D&D 5E My New Players Have Quit 5th Edition

[Obryn]

Maybe they believe that fantasy vietnam is the best way to learn D&D. Maybe you just have a preference for a style of game and that results in a bias in your assumptions about D&D players in general.

There are lots of possible reasons the game keeps refusing to go your way in the design. They could be wrong in their assessment of the playerbase and newbie needs. They could be spot on and your out of touch.

My personal gut bias is that players are adults and character death is not the end of the world.

I don't even know what you mean about my "assumptions about D&D players in general" line; could you fill me in?

As for why, I think it's plainly tradition mixed with the simple way D&D's mechanics work. If you start out with x hit points, then next level you have 2x, you're less fragile by definition. I'm saying I don't think "gritty" and "beginner" should be tied together like this through the mechanics.

That's pretty much what GMs are for. I don't think that the game rules should coddle players, character death is part of the learning curve. It's not like you can't NOT just pretend it didn't happen and start over with the same characters.

I don't love the wording, "coddling players" because it feeds into and assumes the weird machismo about 1st-level character death that's been running up and down this thread.

 

[Charles Wright]

I don't love the wording, "coddling players" because it feeds into and assumes the weird machismo about 1st-level character death that's been running up and down this thread.

I am far from macho when it comes to gaming, but I don't know what else to call "making sure they don't die no matter what they do (within reason)".

How about "overly cater to"?

 

[Obryn]

I am far from macho when it comes to gaming, but I don't know what else to call "making sure they don't die no matter what they do (within reason)".

How about "overly cater to"?

Well, I'm not even talking about making sure they don't die. I'm more saying that one good hit from a surprise bugbear attack shouldn't do you in right away, you know? Character death is fine; at low levels, I think there should just be a bit more coaching and warning. A broader intermediate space between "Fine" and "Dead." I don't know if the solution is more hit points, certain monsters that deal less damage, different rules for PC death at 1st level, or what.

I simply think that "gritty" and "newbie" both have certain playstyle needs, which happen to be at odds.

 

[Charles Wright]

Well, I'm not even talking about making sure they don't die. I'm more saying that one good hit from a surprise bugbear attack shouldn't do you in right away, you know? Character death is fine; at low levels, I think there should just be a bit more coaching and warning. A broader intermediate space between "Fine" and "Dead." I don't know if the solution is more hit points, certain monsters that deal less damage, different rules for PC death at 1st level, or what.

I simply think that "gritty" and "newbie" both have certain playstyle needs, which happen to be at odds.

Yes, I would have personally fudged the damage to leave the PC with 1 hit point.

 

[GX.Sigma]

Well, I'm not even talking about making sure they don't die. I'm more saying that one good hit from a surprise bugbear attack shouldn't do you in right away, you know? Character death is fine; at low levels, I think there should just be a bit more coaching and warning. A broader intermediate space between "Fine" and "Dead." I don't know if the solution is more hit points, certain monsters that deal less damage, different rules for PC death at 1st level, or what.

I simply think that "gritty" and "newbie" both have certain playstyle needs, which happen to be at odds.

In theory, the solution is obvious: If you're GMing for newbies, and you don't want them to lose, don't give them encounters that are too hard. The XP budget thing lets you do that. You want it to be easy, make the encounters easy. (In other words, if a bugbear can kill a character in one hit, and you don't want them to die, don't throw bugbears at them.)

As-is, I think something is wrong with the Bugbear stats. The game is saying "this monster, which can deal 18 damage before you even know it's there, probably won't kill any 1st-level characters by itself," which is just not true.

Edit: Here's a potential houserule: You can't get knocked from conscious to dead in one hit. No matter how much damage it is, you have to go through "dying" first.

 

[Charles Wright]

Won't kill any 1st-level characters or can be overcome by 4 1st-level characters?

 

[GX.Sigma]

Won't kill any 1st-level characters or can be overcome by 4 1st-level characters?

The definition of challenge rating in the book actually says "An appropriately equipped and well-rested party of four adventurers should be able to defeat a creature that has a challenge rating equal to their level without suffering any casualties."

 

[Charles Wright]

The definition of challenge rating in the book actually says "An appropriately equipped and well-rested adventurers should be able to defeat a creature that has a challenge rating equal to their level without suffering any casualties."

Yeah, definitely too powerful for a CR1 then.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

Fighting a lone Bugbear is unlikely to result in a death. It's unlikely but it can happen. It may drop a character but it's unlikely to kill them.

 

[GX.Sigma]

Fighting a lone Bugbear is unlikely to result in a death. It's unlikely but it can happen. It may drop a character but it's unlikely to kill them.

It's unlikely in an "open the door, there's the monster" situation. But the bugbear is designed for surprise attacks. If this thing sneaks up on the Wizard at the back of the party, that mage is toast.

Edit: math in a later post