How do you like your probability of success?

[Chrono22]

I like to have the statistical probability be close to 0. I consider it a challenge and a reward to do the impossible. Being a hero is about overcoming impossible odds, it's the stuff of legends.

 

[Wik]

If the party approaches the problem with tactical forethought and utilizing the battlefield correctly, party success ("success" in this case meaning the best outcome of the encounter - fleeing a much larger monster with no party casualties in this case counts as a success) should never be less than 90 - 100%.

After all, the GM is throwing the encounter at the players, and if he has that number super lower (say 50%), even if they're doing everything right, then he isn't a very good GM.

However, if the PCs do not use the information provided them, do not work together for best effect, do not make correct tactical choices, and make poor decisions, then the chance of success should obviously plummet.

 

[Ahnehnois]

Ideally I think the odds should be about even (50/50). Really makes the PCs feel like they've accomplished something if they win, but allows them to win.

 

[Umbran]

Sooo...take that thought one step further. Obviously an auto-win (100%) isn't fun for you, but neither is an auto-TPK (0%). What odds make for the epic fight?

My point is that while the extremes are often problematic, the odds aren't what make for the epic fight. The odds of success don't really speak to how much or what kind of work has to get done before you achieve success.

Last week, I ran a session wherein the players honestly were bound to win. But there was an airship, acid guns, and an undead slippery-fish of a mad scientist involved. There wasn't much I could do within the rules to keep this guy from shuffling off to Boot Hill, but I could prolong his (un)life so the action was cool. The players ended by describing the encounter as "Awesome!"

 

[ExploderWizard]

As a player I like for my odds of success to be as high as I can arrange it.

As a DM I like for my players to try and make their odds of success as high as they can arrange it.

 

[Flatus Maximus]

My point is that while the extremes are often problematic, the odds aren't what make for the epic fight. The odds of success don't really speak to how much or what kind of work has to get done before you achieve success.

Last week, I ran a session wherein the players honestly were bound to win. But there was an airship, acid guns, and an undead slippery-fish of a mad scientist involved. There wasn't much I could do within the rules to keep this guy from shuffling off to Boot Hill, but I could prolong his (un)life so the action was cool. The players ended by describing the encounter as "Awesome!"

I would totally agree with you that there is more to an epic fight than odds, and that those things (evocative descriptions, imagination, etc.) are critical, but surely seeing that the odds are against you and yet somehow pulling it off makes it that more fun, right?

In any case, our campaigns tend to have a fair number of level-inappropriate encounters. Sometimes we recognize we're in over our heads and run, other times we go for it. I suppose this thread doesn't make sense for folks that always have level-appropriate encounters.

 

[3d6]

I answered between 60% and 80%, but I don't think that's correct on further reflection. If I have an 80% chance of successes, then I must have a 20% chance of failure. My group plays 3.5, so it takes ~13 1/3 encounters to gain a level of experience. If we had a 20% chance of TPK with each of those encounters, then the chance that at least 1 of those 13 1/3 encounters ended in a TPK would be 1 - (.8^(13 1/3)), or about 95%. That's obviously much too difficult. I would say you want at least a 50% chance of making it to the next level, so that means you need to have 95% chance of success with each normal encounter. (All of this assumes that I remember that statistics course I took 10 years ago correctly, of course).

 

[Holy Bovine]

For a typical encounter, how do you like your odds? My first poll: I have no idea how to do this, so forgive me if I frak it up.

Edit: Allow me to rephrase: For the most fun encounters, what constitutes the most fun odds of success?

I'm confused on this question.

Does success = the PC surviving the encounter?
Does non-success = the PC dying?
Does success = the PC gaining some big benefit?
Does non-success = the PC losing some big benefit?

Too vague for me to tell. I like to be able to defeat most anything that comes my way - sometimes you will encounter something that is way out of your league but those should be a rarity. If you are constantly running away from everything that crosses your path it is awfully hard to portray a brave adventurer.

 

[the Jester]

"Odds of success" at what? What do you define as success?

A lot of the best encounters are ones where the pcs have a goal other than "win the fight" imho.

I don't think there's a single answer to this question- if the party has had a really rough time of it lately, sometimes an easy encounter is just the thing.

 

[Umbran]

I would totally agree with you that there is more to an epic fight than odds, and that those things (evocative descriptions, imagination, etc.) are critical, but surely seeing that the odds are against you and yet somehow pulling it off makes it that more fun, right?

As a player, I try not to assume that I have a good estimate of the odds, to be honest.

In the encounter (which wasn't D&D, but I don't think that matters much), the players first thought it was going to be pretty easy - they thought the guys was a mad scientist, and they disguised themselves to get on his airship and had six to one odds. Their only real fear was that he had some massively dangerous weapon.

When he jumped out of the airship, fell sixty feet, and got up and started to run away, they got rather more scared.

When they figured out he was undead, rather than mechanically enhanced, they got even more scared.

But, the actual difficulty didn't rise. He didn't have too many ways to hurt them on hand. And, in fact, learning he was undead also gave them the information on how to kill him - they got more scared, but their chances of permanently beat him skyrocketed!

So, no, I'm not at all sure that the chances of winning (either real or perceived) makes the thing more or less fun. A grinding combat is a grinding combat, no matter which way the odds are.