D&D 5E 5th ed D&D general impressions from a new player and DM.

[DND_Reborn]

Unless, of course, the monsters are smart enough to target the cleric, double tap downed PCs*, drag unconscious or dead PCs off to be eaten elsewhere. restrain the cleric or use other methods to ensure they can't find or get to the PC, so on and so forth.

I don't run a particularly lethal game because of player preference (I always ask during session 0), but as a DM I also have infinite dragons.

*Attacks against an unconscious creature have advantage and are always critical hits. Critical hits cause 2 failed death saves

How do your monsters (especially since many aren't particularly smart) know which PC is the cleric...?

Yeah, I double-tap downed PCs when I can (well aware of the rules on it). I am a lethal DM if the players let their PCs get themselves in trouble.

And you shouldn't have to design your encounters because the game makes survival too easy.

But of course, the DM always has infinite dragons, as you say, but unless the encounter matches the adventure, I don't use them.

I have a house rule that if you get knocked to 0 hp, you come back with a level of exhaustion. This definitely helped.

Yeah, we've been doing that since nearly the beginning. It makes sense and helps with the whack-a-mole issue.

I have a stacked of sealed envelopes containing embarrassing and damaging information on the players. Whenever one of their characters reaches 0 hp I send off one of the envelopes. It has really increased the tension of my games!

LOL that could be interested!

 

[Oofta]

How do your monsters (especially since many aren't particularly smart) know which PC is the cleric...?

That's why I qualified my statement with 'if they're smart enough". I don't think it takes a great deal of knowledge in a world where combat cleric exist to realize that the guy waving around a holy symbol casting a spell while touching a downed comrade who then stands up takes a whole lot of intelligence.

And you shouldn't have to design your encounters because the game makes survival too easy.

But of course, the DM always has infinite dragons, as you say, but unless the encounter matches the adventure, I don't use them.

I'm just saying that even at higher levels (I've run up to level 20) you can set it up so that PCs die, especially if they do stupid things. Either design your encounters to be threatening or don't complain about it. The opposition will match the scenario, but I'm also not going to have a high level party hunting giant rats in Granny's basement and then complain the game is too easy. Unless, of course, granny is really a shapechanging demon and her basement is really a one way portal to the abyss.

 

[Azuresun]

Just a note to the OP--read the DMG guidelines on encounters yourself. Lots of people don't read what the text actually says and take "6-8 encounters" as holy writ based entirely on what other people say.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I'm just saying that even at higher levels (I've run up to level 20) you can set it up so that PCs die, especially if they do stupid things.

So have I, and I set up the challenges to be deadly, especially when they do stupid things!

Either design your encounters to be threatening or don't complain about it.

To be clear, I am not complaining about MY encounters, I am complaining that the game (as designed) is pretty easy and meant to be won. Some people like games you are meant to win--I prefer games that are challenging both as a player and as a DM.

I'm also not going to have a high level party hunting giant rats in Granny's basement and then complain the game is too easy.

Then you wouldn't be building encounters the way the game is designed to, either, you would intentionally be making it even easier than it already is.

Anyway, respond if you want, but this is derailing the thread's purpose so I am done with this discussion. It's been done before and never resolves anything so further debate on this issue is fruitless.

Besides, I have to prep for today's Shadowrun game.

Just a note to the OP--read the DMG guidelines on encounters yourself. Lots of people don't read what the text actually says and take "6-8 encounters" as holy writ based entirely on what other people say.

If you can actually understand them.

 

[Blue Orange]

I have a stacked of sealed envelopes containing embarrassing and damaging information on the players. Whenever one of their characters reaches 0 hp I send off one of the envelopes. It has really increased the tension of my games!

You're blackmailing the characters, or the players?

 

[Charlaquin]

Just a note to the OP--read the DMG guidelines on encounters yourself. Lots of people don't read what the text actually says and take "6-8 encounters" as holy writ based entirely on what other people say.

Certainly a lot of people who don’t like the 6-8 encounter adventuring day guideline seem to think that those who do are “treating it as holy writ.” The truth, however, if you look closely at the game’s math, is that the 6-8 encounter adventuring day is simply an underlying assumption the designers used to balance the math. Just like starting with a 16 in your primary ability and increasing to 18 and 20 at levels 4 and 8, just like getting +1, +2, and +3 weapons at levels 5, 11, and 17. None of these things are requirements. The game runs fine even if you don’t follow any of these guidelines. They’re just the assumptions the system math is built around.

 

[Oofta]

So have I, and I set up the challenges to be deadly, especially when they do stupid things!


To be clear, I am not complaining about MY encounters, I am complaining that the game (as designed) is pretty easy and meant to be won. Some people like games you are meant to win--I prefer games that are challenging both as a player and as a DM.

Then you wouldn't be building encounters the way the game is designed to, either, you would intentionally be making it even easier than it already is.

Anyway, respond if you want, but this is derailing the thread's purpose so I am done with this discussion. It's been done before and never resolves anything so further debate on this issue is fruitless.

Besides, I have to prep for today's Shadowrun game.

On topic of advice for a new DM: feel free to play around with threat level guidelines. They're just guidelines. I've run for different groups with the same options and what was a cakewalk for one group was a serious threat to another. Also, the guidelines (and most mods) seem to be written for a party of 4 with no magic items, feats, using point buy or array.

Have fun with your game!

 

[Azuresun]

Certainly a lot of people who don’t like the 6-8 encounter adventuring day guideline seem to think that those who do are “treating it as holy writ.” The truth, however, if you look closely at the game’s math, is that the 6-8 encounter adventuring day is simply an underlying assumption the designers used to balance the math. Just like starting with a 16 in your primary ability and increasing to 18 and 20 at levels 4 and 8, just like getting +1, +2, and +3 weapons at levels 5, 11, and 17. None of these things are requirements. The game runs fine even if you don’t follow any of these guidelines. They’re just the assumptions the system math is built around.

I asked that the OP read it for themselves. If you're sure that the single sentence of text in the DMG obviously supports your theory, then you have nothing to worry about.

 

[Charlaquin]

I asked that the OP read it for themselves. If you're sure that the single sentence of text in the DMG obviously supports your theory, then you have nothing to worry about.

The single sentence of text is a single sentence of text. The system’s math supports my claim. But, of course, nobody wants to crunch the numbers to confirm for themselves, least of all people who don’t like the guideline. It is true that math is built on those assumptions, whether you believe me or not. Again though, those assumptions don’t need to be adhered to for the game to work.

 

[DND_Reborn]