D&D 5E How many combat encounters per adventuring day does your group have?

[Flamestrike]

I like to have at least one combat per night of gaming. Sometimes the party is in town and researching, looking for clues and such. Travel on a road with some roleplay and such, but one combat can still be thrown in to satisfy some of the players who like that over some of the other aspects.

In an area where they are at the 'dungeon', I like to make something that can be handled in one night so maybe the 5-8 encounters with a couple maybe being traps and puzzles over just combat. Maybe 1/4 of the traditional dungeons are 2 night with 10-12 encounters.

You're conflating 'adventuring day' with 'nightly session at my house'.

They're not even remotely close to being the same thing.

 

[clearstream]

The main purpose of random encounters is to put pressure on players to move through dungeons quickly an quietly, which conflicts with the need to proceed carefully. This is one of the main ways to create tension in dungeon crawls.

For me it is broader than that. Yes, it does create pressure to move through risky environments quickly and carefully. It also makes the world feel more alive, as creatures are roaming about doing whatever it is they need to do and you might well run into them.

The most spectacular random encounter we had was in OOTA. Based on events emerging from the written storyline I had placed Demogorgon in the Dark Lake, impacting on trade and communities throughout that area. The chance of encountering him in the Dark Lake was 1 in 20 per voyage (typical random encounter chances in OOTA are 14+ twice per day). At one point the party were under time pressure to return to Blingdenstone from Graklstugh and decided to risk it. We made the random encounter check in the open and sure enough they met him... with disastrous consequences.

For me, tailored random encounters with well considered probabilities help instantiate a living world. In ToA, I've associated the tomb guardians (the tomb random encounter) with a feeling of being watched (which is correct per the written storyline, as Withers is watching them).

 

[JohnF]

To address the original survey question about the Adventuring Day game structure, here's my personal 5e DM experience when combat will be the dominant type of encounter:

• 1 Adventuring Day = 2 real-time sessions, approximately 4 hours each
  • The first of those two sessions is around 4 encounters: 1 or 2 medium, and the rest are hard; the PCs generally get 1 short rest during this session and 1 short rest at the end of this session.
  • The second of those two sessions is 2 or 3 encounters: always hard, unless the drama of it all demands deadly; the PCs get their long rest at the end of this session, and then we enter Between Adventures time.
• Of course, variations to the above occur when unexpected outcomes develop and they would be fun to pursue. In those cases, the Adventuring Day structure gets sidelined, and rests just sort of happen when they need to happen for the PCs.
• Exploration with random combat encounters - and its relative "realism" - is very much to the personal taste of a group, so what entertains the players matters more. (I don't have a preference.) Do they like tracking miles and days on a map and calendar? Then the Adventuring Days and resting are in the players' hands (while I'm mentally advancing the baddies' schemes to that same calendar). Do they prefer lighter narrated exploration without a map just for the story-vibe of it? I'll apply the Adventuring Day structure as the random encounters, if any, emerge.

Again, this is just my personal experience of 5e.

 

[Oofta]

When it comes to random encounters in my game, they are only sort-of random. For any given locale, there may be a chance of encountering patrols or opponents that fit the scenario. This may be the result of bad luck, bad choices or failed checks.

I regularly prep an extra simple grouping or two of monsters that would be appropriate for the what's going on so that I can throw them in if it makes sense. In other words, if they are trying to infiltrate castle X they have a chance to observe patrols. If they don't take the time to determine patrol patterns, it's random luck whether they encounter one. Depending on how stealthy the observer is, there may be a chance of encounter. If a guard escapes to get reinforcements, or they are otherwise observed I have something to use.

What I don't do is tell people there's X% chance of a random encounter, or roll on a generic table to see what shows up. Sometimes for pacing and thematic reasons I may decide to throw in one of the encounters. Most of the time though it's because they turned left at Albuquerque when I didn't even expect them to even get to the city.

 

[Vaalingrade]

The main purpose of random encounters is to put pressure on players to move through dungeons quickly an quietly, which conflicts with the need to proceed carefully. This is one of the main ways to create tension in dungeon crawls.
Or that was the concept 40 years ago.

To me as a DM, they usually feel like an obligation to prove there's monsters between the PC's starting point and the place that matters and once we service that obligation once we can get to the interesting place.

Also, they are never random because I pick them ahead of time.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Combats will come if the story dictates it. Thus there's no guarantee of how many times that will happen in any particular day (either in-game per adventuring day, or out-of-game per session.) Now, because it's D&D and D&D is a roleplaying game built from the ground up as a "go kill monsters" board game, combat will usually be the more prominent story choice that results when different options are available. But you can never be sure.

 

[Campbell]

The 5e game I'm a player in generally has about 2-3 combat encounters per adventuring day with no more than 2 fights in a single session. Given a 4 hour session I can't imagine having more fights than that and actually getting to like play your character outside of combat.

The games I run tend to have a fair number of possible fights, but one will generally only break out every 3-5 sessions. That's a big part of the reason I have moved towards Conan 2d20 and Pathfinder Second Edition for the fantasy games I run. They tend to still feel good in low combat/attrition environments.

Despite the labeling I do think 5e feels pretty good with at least 3 fights a day (of sufficient difficulty). You can still put significant pressure on PCs that way. Less than that and resource management doesn't seem to matter that much (from my perspective as a player).

 

[Flamestrike]

The 5e game I'm a player in generally has about 2-3 combat encounters per adventuring day with no more than 2 fights in a single session.

At that frequency, the Gritty rest variant would work like a charm.

2-3 combat encounters effectively per short rest, with the PCs needing to fall back every 3rd or so session to long rest.

 

[MatthewJHanson]

I voted 3-5, which is pretty typical for the campaign when out adventuring, though sometimes more and sometimes less. I frequently have "interludes" where there is just one battle between adventures.

I also try to include other encounters that drain resources in the adventures, such as traps or obstacles that require spell slots to overcome.

 

[Rabulias]

To me as a DM, they usually feel like an obligation to prove there's monsters between the PC's starting point and the place that matters and once we service that obligation once we can get to the interesting place.

As per the Laws of Encounter Probability: 145 Mr(s). Wizard Explains It All - Giant in the Playground Games