RM question for other GMs

[lachancery]

This is a Rolemaster question - regardless of using Fantasy Grounds or not:

It's a couple times now that I've set encounters against a single stronger monster. Both times, I was genuinely concerned of killing characters, perhaps even total party wipes.

Both encounters went in the opposite direction in reality: little to no harm to the PCs. Admittedly, my (GM) rolls were bad and I didn't fudge them up in both cases and the PCs managed tactically the encounter (tanks in front with high parry).

I was wondering if other RM GMs had seen this pattern also in party vs one encounters?

[Ardem]

I was thinking about this the other day, perhaps my view of past rolemaster is clouded.

But I have had 4 level one char kill a level 7 char, but I remember even a wolf was hard for a lvl 1, so far they been going through beast as a breeze, well not quite but not sure if they been super lucky.

They have one super dwarf tank 85 hits a lvl 1. Ok he is stupid and cannot do anything more then hit, but thief and mage sit back cleric comes in to help out a bit later. High parry, cleric eventually flanks. And this is a nice one all are delibrate actions for the +10 they are willing to sacrifice the first hit.

Only chance I been able to out manuvuer the party is on a suprise missile attack, since only one could return fire, and he was wounded quickly it took them a while to kill the lone enemy

[lachancery]

I was thinking about this the other day, perhaps my view of past rolemaster is clouded. But I have had 4 level one char kill a level 7 char, but I remember even a wolf was hard for a lvl 1, so far they been going through beast as a breeze, well not quite but not sure if they been super lucky.
I had similar memories, but a group of 6 level 1's killed a level 6 large (as in, large crits table) creature, twice, without a scratch. I figured the first time, they got lucky, but the result was the same for the second creature.

Last month, 4 level 5 characters killed a level 9 undead (large, no bleed, no stun) with limited damage.

Hmmmm. :confused:

[NEPHiLiX]

It sounds like you've got a well-integrated, tactically-minded team on your hands--the few odd lucky crits aside. I usually think of it this way to get a better idea of what the players are up against: in the case of a 9th level Large Undead vs four 5th levelers, that's 9 total levels vs the players' 20 (4x5), where that "20" features 5 attacks/spells per round (vs 9 levels of dumb frontal assault with 1 attack). Put that way, LA creature crits and no stun doesn't seem so daunting (especially considering that hit delivery is high on LA crits and Undead tend to have low-ish hits)...still a danger, but only a moderate one.

This isn't a hard and fast table--it can be easily broken by access to spells, multiple attacks and/or greater than zombie-intelligence (give that large undead an active intelligence where he hunts the "squishies" then mops clean-up on the fighters (the "crunchies") and you're talking a whole new ballgame).

[lachancery]

To wrap up this thread, NEPHiLiX (and Dakadin in email) called it out right. In both encounters, the enemy creature had specific attack patterns that were limiting & predictable. This allowed the "crunchies" to "control" how the melee played out (with high parry/DB), while the "squishies" nibbled away at it with ranged attacks.

Taking a step back, the tactical realism is nice: you could visualize heavily armored & shielded fighters maintaining the focus of an animal intelligence creature by taking pot shots on its nose, by making noise and parrying its attacks. The creature wouldn't understand that the real threats are not the melee fighters in its face, who it keeps "touching" with its attacks, but really the archers further away.

Sooooo, the outcome against a war troll should be more interesting to see. :)

[Blackfoot]

Sooooo, the outcome against a war troll should be more interesting to see. :)
Sadly war trolls aren't that bright either... against an elite Uruk Hai warrior chieftain of the Dark One's personal guard... well.. that would be a different matter.

[Trenloe]

Sadly war trolls aren't that bright either... against an elite Uruk Hai warrior chieftain of the Dark One's personal guard... well.. that would be a different matter.
Or, 150 Orcs? ;-)

[Dakadin]

LOL. I thought you worked that down to 100 orcs ;)

[Trenloe]

LOL. I thought you worked that down to 100 orcs ;)
All depends on how many legs each Orc has! :D

[Dakadin]

Yeah, I figure that means that half the orcs only had 1 leg :D

[bennis1980]

This is a Rolemaster question - regardless of using Fantasy Grounds or not:

It's a couple times now that I've set encounters against a single stronger monster. Both times, I was genuinely concerned of killing characters, perhaps even total party wipes.

Both encounters went in the opposite direction in reality: little to no harm to the PCs. Admittedly, my (GM) rolls were bad and I didn't fudge them up in both cases and the PCs managed tactically the encounter (tanks in front with high parry).

I was wondering if other RM GMs had seen this pattern also in party vs one encounters?

I constantly struggle with this dilemma. But at the end of the day, players can always run away. If they do this, I won't persue them with too much gusto.

I tend to throw a huge amount into character backgrounds so I feel if I kill a character I'm cutting off my right arm (along with all of the juicy story hooks). That said, with some near misses, I give foolish players a few reminders of the mortality of their characters, and after that I close my eyes and let the rules decide their fate.

One such player loooovvveed the sight of shiney items and magical treasure. I designed a whole ruin for his staged demise, with about 5 progressively worse warning signs. The rest of the party refused to continue after an ancient evil made them bleed from their eyes. Not Dularbeth. Onwards he marched to his death. He wasn't happy...