D&D General 6-8 encounters (combat?)

Minigiant said:

Every adventure day being "You gotta finish TONIGHT or everyone DIES" over and over is lame.

Click to expand...

yeah I used to do this back in the 90's early 2000's but we all get sick of "EVERYTHING IS ON THE LINE ALWAYS"

OB1 said:

You mean like the new crit rules? Those are basically a way to give a power bump to martials, by having only weapon damage Crits (though I bet there will be exceptions for the Rogue's Sneak Attack and Warlock's Eldritch Blast).

As to the purpose of this thread, I voted to 'forget the guidance' for a simple reason. Balance can be maintained as long as the players don't know what to expect out of any given adventuring day. It's designed to be loose so that adventuring days DON'T all become exactly the same. Balance in 5e is balance over a campaign, not any single day.

Click to expand...

Technically, but not really. Though I don't have an issue with the new crit rules, I don't think they really do that much for martials.

Attack roll spells aren't exactly common. Most of the best spells are either a saving throw or automatic, which can't crit to begin with.

Moreover, damage dealing is where the gap between martials and casters is the narrowest. IMO, it's pretty much everywhere else (utility) that fighters need a boost.

Vaalingrade said:

True, but they're saying that about D&D.

Click to expand...

I'm aware, but I wonder if everyone else is.

Fanaelialae said:

IMO, you're overestimating the value of durations. There is some truth in what you're saying, I don't deny that, but it seems like an over exaggeration to me.

I'd be surprised if anyone is complaining about the barbarian. IMO, their per day scaling with Rages is downright weird. They start being able to rage for a small fraction of expected encounters and gradually work their way up to being able to do so every encounter. Given that a barbarian is highly lackluster without rage, I feel like the scaling is simply there for the sake of progression, rather than balance. IOW, I don't think you'd break balance if you just gave 1st level barbarians unlimited rage. They simply wouldn't have a lot to look forward to in terms of progression.

Click to expand...

Having played a barbarian in both a game with 2-3 encounters a day where I could always rage, and one where I needed to decide if I was going to or not, it's a big deal.

Fanaelialae said:

Also, every caster in your games uses 3+ spells every encounter? At my table I'd say it's typically more like 1-2, and generally just cantrips for an easier encounter. The best spells typically have concentration. Last week our 5th level party of four took on 17 zombie ogres (which I believe is several multiples of deadly) and my cleric still only used 2 real spells - spiritual guardians and spiritual weapon. In the interest of transparency, the paladin burned through every smite she had, but still. You've technically got me on 3+ if we take the average from that fight, but at the end of that fight we could have taken a short rest, spent HD, and kept going. A 5th level paladin without smite is basically a fighter whose action surge is on cool down.

Click to expand...

Don't get hung up on if it's 2 or 3 spells - the main point is that there needs to be a mix of cantrips/low impact actions with the high impact spells/actions to average out to what the at-will classes provide.

Fanaelialae said:

Now on to the matter of durations in a multi-wave encounter. Many spell durations simply aren't especially advantageous against multiple waves. If you cast Hypnotic Pattern and a second wave arrives, it's not providing you with any greater advantage than it's already provided.

Click to expand...

Sure it is - there are still foes trapped in it who would be fighting alongside the second wave.

But look back at your example with the zombie ogres - if there was a second wave would the Spirt Guardians and the Spiritual Weapon give more utility? Yes it would have. For zero more actions of casting and zero more spell slots burned. It's a great example where a combat going from 3 rounds to 10 rounds can make a spell much more effective.

Fanaelialae said:

The spells that do last, like Moonbeam, are often on the weaker side. They're nice for conserving resources in a long encounter, but they just aren't as impactful as something like Web, particularly in shorter encounters. Something like Haste, while impactful, starts to run the risk of the spell expiring (and therefore suffering the debuff) in longer encounters.

I don't really think it's really as advantageous or cut and dry and you are presenting it as.

Click to expand...

Durations are the addendum. The main part is that you need the same number of rounds regardless of the number of combats. Durations making spells like Spirit Guardians more effective just bring it up from "the same number" to "the same or more".

Stories take too much time away from 8 fights a day in order to enforce resource management.

iserith said:

No Pain, No Gain
You gain +X% bonus experience points for all encounters after your 5th encounter of the adventuring day.

Click to expand...

I like that one I have done that in campaigns. (the last time I did it was an increasing 5% after encounter 4... so encounter 5 was at +5% and 6 would be at +10% and 7 at +15%)

Blue said:

Having played a barbarian in both a game with 2-3 encounters a day where I could always rage, and one where I needed to decide if I was going to or not, it's a big deal.


Don't get hung up on if it's 2 or 3 spells - the main point is that there needs to be a mix of cantrips/low impact actions with the high impact spells/actions to average out to what the at-will classes provide.


Sure it is - there are still foes trapped in it who would be fighting alongside the second wave.

But look back at your example with the zombie ogres - if there was a second wave would the Spirt Guardians and the Spiritual Weapon give more utility? Yes it would have. For zero more actions of casting and zero more spell slots burned. It's a great example where a combat going from 3 rounds to 10 rounds can make a spell much more effective.


Durations are the addendum. The main part is that you need the same number of rounds regardless of the number of combats. Durations making spells like Spirit Guardians more effective just bring it up from "the same number" to "the same or more".

Click to expand...

I've played a barbarian in both those kinds of campaigns too. In a campaign with 6-8 encounters the low-level barbarian is extremely lack luster. Sure, it makes a difference comparing the barbarian from the one campaign to the barbarian from the other. It just doesn't unbalance them wrt the other classes. No one in the campaign with fewer encounters was saying, "wow, your barbarian is too OP". And that campaign was a majority of martial characters.

I feel like you're white rooming a little.

Sure, if there had been a second wave those spells would have been very useful. Of course, a second wave in this case would almost certainly have TPK'D us. It was a clear one encounter day (well, technically two since there was an easy monster that transformed into the zombie ogres on death) so it would have been perfectly sensible for me to nova. Given concentration though, it made a lot more sense for me to Dodge every round once I got my setup going.

You don't necessarily know at the start of an encounter that reinforcements are coming. If you do, sure, casting a spell like spiritual guardians is a great idea. OTOH, if you cast it and it turns out to be a 2 round easy fight with no reinforcements, you've just wasted your elephant round swatting a fly. If you wait a few rounds to see whether reinforcements arrive, then you've wasted a large chunk of the spell's value.

Finally, no, Hypnotic Pattern is not providing you any more value when the second wave arrives. It CC'd whatever enemies it did from the first wave, and that doesn't change when the second wave arrives. It provides no more value than if you used it in two separate encounters. It has no capacity to hypnotize the second wave, and for you to even attempt hypnotizing the second wave you need to release concentration on the first. Furthermore, if the second wave disrupts your concentration and the first wave is released from the spell, you're getting less value from the spell than if you'd used it in two separate encounters.

GMforPowergamers said:

I like that one I have done that in campaigns. (the last time I did it was an increasing 5% after encounter 4... so encounter 5 was at +5% and 6 would be at +10% and 7 at +15%)

Click to expand...

XP bonus for consecutive encounters feels right, but... the players (and the game) assume the GM will put them up against level-reasonable opposition. So you run into the meta knowledge that you are just speeding up levelling to get to your new toys sooner, but not really becoming stronger compared to what you'll be facing. It should work in a sandbox where the PCs may well run into stuff way outside their comfort zone.

fluffybunbunkittens said:

XP bonus for consecutive encounters feels right, but... the players (and the game) assume the GM will put them up against level-reasonable opposition. So you run into the meta knowledge that you are just speeding up levelling to get to your new toys sooner, but not really becoming stronger compared to what you'll be facing. It should work in a sandbox where the PCs may well run into stuff way outside their comfort zone.

Click to expand...

Arguably, if you're not playing in a sandbox, regular XP is not the best tool to use anyway. In a plot-based game, for example, story-based advancement (see DMG) is probably the way to go since it incentivizes sticking to the plot.

fluffybunbunkittens said:

XP bonus for consecutive encounters feels right, but... the players (and the game) assume the GM will put them up against level-reasonable opposition. So you run into the meta knowledge that you are just speeding up levelling to get to your new toys sooner, but not really becoming stronger compared to what you'll be facing. It should work in a sandbox where the PCs may well run into stuff way outside their comfort zone.

Click to expand...

yeah the one that I ran was a huge sandbox that allowed for players to easily bite off more then they could chew (and a few times they did and they bearly got out)