D&D 5E last encounter was totally one-sided

[dave2008]

Yes, against a standard hack and slash party that insists on meeting him face to "face" he's dangerous. But any real level 15ish party will not defeat him that way. And my party would probably have killed him back when they were single digit level:
- one character to negate regeneration (trivial with chill touch)
- one character to make sure a continual retreat isn't problematic, and/or making sure Juiblex never catches up to the heroes
- three characters pouring everything they have into ranged fire

First, I generally agreed with this post, and I like your upgrades ( I think I did something similar with my update).

However, I take issue with the quoted part. That is exactly how my PCs would face him. The have no ranged weapons and do not have chill touch. They would meet it face to face (if they can't avoid it completely). I'm not saying it is correct or even my preference, but it seems that WotC monsters are designed for groups like mine and they are a "real party." I get the distinct feeling that your suggesting my players are playing the game wrong or simply don't believe anyone plays this way. The fact is they do, and if I had to guess, I would guess it is the majority. Again, it is not my taste, as you know, I love me some epic baddies, I just think we are probably in the minority and that is a big reason monsters are designed the way they are.

 

[Arial Black]

Everyone is the hero of their own story.

Everyone subconsciously acts as if things only happen because of themselves. Monsters exist to wear down my resources, my parents divorced because I wasn't a good enough child, the BBEG spends his day trying to outwit me even though we've never actually met, my boyfriend only leaves the seat up because he knows I hate it. The world revolves around me.

But the reality is that other people aren't worrying about you, they are worrying about themselves. To the monsters, you're just another chance to gain loot/get fed. Your parents didn't get divorced because of you, but because their love for each other started turning to hate. The BBEG is plotting to conquer the world, he doesn't even know who you are yet. Your boyfriend puts the seat up if he needs it up and down if he needs it down, and assumes anyone following will put the seat how they want it, just like he has to do every time.

NPCs, especially BBEGs, have their own life to live and the DM should be aware of what they will be doing without the PCs showing up, as well as how they will respond if they do. For example, the Death Knight disguised as a human lord has stuff to do. His plans may involve going to the opera that he has sponsored to impress the local bigwigs, then he has to continue to corrupt the governor and maybe his beautiful and impressionable daughter.

What's that? Five strangers have walked into town? Are you serious? I'm watching the opera here! There are a hundred strangers in this town every day! What does, "Oh, but they're PCs!" mean anyway?

If the BBEG's response to the news of five strangers walking into town is for him and five of his hardest minions to fireball the ing town hall on the off chance that these must be the foretold heroes, then by the time the actual PCs turn up then the town will be a smoking ruin.

In real life, if you were a wizard, would this make your life better? Well, yeah! I could have my unseen servant do my chores, teleport would make visiting my in-laws easier (Damn!), and basically, life would be sweet. Why would I load out on death spells? Why would I expect to be in combat? I've never been in combat yet, and I'm over 50. Sure, I might have one or two combat spells because, well, you never know, but to have my entire spell loadout to be optimised for combat would be a total waste of my skills if I never see combat.

So an NPC's loadout is going to be a mix of combat and non-combat spells, and his reaction to news about strangers in town is unlikely to be the nuclear option!

Only if the NPC is going loaded for bear on the grounds that he has a specific enemy to fight would his loadout be optimised for combat. Only if he had some reason to believe that these particular strangers were both willing and able to kill him would he nuke the town hall from orbit.

Playing the NPCs realistically results in the players making realistic decisions for their PCs, and this helps them avoid the 'murderhobo' stereotype because they can assume NPCs don't exist merely to kill them.

Players: We go into the cake shop and buy some cakes.
Baker: Adventurers! Die!
DM: You picked on the wrong baker! This one happens to be an archmage and he can tell you are adventurers just by looking. Roll initiative, suckers!
Players: ...we just want some cakes...

Next time....

Butcher: Welcome to my humble store! How my I be of assistance?
Players: We kill him and take his stuff, then move on to the haberdasher's. What is a 'haberdasher' anyway? Probably another word for 'archmage'.

 

[CapnZapp]

First, I generally agreed with this post, and I like your upgrades ( I think I did something similar with my update).

However, I take issue with the quoted part. That is exactly how my PCs would face him. The have no ranged weapons and do not have chill touch. They would meet it face to face (if they can't avoid it completely). I'm not saying it is correct or even my preference, but it seems that WotC monsters are designed for groups like mine and they are a "real party." I get the distinct feeling that your suggesting my players are playing the game wrong or simply don't believe anyone plays this way. The fact is they do, and if I had to guess, I would guess it is the majority. Again, it is not my taste, as you know, I love me some epic baddies, I just think we are probably in the minority and that is a big reason monsters are designed the way they are.

Well I understand your instinctive reaction but aren't you forgetting something here?

My "upgrades" would not make Juiblex be any more powerful against your party.

In other words, I don't see your concern as a good argument for not making "wellbuilt" epic threats, and I certainly don't buy it as a reason to let the designers off the hook.

In this case you might not need any tricks up your sleeve, but I can't imagine you could go an entire level 1-20 campaign without ever needing them.

And even if you do - what's the harm in adding these tricks.

No, when I'm paying WotC to create epic level monsters, my expectations are higher than the Juiblex we were given.

 

[CapnZapp]

If the BBEG's response to the news of five strangers walking into town is for him and five of his hardest minions to fireball the ing town hall on the off chance that these must be the foretold heroes, then by the time the actual PCs turn up then the town will be a smoking ruin.

That would actually be a cool story

"What happened here? Forest Fire? Red Dragon? Playing with matches?"

"Nah, it's Lord Gonfrey. He's kind of paranoid"

 

[robus]

You're missing at least half my point.

The half you're missing is that it is incredibly easy for an overworked DM to forget about a monster's reactions unless they're spelled out right in front of you.

The other half is indeed mostly geared towards beginning Dungeon Masters. But I would gladly help them out even if it means having to read about Shield a couple of times.

As I see it, casting Shield is no different from the way a Knight or Drow Elite Warrior has access to a Parry reaction, and should be equally visible to the DM.

Absolutely. The stuff I want to be thinking about at the table is the dynamic scene unfolding, not trying to recall minutia about a spell I read last night in prep for the session. Players have a way of making things very complicated very quickly and there's only so much input a brain can take before your sitting there staring at the players while drooling. Anything that takes some of the brain work away is helpful. I'm still not down with wanting my NPCs to "auto-function" because again the dynamics of the encounter make that very difficult for the designers to plan for.

But having my NPCs ready to roll with all the info I need to quickly reassess my options - that's awesome.

 

[Arial Black]

That would actually be a cool story

"What happened here? Forest Fire? Red Dragon? Playing with matches?"

"Nah, it's Lord Gonfrey. He's kind of paranoid"

'Paranoid'? Is that what everyone's saying about me now, that I'm 'paranoid'?

Well, that's what 'they' want me to think!

 

[OB1]

"More monsters" solve nearly every niggle we might be having with the 5E combat model, but it also means kissing goodbye to the very cool image of all the heroes fighting a fearsome epic monster on its lonesome for, say, half a dozen rounds, the fight waxing and waning, until the heroes finally manage to obliterate the monster, with half their numbers lying dead and scattered around.

I am personally convinced this won't be solved until WotC relents and makes changes to the way spells are an all or nothing proposition (except numeric effects like damage).

[MENTION=12731]CapnZapp[/MENTION] - I can appreciate what you are saying here and feel for you that 5e isn't what you want it to be, but I have a very different idea of a cool image.

Our heroes, storming the lair of the Litch and manage to sneak around several groups of guards, intimidate their way around another, and fight off 3 other groups in quick fashion. Unfortunately, one guard in the last group got away and called in the Litch's lieutenants, who cornered the heroes into a fight that took quite a bit out of them. Fearing another difficult fight will leave them too weak to face the Litch, the party spellcaster uses a high level spell to get them around several other groups of guards into the inner sanctum of the Litch.

But there is no avoiding the hoard of zombies and skeletons outside the throne room of the Litch, and while they cut through them like butter, a lucky hit here and there takes a bit more from them. Finally, the heroes stand at a closed doorway, bruised, half spent and unsure of whether they have the strength to fight what is on the other side of the door, but knowing that the King's daughter will be turned undead at the stroke of midnight. With no time to rest, they push through the door to their fate.

To me, that's way cooler than a single boss fight on it's own at full power. The success or failure the party had in navigating earlier encounters leads directly to how challenging the final fight will be. I tend to think of the entire day as a single encounter, one in which the fight waxes and wanes and takes 15 to 20 rounds to resolve. I don't worry about any one encounter being to easy or too hard, because throughout the day the luck will change. That is 5e design, and the monsters, as written, work great when the DM follows those design guidelines.

 

[robus]

snip

I wanted to "Laugh" too - great post

 

[Krachek]

Note how I'm suggesting only three pre-written actions. After all, there is little reason for the 3E style stat blocks where monsters had dozens of spell like abilities, when it will on average live only for 1-3 rounds of combat.

So I'd like to argue that things would be much more helpful than cumbersome

PS. Yes, this is a crude draft made for illustrating my point only, and should be refined before entering print. (I agree to your point to such a degree I won't even bring up the fact the three example actions do state they're cast actions...)

It think you miss 4ed monster. They were designed to live and be functional on a combat grid.
5ed monster are more alive.

 

[mpwylie]

In real life, if you were a wizard, would this make your life better? Well, yeah! I could have my unseen servant do my chores, teleport would make visiting my in-laws easier (Damn!), and basically, life would be sweet. Why would I load out on death spells? Why would I expect to be in combat? I've never been in combat yet, and I'm over 50. Sure, I might have one or two combat spells because, well, you never know, but to have my entire spell loadout to be optimised for combat would be a total waste of my skills if I never see combat.

So an NPC's loadout is going to be a mix of combat and non-combat spells, and his reaction to news about strangers in town is unlikely to be the nuclear option!

One small issue, this isn't real life, this is D&D in a fantasy setting. Team bad guy doesn't live in a cushy home in a relatively safe land with well enforced laws. Even in real life, do you think a criminal/mobster/gang member/drug dealer walks around unarmed? If they had access to magic would they walk around with no combat spells loaded? Do you think if you lived in a part of this world that was dangerous and in constant conflict were you could expect on any given day to be in combat, you might pick spells a little differently and approach situations a little differently?

These are bad guys in a brutal fantasy world that would have to be suspicious of everyone. They would walk around buffed, locked and loaded at all times because they are bad guys that should expect to get attacked at any moment from team good or even other bad guys.