# Rise of the Runelords: Difficulty Level (Spoilers included)



## Votan (Jul 26, 2010)

I just decided to start the PF adventure path "Rise of the Runelords" with a new group.  My hope for a gentle introduction was not met.  

There were 3 characters (elite array, book gold): a human rogue, a gnome sorcerer and a dwarf monk.  I found the goblins simply murderous.  The characters had a very hard time hitting AC 16; the goblins had trouble hitting the monk in full defense but the party simply lacked the staying power to keep going.  Adding a dwarf cleric helped (a bit) but we still hovered on the edge of a TPK in the caverns of Wrath )they went the fast way, bypassed  most of the XP and dicovered that they could not stop the Quasit as level 2 characters.

Was this bad dice rollign and nothing else?  Anybody else try this adventure?  Is 3-4 too few PCs for a reasonable party?  Advice?


----------



## Abciximab (Jul 26, 2010)

While I have never run this adventure I have read it and believe it would be very hard for 3 characters. 

The Addition of a Cleric should help a bit, but without a heavy hitter/fighter type it will still be challenging. You have 3 characters with low AC & low BAB and they all work best with assistance from other more martial classes to keep the mooks off of them. 

Intelligent play can make up for some of that (Rogue/Monk tumbling to flank, Net/Cloak capturing invisible opponents), but as we all know, luck plays a big role as well making it harder to succeed without a well balanced party especially against multiple opponents.


----------



## czak (Jul 27, 2010)

Rise of the Runelords has a few places where a tpk is likely. The end boss of the second book is a killer - you will need to tone her encounter down. The adventure path as a whole is very dangerous. The third book focuses on heavy hitting ogres with power attack. The fourth has an army of giants.

Consider adding a barbarian or fighter to soak up some of the punishment or encouraging your players to focus on stealth (monk, rogue and invisible sorcerer) and being willing to run away and regroup.  I ran the adventure path using the beta rules and between 4-6 experienced players a session.

Are you playing 3.5 or pathfinder?


----------



## Crothian (Jul 27, 2010)

I would also let the PCs be a level or two higher then the book suggests and you might want to give out a few ex tra magical items so that they are a bit more powerful to make up for less players.


----------



## Votan (Jul 27, 2010)

czak said:


> Rise of the Runelords has a few places where a tpk is likely. The end boss of the second book is a killer - you will need to tone her encounter down. The adventure path as a whole is very dangerous. The third book focuses on heavy hitting ogres with power attack. The fourth has an army of giants.
> 
> Consider adding a barbarian or fighter to soak up some of the punishment or encouraging your players to focus on stealth (monk, rogue and invisible sorcerer) and being willing to run away and regroup.  I ran the adventure path using the beta rules and between 4-6 experienced players a session.
> 
> Are you playing 3.5 or pathfinder?





We are playing Pathfinder.  I'd assumed that the more powerful PF characters would make up for a lot but I was wrong.  

Some of it had to be bad rolling.  The rogue and monk set up a couple of great flanks that ended with the rogue missing.  In fact, in five encounters, he only had one sneak attack that really paid off (and a couple more that hit and killed a single goblin).  Part of it was he had (IIRC) ma +2 to hit (1st level) and the Goblins had an AC of 16.

He actually broke his bad streak with the Quasit but she had DR 5 (things they could never have at that level), a 22 AC and Fast Healing 2.  So despite great rolls, the Quasit always had time to recover by flying around.  

I suspect that you are correct and that a fighter or Barbarian anchor would have made an enormous difference.


----------



## Votan (Jul 27, 2010)

Abciximab said:


> While I have never run this adventure I have read it and believe it would be very hard for 3 characters.
> 
> The Addition of a Cleric should help a bit, but without a heavy hitter/fighter type it will still be challenging. You have 3 characters with low AC & low BAB and they all work best with assistance from other more martial classes to keep the mooks off of them.
> 
> Intelligent play can make up for some of that (Rogue/Monk tumbling to flank, Net/Cloak capturing invisible opponents), but as we all know, luck plays a big role as well making it harder to succeed without a well balanced party especially against multiple opponents.




The glassworks was murder.  The players used good tactics (a total defense, blessed monk blocking the doorway could only be hit on a 20) but I had the goblins fetch Tsuto and flank using the hallway.  The result was three players down and one players (the sorcerer) escaping by an inch with expeditious retreat.  

I am thinking that a six character group with a Fighter or a Barbarian or subtracting AC from all of the monsters is needed . . .


----------



## Votan (Jul 27, 2010)

Crothian said:


> I would also let the PCs be a level or two higher then the book suggests and you might want to give out a few ex tra magical items so that they are a bit more powerful to make up for less players.




That's not a bad idea.  Maybe an heirloom magic item . . .


----------



## IronWolf (Jul 27, 2010)

Votan said:


> Was this bad dice rollign and nothing else?  Anybody else try this adventure?  Is 3-4 too few PCs for a reasonable party?  Advice?




I haven't run or read this AP, but from what I have read of Pathfinder Adventures and what I have generally heard - they can be lethal!  Smart players and proper sacrifices to the dice gods are all good things to help folks get through.


----------



## czak (Jul 27, 2010)

The campaign arc and final adventures are really worth it, so do what you have to give your players a fair shake.

Another idea - there are a number of rune magic feats, items and special spells (some in a free web enhancement somewhere) - as your players earn sin points and research Thassilon give them some extras as a bonus.

Also Nick Logue posted his unedited hook mountain massacre on his forums as sinisteradventures.com


----------



## TheAuldGrump (Jul 27, 2010)

You may want to use some variant of action points - it can make all the difference in a game with not quite enough players.

The Auld Grump


----------



## Kaiyanwang (Jul 27, 2010)

I realize that this would mean more work for the DM, but, if possile, couldn't they meet a friendly cleric NPC?

This could bring in some heal and buff and make them able to defeat the challenges. They are only 3 PC, I think is fair. maybe Strenght and Heailing domain, see if is possible.

Moreover, suggest to the sorcerer player if he can take spells to control the battlefield and not expose the rogue and monk to too much fire, letting them dispatch their target(s).

Of course, this should be a suggestion: force the player to built HIS character in a certain way = BAD.


----------



## ruemere (Jul 27, 2010)

If I remember correctly, the initial APs by Paizo assumed 5 party members.
Secondly, a cleric is essential for less stealthy parties.
Thirdly, you may want to read about Rise of Runelords at Paizo forum.
Finally, there are conversions of Paizo modules available at d20pfsrd.com, fan conversions, Paizo Adventure paths.

Regards,
Ruemere


----------



## Sylrae (Jul 27, 2010)

If built correctly, the Monk is the big damage dealing class in PFRPG, but he can't take alot of hits. 

Average damage on the dice at 20 reaches 77 points, whereas the fighter with a greatsword reaches like 30. The fighter starts with more AC and more damage, the monk bypasses in damage somewhere around level 5.

I ran the first 2 second darkness modules. The players had an easy go of it though due to me giving out better magic items than they should have had per level.


----------



## neofax (Jul 27, 2010)

I am a player in a RotRL games(we are past where these spoilers are).  We have a party of 5 and some encounters are murderous and some too easy, which a good campaign should be.  A party of three with no heavy hitter is going to have a horrendous time especially when they get to the second and third book.  I don't know about giving out more magic items, but if you can't find a heavy hitter, I would lower the AC on the monsters a bit or make some bad strategy/tactics decisions(w/o letting your players catch on).


----------



## James Jacobs (Jul 27, 2010)

All of our APs assume 4 party members, but they should work relatively well with 5. Once you dip below four PCs, though, things can start getting grisly. And while Pathfinder RPG characters are a bit more powerful than 3.5... I don't think that they're THAT much more powerful.

If you're running an AP with 3 PCs, adding a GM-controlled NPC helper, or giving a player a free cohort, is a good way to shore things up. Alternatively, reducing the number of monsters the PCs encounter in a fight can help.

In specific regard to the first few goblin encounters in "Burnt Offerings," that's something of an unusually designed encounter. I wanted to start the campaign with a small army of goblins attacking a town, and then have the PCs step in to save the town. But if you throw a big number of foes at 1st level players, things can go bad fast. Which is why the goblins are specifically called out for being crazy; they don't always fight to the best of their ability, and indeed every round some of the goblins should "waste" their actions doing things like getting caught in rain barrels, stealing food, laughing at another goblin's misfortune, or attempting really poor tactical choices like attempting to bull rush a heavilly armored fighter at the back of the party when the goblin doesn't have Improved Bull Rush. Running goblins like that not only helps to establish their madcap madness, but it makes a fight against a LOT of foes at low level something that's more fun and less fatal.


----------



## Gorbacz (Jul 27, 2010)

Sylrae said:


> If built correctly, the Monk is the big damage dealing class in PFRPG, but he can't take alot of hits.
> 
> Average damage on the dice at 20 reaches 77 points, whereas the fighter with a greatsword reaches like 30. The fighter starts with more AC and more damage, the monk bypasses in damage somewhere around level 5.
> 
> I ran the first 2 second darkness modules. The players had an easy go of it though due to me giving out better magic items than they should have had per level.




Wha ? Wha ? Have you ever seen a properly built Fighter ? Monks have nothing on Fighters in term of raw damage output.


----------



## czak (Jul 27, 2010)

http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboard...TheMechanicHereIronsidesIMostlyJustHurtPeople

Monks aren't that bad if built for offence.


----------



## Gorbacz (Jul 27, 2010)

Yup, they aren't bad, but they're not before Fighters really. Damage on dice means little as most of the DPR comes from stats, feats, class abilities and weapon itself.


----------



## Kaiyanwang (Jul 27, 2010)

I doubt they can match the fighter - but this is not the point, the two classes are just different (an an example, compare their saving throw, or monk's superior mobility).  But I guess we should discuss it in another thread.

The monk can do his job, anyway.


----------



## Votan (Jul 28, 2010)

James Jacobs said:


> All of our APs assume 4 party members, but they should work relatively well with 5. Once you dip below four PCs, though, things can start getting grisly. And while Pathfinder RPG characters are a bit more powerful than 3.5... I don't think that they're THAT much more powerful.
> 
> If you're running an AP with 3 PCs, adding a GM-controlled NPC helper, or giving a player a free cohort, is a good way to shore things up. Alternatively, reducing the number of monsters the PCs encounter in a fight can help.
> 
> In specific regard to the first few goblin encounters in "Burnt Offerings," that's something of an unusually designed encounter. I wanted to start the campaign with a small army of goblins attacking a town, and then have the PCs step in to save the town. But if you throw a big number of foes at 1st level players, things can go bad fast. Which is why the goblins are specifically called out for being crazy; they don't always fight to the best of their ability, and indeed every round some of the goblins should "waste" their actions doing things like getting caught in rain barrels, stealing food, laughing at another goblin's misfortune, or attempting really poor tactical choices like attempting to bull rush a heavilly armored fighter at the back of the party when the goblin doesn't have Improved Bull Rush. Running goblins like that not only helps to establish their madcap madness, but it makes a fight against a LOT of foes at low level something that's more fun and less fatal.




I like Burnt Offering a lot (it was, BTW, a player based decision -- they all voted and wanted that series because of it's strong reputation).  We did add a cleric in as a "cohort" and that helped a lot.  

Part of what went wrong is that the Sorcerer ran out of spells and the Monk was being defensive to allow the rogue to flank.  But the rogue had a 12 AC and missed a fair bit . . .  

I did appreciate the madcap goblin guidance in the module.  Having them try and "burn the dwarf" with torches (a decidedly sub-optimal approach given that they could have use dog-slicers to much greater effect both mode the insane goblins more scary and prevented a TPK).


----------



## Votan (Jul 28, 2010)

TheAuldGrump said:


> You may want to use some variant of action points - it can make all the difference in a game with not quite enough players.
> 
> The Auld Grump




That's a fine idea.  A second chance at a key moment could make all of the difference!


----------



## Votan (Jul 28, 2010)

neofax said:


> I am a player in a RotRL games(we are past where these spoilers are).  We have a party of 5 and some encounters are murderous and some too easy, which a good campaign should be.  A party of three with no heavy hitter is going to have a horrendous time especially when they get to the second and third book.  I don't know about giving out more magic items, but if you can't find a heavy hitter, I would lower the AC on the monsters a bit or make some bad strategy/tactics decisions(w/o letting your players catch on).




This is useful to know.  I need to read ahead and think carefully.   Also, stepping up Gainesville area player recruitment is a good idea.  The fall is coming and there must be somebody who needs to start playing Pathfinder one the summer heat ends and people become active again!


----------



## Shazman (Jul 28, 2010)

Votan said:


> I like Burnt Offering a lot (it was, BTW, a player based decision -- they all voted and wanted that series because of it's strong reputation).  We did add a cleric in as a "cohort" and that helped a lot.
> 
> Part of what went wrong is that the Sorcerer ran out of spells and the Monk was being defensive to allow the rogue to flank.  But the rogue had a 12 AC and missed a fair bit . . .
> 
> I did appreciate the madcap goblin guidance in the module.  Having them try and "burn the dwarf" with torches (a decidedly sub-optimal approach given that they could have use dog-slicers to much greater effect both mode the insane goblins more scary and prevented a TPK).




How well are the PC's built?   What kind of stats do they have?  A rogue should never have a 12 AC.  At first level, it shouldn't be less than 15.  If the party has poor ability scores or made deliberately suboptimal choices in placing their ability scores, then they are going to be much less effective. As others have said, you really do need a melee heavy hitter.  A barbarian or fighter with a two-handed weapon and power attack should be able to last a while in combat and dish out some serious damage.  That could make all the difference.


----------



## Votan (Jul 28, 2010)

Shazman said:


> How well are the PC's built?   What kind of stats do they have?  A rogue should never have a 12 AC.  At first level, it shouldn't be less than 15.  If the party has poor ability scores or made deliberately suboptimal choices in placing their ability scores, then they are going to be much less effective. As others have said, you really do need a melee heavy hitter.  A barbarian or fighter with a two-handed weapon and power attack should be able to last a while in combat and dish out some serious damage.  That could make all the difference.




The characters were all built on an elite array.  

I think the rogue needs armor and that will help a lot.  But the builds were pretty solid so far as I could tell.


----------



## Shazman (Jul 28, 2010)

What do you mean by elite array?  Is it the 15 14 13 12 10 8 from 3.5?  If so, you should consider giving them a higher point buy.  Also, if they started with by the book gold, why in the world wouldn't the rogue at least have leather armor?


----------



## TheAuldGrump (Jul 29, 2010)

Another trick you can try, though not one that I have used, is a bit of a hand swap - add a few undead to an encounter. If the cleric is more willing to Channel Energy in order to Turn Undead then you can tuck in the healing on the rest of the party, via a houserule,* in manner that he might find more palatable.

The Auld Grump

*The norm is that you pick a critter type, so the Channeling will normally either heal Humanoids or Damage undead. The houserule just allows it to do both at the same time. Given the small group this may help things a bit.


----------

