D&D 5E (2014) Test of High Level 5E: Design 4 or 5 lvl 13 PCs for 6 to 8 encounter adventuring day

[BMaC]

How about you skip the RP and just run the numbers?

 

[Delazar]

How about you skip the RP and just run the numbers?

this!

 

[benbatman]

A lot of back and forth to test whether the 6-8 encounter adventuring day is working as intended.

The fluff is nice - but can't we just assume that you've provided a hook that is hook-y enough to get 5 level 13 characters to do a thing inside 5 hours?

Given the conceit that in any campaign a DM can craft a hook that will apply to the players playing it, do we need the back story?

 

[CapnZapp]

The to and fro is because Flamestrike is setting up a "no long rests and probably only a few short ones", while Celtavian is quite understandably wary of such a trap.

My suggestion: ask the Wizard WHY the world ends in a mere five hours?

How come he knows this? What would happen if our party weren't around?

Myself, I'm sure it's possible to use the design guidelines to create a satisfactory 6-8 adventure day.

My problem is that the game provides very few tools to the DM to actually make this happening.

Perhaps a question for another thread, but what sequences are there in official published scenarios that are likely to make 6-8 encounters when the party doesn't feel like playing along?

My own suspicion is: very very few. Like, perhaps once out of ten or twenty adventuring days.

But free free to respond elsewhere.

For this thread, I really suggest you Celtavian volunteer the wizard's traplike conditions, or we'll never get started. [emoji55]

 

[iserith]

I think the backstory is relevant for decision-making in certain challenges, especially exploration and social interaction which can grant advantages to the PCs (or should in my view). It telegraphs certain things. I do think for the purposes of this experiment that the PCs should find a reason to engage with the adventure scenario though.

 

[Flamestrike]

The to and fro is because Flamestrike is setting up a "no long rests and probably only a few short ones", while Celtavian is quite understandably wary of such a trap.

What 'trap'?

You're actually saying hes using player/ metagame knowledge to justify something in character.

His character cant know this. As far as his character knows, the world ends in 5 hours, and he is being offered a princely sum and more to stop it.

My suggestion: ask the Wizard WHY the world ends in a mere five hours?

That would be a good start.

How come he knows this? What would happen if our party weren't around?

Good questions again. All with in game answers.

Myself, I'm sure it's possible to use the design guidelines to create a satisfactory 6-8 adventure day.

My problem is that the game provides very few tools to the DM to actually make this happening.

It doesnt help when players metagame, or dont participate in the system (by actively metagaming it, or simply refusing to buy in) but I otherwise agree.

For this thread, I really suggest you Celtavian volunteer the wizard's traplike conditions, or we'll never get started.

The fact that you also consider a time limit placed on an adventure (and one suggested by the DMG no less) as a 'trap' says a lot.

 

[CapnZapp]

The fact that you also consider a time limit placed on an adventure (and one suggested by the DMG no less) as a 'trap' says a lot.

Well, as I have said on multiple occasions, having a nice little time constraint is good once in a while. But if you start to rely on it to make the game work, then it becomes a burden.

(It also backs you the DM into a corner. If the party happens to fail through no fault of their own, you've just set up not only a total party kill, but a total campaign kill. You might be fine with that, but we can't assume the regular DM running a purchased module is)

(For the record: I would much rather have the default rule be "the DM/adventure tells you when and where long rests are allowed" than the too-inflexible "you can rest once a day". The Resting section on page 186 of the PHB does not even hint a vague "unless something's stopping you from resting properly" disclaimer!)

So if you need it to prove your point, it becomes that much weaker. Than a hypothetical such as if you somehow could say "take all the time you need, I can still make six "average" encounters that properly challenges a strong party" which is what many defenders of the game-as-written try to do.

But I digress. Carry on.

 

[Flamestrike]

Well, as I have said on multiple occasions, having a nice little time constraint is good once in a while. But if you start to rely on it to make the game work, then it becomes a burden.

Firstly no-one is saying 'Set time limits all the time for every adventuring day, ever'. No-one. Having every single AD comprising of 6-8 medium to hard enounters all the damn time would be boring and repetitive. Thats just the baseline that we work around and the point at which the game works. Not just on a macro level either. If thats your rough baseline, then shorter days work better and longer days are more of a surprise.

Again I work off a 50 percent ratio (roughly). The other 50 percent of my ADs are generally shorter or not time limited, or very rarely longer.

On topic with the thread, read the title. The whole damn point was to test a 6-8 encounter AD for a bit of fun.

I'm getting the feeling that I wasted several hours designing a fun and challenging adventure, and statting up encounters if all this thread 'is' turns out to be an exersize in how to fustrate the DMs efforts to create a fun and exciting adventure by using metagame 'we're all murder hobos and dont care if the world ends, and there isnt a hook in the world that will make me accept a quest SO THERE!' type of argument.

Its Dungeons and Dragons. The party (whom I have yet to see by the way other than a description of them being amoral mercenaries) have been approached by a NPC in a tavern to raid a dungeon, and slay a dragon. The King himself has promised a boatload of GP and titles if they pull it off. There are a series of obstacles that need to be overcome before the dragon encounter. There are magic items to be found along the way, and more treasure to come.

I mean come on. Does this really need to be discussed? What more would you as a DM do here?

This is absurd. This thread is nearly ruined for me, and it promised so much.

Im tempted just to post the damn encounters for review so it wasnt a total waste of my time and forget it ever happened.

 

[BoldItalic]

A stranger enters the inn unexpectedly, shaking the rain from his travelling cloak. "My word!" he remarks casually, "That's quite a storm, isn't it?" He orders a mug of the finest ale and sits down at a table nearby. The only obvious signs that he is anything out of the ordinary are a confident air, a scar across his forehead and the adamantine greaves incised with gold filigree that become visible under his cloak when he puts his feet up on a stool and relaxes comfortably.

After a few minutes casually eavesdropping on your conversation, he rises, gives a graceful salute and addresses the important-looking gnome. He has a slight Cornish accent. "Your pardon, good sir, but mayhap I can be of service? I am Bedrock Trelawney, cousin of the Earl of Penwith. A position at the court of your most noble king would certainly be of interest, and a fortune in gold would not go amiss. I can call on the services of a number of friends, if that is appropriate. Can we come to some arrangement, perhaps?"

 

[benbatman]

I'd love to see them posted and to test them with my group.