tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7817710432110712270.post3773438394294551143..comments2024-03-28T15:32:19.036-04:00Comments on Dungeon Fantastic: Plan It By the Numbers - Frank Mentzer & setting encounters in D&DPeter Dhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14246000382321978462noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7817710432110712270.post-20912172268726619852023-06-25T04:09:20.494-04:002023-06-25T04:09:20.494-04:00https://www.dragonsfoot.org/cd/index.shtml#501https://www.dragonsfoot.org/cd/index.shtml#501Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7817710432110712270.post-85391976304643399032020-07-30T11:11:05.574-04:002020-07-30T11:11:05.574-04:00Agreed! I tend to see "encounter design"...Agreed! I tend to see "encounter design" systems such as this one as a tool for the GM to make sure the encounter is as hard as intended. They tell you what a "balanced fight" looks like, but they never force you to make every fight balanced, or every encounter a fight.<br /><br />You can use them to make nuisance fights, you can use them to make meatgrinders best avoided. Their real utility lies in helping you make sure the nuisance isn't a meatgrinder in disguise, or vice-versa. One can get an instinctive feel for it with years of experience, but a good design system means one doesn't have to. Ubiratanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08504934061105817733noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7817710432110712270.post-43417558646014887042020-07-29T19:02:08.576-04:002020-07-29T19:02:08.576-04:00I agree that's one way to look at it. I read i...I agree that's one way to look at it. I read it more broadly, that it's about making sure you're not overmatched. So no invisible stalkers or (fill in whatever powerful monster) because you've got no answer to that - none of the options works, even if you're a veteran player.<br /><br />Frank Mentzer is really showing something that Len Lakofka showed so often and Delta's D&D shows so often - you can ram all of the numbers of D&D into a spreadsheet and have it give you the average results of X vs. Y, or option A vs. option B. He's just applying it systematically to monsters. It's not really all that much different than the idea of placing monsters by level, either, it just allows you to measure more consistently and precisely what a monster's power level is . . . and how numbers on either side affect that. In a way, it's odd that it took 10 years to see this kind of thing in print - the numbers needed to do this math were always there.<br /><br />I've been meaning to post about this for a while. I actually thought I did, but I couldn't find it when I went to link to it yesterday. So I went ahead and wrote a post about it today. I just remembered this existed - for a while, I was a Dragons subscriber and read everything in every issue, so I can often remember something is out there just because it was part of my formative experience in gaming.Peter Dhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14246000382321978462noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7817710432110712270.post-51663373220081831682020-07-29T17:05:26.396-04:002020-07-29T17:05:26.396-04:00I really like these two posts back-to-back. I too...I really like these two posts back-to-back. I took the idea of balance from yesterday's Gygaxian comment to mean the encounter was presented so that player skill can intervene and give the players a chance to make the call to flee if overmatched (ie, new players with first level characters wouldn't even know what an Invisible Stalker is, let alone that it's time to run...) But not necessarily implying every fight could be won through melee. Whereas the Mentzer article from today is clearly pointing towards using math to create balanced encounters from the perspective that every fight can be won with strength of arms - something we decry as a "new school mindset", but apparently hearkens back to 1985 !! I had no idea. Nice find Peter; are you just jumping around old Dragons for inspiration?Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18031181424520125213noreply@blogger.com