Monsters with levels lower than PCs - useless?

[Rechan]

THey're not useless in terms of math. Supposedly, monsters 4 levels lower and 4 levels higher are very suitable because the low end can hit the PCs, and the PCs can hit the high end.

I've personally noticed that PCs even blow through equal level monsters rather fast. So it may just be more situational, as others are suggesting here.

Also, it might depend on how your players react. Do they generally take out the weak ones first, or go after the bigger threats? If it's the latter, than lower level monsters mixed into an encounter with higher level monsters become more potent, because the players ignore them for the scarier creatures. I recently put a feypanther in an encounter with a dryad and 2 level 8 brutes, and the PCs focused fire on the bigger threats, letting the panther run around doing damage almost unquestioned. The Warlock finally had to unload a daily onto it.

 

[Felon]

Looking at the level of a given monster tells you (and us) little by itself. However, you do have to accept that you'll be missing with a lot of attacks, but hopefully making up for them with quantity.

 

[Nail]

Lower level monsters aren't worthless, but they are going to die faster and do much less damage. To compensate you need good tactics and/or monsters chosen to challenge specific PCs (skirmishers vs. fighters, dwarves for push-happy types, etc.). What were the monsters and what is the party made up of?

Absolutely.

To answer the OP's question accurately, we're going to need more of the set-up.

 

[Hambot]

Standard experience for encounters was probably calculated on the assumption that PC's start with a 16 in their best stat, as per the suggested array after taking a race you like the look of that doesn't boost your awesome powers. I play with a girl who always does this (always an elf... always). If PC's aren't hitting all the time due to lack of optimization, the system still works out - I think the big thing for 4e is that it's defaults work well for casual groups. Hardcore players who know what they are doing will want the difficulty level cranked up to "advanced". Lower level monsters are great as big swarms, PC's feel cool and heroic cutting through them once in awhile.

 

[James McMurray]

It kinda depends on your definition of "blow through." PCs are supposed to destroy encounters of their level or lower (sometimes level +1) without breaking much of a sweat.

 

[Gadget]

Weren't people complaining in the 'grind' threads that even lower level challenges where the outcome was not really in doubt were taking too long (and thus grinding) due to high monster hit points and lower PC dps?

How things change from thread to thread.

 

[BigCat]

Thanks for your thoughts, folks. The setup probably was strongly to the party's advantage - soldiers and archers on a pretty much open area. The wizard managed to thrash the baddies with stinking cloud, and the fighter locked down the soldiers pretty quickly. A controller would have made a big difference.

 

[LittleFuzzy]

Weren't people complaining in the 'grind' threads that even lower level challenges where the outcome was not really in doubt were taking too long (and thus grinding) due to high monster hit points and lower PC dps?

How things change from thread to thread.

Not so much a change, just a different emphasis. The grindspace threads acknowledge that some mobs are easier, some are harder, depending on what the party is composed of, and that you can do things besides play with monster types or levels to make things challenging. It's primarily interested in how to make encounters spicy and fun, while this thread asks "is it possible to run lower-level monsters and still have a challenging encounter." How to mix things up, as opposed to how to do X encounter. You can do X encounter but you have to design it in such a way that the inherent easiness of the monsters is compensated for. There are only so many ways to do that and if you just keep doing that you will end up running into "grind-space."