Creating encounters for characters?

I was rereading the DMG, and I saw the part about set encounters vs. tailored encounters. What do you do, just throw anything at te players, or make sure that every character is useful?

Both you know...

The world doesn't change itself to the characters. Sure, the characters are central to the story - but that doesn't mean that the entire world is going to fit them exactly.

Quite frankly, the party should be the ones to adapt - if they are lacking a cleric, then they should research or find other means of taking out undead. If they lack a rogue, then they must find more inventive ways of getting around traps and locks.

In some encounters, some characters will not be useful. However, that's life - sometimes you're in the spotlight and you're the only one around who can do what you do, and sometimes your skills are completely useless in a given situation.

What GnomeWorks said, 95%+ of the time.

My players mostly cope by sheer perseverance or hiring help.

I chose Other, because I tend to use a mixture of the two. There are times when I design the villains from the villains point-of-view, making sure they make sense and are internally consistant. For those encounters, some PCs may be more effective and others less so.

And sometimes I do indeed design the encounters so that certain characters have a chance to shine, or use abilities that haven't been seen in a while. I don't always do this, because as Gnomeworks said, the world will not always present a challenge that is geared towards what the PCs can do. But on the other hand, if you never consider the makeup of the party, then you're just forcing the players to play the iconic party (fighter, rogue, wizard, cleric) to survive, which isn't good either IMO.

Lord Pendragon said:

But on the other hand, if you never consider the makeup of the party, then you're just forcing the players to play the iconic party (fighter, rogue, wizard, cleric) to survive, which isn't good either IMO.

Click to expand...

First off, let me thank you for agreeing with me.

Now, on to the point... this is not true. The makeup of the party should usually not be considered. If it is, then it should probably be from an intelligent villain's point of view and working to focus on the weaknesses of the party.

And if you don't consider the party, you aren't forcing them to go to the iconic party setup. Let's take a party without a rogue, and they have encountered a steel, well-locked door. They have a few choices - the fighter can bash it down, the wizard can try to melt the door (or freeze it to make it more brittle for the fighter to bash down... etc), or they can find another way.

Let's face it - a party that contains one of each of the iconic classes will do better in a wider variety of encounters than a party that is a little more focused in one area (another mage instead of a thief, another fighter instead of a cleric, etc). That's fact, and that's how the world works. However, if you throw an encounter at a more-specialized party that is within that party's specialization, then the encounter is going to be easier than usual.

As Gnomeworks said. My party's never had a problem with it. If they encounter situations where they really aren't equipped to handle it, they have to think creatively and find another way to deal with it. Works out more enjoyable for all of us.

Tailoring encounters to fit the party doesn't mean changing the world, unless you design entire regions that are lethal to low-level PCs. Tailoring encounters is simply a matter of ensuring that whatever the PCs encounter they can handle. For instance, if a low-level party goes into the Necropolis looking for the Lich Lord's Lair, they most certainly should not find it. This would kill them in a heartbeat. However, going into the Necropolis, they will encounter the skeletons and zombies that the Lich Lord regularly stocks the area with to defend his home. If the PCs are 8th-10th Level, so much the better, cause now they can encounter ghouls, lesser fiends, beafed-up skeletons and zombies, but still don't find the Lich Lord.

By the same token, if the PCs don't have a Rogue, than this should be considered when designing an adventure (no insta-kill traps with Search DCs above 20). Same with any class. I've been DMing for over 10 years now, and I've never had a party of the usual suspects (i.e., 4 PCs, one of each "type"). Parties I have DM'd, however, include:

• 2 wizards
• 2 rogues and a fighter
• A bard and a necromancer
• Six fighters and a psion.

None of these games would have been successful if I enforced a false need for a cleric (note: none of the above have one!), or required the wizards to face a challenge only sheer might would solve, etc. Just a matter at looking at each PC's ability and the skill of the player and developing balanced encounters for them.

You have some good points, Bendris, and I'd like to go over them...

Bendris Noulg said:

Tailoring encounters to fit the party doesn't mean changing the world, unless you design entire regions that are lethal to low-level PCs. Tailoring encounters is simply a matter of ensuring that whatever the PCs encounter they can handle. For instance, if a low-level party goes into the Necropolis looking for the Lich Lord's Lair, they most certainly should not find it. This would kill them in a heartbeat. However, going into the Necropolis, they will encounter the skeletons and zombies that the Lich Lord regularly stocks the area with to defend his home. If the PCs are 8th-10th Level, so much the better, cause now they can encounter ghouls, lesser fiends, beafed-up skeletons and zombies, but still don't find the Lich Lord.

Click to expand...

This seems to be a little iffy. Certainly the Lich Lord would guard his lair. Thus, having lower-CR critters there makes sense. As characters grow in level, they can go deeper and deeper, until they become a match for the Lich Lord.

By the same token, if the PCs don't have a Rogue, than this should be considered when designing an adventure (no insta-kill traps with Search DCs above 20). Same with any class.

Click to expand...

This I disagree with entirely. You should always design an adventure in the way that makes sense with the background and story behind it. If the main villain is the paranoid type, then there are going to be traps, and more than likely they will be lethal. However, as with all information, there is a way to find this out - so if the party is smart, then they will seek out as much information on their adversary as they can get, including the fact that the main villain is extremely paranoid. The logical next step is that, if the villain is paranoid and has a lair or dungeon somewhere, that it's going to be trapped. Thus, the party should be prepared to deal with traps that may be slightly hazardous to their health.

And, if the party can't put 2 and 2 together, or doesn't bother to do a little bit of research before they go into that dungeon... well, perhaps they'll learn a lesson or two.

None of these games would have been successful if I enforced a false need for a cleric, or required the wizards to face a challenge only sheer might would solve, etc. Just a matter at looking at each PC's ability and the skill of the player and developing balanced encounters for them.

Click to expand...

The need for a cleric is never "false". Perhaps, instead of having a cleric, one of the party carries a wand of cure light wounds, or has a stash of healing potions. Then there is always the druid, which, although not a cleric, can fulfill some of the same roles. There are also paladins and rangers.

And the wizard - sheer might should be no problem! With summon monster spells available, no obstacle requiring "sheer might" should prove that problematic. Even if the wizards/sorcerers in the party do not posess this spell, there are certainly scrolls or teachers in the world that hold this spell, or mercenaries for hire that will gladly perform such dirty work for the right price.

GnomeWorks said:

This I disagree with entirely. You should always design an adventure in the way that makes sense with the background and story behind it.

Click to expand...

Exactly. Thus, I design adventures that fit the PCs, including the backgrounds.

If the main villain is the paranoid type, then there are going to be traps, and more than likely they will be lethal. However, as with all information, there is a way to find this out - so if the party is smart, then they will seek out as much information on their adversary as they can get, including the fact that the main villain is extremely paranoid. The logical next step is that, if the villain is paranoid and has a lair or dungeon somewhere, that it's going to be trapped. Thus, the party should be prepared to deal with traps that may be slightly hazardous to their health.

And, if the party can't put 2 and 2 together, or doesn't bother to do a little bit of research before they go into that dungeon... well, perhaps they'll learn a lesson or two.

Click to expand...

Then you condone creating unbalanced adventures as defined on Page 10 of the DMG?

The need for a cleric is never "false". Perhaps, instead of having a cleric, one of the party carries a wand of cure light wounds, or has a stash of healing potions.

Click to expand...

Yes, it is. Most of hit point damage is abstract, not actual wounds. Yet, a source of healing is required to recover the abstract concept of duck, dodge, roll and luck. The need is false.

Then there is always the druid, which, although not a cleric, can fulfill some of the same roles. There are also paladins and rangers.

Click to expand...

Actually, I've generally removed Clerics and Paladins. A W&V-like system combined with Expert Surgeons are a great fix for this long-running falsehood, though.

And the wizard - sheer might should be no problem! With summon monster spells available, no obstacle requiring "sheer might" should prove that problematic. Even if the wizards/sorcerers in the party do not posess this spell, there are certainly scrolls or teachers in the world that hold this spell, or mercenaries for hire that will gladly perform such dirty work for the right price.

Click to expand...

Magic doesn't solve every problem; And if it does, magic is a problem.