Is a DM supposed to ensure level appropriate encounters, by the RAW?

[Orius]

I too see it as more of a guideline. I think it's presented as more of a hard and fast rule for the benefit of less experienced DMs who are more likely to go by the book. There's also the matter of XPs being based on XPs, I think discouraging the use of ELs higher than the party might be there to prevent characters from leveling too quickly.

It might be a hard and fast rule, but good and experienced DMs aren't necessarily going to follow them because they know how to set up an encounter for their players. Also, XP gain isn't necessarily thrown out of whack either because the DM can resort to ad hoc or story XP awards rather than just going by the book on XPs. BTB XPs are there again for the benefit of less experienced DMs who don't know how to award XPs. Many experienced DMs never go BTB on XPs anyway, and I think the DMG sort of reflects that with ad hoc and story XPs.

 

[Quasqueton]

I didn't attribute the quote because I didn't want to argue with the original poster specifically, but rather discuss the concept brought up. I didn't attribute the quote for the very reason the original poster is complaining about now. I dind't want to put him on the defensive. S'mon "outed" himself on this; in the first reply, even.

And "obsessed" with disproving you? Hardly. I'm discussing it. You are rather rabid in your defense of your idea, yourself. Pot, kettle?

Quasqueton

 

[Ravellion]

Uh, I've been away from the site for a year and suddenly there's new jargon... For Freya's sake, what does RAW mean. Last I checked it was a capitalization error of "not cooked".

Rav

 

[Zappo]

Rules As Written.

For my bit, I don't see what the problem is. The DMG doesn't say to only use encounters of EL = party level. It says to use a variety of encounters of all levels including outright unbeatable ones, which is pretty much what a simulationist game would use anyway. Me, I don't think that my habits have changed since 2E.

 

[S'mon]

Q - I agree w BU that it's bad form, and you seem to be deliberately trying to needle me.

 

[BSF]

Bold emphasis mine.

Is this true or baloney? Is this a written rule? Is it implied? Is this any different than in AD&D?

Quasqueton

The DMG provides guidelines that offer far more guidance to new DMs on encounters than previous editions do. It is true, insofar as the authors are implying "If you follow these general guidelines, all the mechanical balance of the game will pretty much fall into place. You won't constantly kill your PCs and torque off your players. You will have decent treasure and everyone will likely have a decent amount of fun." Obviously, these are not absolutes. Each group is stylistically different. As DMs grow in experience and confidence, they will feel much more comfortable stepping out side the boundaries of the guidelines.

The wonderful thing about 3.X is that there is an established baseline that we all begin from. Fireball spells are a spread that wraps around corners and pillars and does not exceed it's radius. Two stock Rings of Protection overlap instead of stacking. Stuff like that. There are also better guidelines for running a game than previous editions had. There is still room for improvement, but it was definitely a step in the right direction.

Personally, I use CR/EL as guidelines for how effectively I might challenge my group. Of course, I have a 7 player group so CR/EL is already less useful for me. I also use Status Quo encounters for some things and tailored encounters for others. As others have said, if the PCs go looking for the ancient wyrm that comes out and terrorizes the area every few years, then they will likely find an ancient wyrm, not a young adult.

 

[D+1]

I wonder how many DMs actually use that?

IME not a large percentage of people truly READ the rule books. They skim, then read enough to function, then read additional parts as they have questions that come up, but don't really read everything so as to be aware of rules that they may not use but probably should know anyway. Grappling might be an example. People know they can grapple but IME the first thing that happens when anyone wants to try it (which is always as a last resort) is the cry goes up, "What ARE the rules for grappling in 3E?" The DMG notes that there should be a spread of difficulty both below and above an "equal" fight. It's really only important that there IS a variety and that the DM is aware of the problems of making too many encounters too easy as well as making encounters too hard. The actual balance of it needs to be struck by the DM and the players he's running the game for - what kind of spread THEY want rather than RAW.

 

[Quasqueton]

Q - I agree w BU that it's bad form, and you seem to be deliberately trying to needle me.

I guess I should have paraphrased instead of quoted. <shrug> Like I said, I was looking to discuss the concept, not the speaker.

I am not trying to needle you, personally, but I don't agree with the idea that D&D3 specifically tells the DM to ensure that PCs meet level-appropriate challenges. You post your opinion, I post mine. It's not personal as far as I'm concerned. Sorry you feel like it is.

But, again, that's why I didn't put your name on the quote, to not personalize the argument.

Quasqueton

 

[Remathilis]

[Barbosa] The Code is more like Guidelines rather than actual rules...[/barbosa]

I prefer this method moreso than guessing or having wandering purple worms near town, but to each his own.

 

[S'mon]

I am not trying to needle you, personally, but I don't agree with the idea that D&D3 specifically tells the DM to ensure that PCs meet level-appropriate challenges.

It's there in black & white on pg 102 of the 3.0 DMG. This is of course a _recommendation_ and Monte won't put you in DM-jail if you run the game differently, he just thinks it's a bad idea not to take account of party level when designing wildernesses or dungeons. Like I said, the big change from 1e/2e is with wilderness encounter tables, in 1e/2e these were generally 'level appropriate' for PC groups around 6th-12th level but of course PCs of any level might go wilderness travelling, nowadays the DM is recommended to design wilderness encounter tables with a particular party level in mind, just as they've always done dungeons.