Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Monte Carlo versus "The Math"
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="eamon" data-source="post: 5020760" data-attributes="member: 51942"><p>How 'bout doing a mix of opponent levels? Say, a level +3, then a level+0,level+2,level+0,level+1 schedule or something. If you've gotta make various opponents <em>anyhow</em> this shouldn't be a huge problem (right?).</p><p></p><p>The advantages are twofold: firstly, this better matches actuality, where various encounters are varyingly difficult. Secondly, if plays to the strengths of a sim; namely to be more robust by using a broader distribution of possibilites. After all, it's a reasonable result to determine that even levels represent a significant (if small) power boost, but it's not reasonable to have similarly hard edges for the opponents: real PC's encounter various levels too. This way you get some differing damage expressions and have fewer artificial discontinuities as levels rise.</p><p></p><p>I suggested the order level+3,level+0,level+2,level+0,leve+1 to account for a peculiarity of sims (which presumably uses dailies and action points early or at least predictably). A real player would after all use dailies and action points with a greater frequency vs. stronger opponents; so it makes sense to confront the sim with stronger opponents in those combats when he has those available (course, you could do various schedules and compare how much it matters...).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="eamon, post: 5020760, member: 51942"] How 'bout doing a mix of opponent levels? Say, a level +3, then a level+0,level+2,level+0,level+1 schedule or something. If you've gotta make various opponents [I]anyhow[/I] this shouldn't be a huge problem (right?). The advantages are twofold: firstly, this better matches actuality, where various encounters are varyingly difficult. Secondly, if plays to the strengths of a sim; namely to be more robust by using a broader distribution of possibilites. After all, it's a reasonable result to determine that even levels represent a significant (if small) power boost, but it's not reasonable to have similarly hard edges for the opponents: real PC's encounter various levels too. This way you get some differing damage expressions and have fewer artificial discontinuities as levels rise. I suggested the order level+3,level+0,level+2,level+0,leve+1 to account for a peculiarity of sims (which presumably uses dailies and action points early or at least predictably). A real player would after all use dailies and action points with a greater frequency vs. stronger opponents; so it makes sense to confront the sim with stronger opponents in those combats when he has those available (course, you could do various schedules and compare how much it matters...). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Monte Carlo versus "The Math"
Top