D&D 5E Guidelines for fewer/tougher encounters?

[Quartz]

The danger here is that you end up in an unwinnable situation, where no amount of resting will help. If you can only get a long rest in a sanctuary, and it's a month of travel between sanctuaries, then you might end up two weeks out with someone at very few HP and no way to restore them at all. Once you're out of Hit Dice, the only healing that you can get out of a short rest comes from a Cleric of Life, and not all parties have one of those.

That can make for a good adventure once in a while, and if things get problematic, the DM can slip in a hidden glade or similar - or something like the village of Ringland in Greyhawk.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

The danger here is that you end up in an unwinnable situation, where no amount of resting will help. If you can only get a long rest in a sanctuary, and it's a month of travel between sanctuaries, then you might end up two weeks out with someone at very few HP and no way to restore them at all. Once you're out of Hit Dice, the only healing that you can get out of a short rest comes from a Cleric of Life, and not all parties have one of those.

For whatever it's worth, this isn't my experience. There's often a bardlock or palalock or something around who can heal with warlock slots; there's the Healer feat; there's Inspiring Leader quasi-healing per short rest; there's also Moon Druid quasi-healing per short rest; there's Second Wind for fighters. I don't think I've ever played with a 5E party that didn't have at least one of those.

Even if it were true in a given party (e.g. pure wizard party), I don't think that would make it a bad game. Having to cut and run and flee for sanctuary is exactly the kind of experience you're shooting for when you institute those rules.

 

[Mouseferatu]

I appreciate the suggestions so far. But I'm trying not to change other basic structures of the game. I'd like to keep the rest/healing rules as they are, and I'd like not to rely on lingering injuries. Thank you, though.

So yeah, I really am just looking at ways to judge/balance much tougher single encounters, and still have some idea of how hard/deadly they're likely to be going into it.

 

[Mouseferatu]

Or, to put it another way, I'm not looking to make attrition workable. I'm looking for a way to make fights dangerous and fun without the use of attrition.

 

[empireofchaos]

I appreciate the suggestions so far. But I'm trying not to change other basic structures of the game. I'd like to keep the rest/healing rules as they are, and I'd like not to rely on lingering injuries. Thank you, though.

So yeah, I really am just looking at ways to judge/balance much tougher single encounters, and still have some idea of how hard/deadly they're likely to be going into it.

Well, you can always jack up the CR of the monsters in a planned encounter by 3 points or so. Alternatively, in the age of bounded accuracy, lots of little critters pose quite a danger. I threw 20 kobolds armed with slings and having partial cover against 4 3rd level characters, and they nearly brought them all down. In any event, the party would risk no further combats that day, and were nearly out of spells from that one encounter. (Well, OK, two were winged, and one was a 3rd level caster, but he got away early on in the fight).

 

[mellored]

the easiest way is to change short/long rests

short rests = 1 day (2 normal battles a day)
long rest = 1 week or other downtime (3 days of combat per rest)

 

[Huntsman57]

I also don't typically have several encounters each day. It's entirely unrealistic, and the first few encounters really feel meaningless. Occasionally the party could experience this day of days where the is just hitting the fan and as a one off that could be a fun change of pace, but normally the best way to make a combat encounter feel meaningful, IMO, is to make every encounter feel like it's possible someone could get dropped. Even as a player, any time I've faced a battle that was zero risk and merely threatened to eat up some resources...it just made me sigh in exasperation inside and wonder when the game session would be over.

Allow short rests only once per day and increase the challenge rating. You should also never be using encounters that are less than a hard encounter. If your players get a thrill from overcoming an encounter and feeling that it was their own quick thinking and skill that made the difference between life and death, then simply throw out these moderate encounters. If you're not quite sure how far to push, then start out slow. Get a bit harder and harder till you find that sweet spot. If your players are unaccustomed to these challenges you should let them know in advance the direction you're taking the game. 5E can inspire something of an "asleep at the switch" way of playing. They don't understand that if you forgot to search that door, or you missed that poison needle, you could be killed instantly. The word "mistake" is code for somebody probably just died. That's not normally a thing in 5E, so let them know that survival is gonna start being a roll of the die unless they start putting their thought into how to weight the die in their favor by carefully consider their tactics, and how to work together as a team. Don't shy away from occasionally giving them an encounter that is too much for them either. Knowing when to exercise the better part of valor is an important part of survival as well.

Before making changes to your game, you definitely want to talk to your players though. Some players just want to be along for the ride and goof around with friends. This whole concept of working together competitively against opposing forces and deriving satisfaction from surviving by the skin of their teeth after a hard fought victory is just confusing for them. They just might not get their jollies that way and they'll just wonder why you're such a mean DM.

 

[werecorpse]

I appreciate the suggestions so far. But I'm trying not to change other basic structures of the game. I'd like to keep the rest/healing rules as they are, and I'd like not to rely on lingering injuries. Thank you, though.

So yeah, I really am just looking at ways to judge/balance much tougher single encounters, and still have some idea of how hard/deadly they're likely to be going into it.

It took me a while to understand what your question was - should have read the original post more clearly.

I also prefer an adventuring day that has only a few meaningful encounters rather than 6-8 of which perhaps 4-5 sometimes feel like they are just there to impose attrition on the PCs. Sadly I am not a delver into game mathematics so probably can't help. Sorry.

I am going to try an adventure day with 2-3 deadly encounters but with maximised hit points with a short rest available after either encounter 1 or 2.

I will be watching this thread with interest to see if someone comes up with the 1-3 encounter day math.

 

[Radaceus]

Or, to put it another way, I'm not looking to make attrition workable. I'm looking for a way to make fights dangerous and fun without the use of attrition.

Firstly, I sympathize, DMing 5E by the RAW for over a year now, no tweaks, and it was very difficult early on. Most of my players are 20+ year veterans. I, too, found that single mob encounters had to be ramped up (CR) to be challenging, and that adding more opponents into the single encounter just bogged the flow of the game, became tedious. I very much dislike the 6-7 combat encounters per rest.

tips:

• build for party make-up, (at random, not always, keep them on their toes)
  • is there a rogue, if so, add traps to the encounter
  • Does the party have Detect Magic, if so add Guards, Wards, Alarms, Anti-magic, etc to the encounter
  • Smart monsters go for the weakest/deadliest party members
  • do not bum rush the party and give them the upper hand (unless your monsters are dumb, of course)
• surprise is paramount, utilize it
  • Heavily armored/encumbered party move slow, make a lot of noise, raising monster awareness
  • Difficult Terrain, it's a thing
  • Encounter field_of_battle set up to the opponents advantage
    • Corridor bottleneck with the exit held by heavies
    • ranged attack from unaccessible ledge, well fortified areas
  • Invisibility, it's a thing
  • Stealthy/hiding opponents waiting for AoO's and backstabs
• Enemies can cast spells and use items too
  • that magic item or potion on the random generation/set loot list, the monster owns it and WILL use it
  • Enemy healers understand it is wise to heal their comrades, and will do everything to keep them alive, in order to keep themselves alive
• area has compartmentalization, separating party members
  • Portcullis/falling stone blocks
  • break away floor
  • magical barrier/wall of force
  • covered pits with drop doors
• Enemies will not always fight to the death,
  • encounter meant to erode resources
    • use tactical retreats, chase rules
    • lead the party through pinch points, traps
    • stall tactics, defense positioning
  • possible reinforcements, push back
• The ones that get away or escape from the fight
  • dogging the party
  • warning the rest of the dungeon/enemy village
  • become long term campaign antagonists, creating problems with party image/rumors/bad reputaion

 

[Mouseferatu]

I've been using "deadly" encounters almost exclusively, and it's not remotely enough. I saw someone above suggesting 3x or 4x deadly, and I might try that. I'm just nervous about one-shotting some PCs if I do that.

Blargh.