Apparently, my mind skipped over this section because I don't remember it at all lol I was curious, the tables on pages 88-90 (under "Encounter Building") give proportions for an encounters that are claimed to be a "satisfying but difficult" battle and that it is "challeng[ing]...while still being winnable".
If you've tried this system, do you find that to be the case? Is it a better system than the DMG's encounter rater? How have you found the resultant match-ups?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
The encounters built using XGTE are roughly medium to hard by the DMG standard, which is to say easy. If you want to make 'satisfying but difficult' fights, I recommend building encounters on twice the number of PCs.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Thanks! I'll give it a shot. I'll bear in mind the single v multiple thing.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
https://donjon.bin.sh/5e/calc/enc_size.html this site has a good graph for encounter calculating. just stick toward the higher side of monsters in reference to this graph or it will be a pretty easy walkthrough
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Apparently, my mind skipped over this section because I don't remember it at all lol I was curious, the tables on pages 88-90 (under "Encounter Building") give proportions for an encounters that are claimed to be a "satisfying but difficult" battle and that it is "challeng[ing]...while still being winnable".
If you've tried this system, do you find that to be the case? Is it a better system than the DMG's encounter rater? How have you found the resultant match-ups?
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
The encounters built using XGTE are roughly medium to hard by the DMG standard, which is to say easy. If you want to make 'satisfying but difficult' fights, I recommend building encounters on twice the number of PCs.
Based on the XGtE system or DMG?
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Based on the XGtE system. Though it seems to balance multi-monster encounters slightly differently from how it does single-encounter.
Thanks! I'll give it a shot. I'll bear in mind the single v multiple thing.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
https://donjon.bin.sh/5e/calc/enc_size.html this site has a good graph for encounter calculating. just stick toward the higher side of monsters in reference to this graph or it will be a pretty easy walkthrough