ECL and CR in Mutants and Masterminds (and other games)?

[lior_shapira]

Yesterday I ran my first M&M(2nd edition) game in which the four heroes, defeated the insidous plan of Dr. Flamingo and his cloned fighters. During game preparations I came to ask myself, how do I know how tough to make the encounters? The only way to measure power in M&M it seems is by Power Level (and power points). Is this enough? I looked through the core M&M book and the Mastermind's manual and didn't find any reference as to how to design suitable encounters.

I have the same problem with Exalted 2nd edition (although I haven't spent as much time reading it so I'm not 100% sure there isn't such a system). How do I create balanced encounters for the group?

I think the CR/ECL system of D20 is one of its main strengths and it seems weird that other games don't handle it (as well, or sometimes at all). Of course as you grow more experienced with a system its easier to estimate toughness, but such a system is invaluble to begginer DM's

Am I way off? am I right? Do you have suggestions?

thanks, lior

 

[Donovan Morningfire]

For M&M, the CR concept can be sort of used, as what ultimately determines an enemy's effectiveness is their Power Level.

A PL 7 bad guy built on 200 points is still going to fight like a PL 7 with all the according offensive and defensive caps, they just might have a bit more versatility. Just the same, PL 15 villain built also built on 200 points is going to be a major challenge for a group of PL 10s unless they've got some great tactical mojo going down.

Then again, I'm of the opinion that CR as listed for D&D isn't always as sure a guideline as some think it is. I've been groups were we've taken down monsters with much higher CRs than was thought a group of four heroes could beat with minimal effort, and conversely in groups were a low-CR threat mopped the floor with a group of six heroes.

I'd say go with the old stand-by of eyeball the bad-guy's level and abilities. A PL 7 M&M villian with a perception-range Disentegrate and the no save extra is going to be a major threat to just about anyone, while a PL 15 w/ a +25 damage bonus but only a +5 attack bonus isn't quite as much of a threat.

 

[buzz]

The Mastermind's Manual specifically addresses this, and gives a base forumla for balancing the PLs of NPCs vs the players. It's sort of hidden in a paragraph, and should have been in the dang core book, but it's there. Don't have my copy to give you a page reference, though.

 

[saucercrab]

buzz,
I seemed to remember that too, & so I was able to look it up (took me a while, though).

lior_shapira,
Page 131, Opposition Power Level. Boils down to:
"As a rough guideline, each additional power level over the campaign's PL makes a character suitable for taking on one additional opponent."
Using one of the examples, a PL 14 villain in a PL 10 game is a good challenge if the heroes are five in number. This can work in reverse, so (again using a listed example), four PL 7 villains versus one PL 10 hero s/b a challenge as well.

However, it is mentioned that this is an estimate only, as some power combos & the number of pp can drastically eff the situation up, for example.

 

[Plane Sailing]

The other thing is sorta just experience - pretty much the technique used in any and all RPGs prior to 3e. Not a great answer, but as you get more experience it will become easier.

The best thing is giving a bad guy allies that you can bring in (or not) to dial up the encounter threat during the process - a sort of dynamic adjustment if you like.

 

[lior_shapira]

Thank you all for your advice. I'm a pretty experienced DM (with D&D and D20) so I've managed, even on our first session of M&M. But trying this new system made me see in a new light how important the encounter evaluation system is in D&D/D20.

thanks again lior

 

[Ben Robbins]

PL is a very good starting point for gauging threat, but because of the huge range of possibilities in a supers game you do have to do a heads-up comparison of the combatant's abilities (mentalists vs low Will bricks, flyers vs characters with no ranged attacks, and so on).

Most d20 systems are based on the concept of resource attrition across encounters -- you use up hit points, spells, etc so each encounter wears you down for the next one. In M&M (and lots of games in the superhero genre) attrition across encounters is a much smaller issue. You can carry over conditions (lethal hits, staggered, exhausted), but you can also wash them with a little rest or by spending hero points. You can run low on hero points, but if you are following the pattern described in the book you may instead gain hero points as the game goes on (permitting you to face and trounce the end villain) -- it's almost a "that which does not kill you makes you stronger" situation.

So unlike D&D, encounters are pretty much binary: if you won, you're usually just as good as you were before the encounter, except for hero points. A tough fight will cost hero points, most other fights will gain you hero points (or you spend them just to do stylish things, not to gain a tactical advantage, which is great too).

Also unlike D&D, M&M can be very random since everything is happening based on a flat d20 range. In D&D damage is generally a predictable fraction of your hit points (you take d8 from the axe, you have 30 hp, so you can take about 7 hits before you drop). In M&M one unlucky toughness save can send a perfectly healthy hero (or villain) flying. Hero points and GM's Fiat are included to mitigate this randomness, but it means that even in a well-balanced fight you can be in for surprises.

None of these points are intended to be criticisms of M&M: I think it fits the genre really well that fights can be so dramatic and decisive, but it can be a surprise to new GMs when the heroes one-punch the evil overlord. The wise use of Hero Points and GMs Fiat (aka metagaming) takes a little getting used to if you're coming from other d20 systems where those options are not so critical.