Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
32 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

Gloomhaven» Forums » General

Subject: The fastest way to determine (suggested) Difficulty rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Jeremy C
United States
Columbia
Missouri
flag msg tools
Average Suggested
Party Level Difficulty
3 2
5 3
7 4
9 5


"Average Party Level" means that number or better, do not round. (4.8 is not 5.)

6/5/5/4: Average party level is 5.
5/5/5/4: Below 5.

IMO this could/should be in the rulebook, as it's obviously no accident.

For many parties, you should be able to determine the average without doing any real math and just eyeballing the values.

If you have mixed retirements it can obviously get a bit more complex.

I made a calculator, but it's not really necessary. Or rather, it's not any faster than just using your head or the calculator on your phone.

The one advantage to a calculator is that you can leave it open (or bookmark it) and change it every time someone levels.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/15Klu9MIGVqQ0Cv-87AtQ...

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
d w
Sweden
flag msg tools
Not sure what you mean, the rulebook does state suggested difficulty level as average party level / 2, then rounded up

Edit: Oh, do you mean that table should be in the rulebook? Eh, dividing your average level by two and rounding up is not much of an effort.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alex Florin
United States
San Jose
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I'm confused.

Pages 15 and back cover:
Recommended Scenario level = Average party character level / 2 (rounded up)

What isn't in the rule book, a chart? You would still need to calculate the average.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Cameron Chien
United States
Rancho Cucamonga
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Because there's virtually no way to guarantee the entire party stays at the same level, including retiring, you just have to do a little math.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jason Druckenmiller
United States
Albany
New York
flag msg tools
Goalie Extraordinaire
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
icelock wrote:
Not sure what you mean, the rulebook does state suggested difficulty level as average party level / 2, then rounded up

Edit: Oh, do you mean that table should be in the rulebook? Eh, dividing your average level by two and rounding up is not much of an effort.


No, he's saying average party level is not always an easy number.

Yes, Avg Party level / 2 and that result is rounded up. The Average party level however will not always be a nice easy number. Given the OPs example, 3 level 5s and a a level 4. That results in an average party level of 4.75. You than divide 4.75 by 2 for 2.375, round that up to 3. While not overly difficult math, it's a touch more difficult than a simple glance to know the result right away.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Anon Y. Mous
msg tools
mbmb
The suggested difficulty becomes really, really easy once you have a build going. It's best to just ignore the math and raise the difficulty to the highest you can handle, whether that's Hard, Very Hard or even higher, unless someone can come up with some sort of formula that takes items and perks into account somehow. Calculating based on level alone makes less and less sense as you progress.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Will
United States
Minneapolis
Minnesota
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I think your scenario levels might be wrong.
If a party has levels 4, 4, 4, 5, the scenario level would be 3.

4+4+4+5=17
17÷4=4.25
4.25÷2=2.125
2.125 rounded up is 3.

The way I'm reading what you wrote, it looks like your result would be scenario level 2.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jason Druckenmiller
United States
Albany
New York
flag msg tools
Goalie Extraordinaire
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Temelin wrote:
I think your scenario levels might be wrong.
If a party has levels 4, 4, 4, 5, the scenario level would be 3.

4+4+4+5=17
17÷4=4.25
4.25÷2=2.125
2.125 rounded up is 3.

The way I'm reading what you wrote, it looks like your result would be scenario level 2.


OP used =round instead of =roundup in his calc. So yea, he's rounding down half the time.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Phil Pettifer
England
Unspecified
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I suppose a table such as the following could be useful:


Total Levels | Suggested
2 Characters | 3 Characters | 4 Characters | Difficulty Level
2-4 | 3-6 | 4-8 | 1
5-8 | 7-12 | 9-16 | 2
9-12 | 13-18 | 17-24 | 3
13-16 | 19-24 | 25-32 | 4
17-18 | 25-27 | 33-36 | 5


Just adding up then, none of that horrible division

Edit: Corrected typo in first column
15 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Izzy Marsh
United Kingdom
Lancashire
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
PhilP wrote:
I suppose a table such as the following could be useful:


Total Levels | Suggested
2 Characters | 3 Characters | 4 Characters | Difficulty Level
2-4 | 3-6 | 4-8 | 1
5-8 | 7-12 | 9-16 | 2
7-12 | 13-18 | 17-24 | 3
13-16 | 19-24 | 25-32 | 4
17-18 | 25-27 | 33-36 | 5


Just adding up then, none of that horrible division


Yup
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David desJardins
United States
Burlingame
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Maybe the game needs to ship with some Cuisenaire rods, so that players can compute the level difficulty by grouping rods without having to do all of that confusing division and perhaps even mastering place-value notation.

16 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Furry Fox
msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
DaviddesJ wrote:
Maybe the game needs to ship with some Cuisenaire rods, so that players can compute the level difficulty by grouping rods without having to do all of that confusing division and perhaps even mastering place-value notation.



Haha, I just burst out laughing because I was really starting to wonder how terrible people must be at math if determining scenario level was too difficult... and then i see these. laugh
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Matthew Kameron
msg tools
Old Deep One wrote:
PhilP wrote:
I suppose a table such as the following could be useful:


Total Levels | Suggested
2 Characters | 3 Characters | 4 Characters | Difficulty Level
2-4 | 3-6 | 4-8 | 1
5-8 | 7-12 | 9-16 | 2
7-12 | 13-18 | 17-24 | 3
13-16 | 19-24 | 25-32 | 4
17-18 | 25-27 | 33-36 | 5


Just adding up then, none of that horrible division


Yup

I agree. This would be a worth improvement to the rulebook. I am a Mathematician and I don't like the current way it is done... even worse for others in my group!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Aaron Senser
United States
Oak Park
IL
flag msg tools
Yes they do.
badge
This isn't my dog.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Fizi wrote:
Old Deep One wrote:
PhilP wrote:
I suppose a table such as the following could be useful:


Total Levels | Suggested
2 Characters | 3 Characters | 4 Characters | Difficulty Level
2-4 | 3-6 | 4-8 | 1
5-8 | 7-12 | 9-16 | 2
7-12 | 13-18 | 17-24 | 3
13-16 | 19-24 | 25-32 | 4
17-18 | 25-27 | 33-36 | 5


Just adding up then, none of that horrible division


Yup

I agree. This would be a worth improvement to the rulebook. I am a Mathematician and I don't like the current way it is done... even worse for others in my group!


See underlined above. I assume these should be switched?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Troy Laurin
Australia
Perth
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
That second table does simplify things (the first table is simply incorrect, and doesn't really simplify things?).

Putting ranges in a table means twice as many numbers to try to interpret and reduces the utility, so I'd tend to avoid that. Case in point, that 7-12 in 2P should be 9-12.

How about...

If total party level is at least: | Scenario level
2P | 3P | 4P | 5P | Easy | Norm | Hard
1 | 1 | 1 | | 0 | 1 | 2
5 | 7 | 9 | | 1 | 2 | 3
9 | 13 | 17 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4
11 | 19 | 25 | 11 | 3 | 4 | 5
15 | 25 | 33 | 21 | 4 | 5 | 6
| | | 31 | 5 | 6 | 7
| | | 41 | 6 | 7 | 7

(5P is unofficial and requires extra components. Official recommendation is max 4P)

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Phil Pettifer
England
Unspecified
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Doomburrito wrote:

See underlined above. I assume these should be switched?

Well, I did say a table such as the following
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bernard
Netherlands
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
MrTroy wrote:
That second table does simplify things (the first table is simply incorrect, and doesn't really simplify things?).

Putting ranges in a table means twice as many numbers to try to interpret and reduces the utility, so I'd tend to avoid that. Case in point, that 7-12 in 2P should be 9-12.

How about...

If total party level is at least: | Scenario level
2P | 3P | 4P | 5P | Easy | Norm | Hard
1 | 1 | 1 | | 0 | 1 | 2
5 | 7 | 9 | | 1 | 2 | 3
9 | 13 | 17 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4
11 | 19 | 25 | 11 | 3 | 4 | 5
15 | 25 | 33 | 21 | 4 | 5 | 6
| | | 31 | 5 | 6 | 7
| | | 41 | 6 | 7 | 7

(5P is unofficial and requires extra components. Official recommendation is max 4P)



This table would be a very nice addition to the rule book. Who is going to inform Isaac so he can put it in the rulebook for the second print run? :)
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Cameron Chien
United States
Rancho Cucamonga
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
The rulebook is long enough as it is, especially if the errata and clarifications are going in.

Every phone has a calculator. How hard is it to just hit a few numbers then round up?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bernard
Netherlands
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Zeede wrote:
The rulebook is long enough as it is, especially if the errata and clarifications are going in.

Every phone has a calculator. How hard is it to just hit a few numbers then round up?


I agree with you that once you know what you need to do, it is easy. Though, for some people calculating the right scenario level is somewhat confusing and the threads about this topic proofs that errors are made. I think the fact that you need to do three steps of calculating and the round up a number like 1.125 to (level) 2 is not very intuitive and elegant. A simple table like this fixes that for a lot of people and helps smoothing out the setup. And that is a nice addition I would say.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Phil Pettifer
England
Unspecified
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
MrTroy wrote:
Putting ranges in a table means twice as many numbers to try to interpret and reduces the utility, so I'd tend to avoid that. Case in point, that 7-12 in 2P should be 9-12.


I've found that RPG books and the like will usually have tables with ranges in, which may suggest that most people prefer that format. I know I certainly find ranges much clearer.

BTW your table has more errors in than mine (bottom entries of 2P column)
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Troy Laurin
Australia
Perth
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
PhilP wrote:

BTW your table has more errors in than mine (bottom entries of 2P column)

!!

cry
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Wil Sullivan
msg tools
slightly off topic, are people following the recommended difficulty?

I've been playing difficulty at average party level rounded up and it's been fine. (ie. 3+2/2=s 2.5 rounded to level 3)

as people say sometimes it comes right down to the wire, but we've yet to fail a scenario (10 or so in). by no means do i consider myself to be a tactical genius and i think im playing the rules right. so i'm confused at the idea of playing the recommended difficulty which i think would make it too easy (although in fairness may help speed the game up a bit as we'll be less edgey and the monsters would have less hp...)

anyways just interested in what everyone was doing.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jason Winterfeld
United States
Tecumseh
MI
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
OMG My group has been doing this all wrong!!!! We missed the /2 part!

BEASTMODE GLOOMHAVEN!!!!

We are all lv 4 and have been playing at lv 4 lol no wonder why the last couple scenarios come down to the last card played
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tim Ross
United States
Ohio
flag msg tools
icechamber wrote:
OMG My group has been doing this all wrong!!!! We missed the /2 part!

BEASTMODE GLOOMHAVEN!!!!

We are all lv 4 and have been playing at lv 4 lol no wonder why the last couple scenarios come down to the last card played


Good argument for a small table here.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Marcus S
Canada
Calgary
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
MrTroy wrote:

(5P is unofficial and requires extra components. Official recommendation is max 4P)

I know you said this isn't official, so it's not a big deal, but the 5P column is technically wrong. With 5 level one's you aren't actually playing scenario level 3... You are just bumping the monster level and trap damage, without increasing Gold and XP.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.