Systematic challenge, or "How the party met an untimely

[taalyn]

One of the things that really impressed me with Dunjon was the method for gauging how many or what level to make NPCs so that they would be a consistent challenge to the characters. I thought that was probably the coolest thing I'd ever seen, because instead of design-defined challenge ratings or hit dice, I had a concrete way to systematically calculate what would challenge my players, no matter what level they were.

I want something similar for Crux, so that given party W, with strength X, I know to challenge my players with number of mooks Y, or archvillain Z.

So, what I'd like to know is if there is any math behind that idea, and whether there are any other methods like this out there. Any mathematical or systematic way to figure out what would be lightly challenging versus extremely challenging?

Aidan

[M. J. Young]

Aidan--

I don't know if this helps, but I did an analysis of combat numbers for D&D years ago which I called http://www.mjyoung.net/dungeon/adr.html">ADR's and Surv's. The explanation of how it works is on the linked page. The general idea is that you can reduce the D&D combat system (and that of most games) to mathematical equations, and so work out just how potent various entities are relative to each other.

It may help you to figure out what the relevant factors are in your design, and so work your way through to a simple set of guidelines for establishing appropriate levels of challenge.

--M. J. Young

[taalyn]

Heya MJ,

 Hmmm. I read through your article a couple of times, but I'm not sure it would work very well for my system. There are numbers in it, yes, but they're not very crunchable. That's why I was looking for something a little more intuitive/streamlined/gritty.

 Still, I'm going to play around with it tonight, and see if I can get it to be crunchable at all. Thanks for the link!

Aidan