Fiddling around with Fifth Ed

[Salthorae]

1) 5e doesn't seem to support high level play. Most official products tap out at 11th level. There's little to no help in showing DMs how to craft adventures or encounters for higher level. It's as if there is no intention that characters should play beyond mid level.

There has long been a self-defeating loop. "There's no support so we don't play it, so they don't design it because no one plays it." Mordenkainen's Tome has a bunch of new high level monsters with more than just hit point stuff. There are also a number of iconic monsters just in the MM that have Legendary and Lair actions that are quite enough to challenge a group of high level characters in my experience.

2) The encounter creation math just doesn't work. Some monsters (such as hellhounds) can decimate low level parties. Others are not even challenging at all.

Agreed, but as another poster pointed out, some of that is due to using optional rules as default where most encounter maths are not accounting for that.

3) Most combats are boring. There are few tactical options, and most monsters are just bags of hit points, ever-increasing as characters level up. (This seems to originate from the bounded accuracy design goal.) Most monsters can't reliably hit PC Armor Class.

This to me feels like you're not using enough different monsters. There is certainly that feel on occasion, but I rarely have an issue hitting my PC Armor Classes if i'm using level appropriate monsters.

4) You either have a TPK or no character ever dies. (Not that I like character death, but it should at least feel threatening without being "campaign-ending")

I end up almost killing at least 1 PC every other week or so, and right now Im just playing through the Hidden Shrine of Tamoachan (from Tales of the Yawning Portal). I usually have that rate regardless of what I'm playing and my players to enjoy the thrill of victory that comes with overcoming challenges that are deadly, but I've also never managed to TPK a group in 5e... so ymmv. In just this set of adventures over all I have killed 4 PC's in total over the course of 6 PC levels.

5) Few groups (or official products) actually follow the encounters per day guideline, creating overpowered casters and underpowered martial characters.

I have not found martial characters to be underpowered in my games. They tear up my melee baddies like it's no one's business while the casters do their things. My biggest issue from a "nova" standpoint has been Sorcerers with their quickened spells, especially SorLocks with their quickened spells and Agonizing Blast Eldritch Blast (grr). But my players tend to be very conservative with their resources, most Casters are using cantrips for 80% of their battle spells and letting the melee's do what they do with the rogues in support, saving their slots for when they're really useful (i.e. large groups or super dangerous foes).

One thing I do tend to do if an encounter is seeming too easy is usually bring in extra foes and/or randomly up the hit points of some creatures. I also try to use minions to soften up a group, get them to use up resources before I bring in the bigger encounter of the night (whether that is RP or fighting), I want them to spend their resources because it makes them more cautious and also vulnerable for random strikes from a BBEG or his lieutenants.

One other key things is switching up monster abilities and/or resistances every now and again so the PC's don't get comfortable or meta too hard.

 

[ccs]

A few observations I've made (and some that my players have shared with me):

1) 5e doesn't seem to support high level play. Most official products tap out at 11th level. There's little to no help in showing DMs how to craft adventures or encounters for higher level. It's as if there is no intention that characters should play beyond mid level.

Of course 5e supports high lv play. You only need 7 things: A PHB, A DMG, a MM, a set of dice, a pen/pencil, a notebook, and your imagination. You do have all of those things, right?
WoTC can sell you the first 3 or 4 of those. WalMarts got you covered for the pen & paper. The imagination? That ones on you.

Official adventures top out around 11th lv? Yeah, that's intentional. As others have pointed out, that's the range Wizards research shows most games run until & what sells best. There's NO point in printing stuff that won't sell as well as that.

No help in showing you how to design high lv adventures? What? After running all those campaigns you didn't learn anything? Take those templates, apply your imagination, & now dial them up however many notches it'll take to actually challenge the people sitting at your specific table.

2) The encounter creation math just doesn't work. Some monsters (such as hellhounds) can decimate low level parties. Others are not even challenging at all.

So what? The CR system has been (at best) faulty ever since 3e. And there was no system prior to that.
My solution to the CR system? I just ignore it.

3) Most combats are boring. There are few tactical options, and most monsters are just bags of hit points, ever-increasing as characters level up. (This seems to originate from the bounded accuracy design goal.) Most monsters can't reliably hit PC Armor Class.

This one is mostly all on you.
Look, you're the DM. You're not restricted to what's listed in a module or stat block. Those are written assuming a fairly low baseline average - in order to $ell to as many people as possible. If that average doesn't cut it for your group? Then you can use whatever monsters you like, have them act however, equip them as you see fit, set the encounters in whatever type of environment.... You can even restrict the PCs access to equipment if you desire.

Your players - even with a plethora of options it's easy for players to default to their characters standing in place whacking away at the monsters. This has been happening since OD&D. It'll continue into the next century.

4) You either have a TPK or no character ever dies. (Not that I like character death, but it should at least feel threatening without being "campaign-ending")

Oh. I must be doing something wrong then. Because I've killed plenty of 5e characters without having TPKs. (and very few of them have gotten better) I think I'm nearing 20. And I've certainly mangled characters/parties that, although they ended up not dying, definitely knew that was a possibility

5) Few groups (or official products) actually follow the encounters per day guideline, creating overpowered casters and underpowered martial characters.

Well, if you've got the latter happening, of course the former should.
Look, Gygax himself could come back from the dead & lecture me on how to make encounters. And though I'd be surprised & honored by his ghost paying a visit, I'd still make encounters aimed at challenging/entertaining the specific 3-5 people sitting around my table vs whatever the book presented as the ideal.

I've been watching Matt Colville's YouTube videos, and at his advice, I'm going through my old 4e books for inspiration. I've been redesigning every monster and the encounter math. The game I'm running now is still 5e from the players' perspective, but everything on my side of the DM Screen is homebrewed.

Good. You're supposed to modify the game to suite you & yours.

Has anyone else run into similar issues? If so, how did you address them?

Anytime I run into issues with a game system (D&D or otherwise) I refer back to the advice my 11 year old self read in my original (Moldvay) Basic set book:
"Anything in this booklet (and other D&D booklets) should be thought of as changeable -~~~"
Similar advice can be found in my 1e books.
So I change bits & pieces to provide myself & my group a better game.

 

[Mouseferatu]

Let us also remember that one of the upcoming adventures WotC just announced goes to high-levels--all the way to 20 IIRC, though I could be mistaken--so there'll be an example to draw from soon enough.

 

[Tormyr]

I've been running 5th edition since the Starter Set was released, and run several other campaigns including Hoard of the Dragon Queen (with D&D Encounters), Princes of the Apocalypse, Storm King's Thunder, Out of the Abyss, and (now) Tomb of Annihilation. I've run homebrew campaigns in Ravenloft (before the Curse of Strahd release) and in an original setting.

A few observations I've made (and some that my players have shared with me):
1) 5e doesn't seem to support high level play. Most official products tap out at 11th level. There's little to no help in showing DMs how to craft adventures or encounters for higher level. It's as if there is no intention that characters should play beyond mid level.
2) The encounter creation math just doesn't work. Some monsters (such as hellhounds) can decimate low level parties. Others are not even challenging at all.
3) Most combats are boring. There are few tactical options, and most monsters are just bags of hit points, ever-increasing as characters level up. (This seems to originate from the bounded accuracy design goal.) Most monsters can't reliably hit PC Armor Class.
4) You either have a TPK or no character ever dies. (Not that I like character death, but it should at least feel threatening without being "campaign-ending")
5) Few groups (or official products) actually follow the encounters per day guideline, creating overpowered casters and underpowered martial characters.

I've been watching Matt Colville's YouTube videos, and at his advice, I'm going through my old 4e books for inspiration. I've been redesigning every monster and the encounter math. The game I'm running now is still 5e from the players' perspective, but everything on my side of the DM Screen is homebrewed.

Has anyone else run into similar issues? If so, how did you address them?

I have the other opinion in these discussions, not having a problem running a fun and effective game at any level. We used feats; everyone had plenty of magic items; and at least one PC multiclassed. One PC was a GWM champion with a Defender greatsword that frequently had foresight cast on her.

1. I converted Age of Worms to 5e and ran the campaign from levels 1 to 20 over 3 years. We had a lot of fun with the higher levels. In preparation, I did nothing more than use the 3.5 adventures, build the missing monsters using the guidelines in the DMG, and build the encounters using the guidelines in the DMG.

2. The encounter building math worked for us throughout the campaign through every level of play.

3. The monster hp and frequency to hit are part of the balancing act. If the monsters hit more frequently, the PCs would not make it through the adventuring day. If the monsters were not bags of hit points, the fights would be over fast as PCs can dish out the damage. I try to have each monster do at least 1 interesting thing. One was a long-distance eldritch blast warlock who shot a PC off a drawbridge, sent him through the 9 hells, and had him reappear in midair before falling into the moat of acid. Another was a CR 20 oathbreaker paladin. One class of monsters turned PCs into favored spawn of Kyuss if they died in its gullet. There was the spellweaver lich who could cast up to 6 spell slots worth of spells (in any combination) each turn. A half-orc barbarian had a potion of growth. Inquisitors have an unblockable counterspell.

4. I have never had a TPK, but I have had many sessions where some of my players were starting to chant "TPK! TPK!" I have had characters die several times, but they almost never stay dead.

5. My issue with the 6-8 encounters per day is that a DM follows that at the risk of having encounters just to have encounters. In my opinion encounters should be there to further the story, and sometimes the story does not have 6-8 encounters in a day. Some encounter days are "long days" with 6-8 encounters either at or a little above the party's level. One day recently was two EL 7 encounters for the level 3 party with a short rest in between.

I have built a few things to help me with all the number crunching. The first is a CR calculating spreadsheet. The second is an encounter building spreadsheet that modifies the guidelines slightly. In the DMG rules, there are spikes in the encounter XP multiplier as you pass certain numbers of monsters and PCs. My spreadsheet smooths out those spikes so that adding a monster moves the multiplier predictably (instead of 1 number after the first monster and a wildly different number after the second). Both of those files, as well as my Age of Worms conversion, are available by clicking my user name and then clicking the Downloads link.

I have also adopted two main house rules. The first is to use Matt Mercer's resurrection rules which feature a chance of failure on resurrection while allies can aid the person performing the ritual. The second is a modification of the falling rules. I was frustrated that high-level PCs can shrug off falling 1,000 feet. Rather than arbitrarily deciding when a PC dies from a fall. I made a table based on falling speed of a 6-foot person while allowing the creature to make a Dexterity (Acrobatics) check as a reaction and reduce the damage by the amount of the check. The end result is that a commoner can both die or take no damage from a 10-foot fall, a PC has a chance of taking no damage from a 20-foot fall, and some high-level PCs can scrape themselves off the pavement but be heavily damaged after a 1,000-foot fall. The falling house rule is also in my Downloads section.

 

[Riley37]

How important is it, to your DM style, that the PCs encounter foes which are closely matched to their abilities?

I'm happy with a game in which the PCs don't know whether a foe will be easy to defeat, hard to defeat, easy but only if they burn resources, or it's time to run away. If the DM doesn't know either, and both sides of the screen find out the hard way, then so much the better, as long as the PCs have an option to retreat or surrender.

 

[OB1]

Here is my two silver

1) 5e doesn't seem to support high level play. Most official products tap out at 11th level. There's little to no help in showing DMs how to craft adventures or encounters for higher level. It's as if there is no intention that characters should play beyond mid level.

As others have mentioned, the DMG is fantastic support for high level play. Because of the wide variety of party ability that Feats,Multiclassing and Magic Items bring, it's very difficult to design a one size fits all adventure. Undermountain this fall is going to attempt it, but I'd be willing to be that it will have a LOT of advice for tweaking to meet individual parties in levels 14 and above.

2) The encounter creation math just doesn't work. Some monsters (such as hellhounds) can decimate low level parties. Others are not even challenging at all.

Are you sure you are using correctly? If you aren't using the multiplier effect for number of enemies you can be quite off in your estimate. For example 4 CR 3 Hellhounds against a 4th level 4 pc party isn't 2,800EP vs the deadly threshold of 2,000, it's 5,600, almost triple a deadly encounter.

3) Most combats are boring. There are few tactical options, and most monsters are just bags of hit points, ever-increasing as characters level up. (This seems to originate from the bounded accuracy design goal.) Most monsters can't reliably hit PC Armor Class.

Terrain features, IMO, make all the difference in combat, and one of the main reasons I use Theatre of the Mind for most encounters. Also, Volo's, Mordenkainen's and (if you are okay with third party) Tome of Beasts present a much wider variety of monster abilities that might be to you're liking. Tome of Beasts especially has a much more 3e/4e feel to the monsters.

4) You either have a TPK or no character ever dies. (Not that I like character death, but it should at least feel threatening without being "campaign-ending")

Not my experience. Never had a TPK in 5e but have had a handful of character deaths. Of course, my intelligent monsters don't allow wack-a-mole tactics. Once they see someone stand from 0 HP once in a combat, they will press their advantage when they get it and hit them when they are down until they are dead.

5) Few groups (or official products) actually follow the encounters per day guideline, creating overpowered casters and underpowered martial characters.

This is usually due to a misunderstanding of what the guidelines mean. You can reach the expected daily XP budget by creating 3 deadly level encounters. You also don't need to hit the guideline every day. Players just need to BELIEVE that there will be that many encounters. All it takes is to have the BBEG's lieutenants show up immediately after you defeat said BBEG to avenge her death in a deadly encounter to make the players think twice about going Nova unless they have to. Or to have a mission where there are more encounters than they can possibly overcome if they fight them all to get them looking for ways to avoid unnecessary fights.

All in all, 5e suggests a certain type of play that is different than past editions. Rather than fight the rule system, I suggest trying to understand it and then tailoring your game to fit.

 

[Oofta]

A lot of what I think has already been covered. D&D is far too flexible in character creation and implementation to answer all of your questions. It's far from perfect but I do think it's the best version yet.

1) 5e doesn't seem to support high level play. Most official products tap out at 11th level. There's little to no help in showing DMs how to craft adventures or encounters for higher level. It's as if there is no intention that characters should play beyond mid level.

Older versions of the game (3 and before) fell apart after about level 14/15. I played in and ran games to 30th in 4E, it was a boring slog-fest that took an hour or more per turn. I've played in and run games that ran to 20th in 5E. The games in 5E were a little silly at times with the wizard taking out entire encampments with Meteor Storm, but I was still able to challenge the players.

2) The encounter creation math just doesn't work. Some monsters (such as hellhounds) can decimate low level parties. Others are not even challenging at all.

I use it as a rule of thumb, but you still have to think about the encounter. I've done encounters that were "low" and ones that were "high" that were about the same challenge. Throw a "calculation level appropriate" encounter with just flameskulls, give them a surprise round and you're probably risking a TPK. Bunch of ogres approaching in fireball formation? Cakewalk.

So as a general guideline adjusted appropriately for your party, it works decent most of the time. Use it assuming a single calculation will work for every group and every monster combo regardless of environment? Obviously not going to work.

3) Most combats are boring. There are few tactical options, and most monsters are just bags of hit points, ever-increasing as characters level up. (This seems to originate from the bounded accuracy design goal.) Most monsters can't reliably hit PC Armor Class.

Being blunt: you're doing it wrong. Vary goals, terrain, tactics. It could be a whole other thread.

4) You either have a TPK or no character ever dies. (Not that I like character death, but it should at least feel threatening without being "campaign-ending")

Not in my experience. I'm not generally a killer DM but I have killed PCs, and had encounters where they were hanging on by a thread.

5) Few groups (or official products) actually follow the encounters per day guideline, creating overpowered casters and underpowered martial characters.

I use the alternate rules where a short rest is overnight, a long rest is several days or a week or so depending on where they are. That fits the pace of my campaign since I generally don't do dungeon crawls.

Having said that, I set up situations and challenges I don't "count" encounters ahead of time.

I've been watching Matt Colville's YouTube videos, and at his advice, I'm going through my old 4e books for inspiration. I've been redesigning every monster and the encounter math. The game I'm running now is still 5e from the players' perspective, but everything on my side of the DM Screen is homebrewed.

Has anyone else run into similar issues? If so, how did you address them?

I do use custom monsters on a pretty regular basis or modify existing. So that dragon? It has levels of sorcerer. That death knight? It has a split personality, with each personality taking a turn. That "boss" monster? It's going to transform during the fight with different tactics at different levels.

The only limit is your imagination. The rules are merely a framework to start your game. If you have specific questions, ask them. Don't throw them into a general D&D SUCKS post.

 

[Jester David]

1) 5e doesn't seem to support high level play. Most official products tap out at 11th level. There's little to no help in showing DMs how to craft adventures or encounters for higher level. It's as if there is no intention that characters should play beyond mid level.

No edition has really supported this, because its seldom played. There's a reason the number of encounters between levels drops suddenly after level 10: so people will actually have a chance to play at that level.
Even with storyline adventures, going to 20 is tricky. And not just because of the page count making it harder to hit 20th level. Groups are going to break apart, parties with TPK, the next adventure will be released and people will want to switch, etc. And all those will prevent a group from hitting 20.
It's always going to be a much smaller, niche market.

2) The encounter creation math just doesn't work. Some monsters (such as hellhounds) can decimate low level parties. Others are not even challenging at all.

It works better than the encounter creation math in almost every other game in the market (i.e. the games without one). Encounter creation is typically left to the GM to just figure out. Because, often, that's the best way.
The encounter building rules are in the DMG for two reasons:
1) Because they're expected.
2) For a standardized method for designing encounters for published adventures.

You're not really expected to use them. Because there's too many unwritten variables.
Imagine I say "Design an encounter for my party. They're 3 level 8 PCs, one level 7, and one level 8. Go!" What do you do? What's an appropriate challenge. You cannot say because it depends on how many encounters they will have before or after. What classes the PCs are. What builds the PCs are. How optimised for combat the party is.
Having an undead heavy encounter won't hinder a party with a higher level cleric and a paladin. A party with a ranger, warlock, and halfling sniper rogue might rip apart most fights that rely on melee.

3) Most combats are boring. There are few tactical options, and most monsters are just bags of hit points, ever-increasing as characters level up. (This seems to originate from the bounded accuracy design goal.) Most monsters can't reliably hit PC Armor Class.

This is on the DM.
5e, like 3e, really relies on the DM to make encounters tactical and dynamic through the creation and use of terrain, lighting, environment effects, and monsters using their natural abilities effectively. Plus, because low level monsters like orcs or goblins might transition from being 1-on-1 threats to fighting PCs in groups of 3 or 6 or 10 having those monsters have a three or four tactical choices would be overwhelming. They're designed for speed.

4e was better for tactical play out of the box. But the trade-out was far more complicated monsters and much slower play. When the game is designed for interesting and tactical combat encounters, it's instantly harder for short mook fights and incidental encounters. The small scene where a failed attempt at sneaking results in a quick brawl or the sudden bandit ambush on the road takes up an hour rather than a quick 15 minute speedbump.

4) You either have a TPK or no character ever dies. (Not that I like character death, but it should at least feel threatening without being "campaign-ending")

This is also on the DM.
You have to hit PCs when they're down. Most monsters have multiple melee attacks, so it's not much of a problem to spend one of their four attacks pounding a fallen PC. Two failed death saves right there. Remembering to include downed PCs in AoEs can also help, as can ongoing environmental damage.
Hindering line of sight can also be problematic. Ranged healing spells require you to target the PC and anything that obscures vision greatly hinders healing.

Smart, high level opponents will know that PCs aren't going to stay down and letting them remain alive hurts them in the long run. Putting the fallen PC in the fireball's radius makes sense.

5) Few groups (or official products) actually follow the encounters per day guideline, creating overpowered casters and underpowered martial characters.

This is mostly perception.
Because spellcasters were so powerful in past editions, people still expect that in this edition, especially when they can nova. The players see what they expect to see. The remember the time the wizard broke an encounter and not the time the rogue critted and devastated the boss.
Short adventuring days of 2-3 encounters with a short rest can really help the martial characters. Barbarians and rogues can be amazing regardless of the number of encounters, and being able to rage in every fight helps barbs. And fighters can pack a lot of damage into a couple short encounters where they can nova action surge and superiority dice without having to pace those out.
In general, the number of rounds in an encounter is a higher balancing factor. The wizard can only get so many spells out each round.

Very often the power difference between martials and spellcasters in 5e comes down to player skill. Optimizers are drawn to the many choices of spellcasters while players who want a simple character might go fighter or rogue. Which creates a self fulfilling prophecy of the strongest character, with the player not using the class to its full potential.

 

[Tony Vargas]

. The game I'm running now is still 5e from the players' perspective, but everything on my side of the DM Screen is homebrewed.

Has anyone else run into similar issues? If so, how did you address them?

Sure, but only since I started running D&D in the 80s. While I did happily go the extensive variants rout back in the day, as well, simply improvising things as I go - from behind the screen, so it's still D&D to the players - is my preferred style.

 

[Tony Vargas]

5e doesn't seem to support high level play. Most official products tap out at 11th level. There's little to no help in showing DMs how to craft adventures or encounters for higher level. It's as if there is no intention that characters should play beyond mid level.

True, and it's a perennial issue. Level advancement is key to D&D, but it wasn't initially conceived to cover 20 levels. It seems like high-level spells, for instance, starting at 5th or 6th, were conceived as penultimate expressions of magical power for high-level opponents like liches and the like, only to be acquired by PCs achieving those same unprecedented levels, requiring yet another penultimate spell level.
Level advancement works great at first, but eventually the system creaks under it's weight, becoming less & less playable.

Even so, D&D has made attempts. The Masters & Immortals sets and the Epic Level Handbook both provided material for very high level play. They suffered from the same problems, but they were support. Conversely, 4e Epic Tier was mechanically sound, but under-supported, much as Paragon Tier had been until DMG2 - perhaps if there had been a DMG3, we might have finally had both workable mechanics and significant support for very high level play, but, instead, we got Essentials, which refocused the game on Heroic, again.

There has long been a self-defeating loop. "There's no support so we don't play it, so they don't design it because no one plays it.".

Exactly.

At this point, it's just become part of what it is to be D&D, that high level play is fraught, so wrap it up and start a new campaign. So, 5e has a 'sweet spot,' by design, IMHO, since the exp tables and encounter budgets help you move quickly out of the lowest levels into it, then slows advancement down to savor it, before speeding up again to get through as much of the higher levels as you can stand. That sweet spot is about 4-12, at the outside.