[DF] Suitable Dangerous Encounters

[Bruno]

I advocate against taking into account EVERY single part of the party composition, player psychology, possible tactics, etc.

This is for a number of reasons:

1. You'll go insane trying to account for all the permutations.
2. Your players will do something you didn't plan for anyways (almost guarenteed)
3. You'll spend more time planning the fight than playing it out (I mean, if you're having fun simulating, knock yourself out, but don't stress yourself over it)
4. Perfectly and PRECISELY balancing the encounter against your players every possible move is, basically, managing to railroad your way right past the dice. If you want a scripted outcome, just be honest with your players and say "There's a few rounds of back and forth but you beat up the guards." or "The guards spank you and haul you off to jail."

The tactical planning on the players part is part of the fun they're having. If they do something brilliant and get rewarded with a smooth and easy fight, they notice that they did something brilliant and they feel good about themselves. If they do something dumb and get beaten up badly, it's a valuable learning experience, and should go towards them doing something brilliant (eventually).

GMs will have to adjust a little for their own groups, but having a baseline to adjust from is easier than nothing. I find my players tend to waltz through D&D 4e encounters "appropriately" rated for their level, so I go with the guideline, and then add an extra monster of their level. That brings the encounter to a level of difficulty that everyone seems to find "fun". In GURPS, I'd probably tweak monster defenses up by 1 instead, since an extra foe means a lot more in a game with strict facing rules.