Challange rating and balanced encounters

[polorclaw]

In D&D there are challange ratings and encounter levels so can judge if your bad buy is more or less powerful then the PCs.

 

Whats balanced for 4 250 point PCs?

 

-20 50 point enemies (riot)

-10 100 point enemies

-4 250 point enemies

-2 500 point enemies

-1 1000 point enemy (Galactus)

 

Does HERO / Champions have a system like that or is it just a judgement call for the GM?

[Silbeg]

Re: Challange rating and balanced encounters

 

It is a little harder to say than just compare the numbers.

 

On either end of the spectrum, other factors tend to take over...

When opponents are too weak, then the heroes won't be challenged at all.

 

Hard to say about too strong. The problem is the nature of chargen in HERO.

 

I need examples for this:

 

Let's assume that the characters are reasonably well balanced... with 10DC attacks, and defences of 25.

 

Case A:

Invulnerable Man.

Invulnerable Man has 45PD/45ED (hardened, of course), and all the required special defences (to protect against NNDs, etc).

 

With only 10d6, they will rarely, if ever, penetrate Invulnerable Man's defences. Thus, they'll never KO him... the best that they can hope for is that Invulnerable Man gets bored with them and leaves.

 

 

Case B:

Megablast Man

Megablast Man has a 20d6 EB for his main attack, with the OCV to match, and decent defences (enough that the team has to attack him many times to take him out).

 

He always hits, and even his average damage causes the heroes 75-25= 50 STUN. Megablast Man just fires at each hero, once or twice, until the hero goes down. Then, he gets bored and leaves.

 

Neither of these characters will require 1000 points to create... in fact, either could probably be done with 250-350, easily enough.

 

Point are not the end-all in determining encounter balance. You really need to get a feel of the character interactions. There are certain indicators (defences relative to the attack DCs, etc), but nothing is absolute.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Challange rating and balanced encounters

 

Points are a horrible bad way to judge Encounter Effectiveness. They are an excellent way to judge relative overall effectiveness.

 

 

You need to look at the following to determine Combat Effectiveness:

OCV

DCV

Speed

Defenses (Normal and Resistant) (+ CON to determine how much it takes to Stun someone)

Damage Classes

Movement

 

For Social Encounters:

Interaction Skills

EGO

Presence

Knowledge Skills

And the ever ambiguous Player Input

 

And of course, Players always manage to find a clever use for a Power that is non-traditional. Tactics in other words are hard to quantify.

[Metaphysician]

Re: Challange rating and balanced encounters

 

It should also be noted that, even in cases where point total is a reasonably accurate measure of capability, the scale is not linear. Four 250 point characters are not generally a match for one 1000 point character; in fact, they generally won't even be a challenge for him. Likewise, five 50 point mooks won't be much trouble for a 250 point character ( *provided they aren't benefitting from free agent equipment* ).

 

This is because most game mechanics don't follow a purely linear progression. An OCV of 12 isn't usually 20% superior to an OCV of 10, its notably moreso ( unless the attack is a sure thing or hopeless effort in both cases ). Damage tolerance involves a lot of thresholds ( avoiding all damage, avoiding stun, avoiding knockout ), and when an attack passes a threshold either way, the result is a major change in efficacy for better or worse.

 

If I had to make a rule of thumb, I'd say that when comparing point values of characters, every doubling ( or halving ) of points is equivalent to a quadrupling ( or quartering ) of potency. This is a very vague rule, though, and only really applies if the lesser characters can actually hurt the greater one.

[Balabanto]

Re: Challange rating and balanced encounters

 

It's much harder to do than that. Design philosophy has a lot to do with that.

 

If your PC's all throw 10-12 dice, then an agent should throw around 8-9, and an agent leader, or specialized agent, should throw 10-12.

 

An agent commander or agent base leader is probably an actual super villain.

 

I have a unique problem regarding this. One of my players hates fighting mooks and minions. He always attacks the leader. He gets frustrated when fighting agents, especially tactically competent ones.

 

So I'm fixing the problem. I'm going to build a villain who's a total loser other than the fact that he's greedy, charismatic, and makes great plans. His agents, on the other hand, will be 225 point horror stories. Hopefully, he'll be begging for mercy by the time phase 5 rolls around.

[Arkham]

Re: Challange rating and balanced encounters

 

Really, it breaks down to the players and how well they built and can play their characters versus how efficient the opposition is. 4 350 point characters built with a 15 DC soft cap played by people who know how to maximize what they've got can easily take down two 800 point villains that are not built with a mind towards maximizing combat efficiency. Tactics like AIDing the brick's STR, while tripping or Flashing the villain tends to let the lesser pointed characters come out on top.

 

Personally, I use whatever villain is appropriate for the plot and let the PCs either succeed or fail to stop his/her plans. Even if they fail the first time, they inevitibly come up with a better tactic for the rematch that allows them to win the day.

 

[edit What I mean is, if opposition doesn't have both numeric and qualitative advantages, then well motivated players will find a way to come out on top. If they don't, there is always a re-match, as long as the oppositions primary goal is something, anything, other than actually killing the PCs. Robbers get the loot and flee, conquerors take another step on their way to global conquest, etc. But as long as the PCs survive and you don't go out of your way to play to their weaknesses, they'll find a way to overcome.]

[Shadow Hawk]

Re: Challange rating and balanced encounters

 

Unlike DnD, Champions is mostly non-lethal. Killing a PC is usually hard to do unless you build the villians to be pure killing machines.

If you underestimate them and have a cakewalk, let them... you'll know better next time. If you overestimate them, let them be defeated or fail... while giving them a chance to succeed next time.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Challange rating and balanced encounters

 

No, there is no such rule of thumb. This document might be helpful you as general advice:

D&D vs HERO Opposition

 

But ultimately, there are basically a nearly infinite different ways to design characters in the HERO System, and there are many different sorts of "attack" and "mitigation" schemes. It is possible for character A to always beat character B, character B to always beat character C, but for character C to always beat character A.

 

Also, since every GM is free to define their own campaign limits, stat values and power levels can vary widely even within a given point range. You could make a 350 point character and I could make a 350 point character, but if Im designing against caps and you arent...not a good match up for me.

 

 

 

 

If you stick to the basics and don't have any oddball powersets on either side of the equation, a foe with roughly double the points of the PC's is going to be a major threat for a group of 4 PC's. So...if you are running a 50 pt campaign of 4, a 100 pt villain is likely to be pretty tough (assuming they aren't a non-combatant); similarly a group of 4 250 pointers will be challenged by a 500 pointer, and a group of 4 500 pointers will still be very challenged by the typical 1000 point build.

 

For a less dangerous foe, go half again instead of double and tweak as necessary...so four 350 pointers vs a 500 odd pointer will have a decent fight but should win without too much trouble.

 

However, if the villain is made of particularly tough or vulnerable and / or particularly offensive or inoffensive then its less clear cut.

 

If your PC's are real slavering combat monsters, increase the points by half again. Similarly for every extra PC add an extra chunk of points; for five 500 points starting targeting the villain to be at least 1250 points.

 

 

The best guide is simply experience running the game and eyeballing sheets.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Challange rating and balanced encounters

 

One thing to keep in mind though is an idea I call "the gravy stage". Every character has one, if they last long enough.

 

Basically to fulfill a characters particular concept well will require a certain number of points. Often, a character starts out with gaps that need to be filled in w/ XP, unless they are hand rolled by the GM to suit a particular need without worrying about final cost. The character's growth is basically a process of a) earning enough XP to fill the character out to fulfill the character's concept and discover via trial by fire what really works and what they really need to bolster to be competitive.

 

XP is gained, holes are filled, development is made. However once the character has fulfilled their basic premise, meaning the abilities that are on the sheet adequately cover all the aspects of the character's core concept sufficiently to make the character reliable and complete, then they can either be "frozen" or continue to gain points with which to buy other abilities or to make existing abilities better. This is the "gravy stage" -- in other words it's all just gravy after this point.

 

 

For instance, if a character is already very competent, and an additional noteworthy attack or defense or utility power is added to them, or one of their existing abilities is pushed higher, that character is now suddenly more dangerous than they previously were before -- more so than their points might indicate.

[Metaphysician]

Re: Challange rating and balanced encounters

 

It's much harder to do than that. Design philosophy has a lot to do with that.

 

If your PC's all throw 10-12 dice, then an agent should throw around 8-9, and an agent leader, or specialized agent, should throw 10-12.

 

An agent commander or agent base leader is probably an actual super villain.

 

I have a unique problem regarding this. One of my players hates fighting mooks and minions. He always attacks the leader. He gets frustrated when fighting agents, especially tactically competent ones.

 

So I'm fixing the problem. I'm going to build a villain who's a total loser other than the fact that he's greedy, charismatic, and makes great plans. His agents, on the other hand, will be 225 point horror stories. Hopefully, he'll be begging for mercy by the time phase 5 rolls around.

 

Hence why I specify "Unless they get free agent equipment" for my rule of thumb. 50 point agents, that have 10d6 blaster rifles and equivalent equipment, aren't really 50 point agents.

[Utech]

Re: Challange rating and balanced encounters

 

Don't forget that where you fight can be more important than the point level of your opponents. Consider how each of these combat environments might play to (or against) different characters:

 

• a flat, featureless plain
  
• midair
  
• inside a submarine at great depth
  
• a city street in the financial district
  
• a city street in a slum
  
• a department store
  
• a saloon
  
• a salon
  
• a bank
  
• a kindergarten
  
• a Gothic castle
  
• the surface of a frozen lake as the ice begins to break up
  
• a forest
  
• a steelworks
  

 

Add DNPCs and other bystanders for extra challenge. Add darkness, adverse weather conditions, bombs, valuable pieces of art, and/or power lines for even more challenge.

 

You'll probably get a good feel for what sorts of challenges you can throw at your PCs as you go along. Until you reach that point, do not hesitate to play fast and loose with the bad guys and the environment. You can always adjust things on the fly if you've badly over- or underestimated. Odds are your players won't mind at bit if you flat out tell them, "Guys, I thought this was going to be a good encounter for you, but I didn't quite get it right. Why don't you all take five while I tweak things a bit."