Do random monster encounters really come as often as I designed them?

A designed chance per step and what players report ("it feels constant") can drift far apart. This entry shows how to measure the steps between encounters and compare them with what the design promises, ignoring steps where encounters cannot happen.

Why this works

A chance per step produces a known spread of gaps, so what the player feels, again already, can be held against the promise. Only steps where it could happen count, or the gaps look longer than designed, and the short gaps annoy more than the average.

When not to use it

Wrong for encounters set by the story or placed by hand: no chance stands behind them. Also with few steps logged. If the feel is the goal, guarantee a number of safe steps after each fight instead.

In the full entry

• What to build, step by step
• Starting values and the reason for each
• 3 common mistakes and the fix
• 31 lines of example code with 3 checks that pass
• How your AI shows you that it works

Say this to your AI

Use the Spielerando entry "Do random monster encounters really come as often as I designed them?" (read_entry rpg-encounter-gap-vs-design) in my game. Build it step by step, and show me how you checked that it works.

Or skip this and connect the MCP: your AI then finds all of this by itself.Connect the MCP