5e combat system too simple / boring?

[iserith]

That's the sort of thing I was expecting, given what I recall hearing from you over time, yes. I'm a little surprised at the pull-no-punches/never-fudge stuff, but I'll take your word for it.

It's just part of my agenda - if I'm going to engage the system to determine an outcome, I'm not then going to reverse the decision the dice have made. Seems pointless to do otherwise.

As for pulling no punches, I like to run and play in challenging games. The monsters are going to come hard at you and then go after your family.

 

[robus]

Ooch. Not a great choice. Level 1 is really, strangely, not for beginners - it's where the game is tough/gritty/deadly/frustrating or however you want to couch it. Level 3 is a better place to start all around. A little overwhelming to jump into a full caster at 3rd, maybe, but there are a few simpler (sub-)class choices.

I'm surprised you say this, Tony? Level 1 is definitely for beginners and as such the encounters should pedal softly. There's no real need to throw them in the deep end. The first set of encounters in LMoP are interesting but I don't think they're particularly hard. The PC deaths from that chapter I'd wager are pretty minimal? And they only need 300 XP to get to level 2.

But sure, if the DM is not prepared to ease players in at level 1 then yeah it's instant death. But why would a DM do that?

 

[Tony Vargas]

I'm surprised you say this, Tony? Level 1 is definitely for beginners and as such the encounters should pedal softly.

The implementation of the lowest levels is one of the areas 5e has really fallen short of my hopes for the edition. Yes, it's intuitive that 1st level should be for beginners. But, in a few ways it's mechanically inappropriate for new players - especially if the whole group is new, vs an experienced DM easing them into it. For instance, 5e death & dying rules really provide quite a comfortable safety-net for PCs - but not at 1st level, when instant death is very much on the table. It's odd, but it's easy to fix, most simply, by not starting at 1st level. And, yes, you can very carefully soft-pedal encounters, too.

The one plus side I see to 5e's version of low-level play is that it makes the game seem much harder and deadlier than it actually is. Set player expectations that way with their first experiences, and you don't have to worry so much about creating a sense of jeopardy later, which lets 5e get away with the kind of 'too easy encounters'/'too weak monsters' you hear people complain about, but which it needs to keep combats fast.

 

[Huntsman57]

It is the expectation set by the game as to what a party of characters can handle. See DMG, page 84. And it's not every day, but every adventuring day, that is, days where the PCs are actually adventuring. Six to eight medium to hard encounters, more if easier, fewer if harder. Do this and the risk of death will loom.



It sounds like you don't attack unconscious PCs.

Most enemies would make their priority to deal with the very much alive threats first unless it's a special situation. If the DM regularly had its NPCs prioritize unconscious adversaries over the ones swinging swords at them, the players wouldn't know why to be mad first, because it made no tactical sense or because they were now dead because it made no tactical sense. Actually that would be an "insult to injury" scenario I believe...

 

[iserith]

Most enemies would make their priority to deal with the very much alive threats first unless it's a special situation. If the DM regularly had its NPCs prioritize unconscious adversaries over the ones swinging swords at them, the players wouldn't know why to be mad first, because it made no tactical sense or because they were now dead because it made no tactical sense. Actually that would be an "insult to injury" scenario I believe...

Reasons abound for unconscious PCs to be the target of attacks. They could be included in an AOE. An enemy might try to use attacking the PC as leverage to get the other still-standing PCs to surrender. A monstrosity or undead might just want to chow down. An NPC might be so full of rage or evil that mutilating the body of a fallen foe is a priority over the other PCs. And so on.

I just don't think it's a fair criticism to say that D&D 5e's mechanics make it less deadly than other systems if one is willing to take a perfectly viable means of threatening the PCs off the table. I think this is especially so when there are rules specifically for taking damage at 0 hit points (counts as failed death save).

 

[Huntsman57]

Reasons abound for unconscious PCs to be the target of attacks. They could be included in an AOE. An enemy might try to use attacking the PC as leverage to get the other still-standing PCs to surrender. A monstrosity or undead might just want to chow down. An NPC might be so full of rage or evil that mutilating the body of a fallen foe is a priority over the other PCs. And so on.

I just don't think it's a fair criticism to say that D&D 5e's mechanics make it less deadly than other systems if one is willing to take a perfectly viable means of threatening the PCs off the table. I think this is especially so when there are rules specifically for taking damage at 0 hit points (counts as failed death save).

Yes, aside from the stray AOE, or maybe something lacking a sense of self preservation like a demon on the prime without fear of permadeath and more interested in causing harm than surviving...or possibly something with an extreme degree of aggression relative to a very low intelligence. Anything with a 5+ intelligence that can feel pain and die and is sane is simply not going to attack a downed creature as a priority. The small remainder? Maybe they would, and maybe they wouldn't.

A failed save...it should be a coup de grace. A failed save isn't particularly meaningful since you're statistically more likely to make than fail a save, the downed PC, odds are, will made up the difference next round and succeed. If you were low on hitpoints in prior editions and were hit too hard, you would go under -9 and you would be outrights dead instantly, or at a low negative in hitpoints and the act of saving your life became an urgent matter for your team. There are very few spots where you can blink and be dead in 5E. I don't have my DMG handy, but are there even any save or die effects in 5E? Every rule in 5E is designed to be more carebear than prior editions.

I just don't understand how anyone who played 2E or 3.5 could argue there is any comparison in lethality between the systems. In the older editions character deaths inevitably happened throughout a campaign from time to time. It just doesn't seem to happen in 5E...again, unless the party is at the point of being TPKd. Having just one character make a wrong move and suddenly end up pushing up daisies before they can be aided by a teammate or more likely just stabilize on his own (that last part is utterly ridiculous) is simply something that doesn't happen in 5E.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I just don't think it's a fair criticism to say that D&D 5e's mechanics make it less deadly than other systems if one is willing to take a perfectly viable means of threatening the PCs off the table.

It's not like you couldn't attack downed PCs in prior eds, either. In those editions, there was a -hp death threashold, and those negative hps added up, in 5e you get a failed death save, instead. So, at least two hits while you're down to finish you, if you haven't already failed a death save, 3 if you're constantly making your saves. In 1e, if the DM didn't have you die outright at 0, you died at -10, and it's not like it's hard to do 10 hps in one hit. 2e, IIRC, and 3e automatically used the -10 hp threshold, too. So they're all deadlier than 5e when you're down and the enemy is beating on you...

OTOH, 5e's instant death rule is negative your hps, which, if you're 1st, just might be less than 10. So you can be insta-ganked more easily in 5e, at 1st level (maybe even 2nd if your CON sucks). FREX, a 1st level magic-user would have had 4 hps in 3e-and-earlier, and could go to -10 before dying (for a total of 14 hps between him and instant death), while in 5e a 6hp 1st-level wizard is only 12 hps away from instant death even when fully-healed. OK, 2hps isn't a /big/ difference, but still, you can so totally die in one hit. The same applies as long as you have fewer than 10 hps, so apart from the tougher melee types, everyone dies easier in 5e than any prior ed, at first level.
That's gotta count for something in terms of being 'deadly.'

 

[Huntsman57]

everyone dies easier in 5e than any prior ed, at first level.
That's gotta count for something in terms of being 'deadly.'

I'm actually bewildered as to why 5E even bothered with the instant death rule. As soon as you gain a few levels the prospect of taking enough damage to actually 1 shot you becomes rather absurdly bad unless you're facing something that you're way too low level to fight. Bravo to 5E for at least putting one instant life or death decision into the hands of the player...even if it is an obvious one. Ancient dragon? Maybe I shouldn't fight it...

 

[Tony Vargas]

I'm actually bewildered as to why 5E even bothered with the instant death rule. As soon as you gain a few levels the prospect of taking enough damage to actually 1 shot you becomes rather absurdly bad

Yeah. "Let's have a really big, soft safety net - except for new 'apprentice' characters, who can just die like flies..." ???

The only thing I can think of is that it sets new player expectations to "wow this game is deadly," when it's really not, outside of that low-level corner case. But, first impressions are powerful, so from then on the game is relieved of the need to create any sense of challenge or jeopardy. Maybe? Or too much double-think? :shrug:

 

[devincutler]

I am playing a battlerager with 3 levels of fighter (champion) for the critical hits.

While at first it might seem I have no choices in combat but rolling a D20, this is entirely wrong. Let's see what this non spellcasting class has as combat choices (including GWM feat):

1. Swing great axe

2. Rage (bonus action)

3. Reckless attack (a very important high risk high reward option available every single round)

4. Great Weapon Master "power attack" (-5 to attack, +10 to damage) available every single round

5. Extra Dash action (bonus action while raging)

6. Spiked armour bonus attack (bonus action while raging)

7. Grapple (causing spiked armour damage while raging)

8. Second wind (bonus action, 1 per short rest)

9. Action surge (1 per short rest)

10. Bonus greataxe attack on a critical or bringing opponent to zero hp (bonus action)

As you can see, I have 10 different options to consider, with 5 of them competing for my bonus action slot. This doesn't consider other options like using an item, dodging, or shoving.

Every class has a nice array of things they can do in combat aside from simply rolling a D20 to make an attack. The only exception is the Fighter (champion) path, and that was specifically made simple to allow newbies to be able to step right up and play a character of any level.