D&D 5E Test of High Level 5E: Design 4 or 5 lvl 13 PCs for 6 to 8 encounter adventuring day

[Azurewraith]

You didn't take Expertise in Perception? That is an essential scout skill. It doesn't help much if you're getting ambushed or destroyed by dangerous traps. You're a Halfling which means no Darkvision, thus your stealth will be nearly useless since you'll likely have to employ a light source to Stealth which negates the advantages of Stealthing. Even with Darkvision, when Stealthing absent light we'll have a reduction in Passive Perception of 5 due to shadowy light. Without darkvision, our scout will be a sitting duck. No Acrobatic Expertise to resist grapple is less of a problem because you'll be ranged. No expertise in Thieves' Tools for disarming traps could be a problem, then again traps don't come up a ton. Investigation is not bad depending on how Flamestrike runs that skill and if he allows Passive Checks.

For an assassin, you're definitely hamstringing yourself by choosing Halfling with no darkvision and no Expertise in Perception. The lack of Darkvision in 5E for a PC that relies on Stealth is a huge disadvantage. Given you have a decent Charisma, you may almost want to optimize by taking some levels of warlock to obtain Devilsight. This will make you a far more effective Assassin.

Just an FYI that if Flamestrike's encounter design is as ruthless as he has made it sound, you may get hammered quickly lacking the advantage of seeing the enemy first.

Ah the perception and tools is my bad lingering house rules in my head we where using investigation for trap finding and sleight of hand for disarming old habbits and what not. As for the 2levels of lock that could be a plan I was looking after the kids while knocking this up. Didn't think through all the options just assumed some kind soul would cast darkvision on me. Don't dnd with parental responsibility folks it don't mix. I'm assuming its cool to flip investigation for perception and hands for tools if that's how where running it seen that wep not started. I wasn't concerned about the grappling as they would need to get close by that point the caltrops and ball bearings gone out and I'v found a hiding spot somewhere.

Frigging house rules getting stuck in my mind grrr. Have to see what [MENTION=24449]FLA[/MENTION]nestrike says its about 6am for him though(if I remember timezone right)

 

[iserith]

That's why these conversations tend to go as they go. Some of us are playing very differently.

The issue I see it is this though: If a playstyle is not supported by the game system being used, is that the "fault" of the game system or how the game is being played?

I think the perhaps forgivable impetus is to point the finger at the game system, but I'm of a mind to examine my playstyle first. I know it's popular to think of playstyles as some sort of unassailable, immutable preference. I just don't think that works well in any practical sense and it's worth challenging our assumptions from time to time in my view, especially in longstanding groups.

There's always the option of modifying the game system, of course, to suit one's particular kinks.

 

[Celtavian]

Ah the perception and tools is my bad lingering house rules in my head we where using investigation for trap finding and sleight of hand for disarming old habbits and what not. As for the 2levels of lock that could be a plan I was looking after the kids while knocking this up. Didn't think through all the options just assumed some kind soul would cast darkvision on me. Don't dnd with parental responsibility folks it don't mix. I'm assuming its cool to flip investigation for perception and hands for tools if that's how where running it seen that wep not started. I wasn't concerned about the grappling as they would need to get close by that point the caltrops and ball bearings gone out and I'v found a hiding spot somewhere.

Frigging house rules getting stuck in my mind grrr. Have to see what [MENTION=24449]FLA[/MENTION]nestrike says its about 6am for him though(if I remember timezone right)

I see. We had this game debate. I think the Sage clarified that Perception for finding traps and Investigation for finding traces of the trap working. We were doing it sort of like you where the skills were almost interchangeable. We were thinking Investigation was like Search in 3E. We'll see how Flamestrike sees it. Now I understand better your thought process, which was similar to my group.

 

[BoldItalic]

As it happens, Edward has proficiency in Thieves' Tools (from his Urchin background) so he can use the Help action to give Thomas advantage with tricky locks and traps, if the situation arises. He also has a spare set of tools, but keep your voice down, we don't want everyone to know, do we?

 

[Azurewraith]

As it happens, Edward has proficiency in Thieves' Tools (from his Urchin background) so he can use the Help action to give Thomas advantage with tricky locks and traps, if the situation arises. He also has a spare set of tools, but keep your voice down, we don't want everyone to know, do we?

Tricksy mage is Tricksy

 

[Azurewraith]

I see. We had this game debate. I think the Sage clarified that Perception for finding traps and Investigation for finding traces of the trap working. We were doing it sort of like you where the skills were almost interchangeable. We were thinking Investigation was like Search in 3E. We'll see how Flamestrike sees it. Now I understand better your thought process, which was similar to my group.

This is why I hate new. You play with the same group for 10years(nearly half my life oh my) you get used to it all and think its RaW pffft I hate change

 

[Celtavian]

The issue I see it is this though: If a playstyle is not supported by the game system being used, is that the "fault" of the game system or how the game is being played?

I think the perhaps forgivable impetus is to point the finger at the game system, but I'm of a mind to examine my playstyle first. I know it's popular to think of playstyles as some sort of unassailable, immutable preference. I just don't think that works well in any practical sense and it's worth challenging our assumptions from time to time in my view, especially in longstanding groups.

There's always the option of modifying the game system, of course, to suit one's particular kinks.

D&D has always been easily modifiable to suit a lot of different styles. That's why it is the big daddy of the fantasy gaming genre. No game system is perfectly compatible with everyone's tastes. It's always about finding a system that fits a high percentage of what you want to do and playability is very important as well.

I don't see why you worry about questions about the game system. It's not perfect. Why assume it is? There are flaws in the system. Some of us are pointing out those flaws and modifying accordingly. There has never bee and will never be a flawless D&D system. There will always be choices that are overpowered, underpowered, or middle of the road. Players will vet them accordingly. Criticizing a game system in no way means you hate the system. You're just pointing out problems that occur if the game is played a certain way. Min-maxers that focus on mechanics happen to find these problems far more often than groups that don't look for ways to maximize their PC effectiveness in the game.

I looked at some of the parties you run. My group wouldn't be caught dead playing such a suboptimal mix of classes with suboptimal power choices. This is how you choose to play. This makes it easier for you design challenges for those types of groups because they are not seeking to maximize their individual and group effectiveness. This doesn't mean that the way you play is somehow appropriate to the game system. Just like the way my groups plays doesn't make them appropriate to the game system. Just means you find less of the ugly warts on the game system and thus don't need to modify as much because you don't have a group that is looking to maximize every combination.

Then again this may just be semantics. What I consider easy and what you consider easy may be very different as well. Perception colors opinion. I ran the Droki encounter I showed you against the party. I dropped one party member. Almost killed three more and dropped a fourth to half hit points. Effectively neutralized the archer, though I didn't damage him much. It still didn't quite feel deadly enough for my tastes. This was one encounter with the group novaing with nearly full resources. I'm not sure how others would feel about that encounter. Is the result equal to the Deadly threshold or only hard? I don't know. Seemed too soft to me. How many people have to be near death to be a Deadly Encounter? I met the threshold of a few characters near death or falling. Is that deadly or only hard? That might be another debate.

 

[iserith]

D&D has always been easily modifiable to suit a lot of different styles. That's why it is the big daddy of the fantasy gaming genre. No game system is perfectly compatible with everyone's tastes. It's always about finding a system that fits a high percentage of what you want to do and playability is very important as well.

I don't see why you worry about questions about the game system. It's not perfect. Why assume it is? There are flaws in the system. Some of us are pointing out those flaws and modifying accordingly. There has never bee and will never be a flawless D&D system. There will always be choices that are overpowered, underpowered, or middle of the road. Players will vet them accordingly. Criticizing a game system in no way means you hate the system. You're just pointing out problems that occur if the game is played a certain way. Min-maxers that focus on mechanics happen to find these problems far more often than groups that don't look for ways to maximize their PC effectiveness in the game.

I looked at some of the parties you run. My group wouldn't be caught dead playing such a suboptimal mix of classes with suboptimal power choices. This is how you choose to play. This makes it easier for you design challenges for those types of groups because they are not seeking to maximize their individual and group effectiveness. This doesn't mean that the way you play is somehow appropriate to the game system. Just like the way my groups plays doesn't make them appropriate to the game system. Just means you find less of the ugly warts on the game system and thus don't need to modify because you don't have a group that is looking to maximize every combination.

Then again this may just be semantics. What I consider easy and what you consider easy may be very different as well. Perception colors opinion. I ran the Droki encounter I showed you against the party. I dropped one party member. Almost killed three more and dropped a fourth to half hit points. Effectively neutralized the archer, though I didn't damage him much. It still didn't quite feel deadly enough for my tastes. This was one encounter with the group novaing with nearly full resources. I'm not sure how others would feel about that encounter. Is the equal to the Deadly threshold or only hard? I don't know. Seemed too soft to me.

I have no issue with people criticizing the game, but some of the underpinnings of thoe criticisms are based simply on how the group plays the game, as if how the game is played is unchangeable for them because there's no other way to have fun. To me it's like playing Life for a long time, then busting out Monopoly and complaining there are no blue and pink pegs to stick in the race car to represent your growing family. Maybe playing the game with different assumptions than you're used to is a good solution worth trying. I think that's especially true of a group that's been at it a while. Mixing it up could be a breath of fresh air that solves more issues than the 6-8 encounter adventuring day.

 

[Celtavian]

This is why I hate new. You play with the same group for 10years(nearly half my life oh my) you get used to it all and think its RaW pffft I hate change

Haha. I know that feeling.

 

[BoldItalic]

I hope the Cleric has a light spell. Because neither Bedrock nor Edward has darkvision and not a torch between them. Bedrock could stick a candle on his helmet, maybe, and Edward can use his Third Eye 1/short rest. Otherwise, if it's dark inside the volcano, we're going to be rather embarrassed.

Bedrock: Thomas, lad, would you mind going out and "buying" some hooded lanterns from somewhere? Charge it to party funds, of course. I would go myself, but I need to go and talk to the king's wizard chap again.