Topic: Encounter Levels??

[Marc R]

"Super Goblin"

Mage cast 2 airwalls, so -200 to missile attacks. . . .and goblin threw his 35 OB spear, triple open ended and took the mage down with a good roll on the A crit.

The Mage's partner unloaded and slew heck out of that goblin, but as my GM of those days would say just before rolling "What are the odds?"

That one phrase, I think catches the whole of the issue, quite nicely.

[rdanhenry]

Skinning is a Rolemaster skill from at least RMCII.

Yes - but what about specifically "skinning the cat" and would that be under crafts or acrobatics?  Good question for are RMFRP brethren.

RMSS places it among the Crafts. However, another way to skin a cat is harder to find in RM than you might think. Perhaps a crude job could be done with the Survival skill. I don't think there is a spell in Spell Law that would do the trick, unless a Cleric summoned his god to ask for divine aid in skinning the cat. Don't know how well that would go over. Maybe turn the cat into an undead cat and make it skin itself? Turn to Construct Companion and create a cat-skinning servant?

[Arioch]

Can't be done in RM if one is using DnD thought processes. 

And this imho is one of the first thing that should be explained to new GM: combat in RM is supposed to be lethal and difficult to predict. In every fight, each side has a chance to lose.

Setting encounters in RM are an art, not a science.  Trying to come up with a methodical approach will not work in such an excellently diverse game. 

Sorry, but this make me smile everytime I read it: do you think that art is not methodical? That it has no rules? You couldn't be farther from truth.

[Arioch]

"Super Goblin"

Mage cast 2 airwalls, so -200 to missile attacks. . . .and goblin threw his 35 OB spear, triple open ended and took the mage down with a good roll on the A crit.

The Mage's partner unloaded and slew heck out of that goblin, but as my GM of those days would say just before rolling "What are the odds?"

That one phrase, I think catches the whole of the issue, quite nicely.

The odds are very small, but perfectly calculable, I think that the math guys here in the forums will be happy to tell you what's the goblin % of scoring a hit against the mage.

[Marc R]

I did the math above. . .and really the end result is "What are the odds?"

If your variables exceed the size of your average value, that comes fairly close to the mathmatical definition of "unpredictable".

[Arioch]

But, LM do you really expect that a guide will be able to unfailingly predict the exact outcome of every single battle? That's impossible, and not only in RM, but in every rpg. Uncertainty is one of the key factors in combat in most of the rpgs I know. (Besides,what would be the point of throwing the dice if you already know the outcome?)
Does this makes an encounter building guide worthless?
Hardly so, it can still teach the GM (and the players) what are the basic assumptions of the game and how to gauge (within a reasonable aproximation) what are their chances in every fight.

Note, that I said "gauge", meaning "to appraise, estimate, or judge": it's not a certain prediction, it's an esteem. Like in "what are the chances of the above goblin to score a crit against the mage"
As I said: "Very low".
I've not said "this is never gonna happen", it's not impossible for the goblin to kill th mage, it's just uncertain.

[Ecthelion]

I think one of the main reasons why it is hard to guage combat encounters in RM is that is matters so much what tactic that is employed. In many other games it pretty given how damage a character of a certain profession are expected to deliver each round no matter the tactical situation.

In RM the OB, db and AT of the involved characters is not enough to answer how damage the character will deliver. You also need to know how the group will move, if the players can team up on enemies and get flanking or rear bonus then those enemies are most likely dead. Superior numbers are the single factor that decide most RM combats. If the characters will get surprise bonus then also helps. Use of skills like tactics might even further change the odds.

In the end this IMO boils - from a mathematical POV - down to a higher variation in comparison to other games.

If you have dumb critters who always engage the PCs only in frontal 1:1 combats and if you use a combat system with little variation, e.g. one without special critical damage, and if the combatants may not use special skills, like tactics, or spells, which bring even more variation, then the outcome of combat is quite easily predictable. The only thing a GM then has to do is to get a feeling for perhaps differing combat abilities of the opposing group, i.e. how many 1st level goblins may I send against my group of four 3rd level PCs?

But RM has a combat system with criticals and therefore a bit of variation and you often have critters that are smart and RM of course has a wide range of spells and also some skills that might influence the outcome of combat. The latter two factors, smart opponents and spells (+skills), are AFAIK used in most FRPGs, so that it is IMO mainly RM's combat system which brings a bit more variation.

Personally I only had difficulties in assigning the "correct" number and type of opponents during the first few sessions as a GM, but I can see that for new GMs some guidelines would be helpful. IMO, for melee fighters, OB+DB is still the best gauge for the combat abilities. More hits are nice, but usually "it's not the bruises that kill". Armor can be converted into better or worse defense i.e. factored into the DB. The more variation comes into play, e.g. through the use of spells, the more I tone down the planned encounter level/lethality, to be able to cope with bad spell/maneuver rolls. Finally I vary the danger of the opponents during combat by letting them act smarter or dumber, depending on how well the combat turns out for the PCs. Nowadays only in the case of high-level spell users in the PC group it is difficult for me to estimate what would be a good encounter since e.g. a successful Fireball might bring down half of the opponents, so that the combat gets too easy, while, if the same spell has a bad roll, no enemy is even noticeably injured, so that combat becomes too hard.

Just my 2 cents

[Marc R]

Arioch:

I understand, but when you attempt to estimate, you need to come up with answers that cover "most situations" or else you're either mistaken or misleading.

If you have $2 in your pocket, +/- $10, you cannot actually lay out an easy prediction as to if you can afford a $2.50 slice of pizza. The variation exceeds the average, so anyone who says they can predict the likely result is wrong. (Essentially, in the model here you have either not enough data to answer, or too much variability to predict).

First problem: You could crunch all the variables to construct a probability model (it's not impossible, it's merely complex) but you'd be talking about a LOT of variables to enter in the front end to determine "start of fight" odds.

Second problem: Party variability is so high, that an encounter can't be said to be challenging to a group of five 6th level adventurers, since they could be anything from Sages to Warrior Monks to Archmages, plus all the variations within that.

Third Problem: Many of said variables are situational, so are not determined until just before the fight. . . .things like surprise, terrain. So you cannot put an encounter down on paper and compare it to the party and state the odds. . .you roll perception, one side is surprised, odds totally shift from "as written" to "as encountered".
 
Fourth Problem: and a LOT of mid flow variables. . .i.e. starting off the 10th level fighter seems to have the advantage over the 3rd level fighter, but in round 1, the 10th level fighter takes a -50 penalty wound. . .odds have now completely shifted for the start of round 2.

Fifth Problem: Rolemaster doesn't use an errosion model of hits like many games do, it has multiple vectors of damage, hits, stuns, bleeds, penalties, etc. . .David can kill Golliath in RM, in most other games, he's doomed.

Sixth Problem: Intelligence and tactics have a greater effect on results than OB does. . .quantify "smart" or "Stupid" to put into the model? Run into 5 goblins, the GM runs said goblins as a stand up fight in a hall with no cover. . . .run into the same 5 goblins, the GM runs them using Apache sneak-n-strike tactics. . .which is more dangerous? How can you hang a number on that and predict results?


Ecth,

Same answer for me. . .the sixth problem is also the one variable completely under GM control. . .and one the GM can play with on the fly to re-balance as things go, depending on the intended lethality level of the game.

[Arioch]

LM: Ok, but the purpose of a guide would be that of teaching GMs how to do the esteem, not to estimate the outcome in their place!
You're right: we cannot gauge the outcome fo a battle without knowing the variables in play. But GMs and players (hopefully) know their variables. They know how the PCs party and the opponent party are composed, how do they fight, what skills they have, in which situation they're fighting etc..
What they need are guidelines to help them using these information.

[OLF, i.e. Olf Le Fol]

My opinion is that people are turning a molehill into a mountain. All these talks about how RM2 is complicated (compared to other games) and unpredictable, with too many variables are just missing the point and are akin to saying that an average serves no purpose because no data in the data set equals the average. Or, applied to something closer (since people would probably discuss over how you can "easily" compute an average), akin to saying that social and psychological studies are useless because the exact behaviour of a person or of a group of persons actually depends on the personality and mental state of particular person or group of persons.

To answer Rasyr, I think one solution would be to implement something similar to D&D3's "Challenge Rating" concept for each creature. For people not familiar with it, a creature's CR represents "the average level of a party of 4 adventurers for which one creature would make an encounter of moderate difficulty", "moderate difficulty" being "have good chances to defeat it while spending about 25% of the party's resources". For people considering it's an easy task in D&D to determine that because "there aren't many cases possible", I'd say that with the amount of basic classes, prestige classes, feats, spells and magical items, the difference between two D&D3 "parties of 4 adventurers" of the same level can be pretty huge (not mentioning the ability to make use of all these resources also make a difference). Does that make the CR concept useless though? I'd say that no, all the contrary.

That being said, how to do the same in RM2? Well, the same way as in D&D, in which there isn't really any magical formula other than "playtest". In RM2, the solution would be, for instance, to _state_ what an average party would be (say, 2 combat-oriented non-spell users, 1 combat oriented semi-spell user and 1 combat oriented mage) and playtest encounters between it and a given creature. It then would be up to a GM to adjust his encounters, according to how his PC party deviates from that "average party".

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

That being said, how to do the same in RM2? Well, the same way as in D&D, in which there isn't really any magical formula other than "playtest". In RM2, the solution would be, for instance, to _state_ what an average party would be (say, 2 combat-oriented non-spell users, 1 combat oriented semi-spell user and 1 combat oriented mage) and playtest encounters between it and a given creature. It then would be up to a GM to adjust his encounters, according to how his PC party deviates from that "average party".

I would suggest that an "average party be considered to be the following:

1 Fighter (melee tank type)
1 Rogue (agile melee type, or ranged attack type)
1 Magician
1 Semi Spell User (at least somewhat combat oriented - i.e. A Ranger, Monk, Champion, Elemental Warrior, or Venturer).

I like the Challenge Rating idea -- if anybody wanted to go through and create it and write it up (including the ratings... hehe), ICE would most definitely be willing to publish in an issue of Express Addtions.

 

[Marc R]

OLF. . . .there's a lot less variability in play in D&D due to the very nature of the fifth problem, above.

You can essentially split the whole RPG industry in two, and RM and D&D sit on either side of the mortality scale divide. . .and that mortality scale creates a lot of static in the probabilities.

Any game with dice has a minimum hazard level where danger of death is in play, but the difference between "an accumulation of strikes might beat you to death" vs "Any one shot can kill you" draws a hard line between the two types of games.

Many (not all) modern games are highly mortal.

Even skip the magic part, using RMSS black Ops:

10 russian partisans 5th level with bolt action rifles and a wire detonated 6 pack of dynamite vs 20 German infantry 2nd/3rd level with subguns and grenades in two trucks with pintle mounted light machineguns. . . .who'll win? Give me a lot more information and I'll hazard a guess, but it's gonna take a lot more data. (Same would be true of Twilight 2000, Aftermath, or a slew of other "modern era" games.)

I played in exactly ONE d&d game that had that same spine shivery feel of constantly imminent mortality you always have in a highly mortal game like RM. . .

We all were instructed to create ambitious 5th level mages. . . .and arrive at a contest of 100 mages. . . . .involving missions, and where in the field, anyone who didn't come back was considered to have lost. So the 5 PCs banded together, with the understanding that when the field narrowed to 5, all bets were off. . . but once you hit 5th level in AD&D, the single attack damage potential of a mage exceeds their hits. . .so literally at any point, if a PC or NPC got first shot off on you, you were likely dead. . . .and in the absence of clerics, we had almost zero healing magic. . .everyone was paranoid, crafty and sneaky, and those that didn't watch their backs got scragged.

Under those circumstances, with everyone playing an egg carrying a sledgehammer, AD&D felt like RM. . .it was a blast.

That "shiver of fear" is a gut-level realization of the odds, the fact that the probabilities are so in flux that at any moment you could be killed.

In D&D, a 5th level mage is far more of a hazard to a 10th level mage, than a 5th level fighter is a hazard to a 10th level fighter. . . .in RM, the nature of the open ended dice, the many situational attack mods, and the critical tables share that fear out to everyone. IMO that's the central point of RM vs games like D&D, that thrill gained from being at least a little afraid all the time.

Once you do that, IMO, any meaningful CR goes right out the window, you can create them, but the amount of deviation in play will mean that either the results won't match the CR predictions, or the GM will constantly be fudging things. . . .

I can see a chapter or two in a book explaining some of the logic, to help Noob GMs "get it" a bit faster, but a mathmatical model will likely either be absurdly complex, or completely deceptive in it's results.

[OLF, i.e. Olf Le Fol]

10 russian partisans 5th level with bolt action rifles and a wire detonated 6 pack of dynamite vs 20 German infantry 2nd/3rd level with subguns and grenades in two trucks with pintle mounted light machineguns. . . .who'll win?

Well, similarly, in D&D, 10 fighters 10th level with mere clothes and a longsword wouldn't win vs. 20 orcs 1st level with wands of fireballs (10th level) and rings allowing them to use them without problem. So, what was your point? That a level 1 with an artefact can kick the ass of a level 50 naked and weaponless? Well, sure. It's just as true in D&D than in RMSS.

in RM, the nature of the open ended dice, the many situational attack mods, and the critical tables share that fear out to everyone. IMO that's the central point of RM vs games like D&D, that thrill gained from being at least a little afraid all the time.

Or not. Possibility isn't probability. Sure, a +35 OB/0 DB, AT2, 3rd level orc may kill a +240 OB/+150 DB, AT20, 20th level fighter, but even considering the 20th fighter doesn't have the equipment going with his level, and going with an average parrying (say 140), the orc would need to reroll at least thrice to be able to score a CC. So, sure, you can say that in RM2, he still stands a chance while in D&D he doesn't, but to say that "once you do that, any meaningful CR goes right out the window" would be wrong IMO.

At least, in case you didn't notice, the suggested "standard party" used to determine the CRs would use the RM2 rules as well. What does that mean? It means that it's already in the same "probability pool" as your own PC party. What does that mean? It means that an encounter has about as much chances scoring a wonderful open-ended roll vs. it than vs. yours.

Heck, IRL, commanders would give/assess missions difficulty levels and put against it the necessary men and material (if available). Sure, anyone using a gun could indeed shoot dead the best SEAL if circumstances are right, but most officers would expect their 5 SEAL marines trying to take back a boat held by 2 fishermen to win without any difficulty. A CR is just representative of that: the fishermen are CR1, the 5 SEAL marines are level 10, so their should be able to take down a CR1 encounter without much trouble and spending less than 10% of their resources.

but the amount of deviation in play will mean that either the results won't match the CR predictions, or the GM will constantly be fudging things. . . .

Except if your PC team changes each and every time, its "amount of deviation in play" won't differ much from the "standard party" used to get the CR. As such, once you determined that your party is, say, 2 levels more than the "standard party" level, all you have to do is to use encounters of 2 CR higher and that's all...

A CR is a certainty: it doesn't mean "each and every time, when a similar party meets this encounter, they shall defeat it with spending exactly 25% of their resources." It is a difficulty assessment: it means "most of the times, when a similar party meets this encounter, they're very likely to defeat it with spending about 25% of their resources."

[OLF, i.e. Olf Le Fol]

*A CR is NOT a certainty

Anyway, my purpose isn't to persuade you? If you think that there is absolutely no way to assess the difficulty for a party of 4 composed of 1 fighter, 1 rogue, 1 mage and 1 combat-oriented semi vs. a specific encounter, or that doing so wouldn't have any use to anyone, well, sure. I personally think it would, especially to beginners, to whom Rasyr first expected this solution to help.

[Marc R]

My russians vs germans isn't "One side pounds" it's "Either side could win, it really depends."

That's the issue. . .RM danger levels do begin to level out to where the average value of OB/DB exceeds the likely modifiers around 120. . .but then you toss in parry and it goes back out the window again. (and surprise, which does that again.)

Based on the motivation of a squad of five 5th level fighters to fanatically kill, fight but survive, or block without hurting. . . .i.e. Full OB / 50:50 / Full DB the results are totally different.

You might be able to assess, that a group of five 5th level fighters intending to block a doorway without hurting the attackers and going full DB. . . .or the danger level of five 5th level fighters intending to fanatically kill the party at full OB. . . .but you can't assess the average danger of "Five 5th level fighters" casually.

Then if you get into specifics of "OK, they only have melee weapons, can we fire missile weapons or spells at them where they're trying to hold the doorway without closing in, forcing them to die in place or leave the door to come after us?" situational and specific modifiers totally change the scope of what's afoot, and the relative danger. . .

I have no problem offering advice to Noob GMs on how to assess danger, but stating "Five fifth level fighters = CR5" is essentially offering an answer so stripped of likely (not possible, likely) variables as to be a deceptive statement. .

Or not. Possibility isn't probability. Sure, a +35 OB/0 DB, AT2, 3rd level orc may kill a +240 OB/+150 DB, AT20, 20th level fighter, but even considering the 20th fighter doesn't have the equipment going with his level, and going with an average parrying (say 140), the orc would need to reroll at least thrice to be able to score a CC. So, sure, you can say that in RM2, he still stands a chance while in D&D he doesn't, but to say that "once you do that, any meaningful CR goes right out the window" would be wrong IMO.

In D&D, it's flatly impossible for the orc to 1 shot kill the 20th level fighter, and the odds of winning a stand up fight are so tiny as to almost equal zero. . .but in RM, while the odds of winning a stand up fight still remain clsoe to zero at this very one sided example of combat, if the orc gets a flat footed, rear, surprise attack on the 20th level fighter. . . .the Fighter has zero quickness DB, zero parry DB, zero shield DB, and eats a 35 + 55 = +90 shortbow attack, which gives a 95% chance of an A critical vs AT1, and a 65% chance of an A crit against AT20, and an A krush 4% of a down/dead reasult and around 25% of multi round stun no parry. . . .thus, in the modifiers and mechanics, there is a VAST difference between the two game systems.

Heck, IRL, commanders would give/assess missions difficulty levels and put against it the necessary men and material (if available). Sure, anyone using a gun could indeed shoot dead the best SEAL if circumstances are right, but most officers would expect their 5 SEAL marines trying to take back a boat held by 2 fishermen to win without any difficulty. A CR is just representative of that: the fishermen are CR1, the 5 SEAL marines are level 10, so their should be able to take down a CR1 encounter without much trouble and spending less than 10% of their resources.

Yep, if the seals get to shoot first, from ambush, they should have a chance of success approaching unity. . .of course, that same Seal commander would say "If my team should get screwed by murphy, and two fishermen with bolt action rifles see the team and shoot first, I might loose some of my men." . . .that's the thing, if the worm turns, and the luck plays out wrong, the odds aren't shifted a little, they can completely invert.

Small team odds are based on minute planning, knowing as many of the particulars as possible, and large scale planning is based on % of acceptable casualties. . .which may disatisfy the PCs if your CR level system assumes 20% of them die every session.

[kevinmccollum]

Guys, even games like DnD, which DO have guidlines for encounters, aren't even close to being precise. The best way to balance and encounter is experience. A beginning GM will over and underpower an encounter a lot. A very experienced one will do so rarely.

[OLF, i.e. Olf Le Fol]

if the orc gets a flat footed, rear, surprise attack on the 20th level fighter. . . .

Then, his CR would go up. You know, circumstance CR modifiers and all.
Like I said previously, you're merely stating that "Heh, you cannot assess than a car going at 50 mph at a man puts the man into danger because, if the man sees the car a hundred metres before he's hit, if he has fantastic reflexes, is an athlete that can perform a standing jump of several metres in an instant, if there's a road dip between them, if many other circumstances happen, then the chances that the man isn't hit increase a lot."

So, yeah, mayhap that in your games, it is proven regularly that 1st level characters are perfect challenges to 20th level characters but it's not the case in mine, where a party of the same level is a way more adequate challenge.

Anyway, whatever. Rasyr asked a question about a problem, I gave him a solution. You consider there's no solution and that mine doesn't help with the problem? Well, I'll let Rasyr decide.

[Arioch]

That being said, how to do the same in RM2? Well, the same way as in D&D, in which there isn't really any magical formula other than "playtest". In RM2, the solution would be, for instance, to _state_ what an average party would be (say, 2 combat-oriented non-spell users, 1 combat oriented semi-spell user and 1 combat oriented mage) and playtest encounters between it and a given creature. It then would be up to a GM to adjust his encounters, according to how his PC party deviates from that "average party".

I would suggest that an "average party be considered to be the following:

1 Fighter (melee tank type)
1 Rogue (agile melee type, or ranged attack type)
1 Magician
1 Semi Spell User (at least somewhat combat oriented - i.e. A Ranger, Monk, Champion, Elemental Warrior, or Venturer).

Surely it would be the easiest solution, I don't like very much the idea of the standard party: it's a good idea for the purpose of "selling" RM to the d&d crowd, but at the same time is forcing RM within an artificial structure which it wasn't mean to have.
 

[Marc R]

Anyway, whatever. Rasyr asked a question about a problem, I gave him a solution. You consider there's no solution and that mine doesn't help with the problem? Well, I'll let Rasyr decide.

true, but the odds of being killed from behind for that 20th level fighter? They're the same odds for a 1st level fighter, or a 100th level one being attacked at 35 OB from behind with a shortbow, as at that point only AT matters. . ."The great leveler of being shot in the back"

If you don't know if either side is going to be surprised, until you're actually playing, how can you put an encounter into play, and call it CR5? If the party surprises it, it might be CR0, and if they get surprised by it, it might be CR20. . .so how exactly was it pointfull to establish that it was a CR5 before rolling for surprise made the pre-calculation moot?

A 20th level party knows better than to go wandering around in an area full of below 3rd level hostiles in RM, because, it only takes one of them to kill you. . . .you can't casually ignore dinky little low levels as you could in a low mortality level game.

YMMV, good luck, IMO you'll need it.

[Marc R]

If the "average" party doesn't include a cleric, a healer, or a bag of mixed herbs, you'll likely find they lack stamina to make multiple encounters in a row.