How many monsters/encounter do you use in 3e?

[MerricB]

There is already a poll on this topic, but it starts from the assumption that 3e play is either vs one monster or vs many monsters, which is not one I agree with.

Instead, I believe that 3e balance is primarily aimed at groups of 1-4 monsters, with a very few monsters working in groups of 5-8. Groups of 9 or more monsters work very rarely as expected under the CR/EL system, although Orcs are the most likely to function properly.

A prime example of the wonkiness of this system can be found in the Paizo Dungeon adventure Encounter at Blackwall Keep, where masses of Lizardmen prove little danger to the PCs (despite a high EL) due to their ineffective attacks (+1 bonus! woo!)

One should also note that the playtesting CR rules suggested in the 3.5e DMG are *two* monsters versus an CR+2 level standard party.

For this poll, adjust the numbers of monsters you use to make them work with a 4-member party. If you had 6 PCs in your groups, then if you threw 6 orcs against the group, that is the equivalent of a 4 monster encounter.

Cheers!

 

[xechnao]

Why is the number of monsters important? What's the difference if I use thousands of monsters or only one?

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Why is the number of monsters important? What's the difference if I use thousands of monsters or only one?

Thousands of monsters take lots of die rolls. (That's probably why Swarms were invented.) It also leads to really annoying complications. For instance, you can use a swarm of basic kobolds to overpower much higher level PCs... if you can wrap your brain around aid another + grapple. (So, the bonuses apply to the touch attack rolls, which might miss without them? Or to the grapple itself? Both? Split? You can only surround one PC with 8 kobolds. Etc.)

On the other hand, a single monster has only one round's worth of actions to it each round, and if bombarded with multiple "controlling" effects such as Hold Monster, won't be much of a threat.

 

[el-remmen]

I chose 5-8 because you said for a party of four. I run for parties of 6, and think my average is more like 9 to 12.

Just today we finished a combat encounter with 2 lizardfolk, 2 yellow musk zombies (and 2 easily avoided creepers), 2 needlemen rangers, 2 druid variants, 2 giant ants, 1 druid variant/barbarian and a "summoned" giant fiendish preying mantis.

Though in this (and many) cases they arrive or are encountered in waves. The lizardfolk and zombies were encountered first and then the needlemen joined the fight and then the ants and druids and finally the giant fiendish preying mantis arrived from Hell as most of the other foes were defeated.

 

[xechnao]

Thousands of monsters take lots of die rolls. (That's probably why Swarms were invented.) It also leads to really annoying complications. For instance, you can use a swarm of basic kobolds to overpower much higher level PCs... if you can wrap your brain around aid another + grapple. (So, the bonuses apply to the touch attack rolls, which might miss without them? Or to the grapple itself? Both? Split? You can only surround one PC with 8 kobolds. Etc.)

On the other hand, a single monster has only one round's worth of actions to it each round, and if bombarded with multiple "controlling" effects such as Hold Monster, won't be much of a threat.

I would have understood a poll that asks the opinion about what 3e rules are made to handle best. But the way the poll poses the question makes no sense to me really.

If rules do not help you just use different rules. I do not wrap my game around the rules. It is the other way around.

 

[Henry]

On average, I follow the 3E encounter rules: 1 monster of their level, or 2 monsters of 1 level below, or 4 monsters of 2 levels lower, etc. If it's a hard challenge, I'll use an equivalent up to EL+3 above them, such as 8 monsters of their level or something.

Then again, if the party is pretty tough or pretty weak, I'll adjust for that based on the monster's hard numbers. If there are no heavy hitters, then no monsters with really high ACs, etc.

In other words, it's quite a bit of math juggling for me to keep from killing the party.

 

[HeavenShallBurn]

In general I try to make sure there's at least one monster per PC or other party member. I only do solo or duo monster encounters as wandering monster encounters or when the monster(s) are so powerful they have the party in a blatant overmatch situation.

 

[MerricB]

In other words, it's quite a bit of math juggling for me to keep from killing the party.

And sometimes, with an ogre and a critical, you can't even stop that!

Cheers!

 

[JDJblatherings]

How about an entry for: Whatever fits the adventure/campaign.

I lean towards status-quo DMing, the villains don't recruit CR1 door guards just because the PCs might be 1st level.

Yes is still tend to follow rough level based guidlines a lot of the time, but not all of the time.

 

[el-remmen]

Just today we finished a combat encounter with 2 lizardfolk, 2 yellow musk zombies (and 2 easily avoided creepers), 2 needlemen rangers, 2 druid variants, 2 giant ants, 1 druid variant/barbarian and a "summoned" giant fiendish preying mantis.

And for those who are curious this combat took 23 rounds.