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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Janx" data-source="post: 6223774" data-attributes="member: 8835">In 3e, the basic metric I use is the CR rating compared to party level (party level = sum of all PC levels divided by 4).Barring issues with CR calculation/imbalance, I stick to running encounters within a CR range around the party level (below for the mooks, above to a certain threshold for the big bad guy).In any case, the expectation is that the toughest encounter is dangerous, but statistically beatable.My goal is to make sure the tough encounters feel very hard.  But mechanically, I want them to be beatable if the party players decently smart.In this way, as GM, I don't have to pull any punches when running an encounter that is correctly rated for their level.  I just try my best to kill them, and I have a reasonable safeguard that if they don't play stupid, and don't have bad luck, they'll make it to the end of the adventure.For my group, they tend to want to kill things.  So putting an over-kill monster in would feel like the GM railroading them into a retreat situation (because it's obvious they can't beat it no matter what).By limiting monsters to a certain power range relative to the party, the decision to run away, or fight remains in the party, or outsmart it, is based on their own circumstances (having lost too many resources in the last encounter, etc).As a note, PCs still die, etc in my games.  I just try to have a sense of regulation about my part in it.</blockquote>

Verification