|
|
Post by greenmanalishi on Jun 18, 2018 13:45:29 GMT -5
Hello All
I am new here and new to T&T. I'm planning on running a dT&T in a few weeks and I have a question about encounters. Is there an easy way to figuring out scaling for combat, meaning how do I gauge the size and number of the opponents the party will face?
We will have a party of 3 PCs (no players running multiple characters), most likely Warrior, Rogue and Wizard.
What's the best way to calculate how many monsters, what size MR (or Attributes) during encounters, corresponding to their level?
|
|
|
|
Post by zanshin on Jun 18, 2018 15:29:46 GMT -5
Hello greenmanalishi, welcome to Trollbridge. Very cool name. Judas Priest fan?
There are a few threads scattered around the bridge that discuss this (calling Prof Gremlin...)
One way is to calculate the parties average Hit point total
Each character will have a certain number of combat dice and adds - figure 3.5 for each dice and total the adds.
Then use the monster ratings to calculate a similar amount of output.Many smaller monsters will generate more combat dice, but will die more quickly as once they are knocked out of combat their contribution will disappear. Some examples
Goblin MR 8 = 1d+4 = 7.5 Average HPT
Hobgoblin MR 15 = 2d+8 = 15 Average HPT
Orc MR 20 = 3d+10 = 20.5 Average HPT
Orc Leader MR 30 = 4d+15 = 29 Average HPT
Ogre MR 40 = 5d+20 = 37.5 Average HPT
Gargoyle MR 60 , 8AP stone armor skin = 7d+30 = 54.5 Average HPT plus armour
If the enemies HPT is less than the parties they will usually be just a speed bump (slightly attritional if you play Spite as a rule)
If they are equal the party will usually prevail, because armour and magic shift the balance.
If the monsters HPT are more than 20% are higher the party can win, but will need to use magic and other resources (or stunts) to prevail.
I personally prefer my T&T combat to encourage stunts, and to have monster special attacks and spite as i think it makes things more interesting. Exactly how you plan an encounter will depend on this. If both sides have lots of armour, there can be a tendency to stalemate. I only tend to give
monsters armour if it feels right - otherwise you can assume monster armour into monster rating.
Different editions of T&T also treat how monsters combat output degrades as they take damage differently. Whether you are playing 5e or Deluxe, or another one, make sure you are clear about this and your preference. Once 5e monsters start to lose, they go down hard.
|
|
|
|
Post by gaptooth on Jun 18, 2018 17:09:10 GMT -5
My method is this: Put the monsters in the world wherever they make sense in the fiction, and let the players decide how they "scale" combat.
When I first got into T&T, I put a lot of effort into scaling the challenge of monsters to the capabilities of the delvers. What I learned very quickly is that fictional positioning overwhelmingly sways the challenge of combat, way more than the numbers.
If the players are smart, resourceful, and lucky, they can evade, outfox, befriend, manipulate, or eviscerate monsters of any power level. If they refuse to gather intelligence, ignore signs of approaching threat, behave recklessly, they might turn even the most friendly and/or feeble monster encounter into a gauntlet of sudden death.
I wouldn't say the effort of trying to scale the combat encounters was wasted, because I learned a lot from it. But I don't bother with that anymore. I've found the game doesn't really support a mindset of "balance", as much as it rewards playing by the seat of your pants, and letting the players choose what opportunities they want to pursue, and what risks they are willing to take.
|
|
|
|
Post by greenmanalishi on Jun 18, 2018 17:55:41 GMT -5
Hello greenmanalishi, welcome to Trollbridge. Very cool name. Judas Priest fan? There are a few threads scattered around the bridge that discuss this (calling Prof Gremlin...) One way is to calculate the parties average Hit point total Each character will have a certain number of combat dice and adds - figure 3.5 for each dice and total the adds. Then use the monster ratings to calculate a similar amount of output.Many smaller monsters will generate more combat dice, but will die more quickly as once they are knocked out of combat their contribution will disappear. Some examples Goblin MR 8 = 1d+4 = 7.5 Average HPT Hobgoblin MR 15 = 2d+8 = 15 Average HPT Orc MR 20 = 3d+10 = 20.5 Average HPT Orc Leader MR 30 = 4d+15 = 29 Average HPT Ogre MR 40 = 5d+20 = 37.5 Average HPT Gargoyle MR 60 , 8AP stone armor skin = 7d+30 = 54.5 Average HPT plus armour If the enemies HPT is less than the parties they will usually be just a speed bump (slightly attritional if you play Spite as a rule) If they are equal the party will usually prevail, because armour and magic shift the balance. If the monsters HPT are more than 20% are higher the party can win, but will need to use magic and other resources (or stunts) to prevail. I personally prefer my T&T combat to encourage stunts, and to have monster special attacks and spite as i think it makes things more interesting. Exactly how you plan an encounter will depend on this. If both sides have lots of armour, there can be a tendency to stalemate. I only tend to give monsters armour if it feels right - otherwise you can assume monster armour into monster rating. Different editions of T&T also treat how monsters combat output degrades as they take damage differently. Whether you are playing 5e or Deluxe, or another one, make sure you are clear about this and your preference. Once 5e monsters start to lose, they go down hard. Cool, thank you! I'll be running Deluxe with Spite and Stunts. Since we're all new to the system the stunts will need to get used to, so in the meantime I just wanted some concrete guidance with numbers. And yes, I'm a huge Priest fan. \m/ |
|
|
|
Post by greenmanalishi on Jun 18, 2018 18:04:16 GMT -5
My method is this: Put the monsters in the world wherever they make sense in the fiction, and let the players decide how they "scale" combat. When I first got into T&T, I put a lot of effort into scaling the challenge of monsters to the capabilities of the delvers. What I learned very quickly is that fictional positioning overwhelmingly sways the challenge of combat, way more than the numbers. If the players are smart, resourceful, and lucky, they can evade, outfox, befriend, manipulate, or eviscerate monsters of any power level. If they refuse to gather intelligence, ignore signs of approaching threat, behave recklessly, they might turn even the most friendly and/or feeble monster encounter into a gauntlet of sudden death. I wouldn't say the effort of trying to scale the combat encounters was wasted, because I learned a lot from it. But I don't bother with that anymore. I've found the game doesn't really support a mindset of "balance", as much as it rewards playing by the seat of your pants, and letting the players choose what opportunities they want to pursue, and what risks they are willing to take. Interesting approach. Considering how loose T&T is at its source I can see how I could possibly get to that mindset with some mileage under my belt, depending on the resourcefulness of the players of course. But for now I feel like I need some numbers to rely on, a crutch of sorts. Wouldn't want a Total Party Kill on our first outing because of some poor decisions on the party's side or some lousy calculations on my part. |
|
|
|
Post by ProfGremlin on Jun 18, 2018 20:48:23 GMT -5
There are a few threads scattered around the bridge that discuss this (calling Prof Gremlin...) You Rang? Hmm... I'll have to search around for a few of those threads, I don't have any bookmarked at the moment. In the meantime, here's a great thread from devadasi regarding Saving Roll guidelines to help with your stunting: making that saving roll Here's a good conversation about T&T combat, geared towards 7th ed., specifically, but good to understand the overall mindset of T&T Combat: Tunnels and Trolls! Combat! We can thank Devadasi for that link, too. Here's a suggestion from khaydhaik indicating a monster's MR should be ~85% of the parties Hit Point Total: Monster Ratings. It's from an older version of T&T, 5th ed IIRC. No reason you can't take that as a starting point and adjust from there.
That's what I have for the moment. I need to go find some of those deep-fried battered pixies. I'm gettin' hungry!
|
|
|
|
Post by gaptooth on Jun 18, 2018 21:27:59 GMT -5
But for now I feel like I need some numbers to rely on, a crutch of sorts. Wouldn't want a Total Party Kill on our first outing because of some poor decisions on the party's side or some lousy calculations on my part. Total Party Kills, and near brushes with it, were the big thing that got me to abandon trying to calculate "fair" fights for the players. What is "fair" depends so much on their tactics and advantages in the fiction, as well as the tactics and fictional advantages leveraged by the opposition. |
|
|
|
Post by zanshin on Jun 19, 2018 3:35:02 GMT -5
Loads of resources here about stunts and monster special attacks. Also highly recommend the free to download webmag Trollszine - some of the threads here got polished up for publication as well.
Also, I think Gaptooth has a great approach for sandbox style play, and T&T is the easiest system I have come across to facilitate that playstyle.
|
|
|
|
Post by ProfGremlin on Jun 19, 2018 6:47:07 GMT -5
[Snip]Total Party Kills, and near brushes with it... [/Snip] Another point to keep in mind is that, early on in the philosophy, game balance wasn't a concern and PC death wasn't seen as a problem. In fact, many consider it a feature of the game. When you can have a new character rolled up in 15 minutes and fit it on a 4"x6" index card (Hey, I want space for my loot!) reincarnation is seen as relatively inexpensive. |
|
|
|
Post by khaboom on Jun 19, 2018 8:06:01 GMT -5
This a good thread! I think Greenmanalishi (Fleetwood Mac, I thought) starting out with a calculation is sensible but I think the gravitation to Planet Gaptooth is orbitally inevtable.
Nothing I can add to what Zanshin, Gaptooth and Prof. Gremlin have said but good luck and enjoy!
|
|
|
|
Post by gaptooth on Jun 19, 2018 8:32:02 GMT -5
Another point to keep in mind is that, early on in the philosophy, game balance wasn't a concern and PC death wasn't seen as a problem. In fact, many consider it a feature of the game. Count me among them. Let them die by the thousands, if they are reckless enough!  |
|
|
|
Post by zanshin on Jun 19, 2018 9:10:15 GMT -5
This a good thread! I think Greenmanalishi (Fleetwood Mac, I thought) starting out with a calculation is sensible but I think the gravitation to Planet Gaptooth is orbitally inevtable. Nothing I can add to what Zanshin, Gaptooth and Prof. Gremlin have said but good luck and enjoy! I did not know that the Judas Priest song was a cover. You live and learn. Thanks khaboom. |
|
|
|
Post by greenmanalishi on Jun 19, 2018 11:38:30 GMT -5
This a good thread! I think Greenmanalishi (Fleetwood Mac, I thought) starting out with a calculation is sensible but I think the gravitation to Planet Gaptooth is orbitally inevtable. Nothing I can add to what Zanshin, Gaptooth and Prof. Gremlin have said but good luck and enjoy! I did not know that the Judas Priest song was a cover. You live and learn. Thanks khaboom. Yes, Peter Green wrote the song in the early days of Fleetwood Mac (before having a Syd Barret style breakdown). Priest popularized it. The original Fleetwood Mac song is much more haunting. Priest have a knack for picking covers and making it their own, as they did with Joan Baez's Diamonds and Rust. Thanks for all the input everyone! So it seems everyone runs the game the Gaptooth way? Looks like I'll be going down that path eventually. I think the key would be to guide the players to think Stunts and Creativity over dice rolls and stats. |
|
|
|
Post by greenmanalishi on Jun 19, 2018 11:45:40 GMT -5
[Snip]Total Party Kills, and near brushes with it... [/Snip] Another point to keep in mind is that, early on in the philosophy, game balance wasn't a concern and PC death wasn't seen as a problem. In fact, many consider it a feature of the game. When you can have a new character rolled up in 15 minutes and fit it on a 4"x6" index card (Hey, I want space for my loot!) reincarnation is seen as relatively inexpensive. Interesting. Forgiving for the sake of fun. |
|
|
|
Post by gaptooth on Jun 19, 2018 14:02:43 GMT -5
I find that the sudden death offered by T&T and many other old school games provides a very strong feedback loop that rapidly builds up more skillful and intelligent play, that is more rewarding for everyone at the table.
When they think they can count on their enemies being evenly matched and their characters can endure regardless of their approach, it can take a lot longer for them to learn from missteps and mistakes, which can lead to much more painful letdowns if their approach leads them to a dead end or fail state.
But when sudden death is on the table, the learning is instant, and the new characters they roll up are much more tuned in to the fictional situation, and much more responsive and resourceful. It may be counter-intuitive, but this seems to produce more longeval characters overall.
That's been my experience. I do enjoy other games that don't offer the sudden death feedback loop, but I find T&T works really well with that mindset.
|
|
