D&D 5E FeeFiFoFum *splat* goes the giants

[Oofta]

We got to pre-buff a bit. Our sorcerer has an item which allowed him to bless the entire party, and the paladin cast aid, and my fighter (who has chef) gave out a few measly temp hp. The sorcerer won initiative, fireball, hit all of them... does nothing.

The 3 young remoraz has AC 16, the big one AC 18 (not 19, sorry about that). The big one also attacked twice a round. The 3 young one rushed forward due to high initiative, while the big one was last.

The returning player (also level 7) is a Paladin of Glory with a giant slayer 2nd handed sword - you'll note that's not super helpful vs remoraz. He also has a wand with ice powers, and he wasted some time learning it does nothing vs remoraz. He rushed forward to distract the big one and keep it busy.

Particularly painful was when he took a huge hit to protect his horse, and then "cleverly" used the ice wand to create a sleet storm to cover his retreat and slow the remoraz down... but it has tremor sense, so the GM ruled it didn't have disadvantage on the AoO, hit the paladin again, brought him to zero and swallowed him.

We had 2 allies - two awakened trees - but they did not act for 2 rounds, as we learned that they apparently don't help you unless specifically told. They then delayed the big Remoraz for 2 rounds which was clutch, but also very importantly the GM ruled that they punched the big remoraz in the stomach hard enough to make it throw up, thus expulsing the paladin from its stomach. This was the GM going easy on us, because this situation was going to be a guaranteed PC kill otherwise (stomach acid damage = auto failed death saves...). The sorcerer was able weave through the commotion and heal the paladin, which then used lay on hand to get back to near full.

Our monk almost got killed and he resorted to hit and run tactics. Using a +1 whip, con 12... it was rough. I think he managed to land 2 stunning strikes the entire battle.

My fighter was ... fairly effective. Not a ton of damage, but lots of defensive use of his psi power to shield the others and the luck feat to keep himself alive. I know some of you want to know what items he has and the ones that mattered in this fight was +1 studded leather armor and a sun blade - yes, it's a good weapon, but in this situation, it's a + 2 sword.

We managed to kill the 3 small ones, but the big one was still kicking and a lot of our resources were depleted - the paladin was back down to 15 hp. But then more allies showed up and we won the fight. But yes, it was brutal. Without the bless OR the trees we would probably have lost people. In fact, you could say we did because the GM essentially gave the paladin a get out of jail card, because there was no way we could have rescued him.

So in other words, the DM may not have used their infinite dragons but instead used infinite remorhaz. Which has been my point. The DM can always make more difficult encounters. Ultimately it's up to the DM to figure out how to make encounters fun. Did they really plan on exactly when reinforcements would arrive, or did they just wait until it was dramatic?

D&D is as challenging as the DM and players want it to be and no encounter calculation can take into account every variable. In this case the paladin made some, shall we say, less than tactically sound decisions. The DM made some calls that were not strictly in the rules (it takes 2 turns to swallow someone, attack and grapple first round then swallow second), the punch getting the paladin out.

But imagine if the sorcerer had gotten off two lightning bolts managing to line things up just right while the targets failed their saves? What if the paladin hadn't taken unnecessary hits or done ineffective attacks? Would this encounter suddenly have been "surprisingly easy"?

 

[Stalker0]

From what I've seen, it's a really good try. Way too complex for me

Assuming you use the main encounter system (because almost all of the math is the same formula as core) what about it do you find complex?

also it does factor in surprise.

 

[Ancalagon]

Well for context, as a baseline this fight was 4.2x deadly compared to the hill giants 2.1x. Literally twice the deadliness of the last encounter. Even in my game where my players knock down regular deadlies like nothing would I consider a 4.2x deadly a "real good chance of death" type of fight.

Obviously its clear this party would have suffered deaths or a TPK if not for DM intervention. But what started this thread in the first place wasn't the notion that PCs are invincible, yes it is always possible to kill PCS. The concern was the "degree" of difficulty a group of players seems to be able to face.

a few comments I can make here, but I'll start with the math.

I'll note to start that I don't know how to account to the presence of the 2 animated tree allies. Even if you ignore the "DM intervention" to save the paladin, their holding the large worm for 2 rounds was very important.

So, math. (1800X3 + 7200)x2 = 25 2000 xp. Our encounter budget for deadly was 6800, so it's "3.7 times deadly". I think you may have been off because of the extra PC in this battle.

What I think is interesting here is seeing what level would this be still considered deadly - and it's 14. I really don't think this would be a challenge for a party that level at all...

Which brings me to a more overall conclusion - Of course, it's always possible for the DM to kill PCs. I have heard many say that the DMG encounter guide is too "easy" on the PCs and I think I would agree... this new battle doesn't change my mind.

 

[Mort]

Which brings me to a more overall conclusion - Of course, it's always possible for the DM to kill PCs. I have heard many say that the DMG encounter guide is too "easy" on the PCs and I think I would agree... this new battle doesn't change my mind.

Gotta say, from the description of this fight - it seems like your DM likes to put you guys in dangerous situations but then nudges things just enough so you guys don't actually die, the addition of the awakened trees seems in that direction(If nothing else, Remorhaz don't spit things out unless they take 30hp from inside, so he was generous there).

I mean the Adult alone was doing enough damage to down half the group in 1 hit and down anyone in the group in 2 (we're talking 50-100 damage per round with +11 to hit). Couple that with the Young ones doing around 27 HP on a hit (and there were 3 of them).

The fact that the mage wasted the 1st round on fireball (which did nothing) - could easily have been a death sentence if the DM had chosen it to be so.

I guess that's just another personal preference. I prefer to not heavily over CR (unless I'm sure the group can handle it, or the group puts themselves into a position where it's naturally unavoidable) so I don't feel I have to hold back or nudge.

 

[Stalker0]

Which brings me to a more overall conclusion - Of course, it's always possible for the DM to kill PCs. I have heard many say that the DMG encounter guide is too "easy" on the PCs and I think I would agree... this new battle doesn't change my mind.

So I was thinking some more about why I have such a different reaction to 5e's encounter building than I did 4e and 3e. Now at first I thought it might be the bounded accuracy, higher level monsters don't scale that quickly and so low level people can take out higher level threats much more easily then the flavor might allow.

That is part of it, but that's not SO new, I mean one good 3x crit in 3e and you can do way more damage than normal and take out a big baddie. So what is it?

I think part of my issue is the removal of the "you must be this cool to fight this monster" type mechanics. Lets use the 3.5 spell blasphemy as an example. Blasphemy was a minor issue if you were about equal with the bad guy, but if you were a bit lower level, you were stopped cold (literally, it paralyzed you . A 13th level cleric was a terror to any party 8th level or lower because this one spell could absolutely curbstomp them. Even if on paper, and 8th level party could easily do enough damage to take out a 13th level cleric..... you really had to consider if it was worth the risk.

Another example is level drain, say a vampire. Now sure level drain is bad for anyone, but the lower the level you are, the greater the risk that you just die from it straight off. So a vampire was a very scary threat to a lower level party. Even DR is a good example, DR is nastier the less damage you do....higher level parties with more raw damage are less effected by them. In 5e where everything is halved, everyone is hit equally.

Now the mechanics of 3e were far from ideal (and 5e cleaned a lot of things up) but I think what this did is give certain classes of monster "riff raff" protection. No matter how physically strong a party of X level is....when dealing with a Y tier monster, they always had to tread carefully. But in 5e it mostly comes down to DPR vs hitpoints.... yes some higher level abilities are scary but generally its more about stronger DCS (and not that much stronger) and more hitpoints/damage. As long as the party can match that needed DPR....they can take on a great deal of high level threats.

I'll try to put it in an even simpler way. 5e uses CR as a warning.... if you use a CR higher than your average party level, you are adding in a lot of risk. I think that is only true with a select group of monsters, past 5th level, a party can often take on CRs way above that weight class, and I think its because those monsters have no "riff raff" protection.

Here is an example of some more "5e style" mechanic that might offer some form of the "riff raff" protection I am referring to.

Aura of Dread: Any creature within 60 feet that has a proficiency bonus of +3 or less gains the frightened condition until they leave the aura.

Adamantine Scales: Unless the attacker has a +4 proficiency bonus or higher, they suffer disadvantage on all attack rolls.

Weakening Mist: Make a constitution saving throw. On a failure, take exhaustion equal to 6 - your proficiency bonus.

Skill Absorption: Make a charisma saving throw. Your proficiency bonus drops by 1, and the creature's increases by 1. When your proficiency bonus drops to 0, you become paralyzed.

 

[Lyxen]

Assuming you use the main encounter system (because almost all of the math is the same formula as core) what about it do you find complex?

A lot of computations for the party, the opposition and the mix of them in the environment. Instead of filling a party of X adventurers at level Z and adding monsters to the right amount, it requires a lot of computations. Some people might find it useful though.

also it does factor in surprise.

I missed that, my apologies.

 

[Lyxen]

I'll try to put it in an even simpler way. 5e uses CR as a warning....

I agree, but then I hope that we agree that this has little to do with the encounter calculator. It's just that bounded accuracy makes things more "integrated", there are no "power gaps" that one mus have to be able to challenge higher level monsters.

Which I think is cool, by the way, because at any level, I can still create very easily a much more dangerous encounter for any group, simply by adding more hit points to a monster and maybe adding a few points to attacks, DC and defenses, and at the same time since lots of people never play at really high level, it gives them a chance to fight high CRs monsters if the circumstances favor them.

It's CaP, for sure (if I understood the term), but it's perfectly acceptable if that is what you are looking for, and it works for CaW too. Where it's harder to do (and which 4e did much better) is CaS, because the circumstances are so important that you can always doubt whether you fairly beat it, and also you might come upon totally casual people telling you that they have easily beaten what was a hard fight for you, which I suppose can be a bit vexing...

 

[Stalker0]

Instead of filling a party of X adventurers at level Z and adding monsters to the right amount, it requires a lot of computations. Some people might find it useful though.

So let me challenge that slightly. Lets consider what we do now vs what we would need to do with this system change.

INFREQUENT CALCULATIONS (only done once in a while by the DM)

1. Determine PC level
2. Update PC ECL
3. Determine PC XP Thresholds

Encounter Calculations (aka what a DM will do most of the time)

1. Calculate Base Monster XP
2. Determine PC/Monster Style
3. Modify XP for Encounter Type
4. Modify XP for Monster Number

Encounter Type is two charts (and one of them is just a pure lookup so what modifier to use), and once you have set it, if you want to adjust monsters to "just the right amount" you don't have to keep referencing. Once set it works just like you do today, you add another monster, check the monster number chart to see if the modifier changes, rerun the formula with the updated base monster XP. Rinse and Repeat.... the encounter type modifier is actually the simplest thing here as its the part of the formula that is not changing, the monster number and base Xp are the values that change with number, so those are the calculations you keep updating.... which is what you do in the core system right now.

Now of course it is more complex than the base system, but is it really "that much more"?

 

[Stalker0]

It's CaP, for sure (if I understood the term), but it's perfectly acceptable if that is what you are looking for, and it works for CaW too. Where it's harder to do (and which 4e did much better) is CaS, because the circumstances are so important that you can always doubt whether you fairly beat it, and also you might come upon totally casual people telling you that they have easily beaten what was a hard fight for you, which I suppose can be a bit vexing...

Maybe I'm showing my age, but I have no idea what those acronyms mean

 

[Mort]

I agree, but then I hope that we agree that this has little to do with the encounter calculator. It's just that bounded accuracy makes things more "integrated", there are no "power gaps" that one mus have to be able to challenge higher level monsters.

Which I think is cool, by the way, because at any level, I can still create very easily a much more dangerous encounter for any group, simply by adding more hit points to a monster and maybe adding a few points to attacks, DC and defenses, and at the same time since lots of people never play at really high level, it gives them a chance to fight high CRs monsters if the circumstances favor them.

It's CaP, for sure (if I understood the term), but it's perfectly acceptable if that is what you are looking for, and it works for CaW too. Where it's harder to do (and which 4e did much better) is CaS, because the circumstances are so important that you can always doubt whether you fairly beat it, and also you might come upon totally casual people telling you that they have easily beaten what was a hard fight for you, which I suppose can be a bit vexing...

CaW = combat as war;
CaS = combat as sport;
CAP = combat as performance? Not sure of this one!