How Many 1st Level Fighters Should a 10th Level Fighter Beat?

[Dice4Hire]

HOnestly, I would prefer 6-10, The guy is a lot better than one on one, which should be a nearly 100% win for tenth level. But 6-10 have a nice advantage, i.e. number of attacks.

I guess I want the attack bonus and AC to scale a lot slower than it did in 4E, where 1st vs 10th is really rally hard.

 

[howandwhy99]

It's just not as simple as a number for me. It doesn't matter the edition. If you play a game and lay down and let someone beat you, then it doesn't take more then 1. The rest is based upon odds and the play of the game. I think the odds are a 10th level F-M could take on 10 or so and win pretty well. Heroes and Superheroes were based on that understanding for a 10:1 mass battle scale with the heroes fighting singly. Take on a few of those forces and even they can be outmatched. I don't think it was ever about Drizz't vs. 10,000 orcs as a even match up, but I guess I could see it risen to that if desired.

 

[keterys]

HOnestly, I would prefer 6-10, The guy is a lot better than one on one, which should be a nearly 100% win for tenth level. But 6-10 have a nice advantage, i.e. number of attacks.

I guess I want the attack bonus and AC to scale a lot slower than it did in 4E, where 1st vs 10th is really rally hard.

For what it's worth, 4E's ratio is 5 1s to 1 10th and attack bonus scaled slightly faster in 3e - and, in fact, 4E's attack bonus scales the slowest of every edition of D&D, though AC is a lot more muddled...

While you might want AC/attack to scale slower so folks stay on the same d20, you might want effectiveness to scale faster (20-100% faster than 4e)

 

[Quickleaf]

And Adams does not think in base 13.

When I read that I lost all respect for the author. At least we know the answer certainly isn't 6....unless we're going back to hexes!!

300.

After all, This! Is! D&D!!!!

I so want to see a WotC + Paizo spoof on that. Yeah it takes a certain level of dark humor on a Thursday to make fun of Wizards X-mas layoffs...

 

[The Human Target]

It doesn't matter.

The game isn't based around PVP and I don't think enemies should have proper classes.

 

[TarionzCousin]

I think a 10th level fighter should be nigh-unbeatable by 1st level fighters, no matter how many of them there are.

I don't have any math to support this position, other than pointing out that all 300+ could not reach Conan at the same time. Maybe 20 could, if half of them had longspears and could surround him.

But unless they surprised Conan, he should be able to get to someplace where he can put his back up against a wall. If he knows he's going to be fighting a horde of mooks, he should be smart enough to do this.

And then he can last as long as his Endurance holds out or the other guys run out of mooks.

 

[Jawsh]

If I were running the thing as an encounter, an entire army of thousands of 1st-level guys wouldn't even attack, because they'd have no one to lead them.

But maybe they don't know how powerful the 10th-level fighter is. What would happen is one or two brave, foolish 1st-level guys would make tentative attacks. The 10th-level guy cuts them down in a single swipe, and the remaining army runs away.

In order for such low-level guys to want to fight the high-level guys, they need some motivation. Maybe the 10th-level guy is evil, and threatening their homes and farms. Even so, without a commander, the 1st-level guys would probably try and flee, grab their families and hide, rather than fight.

Maybe there are some 7th-level commanders (imo they'd have to be at least 7th level) threatening the 1st-level dudes with execution if they don't attack the 10th-level guy. Even so, the threat might not be enough to overcome the urge to flee. 1st-level guys do not have the kind of training required to stand and fight.

In the case of the 7th-level commanders, the encounter is not really about the 1st-level army, because to me, it's a battle of forces of will between the 10th-level fighter and the 7th-level commanders. The 1st-level guys can count as equipment, or summoned allies, effectively. Or simple reactive terrain between the real foes.

 

[Chris_Nightwing]

I voted for 3 because I don't like power levels to escalate that fast.
10 might also be acceptable however.
Certainly nothing above linear please, although if that's what you want, the Fibonacci suggestion is inferior to triangular numbers:

1st: 1
2nd: 3
3rd: 6
4th: 10
5th: 15
6th: 21
7th: 28
8th: 36
9th: 45
10th: 55

 

[Hassassin]

It doesn't matter.

The game isn't based around PVP and I don't think enemies should have proper classes.

Ok, imagine a monster or NPC a 1st level fighter has a 50% chance of beating alone. How many of those should make a 50-50 encounter against a 10th level fighter?

Edit: These are only ways to concretely ask about how quickly you would like PC abilities to increase.

 

[Hassassin]

I think a 10th level fighter should be nigh-unbeatable by 1st level fighters, no matter how many of them there are.

I don't have any math to support this position, other than pointing out that all 300+ could not reach Conan at the same time. Maybe 20 could, if half of them had longspears and could surround him.

But unless they surprised Conan, he should be able to get to someplace where he can put his back up against a wall. If he knows he's going to be fighting a horde of mooks, he should be smart enough to do this.

Ok, if they have bows? I specifically said in 1st post there wouldn't be an environmental advantage the 10th level one could use.

So yeah, this is a worst case for the 10th level one. Realistically he might be able to escape or cheat in most fights.