Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Swarmkeeper" data-source="post: 9285455" data-attributes="member: 6921763">Isn't part of the fun of the game discovering what happens based on the nigh infinite variables of PC/NPC/monster stats/abilities, player/DM decisions, environmental factors, and - perhaps most importantly - the fickle nature of the d20?&nbsp; Is it really that helpful to know, assuming said variables can truly be quantified accurately, that the likely combat outcome for the party will be 82.5% victory, 10% stalemate, 7% defeat, 0.5% TPK (or whatever)?&nbsp; Not to mention, it seems like an extra step of prep to worry about &quot;likely outcomes&quot; of combat when an encounter may not even be resolved by combat.&nbsp; Negotiation (see social interaction rules in DMG), Parleying (see Tasha's), Stealth, Evasion, etc. - the DM doesn't necessarily know what the party will choose to do in a given situation.&nbsp; Or will those need to be programmed into the simulation as well?In practice, I tend to create encounters that are primarily appropriate for the adventure location - it is a secondary consideration that they are an appropriately &quot;balanced&quot; encounter for the party. In game play, when combat is the chosen encounter resolution, that means that sometimes the party will enjoy a cakewalk, occasionally the party will be in over their head, and sometimes the encounter is juuuuuust right (whatever that really means... I guess it feels challenging to some extent but doesn't end in a TPK/defeat). I used to employ Kobold Fight Club but haven't in some time - and it has made no difference in the enjoyment of sessions, IME. I also try my best to run combats according to the motivations of the baddies. Not every fight need be to the death. The <a href="https://www.themonstersknow.com/" target="_blank">Monsters Know What They're Doing </a>is a great resource for this.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Swarmkeeper, post: 9285455, member: 6921763"] Isn't part of the fun of the game discovering what happens based on the nigh infinite variables of PC/NPC/monster stats/abilities, player/DM decisions, environmental factors, and - perhaps most importantly - the fickle nature of the d20? Is it really that helpful to know, assuming said variables can truly be quantified accurately, that the likely combat outcome for the party will be 82.5% victory, 10% stalemate, 7% defeat, 0.5% TPK (or whatever)? Not to mention, it seems like an extra step of prep to worry about "likely outcomes" of combat when an encounter may not even be resolved by combat. Negotiation (see social interaction rules in DMG), Parleying (see Tasha's), Stealth, Evasion, etc. - the DM doesn't necessarily know what the party will choose to do in a given situation. Or will those need to be programmed into the simulation as well? In practice, I tend to create encounters that are primarily appropriate for the adventure location - it is a secondary consideration that they are an appropriately "balanced" encounter for the party. In game play, when combat is the chosen encounter resolution, that means that sometimes the party will enjoy a cakewalk, occasionally the party will be in over their head, and sometimes the encounter is juuuuuust right (whatever that really means... I guess it feels challenging to some extent but doesn't end in a TPK/defeat). I used to employ Kobold Fight Club but haven't in some time - and it has made no difference in the enjoyment of sessions, IME. I also try my best to run combats according to the motivations of the baddies. Not every fight need be to the death. The [URL='https://www.themonstersknow.com/']Monsters Know What They're Doing [/URL]is a great resource for this. [/QUOTE]

Verification