More Players = More Monsters or Tougher Monsters?

[andargor]

We're about to start a new campaign, and the player count will reach anywhere from 4 to 8.

My question is how to scale encounters depending on the number of players. There are two main ways I can see this:

- Add more monsters per encounter
- Increase the monster difficulty (higher CR monster, Advanced monster, add classes, etc..)

I know about the CR formula in the DMG, but somehow, this "cookie cutter" approach doesn't work well in all situations.

The problem is, they're starting at 1st level, and I see both methods vary in efficiency as the level goes up:

- Adding more monsters is deadlier at lower levels, since there are more attacks per character. At high levels, it becomes irrelevant if spellcaster support is available (1,000 orcs, 10,000 orcs, etc., don't make much of a difference)

- Adding tougher monsters can be deadlier at mid-to-high levels, since those higher CR critters usually pretty good defensive capabilities, and their attacks are concentrated on one or two players before they go down.

So my thoughts are:

- Tougher monsters at low level
- More Monsters at mid level
- A mix of tougher monsters and more monsters at high level

Anyone run simulations to prove/disprove my impression? I know that spellcasting skews everything, but perhaps a straight melee simulation could shed some light on this.

Andargor

 

[Murrdox]

I would strongly disagree with giving characters Stronger monsters at low level, and I would use MORE monsters instead.

STRONG Monsters at low levels can kill players in one hit, they have enough hit points so that they take multiple hits to take down, and they may have a high AC that the players have a hard time hitting. Strong Monsters also might have multiple attacks, which make them even more deadly.

Even a CR2 creature can be deadly to a party of level 1's.

Personally I would stick to building a EL2 Encounter (if you were going for a difficult fight, with 8 people) and I would use a combination of 1/2 CR and 1 CR to create it.

 

[Mistwell]

More monsters, not stronger monsters, is the standard I believe.

 

[andargor]

I would strongly disagree with giving characters Stronger monsters at low level, and I would use MORE monsters instead.

STRONG Monsters at low levels can kill players in one hit, they have enough hit points so that they take multiple hits to take down, and they may have a high AC that the players have a hard time hitting. Strong Monsters also might have multiple attacks, which make them even more deadly.

Even a CR2 creature can be deadly to a party of level 1's.

Personally I would stick to building a EL2 Encounter (if you were going for a difficult fight, with 8 people) and I would use a combination of 1/2 CR and 1 CR to create it.

Hmm, I see your point. But perhaps just advancing the monster one HD, if they don't increase in size, should not be that deadly?

Or would stat changes modify the difficulty. E.g. more constitution? Or perhaps better equipment (for those monsters that wear it).

Andargor

 

[andargor]

More monsters, not stronger monsters, is the standard I believe.

But at high level, does it make much of a difference? Particularly with a strong arcane caster to blow them away en masse?

Andargor

 

[Pinotage]

Definitely more monsters. Tougher monsters kill at lower level because they have abilities, such as DR, that lower level characters are not equipped to deal with. Also, once you reach mid to higher levels, a single toucher opponent actually has to opposite effect and is easier to kill since the PCs get 8 actions vs its only 1. Use more monsters and you get rid of both those issues.

Pinotage

 

[Pinotage]

But at high level, does it make much of a difference? Particularly with a strong arcane caster to blow them away en masse?

Andargor

That's true with fewer characters as well. One fireball against a few opponents with a party of 4 characters is the same as two fireballs with more opponents and a party of 8 characters. Sometimes it's easier to stick to one or two more as well, rather than masses more.

Pinotage

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Generally, more monsters.

Tougher monsters tend to have special abilities that are counterable by higher-level spells and effects. In other words, a particularly tough ground-pounder is level-appropriate because the party (at least, some of them) will have access to flight. If the party isn't flying, he's suddenly a much tougher hombre.

The other issue you'll run into is the primary limiting factor on D&D combat is actions / round. A single strong monster has the same number of actions / round as a weak monster, meaning that single, tough monsters tend to get mobbed and overwhelmed by the larger number of PCs.

My advice, however, is that you start off with normal-sized encounters until you get a handle on how well your party performs. Then, gradually increase the numbers (and possibly the toughness in smaller amounts) until it feels right.

A great way to do this is to stat up the encounter in waves. In the first wave, it's whatever the normal encounter would have been for a normal party (four kobold warriors, for instance). Each additional wave is another set of reinforcements (one or two additional warrriors). Keep them "waiting in the wings," and bring them in gradually as your players progress. This has two benefits: first, if you've managed to completely underestimate your player's abilities, they aren't victims of a premature TPK brought about by an accidentally overwhelming enemy force; second, it lends verisimilitude, as the cries of fighting and dying enemies bring their allies to their aid. I am counting heavily on this strategy in an upcoming game I am running.

As another bit of "unasked-for advice," take a careful look at how your dungeons / encounters are structured. They are, I would imagine, either consciously or subconsciously built around the 4-person party: 10' wide corridors, 20' by 50' rooms, etc. Larger parties need more space, or else half of the party will spend the battle twiddling their thumbs, waiting for a square to open up. I speak from experience; my current group generally has on the order of 8 or so PCs.

 

[JamesDJarvis]

More frequent encounters handles the situation for me. More PCs = more noise = more curious monsters= more encounters.

Maybe just a few extra wandering monster encounters.

The party may also simply be tempted to stay in danger longer becasue they have more resources; this can actually be lethal as they breeze through 4 or 5 encounters and press on figuring they can take more because of the number in they party and then 1 or 2 encounters later you end up with one or two pcs escortign out a lot of unconscuous or 1hp allies.

The group i Dm for has a spreading out and splitting up problem now and again so while the can they are able to wipe out 1 matched encounter they have soem trouble indeed with 2 or 3 encounters at virtually the same time.

 

[Sejs]

More monsters, more seperate encounters.

It's been my experience that single opponents that are within the galaxy of Reasonable Challenge can get pounded into oblivion pretty easily by a group that's able to focus solely on it.

Spread out the focus a bit more and it seems to do a better job in presenting a challenge to the group.