Hi all,
I wanted some input as to the *amount* of randomness in a Dungeon Crawl. Specifically I would want to know if you should *roll a dice* to determine how many enemies you must fight OR should each monster have a default quantity (instances).
Version 1.0: Roll a dice to determine how many monsters you must confront.
Version 2.0: Specified by the *Encounter* value, whatever the value that is how many monsters you must confront.
I like the revised version. It would make it more realistic and you could better control the amount of monsters to combat determined by their type. Some lower level beasts could attack in large numbers, such as a horde of skeletons, orcs, etc.
They would inflict less damage individually, but be quite formidable in mass amounts, whereas more powerful creatures would be more solitary or perhaps only encountered in pairs, such as mountain trolls or dragons. It would eliminate the randomness of the battles, thereby players would not just walk through a few skeletons or be decimated by a herd of dragons. Either of those scenarios could turn players off with either being bored by just skipping through an encounter or being wiped out by it.
I'm a very reasonable man.
You'd have to be a pretty darn high level warrior to take on a dozen minotaurs, but my little old granny can handle a few rats with her broom and a good swift kick!
 | Power Creep, a Dungeon Pages adventure (0) by jasongreeno |
| Build your own [insert game genre here] (8) by questccg |
| Board Game Blueprint - New Episode Every Wednesday (21) by The Game Crafter |
| Premium Bullet & Premium Toxic Waste Board Game Pieces at The Game Crafter (0) by The Game Crafter |
 | PoA — Major shift back closer to FCE (2) by questccg |
| What “Should” Be in an RPG Design Book (11) by lewpuls |
| Blank Poker Card Sale - 3 Cents Each! (0) by The Game Crafter |
| Blank Playing Cards - Bridge 57mm x 89mm UK (1) by questccg |
| Finally returned after all these years (1) by DyminoMonsters2004 |
| State of the let-off Union - November 2024 (0) by let-off studios |
| Shoppe: The Simulation of Guilds (1) by questccg |
| The fine line between a game and a simulation (22) by X3M |
| Only 24 hours left to bid on games for the Extra Life Charity Auction (0) by The Game Crafter |
| Songs of Conquest is now 60% off plus an additional discount for... (5) by questccg |
| Returned the reMarkable 2 and purchased the BOOX Go 10.3 (3) by questccg |
| Happy Halloween 2024 (0) by questccg |
| Epic Metal Monster Coins - Now on Kickstarter - Created by The Game Crafter (0) by The Game Crafter |
| DuelBotz: Sample New Card (12) by questccg |
| 2 levels for an unit (wargames) (6) by X3M |
| Dragon Spark Playthrough (0) by The Game Crafter |
| New Board Game Pieces - Premium Water Droplet & Premium Blood Droplet (0) by The Game Crafter |
| Designer with an 'almost' ready product (18) by questccg |
| Protospiel Madison - Only 17 Days Away! (0) by The Game Crafter |
| New Board Game Pieces - Premium Milk Bottle & Premium Beer Mug (0) by The Game Crafter |
| Testing chat GPT for mechanics searching (6) by larienna |
They would inflict less damage individually, but be quite formidable in mass amounts, whereas more powerful creatures would be more solitary or perhaps only encountered in pairs, such as mountain trolls or dragons. It would eliminate the randomness of the battles, thereby players would not just walk through a few skeletons or be decimated by a herd of dragons. Either of those scenarios could turn players off with either being bored by just skipping through an encounter or being wiped out by it.
Ya I had not really thought of the extremes like 1 horde of rats (weak) or 12 minotaurs (very strong). But you make a solid argument about balancing out the attacks. I will go with version 2.0 (Encounter stat).