Epic Level Encounter Design

[Tony Vargas]

What they don't tell you is that the PCs scale approx. 18% (of a level) faster than the monsters. In a nutshell, every 6 PC Levels = 7 Monster Levels.

OK, I'll bite, how do you come to that conclusion? Did WotC over-compensate for the infamous 'math problem?' Are you assuming some level of system mastery and optimization?

 

[Will Doyle]

Therefore the ways to balance epic encounters is to swop Elite's for Standards, Swop Solo's for Elites and swop Super-solo's for Solo's.

Super-solo's as in KRONOS.

I'm really enjoying reading through your super-solo monster, and it's definitely got me thinking of similar challenges. Top work!

 

[Wednesday Boy]

Do make the PCs attack each other and themselves. It tends to auto-scale for the level of optimization, and it's often hilarious.

It makes the rest of us shake in our boots when our GM makes our group's optimized Slayer attack one of us. (Although the last encounter when it occurred he missed every time. That definitely made it hilarious!)

 

[keterys]

It makes the rest of us shake in our boots when our GM makes our group's optimized Slayer attack one of us. (Although the last encounter when it occurred often he missed every time. That definitely made it hilarious!)

I was playing my level 26 fighter last weekend, and the DM kept trying to use me to take down our cleric... I could hit her on a 2 most of the time, and would do 1/3 of her hp in one shot.

The first time he did it, the swordmage sigil of safety-ed her away from me using one of his most powerful encounter powers to make her safe.

The second time he had me charge her for near max damage, but not a crit, at 71 damage.

The third time she was bloodied and thought she was going to drop... needed a 2 to hit. And I got that 1

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hey Tony!

OK, I'll bite, how do you come to that conclusion? Did WotC over-compensate for the infamous 'math problem?' Are you assuming some level of system mastery and optimization?

I studied every epic report I came across and noticed similar trends. I developed a theory based on that and so far its been born out in both testing and feedback by others.

Obviously optimization has an effect, but the numbers I am suggesting are for a default approach. So it won't completely balance min-maxing power gamers and it might be a bit tough for complete epic 'noobs' (if you'll pardon the expression) running one-shots. But for the vast majority of epic parties it will make a positive difference.

Random (Throwaway) Encounter: Encounter Level +0-2 (at epic levels)
Standard Encounter: EL +3-5
Tough Encounter (ie. involving NPCs?): EL +6
End of 'Act' Boss: EL +7
End of Adventure Boss: EL +8
End of Adventure Path Boss: EL +9
End of Campaign Boss: EL +10

What I will add is that I simply wouldn't use monsters of 4 levels higher (or whatever - because of the math), but rather use more monsters (or higher rank monsters) of levels closer to the PCs.

So for a Level 24 party I would suggest 5 elites of Level 24 or 10 standard monsters of level 24 rather than 5 standard monsters of level 28.

 

[Upper_Krust]

I'm really enjoying reading through your super-solo monster, and it's definitely got me thinking of similar challenges. Top work!

Thanks for the kind words. Glad you liked it Will. I have a few other interesting epic tier articles on the website you might also enjoy including versions of Orcus and Asmodeus.

 

[keterys]

Random (Throwaway) Encounter: Encounter Level +0-2 (at epic levels)
Standard Encounter: EL +3-5
Tough Encounter (ie. involving NPCs?): EL +6
End of 'Act' Boss: EL +7
End of Adventure Boss: EL +8
End of Adventure Path Boss: EL +9
End of Campaign Boss: EL +10

Fwiw, a strong group (always win init, radiant vulnerability, ability to nova over 600 hp, etc tested an EL +2 encounter for me this weekend and almost TPK-ed.

I've also found that I generally can't write more than EL +5* without almost guaranteeing TPK except for very optimized groups, up through level 26 so far.

* Assuming I design as I normally do, so creatures have synergies and cover things (like the monsters aren't all in a small burst, can cope with all flyers, or resistance to one damage type, etc). If I just kinda threw together random creatures, that would give a little more leeway.

So for a Level 24 party I would suggest 5 elites of Level 24 or 10 standard monsters of level 24 rather than 5 standard monsters of level 28.

This is decent advice for an optimized group, yes. Strongly optimized, for clarity. If a group doesn't autowin initiative and have its share of crazy outs, 5 post MM3 elites can be enough to drop half the party.

 

[keterys]

In general I've found:

L+1-2: Standard - bloodied and or drop multiple, low chance for some death, almost no chance of TPK
L+2-3: Boss - some death(s)
L+4-5: Endgame, a TPK or near TPK is fine

Optimized or have a few key ingredients (warlord, radiant mafia): +1 monster worth
Glory (have notable optimization, for example their strikers can reliably kill 1-2 monsters in round 1, each): +3 monsters worth
Insane (never lose init, can kill an entire encounter, then follow up with another): +6 monsters worth
Wrong (plays a different type of D&D, most likely using rules loophole that a DM shouldn't allow for things like infinite damage, etc): +10 monsters worth

So generally you just need to up one thing to an elite or one elite to a solo, not the whole encounter.

If you have a big group (more than 4 or 5), you might need to bump things even more, of course.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hey keterys!

...I think we discussed this very point before.

Fwiw, a strong group (always win init, radiant vulnerability, ability to nova over 600 hp, etc tested an EL +2 encounter for me this weekend and almost TPK-ed.

I'd need to hear the details but as you note below, your Monster Encounters are themselves optimized.

I've also found that I generally can't write more than EL +5* without almost guaranteeing TPK except for very optimized groups, up through level 26 so far.

* Assuming I design as I normally do, so creatures have synergies and cover things (like the monsters aren't all in a small burst, can cope with all flyers, or resistance to one damage type, etc). If I just kinda threw together random creatures, that would give a little more leeway.

This. Plus also take into account that the fewer monsters you have (ie. Solo monsters) the less chance you will have to set-up synergies and cover things.

This is decent advice for an optimized group, yes. Strongly optimized, for clarity. If a group doesn't autowin initiative and have its share of crazy outs, 5 post MM3 elites can be enough to drop half the party.

I think it assumes a median level of optimization (either 1-2 players heavily optimized or all with a small degree of optimization).

In general I've found:

L+1-2: Standard - bloodied and or drop multiple, low chance for some death, almost no chance of TPK
L+2-3: Boss - some death(s)
L+4-5: Endgame, a TPK or near TPK is fine

Optimized or have a few key ingredients (warlord, radiant mafia): +1 monster worth
Glory (have notable optimization, for example their strikers can reliably kill 1-2 monsters in round 1, each): +3 monsters worth
Insane (never lose init, can kill an entire encounter, then follow up with another): +6 monsters worth
Wrong (plays a different type of D&D, most likely using rules loophole that a DM shouldn't allow for things like infinite damage, etc): +10 monsters worth

So generally you just need to up one thing to an elite or one elite to a solo, not the whole encounter.

If you have a big group (more than 4 or 5), you might need to bump things even more, of course.

Most of the groups I have seen would fall into the 'Glory' mould - though I have read a few 'Insane' playtests.

 

[Ferghis]

Sigil Carver Swordmage: Nullifies two monsters worth of damage every round.

I've been dying to play this at high paragon or epic for YEARS now. If only I could find that game...