D&D General What does the mundane high level fighter look like? [+]

[Crimson Longinus]

Nah. I've constantly said to low monster HP is preferable not raise fighter damage.

But the community doesn't want major changes as they don't want to learn new rules or adjust old content. So increasing fighter/barbarian/ranger damage is the only option "allowed".

But my preference from jump is to

1. lower monster HP. Either remove CON mod bonus to HP (Vampire Spawn goes from 82 to 49) or roll monster HD as 1s (Vampire Spawn goes from 82 to 33).
2. Assumption of using magic items and feats at all table.

It's all about the fantasy. D&D should fulfill the fantasy. Especially since newcomers will come expecting that fantasy from other media which inspired their fighter PCs. And there are ways to do it with overwhelming new players.

Do something. Do anything. But the "5e fighters can't cleave through enemies so it okay" is just cope. It ain't right and excuses are being made.

Then lower the monster HP and see how it goes. I just really don't feel that is needed. Stuff not dying fast enough definitely is not an issue I've had in 5e. Monsters often explode before they can do anything.

I don't think killing stuff being too hard just is an issue most people have with 5e, so I wouldn't expect an official fix to this problem that most people simply do not have. I feel you're again generalising your own expectations to be the expectations of the community as a whole.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

But, actual "cheating" is about the actual tactical and strategic layer of a game. Insofar as a game actually cares about this (and they don't all do that), what matters is that the particular mechanic in question engages with and preserves one or both of these layers. And the 4e minion rules, and the AD&D originals, do so as long as there isn't any user error. Neither of these mechanics are there exclusively for color or genre tropes. They are both of those things, but they get there via engagement with and preservation of that tactical and strategic layer of the game.

Minion rules don't exist in isolation. So like in 4e, you have to consider them holistically along with the rest of the game engine and the best practices instruction on how to generate a compelling tactical and strategic layer of the game along with strong color and coherent genre tropes. So you start with (1) Encounter Budget > (2) Battlefield Array > (3) Team Monster Roster within those Encounter Budget constraints and synergizing both within Team Monster and with respect to the Battlefield Array.

Minions are a part of that last piece and they can easily be either (a) the pivot point for threat in a conflict (due to what they can do alone, do to what they can do in concert with respect to other components of the roster or the terrain, or due to how they can make difficult a Win Con alternate from "kill all the HPs dead") or (b) merely an amplifier of threat due to their interactions/synergy with the rest of the roster or the terrain. Which is to say, when using the system as its design, Minions are multivariate threats that engage with the tactical and strategic layer and that must be legitimately overcome to achieve whatever the Win Con is of the combat (whther that be "Kill Team Monster" or "Escort NPC Safely" or "Escape the Waves" or "Stop the Ritual" or "Exorcise the Demon Before it Kills the Host" etc).

I don't think this really engages with anything I said. This is tactical gamey stuff that whilst somewhat important, is not a high priority to me.
I fully get what their purpose in the tactical tapestry of the game is and the trope they try to evoke. I just don't like the way the go about doing it.

My criticism was about failure to represent consistent world via mechanics and the feel the mechanics generate. The former is something that is important to me, but obviously something everyone doesn't care for. The latter I tried to illustrate with my example about the same situation handled without minion rules and with them.

 

[Minigiant]

Then lower the monster HP and see how it goes. I just really don't feel that is needed. Stuff not dying fast enough definitely is not an issue I've had in 5e. Monsters often explode before they can do anything.

I don't think killing stuff being too hard just is an issue most people have with 5e, so I wouldn't expect an official fix to this problem that most people simply do not have. I feel you're again generalising your own expectations to be the expectations of the community as a whole.

People are only not clamouring for it because 5e breaks down before cleaving becomes a problem.

It's a "high level is broken" problem.

It's the same as the fighter OOC and athletics problem

 

[Crimson Longinus]

People are only not clamouring for it because 5e breaks down before cleaving becomes a problem.

It's a "high level is broken" problem.

It's the same as the fighter OOC and athletics problem

I am not convinced this is true, but it could be. But if it were the case, then reducing hit points across all levels would be a mistake, as a targeted solution for higher levels would be needed.

 

[Oofta]

People are only not clamouring for it because 5e breaks down before cleaving becomes a problem.

It's a "high level is broken" problem.

It's the same as the fighter OOC and athletics problem

By "people" I assume you're talking about the same half dozen or so posters such as yourself that have fundamental issues with the way 5E works? Because I know of no one else that is "clamoring" for anything you're proposing. It certainly doesn't appear to be an issue that rises to the level of WOTC changing anything to address it. We are not going back to 4E style powers.

I know I don't need the types of changes you suggest, I've already given the rules from the book and my own customized ways of dealing with it. But as always that's not good enough because it's not exactly what you personally want.

 

[Minigiant]

By "people" I assume you're talking about the same half dozen or so posters such as yourself that have fundamental issues with the way 5E works? Because I know of no one else that is "clamoring" for anything you're proposing. It certainly doesn't appear to be an issue that rises to the level of WOTC changing anything to address it. We are not going back to 4E style powers.

I know I don't need the types of changes you suggest, I've already given the rules from the book and my own customized ways of dealing with it. But as always that's not good enough because it's not exactly what you personally want.

5e being busted after level 13 or so is well known. It's not just a dozen people. C'mon man.

 

[TwoSix]

5e being busted after level 13 or so is well known. It's not just a dozen people. C'mon man.

I've run and/or played in 3 different games that have gone to 16th without major issues. I can't speak for Tier 4, but I'm not sure where the obvious problems would be in Tier 3, with the possible exceptions of simulacrum and magic jar abuse.

 

[Oofta]

5e being busted after level 13 or so is well known. It's not just a dozen people. C'mon man.

It works fine for me whether I was DMing or playing. I would agree that 3E was broken after a certain level. But high level 5E? Again, the same half dozen or so posters are the ones beating that drum. I guarantee it is not universally accepted.

 

[hawkeyefan]

It is not about number of words, it is about having to use this sort of feature that doesn’t represent anything that exists in the fictional world to patch the fact that your combat system doesn’t scale properly.

Actually, you already provided an example of what it represents.

Let's have an example. At early levels characters encounter a bunch of monsters of certain type. They have a tough fight, are badly beaten and barely manage to escape alive. Perhaps even one of the characters dies. Later in the campaign when the characters are higher level, they encounter the same monsters again. Oh no! But this time they defeat them with ease! The characters have become more powerful!

That's what the mechanics are depicting. It's simple.

You would rather compromise the universe to do so? You and I are very different gamers.

I mean, this bit of hyperbole actually summarizes what I see as the main issue here.

The suggestion doesn't "compromise the universe". If it compromises anything, it's persistent mechanics. But what are the mechanics meant for? To dictate how the world works? Do they rule the world or serve it?

It seems that you want the mechanics to rule the world. I would argue that they are tools. They are means, not ends. So you use the tools you like to get the results that you hope for.

Minion rules or any similar example are no different. They don't "compromise the universe".

 

[Sacrosanct]

It works fine for me whether I was DMing or playing. I would agree that 3E was broken after a certain level. But high level 5E? Again, the same half dozen or so posters are the ones beating that drum. I guarantee it is not universally accepted.

Coincidentally, WoTC just dropped Chains of Asmodeus, which is a high level source book (level 11-20), and Ted from Nerd Immersion said "it's the best thing WotC has made in a while."

He also says that the balance focus is on level 1-10 (which makes sense because that's where most people play), but doesn't say levels 11-20 is broken. Just says the focus wasn't there.