D&D 5E Design Debate: 13th-level PCs vs. 6- to 8-Encounter Adventuring Day

[Celtavian]

Still, those are some high level spells getting tossed out. Basically they went nova because they had no fear that they would need those spells later. As a DM your job is to make them worry.

Travel encounters are by nature like this. One or two a day random encounters. I wanted to spice things up since Out of the Abyss is a lot of walking about.

And now we get to the heart of the problem. You basically just give the party the win here. It's great that they notice things, but you are telling me that they can see an incorporeal (completely silent) creature of darkness, in darkness (basically invisible), before they themselves can be spotted? How fast are they moving to be able to stealth all day long (in full plate no less) so well that they can't be spotted by incorporeal shadow creatures (in complete darkness) while they can see the shadow demons.

Half the party are drow with 120 foot darkvision and one has Devilsight. So yes, they can see in darkness quite well. The shadow demons didn't roll high enough to beat their Passive Perception with +7. They aren't invisible. So that would be a house rule on your part. I tend to run Passive Perception versus Stealth per the rules in the PHB. They have a ranger with Underdark terrain. He doesn't get minuses for moving too fast. And he's drow. Very hard to beat his passive Perception in the Underdark given he has good Wisdom as well.

Okay, sure. Let's go ahead and give them that (I wouldn't, but whatever).

Give? I don't think you have a choice but to "give" a drow Underdark terrain ranger his bonuses in the Underdark. At least I don't see it as a choice. I let the players use their abilities per the rules.

There are 6 shadow demons. Are they all grouped together? Why? How about putting them in a grid so they are all 120' apart? Each one can see two others. Only one shadow demon needs to get away to warn the Marilith. It is so trivially easy to allow a lone shadow demon to get away.

I had the shadow demons following them for a few days running when able. They didn't know precisely where the demonic horde was considering they were roving and raiding with no set base of operations. The party spotted them earlier, but didn't ambush them for a bit.

The one that got away destroys the parties advantage completely. They have no idea that there is anything more than shadow demons out there. They have no idea that they missed one.

What advantage? A roving band of demons is very easy to hear. Not sure what advantage you think they had. Neither side ambushed the other. They started 120 feet apart aware of each other. The demon horde thought they would crush the humanoids as they had been doing. The PCs fought them straight up and won.

Once they are alerted the demons just need to wait at a bend in the tunnel that puts the party less than a full move away. Or wait till they are crossing a chasm, or a bridge, or going up a cliff, or anything other than a flat featureless plane.

Why does it leave them less than a full move ahead? Quasits may be able to surprise the party, but not the demon horde. Why would the PCs walk into that? They just hang back and wait for them to move. I don't understand the idea that the PCs wouldn't know the demon horde was there. They have 120 foot darkvision or better in four of the six. They can easily wait for the demon horde to come their way. The demon horde has no way to hide from them given their number, lack of stealth, and weaker Perception. If the PCs hear the demon horde, and they will hear them way before the demon horde hears the PCs, they cast pass without trace and sneak on them.

By starting it in a neutral area where neither had the means to ambush the other, I gave an advantage to the demons they otherwise would not have had. They have zero means to stealth as well as the PCs and lesser Perception abilities. I'm still not sure why you seem to think that isn't the case. There isn't a single person in the demon horde other than the shadow demons with even close to a high enough stealth or Perception modifier to match the PCs stealth and detection abilities.

Again, they can cast "a few shield spells because they have no fear that they will need them again for the rest of the day.

Really? You think a few shield spells cast by four characters with shield and 16 1st level slots with one guy with two short rest slots a big resource cost? A few shield spells is nothing to this group. It's nothing to any group with a high number casters. I have six casters in this group.

Using a couple spell slots in one round, again, because why not? Not going to need them again today!

A couple of spell slots in a round amongst six casters is a big deal to you?

Putting aside the fact that they should never have been allowed to ambush the shadow demons, you forgot to include all the shield spells cast and the ones sacrificed for smites.

Never allowed? You don't get to disallow players from using their abilities. I do not DM like that. If I found out you were "disallowing" me from using my abilities, I don't think we would play together long. You get to use the abilities of a shadow demon. +7 Stealth and Hide as a bonus action in dim light and darkness. You must allow the players to use their double perception rolls and 120 foot darkvision and devilsight to spot them. Your steath roll is against their passive perception minus 5 for disadvantage due to dim light. The shadow demons missed the roll and got spotted. It happens and I don't disallow it because I don't like the outcome.

Oh, one more thing. You keep claiming that your players are awesome and there is no stopping them. This implies that everyone else is not-so-awesome and that their tactics are inferior. That is why people keep popping up to tell you you are wrong. Because there definitely are ways of stopping them, you just don't want to use them (like breaking a bow).

Twig, tell me, are the tactics and character building options I've described common in your group? I've told you my real experience. What is your real experience? Not this second guessing, after the fact discussion we've been having. Do your players optimize like mine? I didn't say it was awesome. I just said they do it. The fact that you're thinking I'm saying "My players are awesome" is so off base that it is ridiculous. It's you personally believing something that is not true.

I'm saying my players optimize all the time and it makes it harder to challenge them as a DM. You converting this into "I think my players are awesome" is strange. I don't think it's "awesome." In fact, I find it annoying. Just like I find it annoying having people tell me my assessments are wrong when I've been doing this as long as I have. Or telling me it's not the rules, when it very much is the rules.

It's not "awesome" when the game designers insert so many ways to game the system. It's a pain in the behind is what it is. I have to do a bunch of extra work to challenge them because the base game has done such a poor job in some areas of making the player versus environment challenging.

Please stop confusing my optimization discussion as a statement my players are "awesome." It's a criticism of the 5E system. People that like 5E don't like to hear criticisms of the 5E game system. When they get pointed out, there is always a group shouting down such concerns. That doesn't make my concerns invalid. Because my players are exploiting the cracks in the 5E system doesn't make them "awesome." It just means like every edition of D&D ever made, 5E has power combinations that allow the PCs to exploit the player versus the environment in their favor. I have to find ways to deal with this that satisfy me as a DM.

Instead maybe just say that you like to let your players be the toughest things around and let them beat on creatures far above there level. That seems to be what they like, and if they are having fun, then that's the most important thing. You will even get suggestions on ways to let them keep beating on things.

Or you could admit that there are power combinations in 5E that need to be toned down and there are monsters that need to be powered up some. Is that such a hard thing to admit? Or do you think 5E is somehow perfect?

I don't need suggestions. I've been DMing for a long time in multiple game systems. I use math to design challenges. I'm very good at it. In these discussions, I usually get a dismissive attitude towards my concerns with little or no mathematical argument to support the counterarguments. If I had someone proving the math of what I'm discussing using the Monster Manual and PHB, then maybe we would have a discussion. Instead I get miscommunication like "You consider your players awesome." Pretty far from what I'm looking to discuss. I'm far more concerned with all the optimization problems in the 5E rule set that makes creatures like mariliths or balors a fairly weak challenge. Seriously, the base balor and marilith have a Passive Perception of 13. Even a non-expertise Stealth character can beat that with ease. Now an expertise Stealth character or a party using pass without trace is going to ambush the balor or marilith by the level they face such creatures with trivial ease. Yet I point out this discrepancy in the game system and get told, "It's all about the environment you choose" or "Six to eight encounters per day will change that." Will it? Do either of those change the fact that a balor and marilith have a egregiously low Passive Perception? No, it doesn't. A lot of creatures in 5E are designed in this fashion, lacking skills and abilities to counter what the players do by a margin that nearly guarantees PC success in these short combats.

 

[Lord Twig]

[MENTION=5834]Celtavian[/MENTION],

In my edits and re-edits of trying to get my post done I think I lost the meaning of some of my points. So I apologize for that. I did not mean to say that you were saying that your players are better. I meant to suggest that the way it has been stated implies superiority weather you meant it or not, and I don't think you meant it that way.

So, yes, your players do optimize for ruthless efficiency far more than the "typical" group, but that is not the only problem. It seems that, although they are "playing to win" to an extent that race, class and abilities are reduced to a numerical puzzle to figure out the "best" combination, you, as a DM, are not doing the same. So you have a disparity of play styles. Sure you DM for them, and are used to their play style, but you apparently refuse to stoop to their level.

And no it is not house ruling to have a shadow demon out of range of the party's sight observe its fellows being destroyed and run away. It doesn't matter how good their stealth and perception are if he isn't in range. But you decided they would all be in range and spotted.

Likewise you will apparently always give the party a way to avoid the demons. If they are in a tactically advantageous position the party will just never approach them. They will always spot them and will always find another way around. Why? Because you decided there would be another way around. They are in the underdark. There are only so many ways to go. Just tell them, "Yes the demons are ahead, but there is no other way around them. Unless you want to waste weeks doing so and allow (horrible thing) to happen." It's up to you to decide what the horrible thing is. If you can't figure out something that will motivate the party then that's your problem. I can guarantee that I could come up with something, no matter chaotic neutral murder-hobo the party is, there is something they care about. And I will destroy it if they don't act.

Or just have more demons come up behind them, because, you know, DM.

Now after all that I'm going to agree with you. The melee brutes actually are a problem. I don't think it is an insurmountable problem, but the marilith and balor should not have been pure melee brutes. They are supposed to be lords of the Abyss. They should be impossible to run away from. They should be able to do something bad to you no matter where you are. How are they supposed to rule if the other demons can just run away and they can never touch them? At the very least there should be some helpful notes about always including some other demons to help them out against range focused characters and such.

So yeah, the game is not perfect.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

And no it is not house ruling to have a shadow demon out of range of the party's sight observe its fellows being destroyed and run away. It doesn't matter how good their stealth and perception are if he isn't in range. But you decided they would all be in range and spotted.

Yes, dispersal should be SOP for a recon patrol or for pickets. A good configuration for four shadow demons would be two ahead (30' separation between them), two behind (at the edge of visual range of the first two, with 30' separation between them). That gives you some mutual support capability without too much risk of all getting caught in the same ambush.

As an aside: I've done a fair amount of playing in the dark in 5E, and one of the most annoying things that can happen is when your pickets don't see the enemy and the enemy doesn't see the pickets, so the hidden enemy walks right into your main body without ever noticing the pickets. Therefore, sometimes it pays to have a stalking horse, such as a guy with a torch who is apparently "alone" in the dark. I'm not sure how or whether shadow demons would apply the same doctrine, but if they're close to the demon horde and acting as pickets this would be a reason to bring along a non-stealthy demon like a vrock or a dretch. If something hidden decides it can tackle the vrock and attacks, shoom! face full of Shadow Demon!

I love tactical deception. Edit: oh! No wonder my players are such scaredy cats sometimes about obstacles that I don't think should be a big deal. I get it now. It's because I love tactical deception. I must be doing my Evil DM job correctly.

 

[Flamestrike]

But this discussion is irrelevant. We have a house rule that allows two concentration spells active at one time as long as one is a buff cast on another player.

You literally told me in another thread that you wont play in games with house rules.

Also; way to break the game. This is a dramatic increase in the power of PC's right here. No wonder all your PCs are long rest dependent caster classes who extensively pre buff. You only make them fight one encounter per day, and let them double down on concentration spells.

They must burn through slots like candy, and enter every fight buffed up the wazoo.

In not surprising that they rely on uber perception scores and stealth scores to locate creatures then spam a ton of buffs and nova like crazy. Thats the game meta that you set for them.

Remove this rule and force them into longer AD's. I bet you'll see a marked change in tactics and power.

I didn't keep a round by round battle log. The whole point of the discussion is that one Sharpshooter Ranger/Eldritch Knight with a +2 bow took 100 hit points from a 189 point mariilth in a single round.

Im missing something here. How did he do so much damage? He gets two attacks per round; three at most if he's hasted. Five with action surge and haste. All at -5 thanks to sharpshooter.

Im assuming he was hasted AND blessed thanks to your house rule. Assuming a Dex of 20 (these guys are all loaded up with feats yet keep pulling stats of 20 out of nowhere) and a +2 bow, he hits at +9-13 vs AC 17, and he hit all 5 times?

 

[pemerton]

Im missing something here. How did he do so much damage? He gets two attacks per round; three at most if he's hasted.

The cleric cast bless on the paladin/warlock, paladin/bladesinger, and ranger/fighter (Notice lots of multiclassing and paladins...we might have to try a campaign without multiclassing). So the opening round the archer beats the Marilith on initiative and the cleric beats the sharpshooter (due to the Alertness feat, he has a high initiative modifier).

So the Sharpshooter with his magic bow (+2 bow) and bless fires all attacks at the marilith. He moves forward 30 feet to hunter's mark. We are using Unearthed Arcana material. So he has Close Quarters Combat and Archery Style (fighter/ranger) and is a Deep Stalekr ranger (1 extra attack on the first round of combat). He Action Surges and unloads five Sharpshooter arrows at her. Attack bonus +4 prof +5 dex +2 bow +1 Close quarters fighting +2 archery style -5 sharpshooter +1d4 bless. Each attack is +9 +1d4. He hits four of five attacks. He does 1d8+1d6+17 per attack. So he did 100 or so in round one of her 180 points. As you know cover and distance don't much matter to a Sharpshooter.

She was pretty much neutered in the opening round. 80 hit points against a six man party is absolutely nothing and will disappear quite quickly.

Action Surge gives two additional attacks, for five overall.

 

[Flamestrike]

Action Surge gives two additional attacks, for five overall.

So a 10th level archer (Ranger 3 + EK 7 I presume) with a +2 Bow and the sharpsooter feat and a Dex of 20 using [action surge] + [bless] + [quickened haste] as resources [and the concentration slots of 2 PCs] dealt 100 damage in one round to a Marilith? I still think he's pretty lucky - his average attack roll is +10.5 with bless (after the -5 from sharpshooter) and he hit AC 17 5/5 times.

Game working as intended for mine.

Crap, a Paladin 8/ Fighter 2 with GWM could do more damage with a slightly greater resource expenditure [the smites].

The party used extensive nova tactics, took advantage of a house rule that lets them double their active buffs (haste AND bless? wow!), and expended virtually all their resources to win against a bunch of Demons that were placed at range and used way less than 'optimal' tactics.

This party has been built around a certain expectation within the DMs meta. If the DM had've been forcing 6-8 encounters on them for many of their AD's [and giving out 2-3 short rests], and creating encounters tended to push the PCs into close range fights, they would have very different characters and tactics indeed.

 

[pemerton]

So a 10th level archer (Ranger 3 + EK 7 I presume) with a +2 Bow and the sharpsooter feat and a Dex of 20 using [action surge] + [bless] + [quickened haste] as resources [and the concentration slots of 2 PCs] dealt 100 damage in one round to a Marilith? I still think he's pretty lucky - his average attack roll is +10.5 with bless (after the -5 from sharpshooter) and he hit AC 17 5/5 times.

So the Sharpshooter with his magic bow (+2 bow) and bless fires all attacks at the marilith. He moves forward 30 feet to hunter's mark. We are using Unearthed Arcana material. So he has Close Quarters Combat and Archery Style (fighter/ranger) and is a Deep Stalekr ranger (1 extra attack on the first round of combat). He Action Surges and unloads five Sharpshooter arrows at her. Attack bonus +4 prof +5 dex +2 bow +1 Close quarters fighting +2 archery style -5 sharpshooter +1d4 bless. Each attack is +9 +1d4. He hits four of five attacks.

As I read [MENTION=5834]Celtavian[/MENTION]'s post, the bonus to hit is +11.5 (+4 prof, +5 DEX, +2 magic, +1 class feature (close quarters shooting), +2 class feature (archery), +2.5 bless, -5 feat) which means the chance to hit AC 17 is around 75%.

Celtavian states that four of five attacks hit.

The likelihood of either 4 or 5 of 5 attacks hitting, with a chance to hit of 3/4, is (3/4)^5 plus (3^4 * 1 * 5)/(4^5), which equals 8*(3^4)/4^5, which equals 648/1028, or a little better than 60%.

Winning a coin toss is obviously luckier than losing it, but it's not all that lucky.

Let me see if I can remember. In that deadly fight, they used:
2 5th level banishes
1 4th level banish
1 1st level bless
1 3rd level haste with 3 sorcery points to twin it (cast on bladesinger and sharpshooter)
1 1st level hunter's mark (I think this dropped after he was attacked by the marilth)
1 1st level hex warlock slot

I don't think they cast much else. Just absorbed the hit points, fell back down the tunnel to a relatively safe location, and took a short rest to recover some hit points at a safe location after defeating the warband.

The party used extensive nova tactics, took advantage of a house rule that lets them double their active buffs (haste AND bless? wow!), and expended virtually all their resources to win against a bunch of Demons that were placed at range and used way less than 'optimal' tactics.

This party is 10th level.

That is less than the spell load-out for a single 10th level full caster (3 of 4 1st level spells, zero of 3 2nd level spells (but we know some Shield spells were also used, notionally consuming some of these slots), 1 of 3 3rd level spells, 1 of 3 4th level spells, and 2 of 2 5th level spells).

The party is 6 PCs. Even though we aren't given the details of their healing, and even allowing for the vagaries of memory, that doesn't seem like outrageous nova-ing for a Deadly encounter. At 10th level a Deadly encounter is more than 1/4 of the budget (not factoring in number multiples), and what [MENTION=5834]Celtavian[/MENTION] describes doesn't seem like more than 1/4 of the PCs' resources.

 

[BoldItalic]

Just as an aside, how much difference does allowing multiclassing make? If the DM chooses not to allow MC, does it hobble PC optimization to the point where the kind of encounters we have been discussing become significantly harder to beat? Or can it be compensated for by careful choice of subclasses and feats across the party?

I'm just wondering if the guidelines should be tweaked depending on whether or not MC is in play.

 

[Flamestrike]

4 bow attacks (assuming ranger plus sharpshooter plus Dex 20 plus +2 bow) is 5d8+68 damage. Not bad rolling on that 5d8.

Even with the resource expenditure and house rule that lets the PCs double down on buffs that's some good luck for the PC.

 

[Azurewraith]

Just as an aside, how much difference does allowing multiclassing make? If the DM chooses not to allow MC, does it hobble PC optimization to the point where the kind of encounters we have been discussing become significantly harder to beat? Or can it be compensated for by careful choice of subclasses and feats across the party?

I'm just wondering if the guidelines should be tweaked depending on whether or not MC is in play.

It cripples some classes more than others particularly fighters and barbarians as after 5 in barb and 11 in fighter are pretty meh other than that I would say whole sale classes are ok I would still rather level dip in most cases as most 20rh lvl abilities suck and I would rather have action surge/devils sight/assassinate/a few smites for a crit/ hell even flurry of blows a few times a rest