Monster Damage

[Goonalan]

I'm using the new damage expressions and throwing Level +0 to +2 encounters at my PCs and they're still managing to wipe the floor with me (at times). There are more hairy moments with the new expressions but for the most part- business as usual. In my VTT game (1st level PCs) they're on an 8 Encounter run at present, one player has been in negative figures twice but other than that they're all still standing, and they've still got healing surges left (one or two each anyway).

The thing that has changed for the better for me is at 1st level the PCs are having to go for the Daily Powers & Action Points earlier in the run- previously (with the same group, and up to level 11) the players used to end the day with a stack of unused daily powers, and Action Points.

The new damage expressions have put paid to this- in the present run (eight encounters so far) then no PC has a Daily left and the PCs are constantly asking- do we get another Action Point?

As I say in our previous run (70+ sessions) then players were not frightened of the monsters and so would stock up on action points and daily powers for the 'big one', the problem with that is a fight with judicious use of the APs and Dailies takes 3 rounds and twenty minutes, without takes almost double the time.

If anything the new damage expressions have speeded up my combats and made them more cinematic/epic with the PCs stunting and trying new things.

It works!

 

[Aegeri]

I could never go back to the old terrible damage expressions. Especially by epic where you really feel how worthless the monsters became. Now you can build challenging encounters and you don't have to be hugely cheap to do it either! In my last epic tier game, I was using EL+7 encounters to just get enough damage to bloody someone. That's just stupid in every way.

With the errata to surgeless healing and the changes to other aspects of the game, I think it works 100% as intended. PCs shouldn't be facing 6-7 encounters a day - though mine in Dark Prophecy did get 5, but I gave them healing surge restoring potions halfway. 3-4 sounds exactly right, but if you want them to face more start giving them encounters of EL-2 or so. This will have the same effect while still being a presentable threat to the players.

Personally I could never go back now. Monsters actually being viable threats makes the game exciting and interesting. It also means I don't need to prepare ridiculous encounters that either collapse into nothing or barely bloody a PC.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

The Dungeon Master`s kit tells you what the new encounter difficulties are IIRC.

And yes, I noticed that the Alpha strike tends to be devastating... but after that, the battle usually goes out well for the PCs... which is something to get used to, but quite enjoyable...

Using a + defense daily also has quite an impact now, as accuracy and defenses effectively dropped by 2 to 4 points.

Combat length is now rather 3 rounds than 5 or 6 rounds, which seems to be still quite enjoyable.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

I don't find the new damage values over the top.

In my last Dark Sun session, the players (5 of them) went up against 7 gladiators and 3 spellcasters/psions, all of whom were the same level up to 2 levels above the PCs.

They won. One PC was briefly unconscious, and they used up all their healing resources (except Second Winds, that is)... but they won. Afterward a couple of players told me they thought they might lose (I was worried about that too) but that's why it was so fun.

 

[Cyronax]

In my current campaign, I gave the each low-level PC a modified/supped up paragon tier magic item (11th-14th) of their choice. I also used higher damage stats to get around the grind.

That was before the MM3 even came out.

In general, the grind was gone. Many battles felt dangerous. I killed a few PC's, but it was really exciting. (I think the same can be said without inflating the PC's magic items absurdly, like I do).

Conversely I DMed the early 4e monster math extensivly and experienced sooooo much grind. As a DM and occaisional player, I prefer the beat em out style of the new math.

It makes the PCs stay on their toes more. The new math does NOT auto-kill from what I've seen. It merely speeds up the time it takes for PC's to know if they're overmatched or not.

C.I.D.

 

[Destil]

I'm not actually sure what I want to do with damage numbers post heroic in my game. How much do I need to compensate for the fact that I've house ruled out all items that give always on +item bonuses to damage, for instance?

Likewise, having epic tier fights end in 3 rounds is way too fast for me. That was a big issue in 3E 4E really fixed in heroic. I like my fights in the 5-10 round range, which should play well with PCs who have 4 dailies and 4 encounters (short or easy fights blow most encounters and maybe a daily or an at will, long or hard ones require the use of several at wills or dailies). I liked the idea that a single standard action is a bit less valuable in 4E, the occasional double move or round stunned is a lot less of an issue.

 

[hayek]

No math will ever be exactly right for every party out there. Its always going to be a balancing act of trial and error. If your party is dying, reduce the damage some for all the monsters you throw at them or just use MM1 monsters. Or stick with lower level encounters. If they're wiping the floor with your baddies then increase their damage or stick with MM3 monsters.

I'm a big fan of the new MM3 math because it tries to make fights shorter and still exciting (if not more exciting), and drains party resources faster. If you have time on your hands to run 6-7 fights per adventure then more power to you, I have about 4 hours every other week. I need tension to rise quickly and for the party to feel drained and threatened after only a couple fights.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Just a reminder:

if your players are wiping the flor ith monsters, by all means, use higher level MM1 monsters!

If your party wins combat by lasting out all monsters, then new monsters are those you seek!

 

[Mengu]

No math will ever be exactly right for every party out there. Its always going to be a balancing act of trial and error. If your party is dying, reduce the damage some for all the monsters you throw at them or just use MM1 monsters. Or stick with lower level encounters. If they're wiping the floor with your baddies then increase their damage or stick with MM3 monsters.

At this point, I'm finding myself in agreement with this. Parties seem to have different experience. Mine was doing fine against MM1 monsters, though challenging combats took too long for my taste. Against MM3 monsters every combat is a challenge, and they just don't have the resource to deal with what I like as a full day of adventuring.

Anyway, I guess experience with both sets of monster stats (and this discussion) were educational, and I'll use it to tweak encounter difficulty vs resource management as appropriate for each adventuring day, for short adventuring days staying close to MM3, and for long adventuring days making tweaks toward MM1. Thanks all.

 

[jbear]

My personal experience with the new damage expressions is vastly positive.

Combat has an added tension. Monsters are serious threats. Death is a step behind the PCs all the time.

Retreating or finding ways to achieve goals and then fleeing the scene are now totally viable options for my players. And if they can find ways to completely avoid combat, they do. And I reward them for it.

I like to use quite a few monsters below the PCs level, meaning they are easily hit and taken down usually with 2 good hits, maybe 3. I mix them up with a few, one or two higher level monsters who are the main deadly threat. If they can quickly neutralise those ones, the followers tend to end things themselves by looking for the fastest way to the door. But like the OP said, those lower level monsters still have good damage out put and with combat advantage or a leader aura bonus of some kind they can be fairly accurate to hit quite regularly.

If your concern is that 4-5 encounters in a day are too few (that is what my group is currently averaging) you could consider several very easy fights with very challenging terrain, or some fights with 'key terrain features' or 'vital non-combat situations' mixed in which can simply end a combat in one fell swoop (perhaps involving a parallel skill challenge) if activated or triggered adequately avoiding the loss of HSurges.

Alternatively, you could use MM1 monsters when you want 'not-so-threatening/damaging fight' and MM3 monsters for your important battles.

Personally I love the danger and tension that exists when battle occurs now. I adjust all monsters I use to the new damage expressions religiously. Resting isn't always possible for my PCs, not without consequences at least. But I prefer to put the challenges in front of them and let them decide how they are going to deal with them. Sometimes that means resting up despite knowing that doing so may affect their chances of success ... but thems the brakes.

What I do avoid though is having intelligent monsters fighting on to the bitter end when the fight has been lost. Those monsters could probably siphon off another surge or two from the pcs, the fight might take an extra round and half (15 mins...?). Besides those one or two surges add up and siphoning them off is counter productive if you want the PCs to attempt pushing on after 3 or 4 brutal encounters. When a fight is over, I end it as quickly as possible.