Page 3 of 10 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 93
  1. #21
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    16
    Ok, I understand that but the problem is not the stag lord himself, but the fact that he is supported by a bunch of other people the same level as I, after I had to fight a whole fort of people the same level as I.

    Would you call a fight in which you arrive exhausted and resourceless from previous combats, where you are outnumbered and against people at the same level as yours plus a level 8 boss, a fair fight? I don't think so.

  2. #22
    @Strifire, thats the points, its NOT SUPPOSED to be a fair fight. Almost all the Boss battles are supposed to be against you.

    Were the hell are people getting that anything should be a fair fight?

  3. #23
    The Staglord's Fort's difficulty is alright, in my opinion. I had to use almost all of the 25+ healing potions I had found so far to beat it, but those ressources are meant to be spent.

  4. #24
    Bless/Bane + Haste Scrolls + Hold Person on Characters with Spell Focus Enchantment made the Stag Lord trival at level 4 party. (Two characters were level 3, as they were lagging behind XP wise, my Rogue/Wizard and my Cleric)

  5. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by Amardarial View Post
    @Strifire, you are not supposed to match him in level, that's never intended, even in the PnP version, he is SUPPOSED to out level you. Reaching him at level 4-5 is normal.

    This also shows the difference between PnP and a CRPG, in PnP there are hundreds of ways to beat the Stag Lord without ever entering combat, that really can't be translated in a CRPG. So level was less of a issue.
    It's not intended in the PnP version, no. The Stag Lord is indeed level 8 and you do reach him at about level 4.

    But that's not the whole story.

    In the original AP, which I'm looking at right now, the Stag Lord is most likely going to be fought by himself. He might have two or three surviving bandits, but those bandits are very weak. He also starts the right so drunk he has the Sickened condition, which is a -2 to almost all checks. He is a CR 6 fight, a Challenging fight for a party of 6 level 4 characters. If you assume the adventure as written was meant for a party of 4, then you can easily bump the CR back up to the intended difference by removing the Sickened condition, making him CR 7 (a Hard fight).

    In this game, the Stag Lord is not only not sickened, but immediately dimension-doors to an advantageous position (bumping the CR up to 8, making it an Epic fight) and also comes with 4 bandits to assist him (raising the CR even more). This is after you go through a fort with more than twice as many bandits in it, each of whom is much tougher than the version in the book (where they're first-level warriors with 9 HP). This is, by pen and paper standards, a nearly unwinnable fight that no gamemaster would ever use on his players. That's the difference people talk about when they say it's not what they expect. The only reasons this fight isn't so bad are the ability to leave, rest, and come back, and the Monty Haul level of potions you're likely to have with you.

    What's more, it's not even the worst example. The Stag Lord's fight isn't even all that bad - I could tell you about the time I got two elder water elementals (CR13) as a random encounter when my party was level five. It's just a very convenient example of the difference that people mean. Hopefully you understand it a little better now.

    Edit: As a disclaimer, I feel compelled to add that I do like the game. I am having fun with it. But I can also see the point of people complaining about the difficulty, because until I got into the guts of the system and modified it I was having serious problems too. And further, I can also see what Owlcat tried to do. They made a larger party and adapted the relatively encounter-light Adventure path into a video game, so they needed more and harder encounters. That's fine; in fact if they had stuck strictly to what's in the original AP this game would be both short and easy, especially since Kingmaker already has a reputation for being a relatively easy adventure path. That said, I still think they went too far in the other direction. They took a nice romp through the woods and turned it into the original Baldur's Gate, which also had a reputation for being unfair. So I can see where all the frustration is coming from.
    Last edited by BobTheBard; 09-30-2018 at 04:24 PM.

  6. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by BobTheBard View Post
    It's not intended in the PnP version, no. The Stag Lord is indeed level 8 and you do reach him at about level 4.

    But that's not the whole story.

    In the original AP, which I'm looking at right now, the Stag Lord is most likely going to be fought by himself. He might have two or three surviving bandits, but those bandits are very weak. He also starts the right so drunk he has the Sickened condition, which is a -2 to almost all checks. He is a CR 6 fight, a Challenging fight for a party of 6 level 4 characters. If you assume the adventure as written was meant for a party of 4, then you can easily bump the CR back up to the intended difference by removing the Sickened condition, making him CR 7 (a Hard fight).

    In this game, the Stag Lord is not only not sickened, but immediately dimension-doors to an advantageous position (bumping the CR up to 8, making it an Epic fight) and also comes with 4 bandits to assist him (raising the CR even more). This is after you go through a fort with more than twice as many bandits in it, each of whom is much tougher than the version in the book (where they're first-level warriors with 9 HP). This is, by pen and paper standards, a nearly unwinnable fight that no gamemaster would ever use on his players. That's the difference people talk about when they say it's not what they expect. The only reasons this fight isn't so bad are the ability to leave, rest, and come back, and the Monty Haul level of potions you're likely to have with you.

    What's more, it's not even the worst example. The Stag Lord's fight isn't even all that bad - I could tell you about the time I got two elder water elementals (CR13) as a random encounter when my party was level five. It's just a very convenient example of the difference that people mean. Hopefully you understand it a little better now.

    Edit: As a disclaimer, I feel compelled to add that I do like the game. I am having fun with it. But I can also see the point of people complaining about the difficulty, because until I got into the guts of the system and modified it I was having serious problems too. And further, I can also see what Owlcat tried to do. They made a larger party and adapted the relatively encounter-light Adventure path into a video game, so they needed more and harder encounters. That's fine; in fact if they had stuck strictly to what's in the original AP this game would be both short and easy, especially since Kingmaker already has a reputation for being a relatively easy adventure path. That said, I still think they went too far in the other direction. They took a nice romp through the woods and turned it into the original Baldur's Gate, which also had a reputation for being unfair. So I can see where all the frustration is coming from.
    The thing is, the encounter as it is in PnP would be a a cakewalk, wouldn't even be a CR 1 encounter, CRPG versions are stronger mechanically then PnP versions. Icewind Dale tried to do a hack/slash game, and even on the highest level were everything was level 30+ (even starting area Goblins), the game was still a cakewalk due to mechanics.

  7. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by Amardarial View Post
    The thing is, the encounter as it is in PnP would be a a cakewalk, wouldn't even be a CR 1 encounter, CRPG versions are stronger mechanically then PnP versions. Icewind Dale tried to do a hack/slash game, and even on the highest level were everything was level 30+ (even starting area Goblins), the game was still a cakewalk due to mechanics.
    And you're not wrong. But it's still possible to go too far in the other direction. As I mentioned in a different thread, a lot of the people drawn to this game aren't die-hard CRPG fans. They're coming here from the tabletop, from memories of older titles, or because of an interest in games like Divinity Original Sin. Setting the bar for the Normal difficulty as high as they have expects them to be both CRPG veterans and knowledgeable of the Pathfinder mechanics, which many people are not. That's why you're seeing so many complaints about the difficulty, mine among them.

  8. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by BobTheBard View Post
    And you're not wrong. But it's still possible to go too far in the other direction. As I mentioned in a different thread, a lot of the people drawn to this game aren't die-hard CRPG fans. They're coming here from the tabletop, from memories of older titles, or because of an interest in games like Divinity Original Sin. Setting the bar for the Normal difficulty as high as they have expects them to be both CRPG veterans and knowledgeable of the Pathfinder mechanics, which many people are not. That's why you're seeing so many complaints about the difficulty, mine among them.

    and that's fair, it's also fair to note this game may have been intended for veterans who knew what was what, and not for the casual gamer, which it seems is where a LOT of the complaints come from.

    Also this game still feels easier then BG1, that game was BRUTAL if you didn't know your stuff.

  9. #29
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    16
    Maybe it's me then, but I've found BGI a piece of cake compared to the bear-like treant and the stag lord xD

    I repeat, I'm experienced in CRPGs, I like to think that I know what I am doing. The thing is: those single fights in "normal" are harder than BGI on "difficult". For me, at least.

    It's not a matter of being good at the game or not, it's the fact that if a boss can almost (if not absolutely) one shot one of my fully buffed characters with just one arrow, and he strikes 2/3 time per turn, than something is wrong.

    I would understand if one time the rng is against me, it happens, but 6 times in a row?

  10. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by Strifire View Post
    Maybe it's me then, but I've found BGI a piece of cake compared to the bear-like treant and the stag lord xD

    I swear I do not know what other game people are playing. The bear treant in the( admittedly patched) game went down in seconds to a 3rd level party of stock NPCs on normal difficulty with no attack strategy other than auto attack, and Im steamrolling the stag lord and all his goons at level 4, not even making use of the NPCs that will help you fight.

    Rogues get sneak attack basically at will, even against undead. Doesnt matter if anyone gets incapacitated because they get right back up the next fight on Normal. Pin enemies with tanks. Flank with Barbs and Rogues. Cast spells as needed. Repeat. It's RTwP CRPG 101.

    Combat in Baldurs Gate 1&2 was harder because 2nd ed had more arbitrary nasty BS that could happen to you, but allowed you to cheese rest mechanics that this game does a better job enforcing, so it evens out. You're much less likely to be facing encounters at full strength in this game, which was pretty easy to do in BG1-2.

    I honestly think a thread on basic RTwP CRPG tactics and 3rd ed mechanics would serve people better than a thread complaining about the difficulty in a game with a fairly low intensity challenge. I swear this isnt intended as a "git gud", but I cant think of any other explanation for the reported differences in game experience. Either that, or some people are choosing to take a much more challenging path through the available content, forcing you to deal with things a level or so before you should.

Page 3 of 10 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •