Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Thotas" data-source="post: 1547927" data-attributes="member: 18974"><p>Ah, this really is getting good.  Some of you are bringing up things that our original poster may or may not have been trying to point to from the first, but are interesting regardless.  Yes, absolutely, you can't apply CR/EL numbers on a cookie-cutter basis.  At first glance, that's a problem.  On reflection, it's part of the fun.  As several of us have indirectly pointed out, there are a number of factors beyond those first brought up that are vitally important in appraising the true difficulty of the encounter.  There are some fudge factoring rules on EL difficulty in the DMG, but they're as vague, incomplete, and arbitrary as the base situation is, so they're no help, right?  But it's not a problem if you realize those sections aren't meant to be The Answer; it's just where you start to look.  Using the all-Rogues vs. Undead example, we first address the question asked above.  Does the DM adapt the encounter (reduce numbers of opponents, conveniently place the right magical equipment, etc.) or expect the party to adapt, by investigation prior or fleeing when they find 'em and creating a good plan?  I say ... yes.  Either works, and both are more fun if the DM varies the way he handles these situations precisely because the Players can't be sure what to expect.  And the xp reward is whatever the DM wants it to be, though the chart on DMG page 38 can suggest a base to modify based on the DM and what sort of thing he wants to reward.  This point in the game is the one where mathematical precision is of microscopic importance ... and yes, that's coming from the guy who earlier was appealing to the authority of obscure mathematical theorems.</p></blockquote><p></p>

Verification