enemies to counter PCs - how far is too far?

[st00ji]

so, how meta do you go with your encounter design?

im currently running a game with just two players - ones got a fighter, the other a ranger.

they are both new to the game, though the player of the fighter has played a fair bit of NWN. as a result hes learned a little about optimization, at least in a 3.5 / computer game sense. as a result his PC has high strength, and he has put all his resources into upping his AC - so he is currently rocking full plate and a tower shield.

this strategy has so far proven fairly effective for him, for obvious reasons - his CMD is decent too thanks to his strength, and low level mooks suck in general.

the ranger on the other hand, has built almost entirely for flavor, which is cool to see. he even demurred from a few tweaks i suggest at creation to help him get a bit more out of his build, though i have let him retcon a few things as he has realised the impact of his choices.

the upshot being the fighter is a bit of a combat beast, while the ranger, who is going archer, is taking a little while to get going. he also has some unfortunate luck with his attack rolls - though he is dominating the skill monkey role - which is awesome IMO, but i am not sure he sees the glory in that. i've tried to play it up a bit.

i've been reasonably strict on the fighter with his armor - constantly questioning how he is achieving things with his armor and shield on, having enemies flee which he cant prevent due to his reduced movement, laughing at the idea of him ordering drinks with his full face helm still in place and so forth. he even weathered a raging storm on a boat by tying himself to the mast. overall he has taken it in stride, and played it pretty well.

there has been a bit of grumbling from the ranger however, who with a still respectable AC of 18 has taken some hefty damage in recent sessions. he is still coming to grips with the idea of keeping out of range of opponents, and though i've helped him turn his PC into a bit of a switch hitter he is still taking the brunt of the encounters.

as a result i threw together their next major opponent as a pirate captains first mate - a burly figher 4 / barb 1, (the PCs are third level) with a greataxe and improved sunder. his AC is kinda crap so the ranger should be able to deal some damage even with his crappy rolls, but his BAB will enable him to put some hurt on the fighter. their damage output is a bit crap thanks to mr tower shield, and the guy has a bunch of HPs - especially while raging.

my thinking was to sunder the fighters shield to make him a bit more vulnerable, and show him the potential of a hard hitting 2h. he could potentially one shot someone with a lucky crit, which might be a bit too hard hitting i guess. might switch to a great sword.

anyway, am i going too far with the improved sunder business? i couldnt really think of a great in-game justification for the guy to have improved sunder, and i built him specifically to take on mr iron plated. the barb level feels slightly cheesy also, since it was taken for movement speed and enough rage for a single encounter. what do we think?

[Jezai]

I think it becomes meta-gamey when it would be unreasonable to encounter creatures that would counter whatever the player has.

So the question is, is it unreasonable that a fourth level fighter would take a one level barb dip? I think that is quite reasonable and I'm sure many PCs have done it. Same with having a fighter who focuses on sundering. The PC is a fighter that focuses on AC, why would it be unreasonable to a fighter somewhere in the world to focus on sundering?

I think you're good to go!

[Adamantine Dragon]

I tend not to be an equipment sundering, stealing or rust-monstering GM. I just think it ruins the player's fun and unless there is a compelling plot reason for it, it smacks of GM fiat.

There are other things you can do.

Swarms. Spellcasting enemies who target the fighter's will save. Flying creatures the fighter can't reach but the ranger can. Terrain is also a big factor for lumbering armor-clad tanks. Make the battle happen on a swinging rope bridge and watch the fighter hang on for dear life.

To give the ranger a chance to shine, you can throw a crowd of low hit-point mooks at them where the ranger can take out multiple in a round and the fighters massive damage is massive overkill.

Right now it seems that you're trying to address the problem with the fighter by out-meleeing him. That's not the way to do it. Out think him. Out maneuver him.

[bfobar]

I don't know about the beef cake as a challenge. Maybe try something that doesn't target armor class. The ranger should have a substantially higher reflex save. You could change the boss into a 3rd-4th level sorcerer or bard, and have him toss out some reflex saving spells. Grease comes to mind. If your fighter spends a fight on the ground while the ranger wins by keeping the bad guy from casting with a bow, the ranger will feel pretty good.

Think about this: 4th level sorcerer baddy, greases the fighter first round, then summons an eagle to peck him the second round, then starts spamming magic missile at whoever is most threatening, or ray of enfeeblement. Most of these cases favor your ranger over your fighter even if they are both getting targeted equally.

[st00ji]

i guess part of the attraction of the beefcake was to show the player of the fighter what his PC could be like if he would put down his shield for a minute. i've told them AC becomes less of a protection as level rises and foes get spells, touch attacks etc. but i guess he doesnt quite believe it.

a part of me thinks i should just let them play how they like, haha.

its quite interesting trying to build encounters for just two players though - if one goes down it gets tough real fast.

some good thoughts here!

[dkonen]

Why are the encounters hitting the ranger so much? Why not just have the enemies assume the guy in full armor is a bigger threat? This lets your archer pick them off while the fighter holds them. Simple enough.

If you *must* tailor encounters, why not pit an archer or two against them? Up in trees, out of windows, etc. Maybe casters at a distance? I'm assuming from your description it's a melee fighter, so throwing in a couple of distance foes should fix your problem with the ranger feeling outclassed.

[Necroluth]

I occasionally meta-game when designing encounters, but I try my best to justify the NPC's abilities within the context of their established roles WITHOUT THE PC's. I assume these NPC's are as competent and as specialized as the PC's and that they would have made these choices without knowing of the party's existence or makeup.

However, I have made specific baddies to force my players to think. The primary fighter in my 3.5/PF game is a fighter/duelist with two rapiers and way too much luck when he attacks. He gets a lot of crits, and has come to rely on them to carry the day. In order to get him to start thinking outside the 'stab them really hard until they stop moving' box, I made a bodyguard for a big bad that specialized in reciprocal strikes. Every time you hit him, he had two or three ways do return damage to you without wasting an action. His AC was through the roof as well (high 30's to low 40's), forcing the fighter to waste the tail end of his iterative attack sequence.

Of course, the fighter got a crit on the first shot. Imagine his surprise, however, when I told him that he took over 50 points of combined damage from the multiple reciprocal effects! Then the bodyguard got his turn, and hit him for almost 40 more with a spell. The player rolled with the punches, however, and taunted the bodyguard into focusing on him with melee attacks, and then he turtled up with full-defense. He thought outside the box, and barely managed to win the fight.

Not once was I accused of metagaming the villain.