The Three Goblin Issue

[I'm A Banana]

So, a big question in adventure-based design.

Lets say you have a lair of goblins. Lets say you want to fill it with goblins for to beat up. Lets say you have a goblin stat block.

HOWEVER, there's a problem. If you have that goblin attack by itself, it's not as big of a threat as if it gets together with two of its identical siblings and they all attack your party at once.

Given that they're the same XP, the same stats, the same supposed challenge, this may be an issue.

So over in my e-log, I was pondering easy fixes for the issue, and this is what I stumbled on:

In 4e, you have minions, standards, elites, and solos. These "group categories" not only determine a monster's stats, they also determine how many show up in an encounter -- minions appear four at a time, elites take the place of two other monsters, etc.

Well, monster is to encounter as encoutner is to adventure. So what we need is simply a recognition of these categories. Just as minions are meant to be encountered in a larger quantity.

So, some mosnters would be "group" monsters. They work as a group. They try to get together with other monsters and form a group. As a group, they work as an encounter. If encountered outside of a group, they will be weak and sad and likely killed pretty quick. We can probably put goblins (and kobolds, and possibly most humanoids, and probably trained animals, etc.) in this bag. As such, they aren't worth that much of the XP budget, their rules aren't that complex, and they might even have designed-to-work-together abilities (like support powers). They work as a team.

Other mosnters might be "loner" monsters. They work alone. They don't need a support network to form a challenging encounter. If encountered with a group, they might be EXTRA dangerous, but they can handle themselves against a party without much of a problem -- they have multiple attacks, for instance. An iconic solo might be a beholder: it doesn't need a support network, it can take out a party all by itself. As such, it might be fairly complex, and might even have designed-to-be-indepdendent abilities (like multiple actions or auras -- in the Beholder's case, eyebeams). They work alone.

Do you think this might help undo the problem of three goblins at once being a much different challenge than one goblin at a time? By saying, in the rules, that goblins are essentialy intended to be encountered as a group (but Beholders, for instance, are not), does that make it more managable?

 

[the Jester]

I'm honestly not sure what you are suggesting, other than that 4e does encounter building well.

 

[Boarstorm]

I guess I don't understand how this is different from 4E's minion/standard/etc system.

In the example, is the Beholder not just a Solo?

And the goblins, not just minions or standards? Even in 4E, a standard encountered alone is not going to present a problem.

That said -- I like the kernel of the idea, I just don't think you've found quite the right temperature to make it Pop!

I, alas, am no help.

 

[Ferghis]

This makes sense to me, and I can see the xp value of "group" monsters dropping dramatically if encountered alone. For example, if 5 kobolds are worth 50 xp, a single one might be worth only 2 xp.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

This can work for the "group monsters" when the value of the group does not scale linearly by number of monsters. Getting the formula right is the tricky part, though I supposed a certain amount of reverse engineering of monster to necessary stats could get around some of that.

Making up numbers, let's say that goblins need at least three members to really get cranking, while giant rats need five. A squad of 3 goblins or a squad of 5 rats are worth 50 XP, maybe. To keep it simple, if you encounter less than a full squad, they are worth either half or zero, depending upon DM judgement. (Or if you don't like "zero", make the lower bound 10%--small enough that it is hardly worth counting, but not zero.)

Going the other way, you need some kind of judgment on how often and how long a squad of gobins or rats can form against the PCs (on average). There are multiple party members, goblins get killed, goblin squad reform, and N times 3 goblins get to go after a given PC. Things like corridor bottlenecks will radically affect this, but we don't want to worry about situational stuff for the base numbers--getting around it is part of the fun! So maybe the average party is five members. However, we'll be generous and say seven, on the grounds that a smaller party will probably endure more "squad attacks" per player. So if you fight 21 goblins, you get 350 XP.

Or maybe for simpler math, we keep the party size scaling factor as 5, but up the base XP. Or since you are ultimately concerned by the "adventure", not the "encounter," perhaps we go whole hog and make the factor an easy 10. In a 1-hour "adventure", you get full XP for up to 10 squads of a "monster group". So if you clean out such an "adventure" with up to 30 goblins, you get full XP for the lot of them, or 500 XP in this example.

Beyond the "squad times scaling factor", any goblins are worth less. My example is getting away from me here, as it is so ivory tower, but as a ballpark, I'd say that the next block is going to count somewhere between 75% to 50% of normal. Rather than get all precise on an imprecise subject, I'd be tempted to work it so that the next two blocks count at 50%. So 30 goblins for 500 XP, 30 more for +250 XP, and 30 more again for another +250 XP.

We are talking "1 hour adventure blocks". So 90 goblins is a lot. For those odd situations where you need to go past the third block of 10 "monster squads," I think you'll need DM judgement anyway. You've got to compare "party got swarmed under" with "party set up a killing field". So better there to just apply an adjustement to the base number, than start factoring by number of goblins. Or in other words, 1000 XP is the most you can get for goblins, base, but you might get a bonus or penalty adjustment to that for the circumstance. Getting swarmed under by 200 goblins in an abandoned dwarven hall is a modifier--at least until the Balrog showed up.

 

[I'm A Banana]

To try to help clarify:

4e builds encounters with an assumed XP budget that works out to 1 equal-leveled standard critter per PC. You can then swap these critters around: four minions per standard critter, or one solo critter per four standards, or one elite per two.

5e has mentioned building adventures in a way similar to how 4e builds encounters: an XP budget, roughly measuring challenge.

That's a bit of a problem because an encounter with one creature, alone, is going to be easier than an encounter with a goup of them, and so should, concievably, be worth different XP, or at least present a different challenge.

The idea proposed here, as a fix to that problem, is to call out creatures that are meant to be encountered in a group, or meant to be encountered alone with a designator similar to how 4e called out minions and solos and elites.

This way, your basic goblin, if he is designated a 'group' monster, can be designed to roughly provide a given challenge in a group, but might not provide the same challenge when walking along alone.

By contrast, your basic beholder, if he is designed as a 'loner' monster, can be designed to provide a challenge by itself, without a group.

It might be a little redundant with 4e's power roles, come to think, but it's concept is a little different, mostly in scope and strategy: a 'group' monster is made to work with other group monsters, and will be worth its XP only in a group -- if encountered alone, it might be very easy for its XP. A 'loner' monster is made to work alone, and will be worth its XP when by itself -- if encountered with a group, its reward might be less for the effort than it would otherwise be.

Anyway, just spitballing solutions.

 

[Boarstorm]

I guess the disconnect for me is that this is already built into the system by way of individual monster XP.

Say that single goblin is worth 50XP. Three goblins? 150XP. Simple. Easy.

The premise I don't really agree with is that three goblins is MORE CHALLENGING than one goblin three times. That'd be true with a party size of 1, sure. But for most monsters to reach the kind of critical mass that buries a group of PCs, the numbers have to be much higher...

And even still, it's an encounter-level issue in my mind.

 

[the Jester]

This makes sense to me, and I can see the xp value of "group" monsters dropping dramatically if encountered alone. For example, if 5 kobolds are worth 50 xp, a single one might be worth only 2 xp.

Ohhh, I see now!

To try to help clarify:

4e builds encounters with an assumed XP budget that works out to 1 equal-leveled standard critter per PC. You can then swap these critters around: four minions per standard critter, or one solo critter per four standards, or one elite per two.

5e has mentioned building adventures in a way similar to how 4e builds encounters: an XP budget, roughly measuring challenge.

That's a bit of a problem because an encounter with one creature, alone, is going to be easier than an encounter with a goup of them, and so should, concievably, be worth different XP, or at least present a different challenge.

The idea proposed here, as a fix to that problem, is to call out creatures that are meant to be encountered in a group, or meant to be encountered alone with a designator similar to how 4e called out minions and solos and elites.

This way, your basic goblin, if he is designated a 'group' monster, can be designed to roughly provide a given challenge in a group, but might not provide the same challenge when walking along alone.

By contrast, your basic beholder, if he is designed as a 'loner' monster, can be designed to provide a challenge by itself, without a group.

It might be a little redundant with 4e's power roles, come to think, but it's concept is a little different, mostly in scope and strategy: a 'group' monster is made to work with other group monsters, and will be worth its XP only in a group -- if encountered alone, it might be very easy for its XP. A 'loner' monster is made to work alone, and will be worth its XP when by itself -- if encountered with a group, its reward might be less for the effort than it would otherwise be.

Anyway, just spitballing solutions.

Okay, now I can make intelligent comments on this!

Overall I think it's problematic for at least two reasons.

Reason 1 is that the same creature might be a fine threat on its own against a 1st level party (say, a bugbear) but might need numbers to face off against a 4th level party (say, 4 bugbears).

Reason 2 is that, if you start changing the xp a monster's worth based on circumstances, where do you stop? Are undead worth fewer xp if you have a cleric? Does a wolf pack earn a party of druids and rangers fewer xp? What if the party just uses good tactics?

The "undead vs. cleric having party/non-cleric having party" is probably honestly a bigger determination of the difficulty than "one kobold/three kobolds together", IMHO.

I think there's less to gain than the hassle this system adds, personally. The minion/standard/etc. division works well because it's designed to be used per encounter; in a per adventure xp budget, I think the xp system itself needs to be set to work without tons of circumstantial fiddliness. Otherwise, it's just a pain in the butt for very little gain.

I think a better solution is a general dm's guideline in the "Awarding XP" section or equivalent; "If you feel that the circumstances of an encounter make it especially easy (such as the pcs being able to hang back atop a cliff and fire arrows at melee-only enemies), you can reduce the xp award... similarly, if the circumstances make it especially hard (the pcs are sailing over a lake of fire in a cramped boat that it's easy to fall out of and are attacked by flying enemies), feel free to increase it."

 

[Crazy Jerome]

Reason 2 is that, if you start changing the xp a monster's worth based on circumstances, where do you stop? Are undead worth fewer xp if you have a cleric? Does a wolf pack earn a party of druids and rangers fewer xp? What if the party just uses good tactics?

...

I think a better solution is a general dm's guideline in the "Awarding XP" section or equivalent; "If you feel that the circumstances of an encounter make it especially easy (such as the pcs being able to hang back atop a cliff and fire arrows at melee-only enemies), you can reduce the xp award... similarly, if the circumstances make it especially hard (the pcs are sailing over a lake of fire in a cramped boat that it's easy to fall out of and are attacked by flying enemies), feel free to increase it."

I think you definitely need the DM's guidelines, but I don't think having those on top of a "flat XP per creature" system is the best that can be done.

Look at it from the point of the 1 hour adventure. I've got, say 40 goblins, 20 giant rats, and a couple of tougher creatures to play with, using my planned XP budget. I end up spreading the goblins out a bit, over their lair, in ways that make sense. This means that the party, if they are careful, can pick a chunk of them off as stragglers. But those stragglers are still worth more XP than some lone goblin you meet elsewhere!

The threat of 40 goblins is that they get stirred up, realize they are under major assault, and then "enough of them" fall on the party from all directions. The more goblins you have, the more likely that the big threat can materialize. This is more important than having "another set of goblins". If 20 goblins is the threat, then the rest are worth something for being sentries, fodder, etc.--but that isn't true if you find them 4 in room A, and then 5 in far distance room B.

And then with numbers based on that adventure, you can more simply and intelligently apply those DM guidelines. Instead of, "Did the 2 goblins in the anteroom pose any threat, while the 3 in the barracks sleeping took too long to join, hmm, what's the modifier for that?"--you get, "I had 40 gobins. Of the 10 sentries, did any one of them do their job and let a big block of goblins fall on the party? And if not, was this due to something the party did, or just me or the adventure screwing up?" That is, did the 40 goblins magnify or diminish their overall challenge by placement and usage?

 

[I'm A Banana]

So what if we tether it to XP only in the same way that "minions" and "solos" are tethered to XP?

That is, say a "standard encounter" at level 1 is 100 XP.

A beholder is worth 100 XP, and designed to be encountered alone.

A goblin is worth 25 XP, and designed to be encoutnered in a group.

Fight one goblin, it's 25 XP.

Fight four, it's 100 XP.

So, your bugbear might be worth 100 XP. But by level four, the "standard encounter" has balooned to, say, 400 XP.

This is really almost exactly the same as 4e's current minion/solo rules, it's just expanded so that an "encounter budget" is only one part of a bigger whole -- the "adventure budget."