D&D 5E Challenge with a good group

[OB1]

I find that having a second wave come in from behind can be a good tactic now and then...

This simple piece of advice alone will provide a huge change in the way PCs approach fights.

Send one moderately tough second wave in right after a BBEG encounter and your players will forever think twice about going nova when they're backs aren't already up against the wall.

 

[jayoungr]

Check out some third-party monster manuals, such as the Tome of Beasts. I'm running for a pretty tactically-minded group, and I'm finding that the ToB monsters are closer to their power level than the regular MM ones.

 

[Gadget]

With the understanding that you know your players and their preferences best, every table has a slightly different social contract, and "internet advice" can only go so far, here are some thoughts.

1. Discourage bless+ GWM and SS

The real culprit here (if indeed one subscribes to the notion there is a culprit), is GWM/SS. Bless is a good spell. Those feats can, in some situations, make it super.

2. Default array/point buy vs. rolling

If your group is more of the optimizing/Min-max variety, the default array/point buy tends to be more 'balanced' and fair. But this is can be a 'feel' thing for your group as well.

3. No feats + multiclass

This can largely be a feel thing as well. The base game is supposedly balanced without taking feats + multiclass into consideration (or magic items), which may require more work on the DM's part to create challenging encounters, particularly as levels rise. IMHO, the feat design is not particularly well done, and they--along with multi-classing--feel kind of 'thrown in' at the end with a little bit of "These are optional, us at your own risk" type of feel. I've personally taken some of the feats and re-purposed them as abilities in Magic Items/weapons discovered in the game to some success. That said, many players feel very strongly that feats in particular given them the ability to customize their character and would be disgruntled at their omission.

4. Certain multiclass combos discouraged

As mentioned above, many like the 'build' option that multiclassing (and feats) offer them to get just the right character they want to play. In my experience, it usually turns into a min/max meta-game of optimization, which some might enjoy. But if the DM is not on board with that style can make encounter design more difficult. Many games try to enforce strong "in-story" reasons for multiclassing with varying degrees of success, but it depends on your group.

5. simply add CR to encounters

This is what many DM's do almost unconsciously, and it works to a certain point. It is understood that, as the levels rise, the more "inaccurate" the CR is anyway; due to the number of synergies and combinations and permutations available to the PCs

6. Limit the group to 4 PCs

I would be loath to turn friends away, but each group and DM has the limit to the amount of overhead they can handle I guess. This does seem rather extreme unless you are approaching 7+ players.





Lastly, this is not an indictment of the system or any style of gaming, at all. I just want more chances for players to feel the heat and do tactical retreats/high five one another after successes.

I want success to be likely, failure to be very possible with the dial or likelihood being moved by choice, incredibly good and bad die rolling excepted.

The plan would be to tell people up front combat is a "war game" and to treat it as such. In wargames poor reconnaissance and overconfidence can lead to custer's last stand. Don't be that guy![/QUOTE]

 

[Rhenny]

I agree with people who are advising you to avoid limitations.

I like changes on the DM's side of the screen.

My list is as follows:

More focus on story and character development

A true mixture of exploration, interaction and combat

Unpredictable variety

Terrain and environmental hazards, traps, etc. in and out of combat

Use max hp for some monsters/foes and trick out AC at times

Add a few easy feats or powers to unique foes

Realize that at times, it's ok for the PCs to mow through foes or even entire portions of an adventure - they like succeeding so celebrate with them

But, throw in a few curves and temper easy success with unpredictable challenge

 

[Sunseeker]

I see people getting their first foray into 5E and making lists of all the things they're going to discourage, ban, modify and so forth and I go: why not just run it as it comes out of the box?

Seriously if you've never run 5E, then the first place you should start is the way its written.

If problems with these items show up at your table, you can address them as you go, make it clear to the group this is your first 5E and you will be adjusting things if you feel they are getting out of hand, but frankly, 5E, PHB-only is pretty solid.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I see people getting their first foray into 5E and making lists of all the things they're going to discourage, ban, modify and so forth and I go: why not just run it as it comes out of the box?

Because that's the one way no one should /ever/ run it. It's just not designed to work like that!
;P

Seriously, though, no feats & MCing, for instance, /is/ how it comes out of the box, those are opt-in options. So that tiks 3, and make makes 1 a non-issue. And, while point-buy is a variant, array is part of the default generation method, so 2's half-in. 5's always an option, too - though one y'might save until you're out of apprentice tier.

I want success to be likely, failure to be very possible with the dial or likelihood being moved by choice, incredibly good and bad die rolling excepted.

2, 3, & 5.

JMHO

 

[Sunseeker]

Because that's the one way no one should /ever/ run it. It's just not designed to work like that!
;P

Seriously, though, no feats & MCing, for instance, /is/ how it comes out of the box, those are opt-in options. So that tiks 3, and make makes 1 a non-issue. And, while point-buy is a variant, array is part of the default generation method, so 2's half-in. 5's always an option, too - though one y'might save until you're out of apprentice tier.

2, 3, & 5.

JMHO

Are you just going to run around and throw your opinion at my posts everywhere I go now?

The OP is not going the minimalist route. He's clearly going for some "I've heard there's all sorts of problems with this and that online..." route and thinking he can jump the gun against problems he may not even experience.

PHB-only is pure simplicity. Even PHB-basics (array+core 4 races+class) is simplicity. What the OP is doing is not simplicity. It is complicating the waters with ham-fisted DM preference when he literally has no experience with how the game runs.

I've run PHB-only over multiple games and while I've gotten bored of 5E and gone back to 3X/Pathfinder until 5E gets a little more meat on its bones, I've never run into any of the theoretical problems people are complaining about online. Most of the issue come from people misreading or misapplying existing rules, which are simple enough to straighten out.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Are you just going to run around and throw your opinion at my posts everywhere I go now?

Oh, you're the same guy who freaked when I cut part of his post in that other thread? I'll be sure to quote everything in this one...

The OP is not going the minimalist route. He's clearly going for some "I've heard there's all sorts of problems with this and that online..." route and thinking he can jump the gun against problems he may not even experience.

Nod. But, the thing is, going for the 'minimalist' out-the-box game actually addresses some of his concerns. Two of them involve feats, for instance, but feats are opt-in-optional.

PHB-only is pure simplicity. Even PHB-basics (array+core 4 races+class) is simplicity. What the OP is doing is not simplicity. It is complicating the waters with ham-fisted DM preference when he literally has no experience with how the game runs.

Basic-pdf would probably remove even more of the potential problem's he's anticipating. (But, as much as people like calling 5e 'simple' or 'rules lite' it really isn't, the PHB is a thick volume, the system is complex, and the DM needs to know it well - and not be shy about overruling it - to make it run smoothly.)

I've run PHB-only over multiple games and while I've gotten bored of 5E and gone back to 3X/Pathfinder until 5E gets a little more meat on its bones, I've never run into any of the theoretical problems people are complaining about online. Most of the issue come from people misreading or misapplying existing rules, which are simple enough to straighten out.

Experience running earlier eds does help with running 5e, too. More so 1e, IMHO, or any of the classic versions, than 3e, but still. I shouldn't think it would be unreasonable for a DM with experience of other eds - and long, close acquaintance with his players & their foibles - heading off known issues with a new ed.

But, I agree that some of those issues would be headed off simply by not jumping into all the options at once, and starting with the basic or PH version of the game, first...

 

[CubicsRube]

Without changing core rules there is a lot you can do with encoubter design in 5e.

5e works really well with large numbers of enemies, so there's many ways you can use that. You can have reinforcements coming in the background. You can even get meta and have a littke counter so you know theyll arrive in 2 rounds, etc giving the party a chance to escape.

Dont be afraid to use groups that use other functions other than attacks such as shove and grapple and aid to give assistance - its a good way to make a fight tougher without necessarily more deadliness.

Plenty of cover provides +2 to ranged ac. This isnt negated by sharpshooter so it helps to balance that feat somewhat.

Of course running past big gwm damage dealers to the squisher casters at the back is also a good way to keep a party on their toes.

If you run your guys to think like players, use tactics, focus fire, then they can seriously create a challenge for your group. As long as they are happy for you to be ruthless

 

[CubicsRube]

I agree with people who are advising you to avoid limitations.

I like changes on the DM's side of the screen.

My list is as follows:

More focus on story and character development

A true mixture of exploration, interaction and combat

Unpredictable variety

Terrain and environmental hazards, traps, etc. in and out of combat

Use max hp for some monsters/foes and trick out AC at times

Add a few easy feats or powers to unique foes

Realize that at times, it's ok for the PCs to mow through foes or even entire portions of an adventure - they like succeeding so celebrate with them

But, throw in a few curves and temper easy success with unpredictable challenge

Seconded.

You can change so much on the dm side. You can have enemies with their own feats (hobgoblin elites with gwm? Why not?) You can have armies of hundreds. You can have encounters across impassable ravines. Ambushes, sieges, traps. None of these require modifying or banning anything on the player side.

And remember of the players continuously do something that is effective, it'll be a known tactic in your world and others will imitate.