Topic: how to determin the level strength of monsters for your adventures by party memb

[Jacinto Pat]

There is also always the option of giving the party a chance to get "off the hook" when over matched.  If the party wasn't completely outclassed, their opponents may be more than happy to let them withdraw and not risk further injury.  Of course the players have to realize they are losing and that withdrawing is an option...

[tbigness]

I tend to plan for encounters to challenge the players and not give them an easy fight, to encourage them to think about how to negotiate the threat. The roleplaying aspect can be a very fun avenue. I don't completely out class the players everywhere but make it dangerous enough that caution will always be the key to survival. Extra points for avoiding the conflict even better to overcome it without any loses or having opponents retreat. by leveling encounters to the level of the PC's gives them a false sense that this game is easy or the game world will always be at their level. I play a more open sandbox with per-populated area encounters.

[markc]

I forgot to mention the biggest thing, it is not the GM vs the players.
MDC

[Peter R]

I write the adventures to fit the players but I don't fix the levels to suit the players. I remember the kobalds of my youth being a two a penny easy kill monster and we would wade though hundreds. The only real threat would be if they had an oger in tow. A RM kobald is a much more dangerous proposition. I would still set the players the challenge of rescuing an innocent from the heart of a kobald stronghold. I would probably let them meet a scouting party first so they can get the measure of the enemy and if they can take one alive then they will get an idea of the numbers they are up against. A sufficiently terrified kobald may tell the players if the innocent was due to be moved so they could mount a rescue above ground and at a place of their choosing but then maybe not. If the players feel that a full on frontal assault is the answer then that is their choice. The world exists and it is up to them to deal with it and use their own strengths to work together as a sum greater than their individual parts. The rescue should be a heroic act against impossible odds once the players have retold the story a few times and skipped the embarrassing failures that are bound to happen.

If the party revisit the same hold when they are five levels higher and just passing through then the kobalds will not be suddenly higher level or suddenly twice as numerous.

If they fail in the rescue, the same plot may come around again but the innocent is now hold by a band of orcs with a 'pet' hill giant.

[markc]

D&D kobalds got much more deadly after they introduced grappling rules or for that fact most small creatures you would find in large numbers.
MDC

[Spectre771]

I forgot to mention the biggest thing, it is not the GM vs the players.
MDC

<siiiiigh> You are so right.  If only some GM's would remember that more frequently.  I will admit, I've fallen victim to that poor GMing mindset myself.  I've gotten frustrated at the players for killing MY creatures.  Poor form on my part.

I do try to set up an outline of the story and make the difficulty story driven.  Yes, if the party wants to track/hunt/fight a dragon... then that is their folly.  If the party goes off script and wants to start a brawl with the town guard, then so be it.  The story I have set up is an open outline because more often than not, the players go off on a tangent I never expected and I have to throw some things together on the fly.  That won't change the difficulty of the story based enemies.  If they pissed off the assassin's guild and an assassin is now tracking them and there is now a bounty on their head because they pissed off a nobleman and the town guard wants to hang them, then shame on them!  The Story based creatures don't care and are still going to be the same level.

There were so many great points brought up in so many of these replies that it just isn't feasible for me to quote each person who said it.  Please note that these bits of info are not all my own but taken from the previous posts in this thread.



- the singular most important has to be that it is not GM vs. players.  The goal is to have fun and to let the players work through an adventure, not just breeze through it, but sometimes TPKs happen naturally

- there can always be some more orcs coming around the corner if the party just blew through the initial group

- there can always be the spy/assassin/thief/rogue leader who was hiding undetected in the shadows waiting for the party to be weakened before making his presence known

- the players are their own worst enemy at times. Give them many options to get sidetracked and to run into trouble, then let them continue the main quest battered, bruised, and bleeding

- the party almost always has the option to "talk, walk, or fight"

- tactics is superior to strength

- number of creatures is more challenging than a larger one.  More creatures = more attacks = more chances to roll a crit that kills a party member.  5 level 1 players vs. 1 level 5 orc.  My money is on the players.  Unless you go overboard and put them against a Mature Nether Drake

- parry, parry, parry.  Wait... that falls under "tactics"

As my own rule of thumb, the story has set levels of creatures based on player HP, OB, magic items, skill of PC.  If one player has Orc Slaying Sword of Pain, you can bet your last gold piece I am not sending Orcs against them.  The party should be able to handle the quest with challenge, maybe even with difficulty.  I have had a 1st round death crit that completely ended the quest 20 minutes into the session.  On the fly, I had to throw in something to extend the session past 20 minutes.  That ad lib addition to the quest made the session last longer and developed into a well played out campaign and the story line worked.  That isn't the same as "adding" more creatures to the story because the GM feels like pounding on the PCs for a while.

The beauty and caveat of being the GM is that it is YOUR world and only you know what is around the corner in the next room, or what level they are.  If the party is struggling, lower the HP of the NPCs, lower their OB, lower their DB.  Let them live a little before you kill them off!  Muwahahahahaha

[Nortti]

You have to consider at least:

Fighting ability (OB/DB/Armor/hp)
Healing ability
Spellcasting (Defensive/offensive)
Movement (swim/fly)
Spell-like abilities (paralyzation/regeneration etc)
Magic items (weapons/scrolls/wands etc)
Intelligence and tactics (Ambush/ defend/counterattack/prepared escape routes/luring to difficult terrain)

There are so many factors that your best bet is to start with easier opponents that are not very smart and build up from there. Especially if your players are not very experienced.

As I see it a solid plan and good tactical thinking can overcome seemingly superior opposition. So later you can easily up the abilities and intelligence of the enemy.

Like others have mentioned this is not only a question of finding good balance for fights. That too is important but I myself too like to plan the campaign world so that there are clearly too powerful creatures in the world that PCs would be suicidal to challenge. If they want to do it its their choice but GM doesnt have to let them win that fight.

Its good for PCs to understand when to fight and when to talk. Creature that is clearly superior to the PCs can demand them to give them magical items or gold, or it can ask them to perform a mission for him. It doesnt have to kill them off right away, thats not fun. An encounter can be very powerful comparing to PCs but it doesnt have to be lethal.