Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celtavian" data-source="post: 6784380" data-attributes="member: 5834">It seems like expectations to me. I expect a powerful monster to be able to take the party on alone. That is my expectation. Whereas you prefer to design challenges where the expectations are that the party take on the monster, the environmental challenge, and whatever else you've thrown in as a sort of combination to overcome the environmental hazard while fighting a monster you believe they have a chance of victory against with perhaps some other goal thrown in. That can be fun now and again as an encounter.To me a powerful demon lord shouldn't need environmental factors to pose a challenge. And a high level group should have little trouble eliminating environmental challenges as well as creating their own to use against the monster.My view is that certain things should be able to take on a party in battle without any bells and whistles. Powerful demons like balors or pit fiends, dragons, archwizards, and other creatures that might be considered legendary. They should be so powerful in my opinion that they can devastate armies by themselves. That is why you need high level adventurers to put an end to them. As players like Hemlock have shown, skeleton archers or an army of human lvl 1 or 2 archers can end an adult or higher dragon or a balor due to Bounded Accuracy and the lack of adequate defenses due to probabilities and hit point attrition. This was not the case in Pathfinder/3E. Those creatures were powerful enough that the chance of a low level creature hitting them was next to nothing. If you hit them with a weapon that wasn't built to harm them, it did nothing. In 5E a Balor isn't immune to attacks from normal weapons and can be killed by a group of skeleton archers with mundane weapons by a necromancer. That doesn't meet my expectations for a demon lord like a balor.Strange party. At the end of the day I agree that fun is the primary goal. If you and your group had fun, then you did it right. We differ on what we want creatures to be able to do. It doesn't mean either of us are playing the game wrong or that 5E is a bad game. As I've stated before, I've had to increase the power of things in every edition of D&D using the available tools. I had reached a point of system mastery in 3E/Pathfinder where I could do this quite easily. I haven't reached that point in 5E yet where I know how to make the mechanics fit the play-style I'm going for. You seem to have found the right way to implement your play-style. I'll get there, but at the moment the game is too soft for my tastes.</blockquote>

Verification