WotBS Early WotBS encounters post MM3 release

[Sentack]

From what I can see, the 4th edition conversion of WotBS started in October 2009. After that point, Wizards revised it's core design of monsters with the publication of Monster Manual 3 in June, 2010, and then you saw some major revisions of the 'core' monsters with Monster Vault, released recently.

Now I figure that all the encounters in WotBS have been actually tested for balance/fun factor already but, the length of combat and general flow of it did change some with the new monsters. My question is two fold.

1. Have the change in monster/encounter philosophy come into place in most published 4e editions of WotBS?

2. Are there any plans to go back and revise the old encounters to fit the new model?

 

[Truename]

Now I figure that all the encounters in WotBS have been actually tested for balance/fun factor already but, the length of combat and general flow of it did change some with the new monsters. My question is two fold.

1. Have the change in monster/encounter philosophy come into place in most published 4e editions of WotBS?

2. Are there any plans to go back and revise the old encounters to fit the new model?

Speaking as someone playing through the series, I have to say that the earliest adventures probably weren't tested for balance/fun factor. A lot of them have problems. Not only is the monster math off, some of the encounters are just not built well for 4e. There's a 3.5e sensibility to it, such as using combat stats that follow PC rather than monster rules (which makes complicated, underpowered monsters) or creating encounters with just one or two standard monsters (which leads to pointless encounters with no dramatic tension).

That said, the adventures' mechanics get steadily better. The "Festival of Dreams" adventure just published has an amazing set-piece battle that looks incredible. It's also fairly easy to fix these problems on your own, and the NPCs, plot-line, and other the other good stuff that makes WotBS worth playing is still just as solid.

I don't know where the switchover happens. I'm currently in adventure #3 (Shelter From the Storm) and I still need to fix the monster stats.

 

[Morrus]

The monsters etc. started changing at the same time as new official books/materials/errata were produced.

 

[Sentack]

Is anyone looking to convert some of the older modules with revised enemies? It would be nice if we could see some encounters that have been play tested first but I realize most people just run each of the encounters once, at best, so they can offer up what they did and how it went, but little more then that.

I wish I could take the individual encounters, just run them against a set of test players once or twice just to see what would happen with different combination of enemies.

 

[OnlineDM]

My take on this is that you need to feel empowered as the DM running the game to change things as you see fit, as with any published adventure.

I've run very, very few encounters just as written, and those that I have run as written have been disappointments. However, all of the encounters are great as inspiration - take the maps, take some of the monsters, tweak the monsters, rejigger things as you see fit, and voila - fun encounters!

Throw away the random battles that add nothing to the story. Ramp up the challenge of fights that seem too easy (the only one I've seen so far that was surprisingly hard was with the undead dwarves in the crypt in the first adventure). Make it your own - your players will thank you for it!

Fortunately, modifying monsters and fights in 4e is easy to do on the fly, and I highly recommend doing so.

 

[666Sinner666]

After playing through all the encounters that happen inside Gate Pass in the first module I did notice that a lot of the monsters are built more like NPC's with templates, ala 3.5, than using actual "monster math" for 4e. Which even in a well balanced party can make the encounter very difficult for the PC's. In every encounter so far we have had at least one character nearly drop or drop and anyone in melee gets bloodied at least once if not more. We have also nearly been TPK'd multipule times. Due to this the DM is looking at rebuilding all, or some, of the monsters in further encounters.

Overall, I would actually go so far as to say the ENWorld guys did a piss poor job of translating their 3.5e mobs into 4e mob equivalents. Their story leaves nothing to be desired but their mob building for 4e needs some serious work.

 

[OnlineDM]

Wow... my experience was the opposite. I found that the challenge level of the combats in Gate Pass was too low, not too high. The raid at the Poison Apple, for instance, was not scary in the slightest to the players. I changed or skipped the rest of the encounters up until the gnolls, but the gnolls and then the battle with the Inquisitor were both pretty easy (a little difficulty from the gnolls came up, but that was due to my mis-reading of an attack bonus). The same goes for the combats in the second module - most needed ramping up in order to be interesting.

 

[Morrus]

Wow... my experience was the opposite. I found that the challenge level of the combats in Gate Pass was too low, not too high. The raid at the Poison Apple, for instance, was not scary in the slightest to the players. I changed or skipped the rest of the encounters up until the gnolls, but the gnolls and then the battle with the Inquisitor were both pretty easy (a little difficulty from the gnolls came up, but that was due to my mis-reading of an attack bonus). The same goes for the combats in the second module - most needed ramping up in order to be interesting.

I'd agree with that assessment. The actual monster math officially changed a bit later, though, with WotC errata. Offhand I can't remember what the change was - it was quite a while ago, I'm sure some folks here can remember - but it definitely made a lot of monsters tougher.

 

[Zinovia]

If I use encounters as written, I generally find the fights too easy, even with my group being lower level than expected for the module. Part of it is having six players, but some is that the original monster design in 4E had too little damage, especially as you go up in levels.

Changes in design to be aware of include raising the damage, especially on limited attacks such as encounter or recharge powers. Lower the defenses on solos and elites. They no longer receive a boost to these. Give solos some type of ability to mitigate stun and daze. Give them effective minor actions and triggered actions.

Part of the problem with the 4E conversion is the level range they chose to convert the modules for. If I were to change it given my experience in 4E, I would slow down progression in the early mods, and increase it in the later ones. Because progression is so fast in the early modules a lot of fights have been added that really have no impact on the main plot, and were not in the 3.5 version. I have been stripping these out (aside from a few that fill in major gaps in the original story) and letting my group fall behind a bit. They are currently at the end of Banquet (and well off the rails in terms of how the module was written), and they just recently hit 10th level. I find they can handle encounters written for 12th level characters with no trouble.

My group will hit paragon as they start module 5, and that feels about right to me. In terms of what the group is accomplishing in the story, the first 4 modules feel like they all belong in heroic tier. I level them when it seems right, and do not track xp.