More Players = More Monsters or Tougher Monsters?

[Plane Sailing]

I'd definitely go for more monsters every time.

So does one of my current DMs. Last night we were attacked by five Dire boar, then the next day by six dire apes followed quickly by six dire wolves.

Was I glad to be a druid with 'Hide from Animals' prepared? You bet!

 

[DanMcS]

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

Yes, more numbers make a difference, because due to the nature of lots of D&D combat (close quarters, intermixed ranks for melee), high-level spellcasters will very rarely be able to just open up on a massed group of enemies. Sure, if you see them coming across a clear field, they're done for, but that would be true whether the party was large or small.

The most precious resource in combat in D&D is actions per round. A large party has more of them, so the enemy must be increased in this regard as well, or they'll just be completely outclassed.

 

[Wish]

You can do either, but you just need to look at the way the encounter actually balances. You can't just open up an adventure and double all the encounters, nor simply bump up all the CRs. Let me give some examples. A 5th level wizard can hit your party with a 5d6 fireball. Two 5th level wizards can hit your party with 10d6 worth of fireballs (just like a 10th level wizard would). On the other hand a 7th level wizard still only gets one spell per round, but gets some fun things like stoneskin and Evard's black tentacles to even the score. Now look at a cleric encounter. An 11th level cleric might be pretty tough for an 9th level party. He's CR +2. Two 11th level clerics is obviously tougher, but a reasonable challenge for an 9th level party of 8 PCs. But a 13th level cleric just needs to cast Blasphemy and walk around slaughtering the PCs at his whim. It's almost a sure fire TPK. Yet it's the same CR as the other encounter with the 11th level clerics. You just need to pay attention to the specifics.

 

[SelcSilverhand]

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.

This worked extremely well for me when DM'ing a very small group of players. Actually just 2 people with their PC's and a single cohort a piece. They were level 7 and my single CR5 critters usually had one character near death at the end of a fight. I think I was using a hook horror that rended the sorcerer. I ended up using a lot of CR2's and CR3's and only busting out the high CR's for major plot encounters. My situation was the same as Patryn's description. My PC's were clearing Chokers out of a cave system and when they would start a fight, more would crawl out of cracks in the walls drawn by the smell of blood. Once I felt they were running low enough of spells and HP's I stopped sending in fresh Chokers and just let them mop up what was left.

As for arcane casters cleaning up the mooks, have them use good tactics and fan out. Tumble through enemy ranks to force them to use single target spells. Have some in hiding and attack from the rear at the same time. My favorite is somehow getting a bad guy near the middle of the PC group who then casts Obscuring Mist. Things like that should help the survivability of your low CR critters.

 

[Shallown]

In most cases more monsters is better. Mainly for reasons pointed out above. The number of actions and ability for a larger party to focus on one or two monsters tends to make even tougher monsters mulch. Once you boost the monster up enough to make it a challenge they can hose characters easily and what you end up with is one dead character in a party and no one else really hurt. Multiple monsters or multiple encounters helps this way. Wearing down resources can have a serious impact. D&D is designed for multiple encounter balance.

later

 

[andargor]

Interesting opinions, I should've asked for a poll.

Seems like more monsters wins hands down, whatever the level.

It is just contrary with my group's experience with the current finishing campaign. As soon as we hit 17th level or so, monsters with CRs of our level or less would get wiped out fairly easily and their numbers would not matter that much.

But a single baddie of our level +1 would risk at least one character death, and was much tougher to kill, even if we were bunched up on it.

Now in Epic levels, we frequently run into single or dual CR+1 creatures, and we get our butts handed back to us half the time. The most recent disaster was a CR 31 Advanced Great Wyrm Dragon, and it cost 2 characters, plus a retreat... (it was CR+2)

Seems like there's a line: CR or lower, walk in the park, CR+1 or more, character death. Depending on who is present around the table (some players miss a game), it can go either way.

Andargor

 

[Dinkeldog]

I usually have more monsters come from more different directions, but I also boost the power of my bosses and spellcasters just a touch. I'm careful, though, that I don't advance spellcasters to where they get the next spell level. Moving a lvl 3 wizard to lvl 4, however, seems to provide just enough additional punch for the longer fights that ensue.

That and a few templates that add +1 CR seem to do well for me. The party seems challenged, but the only character death happened when the party allowed themselves to become split up and engage two encounters at once.

 

[Mistwell]

Play monsters smarter, and you won't find that more monsters results in just more slaughter.

 

[axp_dave]

I agree with more for lower levels, but when you get to mid levels make sure you mix it up between more and stronger monsters. Every DM has his/her style, but if you always go with more monsters then players start taking feats and spells based on your style.

At mid levels whirlwind attack and area spells are geared to more monsters while other feats and spells are geared to tougher single opponents. don't always throw more monsters or your players will specialize their feats/spells towards the DM's style.

David

 

[Brother MacLaren]

The biggest drawback to using "more monsters" rather than "tougher monsters" is that large combats can take a lot longer -- not just more NPCs to have actions, but on a cluttered battlefield the players might take more time pondering the best course of action, how to best position themselves to avoid AOOs or gettting flanked, figuring out which targets are the priority for their particular PC to attack, etc. That may not be true in your group, though.