Encounter Level - realistic maximums

[Lord_Blacksteel]

I am about to start running my first 4th edition campaign - I am setting up encounters and I notice the DMG says that monster more than Party Level + 7 make for bad encounters. I believe I saw somewhere else that it's best to keep it to lvl plus 5. So let me ask the DM's out there who have been running 4E for a while - does that work? If I want a big bad at the end of my Heroic tier campaign could I throw a Level 15-16-17 at the standard 5 man party at 10th lvl and not have a TPK? I'd like to know how it has played out for those who have .. played it out.

 

[Flipguarder]

If you want a big baddie I would not use levels to make it big and bad. I'd give it extra hp, lots of minor action powers, free actions when hit, powerful recharge powers.

It isn't very fun for players to fight something their level +7 or 8 mainly due to their defenses. round after round of having to roll a 16 or higher to hit something is just not very fun. But having the monster have WAY too many actions and responses for your actions, having lots of hp, and lots and lots of damage is how you make an encounter fun imo.

I would take a level +4 or 5 solo that fits your idea, and then give it a bunch more powers that don't happen on their turn, as well as minor action powers.

 

[Mentat55]

I will often run encounters up to 5 or even 6 levels about the party. However, I do this by adding more monsters of the PCs' level (+/- 1), not by using individual monsters that are level +5 or something like that. As Flipguarder says, higher level monsters have very high defenses, and it becomes a real grind with the PCs just throwing at-will after at-will, hoping to roll 15s or something to hit their opponent.

I'd go with a level, maybe level +2 solo to represent the BBEG, and then fill the battlefield with minions, bodyguards, terrain effects, and traps.

 

[blargney the second]

It's very dependent on party composition, and even build choices that individual PCs made. If you've got a taclord with Lead the Attack (or any other leader that can give massive attack bonuses) and the remainder of the party has good solo killer dailies, you could easily have a cakewalk on your hands.

I'd guesstimate that a party that's specialized in solo killing could handle a level +7 or 8 reasonably easily by the end of heroic tier. A normal, non-specialized party would likely find that brutally hard.

 

[the Jester]

I think it works well to use a level + 7 monster now and then as long as you watch your overall encounter budget- a level + 7 encounter is likely to be a TPK.

 

[Obryn]

Brutes of very high level can work rather well. Their low defenses and high damage make them scary, but not that tough to hit.

Soldiers and controllers of very high level will drag the fight to a standstill. Soldiers, because you can't hit them. And controllers because they'll status-effect the PCs into oblivion.

-O

 

[Prestidigitalis]

I think it works well to use a level + 7 monster now and then as long as you watch your overall encounter budget- a level + 7 encounter is likely to be a TPK.

Agreed.

Level + 7 encounter is likely to be a TPK.

Level + 7 creature is merely likely to be a boring grind. But it could be a TPK too, if the party has bad luck.

Unless your players are very, very skilled, I think you have to figure that if you consistently pit them against Level + 3 (or higher) encounters, eventually one of them will turn into a TPK, no matter how reasonable you thought it was.

Also: Do not for a moment forget to take into account environmental hazards. If there is a risk of characters being (for example) thrown off a cliff, your odds of a TPK just went up by a factor of about 10.

 

[cdrcjsn]

You know those people that complain that 4e feels like a grind?

They're the ones that are throwing encounters of +3 or +4 against the party.

The higher you go up, the worse it gets until you hit TPK territory.

 

[Mengu]

Indeed, for big baddies, rather than using a level+6 or 7 standard, it's much better to use a Level+4 or 5 elite, or a Level+2 or 3 solo. This way defenses are more in line, and you gain durability with more hit points.

I use level+4 controllers, artillery, or brutes fairly routinely, and they don't really have a BBEG feel to them. I don't think level+7 would accomplish that role either. Elites and Solos with multiple actions and much greater durability fit the bill better.

 

[Lord_Blacksteel]

Alright I like what I see so far so I'll be a little more specific.

My encounter areas are using +0 to +2 for most battles but as the big bad in my 1st level area I'm using the ubiquitous Young White Dragon. Not too tough but it should cap things off nicely.

I have a series of areas of escalating levels that the group will pass through ending up at 10th or so when they "storm the gate" to open up the big bad guy's castle. I want to make the Gate Boss a Beholder, so we're looking at a lvl 13 controller vs a 10th lvl party. It seems like it would work to me but I haven;t run much yet in 4th, so I am open to advice.

Within the castle I expect the party to hit 11th and start their Paragon path before they meet the final boss. They might even be 12th depending on whether I add another level to the castle or not. I would really like to use a Dracolich for this as it ties in very well with the background, but the MM version is a Lvl 18 solo, so I'm concerned that he might be a little too much for them, but I do want it to be a big fight. Is a DracoLich (possible downlevelled a bit) a reasonable match for a 5- man party at 11th or 12th level?

I'm sketching this in now so I can do some foreshadowing and hinting during the climb through Heroic. It will be quite a while before they get this far. I know there are some options for level adjustments but I'm unsure of how much adjusting might be needed to make this threatening but not an automatic TPK.