These encounters too easy/too tough?

[Pinjata]

Soon, my PCs will cooperate in defending a village from Orc horde attack. Depending on how sucessful the preparations will be, the set of the final encounters will be gauged up or down regarding difficulty. PCs are lvl 7, standard setup (fighter, mage, rogue, cleric) and will fight three consequitve waves of Orc horde the first night and three more the second night. They will defend these in a village where they will have a benefit of barricades, meaning they will get an Oppurtunity attack vs each creature that will try to climb these baricades. Orc giants will get an ability to destroy a single 5x5 square of barricade with a standard action. I want these encounters to be: challenging, threatening, very difficult and very deadly. Here is what they will meet if:

3000 XP Group If they organize things perfectly (random roll for each barricade hotspot. they will be basically a "fire brigade" of defenders, running from first to second to third spot):

1 Orc war chief, Orc Eye of Gruumsh, Orc (14)
2 Orc Eye of Gruumsh (3), Orc (16)
3C Orc war chief , Ettin, Orc (8)

4400 Group If they organize things with a few subquests unfinished (random roll for each barricade hotspot. they will be basically a "fire brigade" of defenders, running from first to second to third spot):

1 Orc war chief, Orc Eye of Gruumsh (3) Orc (20)
2 Orc war chief, Ettin, Orc Eye of Gruumsh(2), Orc (13)
3 Orc war chief, Orc Eye of Gruumsh, Hill giant, Orc (10)


6800 XP Group If they fail most of subquests (random roll for each barricade hotspot. they will be basically a "fire brigade" of defenders, running from first to second to third spot):

1 Orc war chief, Orc Eye of Gruumsh(3), Hill giant (2), Orc (7)
2 Orc war chief, Orc Eye of Gruumsh(4), Hill giant, Ettin, Orc (10)
3 Orc war chief, Orc Eye of Gruumsh(4), Hill giant(2), Orc (3)

9600 XP Group If they really mess up (random roll for each barricade hotspot. they will be basically a "fire brigade" of defenders, running from first to second to third spot):

1 Orc war chief , Orc Eye of Gruumsh(4), Hill Giant(3), Ettin(1), Orc (2)
2 Orc war chief, Orc Eye of Gruumsh(4), Hill Giant(2), Ettin(2), Orc (2)
3C Orc war chief , Orc Eye of Gruumsh(4), Hill Giant(1), Ettin(3), Orc (2)

I will roll for spot A, B, C and PCs will meet each array (A, B or C) at each of the spots.

What do you think of monster pick and of difficulty level? It is highly unlikely they will end up with hardest possible option, but second easiest is a probable option.


thanks

[Ninja_Prawn]

You know your group better than we do, but even if they're super-expert tacticians, you need to take into account Action Economy.

So, going by the DMG (and inventing a few extra difficulty brackets), the 'actual difficulty' of your groups is:


3000 XP Groups

1 Orc war chief, Orc Eye of Gruumsh, Orc (14) (1,100+450+1,400)*4=11,800. Super-deadly
2 Orc Eye of Gruumsh (3), Orc (16) (1,350+1,600)*4=11,800. Super-deadly
3C Orc war chief, Ettin, Orc (8) (1,100+1,100+800)*2.5=7,500. Deadly


4400XP Groups

1 Orc war chief, Orc Eye of Gruumsh (3) Orc (20) (1,100+1,350+2,000)*4=17,800. Super-deadly
2 Orc war chief, Ettin, Orc Eye of Gruumsh(2), Orc (13) (1,100+1,100+900+1,300)*4=17,600. Super-deadly
3 Orc war chief, Orc Eye of Gruumsh, Hill giant, Orc (10) (1,100+450+1,800+1,000)*3=13,050. Super-deadly


6800 XP Groups

1 Orc war chief, Orc Eye of Gruumsh(3), Hill giant (2), Orc (7) (1,100+1,350+3,600+700)*3=20,250, Hyper-deadly
2 Orc war chief, Orc Eye of Gruumsh(4), Hill giant, Ettin, Orc (10) (1,100+1,800+1,800+1,100+1000)*4=27,200. Uber-deadly
3 Orc war chief, Orc Eye of Gruumsh(4), Hill giant(2), Orc (3) (1,100+1,800+3,600+300)*2.5=17,000. Super-deadly


9600 XP Groups

1 Orc war chief, Orc Eye of Gruumsh(4), Hill Giant(3), Ettin(1), Orc (2) (1,100+1,800+5,400+1,100+200)*3=28,800. Uber-deadly
2 Orc war chief, Orc Eye of Gruumsh(4), Hill Giant(2), Ettin(2), Orc (2) (1,100+1,800+3,600+2,200+200)*3=26,700. Uber-deadly
3C Orc war chief, Orc Eye of Gruumsh(4), Hill Giant(1), Ettin(3), Orc (2) (1,100+1,800+1,800+3,300+200)*3=24,600. Hyper-deadly


I know you want this to be epic and difficult, but I think this is too much.

Edit: you didn't mention the militia that were kicking around in your previous thread, so I assumed they uh... didn't make it...

[Seruvius]

Are the PC's fighting alone? Does the town have guards to help them out, or is there time for them to train some of the locals in the use of say spears and crossbows?

It is your campaign of course and you know your story and players best, but I personally would recommend having the baddie waves being of a set difficulty (say your 6800 xp groups), and give the PC's more advantages depending on how they organise to help balance it out. Say the barricades yo suggested, along with maybe elevated vantage points for spellcasters.

Maybe take a leaf out of the RHOD campaign. Give them say 10 cannon fodder and 4 decent addition milita gents to use eahc day, but they must deploy them in advance at whiechever barricade they chose. With certain in advance RP stuff, they can have these guys be better equipped (convince/help the smith to give up his secret stash/make more gear) or better trained (say if you have a ranged combatant let them train with the archers for a few days to give them a 3/short rest archery combat style).

Or another version might be have 2 waves coming in at once and the PC's have to decide how to handle it. split themselves up with militia to take on both waves? or pc take one wave and milita take another one, but the militia one breaks through for a climactic final battle inside the church/town hall/town square etc. with the leader of this siege and his/her bodyguards.

These are all just general ideas that i reckon could make it a bit more involved for the PC's during the fights rather than just waves of baddies to murder. On the other hand if your PC's dont like this sort of thing, then waves of murder-death works quite fine =P

[Pinjata]

Splendid input but ... how the heck can your calculations Ninja_Prawn differ from mine so much? :O I have put encounters together here (http://tools.goblinist.com/5enc).

@Seruvius
The militia input will be reflected by PCs previous deeds. The more they manage to organize the village, the weaker Orc attack they will get in the end, thus reflecting a good militia organization/morale/equiptment. There will be 4 or 5 tokens with them on barricades, but their effect in combat will be nil.


waves of murder-death works quite fine =P


This is the way I'll go.

[Ninja_Prawn]

Splendid input but ... how the heck can your calculations Ninja_Prawn differ from mine so much? :O I have put encounters together here (http://tools.goblinist.com/5enc).


Double checked and some of my numbers may be out. I will update. Updated. They were only out by a few hundred.

The difference is because your calculator fails to multiply all the monsters by the group size factor - it only seems to multiply the XP value of the monsters that there are more than one of.

[Pinjata]

Hm. Could I kindly ask you to shape for me mentioned options? Three different encounters for option 1, three for option 2, three for option 3, three for option 4. First should be "challenging", second "tough", third "barely doable" and fourth "almost impossible". Keep in mind PCs will engage first option thrice in in-game time of about 10 minutes, and second one the next day in the same time span.

If you feel like it. If not, thanks for the help so far :)

[Demonic Spoon]

To be clear, the party will be fighting all 3 groups without a short rest?


Anyway, in general, the DMG guidelines expect 6-8 medium to hard encounters per day, with two short rests between them. So, relative to baseline, your short rest classes are going to be less powerful than the long rest classes (that's just wizard and cleric), since your cleric/wizard will be able to spew out an above-average amount of spells per encounter.

For these, I'm assuming that the barricades aren't going to help the PCs that much (that is, I'm assuming that everyone but the mage is primarily melee). If that is not the case, then I'd bump the difficulty up a little bit further.

I would put the first group in the middle to middle-high of the range for Hard. Your PCs will be almost guaranteed to win, and probably won't be in a truckload of danger, but it'll burn resources and they'll take a bunch of damage. It will be a real fight, but not a desperate one.

I would put the second group around the Deadly threshold. Your PCs will still probably win, depending on how well they can preserve resources and such, but with 3 of such fights in a row they'll be hurting by the end.

I would put the third group at maybe Deadly threshold + 20-30%. There's a distinct chance the PCs will fail, but they could still definitely pull it off given not-terrible luck and good tactics.

I would put the fourth group at deadly threshold + 60-75%. At three of such encounters in a row, your PCs will probably lose, but not so hard that a victory isn't within the realm of possibility.

[Ninja_Prawn]

To be clear, the party will be fighting all 3 groups without a short rest?


Anyway, in general, the DMG guidelines expect 6-8 medium to hard encounters per day, with two short rests between them. So, relative to baseline, your short rest classes are going to be less powerful than the long rest classes (that's just wizard and cleric), since your cleric/wizard will be able to spew out an above-average amount of spells per encounter.

For these, I'm assuming that the barricades aren't going to help the PCs that much (that is, I'm assuming that everyone but the mage is primarily melee). If that is not the case, then I'd bump the difficulty up a little bit further.

I would put the first group in the middle to middle-high of the range for Hard. Your PCs will be almost guaranteed to win, and probably won't be in a truckload of danger, but it'll burn resources and they'll take a bunch of damage. It will be a real fight, but not a desperate one.

I would put the second group around the Deadly threshold. Your PCs will still probably win, depending on how well they can preserve resources and such, but with 3 of such fights in a row they'll be hurting by the end.

I would put the third group at maybe Deadly threshold + 20-30%. There's a distinct chance the PCs will fail, but they could still definitely pull it off given not-terrible luck and good tactics.

I would put the fourth group at deadly threshold + 60-75%. At three of such encounters in a row, your PCs will probably lose, but not so hard that a victory isn't within the realm of possibility.

This seems like a reasonable approach. The fourth group (3 fights at deadly+60%) is punishing, but is probably acceptable for an 'endgame' battle.

I'll have a look at recalibrating all the monster groups to these numbers in a while, if you like.

[Pinjata]

I'll have a look at recalibrating all the monster groups to these numbers in a while, if you like.

I'd appreciate that very much.

[Demonic Spoon]

This seems like a reasonable approach. The fourth group (3 fights at deadly+60%) is punishing, but is probably acceptable for an 'endgame' battle.

I'll have a look at recalibrating all the monster groups to these numbers in a while, if you like.


My understanding is that the party will only be fighting one of those four groups, depending on how they do at setting up for the siege. The party would probably lose 3 fights at deadly+60%, but that's intentional, as it represents a failure to prepare properly - but, per OP, that won't happen unless they really screw up the defense.

[Ninja_Prawn]

My understanding is that the party will only be fighting one of those four groups, depending on how they do at setting up for the siege. The party would probably lose 3 fights at deadly+60%, but that's intentional, as it represents a failure to prepare properly - but, per OP, that won't happen unless they really screw up the defense.

Hmm... I was under the impression that preparation selects the difficulty, then they face three consecutive fights from that difficulty, two nights in a row (six fights total).

Anyway, my Orc bands:


A) War Chief, Eye of Gruumsh, 8no Orcs. 2,350XP
B) 2no Eyes of Gruumsh, 11no Orcs. 2,000XP
C) Eye of Gruumsh, Ettin, 8no Orcs. 2,350XP



A) War Chief, 2no Eyes of Gruumsh, 7no Orcs. 2,700XP
B) War Chief, 2no Ettins, Orc. 3,400XP
C) Eye of Gruumsh, Hill Giant, 5no Orcs. 2,750XP



A) War Chief, Eye of Gruumsh, Ettin, 7no Orcs. 3,350XP
B) War Chief, 3no Ettins. 4,400XP
C) 2no Eyes of Gruumsh, Hill Giant, 7no Orcs. 3,400XP



A) War Chief, Ettin, Hill Giant, 4no Orcs. 4,400XP
B) 3no Hill Giants. 5,400XP
C) 2no Eyes of Gruumsh, 18no Orcs. 2,700XP


Anyone fancy double-checking the maths?

[Demonic Spoon]

Hmm... I was under the impression that preparation selects the difficulty, then they face three consecutive fights from that difficulty, two nights in a row (six fights total).

Anyway, my Orc bands:


Well yes, that's what I thought too. The point being that I agree that deadly + 60% is "too tough" in the sense that the players probably won't win, but "too tough" makes sense given that it represents the most that they could have failed in preparing, and that most likely, they will not fight it.

[Ninja_Prawn]

Well yes, that's what I thought too. The point being that I agree that deadly + 60% is "too tough" in the sense that the players probably won't win, but "too tough" makes sense given that it represents the most that they could have failed in preparing, and that most likely, they will not fight it.

Well, at least we're all on the same page. :smallsmile:

With the horde multipliers, a small change results in a big difficulty bump. It's hard to tell how they'll pan out without seeing them in actual play. Especially the ones with lots of little Orcs. 7th-level players should be able to one-shot them easily, so a well-placed fireball could seriously affect the combat. On the other hand, being swarmed 4-on-1 could be painful if the party doesn't co-ordinate well (or protect the squishies).

[Pinjata]

Hmm... I was under the impression that preparation selects the difficulty, then they face three consecutive fights from that difficulty, two nights in a row (six fights total).

Your impression was correct 100%. And I really can not thank you enough for help. I am still waiting to play a longer 5e campaign, but I like to DM, so I started to shape this up. I'm still getting accustomed to number crunching in 5e.

[DragonLordIT]

I am running a campaign in which my players are fighting a hobgoblin legion with mixed devil allies and so the situation resembles yours. :smallwink:

I was just thinking one thing to add some real flavour to the battle other than some encounter based on simple calculation:

>you could put more monsters in the encouter adding NPC on your players side, it would be funny to think the possible consequences of behavour like "Did they let the other guards die while trying to save themselves?" or "did they fought in front line becoming the heroes of the normal men?"
>Insted of short rest between monster waves (unlikely to happen during a siege where monsters want to obliterate their target) you could award them with hero points (optional rule of DMG) for special or well played actions (saving a dying NPC on the battlefield, engaging their leader in a brutal duel in the middle of a fire burning alley of the village and so on)
>While DMing the sessions with my players I never made the enemies fight until last man (or orc or hobgoblin), it would be normal for them to flee if decimated (killing 50% of them in ... let's say 3 rounds? you decide, simply killing a % of them, preparing for them a big spooky trap that drops their morale, up to you . . .and your players) or if their big ally (an ettin, their leader or so on) is taken down. Then the ones who flee would be added to the next wave or they would flee if it is the last one.

[Pinjata]

I am running a campaign in which my players are fighting a hobgoblin legion with mixed devil allies and so the situation resembles yours. :smallwink:

I was just thinking one thing to add some real flavour to the battle other than some encounter based on simple calculation:

>you could put more monsters in the encouter adding NPC on your players side, it would be funny to think the possible consequences of behavour like "Did they let the other guards die while trying to save themselves?" or "did they fought in front line becoming the heroes of the normal men?"
>Insted of short rest between monster waves (unlikely to happen during a siege where monsters want to obliterate their target) you could award them with hero points (optional rule of DMG) for special or well played actions (saving a dying NPC on the battlefield, engaging their leader in a brutal duel in the middle of a fire burning alley of the village and so on)
>While DMing the sessions with my players I never made the enemies fight until last man (or orc or hobgoblin), it would be normal for them to flee if decimated (killing 50% of them in ... let's say 3 rounds? you decide, simply killing a % of them, preparing for them a big spooky trap that drops their morale, up to you . . .and your players) or if their big ally (an ettin, their leader or so on) is taken down. Then the ones who flee would be added to the next wave or they would flee if it is the last one.

Very nice. Have replaced short rest with Hero points. Have added the rule: The moment the enemy of highest CR is killed, attack wave retreats.

[MrStabby]

I have a few questions/thoughts/observations...

Short rests: I would give them. More abilities to use means more fun and at least one short rest per day means that those with short rest abilities do get some benefit from them. Also your classes are not really too short rest focussed - fighter a little and Cleric a little...

Do the players know how many waves there are? If they know it is much easier to regulate resources and to do things like hold back spell slots. Do the players know what they are facing to help them select their spells for the day?

I would want to add more character to each wave. A difference in strategy as well as numbers to make things more interesting. I think there is likely to be quite a bit of difference anyway just from the composition.

Can the players stock up on consumables/use things like caltrops in advance and similar measures?

Is the attack day or night? What is visibility like? With good viability, clear lines of sight and defenders shooting from cover against melee foes your PCs could get a major advantage. Will darkvision be an issue? Can the PCs force the attackers hand making the attack be on favourable terms? Can they scout the enemy to know what is coming?

Finally (and a personal thing - not saying it is better) I would adjust the difficulty between encounters (whilst aiming to keep any nominal average the same). An easy early wave to warm up. Then a really tough wave to get the PCs worried for their lives. In the end a medium wave - still a tough fight as the PCs have fewer resources left by that point.

Is there an in game reason why the Orcs are splitting into bitesized attacks rather than swarming in all at once?

Personal thought is for level 7 the encounters are very tough but, given forewarning, defensive advantage (and ability to prepare), visibility and some consumable items or similar the players should have a very good chance if they are smart.

[Pinjata]

Nice second thoughts.

I have a few questions/thoughts/observations...
Short rests: I would give them. More abilities to use means more fun and at least one short rest per day means that those with short rest abilities do get some benefit from them. Also your classes are not really too short rest focussed - fighter a little and Cleric a little...
I think Hero points will be really cool.


I have a few questions/thoughts/observations...
Do the players know how many waves there are? If they know it is much easier to regulate resources and to do things like hold back spell slots. Do the players know what they are facing to help them select their spells for the day?

They will not know what is coming after them except lots of Orcs/wargs/ogres. At least that is what they will be expecting.


I have a few questions/thoughts/observations...
I would want to add more character to each wave. A difference in strategy as well as numbers to make things more interesting. I think there is likely to be quite a bit of difference anyway just from the composition.

Well ... I'm too lazy for that. :P



Can the players stock up on consumables/use things like caltrops in advance and similar measures? Is the attack day or night? What is visibility like? With good viability, clear lines of sight and defenders shooting from cover against melee foes your PCs could get a major advantage. Will darkvision be an issue? Can the PCs force the attackers hand making the attack be on favourable terms? Can they scout the enemy to know what is coming?


Players will be able to stock up on mundane things found in a village. Attack will be at night - the only part of "tactic" from orcs' side. Darkvision will be an issue if PCs roam out of reach of torches, placed on all baricades. The more PCs will make things worse for the eemy with each subquest they make. Yes, they can scout, in fact, there is a vilalge scout available and with a little luck, they can get good estimate on time of arrival and enemy size.



Is there an in game reason why the Orcs are splitting into bitesized attacks rather than swarming in all at once?

They are not really splitting, Orcs will attack all sides at once, but "strangely" (yes, its a cliche) militia will fail to hold the enemy just as PCs end their previous encounter.

[PoeticDwarf]

Soon, my PCs will cooperate in defending a village from Orc horde attack. Depending on how sucessful the preparations will be, the set of the final encounters will be gauged up or down regarding difficulty. PCs are lvl 7, standard setup (fighter, mage, rogue, cleric) and will fight three consequitve waves of Orc horde the first night and three more the second night. They will defend these in a village where they will have a benefit of barricades, meaning they will get an Oppurtunity attack vs each creature that will try to climb these baricades. Orc giants will get an ability to destroy a single 5x5 square of barricade with a standard action. I want these encounters to be: challenging, threatening, very difficult and very deadly. Here is what they will meet if:

3000 XP Group If they organize things perfectly (random roll for each barricade hotspot. they will be basically a "fire brigade" of defenders, running from first to second to third spot):

1 Orc war chief, Orc Eye of Gruumsh, Orc (14)
2 Orc Eye of Gruumsh (3), Orc (16)
3C Orc war chief , Ettin, Orc (8)

4400 Group If they organize things with a few subquests unfinished (random roll for each barricade hotspot. they will be basically a "fire brigade" of defenders, running from first to second to third spot):

1 Orc war chief, Orc Eye of Gruumsh (3) Orc (20)
2 Orc war chief, Ettin, Orc Eye of Gruumsh(2), Orc (13)
3 Orc war chief, Orc Eye of Gruumsh, Hill giant, Orc (10)


6800 XP Group If they fail most of subquests (random roll for each barricade hotspot. they will be basically a "fire brigade" of defenders, running from first to second to third spot):

1 Orc war chief, Orc Eye of Gruumsh(3), Hill giant (2), Orc (7)
2 Orc war chief, Orc Eye of Gruumsh(4), Hill giant, Ettin, Orc (10)
3 Orc war chief, Orc Eye of Gruumsh(4), Hill giant(2), Orc (3)

9600 XP Group If they really mess up (random roll for each barricade hotspot. they will be basically a "fire brigade" of defenders, running from first to second to third spot):

1 Orc war chief , Orc Eye of Gruumsh(4), Hill Giant(3), Ettin(1), Orc (2)
2 Orc war chief, Orc Eye of Gruumsh(4), Hill Giant(2), Ettin(2), Orc (2)
3C Orc war chief , Orc Eye of Gruumsh(4), Hill Giant(1), Ettin(3), Orc (2)

I will roll for spot A, B, C and PCs will meet each array (A, B or C) at each of the spots.

What do you think of monster pick and of difficulty level? It is highly unlikely they will end up with hardest possible option, but second easiest is a probable option.


thanks

Like the Prawn said. It sounds way, way to difficult. But if it are veteran players with barigades maybe they can have a chance. I mean, an orc is not the best in ranged, right?

[Ninja_Prawn]

Well ... I'm too lazy for that. :P


I would urge you to reconsider this position. Changing up the tactics used by each wave is important, not just to keep your players interested, but also to ensure the orc army lives up to its theoretical challenge rating. If they all behave like morons, they won't be as challenging as you want them to be.

You've got 12 possible waves. How difficult is it to write up a unique (but basic) battleplan for each one?

Do you have a rough tactical map(s) of the battlefield(s) you could share? I'd be happy to have a crack at it myself after work (about 5 hours from now).