Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Quickleaf" data-source="post: 6419606" data-attributes="member: 20323">I've been comparing your system with the RAW system for the purposes of encounter design and noticed something along these lines. When it comes to large groups of same CR monsters, your system seems to underestimate the encounter challenge by one degree as compared to RAW.For example, take a party of 4 characters of 8th level.In your system, the PEL thresholds would be EASY (40%) = 12+ / MEDIUM (60%) = 19+ / HARD (80%) = 25+ / DEADLY (100%) = 32+Whereas in the RAW system, the XP thresholds would be EASY =1,800+ / MEDIUM = 3,600+ / HARD = 5,600+ / DEADLY = 8,400+First, they face a pack of 8 dire wolves. In your system this would be just an EASY encounter (PEL 16), whereas in the RAW system this would be a MEDIUM encounter (8 * 200 * 2.5 = 4,000 XP). Probably not a big deal, since the key difference between an EASY and MEDIUM encounter is the expenditure of healing resources.Next, they face a pack of 14 dire wolves. In your system this would be a HARD encounter (PEL 28), whereas in the RAW system this would be a DEADLY encounter (14 * 200 * 3 = 8,400). And if it were 15 dire wolves it would clearly be a DEADLY encounter thanks to the monster multiplier. This is a more significant discrepancy because the difference between a HARD and a DEADLY encounter could be the difference between few / no PC deaths and multiple deaths / a TPK.Which is the more accurate guideline? I don't know. I suspect for a well-equipped fully rested party of 4+ PCs with powerful area spells that your system is a bit more accurate. However, if the party is under-equipped, not fully rested, is of small size (thus with diminished force multiplier capacity), or lacks a caster with area spells, then I suspect the RAW system is a bit more accurate.</blockquote>

Verification