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

[UngeheuerLich]

Lets just state for a second: a 13 level 5 PC party can be thretened without using an overwhelming mass or way high level foes.

 

[BoldItalic]

Lets just state for a second: a 13 level 5 PC party can be thretened without using an overwhelming mass or way high level foes.

I think it's a bit soon to conclude that, isn't it? All we can say so far, is that a PC can be injured part way through the first round of a medium/hard encounter.

 

[Azurewraith]

I think it's a bit soon to conclude that, isn't it? All we can say so far, is that a PC can be injured part way through the first round of a medium/hard encounter.

I would say they could be injured part way through the first round of an easy combat. Crit happens lol

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I think that group does feel threatenend after half of that round. Is it enough to really endanger them? Don't know and probably not but such a tound will leave some mental scars. Even if they survive, they need to spend resources and will spend more to prevent such a bad start next time.
And the aim is not a tpk in the first round but just a small battle that drains some resources which already happened and to scare them a bot which it also did as you can read in the last few posts.

 

[Flamestrike]

I think that group does feel threatenend after half of that round. Is it enough to really endanger them? Don't know and probably not but such a tound will leave some mental scars. Even if they survive, they need to spend resources and will spend more to prevent such a bad start next time.
And the aim is not a tpk in the first round but just a small battle that drains some resources which already happened and to scare them a bot which it also did as you can read in the last few posts.

Agree. At the actual table, all eyes would be on the battle map, and a silence would fall on the players around this time.

Everyone thinking 'hmmm crap, how to get out of this'.

 

[Flamestrike]

@Flamestrike - do you want to complete this first round, or discount it and let everyone theory-craft from back at the start of the encounter? I'm easy either way; if you want to carry on, I have Bedrock's move ready to paste in, but if you want to cancel the round, all I have to do is revert the hit points in his sheet.

Lets complete the first two or three rounds. I'm intrested to see how two plays out. By that point we should have a clear winner emerging.

Hopefully the party!

 

[Flamestrike]

At the moment we have to disperse. Concentrated breath weapons by Winter Wolves are going to hammer the party. I see the paladin going down if the winter wolves are allowed to fire off. If we stay close, the Winter wolves will chew us up with their breath weapons.

I largely agree. OTOH, staying close to the Paladin helps those dex saves.

That's why this is so hard to do online. My coordinated group would likely engage the giants first,

This encounter was set up to make that very very hard to do.

This was intentional. No point in discussing what would happen in a different set of circumstances. These are the circumstances this party faces in this encounter.

hypnotic pattern the winter wolves, and focus fire archery one of the giants while using the dodge action against the other after using a Bonus Action to cast shield of faith.

Those tactics arent gonna work here.

Its the Bards turn, and I'm waiting for what you want to do mate. No more theory crafting, this is the actual first encounter now. At the table, I would give you (the player) around 2-3 seconds to declare an action, then I would make you take the dodge action due to indecision.

What does the bard do?

 

[Radaceus]

peanut gallery input here:

1) one could only wish PbP moved this quickly!

2) this experiment is not efficient, in that, it is only one roll of the dice; so the experiment succeeds or fails by the chance of that one roll per each save/attack.

3) is it possible to randomize, take a core sample so to speak, each action; instead of making the one roll, make 20 attack rolls (AVERAGE{{1d20+x}*20}) and use that as the determining denominator, likewise with all rolls of any sort?

 

[Flamestrike]

peanut gallery input here:

1) one could only wish PbP moved this quickly!

2) this experiment is not efficient, in that, it is only one roll of the dice; so the experiment succeeds or fails by the chance of that one roll per each save/attack.

3) is it possible to randomize, take a core sample so to speak, each action; instead of making the one roll, make 20 attack rolls (AVERAGE{{1d20+x}*20}) and use that as the determining denominator, likewise with all rolls of any sort?

Swings and roundabouts mate. Rolling has been pretty average so far. Maybe slightly in favor of the monsters (barring damage rolls).

 

[Radaceus]

fair enough

going back to my popcorn, enjoying the show