D&D General 6-8 encounters (combat?)

[Maxperson]

2e was odd (I don't have exp to talk on 1e) and what I want to go back to. A healthy mix of per encounter, survive the encounter and resource manigment... 3e made the game resource attrition, and 4e took it away and 5e went back to 3e for it (IMO)

Yes and no. 2e had resources, but it wasn't balanced around managing them. Sure, if a 5th lvl wizard went crazy and cast all of his spells in the first combat, he could be hurting things if another encounter happened, but the edition was based on rocket tag. First side to kill the other.

Save or die poisons were everywhere. Permanent no save energy drains were common. Creatures weren't hittable with any old magic weapon, you also had to have the right + or you did no damage at all. Hit points were lower on both sides. Saves didn't get better quickly and until high level you missed more of them than you made.

It was balanced around death. The resource management aspect was secondary to the game balance. 1e was similar, but a bit harsher and harder to survive.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Yes and no. 2e had resources, but it wasn't balanced around managing them. Sure, if a 5th wizard went crazy and cast all of his spells in the first combat, he could be hurting things if another encounter happened, but the edition was based on rocket tag. First side to kill the other.

yes very much agree, I remember campaigns where we had casters act as heavy artillery in the background more then full combatants...

funny thing, pre 3e I remember multi times that the combat characters were the only ones to act in every round of combat...

Save or die poisons were everywhere. Permanent no save energy drains were common.

yes and I don't fully miss thoughs (okay sometimes I do)

Creatures weren't hittable with any old magic weapon, you also had to have the right + or you did no damage at all.

I miss the concept of this but I think 3e did betterish
I want "needs magic to hit" and "Needs silver to hit" and "Needs adamantine to hit" to be rare but resist non versions of those to be slightly more common, and magic not to trump the silver and adamantine... the only reason I don't push for it is becuse you need to nerf casters or it is JUST hurting already hurt martials.

Hit points were lower on both sides.

I want that back too... I want 100hp monster or PC to be rare high level (or maybe just a big solo bag of HP at the end of a dungeon) not an assumed level 9+ threat.

Saves didn't get better quickly and until high level you missed more of them than you made.

It was balanced around death. The resource management aspect was secondary to the game balance.

yeah

 

[iserith]

Precisely. The bad guys won't stand around waiting for you.

This does, however, put extra work on the DM - to consider what the rest of the world is doing while the PCs are dungeon crawling, keep careful track of time passing, and make sure the consequences of delay are big enough to sting but not so big as to end the campaign.

It is certainly doable without hamfisted "Doom clocks." But not trivial. I hope the 5.5 DMG offers some tools to help with it.

I think what is or isn't "hamfisted" comes down to player preference and the DM's skill. Plus, people who are skeptical of doom clocks will tend to imagine the Worst Possible Example rather than all the cool or subtle ones that support a solid play experience.

I agree that the DMG isn't of great help when it comes to instructing DMs on how to manage time or its importance. To me, this flies in the face of how much better the game works when time actually matters. Do better, WotC!

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I think what is or isn't "hamfisted" comes down to player preference and the DM's skill. Plus, people who are skeptical of doom clocks will tend to imagine the Worst Possible Example rather than all the cool or subtle ones that support a solid play experience.

the doom part is my issue... I even gave an example of a clock up thread I have used.

I agree that the DMG isn't of great help when it comes to instructing DMs on how to manage time or its importance. To me, this flies in the face of how much better the game works when time actually matters. Do better, WotC!

yes WotC do batter

 

[Maxperson]

yes very much agree, I remember campaigns where we had casters act as heavy artillery in the background more then full combatants...

funny thing, pre 3e I remember multi times that the combat characters were the only ones to act in every round of combat...

Yes. Playing a wizard in 1e and 2e was not about casting spells every round, it was about casting the right spells in the right round. During 2e I was at a game convention and there was one of those big tables with a city and mountains built out of beautiful terrain and if you signed up, you could play a 4th level character and see how far you could get.

I signed up and got the wizard. I had a wand of magic missiles with like 3 charges, web and a few other combat spells. In the first fight we were up against a higher level spell caster solo. I used my magic missiles, because it had a faster casting time and I was likely to disrupt the enemy spellcaster. Success! We dominated the fight because I hit him in the middle of his spells twice. Then I didn't do much until some encounter where I used one of my spells to help win the fight. Then nothing until the end when we came up against 4 dopplegangers who looked like us. It an encounter that would likely have TPKd us after so many encounters, except that I still had my web in reserve and got it off before they could move. All of them failed and we just killed them while they were stuck.

Afterwards we had to rate the other spellcasters and some guy who clearly didn't know what he was doing rated me a 1 out of 10 for playing a wizard. His reasoning? I made it to the end with spells still memorized.

1e and 2e weren't as fun when I wasn't doing anything as a wizard, but 2e helped fix that with specialization. The extra spell per spell level really made a difference.

yes and I don't fully miss thoughs (okay sometimes I do)

I do. It was too common in 1e and 2e, but I don't like it being virtually non-existent in 5e. I think there's a middle ground, especially if it shows up mostly at high mid to upper level play where saves are better and spells can help mitigate.

I miss the concept of this but I think 3e did betterish
I want "needs magic to hit" and "Needs silver to hit" and "Needs adamantine to hit" to be rare but resist non versions of those to be slightly more common, and magic not to trump the silver and adamantine... the only reason I don't push for it is becuse you need to nerf casters or it is JUST hurting already hurt martials.

I'm mixed. I don't like that a Balor is as easy to hit as a Quasit in 3.5 and 5e. It would just be too much work for me to switch it to +x for every creature that has resistance or immunity.

I want that back too... I want 100hp monster or PC to be rare high level (or maybe just a big solo bag of HP at the end of a dungeon) not an assumed level 9+ threat.

 

[iserith]

the doom part is my issue... I even gave an example of a clock up thread I have used.

yes WotC do batter

This is why I typically use the term "time pressure" rather than "doom clock." Most everyone in my experience agrees time pressure is good. But add "doom" to it and suddenly it's contrived, ham-fisted garbage.

 

[tetrasodium]

yes very much agree, I remember campaigns where we had casters act as heavy artillery in the background more then full combatants...

funny thing, pre 3e I remember multi times that the combat characters were the only ones to act in every round of combat...

I remember similar. The wizard or whatever might roll a d20 & make an effort with their sling before promptly declaring that they missed with their sling & move like so but the important part was the wizard was not being pasted by the skeleton/kobold/etc maving towards them & everyone had fun working together with different niche roles

yes and I don't fully miss thoughs (okay sometimes I do)

I miss the concept of this but I think 3e did betterish
I want "needs magic to hit" and "Needs silver to hit" and "Needs adamantine to hit" to be rare but resist non versions of those to be slightly more common, and magic not to trump the silver and adamantine... the only reason I don't push for it is becuse you need to nerf casters or it is JUST hurting already hurt martials.

I want that back too... I want 100hp monster or PC to be rare high level (or maybe just a big solo bag of HP at the end of a dungeon) not an assumed level 9+ threat.

yeah

Bringing back the 3.5 style dr #/specificWeaponTraits is something I've tried a bunch in 5e games but 5e pounds the table so hard making sure players know that a "magic" weapon is the first last and only weapon they will ever need to acquire & I usually give up fighting the "BuTiT'sMaGiC current at some point during the campaign.

A reduction in HP on both sides for 5.5 would be nice & really simplify gm overhead

 

[Vaalingrade]

This is why I typically use the term "time pressure" rather than "doom clock." Most everyone in my experience agrees time pressure is good. But add "doom" to it and suddenly it's contrived, ham-fisted garbage.

Call it what you want, but I find constant ticking clocks something that makes m relaxing funtime game too stressful to enjoy.

 

[Maxperson]

Call it what you want, but I find constant ticking clocks something that makes m relaxing funtime game too stressful to enjoy.

Same. Doom Clock and Time Pressure are synonymous to me. Sometimes it's okay. All the time and it's both contrived and unfun.

 

[iserith]

Call it what you want, but I find constant ticking clocks something that makes m relaxing funtime game too stressful to enjoy.

I can't speak to how you handle stress, but I find it enhances play by creating more opportunities for meaningful decisions by the players. The more of those they get to make per unit of game time increases engagement in my experience. It also help support the vision of a setting that is in motion and that moves ahead even without the PCs. And, to the topic of the thread, it can get the players into the sweet spot of encounters per adventuring day where in my view the game just works better.