. The party is not. Therefore the enemy has a massive advantage, and thankfully you have a turn to use to escape before they utterly annihilate the party accordingly.

Three more things. First, it sounds like your 'so called power gamer' wizard was actually a gimp. What, no heavy fort?

Second, the rest of the party must have been very gimpy if the halfling fighter (gimped even by gimp standards, because he is a Halfling and therefore cannot utilize the singular basic tactic) is the least gimpy among them.

Third, you want to talk PvP? Fine.

Now I've never actually done PvP combat. No reason to, since the party is there to work together. If however I did I had a character who could easily take out the entire party. And this, being an intelligently designed party was a caster heavy party. Suffice it to say those were the parts that warranted actual thought. Taking out the others? Beyond trivial. And these were far better built melees than anything someone with your lack of expertise could ever field. 250 and 10 negs a round for example. As in, good enough to actually participate in combat on the same side of the casters and not be a liability.

Again, I never actually tried this, because we were on the same side. But I had the no fail plan ready to go.

[clanqui]

So in other words, you are taking a fairly 'unusual' interpretation of the rules to allow your players to do something that you consider game breakingly abusable.

And you are wondering why you are having problems. :confused:

[Aspenor]

So in other words, you are taking a fairly 'unusual' interpretation of the rules to allow your players to do something that you consider game breakingly abusable.

And you are wondering why you are having problems. :confused:

What?

[clanqui]

What?

His rope trick explanation is ridiculous. He is intentionally rules lawyering away the main limitation placed on the spell, and then complaining that the spell is so overpowered it breaks his games.

3.5 is far from perfect, but the major flaw at his gaming tables is a table chair interface problem on the DM seat.

[SquelchHU]

So in other words, you are taking a fairly 'unusual' interpretation of the rules to allow your players to do something that you consider game breakingly abusable.

And you are wondering why you are having problems. :confused:

Exactly what are you referring to, and who are you talking to?

It doesn't sound like you're talking to me. I know clan isn't actually talking to me, even though he says he is because a does not equal b, and I never did say anything about it breaking my games. I have said not having it breaks THE game though.

[clanqui]

a and b are used completely interchangeably in the description of the portable hole, and not defined as different anywhere else. You chose to interpret them as different even though it creates obvious problems and is clearly against the intent of the rules.

The main point is that if you let your players rules lawyer you into interpretations that create an unplayable game, then the problem is not with the rules, and probably not with the players.

[SquelchHU]

a and b are used completely interchangeably in the description of the portable hole, and not defined as different anywhere else. You chose to interpret them as different even though it creates obvious problems and is clearly against the intent of the rules.

The main point is that if you let your players rules lawyer you into interpretations that create an unplayable game, then the problem is not with the rules, and probably not with the players.

The intent of the rules: If you put a Portable Hole into a Bag of Holding, or vice versa weird things happen. It then goes on to state those things. Why? Legacy throw back to earlier editions. They started to do the same to Rope Trick but never actually specified anything. Which means it is just fluff text.

Creates what obvious problems? That level 5+ or 9+ adventures cannot die like level 1 mooks? If you consider that a problem, please do us all a favor and stop running games immediately.

That players actually have a recourse against the advantage that comes simply by 'being the attacker' being used against them? If you have some problem with the entire party not dying in 1 round, likely before they get a turn because the enemy attacked at night I again refer you to my previous advice.

And how does 'players can actually survive the night, and not worry about low level stuff' in any way translate to an unplayable game? I suppose if you're only playing the game to watch the players die horribly over and over, then a game in which they can dodge your BS is unplayable to you.

Are you even thinking about what you're saying here?

[clanqui]

Which means it is just fluff text.


Exactly. You are discarding rules and then claiming that it's the rules that are broken.

[Corebreach]

People need to remember that PnP is completly different that online video games.
No one here is discussing video games. This thread is about PnP alone, specifically 3.0/3.5 and possibly Pathfinder.

EDIT: Squelch throws around some video game terms, but they're analogies.


Just like in real life you have stupid and smart players, you also have stupid and smart NPC's.
Showing that a well-played fighter can beat a poorly-played mage doesn't prove anything about class balance. If you want to demonstrate that both casters and non-casters can contribute equally to the combat portions of the game, you must do so using players of comparable skill.

[SquelchHU]

Exactly. You are discarding rules and then claiming that it's the rules that are broken.


Which means it is just fluff text.

Fluff text =/= rules. Fluff text is the antithesis of rules even, as fluff text is not backed by anything, and rules are.

Stop the non sequitors, or you can be the fourth to go on my ignore list.

[clanqui]

Fluff text =/= rules. Fluff text is the antithesis of rules even, as fluff text is not backed by anything, and rules are.


What page is the definition of fluff text. I can't find it in my index.



Stop the non sequitors, or you can be the fourth to go on my ignore list.

Don't throw me in that thar briar patch.

[MystDragon]

I guess I'll link this (http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19872034/A_Coreonly_Wiz_20_vs_Splatbook_Ftr_20?post_id=3384 25214#338425214) again. No terms means:
Wizard knows the battle will occur
Wizard has long terms active (he only needs one, Moment of Prescience cast immediately after preparing spells)

In your example, assuming the wizard was at least 17th level, he was an idiot.

This is not coming from the DDO mindset, at all.

A well-played wizard is not surprised. Ever.

Mr Power-gamer was an idiot. That's the point. He believed that since he was the powerful wizard, he was automatically going to win. Sounds amazingly like Squelch, doesn't it.

My mention to online mentality is if you read through his postings he seems to really mess up and interchange online methodology vs. PnP. That's what I was referring to.

No offense - but this is a bit naive. Anyone can be surprised. They are not omniscient. No one is perfect - in fact, I find it easier to surprise higher level characters because the players tend to get overconfident and very arrogant about their characters abilities.

[MystDragon]

No one here is discussing video games. This thread is about PnP alone, specifically 3.0/3.5 and possibly Pathfinder.

EDIT: Squelch throws around some video game terms, but they're analogies.


Showing that a well-played fighter can beat a poorly-played mage doesn't prove anything about class balance. If you want to demonstrate that both casters and non-casters can contribute equally to the combat portions of the game, you must do so using players of comparable skill.

I may have not stated it clearly. The true skills in PnP rely on the player - that is the beauty of the system. Squelch is saying that no matter what - Caster beats everything. Period. End of Story. I disagree.

I have seen two skilled players as adversaries. Caster beats warrior. Warrior beats Caster. Casters in PnP are not the overpowered class they are in DDO. He references them like he is talking about DDO.

I have seen two players absolutely clueless do the same - and that was just a travesty that kept everything in the air.

[Corebreach]

I have seen two skilled players as adversaries. Caster beats warrior. Warrior beats Caster.
Can you go into more detail as to how? It is the topic of this thread, after all.


Casters in PnP are not the overpowered class they are in DDO. He references them like he is talking about DDO.
If he is, he's off-topic and you should ignore that aspect of his posts. (I don't think he is, but I'm used to his posting style.)

[SquelchHU]

*flames snipped*

Marginally higher HP's for the melees? are you kidding me? you do realize that at 20th level in PnP a wizard or sorcerer has a max of 80 hit points plus bonuses, right? Rogues have a max of 120 plus bonuses, clerics a max of 160 plus bonuses, fighters a max of 200 plus bonuses, and barbarians a max of 240 plus bonuses. Combine that with the fact that most players playing a melee will focus more on Con than will a caster character.

Wrong. Everyone will have 14 Con, minimum because you are gimp not to.

Everyone will keep their con item up for the same reason.

Min 20 Con.

Average HP: 151 vs 214. Assuming all else is equal, which it is not because the wizard only also needs Int and the Fighter also needs Str, Dex, Wis, and Int if a tripper. More Con for the Wizard. And still more, because his equipment is cheaper (crafting) and as he needs fewer things he has more resources for Con.

So what actually happens in an actual game is... 171-211 vs 214. And that is indeed marginal.

At 75% you get 181-221 vs 252. Better.

At max you get 200-240 vs 300. Much better.

In summary, you have learned nothing. Experience only matters if you learned from it. Thanks for playing I guess.

[SquelchHU]

Can you go into more detail as to how? It is the topic of this thread, after all.

No, he can't.


Let me guess, most of the casters you play with blast stuff, don't they.

But that's the most likely reason. Given the number of disingenuous or flat out wrong statements he has made, it is clear he has no idea what he is doing.

Edit: I missed a gem.


Casters in PnP are not the overpowered class they are in DDO. He references them like he is talking about DDO.

LOL! DDO casters are quite gimpy. At best you abuse poor AI with Firewall.

Conversely, DDO melee is actually quite viable.

Since he completely pwned himself with that post, let's examine why DDO melee is good:

Drastically improved: The classes have a lot more to offer. The base mechanics such as BAB also work more favorably. Pop into my thread. Sound familiar?

Gear availability: It's far more available. Gear is power, especially on gear dependent characters. Being able to have an array of +7 weapons, +6 stat items etc at 13 is far better than barely being able to afford one. I don't go nearly this far but check my thread.

Intelligence: The enemies have none. So now you can get through life with run up and hit it as your only option.

[Aspenor]

No offense - but this is a bit naive. Anyone can be surprised. They are not omniscient. No one is perfect - in fact, I find it easier to surprise higher level characters because the players tend to get overconfident and very arrogant about their characters abilities.

In the context of the certain type of scenario you mention, this wizard should have been, in fact, nearly omniscient. The fact that this guy didn't hole up in his tower (well, actually, his personal demiplane of existence) and chain cast Contact Other Plane to determine the plans and tactics of his enemies was his downfall. Said wizard should never, I repeat, never be surprised. The ONLY, and I do mean ONLY, reason he should ever be caught by surprise is if his enemy has permanent Mind Blank, which is extremely unlikely.

When you actually play out the wizard's INT, he is virtually omniscient and invulnerable (except to other spell casters).

[timberhick]

In the context of the certain type of scenario you mention, this wizard should have been, in fact, nearly omniscient. The fact that this guy didn't hole up in his tower (well, actually, his personal demiplane of existence) and chain cast Contact Other Plane to determine the plans and tactics of his enemies was his downfall. Said wizard should never, I repeat, never be surprised. The ONLY, and I do mean ONLY, reason he should ever be caught by surprise is if his enemy has permanent Mind Blank, which is extremely unlikely.

When you actually play out the wizard's INT, he is virtually omniscient and invulnerable (except to other spell casters).

Why would it be extremely unlikely for people to use Mind Blank so often?

This idea is one that has always made me scratch my head in confusion.

[SquelchHU]

Why would it be extremely unlikely for people to use Mind Blank so often?

This idea is one that has always made me scratch my head in confusion.

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/mindBlank.htm

Not everyone is a level 15+ Wizard/Protection domain Cleric.

Also...


When you actually play out the wizard's INT, he is virtually omniscient and invulnerable (except to other spell casters).

Already addressed.

[Aspenor]

Why would it be extremely unlikely for people to use Mind Blank so often?

This idea is one that has always made me scratch my head in confusion.

Spending 120 thousand gold pieces for an item of permanent mind blank isn't exactly in everybody's budget, particularly melee types that must spend it on weapons, stat items, etc. You could do it, but only at the highest levels. And then, the rest of your gear could be comparatively lacking.

Other than that, you'd need to be a spell caster. I already covered that point in the post, though.

Of course, even if you DO surprise the wizard, he is Shapechanged into a Dire Tortoise, and always acts in the surprise round anyway. He also has Celerity.

[SquelchHU]

Spending 120 thousand gold pieces for an item of permanent mind blank isn't exactly in everybody's budget, particularly melee types that must spend it on weapons, stat items, etc. You could do it, but only at the highest levels. And then, the rest of your gear could be comparatively lacking.

Other than that, you'd need to be a spell caster. I already covered that point in the post, though.

Of course, even if you DO surprise the wizard, he is Shapechanged into a Dire Tortoise, and always acts in the surprise round anyway. He also has Celerity.

And the only other way to do it is with a Legacy weapon... which requires extensive house rules just to not be a liability. As in practically rewriting that entire book. And you have to be level 18+ to do it, so you still lose out at 15, 16, 17.

Also, Wizards have the highest Initiative in the game, even if they don't use an 'I go first anyways' ability.

[samthedagger]

Rope trick is so unbelievably easy to deal with. All it requires is an enemy 5th-level caster (cleric or wizard most likely) to find some means of locating the rope trick. This is relatively simple with a divination spell or two. Even mundane means like having some creature with scent track the party to where the scent "disappears" can offer the necessary clues. Once the caster locates the portal to the rope trick, cast dispel magic, watch the party plop out of extra-dimensional space in their underwear, then manacle them up.

Resting in a dungeon is rarely a good idea, even in a rope trick.

But Sam! What about teleport? After 9th-level, the party can just teleport hundreds of miles away to safety!

Not really. Dimension lock keeps the party right there in the dungeon. No teleport, no plane shift, no dimension door.

The moral of the story is that there is a counter to every spell in the game. Let the party use their trick once. After that, any bad guys that remain wise up to it and figure out a way to counter it. Force the party to adapt. If you are letting them use the same trick on the bad guys over and over, you're a bad DM. The enemies the PCs face should be capable of being just as intelligent and cunning in their tactics and strategies as the PCs. Or turn the PCs' tactics on their heads. The PCs teleport away to a safe inn a hundred miles away. The bad guys scry on the PCs and teleport in right next to them with a group of assassins while they are sleeping in their supposedly safe beds. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

[SquelchHU]

Rope trick is so unbelievably easy to deal with. All it requires is an enemy 5th-level caster (cleric or wizard most likely) to find some means of locating the rope trick. This is relatively simple with a divination spell or two. Even mundane means like having some creature with scent track the party to where the scent "disappears" can offer the necessary clues. Once the caster locates the portal to the rope trick, cast dispel magic, watch the party plop out of extra-dimensional space in their underwear, then manacle them up.

So a 5th level caster walks around with Detect Magic for... 5 minutes. And if he happens to find the party in this time, he has an approximately 50% chance of waking them up, at which point the party attacks him. And of course, there's plenty of ways to cover up scent.


Resting in a dungeon is rarely a good idea, even in a rope trick.

But Sam! What about teleport? After 9th-level, the party can just teleport hundreds of miles away to safety!

Not really. Dimension lock keeps the party right there in the dungeon. No teleport, no plane shift, no dimension door.

Yes, a level 15 ability can stop a level 9 ability from working... in a very small area. Like about one room worth. If it isn't an overly large room. And the effect is obvious to the naked eye because it's a BIG GLOWING GREEN FIELD.

So yes, if a level 15 caster has a very small home, and wants to spend all his best spells stopping level 9s from jumping him he can. Of course no one really cares.

Level 15s, and for that matter level 9s are long past 'the dungeon'. This isn't gauntlet, and it's not 4th edition either. This is a game that fundamentally changes every few levels. There is more to higher levels than better numbers.


The moral of the story is that there is a counter to every spell in the game. Let the party use their trick once. After that, any bad guys that remain wise up to it and figure out a way to counter it. Force the party to adapt. If you are letting them use the same trick on the bad guys over and over, you're a bad DM. The enemies the PCs face should be capable of being just as intelligent and cunning in their tactics and strategies as the PCs. Or turn the PCs' tactics on their heads. The PCs teleport away to a safe inn a hundred miles away. The bad guys scry on the PCs and teleport in right next to them with a group of assassins while they are sleeping in their supposedly safe beds. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

So in other words, the PCs should relentlessly dispose of anyone that is, might be, or can be a threat, and always sleep in a safe space to avoid being killed like a level 1?

[RictrasShard]

So a 5th level caster walks around with Detect Magic for... 5 minutes. And if he happens to find the party in this time, he has an approximately 50% chance of waking them up, at which point the party attacks him. And of course, there's plenty of ways to cover up scent.

The fifth level caster had scouts secretly watching the party, thus he knows the area in which they disappeared. He and his group/henchmen/army are fully armed and ready for the fight with the unprepared PCs.

[SquelchHU]

The fifth level caster had scouts secretly watching the party, thus he knows the area in which they disappeared. He and his group/henchmen/army are fully armed and ready for the fight with the unprepared PCs.

So in other words, the encounter is much higher level than 5. Therefore either the party is higher than 5 (lowering his success chances dramatically at both exposing and defeating the PCs) or this is a higher level encounter than normal (which means either the party still has plenty of juice left and doesn't need to rest, or just all died because the DM decided to kick em while they were down).

By the way, this further encourages Rope Tricking. If you're going to be jumped by uber encounters, you had better be close to full power when you sleep. Congrats, you're making it worse.

[RictrasShard]

So in other words, the encounter is much higher level than 5. Therefore either the party is higher than 5 (lowering his success chances dramatically at both exposing and defeating the PCs) or this is a higher level encounter than normal (which means either the party still has plenty of juice left and doesn't need to rest, or just all died because the DM decided to kick em while they were down).

By the way, this further encourages Rope Tricking. If you're going to be jumped by uber encounters, you had better be close to full power when you sleep. Congrats, you're making it worse.

Nope, you can easily do this sort of thing with a fifth level encounter.

And I wouldn't do this sort of thing on a regular basis. Just on players who continually do lame things such as rope tricking after every encounter. If they know they aren't going to be able to walk over their DM, they will be discouraged to try doing it in the future.

[SquelchHU]

Nope, you can easily do this sort of thing with a fifth level encounter.

And I wouldn't do this sort of thing on a regular basis. Just on players who continually do lame things such as rope tricking after every encounter. If they know they aren't going to be able to walk over their DM, they will be discouraged to try doing it in the future.

5th level encounter = level 5 wizard by themselves. Lower level wizards don't have Dispel Magic. Higher level wizards or wizards with help are higher level encounters than 5. Hi Welcome.

And again, you encourage Rope Tricking every encounter by night jumping them. If you're going to be night jumped you want as much juice as you possibly can.

[Ethiel]

For a full 5th level group a single 5th level wizard is not a full 5th level encounter.

that is right there in the DMG dude. For a full party of level 5's you need to counter with a higher single higher level monster or a party composed of differing levels of bad guys.

[lutherl]

Let's say a DM does want to "handle the game changing fundamentally every few levels". What does he do? How does he offer appropriate challenge to a party that can auto-avoid any enemy it doesn't want to fight, can auto-kill any it does (because it has casters in it), views any foils to these plans as blatant contrivances which justifiably should not be put up with for long, and whose characters gain levels at an average rate of almost one per game day?

I don't expect a complete answer. This is a huge question. Either way, this doesn't seem solvable without either using another RPG entirely or playing what is essentially a different RPG every gaming session.

Not all challenges are born of combat.

Just because the players CAN kill a NPC doesn't mean they should.

Everyone gets caught by surprise sometime.

If your dungeons are like old school D&D dungeons with critters just sitting in a room waiting to get killed, you've no room to complain about the players having too easy a time.

Environment is a NPC in and of itself.

Spend some time with Tucker's Kobolds (http://www.tuckerskobolds.com/) and glean some ideas from them.

[Aspenor]

For a full 5th level group a single 5th level wizard is not a full 5th level encounter.

that is right there in the DMG dude. For a full party of level 5's you need to counter with a higher single higher level monster or a party composed of differing levels of bad guys.

I don't see what you are talking about in the DMG. Page reference please? I do see what Squelch said...of course you could make the wizard a level 6 and still have a level 5 encounter.

Maybe you are talking about 4.0, in which case that commentary has no relevance to the current discussion.

[RictrasShard]

5th level encounter = level 5 wizard by themselves. Lower level wizards don't have Dispel Magic. Higher level wizards or wizards with help are higher level encounters than 5. Hi Welcome.

If you want very easy encounters, sure. For a regular game, that isn't even close to being a fifth level encounter.


And again, you encourage Rope Tricking every encounter by night jumping them. If you're going to be night jumped you want as much juice as you possibly can.

No. If the players know the DM is going to let them walk all over him by exploiting loop holes, they are going to use that tactic all the time. If the DM is fair but firm, and won't tolerate players trying tricks like this, they will stop using tricks like this if they have any common sense.

[SquelchHU]

For a full 5th level group a single 5th level wizard is not a full 5th level encounter.

that is right there in the DMG dude. For a full party of level 5's you need to counter with a higher single higher level monster or a party composed of differing levels of bad guys.

Full group of 5th level PCs = 4 of them.

1 level 5 wizard, or any PC class = 5th level encounter.

1 level 6 wizard or one level 5 wizard and one level 3 helper = level 6 encounter.

1 level 7 wizard or 1 level 5 wizard, and 2 level 3 helpers (not enough to actually help that much) = level 7 encounter.

1 level 8 wizard or 1 level 5 wizard, and 4 level 3 helpers (enough to help out a little) = level 8 encounter.

Hi Welcome.

[Lleren]

Full group of 5th level PCs = 4 of them.

1 level 5 wizard, or any PC class = 5th level encounter.

1 level 6 wizard or one level 5 wizard and one level 3 helper = level 6 encounter.

1 level 7 wizard or 1 level 5 wizard, and 2 level 3 helpers (not enough to actually help that much) = level 7 encounter.

1 level 8 wizard or 1 level 5 wizard, and 4 level 3 helpers (enough to help out a little) = level 8 encounter.

Hi Welcome.

And this is why "challenging" any party by the rules is almost imposible without godmoding.

[Aspenor]

1 level 5 wizard, or any PC class = 5th level encounter.

I suppose if you're looking at it very strictly this is true. But according to my DMG one PC class character of level 4, 5, or 6 is a level 5 encounter. I usually choose the higher end of the spectrum for my encounters since PC's are normally quite powerful, and also to make up for the single enemy's disadvantage in the action economy.

[RictrasShard]

Full group of 5th level PCs = 4 of them.

1 level 5 wizard, or any PC class = 5th level encounter.

1 level 6 wizard or one level 5 wizard and one level 3 helper = level 6 encounter.

1 level 7 wizard or 1 level 5 wizard, and 2 level 3 helpers (not enough to actually help that much) = level 7 encounter.

1 level 8 wizard or 1 level 5 wizard, and 4 level 3 helpers (enough to help out a little) = level 8 encounter.

Hi Welcome.

So, your group of four fifth-level spellcasters is seriously challenged by one fifth-level spellcaster? That doesn't say much for your group.

[Montrose]

No. If the players know the DM is going to let them walk all over him by exploiting loop holes, they are going to use that tactic all the time. If the DM is fair but firm, and won't tolerate players trying tricks like this, they will stop using tricks like this if they have any common sense.

How is rope trick a loophole? The primary purpose of the spell, the reason that it was created, is to let PCs rest safely. Furthermore, it's core d20 SRD rules.

How is it that PCs who use core rulebook spells to do the specific things that those spells allow are exploting a loophole?

[SquelchHU]

So, your group of four fifth-level spellcasters is seriously challenged by one fifth-level spellcaster? That doesn't say much for your group.

By the actual rules of the game, yes, that is expected to be a normal encounter. Of course the players win action economy by a ratio of 4 to 1. But at the same time if they actually are being 'surprised' it's likely 1-2 will be blown away before they ever get a turn.

And if you throw a harder than normal encounter (level 8 wizard vs level 5 party, that also surprises them) then chances are the party doesn't get a turn. You might as well just say that rocks fall, and everyone dies because you don't like them backing off when low on resources. As I said. Of course if the party needs to worry about being jumped by high end encounters in their sleep they WILL sleep after every single combat. Why? Because that way they have most of their power left to deal with that. Again, as I said.

Now, if I had a party of four fifth level spellcasters, chances are they could deal with a fifth level caster quite easily. Or a seventh level one. Or even a ninth level one. However surprise is a HUGE advantage, because it means you get the first turn. And possibly the second as well. In a system where two moves tends to flat out WIN combats, and a single move often does...

The difference between having surprise, and being the surprised one is literally the difference between defeating a uber encounter with a death or two, and suffering a death or two to a mook fight not meant to be a threat at all.

But seriously. Encounters are designed so that the 'challenging' ones only have a 1% chance of killing someone, if that. This is deliberate. Why? Two reasons.

1: The higher level encounters are much more likely to claim a PC life. Up to 50% chance to kill the whole party for level + 4.

2: There's a lot more than one encounter. If you have a significant chance of dying in normal fights, forget about campaign continuity. Hell, forget about level 2.

And to answer Montrose's question, he plays 4th edition.

This means several things:

1: The encounter mechanics in 4th edition do put lots of mobs on the table to grind on. So when he acts surprised about a single enemy expected to be a viable opponent, it's because of that.

2: 4th edition is all about grinding on the mob. Things that actually give you options, or new ways of interacting with the world are foreign to it. So he calls Rope Trick an exploit, even though it does exactly what it is supposed to do in exactly the manner it is supposed to do it simply because it derails the railroad.

3: He is used to reading things in the least favorable way. Which means instead of taking words at face value like a normal reader would do, or trying to twist things around like an actual exploiter would do, he's coming in with the mindset of 'how can we make this not work'? Why? See the previous point.

[Qindark]

Well, squelch, in your DD world Magic much greater than Melee. If you're DM or your DM allows this and wants this...great have at it (I remember a fantasy novel with a similar theme, everyone could use magic to a degree, and if you couldn't you were "dead" and essentially put to death at birth). Every player will be some sort of magic user, else they are dead. I find that to be a boring and narrow view of the game. Why create the melee/non-magic classes if it was to be so utterly one-sided to the mage? Quite simply, it's the DM's job to keep the play balanced. If balanced in your world is all magic..have at it. I'll stick with variety.

[Rinnoan]

So a 5th level caster walks around with Detect Magic for... 5 minutes. And if he happens to find the party in this time, he has an approximately 50% chance of waking them up, at which point the party attacks him. And of course, there's plenty of ways to cover up scent.

A 5th level caster can also walk around with See Invisible for 50 minutes, which will easily reveal a Rope Trick within your line of sight, not just a 60' distance. Enchanted Items can also provide this ability on a more permanent basis, and are usually fairly common in my campaigns (because really, in a magic world if your trying to protect a place and you can't see the invisible, then you're not really trying). If a party of adventures came into a area that contained an NPC with Character levels, killed a bunch of things and then disappeared completely for a few hours, don't you think the NPCs would be a little suspicious and actively look for them, using see invisible and detect magic and any other resources they had?


Those in the extra-dimensional space can see out of it as if a 3-foot-by- 5-foot window were centered on the rope. The window is present on the Material Plane, but it’s invisible, and even creatures that can see the window can’t see through it.

They may not be able to see through the window, but they can see the window itself. Once they know it's there, they can probably gather the necessary forces to deal with the party before the party has finished resting. The party then must come out on the defensive and advantage goes to the NPCs. Using one in the wilderness to bypass time wasting minor encounters on the other hand, is fine by me.

Regarding teleport, I tend to make the victim they have to rescue be caught up in the middle of some (un)holy ritual that takes a few days to complete for the really bad mojo to happen.



You must have some clear idea of the location and layout of the destination. The clearer your mental image, the more likely the teleportation works. Areas of strong physical or magical energy may make teleportation more hazardous or even impossible.

There are other ways around this too, in a locked room with warding glyphs / traps / permanent dimensional anchor cast on them (party may teleport in, but they can't take the victim out the same way.), or in a place the party is unfamiliar with and therefore can't teleport to.

Divination has it's own weakness, as in it's description:


Divination can provide you with a useful piece of advice in reply to a question concerning a specific goal, event, or activity that is to occur within one week. The advice can be as simple as a short phrase, or it might take the form of a cryptic rhyme or omen.
...

As with augury, multiple divinations about the same topic by the same caster use the same dice result as the first divination spell and yield the same answer each time.

Besides which, I don't think that divination could be used to give a clear enough idea of the location to allow teleportation to, it's just a few sentences at most. The lowest percentage chance to successfully teleport requires that you've seen the place you want to go to. You'd need clairvoyance (but only if within 400') or scrying, both of which can be detected, blocked or saved against.

The tools to cut the casters down to size are there, you just have to find and use them.

I won't comment on the melee vs casters bit as it usually boils down to who gets initiative or surprise and is more prepared.

I will comment on the bag of holding argument though



Nondimensional =/= extradimensional.

...

A Portable Hole actually is an extradimensional space, and actually has rules for how it interacts with a Bag of Holding specifically.


If you read the description for a portable hole, it's described as both.



Portable Hole: ... When spread upon any surface, it causes an extradimensional space 10 feet deep to come into being.
...
Each portable hole opens on its own particular nondimensional space.


Hence, in my games.. extradimensional = nondimensional. Bags of holding, portable holes and handy haversacks entering into a rope trick is a bad thing. Party, meet Mr. Astral Plane!

[SquelchHU]

Well, squelch, in your DD world Magic much greater than Melee. If you're DM or your DM allows this and wants this...great have at it (I remember a fantasy novel with a similar theme, everyone could use magic to a degree, and if you couldn't you were "dead" and essentially put to death at birth). Every player will be some sort of magic user, else they are dead. I find that to be a boring and narrow view of the game. Why create the melee/non-magic classes if it was to be so utterly one-sided to the mage? Quite simply, it's the DM's job to keep the play balanced. If balanced in your world is all magic..have at it. I'll stick with variety.

Wrong.

In D&D magic > melee. No contest. The only way this changes is with some HEAVY changes to the rules, such as those in my thread.

Take your problem with non caster viability up with the devs.

Rin: Ok.

See Invis lasts 10 times as long. But is anyone talking about just throwing up a Rope Trick on their door? Getting out first is a given.

And if they do it your way yeah, the NPCs are waiting... but they don't know when you're coming down. And you can see them, but they can't see you. So the result is PCs buff up, jump down and cut loose.

I'm ignoring anything that begins with 'in my games' because house rules are irrelevant when discussing the default rules.

[Aspenor]

Most of the time PC's consider themselves safe enough in the Rope Trick not to leave a watch.

Dispel Magic = half conscious PC's splayed about all over the floor.

Why on earth would anybody wait for them to come out?

[Rinnoan]

They'd wait if they were using a see invisible magic item instead of a caster, and had no means to dispell/counter the rope trick. If they do have the means, then of course they'd do that once the forces are gathered.

I've had a party attempt to use rope trick in the middle of a dungeon, so wanted to cover that off. Mind you, they were 6-7 at the time and didn't have an easy way out. For higher level parties, I usually allow it, but then the NPCs have all this extra time to prepare for their return with traps, spells and additional forces etc, after all, they now know they've been attacked. NPC clerical types will be casting their own augeries and divinations to figure out where they went and what happened. Warding glyphs added everywhere, etc.. They want to try to push an easy button? I'll let them try. I've had one party clear most of a fort and barricade themselves in a room to safely rest, only to find the rest of the NPCs left after adding they're own barricades to the only door out of the hallway, taking the item the party was hired to find with them. (That was actually a fun one, the NPCs got about a 6 hour head start because they party didn't believe they left and kept searching)

Regarding the default rules, what exactly are they? The portable hole description in DMG (aka the default rules) uses both extradimensional and nondimensional to describe the same thing. That tells me the default rule is that they mean the same thing. The default rules are always subject to interpretation, making sure everybody is on the same page usually leads to house rules. In my games (there's that phrase again) we follow the books, if you can show me the rule, it's valid. If you can't, it's not. If you think of or find a way to use the rules I wasn't ready for.. good for you, I'll deal with it and find a way to use it on you later.

Btw, if you allow use of the Spell Compendium spells, then the teleport in and out becomes a lesser issue. There are spells in there to detect and delay incoming teleports, to a point. If you use the psionic books (which we never do), there are powers to detect and alter the destination of the incoming teleport. (Oh, you meant to land in the courtyard? That's too bad, you ended up in the moat, swim checks!)

I find that Magic is better than Melee when the magic user is prepared and melee is at a distance, but Melee is better than Magic when the magic user is unprepared / used most of his spells or melee is already close. Seeing how most encounters seem to start with parties separated and at a distance, magic gets the first strike advantage which is often critical.

[Lleren]

How is rope trick a loophole? The primary purpose of the spell, the reason that it was created, is to let PCs rest safely. Furthermore, it's core d20 SRD rules.

How is it that PCs who use core rulebook spells to do the specific things that those spells allow are exploting a loophole?

Ah this one I can answer.

To many of the DM's I have run with it is "Spells per Day", not "Spells per Rest Period". 1st Edition and 2nd edition being the main editions I have played. I only dabbled a bit in 3.0 and 3.5 though...

[SquelchHU]

Most of the time PC's consider themselves safe enough in the Rope Trick not to leave a watch.

Dispel Magic = half conscious PC's splayed about all over the floor.

Why on earth would anybody wait for them to come out?

50/50 shot. (more or less depending on CL)

At which point the PCs are awake from the fall.


I find that Magic is better than Melee when the magic user is prepared and melee is at a distance, but Melee is better than Magic when the magic user is unprepared / used most of his spells or melee is already close. Seeing how most encounters seem to start with parties separated and at a distance, magic gets the first strike advantage which is often critical.

Doesn't really matter where the melee guy is. There is a very long list of things that shut down melee. There isn't really anything that shuts down magic. Specific spells and even categories of spells can be negated by... other spells, but magic as a whole?

Even anti magic field is really just the enemy caster screaming ORB ME NOW!

And if he's unprepared, given the number of things that make you prepared then what's he doing? Scratching himself? If he's 'used most of his spells' he's went through well more than a day's worth of encounters already.

[Qindark]

Wrong.
I'm ignoring anything that begins with 'in my games' because house rules are irrelevant when discussing the default rules.

The problem with that: House rules are the game, and "default rules" are guidelines for the game. I played PnP over 20 years ago...so don't have a much experience with the new rules, BUT, the game is a role playing game with combat actions and random die rolling actions. The emphasis was role playing. As such, I'd use the rules to emphasize role playing. If all you want is combat..stick with DDO. So don't take away player's creativity by being so ingrained in the rules that it's no longer fun.

[SquelchHU]

Face, palm.

Show me the rules for roleplaying. No, the social skills don't count.

Why? Because the rules make the game, and the rules cover mechanics. The roleplaying bits? Cops and robbers, really.

You can 'use the rules to emphasize roleplaying' about as well as you can declare Monopoly to be a game about dancing the Macarena. As in you can, but will be automatically and completely wrong and the attempt will fail.

Now if you aren't very good at expressing yourself, and actually meant making the rules encourage the desired sort of play... well if you don't want players backing off after one fight, they need to not be getting jumped. At all. Because if they can be, they will assume they will be, and will play in a very paranoid manner. So instead of Rope Tricking away after a healthy strike on the enemy base... they'll do it after killing the guards at the front door.

[Qindark]

Squelch,

Well, I can see neither of us would enjoy playing at each others table, so I'm willing to agreed to disagree. Back to your original question as we've kinda gone off subject. "So...how DO you challenge a party above level 4?" Simple. First, since I'm assuming you've DM'd them up from level 1, you know their abilities, strategies, etc., you pick enemies to challenge them. If a level 5 groups is wiping the textbook definition of what they're supposed to be fighting, bring on a tougher group. Make them fight a level 6 or 7. If a DM can't run a NPC level 5 wizard against a PC level 5 wizard and make it an even fight, he should quit being a DM. I've read enough of your posts to realize that you think the mage classes are unstoppable as written. This might be true if the only mage classes were PCs. But since NPCs can be a mage class too, you get it evened out.

Scenario: Through the party's various adventures, they've made enemies. A couple of these get together and decide something has to be done. They have an idea of the party's abilities, and hire mercenaries to find them and take them out. So a mercenary group is put together to hunt the party down. It's a given the mage for the mercenaries will use magic to hide their presence, just like the hero party. I promise I could challenge any party with such a scenario. Pick a spell that takes too long to cast (big spells do take more time), and I don't care which side won initiative, my buffed up archers are going to target you. One rolled a natural 20? made the crit roll? oh sorry, your spell failed or went awry, regardless of concentration.

Any good DM should be able to find a way to challenge any party. I don't think it's as hard as you've made it out to be.


At which point the PCs are awake from the fall.
Really? not a period of time to get off the ground, maybe even get untangled from blankets, get your buddy off you because he fell on you, etc. How about acting like a DM, and challenging your players?

[Qindark]

One more thing. Maybe someone else noticed this, as I haven't read the thread in it's entirety. You are a player, and not a DM. Every single argument you have, comes from the players side. Sounds like you've nitpicked your DM to death on rules, and are trying to justify the position you're now in...you're too powerful, and can't be challenged. Or the flip side...you're a DM and have let a player push you around. I think it's the first choice, but I could be wrong.

[amethystdragon]

Let's say a DM does want to "handle the game changing fundamentally every few levels". What does he do? How does he offer appropriate challenge to a party that can auto-avoid any enemy it doesn't want to fight, can auto-kill any it does (because it has casters in it), views any foils to these plans as blatant contrivances which justifiably should not be put up with for long, and whose characters gain levels at an average rate of almost one per game day?

I don't expect a complete answer. This is a huge question. Either way, this doesn't seem solvable without either using another RPG entirely or playing what is essentially a different RPG every gaming session.

I think the answer to your main question would depend on how closely you follow the core rules of the game. Some people prefer to follow the rules to the exact letter, and as long as their group is happy with that and are having fun, then great. Some people prefer to use what is called "house rules" and as long as everyone they are playing with agree and are having fun, then great.

As for challenging your group, there could be lots of ways to go about it. I will list a few things that come to mind for me.

1. Do your rules allow for suppression of certain spells or other abilities? If it does you could once in a while cause the group to go into an area that suppresses all of their magical powers. Instead of their spells always going off, they now have to roll % for every spell to see if they can bypass what ever it is that is suppressing their powers. Could do something similar for magical armor and other items, instead of it being a +2 while in this area it only acts as a +1.

2. Make certain fights unavoidable. For instance; they need to get a map from Encounter A, a key from Encounter B, and they have to have both of these items before they can finish their main objective. Possibly have it so that the only information they can get from any source is what type of "creature" is holding which item. You could go as far as not even having Encounters A and B in the same "dungeon" as their main objective.

3. This idea would involve having the help of a player that you can trust not to get mad, and not let slip what you are up to; also you will need a group that will not freak out. While in town, player A is kidnapped and replaced by a "shape shifter" (or someone that has had magic done to them so that they look exactly like player A). Then impostor player A starts to do little things to hinder the group; like steal spell components, spell books, scrolls, replace finely crafted weapons for wooden ones that have been enchanted to look like theirs, there are lots of things that could be done with this route. Now not only do they need to complete the quest that they are on, they need to figure out what is happening to/with all of their stuff, and once they do figure out what is going they need to get the real player A back.

To me the challenge of any PnP game, is to figure out when the DM is being up front with us or when he is giving us just enough rope to hang ourselves with, to figure out what is a trap laid by our enemy and what is straight forward rescue mission. Basically the challenge is as simple or complex as the story behind why we are doing what ever it is we are doing.

[SquelchHU]

Squelch,

Well, I can see neither of us would enjoy playing at each others table, so I'm willing to agreed to disagree. Back to your original question as we've kinda gone off subject. "So...how DO you challenge a party above level 4?" Simple. First, since I'm assuming you've DM'd them up from level 1, you know their abilities, strategies, etc., you pick enemies to challenge them. If a level 5 groups is wiping the textbook definition of what they're supposed to be fighting, bring on a tougher group. Make them fight a level 6 or 7. If a DM can't run a NPC level 5 wizard against a PC level 5 wizard and make it an even fight, he should quit being a DM. I've read enough of your posts to realize that you think the mage classes are unstoppable as written. This might be true if the only mage classes were PCs. But since NPCs can be a mage class too, you get it evened out.

Bigger numbers don't work. Changing the paradigm does. Stop using site based adventures. They can't scry and fry if there is no set place for the enemies to be.

And 'level 5 wizard vs level 5 party' is not supposed to be an even fight. After all there's four level 5s vs 1 level 5, if the single level 5 is worth as much as all four of them, then Team PC fails at life. Literally. It is however a normal fight.

And I never said enemies could not be mages. Indeed, they can. And if you want encounters worth anything they will be. Every single time. However whoever is attacking still has the advantage, as the attacker simply needs to pick an attack mode. The defender needs to both have and use the proper counter, which also takes time. If the PCs have any sense in their heads at all, they will ensure they are always the ones to initiate conflict. If not, they will die early and often.

Of course this is a problem for the PCs that are not mages, but I have always maintained the problem is that non caster PCs cannot keep up with both their caster brethen and the enemies the group will collectively face.


Scenario: Through the party's various adventures, they've made enemies. A couple of these get together and decide something has to be done. They have an idea of the party's abilities, and hire mercenaries to find them and take them out. So a mercenary group is put together to hunt the party down. It's a given the mage for the mercenaries will use magic to hide their presence, just like the hero party. I promise I could challenge any party with such a scenario. Pick a spell that takes too long to cast (big spells do take more time), and I don't care which side won initiative, my buffed up archers are going to target you. One rolled a natural 20? made the crit roll? oh sorry, your spell failed or went awry, regardless of concentration.

And what spell would this be? The vast majority of spells, including the good ones have a casting time of 'one standard action'. If for some reason he cast a '1 round action' spell you might get to try your so called uber tactic that despite your advocacy has a sub 5% chance of actually working... if they aren't immune to critical hits, and if they can't make a relatively easy concentration check*. And if they get hit in the first place, which is... quite questionable.

* - Archers do very low damage. Even tripled, it's still low. 10 + spell level + damage dealt doesn't mean jack unless you can get a high number in there. Of course the chances that you even get to this point are somewhere between 'you get struck by lightning, right now' and 'the universe suffers spontaneous heat death, right now'.


Really? not a period of time to get off the ground, maybe even get untangled from blankets, get your buddy off you because he fell on you, etc. How about acting like a DM, and challenging your players?

At worst, standing up is a move action. Anything else is you making up random ****, like 'you auto fail concentration checks because LegoMyEggolas shot yous pewpewpew'.

Oh wait, casting a spell is a standard action. So you can totally do that on round one. Or just cast from prone, which isn't hard at all.

The poor non casters are screwed though. Yet again.

And by the way, I've been on both sides of the table many times. I play my NPCs mean, but I don't cheat for them. And guess what? The ability to counter even simple things like Rope Trick is fairly limited. Not because it can't be exposed, but because you have to be in the right area to expose it. And when that right area is 'somewhere within 100 miles/level of here'... yeah, have fun. Course it's a good thing it is, else the enemy would just jump the PCs in their sleep... instant campaign over. So Rope Trick is a solid reason to preserve campaign continuity.

And as a DM, the first thing to do is ensure everyone can play the same game. See my thread for how. If they can't, then the best thing that will happen is the casters get challenged... and everyone else dons a crimson top.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/94/STObsession.jpg

Of course it's more likely you won't even succeed at challenging part of the party, because you're entering with the wrong assumptions and will therefore come to wrong conclusions like 'this CR 30 mob with a Will save of 10 will be a great encounter' or 'I should totally send a sorcerer 18 at the level 12 party... what's the worst that could happen?'

I'm ignoring any DDO style fixes, as they have no place on a non linear game.

[Aspenor]

Well, there is always my favorite way to discourage resting too often...

Time constraints. If you don't accomplish objective A before enemy X completes their goal Y, then you have failed and wasted your time. The enemy may even no longer be occupying the area you happen to be. They also may still be occupying it, but will have fortified.

I usually grant bonus experience for completing objectives without resting as well, when I haven't put time constraints on their current mission. My players know this. They are usually loathe to stop to rest until it is absolutely required.

[SquelchHU]

Well, there is always my favorite way to discourage resting too often...

Time constraints. If you don't accomplish objective A before enemy X completes their goal Y, then you have failed and wasted your time. The enemy may even no longer be occupying the area you happen to be. They also may still be occupying it, but will have fortified.

I usually grant bonus experience for completing objectives without resting as well, when I haven't put time constraints on their current mission. My players know this. They are usually loathe to stop to rest until it is absolutely required.

That works. Thing is the more strict the time requirement, the more only casters can really help. After all, if you only have 7 days then taking... I dunno, 30 minutes to divine and get there is far better than wasting 5 days on travel time. It also gives you a lot more leeway for clearing the place.

If it has two days of encounters, than divining and getting there, and having seven to clear the place means it isn't really a meaningful time limit. If it has seven days of encounters, and you only have two... I hope you have a hardcore party.

With that said, aside from the 'don't use site based adventures' thing there are also built in incentives to keep going. Buff timers. Nothing even needs to be changed. Just as long as the buffs are up, the party is at full power so load up on extended minute/level stuff and higher and go at it. You might be spending only 30 minutes actually running around killing stuff but given that that is >300 rounds< that isn't as short as it sounds. Even though most of it would not involve actual combat.

The party is likely to press on on their own in this way. And, amusingly it is extremely similar to the optimal way to play DDO. Keep in mind I started playing D&D before I even heard of DDO.

[Aspenor]

True, but the party doesn't always have access to teleport (we are talking about levels 4+). When they do have access to teleport...well I assume they are smart enough to figure it out.

[SquelchHU]

True, but the party doesn't always have access to teleport (we are talking about levels 4+). When they do have access to teleport...well I assume they are smart enough to figure it out.

Minimum level for Rope Trick is 5 (you get it at 3... but it's an hour a level, and you need at least 9 hours so at level 5 Extended).

So levels 5-8. Even then, there are some serious discrepancies in travel time even if you ignore things like 'pay someone to teleport you' or 'make a level check to use a scroll anyways'. Mounts for example are a massive liability at those levels.

I'd say simply don't use site based adventures, direct them to the buffs (by demonstration, if necessary) and just let it go. Chances are they'll not want to rest for a while on their own. And if not, it's probably because they think you'll jump em in the night with a juiced up encounter that they could handle fine otherwise, but with surprise on their side would kill them all.

[Aspenor]

Minimum level for Rope Trick is 5 (you get it at 3... but it's an hour a level, and you need at least 9 hours so at level 5 Extended).

So levels 5-8. Even then, there are some serious discrepancies in travel time even if you ignore things like 'pay someone to teleport you' or 'make a level check to use a scroll anyways'. Mounts for example are a massive liability at those levels.

I'd say simply don't use site based adventures, direct them to the buffs (by demonstration, if necessary) and just let it go. Chances are they'll not want to rest for a while on their own. And if not, it's probably because they think you'll jump em in the night with a juiced up encounter that they could handle fine otherwise, but with surprise on their side would kill them all.

Right, I was talking about your statement of using divination and getting there in 30 minutes, not about Rope Trick.

As far as site-based adventures go, I don't really use them. The PC's rarely, if ever, end up in the same place twice.

[SquelchHU]

Right, I was talking about your statement of using divination and getting there in 30 minutes, not about Rope Trick.

As far as site-based adventures go, I don't really use them. The PC's rarely, if ever, end up in the same place twice.

By site based adventures, I don't mean coming back to the same area repeatedly (though that is also one type). I mean where the adventure happens at location x (specific city, forest, whatever).

[Corebreach]

By site based adventures, I don't mean coming back to the same area repeatedly (though that is also one type). I mean where the adventure happens at location x (specific city, forest, whatever).
Which is why I started this thread.

I've never done that as a DM and don't think I can. I can't conceive of an adventure that doesn't happen anywhere, where the goal isn't "go to X and do Y" and is only "do Y". Stop an invading army? Kill a rival king? They're somewhere, aren't they? Don't I have to go there first?

More to the point, I believe no D&D group I've ever lead either expected or wanted a game that changed its fundamental tactical and storytelling paradigms every four or five levels. Honestly, with my current playgroup, it'd be easier to write a homebrew system from scratch than have our mindsets morph from GURPS: Normals to Everway over the course of two or three months.

[SquelchHU]

Which is why I started this thread.

I've never done that as a DM and don't think I can. I can't conceive of an adventure that doesn't happen anywhere, where the goal isn't "go to X and do Y" and is only "do Y". Stop an invading army? Kill a rival king? They're somewhere, aren't they? Don't I have to go there first?

More to the point, I believe no D&D group I've ever lead either expected or wanted a game that changed its fundamental tactical and storytelling paradigms every four or five levels. Honestly, with my current playgroup, it'd be easier to write a homebrew system from scratch than have our mindsets morph from GURPS: Normals to Everway over the course of two or three months.

The key is that their location isn't static.

An adventure of 'go to castle whatever' is site based. An adventure of 'kill Count Chocula' is not.

Now 1st and 2nd edition... well let's just say games like Wizardry are not that far off the mark, as you really are expected to go into multi level dungeons, where the stronger monsters are deeper down and kill them for XP and loot. They even have encounter tables and loot tables based on dungeon level. Which has no bearing to character level mind you, it really does mean you go down a floor and stop fighting kobolds and start fighting ogres. Hope you don't fall down a pit.

Thing is, people got bored of that real fast. After all if people wanted to play Wizardry they could just do that.

And even then, the game did change fundamentally every few levels. It just tried to pretend it didn't, and that the wizards really were on dungeon level 12 fighting balors in a random encounter instead of casting their world changing spells.

In 3rd onto 3.5 they got rid of the dungeon grinding thing. Now it more resembles an actual world, and not a backdrop to grind against. But that in turn made the 'changes fundamentally every few levels' thing more apparent, because while before the wizard might not use Invisibility to sneak somewhere because he'd rather cast a combat spell, now he can.

And then they took a giant step back for 4th. But that's another topic.

[Aspenor]

The key is that their location isn't static.

An adventure of 'go to castle whatever' is site based. An adventure of 'kill Count Chocula' is not.

Now 1st and 2nd edition... well let's just say games like Wizardry are not that far off the mark, as you really are expected to go into multi level dungeons, where the stronger monsters are deeper down and kill them for XP and loot. They even have encounter tables and loot tables based on dungeon level. Which has no bearing to character level mind you, it really does mean you go down a floor and stop fighting kobolds and start fighting ogres. Hope you don't fall down a pit.

Thing is, people got bored of that real fast. After all if people wanted to play Wizardry they could just do that.

And even then, the game did change fundamentally every few levels. It just tried to pretend it didn't, and that the wizards really were on dungeon level 12 fighting balors in a random encounter instead of casting their world changing spells.

In 3rd onto 3.5 they got rid of the dungeon grinding thing. Now it more resembles an actual world, and not a backdrop to grind against. But that in turn made the 'changes fundamentally every few levels' thing more apparent, because while before the wizard might not use Invisibility to sneak somewhere because he'd rather cast a combat spell, now he can.

And then they took a giant step back for 4th. But that's another topic.

The current campaign in which I'm a player has this exact setup, and I hate it. The DM insists on running published campaigns rather than making up his own encounters. Since I hadn't died, I was level 12 on the 10th level of the dungeon. Heck, if I had played the wizard I could have probably solo'd most of the dungeon to this point.

I detest the idea of a dungeon grind. Before I started it, it sounded kinda fun. But now that I'm deep into it, I hate it.

Currently my character's XP has been frozen until we get to the 13th level of the dungeon. We are on the 11th level.

[SquelchHU]

Sounds like World's Largest Dungeon. Nothing good ever comes of that. Ever.

Well, at least you'll get Tiltowait soon. :D

[Aspenor]

Nah, not World's Largest Dungeon, but something like it.

It's called Dungeon Crawl Classics: Castle Whiterock.

[SquelchHU]

Nah, not World's Largest Dungeon, but something like it.

It's called Dungeon Crawl Classics: Castle Whiterock.

Classics = most likely based on first or second edition.

I rest my case.

[Aspenor]

Classics = most likely based on first or second edition.

I rest my case.

Yeah, definitely.

Oh, and the DM thinks that the way to challenge a group of PC's of higher level than the current dungeon layer is to use fill HP per HD and up to double the number of monsters in the encounter. Half our last session involved killing 200+ hit point ettin zombies, somewhere around 20 of them. The encounter was so boring I almost fell asleep. We stomped the stupid things into the ground with minimal threat (as should be expected) but it just was laboriously long.

yawn

[SquelchHU]

Well, at least he hasn't reached the point where he thinks lots of levels = lots of threat and threw a hilariously badly built Fighter 30 (Will save = 9) at you or something.

That's bad regardless of whether or not Enchantment is banned by the Wizard.

[Aspenor]

Well, at least he hasn't reached the point where he thinks lots of levels = lots of threat and threw a hilariously badly built Fighter 30 (Will save = 9) at you or something.

That's bad regardless of whether or not Enchantment is banned by the Wizard.

That will never happen, because he can't comprehend throwing an enemy at us that isn't already built and published in his cherished campaign booklets. The idea of actually creating enemies from scratch is completely foreign to him. Nevermind, I suppose, that it takes me all of 5 minutes to scrap together an NPC of any class or level for for them to fight when I'm DM.

[SquelchHU]

That will never happen, because he can't comprehend throwing an enemy at us that isn't already built and published in his cherished campaign booklets. The idea of actually creating enemies from scratch is completely foreign to him. Nevermind, I suppose, that it takes me all of 5 minutes to scrap together an NPC of any class or level for for them to fight when I'm DM.

Elminster has a published statblock in one of the Forgettable Realms books, and fits the bill (lots of class levels, but terribly built, and has a DM fiat attack he will likely need if he is ever attacked by a competent foe).

[Aspenor]

Elminster has a published statblock in one of the Forgettable Realms books, and fits the bill (lots of class levels, but terribly built, and has a DM fiat attack he will likely need if he is ever attacked by a competent foe).

Yes, true. I've often wondered how, with his current "build," Elminster was able to prevent a strong Red Wizard from obliterating him as easily as I swat a fly.

[SquelchHU]

Well, the reasons to call it Forgettable Realms range far beyond self insert characters. But I'll make that thread later, we're derailing this one.

[Chai]

Have always created my own encounters. Never had a problem challenging player characters. No need for rules lawyering, or running the broken CR challenges by the book or by the module. Even the authors of the modules back in the day made comments regarding having to make adjustments to tailor them to your situation.

[SquelchHU]

Have always created my own encounters. Never had a problem challenging player characters. No need for rules lawyering, or running the broken CR challenges by the book or by the module. Even the authors of the modules back in the day made comments regarding having to make adjustments to tailor them to your situation.

Says the guy who thinks it is perfectly appropriate to lock a character out of an adventure on the grounds they have a slightly below average Charisma. Which means his answer to a similar Strength score is likely to attempt to make the character juggle logs, and so forth.

Given that you're somewhere between 'Rocks Fall, Everyone Dies' and 'Players are DM Slaves', you'll understand why I disregard anything you say about PnP.

That and you label anyone that is remotely competent as 'munchkin min maxers' who you nerdrage against even more than I nerdrage against 4th edition. And that is a remarkable accomplishment.

Now granted, PnP is not all about pure optimization like DDO is. But there still are baselines of competence, standards if you will. And there are plenty of situations where there is a move that is clearly better than other, competitive moves.

If you are expecting your players to play stupid you are disappointing yourself and insulting them. Players will always do whatever they are mechanically incentivized to do. Always.

[Chai]

Says the guy who thinks it is perfectly appropriate to lock a character out of an adventure on the grounds they have a slightly below average Charisma. Which means his answer to a similar Strength score is likely to attempt to make the character juggle logs, and so forth.

Um, what?


Given that you're somewhere between 'Rocks Fall, Everyone Dies' and 'Players are DM Slaves', you'll understand why I disregard anything you say about PnP.

Was beta testing modules 6 months or so before they came out in the 80s and 90s. Had direct communication with many of the original authors who understand my vision and playstyle, which is why they asked us to test. I have a pretty good vision on what the game is about and how to play it.


That and you label anyone that is remotely competent as 'munchkin min maxers' who you nerdrage against even more than I nerdrage against 4th edition. And that is a remarkable accomplishment.

Meh. I get it already. Youre talking down to me like you do everyone else on the forums. There is no rage on my side of the fence. I call it like I see it. DDO is a min maxing game. How else do you explain 70 str 6 wis 6 cha toons? I dont have an issue with min maxers. Its the frothing at the mouth absolutists who I find hilariously misinformed. Oh wait...

You are the one who blathers on with this quantity based arguement about people "who dont know" having their fun at other players expense due to lack of competence. I dont feel the need to attack peoples playstyles when they didnt make every single optimal choice possible. I have seen you do so on many occasions however. This, is absolutism.


Now granted, PnP is not all about pure optimization like DDO is. But there still are baselines of competence, standards if you will. And there are plenty of situations where there is a move that is clearly better than other, competitive moves.

If you are expecting your players to play stupid you are disappointing yourself and insulting them. Players will always do whatever they are mechanically incentivized to do. Always.

Never did I state that I expect my players to play stupid. In fact, its quite the opposite. I adjust the encounters to the situation by creating them myself, and challenge the players. All of this is in your mind, and not something I stated. We've had the authors sit in on our sessions from time to time, and none of them really ever provided any crazy negitive feedback at the level you provide, so we must be doing something right. :p

[Aspenor]

****, no pictures allowed in this part of the forum.

http://www.wolfenstein-norge.com/forum/bilder/AwesomeThread.jpg

I <3 this thread.

[Aspenor]

FWIW, Squelch, not all groups play the way yours does. Most of the time all it takes is a decent DM.

In my case, when I DM, it's a walk in the park. I've got PC's that think damage spells are a good use of an action. I've got PC's that think in-combat healing is a good idea. I've got players that think Monkey Grip is an awesome feat. Even when I try to point them in a direction that actually makes sense, it's actually fairly rare for them to listen to me.

Some people just don't have a mind that works in a way that pieces together actual powerful tactics.

[Chai]

Some people just don't have a mind that works in a way that pieces together actual powerful tactics.

Or maybe, just maybe, there is more than one right way to do something. This profound idea goes completely against absolutism however... :D

/ducks

[Aspenor]

Or maybe, just maybe, there is more than one right way to do something. This profound idea goes completely against absolutism however... :D

/ducks

Yes, there is. Pick your poison: Conjuration, or Transmutation. :D

[SquelchHU]

FWIW, Squelch, not all groups play the way yours does. Most of the time all it takes is a decent DM.

In my case, when I DM, it's a walk in the park. I've got PC's that think damage spells are a good use of an action. I've got PC's that think in-combat healing is a good idea. I've got players that think Monkey Grip is an awesome feat. Even when I try to point them in a direction that actually makes sense, it's actually fairly rare for them to listen to me.

Some people just don't have a mind that works in a way that pieces together actual powerful tactics.

First of all, to say that they don't play the way 'my' group does is disingenuous, as it implies I only have a single group.

The groups I've had have been all over the place.

One group had no clue at all. Lots of 8 con gimps, lots of melee. So I'd throw simple encounters at them, that aren't using any tactics and they'd lose anyways. And I'd try and help em fix themselves up and that'd kinda work... but if things like Fireball and ordinary, non charge specced barbarians with a greataxe are ruining your day, there's not a whole lot of room left to lower the bar further.

So yeah, there definitely is a minimum baseline of competence when the DM is deliberately trying to go easy on you and you still fail.

Another group was mostly the opposite. Now they weren't trying to go all out max power but they certainly did recognize and accept that they must be this tall to play and built accordingly. No con dumpstatters, caster heavy. Initially the casters did just fine... had a very easy time actually and the other guys had a hard time, despite the fact the encounters were easy and non tactical. Through this and various other sources and people, I came to arrive at the conclusions I have now. And by applying those, the melee guys were able to join in and kick ass as well. Even when the encounters became non trivial and tactical, everyone was still able to contribute. So I'd consider that a success.

Point is, it wasn't as if I started off saying it has to be like x or it won't work. I determined that by trying it other ways, having it not work, and then trying x and having it work. And then looked around for other alternatives to x that did work... well sometimes there really is only one right way, or at least a very small number of right ways. For example if you are a non caster you are a charger or a tripper. Choose one.

However this is not true for the entire game. Any magic school not named Evocation is viable, with Conjuration and Transmutation topping the list. Plenty of valid ways to build a caster. Pick one.

Now people like Chai seem to think there's always plenty of options. Even if there isn't. That's why he's gone on record about the low Cha in D&D thing, it's why he constantly defends pointless weapons like Bastard Swords, and it's why he's been known to enter DPS threads just to bash DPS calcs.

And yes it really is a pointless weapon, DDO or PnP.

DDO: You spend one feat and get Khopesh instead. Or you spend no feat and take a Scimitar or Rapier or something. Which still does more damage. 100% Fort comes up in exactly four cases: Constructs, Elementals, Oozes, Undead, and it is only vs 100% Fort that a BS can be called better... except that portals don't care if you're proficient in the weapon or not, so even if you did decide to swing a BS at them you don't need the feat. Oozes are best hit with Muckbane/Muckdoom on the very rare occasions they come up at high levels, most Undead have DR/Blunt so the optimal weapon is a Warhammer (cost: 0 feats). That just leaves Elementals. All 3 of them. Hit em with warhammers, and save your exotic feat for a khopesh. That can actually be called good for more than 0.01% of the game.

D&D: Spend a feat for... 1 damage. By comparison Weapon Specialization is a feat for 2 damage, and is still very weak. How about no?

Well like it or not Chai, sometimes there really is one and only one way to do things. Particularly when discussing DDO, which is a much more narrow game but often in D&D as well. And you can get mad at me all you want about it and call me an absolutist, whatever, but I'm just telling it to ya like it is.

[Aspenor]

First of all, to say that they don't play the way 'my' group does is disingenuous, as it implies I only have a single group.

/shrug

I wouldn't call it disingenuous. It wasn't meant to be a negative thing. If you want to, read it as group(s).

Also, FWIW, there are a couple spells in Evocation that are good. The only problem is that you can easily replicate them with other schools (Greater Shadow Evocation Forcecage, I'm looking at you) and still keep more versatility, as well as save on the staggering material component price tag on Forcecage.

In one way, Chai is correct, yes, many "ways" can work. However, the DM must figure out how to keep the group remotely viable. There are a few "best" ways of doing things, and in this case the DM only has to keep the PC's challenged, which a competent DM can still do easily. He doesn't have to figure out what at-level encounters are "too much" for them to handle, since they should be able to handle anything at level (and more likely, anything 3 or even 4 levels higher than they are).

[SquelchHU]

/shrug

I wouldn't call it disingenuous. It wasn't meant to be a negative thing. If you want to, read it as group(s).

Also, FWIW, there are a couple spells in Evocation that are good. The only problem is that you can easily replicate them with other schools (Greater Shadow Evocation Forcecage, I'm looking at you) and still keep more versatility, as well as save on the staggering material component price tag on Forcecage.

In one way, Chai is correct, yes, many "ways" can work. However, the DM must figure out how to keep the group remotely viable. There are a few "best" ways of doing things, and in this case the DM only has to keep the PC's challenged, which a competent DM can still do easily. He doesn't have to figure out what at-level encounters are "too much" for them to handle, since they should be able to handle anything at level (and more likely, anything 3 or even 4 levels higher than they are).

Didn't really take offense, just saying there's more than one of em.

And I'm not even sure why spells like Contingency and Forcecage are even tagged as Evocation. You'd think if you managed to get it right a few times, you could apply that elsewhere.

But then again, these are the same people that insist new first level spells should absolutely not be better than Magic Missile, because it is the best first level spell...

And Chai is still wrong, because he throws that only one right way talk at me as if it is something I do all of the time, and not only when there is, indeed only one right way. In effect, he is insisting there are always other ways, even if there really isn't. So it is actually him always insisting upon the same thing.

Now to be fair here, in situations where there are many options I'm just going to say ok, plenty of valid ways to do this *list* and move on because what's the problem here right? Whereas in situations where there is only one right way, I'm more likely to talk about it because that often does indicate a problem, people may incorrectly state options are applicable that are not... there is simply more to discuss. So it can kind of seem that way, but it's not.

[Chai]

What is this situation where there is only one right way to go about it again?

Squelch is making these vague absolute comments about things I always supposedly say, but he wont give a specific example, because he knows as well as I, that absolutism can be proven wrong with 1 mere fact. The minute you make an absolutist statement you just put yourself in a proverbial box.



And Chai is still wrong, because he throws that only one right way talk at me as if it is something I do all of the time, and not only when there is, indeed only one right way. In effect, he is insisting there are always other ways, even if there really isn't. So it is actually him always insisting upon the same thing.

This is a perfect example of absolutist assumption based interpretation. I never make the statement, so he has to interpret something I said to mean exactly what he wants it to mean so he can attempt to deliver a counterpoint that holds any weight in a disagreement situation, because twisting other peoples words is the only tool hes got that allows him to do so. In fact, he does it twice in the same sentence here. I dont even have to respond to this stuff. All I have to do is point it out, and the reader can clearly see how rediculous it is.


because he throws that only one right way talk at me as if it is something I do all of the time

-and-


So it is actually him always insisting upon the same thing.

Regarding this thread, yeah, if you play the PnP game literally by its rules, you will likely run into situations where one or more mechanics of the game are situationally broken to the point where it either severely overpowers something or it makes someone useless for an encounter. One could make a decent laundry list of these types of situations. Creating your own encounters and making adjustments according to your campaign and situation allows a DM challenge their players as well as avoid these types of scenarios.

[Salsa]

I must be a bit slow on the problem here.

We got a spell that lets you rest without interruption. Alright, simple enough. (yes it's more complex then that but trying to look at the basics). Now, realistically you should only be able to rest 1 a day, try taking multiple 8 hour naps and see how you feel.

Regardless we will ignore that point.


Party enters dungeon/adventure gets in fight or two.

Arcanist says 'hey' let's rest for 8 hours in a confined space

let's assume no one has a problem with this ( this is where RP comes in, cause really, as any sane person, do you want to spend 8+ hours of your day in a small room watching the casters sleep (assuming more then 1 rest per day is allowed))

Now we flash to the outside world. Let's keep this simple and divide the scenario into two simple outcomes:

1) adventure was against non intelligent creatures - who cares they rested peacefully, they likely wouldn't of got jumped anyways pending on the encounter
a) animals with scent and what not would know something is just wrong

2) adventure was against intelligent creatures

a) brilliant move, the enemy now knows 2 things you are here and are tricky. They can now go on high alert, barricade and trap and reinforce. So now instead of fighting the new fight as the same ECL it gets upped because frankly, the PCs just warned everyone and they are now prepared now have more traps and help. Better yet, if the enemy has casters, they have good chance of guessing what happened. I mean really, 'hmm..no sign of them leaving ie no tracks etc, invis a possibility..' ::makes a spellcraft check on possibilities :: At the very least they know the enemy has casters.

b) any escapees have now given out details of the party to the leadership(your bad guys do retreat right?)


Let's say the party makes it past the ambush fight..given their past history they choose to rest again. Next waking up the party charges into the last area to find it empty. Apparently after the last fight the remaining intelligent enemy took all the loot and left 6 + hours ago and took your horses on the way out. If the party is lucky, the enemy didn't have a caster high enough level or the resources to make their lives miserable when they reappeared.

Options:

"what do you mean the room we rope tricked in has been collapsed?"
"enemy has made the rooms giant bonfires and the air is filled with smoke..start making saves till you get out"
"with all the time you guys have been resting, several groups have returned from leave/scouting/raiding/patrolling and are now sweeping the entire are"
"seems the enemy has been busy diverting that river outside the complex into the caverns..and since this room is below water level it is now completely flooded"
"the enemy left several air elementals in the room to kill anyone entering"
"yea..you know all those guys you killed, seems someone or something made them into undead"


etc

It gets more complex the higher level and of course it depends on the resources available to the bad guys and I am not even throwing out ways to get past the rope trick, just ways the bad guys could counter.


Party then kills the arcanist.



Seriously, great spell for avoiding snow and rain etc. But even if for some reason you allow multiple rests a day and for some reason the entire party likes being couped up in a room it is still not the end all.

Like I said, I am simplifying it, you don't need to counter their use, just use cause and affect.

" hey you guys are the ones that wanted to give the enemy 9+ hours of prep time (don't forget the 1 hour of relearning spells)"

[Chai]

From the rope trick description: Note: It is hazardous to create an extradimensional space within an existing extradimensional space or to take an extradimensional space into an existing one.

Many partys by level 6 or so will have at least one member with some sort of extradimensional storage, usually a bag of holding or heward's handy haversack. If they take this into the rope trick, you wont need to worry about what the denzines of the dungeon are going to do with their 8 hours of preparation, heh.

Usually the rope trick issue solves itself, unless all party members elect to not use extradimensional storage.

[SquelchHU]

I must be a bit slow on the problem here.

We got a spell that lets you rest without interruption. Alright, simple enough. (yes it's more complex then that but trying to look at the basics). Now, realistically you should only be able to rest 1 a day, try taking multiple 8 hour naps and see how you feel.

Regardless we will ignore that point.


Party enters dungeon/adventure gets in fight or two.

Arcanist says 'hey' let's rest for 8 hours in a confined space

Try again.

Party gets in a few fights. Arcanist says hey, here's a safe sleeping place. Since after all, any room is a 'confined space', and I doubt you complain about inn rooms and the like. In fact since it has enough space for 8 people to sleep in there, it's clearly a pretty **** big room.


let's assume no one has a problem with this ( this is where RP comes in, cause really, as any sane person, do you want to spend 8+ hours of your day in a small room watching the casters sleep (assuming more then 1 rest per day is allowed))

So someone has a problem with it. The arcanist calmly states that the alternative is to stay out there. With all the people the group just ticked off. The dissenter meekly gets in the rope trick.

Now we flash to the outside world. Let's keep this simple and divide the scenario into two simple outcomes:


1) adventure was against non intelligent creatures - who cares they rested peacefully, they likely wouldn't of got jumped anyways pending on the encounter
a) animals with scent and what not would know something is just wrong

Assuming the scent was not covered, they trace it to the middle of nowhere and stop. And if it was at the base of a tree, they might think they went up there and if very determined might actually wait. Otherwise, it just seems like they lost the trail.


2) adventure was against intelligent creatures

a) brilliant move, the enemy now knows 2 things you are here and are tricky. They can now go on high alert, barricade and trap and reinforce. So now instead of fighting the new fight as the same ECL it gets upped because frankly, the PCs just warned everyone and they are now prepared now have more traps and help. Better yet, if the enemy has casters, they have good chance of guessing what happened. I mean really, 'hmm..no sign of them leaving ie no tracks etc, invis a possibility..' ::makes a spellcraft check on possibilities :: At the very least they know the enemy has casters.

The same thing that would happen if the party withdrew without using a Rope Trick, or otherwise did anything other than completely annihilating the entire enemy force in one go. Something that isn't always practical to do. Even under the buff timer philosophy.


b) any escapees have now given out details of the party to the leadership(your bad guys do retreat right?)

Only if the party allows them to get away, which no sane party will.

Everything you described is either not a problem or would occur on withdrawal regardless. But Rope Trick makes it safer.

[Sarria22]

Keep in mind, enough room for "8 people to sleep" isnt very big at all. Consider a tent:
http://www.amazon.com/Columbia-Conrad-15-Foot-10-Foot-Person/dp/B00170LS44
10x15 feet, is not terribly large in real world terms, and I dont know about you, but i wouldnt want to spend large portions of my day cramped up in that small of a space, especially when you consider that, by the rules, the rope takes up the space of a single person, and the space isnt including room for all the gear a party is likely to have.

Oh, and since we're pklaying by the rules, with no interpetation outside what the books flat out state, I think it's time to be introduced to my little friend Pun-Pun. Clearly D&D requires a fair bit of make believe rules to even function, as any sane DM would never allow this character, whether it's legal by the rules as written or not.
http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19869366/The_most_powerful_character._EVER.

[Aspenor]

Keep in mind, enough room for "8 people to sleep" isnt very big at all. Consider a tent:
http://www.amazon.com/Columbia-Conrad-15-Foot-10-Foot-Person/dp/B00170LS44
10x15 feet, is not terribly large in real world terms, and I dont know about you, but i wouldnt want to spend large portions of my day cramped up in that small of a space, especially when you consider that, by the rules, the rope takes up the space of a single person, and the space isnt including room for all the gear a party is likely to have.

Oh, and since we're pklaying by the rules, with no interpetation outside what the books flat out state, I think it's time to be introduced to my little friend Pun-Pun. Clearly D&D requires a fair bit of make believe rules to even function, as any sane DM would never allow this character, whether it's legal by the rules as written or not.
http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19869366/The_most_powerful_character._EVER.

No offense, but pretty much everybody in this thread knows Pun-Pun. Linking to Pun-Pun in this thread is completely out of place and doesn't make any real contribution to the discussion (in fact this post makes it look like you're trying to claim credit for Pun-Pun).

[Sarria22]

Not at all, I am purely pointing out that the idea of "play by the rules as written or you're not really playing D&D" is a horrible idea that will, in most cases, inevitably lead to some idiot player pulling something like that, because, afterall, we're all playing by the rules right?

[SquelchHU]

Not at all, I am purely pointing out that the idea of "play by the rules as written or you're not really playing D&D" is a horrible idea that will, in most cases, inevitably lead to some idiot player pulling something like that, because, afterall, we're all playing by the rules right?

As opposed to a conversation that can no longer be quantified by any form of common ground, such as 'playing D&D'? Nice slippery slope you got there. But I want a Freedom of Movement, thanks.

[Chai]

Keep in mind, enough room for "8 people to sleep" isnt very big at all. Consider a tent:
http://www.amazon.com/Columbia-Conrad-15-Foot-10-Foot-Person/dp/B00170LS44
10x15 feet, is not terribly large in real world terms, and I dont know about you, but i wouldnt want to spend large portions of my day cramped up in that small of a space, especially when you consider that, by the rules, the rope takes up the space of a single person, and the space isnt including room for all the gear a party is likely to have.

Oh, and since we're pklaying by the rules, with no interpetation outside what the books flat out state, I think it's time to be introduced to my little friend Pun-Pun. Clearly D&D requires a fair bit of make believe rules to even function, as any sane DM would never allow this character, whether it's legal by the rules as written or not.
http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19869366/The_most_powerful_character._EVER.

Pun Pun is a joke LOL. It basically shows how broken the game can be.

If youve just been through hell and back, an 8 person tent would seem like paradise compared to sleeping with the denzines of the dungeon you just ticked off.

As stated before, people either travel light due to encumberance, or they use extradimensional storage. If they use the storage they wisely will not be climbing a rope trick.

[Xatasha]

Let's say a DM does want to "handle the game changing fundamentally every few levels". What does he do? How does he offer appropriate challenge to a party that can auto-avoid any enemy it doesn't want to fight, can auto-kill any it does (because it has casters in it), views any foils to these plans as blatant contrivances which justifiably should not be put up with for long, and whose characters gain levels at an average rate of almost one per game day?

I don't expect a complete answer. This is a huge question. Either way, this doesn't seem solvable without either using another RPG entirely or playing what is essentially a different RPG every gaming session.


Simple have a bag of holding drop as loot. Bag of holding+ rope trick=explosion. Extra dimensional spaces don't mix well. At least in the old school D&D.

Other things to do.

1) Do they ever forget to pull the rope up. A rope hanging in the middle of the air is a dead give away

2) Use a NPC bad guy wizard that uses the same trick against them and let your players figure out how to counter it.

3) run into slimes that eat their rope. No rope means no rope trick till they can get another rope. If you want to be really wicked then use book worms on the wizards book and eat the spell.

4) NPCs rest and prepare for when the PCs come back. Traps, fresh monsters and refresh their spells as well

Remember rope trick is suppose to let the party rest. Yes like most spells it can be abused and you just have to think a bit to counter it.

[SquelchHU]

Simple have a bag of holding drop as loot. Bag of holding+ rope trick=explosion. Extra dimensional spaces don't mix well. At least in the old school D&D.

You're late to the party. Already covered.


Other things to do.

1) Do they ever forget to pull the rope up. A rope hanging in the middle of the air is a dead give away

About one step away from 'Oh, you forgot to search the HINGES on the trapped chest.' but yes, if they decide to completely forgo their sole reason for a safe sleeping area that sleeping area is not in fact safe. Thank you Sherlock Holmes for that brilliant deduction.


2) Use a NPC bad guy wizard that uses the same trick against them and let your players figure out how to counter it.

Of course all NPC casters should use this. It goes without saying. That's why when you encounter one you kill them RIGHT NAO because if given any chance to react to you you are ****ed. And if one retreats to a Rope Trick, at least you have a few hours before more pain.


3) run into slimes that eat their rope. No rope means no rope trick till they can get another rope. If you want to be really wicked then use book worms on the wizards book and eat the spell.

"Oh hi there, I'm the DM and I have a 10 foot pole up my ass, so I'm going to make mindless enemies home in on one specific thing and oh yeah, somehow worms got in your... hey, what are you doing with that chair..."

"Steve, stop being a ******bag."

"No."

"But thou must!"

Player wields the Folding Chair of Salvation! Excellent move!

DM's ******baggery decreased by 75.

Thou hast done well in defeating the ******bag.

Thy Game Quality increases by 12.
Thy Wanted Level increases by 3.


4) NPCs rest and prepare for when the PCs come back. Traps, fresh monsters and refresh their spells as well

Remember rope trick is suppose to let the party rest. Yes like most spells it can be abused and you just have to think a bit to counter it.

Traps are too slow, and reinforcements probably are as well. But recharge and have a better idea of what they're up against and prepare accordingly? Sure, that goes without saying. It's also going to apply in any situation where the party cannot eradicate the base of all enemy life in one go regardless of if Rope Trick is involved or not. Which, unless the base has a population of 10 or lower is actually quite likely. Sure, good parties can blast through the whole thing on their buff timers but that sort of thing still shouldn't be expected... this is D&D after all. One false move and you die. Even if the DM isn't jerking your chain.

[Chai]

"Oh hi there, I'm the DM and I have a 10 foot pole up my ass, so I'm going to make mindless enemies home in on one specific thing and oh yeah, somehow worms got in your... hey, what are you doing with that chair..."

"Steve, stop being a ******bag."

"No."

"But thou must!"

Player wields the Folding Chair of Salvation! Excellent move!

DM's ******baggery decreased by 75.

Thou hast done well in defeating the ******bag.

Thy Game Quality increases by 12.
Thy Wanted Level increases by 3.



Kingdom of Loathing?

You gained 3 smarm.

[Cam_Neely]

It seems to me that this is not just a pure DM issue, as seems to be talked about, but a PC issue too.

If the PCs want to use a rope trick every fight, and coast though a quest, and follow rules to the letter, then an out of character discussion over a beer would fix the issue. If that can't fix the issue, then there is no issue.

The point is to have fun. If the PCs are all Min-Maxers that purely Metagame, and enjoy that, then give it to them. Line up the monsters and let them knock them down. If as a DM you dont like that, the the issue is that you and the PC have different goals, and the people that you decided to play with were poorly chosen.

If you're like me, as a new DM, I talked to the 4 people that I was going to play for to get an idea of what they wanted. All were light RPers, so did not want an hour of flavor text, but NONE wanted Min-Max, and all enjoy playing their roles to a lesser degree (the halforc plays dumb, the rogue is a crafty party leader, cleric is Lawful good ect). If they were all min maxers I would have set up the quest different.

Did not read 100% of the thread, but it seems that the two sides (DM v PC) wants to get different things out of the experience together.

[Salsa]

Try again.

Party gets in a few fights. Arcanist says hey, here's a safe sleeping place. Since after all, any room is a 'confined space', and I doubt you complain about inn rooms and the like. In fact since it has enough space for 8 people to sleep in there, it's clearly a pretty **** big room.

--> Try again? Not at all. You never answered well, any of my points. Yes it is a confined space, imagine 8 cots side by side, that's your room. Doesn't mean it's comfortable or spacey, you just can't get anymore in there. A cot is what, 7 ft by 3 ft? So you have a 14 by 12 room? My 4 yr olds room is bigger. You have an odd party, the ones I been with tend to like to get nice room, one to two a room. Who in their right mind would sleep in the common room when they can get a private for a few of those gold coins they picked up. Heck who wants a private room and bath and a nice feather bed when they can unroll their bedroll in the common room and sleep with their chums?

Let's further get into this, it's a small cell with likely sweaty and gore splattered people who have to keep reasonable quiet so not to disturb the arcanist. Yea..that sounds fun....



So someone has a problem with it. The arcanist calmly states that the alternative is to stay out there. With all the people the group just ticked off. The dissenter meekly gets in the rope trick.

--> Not likely, let's try this again, out arcanist spends his power on the first few encounters. More likely then not, the warrior types and cleric types are fine. They likely shrug and say 'enjoy your nap' and continue on. After all they may of just spent a week traveling thru the wilderness to get here and after an hour the arcanist wants to sleep in the cell.....again... Is your arcanist usually in charge?


Now we flash to the outside world. Let's keep this simple and divide the scenario into two simple outcomes:



Assuming the scent was not covered, they trace it to the middle of nowhere and stop. And if it was at the base of a tree, they might think they went up there and if very determined might actually wait. Otherwise, it just seems like they lost the trail.

--> go back and reread, I covered this all in the intelligent vs unintelligent part. In summary, unintelligent, well frankly it doesn't matter. Intelligent will know something is amiss and react accordingly.



The same thing that would happen if the party withdrew without using a Rope Trick, or otherwise did anything other than completely annihilating the entire enemy force in one go. Something that isn't always practical to do. Even under the buff timer philosophy.

--> point of the thread was people using rope trick can blow thru their spells, rest, regain, repeat. Least that was my understanding. The point is, the enemy, unless unintelligent, should react. By just blowing thru your spells you break it up into small parts. If your party is wise (and a bit lucky) they should not have to rest. If they did, they did something horribly wrong (or were very unlucky). If a party is allowed to rest, fight for an hour, rest, fight for an hour etc then frankly it's the DM's lack of skill thats the problem and the player's lack of RP. Do you really want to be cooped up in a room waiting for 20 out of 24 hours trying not to disturb the arcanist?



Only if the party allows them to get away, which no sane party will.

--> assuming they can track or find them thereafter and assuming the enemy didn't kill/destroy it before fleeing. Having the enemy still there is mildly different strategy wise then 'they are inaccessible for some unknown reason (or even known)'. You can't access them you run, if you can well...that may be something different.

Reinforcements? Sure. Lots of baddies will send out raiding/scouting/hunting parties. Scouting and hunting parties will likely be back in that 8 hour window.


'Hey look, the remaining goblins grabbed the loot, destroyed what they could and scattered into the woods. So...who can track? Anyone?'


Everything you described is either not a problem or would occur on withdrawal regardless. But Rope Trick makes it safer.


--> no one is arguing rope trick isn't safer generally then barricading yourself somewhere. I know you never read me writing that. My point is a DM should use the bad guys intelligently, and if they do so, it will make the use of rope trick not the default strategy. Rope trick, IMO, is the 'oh gosh we are screwed' tactic. Because frankly, besides your odd RP personality type, there are some, it shouldn't be a 'oh yea!' moment.

[Qindark]

Took me awhile, but I don't think the OP is really looking for a solution. His mind is set, and nothing anyone has said has changed a single thing. He wants fundamental changes to the rules, and nothing else will do. The only reason that there's no balance, is because the DM allows it. Maybe the PC's are running the show and the DM is just providing cannod fodder. At one point he said something to the affect: If I were a PC I'd want to initiate every attack. Well DUH! who wouldn't? Ever think the NPCs and monsters would prefer to initiate every attack as well? Stop pretending the PCs are the only ones that are intelligent in the world, and put in some NPCs that act intelligent.

[SquelchHU]

Kingdom of Loathing?

You gained 3 smarm.

What?


It seems to me that this is not just a pure DM issue, as seems to be talked about, but a PC issue too.

If the PCs want to use a rope trick every fight, and coast though a quest, and follow rules to the letter, then an out of character discussion over a beer would fix the issue. If that can't fix the issue, then there is no issue.

The point is to have fun. If the PCs are all Min-Maxers that purely Metagame, and enjoy that, then give it to them. Line up the monsters and let them knock them down. If as a DM you dont like that, the the issue is that you and the PC have different goals, and the people that you decided to play with were poorly chosen.

If you're like me, as a new DM, I talked to the 4 people that I was going to play for to get an idea of what they wanted. All were light RPers, so did not want an hour of flavor text, but NONE wanted Min-Max, and all enjoy playing their roles to a lesser degree (the halforc plays dumb, the rogue is a crafty party leader, cleric is Lawful good ect). If they were all min maxers I would have set up the quest different.

Did not read 100% of the thread, but it seems that the two sides (DM v PC) wants to get different things out of the experience together.

The fact you have not read the thread shows as no one here is advocating Rope Trick after every fight. That's stupid. Furthermore it's impossible, not because you couldn't do it, but because unless you sit there and cast Magic Missile at the darkness... repeatedly it flat out isn't possible to run out of spells in a single fight. Not enough actions. Either the enemy will die or you will long before then.


Took me awhile, but I don't think the OP is really looking for a solution. His mind is set, and nothing anyone has said has changed a single thing. He wants fundamental changes to the rules, and nothing else will do. The only reason that there's no balance, is because the DM allows it. Maybe the PC's are running the show and the DM is just providing cannod fodder. At one point he said something to the affect: If I were a PC I'd want to initiate every attack. Well DUH! who wouldn't? Ever think the NPCs and monsters would prefer to initiate every attack as well? Stop pretending the PCs are the only ones that are intelligent in the world, and put in some NPCs that act intelligent.

At which point one of two things happen:

NPCs are able to get the first strike. Everyone dies.

NPCs are not able to get the first strike. Everyone does not die.

And that comment came up in regards to safe sleeping areas. You know, those things that make it so you can't be attacked when you aren't ready for it? And that I brought up because they were necessary for campaign continuity, since without them that is exactly what would happen?

It's great you agree with me and all, but you shouldn't word it as if you are arguing instead.

Oh and Salsa? There's this neat forum invention called a 'quote' button. It makes it really easy to differentiate what you're saying and whatever the person you are replying to is saying. This is particularly useful when you respond to an old post, as the person you're talking to is just going to stop reading real fast when it all blurs together like that.

So if you want me to respond to that, use the quote button.

[Montrose]

Not likely, let's try this again, out arcanist spends his power on the first few encounters. More likely then not, the warrior types and cleric types are fine. They likely shrug and say 'enjoy your nap' and continue on. After all they may of just spent a week traveling thru the wilderness to get here and after an hour the arcanist wants to sleep in the cell.....again... Is your arcanist usually in charge?



The arcanist will shortly be in charge of what remains of this party after their next encounter, yes. Groups without an arcane lose (big time) to groups with an arcane.

[SquelchHU]

The arcanist will shortly be in charge of what remains of this party after their next encounter, yes. Groups without an arcane lose (big time) to groups with an arcane.

Thanks for putting that part in quotes for me.

Now I'll respond to it.

If the arcane guy is low on spells, so is the divine guy. They're both throwing spells that end the encounter after all. The warrior guy might be at full HP now, but 2 rounds of combat will take him from full to dead for sure, and 1 possibly will.

So what happens is just as I said.

Arcane guy says 'Hey, let's take a rest.'
Divine guy says 'Good idea, I'm getting low too.'

One of two things happen, depending on the intelligence/wisdom of the warrior guy.

If he's a bright one, he realizes spells are the only thing handling encounters unless he is flat out jaw droppingly awesomely optimized... and even if he is, spells are still the only thing that can replenish his very finite HP.

So even though he seems fine he agrees, because he knows he won't be fine if the group presses on.

If he's not so bright he insists on pressing on, is told to suit himself, and the casters munch snacks while he gets KOed inside of 12 seconds on PPV (cost: 1 Rope Trick).

[SquelchHU]

So someone linked me to another forum. I had a look around, and ended up finding a quote that was too awesome not to share. While it's not completely accurate (he got some of the enemy levels wrong) it is still completely relevant to the topic at hand despite being brought up for a different reason (it was some thread about flask rogues). But that's not important. So here's the quote, unaltered in any way except tags for emphasis.


I go strictly by the strictest and most draconian interpretations of the 3.0 (where 3.5 is unclear)/3.5 rules. I have no problems with them in the games that I run. Although obviously some people here do.

Going by the game's setting and rules, the following are all fairly possible.

Buy two scrolls of Planeshift and Greater Teleport at level 8; alternately, have the cleric prepare Planeshift; then travel to the Elemental Plane of Fire. If you can't figure out how to have either indefinete or merely hours and hours worth of Fire Resistance at level 8, shame on you.

Beat the **** out of Efreetis, spare their lives for Wishes. Harvest greater scrolls of Improved Invisilibty; any magic items worth 15k or less GP; get the gems you need to recoup money lost on scrolls, get extra scrolls.

Return to Material Plane

Keep Playing

Get Perfect Two Weapon Fighting at level 10 if you're a rogue.

There is no argument to any of this aside from strictly personal preference to "not want to actually play D&D as written, but instead to choose to play my own low-power home-brew",

or

Just being unable to grasp the fact that at level 7; you've surpassed every hero from almost every mythology written by man. Yes, this is including the challenges and foes that were faced in Greek (Herakles, Theseus, Perseus, Odysseus, Achillies, Bellerophon, Oedipus), Irish (Setanta/Cu Cullain), Danish (Beowulf), Persian (Rostram), Chinese (Guan Yu +others) mythologies and legends.

These people are actually small potatos compared to D&D. Beowulf died fighting a "large dragon" (aka, Below CR 10) if it was a red that's seriously a CR 5 dragon. Given that Beowulf only killed a Troll (cr 5, and one that couldn't regenerate it's limbs either, even if it was a fresh-water Scrag and immersion in water would have brought it back from dying) or Ogre (CR 2) at best, it shouldn't come as a shock that Beowulf dies facing a CR 5 foe.

Chimeras, Seven-headed Hydras, Pegasus, Medusas, Gorgons, Minotaurs, Fiendish (Nemean) Lions, Chimeric Hell Hounds (Cerberus), Lamias, Ogres, Trolls are all below CR 6.

A Beholder is CR 10, and can kill Herakles, and not skip a beat. It could probably face an all-star team of Odysseus, Herakles, Ezekiel and Merlin, and destroy them all in one or two rounds. It's a CR 10 monster; and they're only level 6 characters at the most.

The real problem is that people seriously don't get that D&D characters make every classical hero look small; but then, the world of D&D characters is massively more expansive than the real world, and Nerull can seriously go all "Populous" on the Material Plane and lower the ground until the oceans flood everything, or just summon volcanos everywhere. So everything about D&D makes classical myths look small.

As a result, people who don't "get" D&D throw a hissy-fit when you tell them that your human character is seriously older than most Elvish empires, and can fight any of the Lords of the Nine to a standstill without fear of dying, or even without fear, choosing intentionally to not kill the Devil Lord in question (from Zuggy-whatever to Asmodeous) because it's too much of a hassle to worry about running a whole Infernal Plane.

Seriously, that's what D&D is. If people get that, they won't quibble over stupid things like "can you attack them by throwing bottles of acid? can you really?"; when the questions should be

GM: "You see a flying red dragon atop the multiple layers of Wall of Force. Can you fly up and reach it?"
PC: "What?"
GM: "What Flying abilities do you have?"
PC: "W-W-What?"
GM: "What ain't no Flying that I ever heard of! Can you Fly with What?"
PC: "...What?"
GM: "FLY, CAN YOU DO IT?!"
PC: ".... no"
GM: "The Dragon flies off, leaving you trapped under the maze of walls of force seperating you from it. It will probably destroy the great library that contains the secrets it's master wishes to not have found out by your party."
PC: "Oh ****."
GM: "I'll say, you're level 20 and can't fly all the damned time. You need to step up for higher level challenges; this isn't no World of Warcraft or Pathfinder, where big numbers mean more, this is D&D. The whole game changes every few levels.

Also, it could read your thoughts. You need to fix that. I'm seriously throwing you a bone with that last bit of advice, I could have waited until your character lost so badlt that the empire got conquered before your character figures that out in game."

Seriously. Can you Fly? Are your thoughts noisy? Can you be Scryed? How do you deal with walls of Arbitrarium?

The orb throwing debate isn't a debate, it's something can be done. Arguing otherwise is for people that can't even prepare to deal with the mid-level challenges of the game. Like a wizard with an army of Vrocks that is destroying everything withing a 5-mile radius of your nation's city, and will keep doing so unless your nation sends him the head, and crown, of your king.

[jwdaniels]

Squelch, no offense but have you ever played D&D? One of the fundamental rules is that no matter how powerful a party gets, there is always someone out there one level higher that can do the same things slightly better. I'm not going to pretend to have read the entire thread, but anyone that let's a single 2nd level spell ruin their game doesn't get the game at all. If your group insists on resting after each encounter/every two encounters/every third encounter, etc. then you make every encounter so difficult that they have to be at full strength to overcome it. If you know they will have full power, design accordingly. It's not about winning after all.

That said, I think 3/3.5 edition was terrible for forcing power gaming and min/maxing onto everyone. 1st/2nd edition (pre player's option) was way more fun in a lot of ways. With every fighter doing the same thing, you had two ways of differentiating yourself from everyone else - cool stuff and roleplaying.

[SquelchHU]

Squelch, no offense but have you ever played D&D? One of the fundamental rules is that no matter how powerful a party gets, there is always someone out there one level higher that can do the same things slightly better. I'm not going to pretend to have read the entire thread, but anyone that let's a single 2nd level spell ruin their game doesn't get the game at all. If your group insists on resting after each encounter/every two encounters/every third encounter, etc. then you make every encounter so difficult that they have to be at full strength to overcome it. If you know they will have full power, design accordingly. It's not about winning after all.

That said, I think 3/3.5 edition was terrible for forcing power gaming and min/maxing onto everyone. 1st/2nd edition (pre player's option) was way more fun in a lot of ways. With every fighter doing the same thing, you had two ways of differentiating yourself from everyone else - cool stuff and roleplaying.

Anyone who claims Rope Trick 'ruins the game' and then goes off on a tangent accordingly has no idea 1: What is going on. 2: What I am talking about. 3: What they are talking about.

And your brilliant solution to regarding Rope Trick as a problem is to encourage them to keep doing it, even more than they already are? Do you work for Paizo, and if not are they hiring?

Also, I loled. Hard.

[Salsa]

The arcanist will shortly be in charge of what remains of this party after their next encounter, yes. Groups without an arcane lose (big time) to groups with an arcane.

Point 1: we are talking 4th level or higher, obviously the behavior will start at 4th. So if a 4th level arcane is REQUIRED you have other problems.

Point 2: If an arcane as an enemy is a party killer, fire your rogue and half the other party. Seriously.


Yes arcanes at high level are scary, but if you HAVE to have an arcane to fight one, you might as well call it quits.

Having been in parties that have ditched the arcanes for silly behaviors 'oh you want to take a week off to research?' and been fine I can atest to not needing them. Heck our level 10 party (the two fighter/rogues, fighter, and archer fighter) went alone in a dungeon meant for the six of us. We fought arcanes, multiple clerics at once, and massively buffed undead (I hate upped wraiths).

Not only did we not lose anyone(thought some of us had much lowered CON) we killed the baddie cleric (though we failed to save the prisoner) we then chased down the a secondary evil adventuring party and killed them. Our uber fighter did die in that one :( .

Our DMs don't pull punches and roll in the open. We don't use splat books, just the core books. Thusly, we go prepared.


Now I don't play Epic so it, we play from 1st to about 14th. Now since the OP was starting at at 4th, it easily falls in that range.

It really bewilders me people think an arcane is a must have to fight other arcanes.

[SquelchHU]

Point 1: we are talking 4th level or higher, obviously the behavior will start at 4th. So if a 4th level arcane is REQUIRED you have other problems.

Point 2: If an arcane as an enemy is a party killer, fire your rogue and half the other party. Seriously.

If you're expecting rogues to have a chance against casters go ahead and fire them.


Yes arcanes at high level are scary, but if you HAVE to have an arcane to fight one, you might as well call it quits.

Having been in parties that have ditched the arcanes for silly behaviors 'oh you want to take a week off to research?' and been fine I can atest to not needing them. Heck our level 10 party (the two fighter/rogues, fighter, and archer fighter) went alone in a dungeon meant for the six of us. We fought arcanes, multiple clerics at once, and massively buffed undead (I hate upped wraiths).

Not only did we not lose anyone(thought some of us had much lowered CON) we killed the baddie cleric (though we failed to save the prisoner) we then chased down the a secondary evil adventuring party and killed them. Our uber fighter did die in that one :( .

Our DMs don't pull punches and roll in the open. We don't use splat books, just the core books. Thusly, we go prepared.


Now I don't play Epic so it, we play from 1st to about 14th. Now since the OP was starting at at 4th, it easily falls in that range.

It really bewilders me people think an arcane is a must have to fight other arcanes.

All fighter parties? Your DM was going very easy on you.

[sainy_matthew]

ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! I love that we have a 9 page thread based on the inaccurate belief that casters have a magical "win-spell" & that fighters are nothing but DPS devices. That may be the case in DDO, but in real D&D casters are just as falliable as anyone else & fighters are only as dull as the player designing them (you design a DPS fighter, you end up with a DPS fighter).

-M

[SquelchHU]

ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! I love that we have a 9 page thread based on the inaccurate belief that casters have a magical "win-spell" & that fighters are nothing but DPS devices. That may be the case in DDO, but in real D&D casters are just as falliable as anyone else & fighters are only as dull as the player designing them (you design a DPS fighter, you end up with a DPS fighter).

-M

Fail.

Casters do in fact have spells that win the encounter on the spot. Many spells, at every level. Most of which are in core.

Melees, meanwhile have no recourse but to hit the thing with the other thing, so yes they are just DPS... except that no one cares about HP damage, so instead of being respected, or even dominant like they are in DDO where only HP damage works they end up the guys who are really just along for the ride (and by ride I mean piling on).

Doesn't matter how 'interesting' he tries to be, his options are Auto Attack and Waste Turn. Choose one. And the latter has a hidden clause, that if you waste too many turns you will be no longer welcome in the party.

Unsuccessful Troll is Unsuccessful.

[jwdaniels]

Anyone who claims Rope Trick 'ruins the game' and then goes off on a tangent accordingly has no idea 1: What is going on. 2: What I am talking about. 3: What they are talking about.

And your brilliant solution to regarding Rope Trick as a problem is to encourage them to keep doing it, even more than they already are? Do you work for Paizo, and if not are they hiring?

Also, I loled. Hard.

I never claimed that rope trick ruined the game, nor did I suggest to fix it by continuously doing it - based on your level of reading comprehension it is no wonder that you don't understand pen and paper Dungeons and Dragons. The rules are there as guidelines to keep things moving and provide a framework for a fun game, nothing more. If a rule doesn't work, ignore it. If that causes a horrible cascade of other rule changes, then ignore those, too. Just because WotC prints two dozen rule books for 3.5 edition doesn't mean you need to use more than three of them...

[jwdaniels]

Fail.

Casters do in fact have spells that win the encounter on the spot. Many spells, at every level. Most of which are in core.

Melees, meanwhile have no recourse but to hit the thing with the other thing, so yes they are just DPS... except that no one cares about HP damage, so instead of being respected, or even dominant like they are in DDO where only HP damage works they end up the guys who are really just along for the ride (and by ride I mean piling on).

Doesn't matter how 'interesting' he tries to be, his options are Auto Attack and Waste Turn. Choose one. And the latter has a hidden clause, that if you waste too many turns you will be no longer welcome in the party.

Unsuccessful Troll is Unsuccessful.

You've clearly never seen a melee trip an opponent and use sneak attack to inflict fireball damage repeatedly. Also, if you understood the encounter level system, you'd realize that the big opponents of high enough CR to be fighting PCs with insta-kill spells have those same abilities themselves or have ways around them.

[SquelchHU]

You've clearly never seen a melee trip an opponent and use sneak attack to inflict fireball damage repeatedly. Also, if you understood the encounter level system, you'd realize that the big opponents of high enough CR to be fighting PCs with insta-kill spells have those same abilities themselves or have ways around them.

1: Tripped opponents are not sneak attackable.
2: The Rogue is tripping them? So a reach two handed weapon? That's the only choice for every other character, but since SA is per hit based, a non dual wielding rogue is just as gimped as a dual wielding non rogue, if not more so. I'm ignoring the fireball comment, as fireball is quite inconsequential and that wasn't the point you were trying to make.
3: Yes, enemies do have instant win abilities as well. That's the WHOLE POINT. Because everyone has instant win abilities except the PC melees, the PC melees fail at life, because they can't play the same game as everyone else. Likewise, everyone is going to be immune to some of them. That's why adaptability is a requirement, why the PC casters will have an array of different win spells (and so should their opponents), and why melee fails since it's still stuck auto attacking for HP damage.

The other post is too stupid and wrong to respond to, so I'm ignoring it.

[jwdaniels]

1: Tripped opponents are not sneak attackable.
2: The Rogue is tripping them? So a reach two handed weapon? That's the only choice for every other character, but since SA is per hit based, a non dual wielding rogue is just as gimped as a dual wielding non rogue, if not more so. I'm ignoring the fireball comment, as fireball is quite inconsequential and that wasn't the point you were trying to make.
3: Yes, enemies do have instant win abilities as well. That's the WHOLE POINT. Because everyone has instant win abilities except the PC melees, the PC melees fail at life, because they can't play the same game as everyone else. Likewise, everyone is going to be immune to some of them. That's why adaptability is a requirement, why the PC casters will have an array of different win spells (and so should their opponents), and why melee fails since it's still stuck auto attacking for HP damage.

The other post is too stupid and wrong to respond to, so I'm ignoring it.

You can multiclass fighter and rogue you know, right? And yes, a tripped opponent is denied its dexterity bonus to AC and therefore can suffer a sneak attack - the fireball comment was just a colorful way of describing damage that involves rolling a lot of d6.

Strangely enough, the melee classes have the highest fortitude saves (other than clerics) which allows them to avoid most of the instant death effects. The game is a lot more balanced than you give it credit for.

As far as ignoring my other comment about not using rules/books that you don't like it just proves once again that you don't get the entire concept of Dungeons and Dragons.

[TheDjinnFor]

I'll quote myself in regards to SquelchedHU:


Don't worry, he's just BSing. He will make random claims with no evidence or references provided, then as soon as you point out a case where he is wrong, he will attempt to divert the issue, or ignore it outright.

Or best of all, he'll attach some long-winded interpretation to a couple sentences in the rulebook in an attempt to justify his so-called 'facts' (after he's heard your arguments of course, so he can make sure you couldn't prove him wrong). If that fails, he'll attempt to troll you out of the thread with nonsensical posts while ignoring you, and pick a point or person that's easier to respond to in the mean time.

It's kinda funny how the thread progresses that way. Give it a quick glance from beginning to end.

There's really no point in responding to this guy at all, in either of his threads. Just stop posting and ignore them. He only survives because you give him ammunition to pick at when you post long replies, because there's bound to be a few straws he can grasp at when you do so. He clearly lacks a proper understanding when it comes to why and how casters can dominate in PnP; he can only answer rebuttals with random assumptions and personal interpretations that he or his group have made about the rulebooks, the campaign world, and DnD in general (or personal attacks, one of the two).

He's just looking for the Ego boost of thinking he 'wins the intranet'; there's clearly no other explanation for it.

I proved he was a blatant liar when he claimed that mobs have something like +30 to hit and 100 damage per full attack at level 10 (or something equally as crazy), when in reality it's more like +15 to hit and 30-50 damage per full attack, assuming power attack, and assuming that they can even reliably hit a full attack, which they couldn't possibly do at +15 to hit and -5 from PA. A mob had +19 to hit and couldn't even average more than 5 damage per round on an undergeared fighter without special circumstances, LOL.

Just don't bother responding to this guy. He's squelched me already since he can't respond.

[SquelchHU]

You can multiclass fighter and rogue you know, right? And yes, a tripped opponent is denied its dexterity bonus to AC and therefore can suffer a sneak attack - the fireball comment was just a colorful way of describing damage that involves rolling a lot of d6.

Strangely enough, the melee classes have the highest fortitude saves (other than clerics) which allows them to avoid most of the instant death effects. The game is a lot more balanced than you give it credit for.

As far as ignoring my other comment about not using rules/books that you don't like it just proves once again that you don't get the entire concept of Dungeons and Dragons.

1: You can, but as I said. You're gimping yourself.

2: Tripped opponents are NOT denied dex to AC. They are prone, which means +4 to hit them. Try again.

3: No, they don't. To have the highest saves, one of the following must be true:

High base progression + primary stat.
High base progression + spellcaster.

The first is not true, because Str is your primary stat. The second is not true because you are not a Cleric or Druid. And, even the Wizard will likely end up with a better Fort save than you, since he's only 2-6 points behind on base progression but has SAD, a familiar, and spellcasting all going for him.

You also assume that it is Fort based... some are, but some aren't. Hell, some of em have no save at all. So either you're immune (spells), you kill it before it kills you, or you die. Choose one.

Anyways, this thread became much more intelligent after Squelching a pair of trolls.

[jwdaniels]

Multiclassing fighter and rogue does not gimp your character at all, in fact it's an improvement especially with prestige classes (like duelist, for example) taken into account.

Every instant death spell or effect that has a save that I can think of is a fortitude save.

I think you're actually right about prone, so I concede that point - I was thinking stunned for some reason.

Go ahead and squelch me if you like, but the fact is that you can design any party of any level for any edition of the game you'd like, and I can design an appropriately leveled dungeon setting to challenge them.

[TheDjinnFor]

Everything you described is either not a problem or would occur on withdrawal regardless. But Rope Trick makes it safer.

So if we've determined that rope trick doesn't actually do anything against anything that matters (besides let you hide from mindless animals, which aren't really a threat to a group of level > 2 anyways), from then from then on you can design situations where the PCs do not need to have to rest regularly. Instead, they will choose to press on even when low on spells, knowing that you won't dump 8 trolls on them just to be a jerk and 'challenge' them, and knowing that resting for 8 hours either in the middle of a 'dungeon' (which can easily backfire), or outside of a 'dungeon' (which is a meaningless waste if you've got a 48-hour time limit) is a waste of time.

Because they aren't resting whenever they want, since they perceive that there is a risk in waiting around for 8-9 hours for no actual benefit, you can throw simple CR 0.000001 challenges at a level 5-8 party (like a 15 foot pit) that the party caster is loathe to waste spells on. Because they don't want to defeat already relatively simple challenges with the now very valuable thing called a 'spell', they won't, and poof, there's a way to make the Jump and Climb skill useful.

The trick to challenging PCs is to throw a thousand non-challenges at them in order to make spells a more valuable commodity, in a nutshell. It's not that hard. Difficult challenges just favor the casters who can trivialize them in the wave of a hand and a few words. This principle can be applied up to level 20. I never really played Epic, so I can't say how it works after that...

So for anyone who doesn't have me squelched, there's your solution. Don't listen to the clown; just leave the thread now.

[SquelchHU]

Multiclassing fighter and rogue does not gimp your character at all, in fact it's an improvement especially with prestige classes (like duelist, for example) taken into account.

Every instant death spell or effect that has a save that I can think of is a fortitude save.

I think you're actually right about prone, so I concede that point - I was thinking stunned for some reason.

Go ahead and squelch me if you like, but the fact is that you can design any party of any level for any edition of the game you'd like, and I can design an appropriately leveled dungeon setting to challenge them.

You just argued that Duelist make a character, any character better. Every argument you have have and will make is invalid. :D

But yes it does gimp you, because trip = two handed reach weapon and rogue = dual wielding. So you're either gimped at rouging, or the fighter levels aren't doing anything for you.

And there are direct save or dies targeting all saves, and no save. And then the indirect ones are more often than not NOT Fort based.

Stunned does make you flat footed, but melees don't have any means of stunning (no, stunning fist doesn't count. In order to count you have to actually be able to make it land, something that you won't be able to do, even as a Monk because the DC is not based on your primary stat).

And you haven't been squelched yet, because while you are still wrong you have not crossed the line into hopelessly stupid. Like that last comment. There is no enemy that can 'challenge' the fighter that is not trivial to a real character. And there is no enemy that can challenge those real characters that will not maul the fighter.

Even with less extreme gaps of power, it is still very much possible, likely even that either the weak link is too weak, or the strong characters yawn through it. This is why it's important to get everyone on the same page, which is why my other thread exists (that, and friends don't let friends play fighters).

I dunno about you, but I don't want my friends feeling like they might as well not be at the table, for all the good they're doing? Do you? And because I want them to be able to participate, that means maneuvering them away from things that will ensure they can't. Gimp classes like the fighter, gimp styles like TWF on any non Rogue or sword and board on anyone are things that will ensure non participation. Making 'a melee' work is an uphill battle requiring a non gimped chassis (class), then optimizing so that your damage is up to par (this means minimum 30-40 at level 5, minimum 100 at level 10, minimum 300-400 at level 20) because otherwise your damage not only will not keep up, but will barely scale at all (seriously, 18 > 34 Str is +12 damage, then add a +5 weapon and if you're not optimizing you're not even tripling your damage from 1 to 20). Whereas if you are, then you have yourself a custom weapon* from the Mage Mart(tm) that exists so that melee characters can continue playing the game, and it adds around 30 damage, +70 on the first hit which does a fair bit of the work required to do enough HP damage to actually make things care you exist.

* - Custom weapon = load up on special properties. This isn't DDO, so there's no prefix/suffix limitations. As long as the whole doesn't have an enhancement bonus higher than 5, or it isn't higher than +10 equivalent it's fair game. +1 Vicious Holy Collision Spell Storing Bloodstone I forgot the rest. Life drinker is a good one for warforged melee.

Amusingly, this does mean everyone ends up using about the same weapons, simply because there simply are not enough special properties with sufficiently useful, and general purpose applications to have any variety. For example, all of the 1d6 elemental effects are negated by trivial amounts of resist, so they're a waste to add to your main weapon (and due to wealth restrictions, you can't afford any others, so you just don't take them). The burst effects would be trash even if nothing had any elemental resist, so you don't take them. Holy barely makes the cut, given that around 3/4th of everything you'll fight is evil, just to give you an idea of what is required to quality as relevant.

[TheDjinnFor]

Quick, everybody, here's your chance! Don't respond!

Also:


There is no enemy that can 'challenge' the fighter that is not trivial to a real character. And there is no enemy that can challenge those real characters that will not maul the fighter.

You're doing it wrong. ******, stop doing it wrong!!

[jwdaniels]

Squelch, I'm beginning to think that we might just have groups with extraordinarily different play styles - my friends all tend to favor melee builds over casters, for the most part and we've never had an issue with high-level fights. The sword and board fighters tend to last longest because they have a high AC, high fortitude saves, and high hitpoints and are the hardest PCs to kill as a result. Any fighter does more damage with a few levels of rogue thrown in, and you don't have to take a rogue to be good at TWF (although the extra weapon with sneak attack dice is amazing).

Do you have any special house rules that make spellcasters so uber, because I have never seen this at all in any version of the game.

[SquelchHU]

Squelch, I'm beginning to think that we might just have groups with extraordinarily different play styles - my friends all tend to favor melee builds over casters, for the most part and we've never had an issue with high-level fights. The sword and board fighters tend to last longest because they have a high AC, high fortitude saves, and high hitpoints and are the hardest PCs to kill as a result. Any fighter does more damage with a few levels of rogue thrown in, and you don't have to take a rogue to be good at TWF (although the extra weapon with sneak attack dice is amazing).

Do you have any special house rules that make spellcasters so uber, because I have never seen this at all in any version of the game.

Compare enemy to hits to AC.

AC makes a difference up until level 5 (which is the levels you can't really invest in it anyways, given that you'll have normal, MW, or +1 gear at this time). Past that, enemy to hit outstrips it very very quickly.

Your DM is probably throwing around lots of artifact swords, opponents not nearly as intelligent as they should be, and in general is going very very easy on you.

And yes, TWF is only worthwhile if you are a Rogue.

Here are the many reasons dual wielding fails:

First of all, let's compare the base damage. Base damage will end up about the same, and str will end up the same if you compare THF to cumulative dual wielding. BUT!

You need three feats to do it. You need zero for a two handed weapon.

You need dex to do it. A rather high dex at that. That means gimping your str (= lower damage) or your con (= even lower survivability).

Even the base + str damage is only equal when you can attack with each weapon. Which means you are both even further forced into full attacks only, and that even when you get them you do not always get them. Each TWF feat adds one off hand attack, for a total of three. Except you have 4 attacks, + haste. So at best, you're only getting even that much 60% of the time.

You take a -2 to hit. Which means even if you ignore everything else so far, the THF guy does 4 more damage a swing (PA + 2) while needing three fewer feats, and not having to gimp out his str and con.

The THF guy has one weapon to keep up. The TWF guy has two. Since you can barely afford to keep a single weapon up to par, this means both weapons will suffer for it. More damage lost.

You can't PA with it, because PA penalizes, but does not reward light weapons. If you use two one handers instead you've either set a FOURTH feat on fire, or you're now behind by 8 damage instead of 4 JUST FROM THE TO HIT PENALTIES. This, alone is enough to ensure you'll never do relevant dps at all. Not the 8 damage part, the not being able to PA bit. No PA = no relevant DPS.

So you pay via various resources (feats, stats, gear) for the privilege of sucking. That is its only purpose. To make you fail at life.

The Rogue doesn't fall into this trap only because of sneak attack, which is weapon independent damage. Large amounts of weapon independent damage favor quantity of attacks. That, and they get a class feature that gives them Perfect Two Weapon Fighting at level 10, without meeting the prerequisites. And even then they're still only doing it because weapon independent damage is exactly that, so they can throw flasks (touch attack) and not care about the to hit penalty, while still being assured of hitting. There's other ways to touch attack of course (Wraithstrike, for example) but Rogues have the most straightforward path to it.

And you can see my house rules in the other thread. They boost non casters substantially, while ranging from doing little to nothing, to (far more often) weakening casters. After all, while enemies that run around with all saves 30+, Mettle, and Evasion are still, ultimately going to be killed by a caster, it will take more effort than what you'd get otherwise (much lower saves, and thus an easy and instant win).

[RictrasShard]

Casters do in fact have spells that win the encounter on the spot. Many spells, at every level. Most of which are in core.

Sorry, I proved this wrong a few months ago, when you made a similar claim.

[RictrasShard]

He's squelched me already since he can't respond.

Actually, the odds are he didn't. He claimed the same with me a few months ago, and yet still responded to my posts.

[Chai]

Squelch, I'm beginning to think that we might just have groups with extraordinarily different play styles - my friends all tend to favor melee builds over casters, for the most part and we've never had an issue with high-level fights. The sword and board fighters tend to last longest because they have a high AC, high fortitude saves, and high hitpoints and are the hardest PCs to kill as a result. Any fighter does more damage with a few levels of rogue thrown in, and you don't have to take a rogue to be good at TWF (although the extra weapon with sneak attack dice is amazing).

Do you have any special house rules that make spellcasters so uber, because I have never seen this at all in any version of the game.

When you sit down at a table full of absolutists who automatically think that x beats y in all cases, is the only time you will see that casters are always more uber. These are the people who memorize the same spell 5 times if they have 5 slots in that level, because its always an encounter ending spell, right?

When one of said absolutists who has this attitude sits down at one of our tables, and starts bantering this kind of stuff to people who clearly understand that DnD is a completely situational game, thats when the true fun begins.

"Hi, my wizard has 8 str, 8 dex, 16 con, 18 int, 10 wis, and 8 cha, theres my 28 point buy." I have seen alot of this.

This kind of stuff works in DDO and other video games due to the sheer level of metagaming. Not being able to metagame in PnP means the toon has alot of vulnerabilities that are not accounted for, which is the sacrifice they make for having 2 superstar stats. I dont have to make any effort as a DM whatsoever to attack their weak stats, as sooner or later they will encounter mobs in the campaign that will do this, either directly or indirectly.

[SquelchHU]

So anyways, the Fighter is this guy: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheLoad

Don't be That Guy.

[RictrasShard]

So anyways, the Fighter is this guy: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheLoad

Don't be That Guy.

Given up on arguing your position, have you? I don't blame you.

[Salsa]

:: chuckles::

No the DM was not being easy, just some players know how to use mulitple rogues, with blink and invis combined with great cleave to maximum affect in tight quarters.

Anyways.........

This never ends does it?


The point of the thread was to give the OP ideas. No one here can accurately predict what a party will do at any instance.

If you want to continue to argue against.. well..almost everyone else, then feel free!

I gave the OP a answer to their question. Since obviously the current method isn't working, they can either try it or not. Either way, I have given an option to the OP thusly, I am done with this thread! I wish everyone happy gaming!

[SquelchHU]

:: chuckles::

No the DM was not being easy, just some players know how to use mulitple rogues, with blink and invis combined with great cleave to maximum affect in tight quarters.

Anyways.........

This never ends does it?


The point of the thread was to give the OP ideas. No one here can accurately predict what a party will do at any instance.

If you want to continue to argue against.. well..almost everyone else, then feel free!

I gave the OP a answer to their question. Since obviously the current method isn't working, they can either try it or not. Either way, I have given an option to the OP thusly, I am done with this thread! I wish everyone happy gaming!

You almost had me until you pretended great cleave was useful to anyone, at any time ever.

Yup, DM going easy on you. Let me guess, he thought a Fireball caster, at any level other than 'much higher than yours' was a perfectly reasonable thing to use right?

[TheDjinnFor]

Why are we still posting again?

[Montrose]

Why are we still posting again?

At this point I think it's safe to say that your respective viewpoints are divergent enough from one another as to be irreconcilable.

If you have a DM who referees in such a way that melee are effective, and if that is enjoyable and agreeable to the players in your group, then you should continue on in that manner. Nobody is forcing you to play any other way or to continue engaging in this debate.

You are unlikely to change your viewpoint, and Squelch is incapable of changing his, so the options here are to spend the rest of your life using the internets 1's and 0's on this conversation or for one of you to move on.

[sainy_matthew]

Fail.

Casters do in fact have spells that win the encounter on the spot. Many spells, at every level. Most of which are in core.

Melees, meanwhile have no recourse but to hit the thing with the other thing, so yes they are just DPS... except that no one cares about HP damage, so instead of being respected, or even dominant like they are in DDO where only HP damage works they end up the guys who are really just along for the ride (and by ride I mean piling on).

Doesn't matter how 'interesting' he tries to be, his options are Auto Attack and Waste Turn. Choose one. And the latter has a hidden clause, that if you waste too many turns you will be no longer welcome in the party.

Unsuccessful Troll is Unsuccessful.Nope. Proved this theory wrong recently. Every group has that fighter: He's the guy who makes a DPS fighter & then complains that all he can do is hit things & then complains that the spell caster has some magical win spell he can always cast. So in our recent mid level campaign (level 7 start) i built a fighter & i let him build the spellcaster. He created a straight up and down DPS sorcerer & i created a Trick shot Archer (through use of feats, not through any PrC).

My Archer had just as many options in combat, but not quite the level of damage of a DPS fighter (which was fine because we had a Barbarian in the group to pick up the slack). My archer was built around the Robin Hood trick shot concept & once i added a special (but still official) composite long bow (with modifications that were also official) & a handful of impressive feats, some carefully placed skills & a dozen special arrows (also official) i had more options then the sorcerer & wasn't restricted by spells per day. I was ranged disarming enemies, sundering weapons from a distance (including the robin hood trick of shooting through bow strings) & pinning opponents to walls. Not to forget that i could also whack people with the bow (an it worked as a quaterstaff for means of melee damage... thank Pelor for the Elvencrafted bow). Heck i was even able to bypass damage reduction with a special enchantment & many different material arrows. I had the surgeons precision, to the Sorcerers overkill.

If you build a straight up DPS fighter thats what you end up with. Funny thing was, the guy playing the sorcerer was the first to die, because he thought that playing the sorcerer was easy (Mage armour & shield do not make you invulnerable). He then complained about a lack of a win-spell when he was continually thwated by spell resistance & saving throws. Just goes to show, its all in the way you build your character. No one character can do everything, not even a Factorum (no matter what the haters say)

-M

[SquelchHU]

Nope. Proved this theory wrong recently. Every group has that fighter: He's the guy who makes a DPS fighter & then complains that all he can do is hit things & then complains that the spell caster has some magical win spell he can always cast. So in our recent mid level campaign (level 7 start) i built a fighter & i let him build the spellcaster. He created a straight up and down DPS sorcerer & i created a Trick shot Archer (through use of feats, not through any PrC).

So basically, you took those garbage feats from Complete Warrior? And this is supposed to convince me of what, and how exactly? Non options are non existent options.

The difference between the DPS Fighter and the any other sort of Fighter is that the former does one thing, and the others do zero. But nice try.


My Archer had just as many options in combat, but not quite the level of damage of a DPS fighter (which was fine because we had a Barbarian in the group to pick up the slack). My archer was built around the Robin Hood trick shot concept & once i added a special (but still official) composite long bow (with modifications that were also official) & a handful of impressive feats, some carefully placed skills & a dozen special arrows (also official) i had more options then the sorcerer & wasn't restricted by spells per day. I was ranged disarming enemies, sundering weapons from a distance (including the robin hood trick of shooting through bow strings) & pinning opponents to walls. Not to forget that i could also whack people with the bow (an it worked as a quaterstaff for means of melee damage... thank Pelor for the Elvencrafted bow). Heck i was even able to bypass damage reduction with a special enchantment & many different material arrows. I had the surgeons precision, to the Sorcerers overkill.

So basically, you could waste your turn applying a trivial debuff to the lowest kind of mook (humanoid melee), or you could waste your turn destroying your own treasure, including and especially BOWS ON YOUR ARCHER, or just wasting your turn.

Sorry, weren't you trying to convince me you were accomplishing something useful? Because shooting yourself in the foot does not accomplish that goal.


If you build a straight up DPS fighter thats what you end up with. Funny thing was, the guy playing the sorcerer was the first to die, because he thought that playing the sorcerer was easy (Mage armour & shield do not make you invulnerable). He then complained about a lack of a win-spell when he was continually thwated by spell resistance & saving throws. Just goes to show, its all in the way you build your character. No one character can do everything, not even a Factorum (no matter what the haters say)

-M

So basically, the Sorcerer did it wrong (AC is not a valid defense), did it wrong some more (SR never bothers a competent caster, at all ever), and meanwhile you did everything wrong... yet somehow you're the winner here?

Sorry, try again with players that have a clue.

...Anyways, aren't you that guy who had a full party kill in MISERY'S PEAK? Granted, that's in DDO and not D&D, but to have everyone die there suggests a notable absence of any mental faculties that would also have a detrimental effect on your ability to play D&D. Which explains why you think making one of the most equipment dependent characters in the game, and then destroying your own loot is a good idea.

[SquelchHU]

At this point I think it's safe to say that your respective viewpoints are divergent enough from one another as to be irreconcilable.

If you have a DM who referees in such a way that melee are effective, and if that is enjoyable and agreeable to the players in your group, then you should continue on in that manner. Nobody is forcing you to play any other way or to continue engaging in this debate.

You are unlikely to change your viewpoint, and Squelch is incapable of changing his, so the options here are to spend the rest of your life using the internets 1's and 0's on this conversation or for one of you to move on.

He's still talking? I've stopped responding to him a while back, so one of us has already moved on... the other stubbornly refuses to do so.

As for the point itself, making melee effective is an uphill battle. Which has already been covered. Anyone who claims it happens by default is objectively wrong. Now, if someone who has some points wants to talk about it, that's different. I stopped reading anything by several posters because anything and everything they said could be dismissed as irrelevant, false, and indicative of some special headgear. (http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/ferouscranus.htm)

Thing is, the people who have enough sense to have some valid points about it also have enough to realize that holy ****, he's not kidding when he says enemy HP averages 56 at level 5 and 87 at level 7 and 137 at level 10 and so forth, and since only the last counts you really do need to do obscene amounts of HP damage just to matter at all.

[Aspenor]

DPS sorcerer

I stopped reading right here. Outperforming possibly the WORST POSSIBLE ARCANE CASTER IMAGINABLE is not something to really use as a point, since this guy obviously didn't have the first clue how to build a decent damage dealing (Mailman) sorcerer. Of course, even if he had built a good Mailman, a decent Conjurer or Transmuter outperforms him every day of the week.

The point here is that using a spell caster played by a complete idiot in an example is pointless.

[SquelchHU]

I stopped reading right here. Outperforming possibly the WORST POSSIBLE ARCANE CASTER IMAGINABLE is not something to really use as a point, since this guy obviously didn't have the first clue how to build a decent damage dealing (Mailman) sorcerer. Of course, even if he had built a good Mailman, a decent Conjurer or Transmuter outperforms him every day of the week.

The point here is that using a spell caster played by a complete idiot in an example is pointless.

I was so busy blasting him for insisting that melee actually had options beyond auto attacking for HP damage, and making fun of the Sorcerer for using exactly the wrong type of defenses that I completely overlooked that it was a 'DPS Sorcerer'.

Congrats, your archer can outperform a Commoner. Would you like a cookie? Perhaps you should get the Same Game Test made four times easier so you won't feel bad about yourself for failing it?

At least I see now why SR bothered him. It never bothers a competent caster, like ever... He was a DPS Sorcerer. Nuff said. (and I've seen the mailman build, it mostly uses SR: No blasting, and could easily fit in the stuff that makes SR: Yes stuff always land so I'm not talking about that)

However, even though the mailman can do relevant DPS, making a caster do HP damage is like inviting Micheal Jordan to play at a kid's basketball game - sure people will ooh and aah over the star, and fawn over him but he has better things to do than school some 9 year olds.

[Aspenor]

I just noticed that was a level 7 character.

First mistake he made: sorcerer. Wizards are better, but a sorcerer can be good if played properly.

Anyway, he was level 7. At level 7, a wizard ends every encounter on his first turn if he plays it properly, and so should a level 7 sorcerer.

[sainy_matthew]

So basically, you took those garbage feats from Complete Warrior? And this is supposed to convince me of what, and how exactly? Non options are non existent options.No i took the rubbish feats from Races of the Wild & they work pretty well. This isn't a hypothetical character, this is an actual character that was run through "Expedition to the Ruin of Greyhawk".


The difference between the DPS Fighter and the any other sort of Fighter is that the former does one thing, and the others do zero. But nice try.So you are basically demanding that the fighter only do DPS, then complain that the fighter only does DPS.


So basically, you could waste your turn applying a trivial debuff to the lowest kind of mook (humanoid melee), or you could waste your turn destroying your own treasure, including and especially BOWS ON YOUR ARCHER, or just wasting your turn.

Sorry, weren't you trying to convince me you were accomplishing something useful? Because shooting yourself in the foot does not accomplish that goal.I'll start by saying Humanoid Melee combatants aren't the lowest kind of mook: If you'd played "Red Hand of Doom" you would know thats blatantly not true. As for destroying your own treasure, how do you figure that? I can shoot through a bow string sure, that doesn't destroy the bow, it just makes it non operational until you get a new bow string, i can range disarm which also works on spell components & holy symbols (which can turn enemy spell casters into a non-issue). The ability to pin somebody to the wall may sound trivial, but it can be easily used to buy other characters breathing room while you work.

What you are talking about is the brick wall response. You are looking for something that every other force will collide with and then break up. My archer wasn't built in that paradigm, he was built for proportional response. Combats could take a little longer & i had to play him smart, but the other players and myself enjoyed the new paradigm.

DPS is not the only thing that the fighter has to offer. It will be the only thing to offer if all your feats are just about doing more damage, but there is other builds.


So basically, the Sorcerer did it wrong (AC is not a valid defense), did it wrong some more (SR never bothers a competent caster, at all ever), and meanwhile you did everything wrong... yet somehow you're the winner here?

Sorry, try again with players that have a clue.Yes, he did it wrong. That was the point i am making. The Sorcerer was a terrible build, the Fighter was a different build. People who play fighters have a tendency to get lazy: From level 1 they are potentially the most powerful class (for there level). Eventually this is not the case & they wonder how to fix it (usually its to late, being locked into their feats). The spellcaster on the other hand has had to develop a greater awareness of system (comes from sucking for the first 5 levels).


...Anyways, aren't you that guy who had a full party kill in MISERY'S PEAK? Granted, that's in DDO and not D&D, but to have everyone die there suggests a notable absence of any mental faculties that would also have a detrimental effect on your ability to play D&D. Which explains why you think making one of the most equipment dependent characters in the game, and then destroying your own loot is a good idea.Wow, an Ad Homenium attack on the Interwebs... I'm suprised. And you can't fly a plane, you must suck at brushing your teeth. Yeah that will show you not to disagree with my awesome leet views on teeth brushing.

Seriously dude, i don't mind discussing things rationally with you, but don't throw "irrational feeling" at me in way of proof. I'm telling you for a fact that when we played through "Expedition to the Ruins of Greyhawk" that that build worked (encounters usually took 4 or 5 more rounds then it would have with a DPS fighter, but it rarely bothered us). As for the character being equipment dependent: All characters are equipment dependent, its just that my tools of the trade was archery, not "hit-things-with-axe-ary," which takes slightly more (very cheap) equipment.

Just for complete disclosure the group was composed of: My trick shot archer, Talia Hart (cleric of the goddess of love), Ephemeral (acrobatic halfling rogue), Baltor (axe wielding barbarian of the Northen Wastes) & Tobias D'North (the rebuilt sorcerer, who did better with his second sorcerer build, but not as well as he wanted).

-M

[sainy_matthew]

Anyway, he was level 7. At level 7, a wizard ends every encounter on his first turn if he plays it properly, and so should a level 7 sorcerer.No he can't, thats straight up hyperbole.

[Aspenor]

No he can't, thats straight up hyperbole.

No, it isn't hyperbole.

Step 1: Wizard casts, wins encounter.

Steps 2-4: Guys with weapons feel good about themselves because they kill stuff the wizard already neutralized. To top it off, the wizard has the ability to actually engage in melee and perform better than the classes that were designed to do it.

[sainy_matthew]

No, it isn't hyperbole.

Step 1: Wizard casts, wins encounter.

Steps 2-4: Guys with weapons feel good about themselves because they kill stuff the wizard already neutralized.So if i told you to build a level 7 wizard & then gave you 4 encounters of EL7 straight out of official D&D products you could win every single encounter on the first round?

[Aspenor]

So if i told you to build a level 7 wizard & then gave you 4 encounters of EL7 straight out of official D&D products you could win every single encounter on the first round?

Yes.

[sainy_matthew]

Yes.Ok... I'll wait, post your build right here when you are ready.

[Ggcpres]

i know i may be a bit late and i'm not sure this is in the D&D rules but this should help with the OP issue AND keep you from going into jerk mode.

Put them in an army and split them for a time.

I am thinking of a senario that goes something like: " you have been hired to train and then lead local militia in a raid on an (orc, goblin, shauagin, etc) stronghold."

once the battle starts they each lead seperate units and thus are spread away from each other. you can pick the make up of the units to keep the PCs on their toes.

then at the end of the battle they team up to kill some super powerful leader type thing that is pwning your entire force on it's own. they would not be able to use the rope trick because if they do the entire militia will be killed and the evil back up from whogivesaflying castlefortkeep will over whelm them and the town.

once again, not sure if that is in the rules but it would work to challenge a level 4 party.

[SquelchHU]

No i took the rubbish feats from Races of the Wild & they work pretty well. This isn't a hypothetical character, this is an actual character that was run through "Expedition to the Ruin of Greyhawk".

Hahaha.


So you are basically demanding that the fighter only do DPS, then complain that the fighter only does DPS.

No, I am saying that the DPS Fighter does one thing. DPS. The non DPS Fighter does no things. One trick > no trick.


I'll start by saying Humanoid Melee combatants aren't the lowest kind of mook: If you'd played "Red Hand of Doom" you would know thats blatantly not true. As for destroying your own treasure, how do you figure that? I can shoot through a bow string sure, that doesn't destroy the bow, it just makes it non operational until you get a new bow string, i can range disarm which also works on spell components & holy symbols (which can turn enemy spell casters into a non-issue). The ability to pin somebody to the wall may sound trivial, but it can be easily used to buy other characters breathing room while you work.

I've played RHoD. It is very much true. Me and ONE other player, at level 5 starting steamrolled the entire thing very very easily, despite having half the recommended party size. There is not a single point at which we were even slowed down. Not even the dragons, who were suboptimally built, and suboptimally played by the module. For example if the black dragon WENT SWIMMING IN ITS SWAMP instead of flying around in the open while some goblin mook pewpewpewed from his back, that encounter would be significantly more dangerous (and they expect you to be on a boat... you should be flying instead of course, but if you were in a boat, you'll soon be in the water with an angry black dragon).

After the first dragon was blown away, all the other dragons were the 'hardmode' version. Still easily pwned. It's nice to have real characters.

Anyways. It is true for all of the following reasons:

Melee combatants are mooks.
Humanoids need massive amounts of gear, or spellcasting to be relevant.
Melee characters lack the latter.
NPC characters lack the former.
Therefore NPC melee characters lack any means of relevance.
They are mooks of the lowest order because melee monsters have better stats across the board, use natural attacks (max attack penalty -5, often much less) instead of weapon attacks (much higher penalties) and in addition to being stronger are also BIGGER (reach is king).

So while you can take say... a level 10 melee monster and throw it at a level 10 party, and it will still get owned the first time a caster gets a turn, it will at least eat your mook (fighter) if it gets a turn.

Do the same with a humanoid and it will never have a chance to threaten anyone, at all ever.

Hell, you could throw a fighter 20 at a level 10 party and be reasonably assured that they will defeat him very very easily.


What you are talking about is the brick wall response. You are looking for something that every other force will collide with and then break up. My archer wasn't built in that paradigm, he was built for proportional response. Combats could take a little longer & i had to play him smart, but the other players and myself enjoyed the new paradigm.

DPS is not the only thing that the fighter has to offer. It will be the only thing to offer if all your feats are just about doing more damage, but there is other builds.

The Waste Turn build is invalid. And 'making things take a little longer' is suicidal for you and your whole party. While you're screwing around destroying your own treasure and such instead of just KILLING THEM, they're annihilating you.


Yes, he did it wrong. That was the point i am making. The Sorcerer was a terrible build, the Fighter was a different build. People who play fighters have a tendency to get lazy: From level 1 they are potentially the most powerful class (for there level). Eventually this is not the case & they wonder how to fix it (usually its to late, being locked into their feats). The spellcaster on the other hand has had to develop a greater awareness of system (comes from sucking for the first 5 levels).

Fail, and fail.


Wow, an Ad Homenium attack on the Interwebs... I'm suprised. And you can't fly a plane, you must suck at brushing your teeth. Yeah that will show you not to disagree with my awesome leet views on teeth brushing.

Not dying in Korthos requires one simply be awake and sapient, particularly with a full party there (as opposed to say, soloing elite). You did die in Korthos, and clearly you were awake, so questioning your status as a human being, while insulting is very much on topic as such a deficiency would also hinder your ability to do anything else. Like make remotely competent characters in D&D.


Seriously dude, i don't mind discussing things rationally with you, but don't throw "irrational feeling" at me in way of proof. I'm telling you for a fact that when we played through "Expedition to the Ruins of Greyhawk" that that build worked (encounters usually took 4 or 5 more rounds then it would have with a DPS fighter, but it rarely bothered us). As for the character being equipment dependent: All characters are equipment dependent, its just that my tools of the trade was archery, not "hit-things-with-axe-ary," which takes slightly more (very cheap) equipment.

Archers are more equipment dependent than melee. I am not talking about arrows.

And... dude. Holy ****ing **** dude. FOUR TO FIVE ROUNDS LONGER? That's, literally TRIPLE the usual length. And you're still trying to pretend you're useful, when you make the WHOLE PARTY THREE TIMES SLOWER? That's almost as bad as some of the KA guy's arguments... Dude, don't be the KA of D&D. We don't need that ****.

The only reason you did not pull a Misery's Peak in EVERY SINGLE COMBAT was because your DM saw he was loaded with gimps and went very very easy on you, likely with cheated dice.


Just for complete disclosure the group was composed of: My trick shot archer, Talia Hart (cleric of the goddess of love), Ephemeral (acrobatic halfling rogue), Baltor (axe wielding barbarian of the Northen Wastes) & Tobias D'North (the rebuilt sorcerer, who did better with his second sorcerer build, but not as well as he wanted).

-M

Because names are totally useful right? Oh wait, they aren't.

Anyways, here's the cold hard facts. Casters have tools to win encounters on the spot at every single level. Even level 1. As such, a Cleric/Druid/Wizard/Wizard party is flat out BETTER than Cleric/Fighter/Rogue/Wizard even at level 1 because while the Fighter actually has a save or die at level 1 (it's called 'his polearm weapon or spiked chain') that hits one target at a time the others can hit multiple targets... and don't come with the opportunity cost of fading from relevance after a few levels, leaving you saddled with a mook.

And as for RHoD, it's easy as hell for real characters because you never do encounter any real opposition. Lot of humanoid melees at low levels like Warrior 2, TWFers sans any bonus damage at all, full spellcasters with LA templates... Druid + Wizard = duo win.

It is hard for gimped characters, not because of the enemies themselves, but because of gear. The campaign lasts 5-6 levels. And while the enemy does have a LOT of items, many of these items are vendor trash like +1 shortswords, ring of protection +1... in other words, you need to convert it to a usable means (sell it) in order to get a useful item (better weapon, ring, whatever). And your ability to do that is limited because they don't have many gear upgrade opportunities in the area, despite the campaign covering a few thousand, or a few tens of thousands of square miles.

So what happens is you're stuck using junk gear while gold or vendor trash burns a hole in your pocket because you can't suit up to handle the task at hand... and therefore you fail.

Crafting doesn't work either, because of the time limit. And while 6 weeks is PLENTY of time for two casters to blaze through everything, it is not enough time to keep your gear level appropriate across 5-6 levels unless YOU DON'T HAVE MANY GEAR NEEDS.

Which, interestingly enough is the case here. Prime stat item, con item, and that's everything you have to have. Everything else is nice, or can come from spells or something.

Also, Teleport at level 9.

And to the other guy: Armies are irrelevant in D&D. Weighing the party down with mooks is not a solution.

[Aspenor]

Ok... I'll wait, post your build right here when you are ready.

If I am going to bother, you're going to have to accept that once enemies can no longer pose any threat, the encounter is over.

Furthermore, I refuse to create a character without knowledge of my surroundings. Nobody goes adventuring without knowing where they are going. I say this because I have a strong suspicion that if I make a character first you will intentionally alter the encounters to thwart my spell selection. Wizards select spells based on what they know about their surroundings.

[sainy_matthew]

If I am going to bother, you're going to have to accept that once enemies can no longer pose any threat, the encounter is over.

Furthermore, I refuse to create a character without knowledge of my surroundings. Nobody goes adventuring without knowing where they are going.Build your 7th level wizard & i'll give you an oppurtunity to prove your hypothesis. I wouldn't expect you to go into battle without some advanced knowledge. You'll get the same knowledge that anyone in the adventure would do. If you can take out a complete encounter (or nuetrilize them then you succed). To be scientific i'll pull only from official sources, so as not to have designers bias. Best of four unrelated encounters (just to make sure its not a lucky roll)

I'll wait until you post your build.

[SquelchHU]

Just to make this interesting I'll make the encounters. Because I might select something remotely relevant, and not something laughable like a Fighter 7 who does nothing but waste actions.

And by DMG rules, out of 4 encounters you can expect 2 at level (50%), 0.4 below level (10%), 0.8 (20%) as puzzle monsters of some kind (which, naturally reward adaptable sorts, aka casters while punishing auto attack only types aka non casters), 0.6 (15%) as 1-4 level higher encounters, and 0.2 (5%) as 5+ level higher encounters.

So along those lines, 2 level 7 encounters, a puzzle encounter around level 7, and a level 9 encounter.

Aspenor has not built his character yet. I have not designed the encounters yet.

Though I can already tell you this is an exercise in futility. Wizard goes first, wizard wins. That's how the game works. And the Wizard can reliably ensure he goes first, thereby reliably ensuring he wins. Clerics and Druids do the same by the way. At this point, the role of the non caster is much like that of an animal companion, skeletal minion, or summoned monster. Except that all of those things have a lower opportunity cost.

[Aspenor]

Or you could both make encounters. ;)

[sainy_matthew]

Just to make this interesting I'll make the encounters. Because I might select something remotely relevant, and not something laughable like a Fighter 7 who does nothing but waste actions.No you won't. Squelch, just because you say something doesn't mean its true. You are not involved at all Squelch. Now if you want to sit and watch, you can, but this has nothing to do with you.

I will not be designing the encounters, i will be culling them from official D&D 3.5 modules. I am allowing someone to prove a hypothesis & as somebody with a scientific mind i'll stand by the results, what every they may be. Now stop trying to turn this into being about you Squelch, take a seat and be a spectator for a change.

-M

[SquelchHU]

No you won't. Squelch, just because you say something doesn't mean its true. You are not involved at all Squelch. Now if you want to sit and watch, you can, but this has nothing to do with you.

I will not be designing the encounters, i will be culling them from official D&D 3.5 modules. I am allowing someone to prove a hypothesis & as somebody with a scientific mind i'll stand by the results, what every they may be. Now stop trying to turn this into being about you Squelch, take a seat and be a spectator for a change.

-M

Lols. Sure it doesn't.

Well, you have fun pulling out your little low level warriors and such.

Anyone want some snacks?

Because this is going to be like that time someone betted that a stock, CR 20 dragon was over the top... so over the top he allowed people to do whatever they wanted to defeat it as long as they were CR 20, and a relatively standard party (Fighter/Rogue/Cleric/Wizard). The winner turned into a CR 40 creature and ate the dragon. :D

[Aspenor]

I'll have some stuff ready soon. The gal doesn't like when I'm preoccupied with D&D stuff while she's awake, so I have to do it in my free time.

[diamabel]

Let's say a DM does want to "handle the game changing fundamentally every few levels". What does he do? How does he offer appropriate challenge to a party that can auto-avoid any enemy it doesn't want to fight, can auto-kill any it does (because it has casters in it), views any foils to these plans as blatant contrivances which justifiably should not be put up with for long, and whose characters gain levels at an average rate of almost one per game day?

I don't expect a complete answer. This is a huge question. Either way, this doesn't seem solvable without either using another RPG entirely or playing what is essentially a different RPG every gaming session.


First. There is a way to handle it according to the rules (without changing the rules itself). Change monster stats, saves or add or remove abilites. By this you don't change the core mechanics. This will adjust the chances of success for certain abilities (e.g. trip) or spells. You want a certain ability to be only successful 25% of the time? Do you want a certain spell to fail 25% of the time?


Second. Accessibility for certain spells or equipment. The campaign world / campaign setting defines what is available and what not. You like to explore a bronze age world? The political environment might mainly consist of city states (see ancient mesopotamia). Certain goods and resources might not be available. A wizard's spellbook might consist of several heavy papyrus scrolls. There may be some organized faiths (polytheistic societies) but shamanism is broadly accepted.
Maybe you want to explore a renaissance world where people are afraid of magic and have occasional with hunts.
There are many options and possible variations. A history of fantasy book might give more inspirations.
The decision for a campaign world can only be made at the start and is irreversible (at least for the time of the campaign).
There might be further restrictions for magic depending on NPC factions (e.g. Wizard guild, churches of certain faiths, political policies by rulers).
Just because some item or spell is described in the rule books, it shouldn't be easily handed out. Spells could be copied from other wizards (for a price), would have to be researched or stolen from another wizard.


Third. Types of encounters. You can plan and design most encounters that are suited for small squad tactics. In such environments magic grants a significant bonus (if available). You can use anti-magic zones, certain enemies which are invulnerable to magic (nishruu or golems that are immune to everything that's magic) or have mixed enemy groups. There are more ways to nullify certain powers. And that's without changing the core rules.
But maybe you want to give your players some diversity. How about a large scale battle? Your party might not be the commander in field, but would have to adhere to certain orders (and it would have to fit in with the evolution of the campaign). Your party could use magic but would be very careful not to kill your own allies by friendly fire. Dunno how you would simulate this in a PnP round (out of practicability you'd have to simplify the process of dice rolling for all participating NPCs).
Or take the example of a hostage. The captor and the hostage are cornered and the captor threatens the hostage with a knife/sword. What would make the situation much more worse is that the captor would kill the hostage as soon as he feels threatened by the party or if he assumes the party's spellcasters are trying some trick. Wht would the party do? Maybe the relatives would blame the party for any bad outcome of this (some more plot twist and potential future enemies). A DM can create lot more loose-loose situations to keep too powerful and confident partys at bay (of course this shouldn't be abused to frustrate the players).
Well, you can get some more inspirations by reading some books or watching movies.


Fourth. The DnD rules have a significant design flaw (especially with 3rd and 3.5 editions). Well, at least from my standpoint. But maybe it's working as intended. It's positive that the rules were overhauled and trimmed (saving throws and skills were consolidated, as well as ability scores). But HP, BAB, saves are proportional to level.
You will have a disparity between BAB and AC at some point (to name one issue). But you had this problem even in previous editions. What can you do? There is a soft cap to these traits, depending on the campaign setting (and thus due to the available equipment) which doesn't solve all problems, though.
You will even have a huge disparity between magic-users and non-magic-users due to ever increasing caster levels.
One solution would be to give the non-magic-users some nice equipment to keep them at an equal power level (like Mr Squelched introduced). The drawback of this approach is that you will have to give out some powerful equipment not once but several times (depending on how high level the campaign gets).
Another drawback is that not only the PCs will rise in power but also the NPCs. To maintain an adequate challenge you will have to give out some goodies to monsters too (not only your PCs) to keep them competitive.
Dunno how many of you have played WoW. But after release the cap was level 60 and players could get their HPs to
somewhere between 2'000 and 5'000. Now with a level cap of 80 the HPs are somewhere in between 20'000 and 50'000. WoW is a computer game, but this example should hint at the issues tied to stat inflation. With the
stat inflation you will have to spend more time to scale the NPCs and difficulty level for your party. A careless DM would kill all challenge if not keeping the numbers in mind. It even get's worse if certain builds and playstyle can't compete any longer.
A better approach in my opinion would be a cap, like in 2nd edition. Hitpoint advancement would be slowed down beyond a given point. In addition BAB, caster level and saves progression could be stopped beyond a point. Casters would still get additional spell slots, but the spell effects (power) wouldn't skyrocket.
The ability increase every four levels could stay as is (age will get its tribute fast enough).
This is a major change to the game rules and game mechanics (players who look for progressing their PC's
power in terms of game mechanics and power players may be turned off).

[SquelchHU]

First. There is a way to handle it according to the rules (without changing the rules itself). Change monster stats, saves or add or remove abilites. By this you don't change the core mechanics. This will adjust the chances of success for certain abilities (e.g. trip) or spells. You want a certain ability to be only successful 25% of the time? Do you want a certain spell to fail 25% of the time?

So you just want to arbitrarily change things? And you expect this to work out for you?


Second. Accessibility for certain spells or equipment. The campaign world / campaign setting defines what is available and what not. You like to explore a bronze age world? The political environment might mainly consist of city states (see ancient mesopotamia). Certain goods and resources might not be available. A wizard's spellbook might consist of several heavy papyrus scrolls. There may be some organized faiths (polytheistic societies) but shamanism is broadly accepted.
Maybe you want to explore a renaissance world where people are afraid of magic and have occasional with hunts.
There are many options and possible variations. A history of fantasy book might give more inspirations.
The decision for a campaign world can only be made at the start and is irreversible (at least for the time of the campaign).
There might be further restrictions for magic depending on NPC factions (e.g. Wizard guild, churches of certain faiths, political policies by rulers).
Just because some item or spell is described in the rule books, it shouldn't be easily handed out. Spells could be copied from other wizards (for a price), would have to be researched or stolen from another wizard.

So basically Fighters Do Not Get Nice Things if you pick the wrong kind of campaign?


Third. Types of encounters. You can plan and design most encounters that are suited for small squad tactics. In such environments magic grants a significant bonus (if available). You can use anti-magic zones, certain enemies which are invulnerable to magic (nishruu or golems that are immune to everything that's magic) or have mixed enemy groups. There are more ways to nullify certain powers. And that's without changing the core rules.
But maybe you want to give your players some diversity. How about a large scale battle? Your party might not be the commander in field, but would have to adhere to certain orders (and it would have to fit in with the evolution of the campaign). Your party could use magic but would be very careful not to kill your own allies by friendly fire. Dunno how you would simulate this in a PnP round (out of practicability you'd have to simplify the process of dice rolling for all participating NPCs).

Armies are irrelevant in D&D. Also, golems are very WEAK AGAINST MAGIC. Lastly, anti magic field is a joke spell. Let me know if you want clarity on any of those points.


Or take the example of a hostage. The captor and the hostage are cornered and the captor threatens the hostage with a knife/sword. What would make the situation much more worse is that the captor would kill the hostage as soon as he feels threatened by the party or if he assumes the party's spellcasters are trying some trick. Wht would the party do? Maybe the relatives would blame the party for any bad outcome of this (some more plot twist and potential future enemies). A DM can create lot more loose-loose situations to keep too powerful and confident partys at bay (of course this shouldn't be abused to frustrate the players).
Well, you can get some more inspirations by reading some books or watching movies.

First of all, no one in D&D really has the ability to protect or save anyone in that situation. Second, the only way you could even try is first strike, act decisively. In other words, standard high init caster throws a win spell. And, as many of said spells are non lethal, even if they hit the hostage nothing bad happens to them. Alternately the bard tries to talk him down. Whatever. Point is, only some people can participate in that adventure.


Fourth. The DnD rules have a significant design flaw (especially with 3rd and 3.5 editions). Well, at least from my standpoint. But maybe it's working as intended. It's positive that the rules were overhauled and trimmed (saving throws and skills were consolidated, as well as ability scores). But HP, BAB, saves are proportional to level.
You will have a disparity between BAB and AC at some point (to name one issue). But you had this problem even in previous editions. What can you do? There is a soft cap to these traits, depending on the campaign setting (and thus due to the available equipment) which doesn't solve all problems, though.

No, actually to hit did not outstrip AC in earlier editions, so physical defense was actually relevant.

It occurs in 3rd edition because of poorly thought out legacy content, aka armor only goes to +5 because it did in earlier editions, except that while before it would give you around AC -12 (rather good protection) after it would give you more like AC 40 something (trash past level 10, except that you won't get it until 20... long after it ceased to matter).


You will even have a huge disparity between magic-users and non-magic-users due to ever increasing caster levels.
One solution would be to give the non-magic-users some nice equipment to keep them at an equal power level (like Mr Squelched introduced). The drawback of this approach is that you will have to give out some powerful equipment not once but several times (depending on how high level the campaign gets).

Get my name right. And, how is this a drawback? People adventure to kill things and take their stuff, so having worthwhile stuff to take is a good thing, whereas having nothing but a slightly more portable form of gold (vendor trash) is not.


Another drawback is that not only the PCs will rise in power but also the NPCs. To maintain an adequate challenge you will have to give out some goodies to monsters too (not only your PCs) to keep them competitive.

NPC humanoids will never be relevant unless they are casters, so don't even try. And if they are NPC casters, or monsters they can do fine with the standard wealth alloted to them. Of course if you are taking my advice and raising the amount of loot, that loot has to come from somewhere and 'the cold dead hands of the guy using it against you' is as good a source as any. So that does make encounters a little harder, but that's still made up for by the fact that non casters can answer that difficulty instead of having no answer to it.


Dunno how many of you have played WoW. But after release the cap was level 60 and players could get their HPs to
somewhere between 2'000 and 5'000. Now with a level cap of 80 the HPs are somewhere in between 20'000 and 50'000. WoW is a computer game, but this example should hint at the issues tied to stat inflation. With the
stat inflation you will have to spend more time to scale the NPCs and difficulty level for your party. A careless DM would kill all challenge if not keeping the numbers in mind. It even get's worse if certain builds and playstyle can't compete any longer.

WoW is an MMO. The numbers ARE the game, so they have to do that to maintain progression, as well as their strict level standards. There is no comparison, and no relevance to your example.


A better approach in my opinion would be a cap, like in 2nd edition. Hitpoint advancement would be slowed down beyond a given point. In addition BAB, caster level and saves progression could be stopped beyond a point. Casters would still get additional spell slots, but the spell effects (power) wouldn't skyrocket.
The ability increase every four levels could stay as is (age will get its tribute fast enough).
This is a major change to the game rules and game mechanics (players who look for progressing their PC's
power in terms of game mechanics and power players may be turned off).

So your solution to those who don't get enough HP is to give them... fewer HP? Right... and nerfing other stats too? Um no. This makes no sense, it has no relevance, and it will accomplish nothing except exasperating the problem.

[Aspenor]

So, anybody got a price on a large-sized humanoid granite statue? :D Though, I probably don't really need it.

[Captain_Wizbang]

After reading a lot of the replies, and really thinking about an appropriate answer, I have my post.

1) what version do you play?

If you answer 3.5 read no further, I will never play that nerfed game set, and 4.0 is well, a childs game.


2) NOW, lets look at your question about a DMs' role and how he/she conducts the campaign.

Are you using published adventures aka modules?
Do you have maps for the outdoor campaign?

A good DM will have at least 3 of their own campaign settings ready.
A good DM will know how to alter the modules.
A good DM will manipulate the core rules to provide their players the most entertaining/ challenging content possible!

Lets look at "Against the Giants" 1975 & 1981 revised , 1999 25th anniversary revision;
It starts at lvl 1 - 4, and has 3 books, and with the subsequent 2 other revisions can get to level 10.

Now, who's to say that the published content doesnt have a tie in with a forgotten realms module? Or, that you find an entrance in the wilderness area that leads you to "The House of Harpies" lvl 6 mini campaign by Owen Stephens that can be run in one night?

Taking modules and modifying them with other modules & bigger HD monsters can be very easy & rewarding.

BUT;;; it is the creativity of the DM that makes or breaks a campaign!

The one thing I will give ample warning against is, trying to mix different rule set versions together to achieve your goal.

If you have anything you need help with, from any published module, PM me, I have too many to list here, ( I did 2 years ago though)

Or if you want me to look at the custom campaign you are running let me know as well.

I can give you maps, monster generators & a ton of other stuff.

I know its not a clear cut answer, but PnP is not a clear cut game! ? :cool:

[Montrose]

So, anybody got a price on a large-sized humanoid granite statue? :D Though, I probably don't really need it.

The interwebs tell me that iron is approx $2 / pound and granite is roughly double that $3.80 per pound. Round up to $4 let's us just double the cost of iron, so it would be 2sp per pound just for the raw materials.

From there the actual cost depends on quality and total weight.

Edit: The real question is what one does with a large granite statue :)

Stone Golem? Nahh, too obvious.
Stone to Flesh? Nahh, just creates a corpse. Those are easy enough to find anyway
Animate Object? Possibly, and still have 3 levels left over. Always useful to have a pair of big stone hands around to help, I suppose...

[Corebreach]

So you just want to arbitrarily change things? And you expect this to work out for you?
If I'm up front with the players and they're okay with it, yes.

I have no hope of running a game for anyone who expects everything that ever happens to his character to be 100% based on verbatim rulebook excerpts.


So basically Fighters Do Not Get Nice Things if you pick the wrong kind of campaign?
So I won't pick the wrong kind.


Armies are irrelevant in D&D. Also, golems are very WEAK AGAINST MAGIC. Lastly, anti magic field is a joke spell.
Golems were an example. And he did not mean the Antimagic Field spell.

[Corebreach]

After reading a lot of the replies, and really thinking about an appropriate answer, I have my post.

1) what version do you play?

If you answer 3.5 read no further, I will never play that nerfed game set, and 4.0 is well, a childs game.
Thanks anyway.

[Corebreach]

This is a major change to the game rules and game mechanics (players who look for progressing their PC's power in terms of game mechanics and power players may be turned off).
It's only the power players I'm worried about. They're the only ones who will enter the game with the attitude that I'm most concerned with, namely that they've solved the game, that they are in full predictive control of everything, and that there are only two possible types of encounters:

a) Ones they will trounce right over with trivial ease (and which they'd better receive full Official WotC-defined XP and loot rewards for, dammit!), and
b) Ones in which I pulled some lame DM shenanigans and ruined the plans they had every right to expect would work flawlessly. ("Seriously, dude. You keep changing the rules out from under us and you'll find yourself out three players.")

[sainy_matthew]

Also, golems are very WEAK AGAINST MAGIC. Um... Golems have construct traits. That makes them completely immune to all mind-altering effects, death effects & the entire school of necromancy. Add into that the fact that Golems get magic immunity to all but the smallest sub set based on element (which they are still immune to, it just slows them down or speeds them back up) & you've got something that is SUPER STRONG against magic. Are you sure you're talking about the same game as the rest of us. We are talking about D&D 3.5. You may want to check your monsters manual again. I'm starting to see why you think fighters are **** and casters have a win spell (you've been playing the game wrong all these years).

-M

[Aspenor]

Um... Golems have construct traits. That makes them completely immune to all mind-altering effects, death effects & the entire school of necromancy. Add into that the fact that Golems get magic immunity to all but the smallest sub set based on element (which they are still immune to, it just slows them down or speeds them back up) & you've got something that is SUPER STRONG against magic. Are you sure you're talking about the same game as the rest of us. We are talking about D&D 3.5. You may want to check your monsters manual again. I'm starting to see why you think fighters are **** and casters have a win spell (you've been playing the game wrong all these years).

-M

What he means is golems have **** saves, and a smart caster has a few SR: No spells around all the time (or he has a LOT of them, more likely). Golems are not remotely immune to SR: No spells.

[Aspenor]

Bleh, **** it, just to keep it simple I won't even omg*** optimize. I considered making a build that, for all purposes, essentially defeated all 8 encounters (both Sain's and Squelch's) even before initiative for the first encounter was rolled. This involved using Improved Familiar to have a Mirror Mephit familiar, having my familiar use its Simulacrum SLA to create a simulacrum of an efreet, using the simulacrum efreet's wish spell like ability to give me three Candles of Invocation, and just start an infinite wish loop. I suppose I technically could accomplish this without the familiar and at level 1, but like I said....well...never mind.

7 Focused Specialist (Complete Mage) Transmuter
Banned Schools: Evocation, Enchantment, Illusion
Race: Elf (Native Outsider, see below)
Familiar: Hummingbird (Dragon Magazine 323) +4 Initiative, doubled by Elven Wizard 3 Racial Substitution Level (Races of the Wild)
32 point buy - can change if necessary

As Elf - Immunity to sleep, +2 to saves vs. enchantments, low light vision, +2 to listen, search and spot
As Outsider (Otherworldly) - Native Outsider, Immunity to spells that affect humanoids, Darkvision to 60 feet, +2 to Diplomacy Checks, Proficiency with all Martial Weapons

Ability Scores:
STR - 10
DEX - 14 (12+2 Gloves)
CON -16 (14 +2 Necklace)
INT - 22 (19 +1 Upgrade +2 Hat)
WIS - 10
CHA - 9

Feats:
Otherwordly (Player's Guide to Faerun) - grants Native Outsider type
Improved Initiative (PHB)
Spontaneous Divination (Complete Champion)
Extend Spell (PHB)

Skills:
Spellcraft - 16
Spot - 6 + 2 (Familiar Alertness) +2 (Elf) = 10
Knowledge (Arcana) - 13
Knowledge (The Planes) - 13
Concentration - 13

Initiative: 1 (Dex) + 4 (Feat) + 8 (Familiar) = 13 + 5 (Nerveskitter) = 18

Saves:
Fort - 2 + 3 + 2 = 7
Ref - 2 + 2 + 2 = 6
Will - 5 + 0 +2 = 7

Gear:
+2 Intelligence Hat (4000 gp)
+2 Constitution Necklace (4000 gp)
3000 pounds of granite (600 gp) - might not even need, but whatever
Cloak of Resistance +2 (4000 gp)
Spell Component Pouch (5 gp)
Wizard's Spellbook (15 gp)
Mirror (Small Steel) (10 gp)
Bedroll (1 sp)
Peasant's Outfit (1 sp)
20 potions of Cure Light Wounds
4 Potions of Lesser Restoration
50 ft. of Silk Rope, 10 gp
Scroll of Knock, scribed to spell book, 250 gp
Scroll of Bull's Strength, scribed to spell book, 250 gp
Scroll of Dispel Magic, scribed 475 gp
Scroll of Shrink Item, scribed 475 gp
Scroll of Stone Shape, scribed 800 gp
1424 gold pieces in gems, 8 silver pieces

Spellbook
Cantrips:
All

Level 1:
Mage Armor
Nerveskitter (SpC)
Animate Rope
Grease
Identify
Ray of Enfeeblement
Mount

Level 2:
Alter Self
Rope Trick
Web
Glitterdust
Knock
Bull's Strength

Level 3:
Fly
Slow
Magic Circle Against Evil
Greater Magic Weapon
Dispel Magic
Shrink Item

Level 4:
Polymorph
Stone Shape
Evard's Black Tentacles

Spells per Day:
0: 3 + 3 Transmutations
1: 5 + 3 Transmutations
2: 4 + 3 Transmutations
3: 2 + 3 Transmutations
4: 1 + 3 Transmutations

Upon reaching level 7, if it's even required (my sources seem to indicate it is not) this wizard buys 3000 pounds of granite and casts stone shape on it. He shapes the granite into the form of a dwarven warrior with a greataxe. He then casts Shrink Item on the statue and puts the now statuette into his pack, on top. While adventuring, he repeats casting Shrink Item as needed every week.

One question I have is how Hit Points will be calculated for this, the way that I calculate them I will have 40 hit points.

[SquelchHU]

If I'm up front with the players and they're okay with it, yes.

I have no hope of running a game for anyone who expects everything that ever happens to his character to be 100% based on verbatim rulebook excerpts.

Arbitrarily changing rules is the way of 4th edition. And look how that turned out. And then of course if you get it wrong...

I've seen DMs who had no clue how to balance so they'd just make random junk happen. Every encounter results in some odd coincidence or another winning the fight.


So I won't pick the wrong kind.

Which is none of the things mentioned.


Golems were an example. And he did not mean the Antimagic Field spell.

Yes, of something that was, but actually isn't anti magic.


It's only the power players I'm worried about. They're the only ones who will enter the game with the attitude that I'm most concerned with, namely that they've solved the game, that they are in full predictive control of everything, and that there are only two possible types of encounters:

a) Ones they will trounce right over with trivial ease (and which they'd better receive full Official WotC-defined XP and loot rewards for, dammit!), and
b) Ones in which I pulled some lame DM shenanigans and ruined the plans they had every right to expect would work flawlessly. ("Seriously, dude. You keep changing the rules out from under us and you'll find yourself out three players.")

You are aware that this is how the game is actually intended to work right? And I don't simply mean from the perspective of a powergamer, I mean that since the default encounter is something theoretically equal to one of you, except that you outnumber it four to one you are in fact expected to win with trivial ease, and indeed that is why you can be expected to handle four such encounters a day while maintaining campaign continuity by say... not dying every other fight.

So where does the challenge come from?

10% = encounters lower than level.
50% = encounters at level.
20% = puzzle monsters (in figuring out what works).
15% = encounters 1-4 levels higher.
5% = encounters 5 or more levels higher.

Or, 40% of the encounters. Which does in fact mean you can DM without BS, and without every encounter being a cakewalk. By RAW.


Um... Golems have construct traits. That makes them completely immune to all mind-altering effects, death effects & the entire school of necromancy. Add into that the fact that Golems get magic immunity to all but the smallest sub set based on element (which they are still immune to, it just slows them down or speeds them back up) & you've got something that is SUPER STRONG against magic. Are you sure you're talking about the same game as the rest of us. We are talking about D&D 3.5. You may want to check your monsters manual again. I'm starting to see why you think fighters are **** and casters have a win spell (you've been playing the game wrong all these years).

-M

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Golem magic immunity is like 'protection from arrows'. It has this grand and evocative name that makes you think it will actually help you. And then you read it and realize what a waste of time it is.


A clay golem is immune to any spell or spell-like ability that allows spell resistance. In addition, certain spells and effects function differently against the creature, as noted below.


A flesh golem is immune to any spell or spell-like ability that allows spell resistance. In addition, certain spells and effects function differently against the creature, as noted below.


An iron golem is immune to any spell or spell-like ability that allows spell resistance. In addition, certain spells and effects function differently against the creature, as noted below.


A stone golem is immune to any spell or spell-like ability that allows spell resistance. In addition, certain spells and effects function differently against the creature, as noted below.

Seeing a pattern yet?

What this means is that spells and spell like abilities that do NOT allow spell resistance work as they normally would, and so do supernatural abilities of any kind (which is usually an irrelevant point, but there are ways for PCs to get Supernatural abilities).

So just what does 'work as they normally would' mean?

Level 7 Flesh Golem: Saves: Fort +3, Ref +2, Will +3
Level 10 Clay Golem: Saves: Fort +3, Ref +2, Will +3
Level 11 Stone Golem: Saves: Fort +4, Ref +3, Will +4
Level 13 Iron Golem: Saves: Fort +6, Ref +5, Will +6
Level 16 Greater Stone Golem: Saves: Fort +14, Ref +12, Will +14

Pretty **** well. In fact, practically assured of success.

So, what type of spells can you cast that are SR: No? Every type except direct save or dies (which constructs are immune to anyways) and if core only, direct damage (which is a waste of actions anyways).

In other words, all the good spells work and work very well. Hell, you can pwn a golem of any level with a freakin' SILENT IMAGE SPELL.

If you don't think fighters are fail and casters have a win spell, you've been playing the game wrong all these years.

[Montrose]

<snipped to save the 1's and 0's.

Nice.

Tentacles gives you an instant win on one of the four encounters, so that leaves three to deal with.

Polymorph is a broken spell and is a transmutation, so you can use it for the remaining three encounters. Combine Polymorph with the buffs you've taken and you're at a significant advantage even if you decide to just go melee for no good reason.

Based upon taking exactly 3000lbs of material, I'm assuming you are going the golem route with the statue. I'm kind of "meh" on that, but I suppose after you apply buffs you can fly around and laugh while your golem does the dirty work.

[Aspenor]

Nice.

Tentacles gives you an instant win on one of the four encounters, so that leaves three to deal with.

Polymorph is a broken spell and is a transmutation, so you can use it for the remaining three encounters. Combine Polymorph with the buffs you've taken and you're at a significant advantage even if you decide to just go melee for no good reason.

Based upon taking exactly 3000lbs of material, I'm assuming you are going the golem route with the statue. I'm kind of "meh" on that, but I suppose after you apply buffs you can fly around and laugh while your golem does the dirty work.
close, but better. PM incoming.

[Montrose]

Ok, so now that the challenges are over (and, given that the build has the "I win" spell of Polymorph, they are indeed over) can we finally agree that caster > non-caster?

[Aspenor]

Spells for a typical adventuring day:

0
Detect Magic x 3
Mage Hand
Mending
Open/Close

1
Nerveskitter x 4
Animate Rope
Grease
Ray of Enfeeblement

2
Mage Armor (Extended)
Knock
Bull's Strength
Web
Glitterdust
Alter Self x 2

3
Fly
Rope Trick (extended)
Alter Self (Extended)
Greater Magic Weapon
Dispel Magic

4
Polymorph x 3
Evard's Black Tentacles

[Aspenor]

I might as well point out that, depending on the proximity of the encounters this character could probably steamroll through many more than 4 at-level encounters, all by himself, with no support. I think it could go as far as 16 encounters under the right circumstances.

[TheDjinnFor]

Spells for a typical adventuring day:

Okay. Let's see...

Challenge: Track down a level 6 ally who has been charmed by what you suspect is a vampire and non-lethally subdue him before he can complete the vampires nefarious plans (recovering a divine artifact from a hidden holy shrine), then locate and slay the vampire. You must also save generic town A and its small group (3) of level one battle-ready Commoner militia from annihilation by a mass (roughly 16) of CR 1/2 Human Commoner zombies that the vampire has sent forth. You have ~2 hours before the party member completes his objective and ~30 minutes before the zombies begin their assault.

You don't know where the vampire is nor do you know the exact location of the holy shrine, although you do know it is due North. You do not know how much of a head start your ally has over you in reaching his destination. You know where the town is and can reach it moving your regular overland speed in ~30 minutes.

That's a puzzle encounter (locating the vampire and the ally), an at-level encounter (dealing with the zombies), another at-level encounter (dealing with a level - 1 friend non-lethally), and possibly a 'challenging' encounter (fighting the mysterious vampire).

Yeah I know it was best of 4 unrelated encounters and you wanted knowledge of what you'd be facing, but looking at what your 'typical adventuring day' selection and your spellbook as a whole, I don't see how you could... besides, you're also using non-core stuff, which I don't really know much about, so I'll call it square. You should have no problem beating all that of course, especially a ton of CR 1/2 trash that pretty much just exists to waste your time. Of course, you can choose to take this on or not, since I don't really have any part in this debate between you and sainy.

Also, beat it 4 times in a row with the spells you have, since you said you could do 16 encounters. Or just 3 times, if you'd like, since you said require special circumstances.

[SquelchHU]

So I temporarily took Djinn off ignore.


That's a puzzle encounter (locating the vampire and the ally), an at-level encounter (dealing with the zombies), another at-level encounter (dealing with a level - 1 friend non-lethally), and possibly a 'challenging' encounter (fighting the mysterious vampire). Just as Squelch asked.

No, that is not what I said.

I said puzzle monster.

An example of a puzzle monster is an incorporeal undead (immune to all non magical weapons, 50% chance to avoid magical weapons and most spells).

Another example is a high level caster. Any high level caster. Because figuring out what will and will not work is a puzzle.

Now this was actually a reasonable misunderstanding, so no fail or any of that.

But anyways, that's no problem for him at all with his setup. He'd have most of his resources left, and I would be very surprised if he ever lost a single HP.

16 might or might not be annoying depending on buff timers.

[TheDjinnFor]

I said puzzle monster.

That is what you said, so perhaps I'll remove 'as Squelch asked'. The DMG, however, doesn't restrict that category just to monsters. You just need to know 'the trick' to 'make the encounter easier', if I recall correctly.

[SquelchHU]

That is what you said, so perhaps I'll remove 'as Squelch asked'. The DMG, however, doesn't restrict that category just to monsters. You just need to know 'the trick' to 'make the encounter easier', if I recall correctly.

Locating the vampire and the ally is not 'finding the right trick to make the encounter easier'. It's a pass/fail check. And since it's a pass/fail check to find the adventure in the first place...

[TheDjinnFor]

Locating the vampire and the ally is not 'finding the right trick to make the encounter easier'. It's a pass/fail check. And since it's a pass/fail check to find the adventure in the first place...

Pass/fail, is it? Just what is he going to use to find them? Polymorph? (Hint: No)

Let's keep it within the PHB, DMG, and MM, of course, and the spell's he's selected as 'typical'.

Another hint: There's a trick to the vampire/ally thing.

[Aspenor]

Okay. Let's see...

Challenge: Track down a level 6 ally who has been charmed by what you suspect is a vampire and non-lethally subdue him before he can complete the vampires nefarious plans (recovering a divine artifact from a hidden holy shrine), then locate and slay the vampire. You must also save generic town A and its small group (3) of level one battle-ready Commoner militia from annihilation by a mass (roughly 16) of CR 1/2 Human Commoner zombies that the vampire has sent forth. You have ~2 hours before the party member completes his objective and ~30 minutes before the zombies begin their assault.

You don't know where the vampire is nor do you know the exact location of the holy shrine, although you do know it is due North. You do not know how much of a head start your ally has over you in reaching his destination. You know where the town is and can reach it moving your regular overland speed in ~30 minutes.

That's a puzzle encounter (locating the vampire and the ally), an at-level encounter (dealing with the zombies), another at-level encounter (dealing with a level - 1 friend non-lethally), and possibly a 'challenging' encounter (fighting the mysterious vampire). Just as Squelch asked.

Yeah I know it was best of 4 unrelated encounters and you wanted knowledge of what you'd be facing, but looking at what your spellbook holds, I don't see how you could... besides, you're also using non-core stuff, which I don't really know much about, so I'll call it square. You should have no problem beating all that of course, especially a ton of CR 1/2 trash that pretty much just exists to waste your time. Of course, you can choose to take this on or not, since I don't really have any part in this debate between you and sainy.

Also, beat it 4 times in a row with the spells you have, since you said you could do 16 encounters. Or just 3 times, if you'd like, since you said require special circumstances.
Technically, I didn't want knowledge of what I'd be facing, I said knowledge of geography and/or surroundings, i.e. outdoors, dungeon, underground, whatever.

Anyway, go to whatevertown and destroy the zombies. The battle would take, about 4 rounds, more likely 3, due to Polymorphing into a 7 headed hydra and dropping 1 zombie per head every round, the 4th round allows for a few misses.

Extended Alter Self into a Lantern Archon for 60 ft fly speed. Get out of town a little and use Detect Magic, concentrating, to locate my ally due to the enchantment aura (allow me to assume that since some punk vampire dominated him, he's a fighter or rogue). Ray of Enfeeblement + Animate Rope (oops, add that to my gear, heh), which I can do while still flying.Also allow me to assume that the vampire was with him, because you said "locate the vampire and your ally." Destroy vampire with ease, you pick the spell (Alter Self, Polymorph, Evard's Black Tentacles, who cares). Dispel Magic if he tries to run away. Oh, and I forgot to mention, take out my mirror when fighting the vampire. Haha you can't attack me, now die.

I still have a couple alter self's and a polymorph left over, so I could probably get it done one more time after the first. The expanse of geography is the reason for this. I technically didn't have to burn a Polymorph against the zombies, I could have used alter self instead and still killed them all without taking a scratch, it just would have taken a little bit longer.

[TheDjinnFor]

Upon reaching level 7, if it's even required (my sources seem to indicate it is not) this wizard buys 3000 pounds of granite and casts stone shape on it. He shapes the granite into the form of a dwarven warrior with a greataxe. He then casts Shrink Item on the statue and puts the now statuette into his pack, on top. While adventuring, he repeats casting Shrink Item as needed every week.

Where is Shrink Item on your spellbook?


Extended Alter Self into a Lantern Archon for 60 ft fly speed. Get out of town a little and use Detect Magic, concentrating, to locate my ally due to the enchantment aura (allow me to assume that since some punk vampire dominated him, he's a fighter or rogue). Ray of Enfeeblement + Animate Rope (oops, add that to my gear, heh), which I can do while still flying.Also allow me to assume that the vampire was with him, because you said "locate the vampire and your ally." Destroy vampire with ease, you pick the spell (Alter Self, Polymorph, Evard's Black Tentacles, who cares). Dispel Magic if he tries to run away. Oh, and I forgot to mention, take out my mirror when fighting the vampire. Haha you can't attack me, now die.

Detect Magic has a 60 ft. range.

Vampire is not with him, they are in two separate locations. Hence:


non-lethally subdue him before he can complete the vampires nefarious plans (recovering a divine artifact from a hidden holy shrine), then locate and slay the vampire.

Also, you don't know if the thing controlling him is actually a Vampire. Hence:


charmed by what you suspect is a vampire

But call that nit-picky. It was subtle and I wanted you assuming it was a vampire, which is why I referred to it as "the vampire" from then on.

In short, you made assumptions, which is unavoidable, but my information provided was quite clear.

[Montrose]

Vampire is not with him, they are in two separate locations.
Also, you don't know if the thing controlling him is actually a Vampire.


<facepalm>

"Plus... plus... the vampire is on another plane, and has mind blank, and is guarded by Tiamat!"

If you're going to keep changing the parameters mid-stream this is going to be very silly.

Asp posted all the details of his build, post all the details of the encounter and this can be a reasonable thought exercise. Otherwise it's just you changing the encounter according to your whim.

[Aspenor]

Where is Shrink Item on your spellbook?



Detect Magic has a 60 ft. range.

Vampire is not with him, they are in two separate locations. Hence:



Also, you don't know if the thing controlling him is actually a Vampire. Hence:



But call that nit-picky.

Shrink item only needs to be cast once per week, so it's done on non-adventuring days. It is listed in my spell book, just not on a the normal adventuring day's prepared list.

I would call this entire post nit-pickey, really. I can fly around at 60 feet for 140 minutes with only the single cast, and with another can do it for 210 and use detect magic the whole time, anyway.

Also, that would be two puzzle encounters, scratch that, three puzzle encounters (finding the ally, determining whom the controller was, and finding the controller), not one. Call that nit-picking.

[Seikojin]

I think the build is interesting and the path you chose is interesting as well. I hope the premade adventure encounter comes along and we see some results that way. I will try a couple of things to see what I can come up with. Something lined up specifically for your character (and 1:1), something a little more in line with the DR = party of 4 I mentioned in the 3.5 thread... And something else for fun.

[TheDjinnFor]

Asp posted all the details of his build, post all the details of the encounter and this can be a reasonable thought exercise. Otherwise it's just you changing the encounter according to your whim.

See the evidence I provided.

[Montrose]

See the evidence I provided.

This is the point --> .

Note that you are nowhere near it. Let me try again.

Unless you actually provide the details of the encounter, there is no way to have a useful discussion. It could be a vampire. Or it could be Bahamut pretending to be a vampire. Or maybe the ally is actually the vampire, oh so clever!

Without providing the details of the encounter anything Asp says you can just counter with "well actually <insert lame counter-argument here>."

Asp has provided the build, in detail. You provide the encounter, in detail.

[Aspenor]

This is the point --> .

Note that you are nowhere near it. Let me try again.

Unless you actually provide the details of the encounter, there is no way to have a useful discussion. It could be a vampire. Or it could be Bahamut pretending to be a vampire. Or maybe the ally is actually the vampire, oh so clever!

Without providing the details of the encounter anything Asp says you can just counter with "well actually <insert lame counter-argument here>."

Asp has provided the build, in detail. You provide the encounter, in detail.

It also should be important to note that he originally said I had FOUR hours to find my ally, but with a quick edit changed it to 2. He changed it while I was still reading my objectives, which I started immediately after he posted it (but was interrupted by a repair man). By the time I hit the "quote" button, it was changed to 2.

Also, as I stated above, the way he clarified the encounters changes them from one to three puzzle encounters.

[TheDjinnFor]

It is listed in my spell book..


Level 3:
Fly
Slow
Magic Circle Against Evil
Greater Magic Weapon
Dispel Magic
Shrink Item

"Last edited by Aspenor; 06-28-2010 at 07:04 PM."

Fail. Dispel Magic was the last one until you edited it. To be even more nitpicky, you'd be a Wizard in my campaign (since I play core), and thus only have a guaranteed 14 spells in your book. I don't know how your class changes this, but w/e.


I would call this entire post nit-pickey, really. I can fly around at 60 feet for 140 minutes with only the single cast, and with another can do it for 210 and use detect magic the whole time, anyway.

You have 7 Minutes of Detect Magic per cast, non-extended (total 21), and you must concentrate the entire time or you lose the spell. I'm assuming, since I don't play splat book stuff, so I don't know how your Epic build circumvents this.


Also, that would be two puzzle encounters, scratch that, three puzzle encounters (finding the ally, determining whom the controller was, and finding the controller), not one. Call that nit-picking.

Okay, you got me, I suppose, if you take that interpretation. I would lump the whole situation as a puzzle encounter, but whatever.


Asp has provided the build, in detail. You provide the encounter, in detail.

This is the point --> . Note that you are nowhere near it.

See, the DM in a situation doesn't actually have to provide the players with any information at all. Me being the DM = no information. I gave him a plot hook as well as a few blurbs what he does and does not know. Beyond what you see and what you hear, it's up to you to as a player to turn around and ask.

Asp is going to fail anything I throw at him when he refuses to take non-combat spells and still thinks he can win any adventure. Meanwhile, I would have laid out more detail had he asked for it and could justify how he found out the information. Instead, I gave him a generic stock of what his character could have known, and he made a bunch of assumptions about what it meant. I corrected them, pointing out where those assumptions failed. I'm not changing anything.

Moral of the story: don't make assumptions. I would do the exact same thing to a group of players I DM, of course, but they'd understand the situation better given more time and the events leading up to it, so perhaps the problem would have been averted.


By the time I hit the "quote" button, it was changed to 2.

Oh come on. Let's pretend that actually happened: nice edit on the Shrink Item spell, then. Repair man... Do you want 4? I'll give you the Shrink Item spell, too, since it's moot and you never used it. Besides, you really can't even be expected to know how much time you have, anyways. But whatever, what's done is done.

[Montrose]

Asp is going to fail anything I throw at him when he refuses to take non-combat spells and still thinks he can win any adventure. Meanwhile, I would have laid out more detail had he asked for it and could justify how he found out the information. Instead, I gave him a generic stock of what his character could have known, and he made a bunch of assumptions about what it meant. I corrected them, pointing out where those assumptions failed. I'm not changing anything.

Moral of the story: don't make assumptions. I would do the exact same thing to a group of players I DM, of course, but they'd understand the situation better given more time and the events leading up to it, so perhaps the problem would have been averted.



Congratulations, you just lost the argument. Well done.

[TheDjinnFor]

Congratulations, you just lost the argument. Well done.

lol. Are you Squelch's alt, or something?

Just because you say it's true, doesn't mean it is.

[Montrose]

lol. Are you Squelch's alt, or something?


No. Honestly, I don't even particularly like him.

However, you just turned the argument into a purely religious debate. You essentially said "I will make the player lose because I don't like the way they play."

There is no arguing at this point. You aren't playing D&D anymore, you're playing cops and robbers. You have lost the argument because you're not even playing the same game.

Imagine that the rest of us are playing hockey and you suddenyl run onto the ice and scream "I just scored a touchdown! I have 6 points!"

That is you.

[Aspenor]

"Last edited by Aspenor; 06-28-2010 at 07:04 PM."

Fail. Dispel Magic was the last one until you edited it. To be even more nitpicky, you'd be a Wizard in my campaign (since I play core), and thus only have a guaranteed 14 spells in your book. I don't know how your class changes this, but w/e.



You have 7 Minutes of Detect Magic per cast, non-extended (total 21), and you must concentrate the entire time or you lose the spell. I'm assuming, since I don't play splat book stuff, so I don't know how your Epic build circumvents this.



Okay, you got me, I suppose, if you take that interpretation. I would lump the whole situation as a puzzle encounter, but whatever.



This is the point --> . Note that you are nowhere near it.

See, the DM in a situation doesn't actually have to provide the players with any information at all. Me being the DM = no information. I gave him a plot hook as well as a few blurbs what he does and does not know.

Asp is going to fail anything I throw at him when he refuses to take non-combat spells and still thinks he can win any adventure. Meanwhile, I would have laid out more detail had he asked for it and could justify how he found out the information. Instead, I gave him a generic stock of what his character could have known, and he made a bunch of assumptions about what it meant. I corrected them, pointing out where those assumptions failed. I'm not changing anything.

Moral of the story: don't make assumptions.

First of all, I didn't edit Shrink item in, it has been there since well before you posted. Anybody that has actually been following the thread can attest to the fact that it was there before noon today. What I did edit in was the 50 feet of rope, if you really care, and I don't really need it to neutralize my ally anyway.

Concentrating costs a Standard Action, and hence I can move 60 feet and maintain concentration. It's not that difficult to comprehend.

I will admit that I had a small brain fart on the part of the spells, but not as big as you claim. I am actually short on first level spells, and have one extra higher level per level, which really doesn't matter (lookie, I can change things too) because I can just drop the dex gloves and buy scrolls, and scribe them. I fell victim to an old house rule we have that specialists add an extra spell to their spellbook from their chosen school at every level. For that I apologize, but it's not really that big of a deal, anyway, as I would have made different decisions if I had realized I made a mistake based on rules my game group has used for years (we don't even look at the books for this stuff anymore).

[Aspenor]

So, I changed the spells to be bought, scribed them all at level 7 and took 10, no fail possible.

I now have more money, and could realistically scribe a bunch more scrolls or just carry them around.

[Aspenor]

Adjusted a feat....was building too quickly and messed up.

Ironically, I found the feat I was looking (Spontaneous Divination) for instead of Insightful Divination, I had the names confused.

It also would make Djinn's little "figure out my story" thing a joke. Whatever though, it was already.

[sainy_matthew]

What this means is that spells and spell like abilities that do NOT allow spell resistance work as they normally would, and so do supernatural abilities of any kind (which is usually an irrelevant point, but there are ways for PCs to get Supernatural abilities).

So just what does 'work as they normally would' mean?

Level 7 Flesh Golem: Saves: Fort +3, Ref +2, Will +3
Level 10 Clay Golem: Saves: Fort +3, Ref +2, Will +3
Level 11 Stone Golem: Saves: Fort +4, Ref +3, Will +4
Level 13 Iron Golem: Saves: Fort +6, Ref +5, Will +6
Level 16 Greater Stone Golem: Saves: Fort +14, Ref +12, Will +14

Pretty **** well. In fact, practically assured of success.

So, what type of spells can you cast that are SR: No? Every type except direct save or dies (which constructs are immune to anyways) and if core only, direct damage (which is a waste of actions anyways).
Did you miss the Construct Traits? Go look it up, i'll wait.

*plays waiting music*

Ok, nice to see you're back. Thats right Construct Traits makes the golem immune to all necromancy spells & to all mind effecting effects (or as we usually call them "anything that does not have a SR") & all necromatic effects (meaning death effects). But since your statement is that Golems are weak against magic i would disagree, they are weak against a handful of spells (most of which don't offer saving throws anyway, all the while being completely immune to a good deal of others).

[Aspenor]

Did you miss the Construct Traits? Go look it up, i'll wait.

*plays waiting music*

Ok, nice to see you're back. Thats right Construct Traits makes the golem immune to all necromancy spells & to all mind effecting effects (or as we usually call them "anything that does not have a SR") & all necromatic effects (meaning death effects). But since your statement is that Golems are weak against magic i would disagree, they are weak against a handful of spells (most of which don't offer saving throws anyway, all the while being completely immune to a good deal of others).

Squelch's point is that all it takes is one Glitterdust and pretty much any golem is out of the fight as they no longer pose a threat to pretty much anybody.

[sainy_matthew]

Squelch's point is that all it takes is one Glitterdust and pretty much any golem is out of the fight as they no longer pose a threat to pretty much anybody.Its still a threat... Its just a blind threat. A listen check (even with 0 listen skill), can still be used to identify where a combatant is. Ok, yeah it will have a 50% mischance to hit, but it can still hit. OK, so it will be easier for the weapon wielders to finish him off, but thats not to say that the golem wont get a lucky crit, thats if he's effected at all (just because he has a low will save, doesn't mean he can't make that save). Also keep in mind that a Glitterdust spell only lasts 1 round per level, if the creatures not dead before then, but its still in combat with the rest of the party, its not like you can cast glitterdust again without risking your own party (the thing with those sorts of spells is they pretty much work once).

-M

[Aspenor]

Its still a threat... Its just a blind threat. A listen check (even with 0 listen skill), can still be used to identify where a combatant is. Ok, yeah it will have a 50% mischance to hit, but it can still hit. OK, so it will be easier for the weapon wielders to finish him off, but thats not to say that the golem wont get a lucky crit, thats if he's effected at all (just because he has a low will save, doesn't mean he can't make that save). Also keep in mind that a Glitterdust spell only lasts 1 round per level, if the creatures not dead before then, but its still in combat with the rest of the party, its not like you can cast glitterdust again without risking your own party (the thing with those sorts of spells is they pretty much work once).

-M

One round per level = dead golem, he is no threat, at all, to anybody. It will likely be dead within 1 round, 2 if the PC's are very weak. The idea that the spell would run out before it is destroyed is fairly ridiculous.

[sainy_matthew]

One round per level = dead golem, he is no threat, at all, to anybody. It will likely be dead within 1 round, 2 if the PC's are very weak. The idea that the spell would run out before it is destroyed is fairly ridiculous.Not if the PC's aren't aware of the strengths and weaknessess of the golem, its potentially possible for particular party members to accidentally be healing the enemy as well as doing damage (cancelling each other out). Spellcasters who are casting spells with an elemental descriptor may even be powering the golem back up. I've seen it happen as a DM (& had to smother a fit of laughter).

-M

[Corebreach]

Arbitrarily changing rules is the way of 4th edition.
Yet you attempted rules changes in your "Fixing 3.5" thread.

Look, if 3.5 really is kerplotz out of the box, I have a better chance of running a balanced game with changes than with pure RAW regardless of how good a DM I am.



[Power players are] the only ones who will enter the game with the attitude that I'm most concerned with, namely that they've solved the game, that they are in full predictive control of everything, and that there are only two possible types of encounters:

a) Ones they will trounce right over with trivial ease, and
b) Ones in which I pulled some lame DM shenanigans
You are aware that this is how the game is actually intended to work right? And I don't simply mean from the perspective of a powergamer, I mean that since the default encounter is something theoretically equal to one of you, except that you outnumber it four to one you are in fact expected to win with trivial ease, and indeed that is why you can be expected to handle four such encounters a day while maintaining campaign continuity by say... not dying every other fight.
I honestly don't care how the designers intended it to work, in and of itself. My primary concerns are how the game actually works (because I have to deal with what got printed, not what was in their heads) and how my players believe/expect it to work (because if they chose to play Game X with preconceived notions of what they were getting into and they get served something else, they won't be happy).

Second, an encounter of which you can only handle four per day is not trivial. It's merely easy. You've been telling me the whole time that they are far easier than that for well-built characters -- that they truly are trivial.


So where does the challenge come from?

10% = encounters lower than level.
50% = encounters at level.
20% = puzzle monsters (in figuring out what works).
15% = encounters 1-4 levels higher.
5% = encounters 5 or more levels higher.

Or, 40% of the encounters. Which does in fact mean you can DM without BS, and without every encounter being a cakewalk. By RAW.
If some classes, at level X, can easily solo most or all EL X encounters -- and apparently some can, even using core rulebooks only -- then a party of 4 such characters can easily [EDIT] defeat an EL X+4 encounter. That cuts the percentage of non-cakewalk encounters to 25.