I'm finally tackling the Threat Level and encounter difficulty topic. To do so, I've run some equivalency tests.

I found that:

A rank 1 combatant character = a Threat 3 monster (SOLDIER or SQUIG)

4 Str

4 Tou

Defense of 2 blacks

One bonus fortune die to Str

Great weapon

* Monster can use exactly the same Action cards as the PC (E.g. reckless cleave or whatever)

I'd appreciate some thoughts on the following:

Is a rank 2 combat character (2 yellows weapon skill) = Threat 4 (Black Orc)

Is a rank 3 combat character (3 yellows weapon skill) = Threat 5 (Giant or Treeman)

Thoughts?

Hi!

As far as I remember, one of the items that was most important determining the thread of an encounter was the action cards given to monsters. The same monster with or without Reckless cleave (or other strong action cards) let's say, is a total different world. For this reason, I found it difficult back when I played the game to do an equivalence between threat levels and PC level.

Good luck!

Yepes

That's why I mention monsters having cards equal to the PCs. If th PCs have reckless cleave, then the monsters do too. Then a GM can get back down to the essence of threat.

That's why I mention monsters having cards equal to the PCs. If th PCs have reckless cleave, then the monsters do too. Then a GM can get back down to the essence of threat.

Though I feel that most NPC actions need less successes to achieve "more". For example some need only a hammer or two to land a critical. As NPCs have less expertise dice to throw around than the PCs I've often felt that the creature actions generate better results (more damage, criticals, stress/fatigue and other effects) than using PC actions. But that's just a feeling on my part, haven't done any actual in-depth testing.

When measuring equivalence, do you mean that there should be a 50-50 chance that either side looses/dies?

A black orc might be right for a challenging rank 2 fight. My feeling is that the PC would win more often than not but that it would be even hard fights.

Giant/treeman sounds a bit tough for rank 3, my feeling is that the giant/treeman would win often in a fight against a single PC.

When measuring equivalence, do you mean that there should be a 50-50 chance that either side looses/dies?

The basis of the difficulty of an encounter would be like this (based on other RPG scales, such as d20). I set "Hard" as the 50/50 as we favor the PCs on this scale. The scale has nothing to do with purple dice. These are example numbers:

COMBAT

DIFFICULTY

SCALE...........EXAMPLE NUMBERS

Simple........ "Boo!" and the enemies could run away

Easy........... Almost assured destruction of the enemy (90%)

Average....... Favor the PCs 75%

Hard............ - 50/50 - equal # creatures and their power equal to the PCs.

Daunting..... Favor the Enemy 75% - takes extra thought by the PCs

Epic........... Almost assured destruction of the PCs (90%) - E.g. BLACK FIRE PASS!

How does that scale look?

..

Looks good.

Then a Black Orc at rank 2 should probably fit into the "Hard" level.

A Giant/treeman at rank 3 would probably fall into Hard or Daunting somewhere. A troll might be closer to Hard.

These are just my "feelings" I haven't done any testing, except experience from play. You could stage one-on-one "Pit Fights" and try out different monsters against different characters.

How hard encounters are often depend more on other factors though. Are the PCs ambushed by goblin archers from higher ground and from behind cover, while they cross a river on a narrow, rickety, partially damaged bridge? Then that group of goblin archers can provide a Hard challenge even for rank 3 PCs.