Why can't PC's fight fair

[King Atticus]

Something I've always wondered about EL's. EL's are supposed to be set up to give a challenge to an average party of 4 adventurers, right? So an EL 5 encounter would be an appropriate encounter for a party of 4 level 5 PC's. But according to RAW doesn't CL = EL? So when you put them up against someone with class level's at an equal level that 1 baddie would have to face off the whole party all by himself.

Am I understanding it correctly that it should take a party of 4 5th level characters to take down 1 level 5 bad guy?

If so...why is it watered down like that? Why shouldn't even #'s be appropriate.

[Tvtyrant]

Because an encounter is supposed to be 1/4 of the parties daily resources. If they face 4 level 5s then the encounter would be an entire day rather than just one normal encounter.

[opticalshadow]

yeah what he said, if you tossed what they could absolutly handle per encounter, they wouldnt have enough for more then one fight.

[Worira]

Because an encounter is supposed to be 1/4 of the parties daily resources. If they face 4 level 5s then the encounter would be an entire day rather than just one normal encounter.

And they'd have a 50% chance of winning even then, and even less of avoiding one or more characters dying.

[King Atticus]

But wouldn't they just walk through an encounter like this? It doesn't seem like it would present much of a challenge.

Sorry if this is overly basic, I've never really DM'd.

[Tvtyrant]

Possibly, if they weren't well designed as an encounter. You could make a Spike-Chain control tripper with an AMF item and have it stand in the middle of the room pulling the rug out from under people's feet, or a Binder with the Gnome vestige build stone walls to keep the party guessing, or a totemist that uses breath weapons and flight to act like a little dragon.

[Amiel]

It's not in their vocabulary.

Also, PC's are eternally hungry for XP.

[opticalshadow]

But wouldn't they just walk through an encounter like this? It doesn't seem like it would present much of a challenge.

Sorry if this is overly basic, I've never really DM'd.

well, there are various things to it, location, a 1/2 hd creature standing in teh open is no problem, put him 30 ft up with partial cover and a cross bow, and suddenly he can become down right deadly to a lower level party.

also realize that some creatures while inhenrly frail and low hd can be very dangerous. a rust monster for example, is a really low hd, but it can absolutly ruin a party (esp now that they can dmg)

but even walking though encounters, every time your pc's take dmg, they have to heal it, that costs either spells or coin in items, it takes ammunition or hp, or spells to fight, all of these things add up.

just liek pocket change, it all adds up at the end of the day.

[Hecuba]

But wouldn't they just walk through an encounter like this? It doesn't seem like it would present much of a challenge.

Sorry if this is overly basic, I've never really DM'd.

What you're catching on is best explained as the difference between a climatic battle and a mook battle. As a convention of the genre, these are different. Even when you look at a pure dungeon crawl entirely devoid of plot, there is usually a "boss fight" somewhere every few floors. In my experience, most DMs will tell you to up the CR of an encounter when you want it to be plot important.

Consider the alternative: if the PC's are evenly matched against the enemy's foot soldiers, why hope do they have of taking their mightiest champions? Why would you send such a group to complete such a goal if they have only a 50% chance of completing the most basic step thereof?

[Amiel]

Sometimes the CRs, and by association the ECLs, are wrong; would PCs fight fair against clockwork horrors (adamantine horrors)?

[kardar233]

well, there are various things to it, location, a 1/2 hd creature standing in teh open is no problem, put him 30 ft up with partial cover and a cross bow, and suddenly he can become down right deadly to a lower level party.

also realize that some creatures while inhenrly frail and low hd can be very dangerous. a rust monster for example, is a really low hd, but it can absolutly ruin a party (esp now that they can dmg)

but even walking though encounters, every time your pc's take dmg, they have to heal it, that costs either spells or coin in items, it takes ammunition or hp, or spells to fight, all of these things add up.

just liek pocket change, it all adds up at the end of the day.

This is why I advise people who are thinking of trying to DM to take a look through the old Dragon Mountain adventure.

I don't think that there's anything else except for Pun-Pun that will have your players start cowering at the mention of a kobold.

[Jjeinn-tae]

This is why I advise people who are thinking of trying to DM to take a look through the old Dragon Mountain adventure.

I don't think that there's anything else except for Pun-Pun that will have your players start cowering at the mention of a kobold.

You could also pull a Tucker on them. Kobolds played smartly will have players running at the mention of them. Bring on the demons, so long as they don't have to fight the Kobolds.

[darksolitaire]

PC or certain level will also have more wealth comparable to the NPC of the same level, giving them edge in even one-on-one fights (unless NPC's gear is customized to counter the PC, who has only random loot, mind you). The reason behind this is simple: PC's are meant to win their encounters.

My DM regularly gives us encounters with CR 3 or 4 higher then our party's ECL, but this is usually achieved by modifying the circumstances to encounter rather then upping the enemies of the encounter itself. Classic example is bogged terrain that reduces PC's movement, while allowing monsters used to it operate at full speed. While this makes encounter harder, the monster has less chance to one-shot PC then it's cousin with increased challenge rating would have.

[ericgrau]

B/c if it's an even fight then you have a 50:50 chance of winning each one vs. getting wiped out yourself, a.k.a. tpk. Campaigns don't last very long like that.

[ffone]

The reasons everyone above said.

In my experience, class-leveled NPCs usually seem to be easier for their CR than most monsters, unless they're

-particularly optimized
-use good team tactics
-play to a party weakness (Fly, Invis etc. when no PC can counter it)
- go for some of the 'riskiest' tactics like save or dies. Since PCs are expected to win their fights, things that increase variance (like using a save or die instead of direct damage) tend to increase the risk of a TPK and-or the use of 'extra' resources (like a way to cure blindness or petrification that lasts after a fight; the 'permanent' duration of certain effects doesn't matter to an NPC who dies anyway, but for PCs it may mean consuming consumables, stopping to prepare the right spell, or limping back to a temple in town).

I suspect a party of four level X NPCs designed to work effectively together, in the way PCs do, will generally be a higher (and mroe interesting challenge) than one NPC of level X+4 (both are CR X+4 encounters).

[Greenish]

When you're fighting for your life, fair play is sucker's game.

[Talakeal]

The game is rigged so the PCs almost always win, simple as that. A "fair" fight would, all things considered, kill the PCs 50% of the time. Even if the player's used excellent tactics, a single mistake or run of bad luck will kill them sooner or later with those odds.

Your average character goes through, on average, 260 odd encounters to reach 20th level. With a 50% chance of victory per encounter, that means only 1 in 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00 0,000,000 parties would ever get to 20th level and "beat the game". In other words, it would be a miracle.

I am not making this up, that is actually what 2 to the 260th power is unless I made a typo somewhere.

Don't look at the game as a per encounter challenge, but rather a per adventure challenge, with only the epic milestone battles actually having odds equal to or against the PCs winning.

[paddyfool]

All of the below.

Even-chance encounters should be climactic battles. Less-than-even chance encounters, meanwhile, should generally only come up in horror games (and preferably ones with clear indications that encounters are meant to be bypassed, not charged into). With the saving grace of having plenty of extra character sheets.

You can, of course, have the PCs meet the odd NPC that would wipe the floor with them; they just should meet up under non-confrontational circumstances, and have it made very, very clear that this is someone they wouldn't want to fight. And even then, don't overdo this.

[kardar233]

You could also pull a Tucker on them. Kobolds played smartly will have players running at the mention of them. Bring on the demons, so long as they don't have to fight the Kobolds.

Is this a published adventure? If so, I'd love to add it to my library of "Ways to terrorize players with weak/innocuous enemies".

[Sir Homeslice]

Is this a published adventure? If so, I'd love to add it to my library of "Ways to terrorize players with weak/innocuous enemies".

It's not a published adventure, it's an over-hyped over-parroted example of what happens when you put a moderately clever DM against a troupe of idiots with the combined intelligence of a two year old.

[Talakeal]

Is this a published adventure? If so, I'd love to add it to my library of "Ways to terrorize players with weak/innocuous enemies".

Its an old gaming story with no explanation given. People always talk about how horrible Tucker's kobolds were, but no one actually knows why or how, or at least no one I have ever talked to about it.

[Autolykos]

The main problem with D&D is that it doesn't give enough advantage to PCs using tactics - so they always have to fight weaker monsters to win. Compare that to a game like Shadowrun, where proper information gathering and planning makes a lot more difference than stats. There, the players will often encounter their equal (or better) and have to use tricks to avoid head-on fights (which is, technically, just another way of fighting unfair). The other way round, a single well-placed sniper with less than 1/100th of the team's resources can easily cause a TPK.

So, it boils down to this: The PCs can't fight fair because they are expected to win.

[Sillycomic]

http://www.tuckerskobolds.com/

There's enough information here to figure out what the kobolds are doing. They are using intelligent tactics against the PC's.

Snipers
Murder holes
Traps
Favored terrain
Flammable hallways
Molotov cocktails (acid flasks/alchemist's fire/tanglefoot bags)

They are smart and devious. It would be difficult for a group to fight if they didn't know what they were up against. Half the time you can't hit them, the other half you are on fire.

I almost had my players once run through a dungeon of kobolds... Ahh, but alas it was coming up on summer vacation and people were moving away so I thought it best for the group to just finish the campaign instead of running through the vicious kobold dungeon.

Oh well. I hope to one day use it. To a GM it seems like such fun to prepare.

[Serpentine]

Something I've always wondered about EL's. EL's are supposed to be set up to give a challenge to an average party of 4 adventurers, right? So an EL 5 encounter would be an appropriate encounter for a party of 4 level 5 PC's. But according to RAW doesn't CL = EL? So when you put them up against someone with class level's at an equal level that 1 baddie would have to face off the whole party all by himself.

Am I understanding it correctly that it should take a party of 4 5th level characters to take down 1 level 5 bad guy?

If so...why is it watered down like that? Why shouldn't even #'s be appropriate.I think I've had a similar sort of misunderstanding of Challenge Rating and Encounter Level. Took me ages until I worked out why I was having so much trouble getting my head around it. Lets see if my understanding of it helps...

First of all, remember that these are all artificial terminologies. In D&D, a "Challenging" encounter doesn't mean "hard". It actually has a very specific definition: A "challenging" encounter, of same CR (or EL if it involves multiple enemies) as the party, should take up approximately one quarter of that party's resources.
In this context, resources means hit points, spells, abilities, potions, charges, and similar assets.
The game assumes that a party will consist of 4 equal characters.
To turn that around the other way, if a party of 4 characters going against a creature of the same Challenge Rating will take up 1/4 of their resources, then one character going against a creature of the same CR will take up 100% of their resources.
When you think about it, this makes sense: if you have two equal opponents going one-on-one, then at the end of the battle, the winner should be almost completely exhausted. They should have to have thrown everything they have at their enemy in order to win, and they should only just barely be able to do so.
Now, in a game, a standard party is expected (as a purely average, rules-forming generalisation) to go against 4 Challenging encounters per day. This means that, as a group, a party is expected to use almost all of their resources across a day's adventuring before stopping to replenish those resources.
That lone level 5 baddie that goes up against the level 5 party of four characters because, basically, he's meant to die, and take out about 1/4 of their resources in the process. If that level 5 baddie instead takes on one of those party members, they have an approximately equal chance of winning.
Having four level 5 baddies taking on that level 5 party... gets a bit more complicated. According to the d20 Encounter Calculator, that's an ECL 9 encounter, and "Very Difficult". The DMG explains how to work that out, but I don't know how it works. It's expected to take a greater percentage of party resources, though.

...no idea whether that helps.

[Amphetryon]

One thing that's sometimes hard for a new DM to judge is how much resource expenditure the encounters are forcing on the party. The essentially binary nature of HP damage means that you could be knocking every party member down to 50% HP or below in every fight, and still have the impression that the PCs found it a cakewalk, because their ability to contribute round-by-round was never compromised. With most players I've known, the loss of 50% HP makes for a tough fight in their minds, but the game's damage model doesn't reflect that especially well.

[Essence_of_War]

Best quote from Tucker's Kobolds:

They ate all our donkeys

It's worth a read just for that :smallbiggrin:

[NecroRick]

The thing with numbers is that th power goes up non-linearly.

Two characters is not 2x harder than 1, they are 3x harder. (See also: game theory)

4 characters vs 1, the 4 have a 10 to 1 advantage.

In order to offset that, you'd need to have the 1 doing area effect attacks, which brings it back down to 4:1, which as you noted is still grotesquely in favour of the party.

Flat-footed and surprise rounds make a huge difference. If the players are always catching the monsters flat footed, then the monsters are screwed. But if a small number of monsters (in accordance with CR guidelines) catches the more powerful party off balance, then the battle will be more meaningful.

The problem is monsters like Carrion Crawler. A Carrion Crawler that catches the party flat footed could be a TPK. A party that can shoot the Carrion Crawler at range might take no damage whatsoever.

If the lvl 3 enemy caster hits the fighter-types with a hold person in the surprise round, suddenly the PCs are in big trouble. Sprinkle the humanoid monsters liberally with 1 level in scout, rogue or ninja... Now all of a sudden instead of the players running up and backstabbing the monsters in the face _twice_ before the monster even gets to do anything, now the backstab is on the other foot... (as it were).

Give the monsters feats to do ranged backstabs... :smallcool:

[Ursus the Grim]

Another thing I think one person has mentioned is that in your given example, the single character can pull out all the stops, but the PCs have limited resources. The enemy can use all its gear, its consumables, and its spells because it doesn't have to worry about fighting another battle. The PCs do. Most PCs will operate under the assumption that there are two or three more fights before they can rest or restock, and so they actually play with a handicap.

Furthermore, a team of class-level enemies played by the DM have several more huge advantages. First, the DM plays all of them. He knows what the PCs can do. He can coordinate perfectly between the enemies. The team is normally perfectly built, because he knows what the other "characters" are doing. Give me a full party to build against my players, and it will always be a TPK.

[The Glyphstone]

The other thing to remember about Tucker's Kobolds was it was in 2e. People talk about how the party was complete idiots because they didn't use Wizard Spells X, Y, Z, and sqrt(Pi)...but that level of magic and magical availability didn't exist when the adventure was run. Tucker's would be almost impossible nowadays in 3.X or 4E, but it wasn't some sort of drastic mental deficiency on the part of the PCs when it happened.

[Essence_of_War]

Also, as I recall, the rules for surprise/initiative/ start and stop of combat time seemed more...fluid...in 2nd edition.

Some of the ideas can be useful, but a lot of the surprises seem hard to employ with things like Uncanny Dodge, or spot checks, as a well codified part of the system.

Maybe that's just the fact that I was much younger when we played 2nd edition though?

[opticalshadow]

The thing with numbers is that th power goes up non-linearly.

Two characters is not 2x harder than 1, they are 3x harder. (See also: game theory)

4 characters vs 1, the 4 have a 10 to 1 advantage.

In order to offset that, you'd need to have the 1 doing area effect attacks, which brings it back down to 4:1, which as you noted is still grotesquely in favour of the party.

Flat-footed and surprise rounds make a huge difference. If the players are always catching the monsters flat footed, then the monsters are screwed. But if a small number of monsters (in accordance with CR guidelines) catches the more powerful party off balance, then the battle will be more meaningful.

The problem is monsters like Carrion Crawler. A Carrion Crawler that catches the party flat footed could be a TPK. A party that can shoot the Carrion Crawler at range might take no damage whatsoever.

If the lvl 3 enemy caster hits the fighter-types with a hold person in the surprise round, suddenly the PCs are in big trouble. Sprinkle the humanoid monsters liberally with 1 level in scout, rogue or ninja... Now all of a sudden instead of the players running up and backstabbing the monsters in the face _twice_ before the monster even gets to do anything, now the backstab is on the other foot... (as it were).

Give the monsters feats to do ranged backstabs... :smallcool:

a good example, i ran a return to the temple of elemental evil camp once, the pc's skipped a room, and made a huge fuss with a bunch of kobold children there, the cleric, whom i decided being a hobgoblin and typically not a brave race, wasnt going to 1v6 a party ran to the throne room to warn the leader.

she used her invisability on her self and the leader and when the pcs foolishly went in (leaving the skill monkey outside the room cause he ddidnt decide to fully walk in) the door go slammed behind them, locked and they got suprised round. on top of that the leader whoam had backstab in his kit, made short work of two of the pc's witht he cleric causesing all sorts of problems, the rouge managed to just finally break in the room in time to save the bard...and just the bard.

one thing i dont see dm's do, is roleplay behind the pc's backs like this. so many people cookie cut moduals, well i know for a fact a race known for not fighting without better odds would nto engage, they would get help, and i know someone trained in back stab, would try to use that, and yeah, the ecl of that encounter skyu rocketed because of the way i did it, but the pc's also decided to make a ton of noise in a place they didnt clear, which happencd to be full of enemies.


im not saying punish your pc's, but remember your enemies dont have to fight fair, and anything the party can do, you are capable of either. its a little rule i have at my table. i wont stop you from having a quiver full of maximized arrows of lesser shivering touch, and start taking dragons out like they were sleeping kobolds, i wont stop the dread necro from raiseing an army, or the wizard from porting in some major nasty from another plane.

but that kind of tactic, when used so often, is likly going to attract attention, they may not want, or be ready to deal with. few people would be ok with an army of undead, less would be comfertable with a extra planer deamon serving them, and if you think dragons are going to sit tight and not ambush the pc's in their sleep when word gets to them youve been murdering them for fun, think again. i dont play unfair, but i found it keep the table exciting, and my players enjoy it

[Greenish]

a hobgoblin and typically not a brave raceI think you may be confusing hobgoblins with, say, elves. :smallannoyed:

[opticalshadow]

I think you may be confusing hobgoblins with, say, elves. :smallannoyed:

well, i refer most of my settingsa to a more r.a salvatore type of setting, elves may be hippies, and they rarely do anything but complain about nature, but the goblinoid races tend to not like to fight unless they out number.

even a brave one though, woudlnt as a spell caster charge into 6 enemies who have thus far made quick work of everything in their path.

[Greenish]

well, i refer most of my settingsa to a more r.a salvatore type of setting, elves may be hippies, and they rarely do anything but complain about nature, but the goblinoid races tend to not like to fight unless they out number.Ah, you meant that they aren't typically brave in your setting, not that they're not typically brave. Still, you're going to get into trouble with the GDF if you keep up with that. :smalltongue:


even a brave one though, woudlnt as a spell caster charge into 6 enemies who have thus far made quick work of everything in their path.Yeah, sure, not contesting that.

[The Glyphstone]

well, i refer most of my settingsa to a more r.a salvatore type of setting, elves may be hippies, and they rarely do anything but complain about nature, but the goblinoid races tend to not like to fight unless they out number.

even a brave one though, woudlnt as a spell caster charge into 6 enemies who have thus far made quick work of everything in their path.

Have we seen Hobgoblins in Salvatore's works, or the Realms in general? The default fluff for them is that they're extremely brave and very martially-minded, the exception among the 'goblinoids'..though they're also Medium sized, which helps. Realms hobgoblins might be totally different.

[Coidzor]

The other thing to remember about Tucker's Kobolds was it was in 2e. People talk about how the party was complete idiots because they didn't use Wizard Spells X, Y, Z, and sqrt(Pi)...but that level of magic and magical availability didn't exist when the adventure was run. Tucker's would be almost impossible nowadays in 3.X or 4E, but it wasn't some sort of drastic mental deficiency on the part of the PCs when it happened.

I thought it was because their ineptitude spawned this idea that has been showcased in this thread that it's ok to go on a DM power trip and perfectly nix and counteract anything the Players do as long as you're doing it with something weak like kobolds.

Well, that and they decided to have all of their followers and pack animals killed by kobolds when they could've used their own brains to counteract the kobolds' planning.

And they did decide to leave their path of retreat unsecured when the entire group were all members of the armed forces, IIRC. Kind of embarrassing for someone in the military to make such a mistake.

[Ursus the Grim]

I thought it was because their ineptitude spawned this idea that has been showcased in this thread that it's ok to go on a DM power trip and perfectly nix and counteract anything the Players do as long as you're doing it with something weak like kobolds.

Well, that and they decided to have all of their followers and pack animals killed by kobolds when they could've used their own brains to counteract the kobolds' planning.

And they did decide to leave their path of retreat unsecured when the entire group were all members of the armed forces, IIRC. Kind of embarrassing for someone in the military to make such a mistake.

I think the point of the anecdote was that the kobolds were normally considered trash mobs. Thus, when the DM played them smart it threw the players off their game. As you said, it could have been handled, but they weren't ready for it.

If they had known they were entering a booby-trapped lair home to brilliant strategists, they would have done much better, I am sure. Playing dumb mobs smart is a great way to challenge your players. of course, the key is moderation.

That being said, kobolds are the kind of creatures that you HAVE to play smart if you want the party to be challenged. Bringing a party of DMPCs into a fight with the PCs? Playing that smart is an ingredient for disaster.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

I think the point of the anecdote was that the kobolds were normally considered trash mobs. Thus, when the DM played them smart it threw the players off their game. As you said, it could have been handled, but they weren't ready for it.

If they had known they were entering a booby-trapped lair home to brilliant strategists, they would have done much better, I am sure. Playing dumb mobs smart is a great way to challenge your players. of course, the key is moderation.

That being said, kobolds are the kind of creatures that you HAVE to play smart if you want the party to be challenged. Bringing a party of DMPCs into a fight with the PCs? Playing that smart is an ingredient for disaster.That's probably what the writer of TK meant to convey, but I learned a different lesson: A more properly prepared group would have just gotten shut down with Schroedinger's traps. A DM with an 'old school' mindset can be a total ass and get away with it (emphasis on can). To be clear, I've played under old school DMs who were fine. There's just always that chance...

[Greenish]

If they had known they were entering a booby-trapped lair home to brilliant strategists, they would have done much better, I am sure.Yet another reason why Tucker's Kobolds wouldn't work in 3.5. :smallamused:

[Coidzor]

I think the point of the anecdote was that the kobolds were normally considered trash mobs. Thus, when the DM played them smart it threw the players off their game. As you said, it could have been handled, but they weren't ready for it.

If they had known they were entering a booby-trapped lair home to brilliant strategists, they would have done much better, I am sure. Playing dumb mobs smart is a great way to challenge your players. of course, the key is moderation.

Yeah, the DM was like, "dumb mobs," "dumb mobs," and then went "OMG TACTICS," followed by "problem player expectations?" And people think that's a good way to play games where the DM's job is to troll the players as a result of the story being told in a funny manner.

Which leads to people who aren't particularly clever trying to implement Tucker's Kobolds and running into players who use half a brain in regards to the scenario before them which results in them pulling out Schrödinger's Kobolds where all attempts by the PCs invariably result in failure as punishment for thinking to ensure that the DM gets to have his fun little power trip.


That being said, kobolds are the kind of creatures that you HAVE to play smart if you want the party to be challenged. Bringing a party of DMPCs into a fight with the PCs? Playing that smart is an ingredient for disaster.

Indeed, Loredrake Great Wyrm Dragonwrought Kobold Sorcerers with the Greater Draconic Rite of Passage have to be played smart to challenge the party. :smallamused:

[Ursus the Grim]

Indeed, Loredrake Great Wyrm Dragonwrought Kobold Sorcerers with the Greater Draconic Rite of Passage have to be played smart to challenge the party. :smallamused:

Hey, I'm not saying it was a good idea, I'm just highlighting what the intended message of the anecdote was. Though I don't think its wrong to throw a curve ball once in a while, so long as it isn't aimed at the collective groin of the players.

Besides, any sufficiently advanced science stacked templated (Edit:) cheesed creature is indistinguishable from magic strategy. :smallbiggrin:

[Greenish]

Besides, any sufficiently advanced science stacked templated creature is indistinguishable from magic strategy. :smallbiggrin:A Loredrake Great Wyrm Dragonwrought Desert Kobold Sorcerer with the Greater Draconic Rite of Passage doesn't have a single template.

[Ursus the Grim]

I'm not going to argue semantics and take this even further off-topic.

[Jjeinn-tae]

Hmm, maybe I shouldn't have brought up Tucker then. I was just adding a way to make players fear Kobolds. No it doesn't work anymore, at least not the same way, if those Kobolds had a team of Wizards that were also played smartly, it probably would work well.

But as others have said, you don't want to give the PC's an even fight all the time. You want to give them fights that will wear them down by attrition (thus making them be cautious) or are upfront obviously too tough for the party to handle thus they run/try a different solution (not very easy to do). You want them to be in the realm of possibility of succeeding.

Players tend to feel they'll be able to handle any encounter you throw at them, and will often suffer tactically as they feel you are probably doing your job of balancing encounters. Of course, an even, or even possibly slightly in the enemy's favor odds work well for "boss" encounters. They should get progressively harder to fight, at least, by my thoughts. It adds quite a bit of a sense of accomplishment when the players persevere, especially when they took heavy losses. It was a tough fight, but they won.

[opticalshadow]

another thing to take into account is rewards. if you make every encounter closer to what they could absolutly handle, then a few scraps of junk loot and coin isnt going to cut, esp when a larger portion of their wealth now has to go twords supplies for combat, these easy to walk thu encounters provide both a sense that the characters are actually powerful (which gives an even bigger feeling when they meet something that they cant push over, and that ellating when you do) and it also gives on avg enough of the coin they need to replenish their combat and heal supplies (leaving the big shiny loot to enjoy)

[King Atticus]

Your average character goes through, on average, 260 odd encounters to reach 20th level. With a 50% chance of victory per encounter, that means only 1 in 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00 0,000,000 parties would ever get to 20th level and "beat the game". In other words, it would be a miracle.

I am not making this up, that is actually what 2 to the 260th power is unless I made a typo somewhere.

Don't look at the game as a per encounter challenge, but rather a per adventure challenge, with only the epic milestone battles actually having odds equal to or against the PCs winning.

Firstly...wow. Kudos on showing your work that is seriously impressive. :smallbiggrin: Also an angle I had never considered before. Thanks


http://www.tuckerskobolds.com/


Thanks for that I've heard of them often but never had a clue what it meant.


I think I've had a similar sort of misunderstanding of Challenge Rating and Encounter Level. Took me ages until I worked out why I was having so much trouble getting my head around it. Lets see if my understanding of it helps...

...no idea whether that helps.

Absolutely this helps. Thanks for the break down. It spells it out nicely :smallsmile:


One thing that's sometimes hard for a new DM to judge is how much resource expenditure the encounters are forcing on the party. The essentially binary nature of HP damage means that you could be knocking every party member down to 50% HP or below in every fight, and still have the impression that the PCs found it a cakewalk, because their ability to contribute round-by-round was never compromised. With most players I've known, the loss of 50% HP makes for a tough fight in their minds, but the game's damage model doesn't reflect that especially well.

THIS...This is my problem. As a player my favorite encounters are the ones we almost don't walk away from. So when putting encounters together from the other side I fall into the trap of trying to make it that way every encounter.

Biggest thing I'm taking in on this thread is I way underestimate the between encounters time. Not making it difficult enough for players to refresh themselves. Instead of making it a continuous stream of events I tend to delay and let them heal up, I'm seeing now that's really degrading the overall flow. Thanks everybody this has been a huge eye opener. :biggrin:

[opticalshadow]

Biggest thing I'm taking in on this thread is I way underestimate the between encounters time. Not making it difficult enough for players to refresh themselves. Instead of making it a continuous stream of events I tend to delay and let them heal up, I'm seeing now that's really degrading the overall flow. Thanks everybody this has been a huge eye opener. :biggrin:

IMO, you know your doing it right, when the players faces are filled with paranoia and dread when they realize they had enough time to get fully healed, and are not in a town.

[Ormur]

Actually, supposing the players and DM are equally skilled and that the CR of the fight is accurate (the power level of the monsters for their CR compares to that of the builds the players are using) the players are still going to win more than 50% of the fights where they face equally powerful opponents.

If they're facing NPCs they'll be using lower WBL and possibly worse stats (depends on stat selection rules and whether they're applied to NPCs too). Monsters have treasure tables I guess.

Most importantly the DM is a single person usually facing four "opponents". He has no-one to second guess him or suggest better alternatives, the players are a hive mind and even with some sort of out-of-character-talk limitations orders can be shouted in mid-battle. The players are also more familiar with their character's build and are presumably more attached to them.

The unstated assumption here is however that this is a fair fight. The DM has much better metagame resources to rig the battle in his favour. Another thing is that even with equally skilled gamers the DM will spend less effort into optimizing disposable NPCs than the players will for their characters.

I prefer a play-style with fewer and tougher encounters than the suggested grind so I almost never prepare encounters that aren't "very difficult" or "overpowering". My party averages at around tier 2,5 but I've routinely thrown DMM clericzillas at them. Most battles are tense but the outcome is seldom in doubt. When it genuinely was I usually managed to exploit their weaknesses, tactically or build-wise (often by sheer luck). However I'm neither a better tactician nor a more devoted optimizer than my players so that's to be expected.