A 30th-level Party needs 50th-level Monsters...

[Upper_Krust]

Hi UK,

Howdy Sammael!

I have 6 players who play the following roles: cleric/party leader, wizard (mostly enchanter/illusionist, but he also has some very handy transmutations and conjurations), sword-and-board tank with limited healing abilities, rogue/assassin type with an impossibly high Sneak skill, bard/seeker of the song with Words of Creation, another sword-and-board fighter with lower AC and HP than the primary tank, but who deals better damage.

As I suspected. The standard 3/3.5 party is made of 4 PCs, thats what the CRs are based upon. Therefore its little wonder your six strong party require tougher challenges.

EDIT: I just wanted to add that the party is at their best when fully buffed by the bard (who can give the party fighters something like +10 to attack, IIRC), and supported by the cleric's mass spell resistance, mass heals, and such.

The party seem to have all the bases covered, so to speak (with regards a good mix of classes).

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hey there Flynn!

At the moment, you should be able to approximate the new "monster level approach" by adding 4 to the v3.5 creature's CR, or thereabouts, to get monster level, right? This is based on the assumption that the CR is equal to four PCs of the same level, so one PC of the same level should be able to handle the same monster when their own character level equals CR+4. Since "monster level" indicates one monster should match one PC, there we go.

Of course, this is an over-simplification, and probably breaks down pretty quickly. However, it is a thought based on the current approach to rating monters based on their ability to create a challenge for the party.

Unfortunately the current official approach in 3/3.5 is a load of poop.

I applaud the direction 4E is going. Its much simpler and I think will lead to better balanced encounters.

I just hope they get the individual vs. group dynamic sorted properly.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hey Baby!

Because dragons are special!

More special than Orcus, or the Tarrasque!? Both unique beings!

Are they more special because their name is on the cover?

If we have Dungeon based traps, are those also 'special'.

If they make a Demonomicon do demons suddenly become special?

Do WotC not trust DMs to understand the system?

Surely its better for one rule to...rule them all.

Seriously, no one knows that much about how the challenge system/encounter balancing etc will break down in 4th edition.

That doesn't stop us from making (hopefully educated) guesses.

Plus, the 1- 20 power scale has changed into a 1 - 30 power scale, with encounters staying viable through all levels.

Power scale is irrelevant as long as each level is roughly balanced to give a similar boost.

I wasn't aware that the new standard party number is 5 – where did you find that?

I thought it was common knowledge, I am sure its been mentioned numerous times by WotC over the past week and I imagine Morrus has it mentioned at least once in his 4th Edition preview page.

 

[mhensley]

I don't know what level monster you'll need, but I do know people will need more colossal size miniatures. And I'm sure that's a good thing for WOTC profits...

 

[Upper_Krust]

Howdy Umbran dude!

Well, remember that there may be some significant difference between what 3.xe and 4e calls "30th level".

There may indeed be a difference, but I am not sure I envision a 'significant' difference.

It should be rather hard for us to guess what critters in the current MM will be challenges for 4e characters of a specific level.

Ancient Red Dragon = Level 29.
Goblin = Level 1/4

Thats my guesses.

There are single critters in the current MM that are suitable challenges for characters at the top of the range the core books handle- 20th level. If 4e's 30th is like 3e's 20th, we might take a stab at a guess - the big old dragons, the big demons, and such (the things we'd throw at a group of 20th level PCs today) should be the critters that challenge that same bunch of PCs in the future.

Indeed, I am wondering if the small number of CR 21+ Monster Manual critters will be Level 31+ in 4E.

What level will they call those critters? That kind of depends on how the power curve goes, and how they represent the math. In the end, the scale is merely arbitrary numbers that work well as a mnemonic, and isn't meaningful in and of itself.

Its meaningful to an extent.

If 4th Editions 30th-level is merely 3/3.5 Editions 20th stretched out, then surely its self defeating if the main idea is to simplify the game. Now I would need 30 levels (of rules) to do 20 levels of stuff.

 

[Baby Samurai]

Surely its better for one rule to...rule them all.

Not according to WotC's new design model for monsters…

 

[Sepulchrave II]

So the first question is: Are there any monsters in the Monster Manual that would be individual encounters for a 30th-level PC Party?

The second question is: What level would they be?

I suspect that the method of evaluating CRs may change radically - its already been intimated that the incremental difference between monsters will be less, and a +4EL encounter will be well within the capabilities of a party. Combined with this, monster roles ("brute" etc.) will play a determining role. I think this is in recognition of the reality of 3rd edition's flaws in CR calculation, and I'm hoping it indicates a move to a quadratic model.

Furthermore, resource management will be very different - an encounter which erodes 20% or 25% of a party's resources in 3.x will almost certainly not do so in 4E. Per encounter and at will abilities seem to be the order of the day.

In the 3.x epic games I've run and played in, we've adopted a "sum of the squares" method of calculating an appropriate EL (after my initial arm twisting from Cheiromancer) and it's worked admirably. I'm hoping something similar might underly the math in 4E, and I suspect that the default method of calculating CR will be based on a difficult (50/50 survival) encounter rather than one which assumes a 20% use of resources.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hey UK.

Hi Jack!

Just reread your post, and it makes more sense now. I think I got confused as to when you were speaking in 3.5 terms and when in 4e terms.

np.

Either way, I dont think we will see lvl 50 monsters in the MM,

I'm a tad skeptical myself.

and I definitely dont think that a lvl 50 monster will be needed to give a lvl 30 group a good combat.

Ye cannae change the laws of physics.

Lacking any more info, I will have to admit that I can offer no better guess.

Your kung fu is weak old man!

 

[Malhost Zormaeril]

I suspect that the method of evaluating CRs may change radically - its already been intimated that the incremental difference between monsters will be less, and a +4EL encounter will be well within the capabilities of a party. Combined with this, monster roles ("brute" etc.) will play a determining role. (snip)

Quite true. I expect that there should be a specific monster role for "Boss encounter", which would challenge by itself a party of 5 PCs. The numbers, etc. can be fine-tuned that way for the actual use the monster will see -- rather than picking one up which was designed to challenge a single character of level L to challenge five characters of level L-4. The whole problem lies in the single most important resource to be allocated: actions. That is why a monster which is good against five will never quite fit fighting only one, regardless of how many levels of difference there are.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Howdy Sepulchrave II!

I suspect that the method of evaluating CRs may change radically - its already been intimated that the incremental difference between monsters will be less, and a +4EL encounter will be well within the capabilities of a party.

Thats most likely simply a by-product of the switch from Challenge Rating to Level (aka ECL).

In the same way that a CR 20 Balor is probably closer to ECL 30 for the purposes of playing one.

A +4 ECL encounter would be well within a 3.5 parties capabilities.

A 3.5E Party of four 16th-level characters will make mincemeat of a single 20th-level NPC.

So even by default a +4 jump in 4E 'level', won't be as great as a +4 jump in 3/3.5E Challenge Rating.

Combined with this, monster roles ("brute" etc.) will play a determining role. I think this is in recognition of the reality of 3rd edition's flaws in CR calculation, and I'm hoping it indicates a move to a geometric model.

Glad you agree...given I invented it.

Furthermore, resource management will be very different - an encounter which erodes 20% or 25% of a party's resources in 3.x will almost certainly not do so in 4E. Per encounter and at will abilities seem to be the order of the day.

I think the game will be much better for it.

In the 3.x epic games I've run and played in, we've adopted a "sum of the squares" method of calculating an appropriate EL (after my initial arm twisting from Cheiromancer) and it's worked admirably.

Cheiromancer...that upstart - I taught him everything he knows about challenge rating.

(Waits for Cheiromancer to storm in and get all 'ecumenical on my @ss'.)

I'm hoping something similar might underly the math in 4E, and I suspect that the default method of calculating CR will be based on a difficult (50/50 survival) encounter rather than one which assumes a 20% use of resources.

Thats certainly how it appears from the information gleaned so far.

All they need to do now is nail the dynamic between using differing numbers of opponents and "Robert's your mother's brother!"...as they say in Guy Ritchie movies.