D&D General Is WotC's 5E D&D easy? Trust me this isn't what you think... maybe

[el-remmen]

My in-person group are third level as well. 3rd level tabaxi circle of stars druid, 3rd level human vengeance paladin, 3rd level human swashbuckler rogue, and 3rd level halfling gloomstalker ranger. Their last battle (which I mentioned earlier in this thread I think) was against 2 bugbears, a bugbear druid, and 10 goblin archers [of which only 6 were part of the fight at a time] (and a bugbear sub-chief who never joined the fight). The battle happened at the entrance to a three story tower with no windows. It was daytime, but while the party was having a hard time seeing past the area right beyond the doors because it was dark inside the tower, the goblins in the tower could see the PCs pretty clearly since they were standing in the light. The bottleneck entrance (it was double doors, but holdable), the bugbears refusal to go out to fight unless they could reasonably assume they could step out strike and step back in, the number of enemies, and the lighting conditions made it a very tough fight for the PCs. They did drop two of the bugbears, three goblins, and the druid (though the druid was able to get back to his feet with a potion) - but still decided (once they realized there was still a fresh leader type who had not joined the fight yet) that this was too tough under current conditions and decided to flee. The paladin did go down three times and the druid went down once - so I understand their fear.

Next session, the goblins will send some parting arrows at them - but I think they will likely get away and regroup (though that means their opponents will also regroup, leaving the bugbear leader, the druid, seven goblins and the one bugbear who was dying but will likely be stabilized [unless something changes] to have to face all over again.

It was a tough fight, but while this is a homebrewed adventure, I ran the monsters' tactics and made use of the environment as I would with any adventure homebrewed or pre-published.

I realize that some people would prefer explicit rules that encourage challenging play as "permission" to run the game in that mode, but that is never going to happen b/c D&D is (and should be) capacious enough to allow for a range of styles and approaches and degrees of challenge at the same level(s) and you don't need rules to get player buy-in. And if you can't get buy-in for a style of D&D you have fun playing, then you should play a different game for which there are different expectations the group can agree on and enjoy or find people that do find buying in to a challenging mode more fun.

Edited to add that the druid's subclass is Circle of Stars.

 

[Stormonu]

Is was actually the 3rd fight of the day. And as a lot of people may miss, this was a published adventure (though not a WotC offical).

And yes the DM can change things but that was kind of my point, it shouldnt have to be if playing with the books recommended # of players While this thread is focused purely on WotC products which I find to be worse in the challenge department.

Well, I think that's one of the quirks of roleplaying because of its openness. It's not a board game with static components. Adventure authors can make a guess what will be a challenge, but they don't know your specific table of players. The reason we have DMs is because it in the end someone's gotta adjudicate things. CR will get you in the ballpark, but it will only ever get you so far. The more complicated you make encounter construction to account for every factor, the more accurate it might be, but the more difficult you make it for constructing your own encounters.

Personally, I think 5E did a botch job on their CR and encounter design, but it's already difficult enough as it is - make it any more complicated and designers would just throw up their hands at trying to make things in the first place.

 

[ezo]

My in-person group are third level as well. 3rd level tabaxi circle of stars druid, 3rd level human vengeance paladin, 3rd level human swashbuckler rogue, and 3rd level halfling gloomstalker ranger. Their last battle (which I mentioned earlier in this thread I think) was against 2 bugbears, a bugbear druid, and 10 goblin archers [of which only 6 were part of the fight at a time] (and a bugbear sub-chief who never joined the fight). The battle happened at the entrance to a three story tower with no windows. It was daytime, but while the party was having a hard time seeing past the area right beyond the doors because it was dark inside the tower, the goblins in the tower could see the PCs pretty clearly since they were standing in the light. The bottleneck entrance (it was double doors, but holdable), the bugbears refusal to go out to fight unless they could reasonably assume they could step out strike and step back in, the number of enemies, and the lighting conditions made it a very tough fight for the PCs. They did drop two of the bugbears, three goblins, and the druid (though the druid was able to get back to his feet with a potion) - but still decided (once they realized there was still a fresh leader type who had not joined the fight yet) that this was too tough under current conditions and decided to flee. The paladin did go down three times and the druid went down once - so I understand their fear.

Sounds like a great fight! Regardless of the scenario though, this registers as a "hard" encounter, right, over half-way to "deadly"--even without the subchief. Counting the scenario/ set-up, I'd probably label this deadly, personally. The fact the players realized they needed to withdraw is a wonderful thing rarely seen! Kuddos.

 

[Oofta]

Is was actually the 3rd fight of the day. And as a lot of people may miss, this was a published adventure (though not a WotC offical).

And yes the DM can change things but that was kind of my point, it shouldnt have to be if playing with the books recommended # of players While this thread is focused purely on WotC products which I find to be worse in the challenge department.

There is no way a module writer can set up encounters that will work for every group.

 

[Micah Sweet]

There is no way a module writer can set up encounters that will work for every group.

Do they have to only work for new players though? I swear it seems like WotC really doesn't care about anyone else sometimes.

 

[ezo]

Do they have to only work for new players though? I swear it seems like WotC really doesn't care about anyone else sometimes.

New players buy more IME. If they get really hooked, they buy so many books that as players they don't really need.

 

[Oofta]

Do they have to only work for new players though? I swear it seems like WotC really doesn't care about anyone else sometimes.

They target new and casual PCs.

 

[Stormonu]

If the new WotC adventure books weren't such massive compendiums, they could fit in a section of advice for increasing/decreasing danger in the various areas. I've seen it done with smaller, shorter adventures by 3rd party makers (the entire Epic Encounters line, for example).

Y'know, it would be nice if they put a PDF or somesuch on Beyond that had a quick list of upgrading encounters in the various adventures on Beyond (part of the package for buying the electronic version?) The game has had power creep since it's release and I'm sure the difficulty of some encounters has moved about as the game has evolved.

 

[Hussar]

Presumably those deaths were through Rules as Written 5e combat rather than fiat house rule and homebrew any gm could simply declare since rocks fall/lightning strikes doesn't offer much room for discussion.

I'm Glad to help you "with actual hard numbers", but understanding is not something that can be forced. Ask for stats or analyzed crunched stats and you shall receive. Someone else has done the work and presented it in a neatly packaged 2 hour video.

Spoiler: here you go

Use the chapters in the video if you want to skip the step by step data presentation and jump straight to sections like findings or statistical analysis.

Oh goody. Pure theory crafting with zero actual play experience.

This is what I’m talking about. This sort of thing is nice and all but it is still just theory crafting. It’s meaningless without actual evidence to back it up. He can waffle on endlessly about the math of monsters from three modules but it’s still largely lacking in actual evidence.

It seems that folks who keep insisting that 5e is so easy are just parroting some YouTubers comments without doing any of the real testing of these theories.

 

[Hussar]

I like attrition management, but I still think six, let alone eight fights between long rests is just too much pacing wise. You can have attrition with three or four harder fights. And for me that is still with using gritty rests. Four fights in one day would be highly unusual pacing for me.

Whereas I’ve rarely had so few encounters in an adventuring day. Phandelver is a perfect example. Cragmaw hideout has six or eight encounters before you can long rest. Redbrand Hideout, same. Thindertree could have but the party withdrew. Still had four.

This Terrible Tavern to Swallow has eight before they can long rest.

Keeping the pressure on is key to making things dangerous.