Topic: Encounter Levels??

[dutch206]

I balance encounters by matching Hit Points and Offensive Bonuses.  The number encountered is usually one per party member plus 2 or 3 extras for the warriors to beat up on.

My biggest problem with Core Rules RMC is that Spellcasters don't get an attack every round until around tenth level. (Which is about when you can cast level two spells as a single-round action).

Deciding on the encounter level for things like traps and locks is another problem area. 

I've just come to the conclusion that you can't run a dungeon crawl in RM.

[Marc R]

I didn't say that, I said:

All of this assumes all adventures will be purely combat, resolved by combat.

What I meant was, it's already rather hard to gauge, and if you expand it to include non combat actions, it's likely impossible due to the number of variables.

The variables may indeed just be too large to properly answer the question posed by this thread.

Like, in AD&D, it's possible, just extraordinarily unilikely, that a dinky 1/2 hit die kobold could kill off a 10th level fighter with 80 hp. . .it would take atrocious rolling bias, but any time there are dice involved, the improbable is possible. . .but you could fairly state that the kobold is way below the fighter's power threshold, and the odds are 99%+ that the fighter will win.

The first problem is that the swing weight is huge in RM. . .that AD&D kobold above has a 5% chance to hit the fighter each attack, and needs to hit the fighter an average of 40 times. . .also needs to survive the fighter's 80% chance to hit them each round, where any hit kills, since the fighter's STR bonus is over the kobold's hits. . .So the kobold has a 20% of surviving each round, and in the rounds they survive, has a 1% chance of surviving and hitting, and needs 40 rounds. . .you get a decimal fraction of a percent with 77 zeros in it. . . .in RM that Kobold would need to open end (5%) and then on average, any critical has a 10% of killing, and they have at least a 3% chance of surviving the round. . .so say a 0.15% of victory any round. (it gets a bit more complex to model if you toss in initiative). \

Fifteen hundredths of a percent chance of dying doesn't seem like much, but if you had a fight that easy once a day, you'd be dead in two years. . .the AD&D fighter's life expectancy far exceeds his possible life span in the same set up. (Note that 666.66 incoming attacks is actually the probability maxima for survival for and RM character, and that's assuming foes that need to open end to hit you where you have to fumble to miss them. . .realisticly you're likely dead closer to 100 attacks directed at your character.)

You can state that the 10th level fighter will beat the 0 level kobold with a fair bit of certainty in AD&D, even if the kobold attacks first from surprise. . .but you can't say the same thing in RM.

The fact that any single shot can kill someone places such a large scope of uncertainty into play that I don't know that you can really answer the question in a generic manner.

As a GM, with an actual party on the table, I do a decent job of balancing out the encounters, but that's art, and a one off based on the specifics of what's on the table. . .I can balance RM encounters only AFTER most of the variables have been firmed into hard numbers. . .and even then every time you get into a fight you might get killed.

(You can run a dungeon crawl in RM, with a large enough group of PCs, and either a crapload of Herbs or a Healer/caster in the party. . .and a safe place to camp between forays.)

[pastaav]

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.

The reverse situation also apply, a well planed attack by low level enemies can be deadly enough to take out the whole team. Why this happens is mostly since the parry mechanic is symmetric, if I parry with 50 both mine and the enemy OB is lowered by that much. On the other hand the combat system does not care where the OB and DB comes from. It takes very many ranks to offset the benefits of having positional bonuses or some support spells.

About the issue of AT I don't think there in general is any AT that on its own can save the day. In some situations the right AT might give you the chance to keep fighting until you can get out of a bad situation, but you can't place a tank character at the front and except him to last just because he has a high AT. On the other hand a single tank fighter backed up by a group of spell users that protect him with Bladeturn and similar can usually battle down very tough monsters.

To sum up...I think any attempt to give guidelines about combat encounters should start with discussing tactics and the effect of superior numbers. The different OB for different professions due to ranks, level bonuses and similar could perhaps be worth a footnote, but you deceive the reader if you give the impression that aspect alone decides the outcome of combat.

[Arioch]

LM: art can be teached and learned. Obvioulsy none will become a Michelangelo as soon as they start following art lessons, but they have to start somewhere, right?

What I mean is, I agree with you, it's impossible to give 100% accurate directions that will work for anyone in every situation. But imho is possible to create guidelines usable in most situations with a reasonable degree of approximation.

[Marc R]

That is I suspect the point where we differ. . .I don't know that you could lay out rules-of-thumb for RM encounters that way. . .

Party of five 10th level arms characters, no casters vs fifteen 3rd level goblins with 35 OBs.

That could be anything from a TPK without any chance to fight back, to a slaughter of the goblins without them having much of a chance. . .how do you give a guideline when the results can be that varied? You can give some basic advice, but that's about it.

If you care to test out the above theory in practice see what happens if you start combat with either side having surprise and missile weapons out. . .five 10th level characters should casually kill 5 goblins in surprise, then almost definitely kill another 5 before the Goblins get their acts together, assuming they started the fight at a decent range, or with some cover, the goblins are doomed. . . .OTOH start the fight off with three 35 OB shortbow shots from ambush on each of the PCs and see what that gets you, as the one or two party members still standing get over-run at 7:1 or 15:1 odds.

In other systems, like for instance AD&D, even attacking from ambush would just allow the Goblins to inflict 2-3x more damage on the PCs before being killed. . .so the average party member takes 20-30 hits rather than 10. . .making the encounter stronger than it was, but not escalating it beyond the PCs ability to cope. . .the situational mods in RM have far more of an effect on results. . .fighting smart can often make you far more dangerous than your OB would seem to indicate. . .and 15 goblins with 35 OBs can slaughter a 10th level party, not defeat, not beat by a narrow margin if lucky, they can romp on them and take their heads home to the lair with minimal casualties. . .but it's not that the goblins are amazingly more powerful, because in the right circumstances the 10th level party can slaughter the goblins at minimal danger to themselves.

So much swing makes events unpredictable. . .how do you lay out guidelines for that? If instructions don't predict results, then what use are they?

[Marc R]

Note: The reason the above makes things so unstable, is that surprise is resolved with a "Highest perception" check on each side. . . .with pass/fail, fail/pass, pass/pass and fail/fail being the four possible results. . .pass/pass and fail/fail meaning both sides enter combat range aware of the other, or that the two groups stumble into each other, can shift the balance for/against casters vs arms. . .but the pass/fail and fail/pass results allow one group to surprise the other, which in RM means you have a chance to kick the crap out of them. . .one die roll and the odds can shift dramatically from one side to the other, meaning you can't actually come anywhere close to predicting results until after the perception checks to determine surprise, if any.

The likely result is literally impossible to call before it with any degree of accuracy.

[markc]

 I can say it is very easy with D&D 1-2 harder with D&D 3.x and very easy with D&D 4.0. D&D 3.x is hard do to the fact you have lots of feats of various power levels that cause the same problems as you have in RM. Which is lots of options.
 You can have a fighter in RM in which you do not spend any DP on weapon skills and only have level bonuses [RM2/C/X] or category bonuses [RMSS/FRP]. In RMSS/FRP he could put all of his DP into spells or in RM2/C/X he could put all of his DP into attunement and Read Ruins [IIRC].
 I think what you could do is use the pregen PC info in the book, or at least I know it is in RMSS and use a standard party mix, 2 pure arms-1semi-1 Pure Spell and try and come up with guidelines. Then you have a note that says if your party is different than the "standard party" [as in the party to compair yous to] you will have different results. I also just guessed on the standard party makeup, IMO a more common make up would be 1 arms-2 semi-1 pure spell based on my groups.

MDC
 

[OLF, i.e. Olf Le Fol]

In other systems, like for instance AD&D, even attacking from ambush would just allow the Goblins to inflict 2-3x more damage on the PCs before being killed. . .so the average party member takes 20-30 hits rather than 10. . .making the encounter stronger than it was, but not escalating it beyond the PCs ability to cope. . .

Adjusting levels in your example (because an AD&D level is more "powerful" than a RM2 level), I'd personally say that, at least in D&D3.5, fifteen level 2 Goblins ambushing a five level 6 party have high chances of slaughtering said party, all things being equal (e.g. the party doesn't have insane magical items compared to the Goblin party) but...

[Marc R]

Flip it around the other way OLF. . .

Five 10th level AD&D non casters vs fifteen 2 level goblins
Five 15th level RM non casters vs fifteen 3 level goblins

I kinda gave up on d20 after a few sessions of 3ed, but my recollection of 2ed would have the five lord level fighters making a party sized platter of goblin sushi, even out of the jacked up group of guards for a tribal chief a group of 2nd level goblins would represent, even if the goblins got to start the fight by barraging the 10ths with a half dozen 1d6 arrows each, even assuming all the shots hit (which isn't that likely) the average 21 HP damage would be just enough to tick the fighters off.

Starting a fight by shooting each of the 15th level RM characters with three 35 OB shortbow arrows from ambush is in a whole other class of danger.

[Arioch]

Comparing RM to other systems won't help imho: they're different game and, as you said, have very little in common.

So much swing makes events unpredictable. . .how do you lay out guidelines for that? If instructions don't predict results, then what use are they?

Starting from the small and then adding complications, like in most tactical games guides (after all, combat is a small tactical skirmish game within the RM system).
For example:
- start by analyzing the various factors that influence a one vs one combat on a neutral ground
- then add general guidelines regarding the influence of terrain
- then regarding surprise, ambush and other tactics
- then add considerations regarding the interaction of multiple combatants
and so on...

If it's possible to predict within a certain aproximation the outcome of a fight in real life, why should it be impossible in RM?

[Marc R]

Starting from an arena fight, you can likely lay out some sort of odds/guidelines. I still wouldn't stake big money on a RM fight short of it being absurdly one sided.

But considering casual use is an "Encounter" and the first thing you should be doing as two groups close in on each other's positions is consider how much noise they're making, and how much they're on watch for noise, then roll perception checks for both groups to assess surprise.

i.e. in normal, average, every session basic rules of play, it should come up in every encounter other than those where one group is being loud and not paying any attention to keeping watch. . .so it would not apply if either group were say having a loud drunken conversation over a barrel of whisky they happened across, which has happened in my games, but not often.

The result of that die roll has a vast and dramatic effect on the "scale" of the encounter. . .it can skew the force analysis enough to completely tip the balance to one side or the other. (It's also one of the reasons when discussing hypothetical character development, I always purchase perception EVERY level.)

If, in the normal course of non-arena combat with enemies not snuck up on whilst having a loud drunken argument, a random die roll can skew the likely result from "Party Casually slaughters encounter" through "Hazardous stand up fight where anyone could win" to "Encounter casually slaughters party" then how exactly can you in good concience give a guideline?

The GM might be a bit miffed when the logic layed out for "This should decently challenge the group" turns into a TPK slaughter when the party fumbles it's perception check.

[dutch206]

The difference in the two systems is massive.  In D&D, a critical hit with a shortbow against an unarmored target would do 1d6 [x2] + mods damage.  By tenth level, most characters have enough hit points to shrug off this kind of damage.  (Wizards notwithstanding)

In RMC, a shortbow attack against AT 1 which scored 150 would do22 hits and an E critical, which has a better than average chance of being a kill shot.  IF you add in the optional "Wrap the charts!" rule, the lethality goes up dramatically.

btw, Rasyr....Good Topic!

[Marc R]

Pastaav's comment above is also very important. Any calculation will have to use OB as a factor. You can get +55 off a rear surprise attack, and you can negate as much or more DB catching someone flat footed, (negating an opponant's DB is equivalent to an OB bonus) . . . How are you going to come up with a mechanism when one of the key elements has more "swing" to it than the average value?

If you have $2.00 in your wallet, plus or minus $10.00, can you afford a $2.50 slice of pizza?

[markc]

If you have $2.00 in your wallet, plus or minus $10.00, can you afford a $2.50 slice of pizza?

 Only if your name is Wimpy and you can pay on Friday for a slice today.
MDC

[Arioch]

If you have $2.00 in your wallet, plus or minus $10.00, can you afford a $2.50 slice of pizza?

Hey, I'm italian, I can cook my own pizza! 

Jokes aside, if we take all what's being said in this topic and organize it a bit, we would obtain a small guide for which I'd have paid when I started GMing Rolemaster!
Even a simple statements like "in RM a single roll can turn any encounter in a TPK" or "in RM, unlike other games, you're not supposed to come up with balanced encounters" are precious for someone who never played RM before.

[dutch206]

Hey, Rasyr.....I think Arioch just volunteered to write "Campaign Law Classic".  LOL

[RandalThor]

The difference in the two systems is massive.  In D&D, a critical hit with a shortbow against an unarmored target would do 1d6 [x2] + mods damage.  By tenth level, most characters have enough hit points to shrug off this kind of damage.  (Wizards notwithstanding)

Heck, by 10th level the wizard has the ability to shrug off at least 2 of those - unless they have a negative Con bonus.

All that aside, this thread just reinforces to me the necessity to arbitrate and not rely completely upon the numbers and rules in the book to run a game. If you accidentally make the encounter too tough, you deal with it then - not consulting the book, but your own head and imagination. Rules, no matter how well crafted, cannot work for every situation that may arise, which I why I don't like the word rule - I like to use guideline instead.*

All the number crunching can be done before the game starts, except the die rolls that will take place in the game. As we all know, those are the "make-it-or-break-it" aspects of the game, so all the prior number crunching could be for naught. I am not saying you shouldn't try to "balance" the encounters as best you can, just that you shouldn't rely too much on an artificial number (aka: ECL from D20) and remember what you had in mind for the encounter.

Of course, those random die rolls have a way of showing us a new way through the encounter sometimes, which is all good too.

*Rules (aka: words written in books - usually by people who are not you, dealing with people you don't deal with) shouldn't take the place of human (or in-human, muahahahaha....*cough*cough*) judgement.

[Emaughan]

One of the things that I have often heard from folks, especially those who are new to GMing RM (any version, or even HARP), is that it is often difficult to know how to gauge an encounter.

Can't be done in RM if one is using DnD thought processes.  RM is a game that has soooo many variables that it would be next to impossible to come up with a - by the numbers - encounter chart.  How smart the players are and how well the gamemaster plays the monster adds even more variables.

Now, before anyone starts accusing me of "quitter talk" or being a wet blanket, let me offer an alternative.  Lord Miller (if that's his real name) mentioned something that is key to what makes RM so different from a RPG like DnD - it's not all about combat!  In RM there are many different ways to skin a cat (is there a skill pick for that?).  It is far easier in RM to help the players learn that not all encounters are best handled with combat.  Also, I give players NO experience for combat (unless they choose it as one of their keys).

So, how do I handle encounter levels:
1- For obvious over powered encounters, and I include them in my game, make sure the players are given some strong hints that they do not want to pick a fight.
2- I let PCs die.  This has created a smarter group that is starting to become more clever and devious in how they handle encounters.
3- Herbs, a healer in the group, and recently fate points are means to help the group when they are caught up in a fight that the GM in his ignorance made a bit too rough for the party.  One cool thing, these are becoming much rarer as both GM and players get smarter.

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.  This is a strength of RM - not a weakness.  It is only a weakness if one approaches RM with a DnD mindset.

[rdanhenry]

In RM there are many different ways to skin a cat (is there a skill pick for that?).

Skinning is a Rolemaster skill from at least RMCII. My RM2 ChL&ChL isn't handy for reference, but I would not be at all surprised if this were among the original "Secondary Skills".

[Emaughan]

One other thing that is good about RM encounters, even though it makes level encounters so tough to determine.  As characters go up to higher levels, GMs can still have fun with "low" level critters.  A GM can make even a lowly goblin a real threat if the goblin is played right.  This is far more difficult in more structured games (i.e. DnD).  As characters advance in most D20 games, the GM losses lower level encounters as options to use about as fast as new, higher level, encouters are added.  In Rolemaster, those lowly minion types still can add much flavor to the game and can not be ignored by even high level RM PCs.

Easy game for GM to determine "proper" encounters = boring linear approach to leveling. 

Oh, and please excuse the typos and grammar errors in the previous post.  I'm a math/science guy who breaks out in hives whenever I think about my past English classes.   

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.