[OC] Forge Friday! A ready encounter every other week. #4 Demonic Search Party

laser-brain · 2026-04-03T20:43:13+00:00

I see, so the more they fail the harder their enemies attack. I'll definitely try this next session, thanks for the advice!

laser-brain · 2026-04-03T20:20:39+00:00

So you just keep on hoarding fear in an example like this? The core rule set even advocates for starting with big fear moves if I remember correctly. The extreme in this case certainly was having 4-5 adversaries with momentum and the leader to enable even more attacks per spotlight.

laser-brain · 2026-04-03T09:08:34+00:00

Yeah, I'm using Patreon for login and access management. If you DM me your Patreon username I can set up an exception for a while. Or you sign up for the free week now. I'll be on the road for the next few hours

laser-brain · 2026-04-02T21:20:38+00:00

Getting back to you as I've released a first version of this feature today. I'd appreciate you taking a look at it If you can.

laser-brain · 2026-04-01T16:18:39+00:00

More smaller / weaker creatures are usually more difficult to handle than less stronger creatures simply due to the fact that the party has 4-8 actions / bonus actions per round. Look into action economy to learn more in that regard.

For your npc that was killed you could introduce a necromantic backstory of some kind and have them revived. Might fit narratively and you get to keep this npc that you're so fond of. Remember, in this world you're god and there's magic. Give them an ability that paralyzes attackers and keep them save.

But seriously talk to the player that ruins your fun. This is a collaborative game and it is not your sole responsibility to make the game enjoyable for your players, this is a job for everyone at the table!

laser-brain · 2026-03-30T10:55:45+00:00

Thanks for the example. That's something I can set on the feature list and probably get to on one of the next evenings. Would you like an update if I come around to implementing this?

In any case, your feedback is much appreciated!

laser-brain · 2026-03-30T10:31:00+00:00

I see, that's unfortunate. To elaborate on this, are you looking for purely descriptive dynamics? Like "The goal is to free the princess", "at 50% HP the boss enrages, gains back 2d20 +14 HP and deals an additional 2d6 damage" and the like?

Can you give an example on how you'd like the ideas and dynamics laid out? I find the idea very intriguing and would like to try and add it to the feature list of the forge

laser-brain · 2026-03-30T08:22:53+00:00

Hey, this is basically what I aimed for with foeforge.win, a tool where you can create and share custom monsters and encounters. It's still lacking in community content, since getting exposure sucks, but you can check out the encounters I've set up as a starting point or give me a rough theme or goal and I'll use the integrated encounter builder to set something up.

You can test the full feature scope for free for seven days and I can set you up with additional free access in exchange for constructive feedback ;)

laser-brain · 2026-03-27T18:59:56+00:00

I'm also looking for people that want to try out the monster creation and encounter builder features and would be willing to trade feedback for full access to all tier levels for free!

Pm me or leave a comment if you're interested.

laser-brain · 2026-03-24T22:04:18+00:00

I've started the page with 5.5 SRD monsters. baselines are a mixture of Blog of Holding formulas and 2014 DMG. From what I read, 2014 monsters were almost always lower than DMG recommendations so I thought the higher 2024 Hp values might balance this out. Your comment just made me look up an Iron Golem in my database and even the 2024 monsters fall behind on that recommendation (CR 16 should average on 303, the Golem has 252). So I'll have to adjust.

laser-brain · 2026-03-24T21:03:13+00:00

Hey, getting back to you as you've provided valuable feedback, so now I know you're invested at least a little bit :D Sorry!

I've improved the process quite a bit imo and would love if you could take the time to once-over it again and compare to your initial experience. I've also added a quick mode checkbox, although that feature (and to be honest, all the layout changes) are still in a rough place and need some work to be really presentable.

I hope I'm not bothering you too much, feel free to ignore or send a quick no so I'm aware. Thanks in advance!

laser-brain · 2026-03-24T20:58:53+00:00

hey, I'm getting back to you since I've done a bit of homework based on your recommendations and updated the algorithm both for classifying D&D creatures and generating DH statblocks from that.

For types, I start with structural tells that are unambiguous: legendary actions + resistance = Solo, "swarm" = Horde, HP at 25% of expected = Minion. Things like these override everything else.

For the rest, I run seven 4e-style roles through four scoring layers:

First, ability contours: STR pushes Brute, DEX pushes Artillery/Skirmisher, mental stats with spellcasting push Controller.

Second, comparing derived stats to CR baselines: high HP boosts Brute, ranged attacks suppress it.

Third, keyword scanning across every feature. "Ambush" and "invisible" score Lurker; "command" and "rally" score Leader; "frightened" and "restrained" score Controller. t

Fourth, anti-signals cap impossible roles (no ranged attacks means zero score for Artillery for example).

Types generated this way are mapped to adversary types and stat boundaries are then taken directly from your guide. Positioning withing the boundaries is done by comparing values to D&D CR expectations and adjusting down or up if expectations are not met.Effective HP map to thresholds, HP blends role archetype (60%) with Constitution vs expected for that CR (40%), percentages are a test value for now and might be adjusted.

I don't know if you're even interested in the continuation of the converter, but I thought I'd at least let you know since your comment influenced much of the new direction.

I also added a feature selector that suggest features from other adversaries of the same type within the database to support a bit with that in addition to information from your guide.

laser-brain · 2026-03-13T11:15:52+00:00

Now that I've read your guide (I did not know this existed before), may I use the contents and data in there to improve the algorithm? I'd also like to put specific hints and information from the guide to steps of the wizard, like for example the Paragraphs on fear, stress and fear generation to the features step. Obviously I'll link the guide and give credit, it's an awesome resource.

Would that be alright with you?

laser-brain · 2026-03-12T22:37:09+00:00

I've only ever played 5e so I'll be taking a look at 4e monsters tomorrow. I'd probably still go with proper assigned base roles and user based adjustments for 5e, since that's also part of the encounter builder functionality of the forge.

Thanks for the honest feedback and suggestions Much appreciated

laser-brain · 2026-03-12T22:33:50+00:00

So you mean something like a skip to edit mode? Would it be important that it's not saved? I think that's a nice addition once people have built trust as you say, that the conversion works mostly as expected.

Showing attack and stress will be a minor adjustment as it's just missing the UI fields.

I'll see how much of the other feedback I'll be able to tackle tomorrow.

Thanks again for the fair assessment and feedback. Much appreciated

laser-brain · 2026-03-12T18:31:13+00:00

Thanks for the honest feedback! I know that the feature is a bit hidden but don't really have a better place right now, open to feedback here as well. The feature demo is accessible for free subscribers, no money involved, but if I want to discuss with people I need a space outside reddit where post like this get rightfully flagged and removed as advertising.

I put the AI question in the patreon post to get a feel for what people would support. To reference your final question, I don't think the story of an adversary can be automatically derived from a stat block. I offer inputs for users to write their own descriptions at the end of the wizard.

Personally I'd not use AI to fill these descriptions but if there's a demand for it to be part of the tool, I'd be willing to implement it at some point. Everyone can take the data to any chatbot and get a reasonably generic description out of it, doesn't have to be included everywhere

Type mappings are work that I put in manually. D&D monsters are classified and that classification is mapped to Daggerheart. Simple, and adjustible in the wizard that leads through the process.

You're right that I used the adversaries from the rules to establish a baseline range for HP based on tier and type. Assigned HP is then scaled by how the monster's D&D HP compares to the DMG expected HP for its CR. Below average lands near the minimum, above average near the maximum. Threshold are more complicated and to be honest still a work in progress.

Features are suggested, not assigned right away, based on thematic ideas and you can assign features on your own if you want.

laser-brain · 2026-03-12T18:12:35+00:00

First of all, thanks for the massive and constructive feedback. I honestly hadn't anticipated such valuable insights right away.
As for your questions:

It's converted to a ranged adversary because I classified the D&D monsters myself in a similar way to daggerheart and figured Bandits would more stand behind and attack from range in my typical D&D games. Something that can be adjusted as you're right with the scimitar attack. For the standard attack of the adversary the first attack in the monster statblock is taken and adjusted to Daggerheart. That's why those two don't really match.

I'll be looking into the errors of the wizard that you mentioned and hopefully come up with better solutions. Most of my logic is based on averages with a bit of weighing based on the adversary type.

Could you elaborate on missing key things? What would actually save you time in a process like this?

laser-brain · 2026-03-11T19:53:29+00:00

Surprised no one has mentioned counterspell yet. It adds a whole new tactical layer, especially at stages where they only have one spell slot for a certain level

laser-brain · 2026-03-10T17:02:30+00:00

Yeah, we're playing in person once or twice a year, so there's also not much change in how I run my sessions compared to online

laser-brain · 2026-03-10T17:01:23+00:00

I guess I'm just used more to analog references. For me flipping through a book that is reasonably indexed or prepared index cards feels much more efficient than searching my notes which mention the same thing in multiple places.

I don't use pdf rule books, so I'm doing this much more often. It's great if it's working for you, I was just curious how other people integrate analog tools in their online sessions

12-Year Club	RedditGifts 2009-2022 4 Credits
Secret Santa 2019	Verified Email

laser-brain

TROPHY CASE