Balancing group opposition?

[Cadd]

Hi all

What sort of guidelines do you use for balancing the opposition when there's a marked discrepancy in numbers?

When there's a 2:1 ratio of baddies to PCs, how much weaker do they have to be to not completely overwhelm, but still be a challenge?

I know there can't be a hard and fast rule, as each character is different and more importantly, each player approaches combat differently and can be more or less adept at tactics, but a general guideline maybe?

[Taran]

Mr. Death has some good advice on this:

http://www.jimbutcheronline.com/bb/index.php/topic,39400.msg1939425.html#msg1939425


The thing with multiple enemies is this:  If they have a low skill rating, no matter how many there are, they'll probably never hit.

So, if they are smart, they'll create maneuvers and have one of their allies tagging it for a big hit.

So, 2:1 would have one guy maneuvering and the other guy attacking.  Or, maybe, they're ganging up on one person 3 or 4 to 1 hoping to take them down quickly so they can move on to the next person.

Let's say 8 opponents vs 4.  If all 7 of 8 maneuver on one guy, then the last tags 7 maneuvers, it can get deadly...so you have to watch that kind of thing.  (that assumes all 7 maneuvers succeed - and assumes that, narratively, 7 guys can actually crowd around 1.)

[bobjob]

I've always been a little shaky on opposed maneuvers. If all 7 attempt to maneuver, couldn't the character defend against all of the maneuvers? Or does that count as an action?

[Belial666]

Except that basing things just on skill levels can often be misleading;

Toughness and Recovery powers give no bonus to attack or defense rolls and Strength only gives it occasionally. Does this mean that they don't affect the outcome? Magic can easily get legendary rolls. Does this mean that a mage rolling legendary for magic will be balanced against a monster rolling legendary without magic? Flight doesn't affect rolls at all. Yet a faerie with a +3 bow skill and wings will easily win against a PC with +5 weapons skill and a sword because there's nothing the PC can do to strike back.


A fight is balanced when it is balanced. Refresh level and skill ranks are an indicator, not the full basis for how a fight turns out. Only if you take into account how the powers/skills mesh and how each side can use them will you know how to balance the encounter - and every single encounter is unique in trying to balance it.

[Taran]

I've always been a little shaky on opposed maneuvers. If all 7 attempt to maneuver, couldn't the character defend against all of the maneuvers? Or does that count as an action?

It totally depends on the maneuver.

If one is using athletics to "flank", I'd let the person defend with athletics
If another is using Might to knock them prone, I'd let them defend
If One is using Rapport to boost his ally's morale, I'd say the PC can't defend that since it doesn't target him.

Defending never counts as an action

[bobjob]

It totally depends on the maneuver.

If one is using athletics to "flank", I'd let the person defend with athletics
If another is using Might to knock them prone, I'd let them defend
If One is using Rapport to boost his ally's morale, I'd say the PC can't defend that since it doesn't target him.

Defending never counts as an action

Yeah, that's kind of how I thought of it. If it effects the environment they're rolling against 0 (unless a block or extenuating circumstances). If it's directly against an opponent then they get to defend like everything else. Looking over the rules (where Murph is crowding her perp in an alley), it reads like she places the maneuver, the per defends on his action, and she maintains the maneuver on hers. Too bad there isn't mass combat rules somewhere with multiple people maneuvering.

[Taran]

Yeah, that's kind of how I thought of it. If it effects the environment they're rolling against 0 (unless a block or extenuating circumstances). If it's directly against an opponent then they get to defend like everything else. Looking over the rules (where Murph is crowding her perp in an alley), it reads like she places the maneuver, the per defends on his action, and she maintains the maneuver on hers. Too bad there isn't mass combat rules somewhere with multiple people maneuvering.

I tend to put maneuvers at a base of 3 because that's what the minimum for spells is.  I suppose it depends, though.  Turning on a light to place "WELL LIT" on the scene would be easy to do.

In any case, if the opponents are mixing it up and forcing the PC's to use different skills (other than their Apex skills) they'll land a few of those maneuvers and start racking up some good hits.

[Sanctaphrax]

My usual method for balancing opposition is to play out a turn or two in my head. Assume ordinary rolls, look at how the start of the fight is likely to play out, and select your enemy stats so that your players get a bit dinged up but not really hurt.

It's a bit of an effort, but I don't know of a better method. And once you've done it for a while it's actually fairly quick.

[Haru]

Short answer.

Long answer:
It's really hard to tell. A strong opponent for one group can be steamrolled by another group, and vice versa.

Two examples from Cradle of Darkness.
1) A gigantic Jaguar statue. It had supernatural everything, and at one point it swallowed a 10 shift hit like someone had thrown a ball of yarn. However, the attack skill was fairly low, so all in all, it didn't do much damage to the group, and they were able to wear it down with, I think, 1 consequence for a total of 6 players. My plan was to have a tough fight that would give them a bit of trouble and force them to take a few consequences. Didn't really work out that way.

2) As a ramp up to the final conflict, I'd thrown a dozen vampires at the group. They were fairly low powered, but not to be underestimated. In any way, I'd thought this would be a lot like swatting flies, but it took a really long time until they were actually down, far far longer than I'd expected.

One of the great things about Fate is the option for a concession. Once you learn how to embrace that, there's no need to worry about the right amount of opponents (see short answer). If you've got too many or too strong opponents, let the players concede or deal with what happens when they are taken out (which doesn't have to be death). If they get stomped into the ground the first couple of conflicts, that's fine, you can always have them come at the problem from another angle and have them take a detour. And if you set the opposition too weak, so be it. The characters caught a lucky break this time around.

Another question would be, what does "balanced" even mean? The big bad doesn't send exactly the right amount of minions to deal with the heroes, he sends what he sends. Maybe he's short on staff, maybe he's prone to overkill, maybe he just wants to delay the characters, and so on. There are a lot of valuables when it comes to opponents, and it doesn't always have to be "balanced".

It's more important in any conflict, to have an idea about what you are fighting about. The goals the two opposing sides are pursuing. If you focus on those goals, you can continue the story either way, no matter which side wins, the story continues. Try to find a way to make even losing interesting.

For example: You players want to hit a group of minions for the location of the big bads hiding place. If they win, they know where to go, if they lose, they don't. Which is fairly anticlimactic. So instead, you can set the goalposts a bit different. The players will get to the fortress no matter if they win or lose. But if they win, they get the location and can go themselves, if they lose, they will be captured and thrown into the dungeon, where they need to free themselves before they can take on the big bad.

If you look at it a bit more from that angle, the exact number of opponents doesn't matter all that much, as you will always find a way around, and while doing so, you will learn what different configurations of opponents can do to your group.

[Mr. Death]

Except that basing things just on skill levels can often be misleading;

Toughness and Recovery powers give no bonus to attack or defense rolls and Strength only gives it occasionally. Does this mean that they don't affect the outcome? Magic can easily get legendary rolls. Does this mean that a mage rolling legendary for magic will be balanced against a monster rolling legendary without magic? Flight doesn't affect rolls at all. Yet a faerie with a +3 bow skill and wings will easily win against a PC with +5 weapons skill and a sword because there's nothing the PC can do to strike back.


A fight is balanced when it is balanced. Refresh level and skill ranks are an indicator, not the full basis for how a fight turns out. Only if you take into account how the powers/skills mesh and how each side can use them will you know how to balance the encounter - and every single encounter is unique in trying to balance it.

That's why I tend to say effective skill levels. And yeah, obviously things like toughness and strength should be factored in, but put it this way -- if something with Supernatural Toughness isn't reliably dodging attacks that it can tank, it's not dodging maneuvers, either, and enough maneuvering can overcome just about any toughness level eventually.

And I wouldn't say a PC with only a sword couldn't hit a flying creature -- PCs are very resourceful, and that +5 is going to serve him well in throwing stuff.

Of course, sometimes the dice just don't cooperate, at which point you have to be ready to make declarations one way or the other. I've had named villains routed entirely because of a few bad rolls, and I've had scrub mooks with only two stress boxes and terrible dodge scores last several rounds from pure luck.