D&D General Tiered Enemies

[ezo]

While an Ogre might be a boss at low-levels, maybe a leader of some bandits or marauders, that Ogre could "report" to a more powerful creature, such as a Giant, and later on be met as a mook in service to the Giant.

It is no different than criminal organizations where a sub-boss might be met by a beat cop, and later on the beat cop is a lead detective and meets that same "sub-boss" but who is now shown to be a "mook" in service to a mafia don or something.

The sub-boss might have even learned a few new tricks and so be more powerful than it was before, so it is still somewhat of a threat to the lead detective.

 

[Krachek]

I think it is pretty easy to have chains of opponents with scaling power.
Bandit can range from 10 to 40 hp. With also scaling damage of course.
Enforcer from 50 to 100.
Cleaner from 100 to 150.
All of those working for the same organization.
And then you reach to the real big boss, and eventually meet a beholder.
I never find problems making scaling opponents.

 

[TiQuinn]

I like tiered enemies because I like the feel of knowing at a certain level that you are capable of fighting certain monsters. Between the choice of being a high level adventurer and fighting a Medusa that has a bunch of templates applied to it (I.E. a Greater Medusa in some form) versus fighting a Marilith, I’d prefer to fight the Marilith. But it’s ultimately all just tools in the toolbox. If you can extend your garden variety troll to become a two-headed demonic troll then I don’t see why that’s a bad thing. I do think that some combinations of monster plus template in the 3e days never struck me as particularly iconic even if by the stats, they hit hard.

 

[GMMichael]

What do you think about tiered enemies. Do you like or prefer certain monster or enemy types to be "locked" to lower or higher tiers of play. Or do you think that enemy types should have examples that cross most or all tiers of play?

A lack of "locking" is loosely responsible for the D&D Effect: PCs think they can reasonably fight anything.

For example, dragons having challenge ratings across the board (just 3e?) ruined the idea, "we're fighting a dragon!? This is going to be epic!" Now it's more like, "we're fighting a dragon? We'd better stock up on healing potions and get a long rest in before we walk straight into its lair."

 

[Reynard]

A lack of "locking" is loosely responsible for the D&D Effect: PCs think they can reasonably fight anything.

For example, dragons having challenge ratings across the board (just 3e?) ruined the idea, "we're fighting a dragon!? This is going to be epic!" Now it's more like, "we're fighting a dragon? We'd better stock up on healing potions and get a long rest in before we walk straight into its lair."

I don't think the dragon issue was a 3E thing. As far back as 1E and Basic, dragons had HP based on their age category and it was pretty much baked in that you met level appropriate dragons (insofar as those games did "level appropriate" -- which was mostly based on dungeon level. in the wilderness all bets were off.)

 

[billd91]

I think there are various editions that made this issue more important than others. 5e does a lot to blur the issue with bounded accuracy and resistances halving damage. Even a lower level henchman or follower can contribute to a fight many CR higher for their PC bosses, even if they'd be trashed 1 on 1 with the same creature. And while I think from a world-building perspective this may cause problems since even low level armies in sufficient number can kill off dragons, it works pretty well for an adventuring party.

For 1e, while there were few hard and fast rules, monsters that could only be hit by magic were difficult to deal with until PCs had adventured long enough to get some of those magic weapons. Other times, there are powers that are hard to resist or fix without certain levels of spells - something I know Paizo took into account with some of their CR revisions with PF1. 3.0's Damage Reduction rules could be pretty harsh on a PC without a sufficiently plussed magic weapon - effectively to the point where they might as well not be hitable and effectively gating the level of PC that could do much to them. 3.5 stepped back on that substantially, though it still have the expected wealth table and an expectation of when a magic weapon could be affordable to make those encounters somewhat easier and less deadly.

 

[Chaltab]

I think my bigger issue is having to justify the escalation of threats within the game world. When the party takes on an adult dragon and a lichen lich within a week-in game that has to give other bad guys pause.

 

[ezo]

I think my bigger issue is having to justify the escalation of threats within the game world. When the party takes on an adult dragon and a lichen lich within a week-in game that has to give other bad guys pause.

In the same light I find it hilarious when PCs go through a region at low level and fight tier 1 threats and then 10 levels later return to the region and suddenly it is overrun with terrors from tier 3!

It is like: where were those high level threat hiding before, and what happened to all the tier 1 threats that used to be here? (We didn't destroy them all, did we???).

 

[Reynard]

In the same light I find it hilarious when PCs go through a region at low level and fight tier 1 threats and then 10 levels later return to the region and suddenly it is overrun with terrors from tier 3!

It is like: where were those high level threat hiding before, and what happened to all the tier 1 threats that used to be here? (We didn't destroy them all, did we???).

It happens in literal days in 5E. PCs travel from town to the Sunless Citadel terrified of running into goblins and giant rats, and come home a couple days later 2 levels higher.

 

[ezo]

It happens in literal days in 5E. PCs travel from town to the Sunless Citadel terrified of running into goblins and giant rats, and come home a couple days later 2 levels higher.

In my own game the PCs have gone about 8 levels in a game year, but I run a game where encounters are based on the game world and creature rarity, not the levels of the players.

In the last couple sessions my players have run into goblins and worgs as well as owlbears and shadow mastiffs (all tier 1) along with occassional tier 2 creatures. Meanwhile, months ago they faced a Hydra and Blue Slaad and other tier 2 creatures. Along the way we recently had our first (and only so far) tier 3 encounter: an adult Black Dragon.

So even though they're approaching tier 3, they will continue to mostly encounter tier 1 creatures, occasionally tier 2, rarely tier 3, and very rarely tier 4 creatures.

They know sometimes they have to bargain, hide, or run, and other times they will win easily.