D&D 5E Level 20 Class Competition Ideas

[FireLance]

Somewhat late to the discussion, but I think a standard one-on-one single fight overly advantages PCs with daily abilities. I wonder how the builds and tactics would change if the rules of the competion were as follows instead:

1. No preparation.
2. The fight is over eight bouts of three rounds each, with one hour between each bout.
3. The contestants are allowed to take three short rests which are evenly spaced: between bout 2 and 3, 4 and 5, and 6 and 7.
4. Any time a contestant is killed in a bout, his opponent scores one victory. The dead contestant is then raised and restored to full hit points, and the next bout commences one hour later as normal.
5. The winner is the contestant who has scored the most victories after all eight bouts. If both contestants are tied after eight bouts, they fight a ninth bout with no time limit.

In this way, a nasty combo might win you one bout, but you had better be able to do something equally impressive in the other seven (or eight).

 

[Sword of Spirit]

Somewhat late to the discussion, but I think a standard one-on-one single fight overly advantages PCs with daily abilities. I wonder how the builds and tactics would change if the rules of the competion were as follows instead:

1. No preparation.
2. The fight is over eight bouts of three rounds each, with one hour between each bout.
3. The contestants are allowed to take three short rests which are evenly spaced: between bout 2 and 3, 4 and 5, and 6 and 7.
4. Any time a contestant is killed in a bout, his opponent scores one victory. The dead contestant is then raised and restored to full hit points, and the next bout commences one hour later as normal.
5. The winner is the contestant who has scored the most victories after all eight bouts. If both contestants are tied after eight bouts, they fight a ninth bout with no time limit.

In this way, a nasty combo might win you one bout, but you had better be able to do something equally impressive in the other seven (or eight).

That could work, but it's probably best to start each bout with full hp (regardless of whether you won or lost the previous one). Otherwise it gets complicated in a way that wouldn't necessarily add to the experience.

 

[FireLance]

That could work, but it's probably best to start each bout with full hp (regardless of whether you won or lost the previous one). Otherwise it gets complicated in a way that wouldn't necessarily add to the experience.

If you do that, then it still advantages characters who pump out a lot of damage in a single bout, and then play defensively to take advantage of the full heal between bouts.

This way, a character can only heal after defeat or expending his own resources: spells/abilities, actions and Hit Dice.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Somewhat late to the discussion, but I think a standard one-on-one single fight overly advantages PCs with daily abilities. I wonder how the builds and tactics would change if the rules of the competion were as follows instead:

1. No preparation.
2. The fight is over eight bouts of three rounds each, with one hour between each bout.
3. The contestants are allowed to take three short rests which are evenly spaced: between bout 2 and 3, 4 and 5, and 6 and 7.
4. Any time a contestant is killed in a bout, his opponent scores one victory. The dead contestant is then raised and restored to full hit points, and the next bout commences one hour later as normal.
5. The winner is the contestant who has scored the most victories after all eight bouts. If both contestants are tied after eight bouts, they fight a ninth bout with no time limit.

In this way, a nasty combo might win you one bout, but you had better be able to do something equally impressive in the other seven (or eight).

No preparation favors martial PCs. It means a wizard won't even have Mage Armor or Contingency cast, for example, which pretty much any wizard would have daily. For no prep, it would also mean warriors have no armor on, either. In which case, Barbarians and Monks would definitely get an edge. That is why I like the idea that casters can have one prepared spells whose duration must be at least an hour (or maybe 8 hours or something).

As for the idea of a boxing match with bouts, short rests, and such. Personally it is unnecessarily complicated IMO. Doing three matches lets the loser learn the strategy that the winner used and try to think of an effective counter and gives a chance for lucky or unlucky rolls to smooth out a bit.

The point is, you aren't facing multiple opponents, just one. So there should be no need to do something equally impressive after your foe is dead... he's dead after all. That was the point of the original question in the other thread.

 

[Hohige]

No preparation favors martial PCs. It means a wizard won't even have Mage Armor or Contingency cast, for example, which pretty much any wizard would have daily. For no prep, it would also mean warriors have no armor on, either. In which case, Barbarians and Monks would definitely get an edge. That is why I like the idea that casters can have one prepared spells whose duration must be at least an hour (or maybe 8 hours or something).

I beg to disagree

It also apply to magic itens or spell components or spell focus.
No prep time is the best way, no prebuff.

If It does, the Sorcerer just cast extended Etherealness (I win button). It's unfair against Martials or Wizard's portent/spells

All you will know about your opponent is their CLASS. You will NOT know their race, subclass, etc. or what they are capable of.

Metagame? Is the decision to waste your single 9th spell slot with Invulnerability difficult?


If your character can discover the enemy's class. OK. If not, good luck. It seems to me that the metagame is, is it martial? I cast Invulnerability
Is it spellcaster? Another spell, because I expended my 9th level spells slot and The enemy dispels it.