D&D 5E Is the Default Playstyle of 5E "Monty Haul?"

Oofta · Nov 9, 2022

EzekielRaiden said:
Nes. Yo. Naybe.

The game wants to have its cake and eat it too. It offers a bunch of mechanics which benefit from getting good gear, and the modules tend to hand out a fair amount. But the rules themselves give extremely strong implications that many characters shouldn't get more than a tiny amount of magical gear, and the rules kinda go out of their way to avoid actually supporting item-related gameplay. The items themselves are fine, but buying/selling, making, and otherwise doing stuff involving items is just...awkward at best.

There's a reason that, for several years, a perennial question about 5e was "what on earth are you supposed to do with the piles of money you get????"

Which is why I ignore the random treasure tables. But it's pretty much always been an issue with D&D, if you and your group don't want to build castles after a while money rarely means much. Unless you assume a magic mart of course, but that has it's own issues.

MichaelSomething · Nov 9, 2022

I agree with you on this. I thought one of the core pricinlpes of 5E was DM empowerment. That the DM should adjust the game according to their personal needs. Am I wrong in this?

Oofta said:
If people feel like they can trip traps because they'll survive, that's not a problem of the system it's a problem with the DM. What's the purpose of the trap? Is it just to add a bit to the attrition? If the PC takes any damage at all or has to expend resources to escape then it's done it's job. If the point is to severely damage or kill the PC then just, I don't know, up the damage of the trap.

Sorry, but I'll never understand how people think D&D 5E is on "easy" mode and that there's nothing they can do about it. You're the DM. Experiment a little. Switch things up. Create some new monsters that are based on lower level monsters so they don't have a ton of hit points but always hit with advantage. Give the enemies cursed blades that drive the bearer insane but do triple the damage the weapon would normally do in psychic damage.

I regularly have one or more PCs knocked unconscious in encounters even when I throw monsters at them that come straight out of the book.

Obviously play whatever edition you want. Just don't blame the fact that you didn't make traps dangerous in 5E on the edition.

dave2008 · Nov 9, 2022

DarkCrisis said:
Stuff like 3 saves to turn to stone in 5E.

If that bothers you, you make it one!

FYI, in 5e it is only 2 saves, it was 3 saves in 4e.

DarkCrisis said:
So you modified 5E. Not effort I want to do.

We do have one page of house rules (vs the 24 I had in 1e), but I don't think anything I was discussing necessarily required house rules.

I personally wouldn't want to DM a game without house rules (it is part of the fun for me). In fact, some of our house rules started way back in 1e and we still use a version of them in 5e (and we would have to use them in 2e too).

dave2008 · Nov 9, 2022

DarkCrisis said:
Stuff like 3 saves to turn to stone in 5E.

So you modified 5E. Not effort I want to do.

Also to be clear, I am not trying to convince you to play 5e. You enjoy 2e - great! Play the game you like (which I have said several times).

But I am curious why you are complaining on a 5e forum? If you don't want to make 5e fit your playstyle, what are you trying to accomplish? Just ranting? I guess that is OK.

Lanefan · Nov 9, 2022

Oofta said:
If people feel like they can trip traps because they'll survive, that's not a problem of the system it's a problem with the DM. What's the purpose of the trap? Is it just to add a bit to the attrition? If the PC takes any damage at all or has to expend resources to escape then it's done it's job.

Only if the PC can't quickly recover those hit points and-or resources. Otherwise, it's a nothingburger.

With 0e-1e-2e it was possible to whittle a character or party down a little bit at a time through ongoing attrition - a trap here, a seemingly-trivial encounter there, etc. - faster than they could recover; eventually forcing a choice between pressing on weakened or stopping for a few days to rest. And that's including the presence of Clerical healing - often it wasn't/isn't enough.

Now, with recovery so much faster and easier, that model has largely Gone Away. If you can't whack them down quickly, they get (almost) everything back.

Oofta said:
If the point is to severely damage or kill the PC then just, I don't know, up the damage of the trap.

The point isn't necessarily to severely damage or kill the PCs right now, it's to weaken/delay/annoy them just that little bit more such that they're easier to kill later if they keep going. Death by a thousand cuts.

DarkCrisis · Nov 9, 2022

dave2008 said:
Also to be clear, I am not trying to convince you to play 5e. You enjoy 2e - great! Play the game you like (which I have said several times).

But I am curious why you are complaining on a 5e forum? If you don't want to make 5e fit your playstyle, what are you trying to accomplish? Just ranting? I guess that is OK.

I wasn’t complaining. You asked me questions and I answered them.

dave2008 · Nov 9, 2022

DarkCrisis said:
I wasn’t complaining. You asked me questions and I answered them.

You were complaining before I asked questions though:

DarkCrisis said:
Had my 5E group play some 2E. 3 of them never played it before. 2 of them LOVE it, the 3rd feels underpowered.

The 2 that love it, love that, and I quote, "The dice rolls feel more important. I actually feel like I'm doing something." "I love that when I swing my axe it can completely change how the battle is going."

One player always ran into rooms and tripped traps etc in 5E because he knew he could easily survive almost anything. Now he actually lets the Thief do her job and uses strategy and caution. Battles have become much more fun.

And they actually love getting XP now (and I love giving it now too). It feels earned.

I don't think ill ever run 5th ed again.

Lanefan · Nov 9, 2022

MichaelSomething said:
I agree with you on this. I thought one of the core pricinlpes of 5E was DM empowerment. That the DM should adjust the game according to their personal needs. Am I wrong in this?

That's the theory, and it's a good one.

The practice, however, is that many DMs want to run it straight out of the tin without tweaking anything; and - even more so - many players expect it to be run that way.

Lanefan · Nov 9, 2022

dave2008 said:
But I am curious why you are complaining on a 5e forum? If you don't want to make 5e fit your playstyle, what are you trying to accomplish? J

Pushing back against the direction 5e is going/has gone, perhaps?

That's why I do it, anyway.

Blue · Nov 9, 2022

Retreater said:
I'm sure most of you are familiar with the expression of the "Monty Haul" style game.
(In case you're not, here's a link to an article: Monty Haul)

Specifically, looking at the 1990 "Campaign Sourcebook and Catacomb Guide" definition: "a 'giveaway' campaign in which the players receive treasure and experience disproportionate to the dangers they overcome."

Is there any "danger" inherent in 5E? In my two groups currently playing 5E, I have the following:

A 3rd level party that functions around 7th level.

A 7th level party that functions around 14th level.

Any time I give them XP or treasure, it doesn't feel "earned." More importantly, it doesn't feel "needed."

Why worry about an extra +1 to hit when you already destroy anything the DM throws at you?

An extra 6 HP when you don't even drop to half health in a routine combat?

What incentive could there be for playing smart when every battle can be won with standard operating procedures? (It's not important to exploit a creature's weakness when you're going to be able to kill it with ease anyway.)

If you know what a 7th level party is supposed to function like, then you know your 3rd level party isn't your average 3rd level party.

So, let's look where it might be outside designer norms.

Is it rolled ability scores that all mysteriously are quite good?
Looking at Xanathar's (pg 135), that 3rd level party should have a total of a single uncommon item among them, while the 7th should have each.
Does the party encounter fewer than 5-8 combats a day on average? Sometimes more and sometimes less is expected. (And yes, in this particular case I'm not just concerned with deadliness which can be done with fewer, tougher encounters, but with resource attrition which is designed around the higher number of encounters and total number of actions.)
Are there in place any variants or house rules like flanking?

If one or more of these is "Yes", then at least part of the answer is "The game is being run outside designer guidelines so don't try to follow them".

Remember that D&D is designed around attrition. One deadly+ encounter a day is designed to be pretty easy. Seven medium and hard encounters a day is designed to be taxing. Who cares if someone goes down 50% of their HPs in a routine fight? D&D isn't designed around single fights, it's designed around the dungeon crawl -- it's designed that the party finds themselves with less and less left and then three more combats hit them and things are rather tough.

The problem is that doesn't fit all playstyles. But it's still the design point to compare.

D&D 5E Is the Default Playstyle of 5E "Monty Haul?"

Oofta

Legend

MichaelSomething

Legend

dave2008

Legend

dave2008

Legend

Lanefan

Victoria Rules

DarkCrisis

Reeks of Jedi

dave2008

Legend

Lanefan

Victoria Rules

Lanefan

Victoria Rules

Blue

Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal

Similar Threads

Voidrunner's Codex