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

[Paul Farquhar]

yes it appears to me to not work but I was hopeing someone could show me how it works...

As you say in your opening, it's gamist. It assumes that the players' enjoyment of the game comes purely from the interaction of their character's stats with rules.

Last session, my players had an enjoyable encounter role-playing their character's first encounter with coffee. No dice where rolled, but fun was had, and it did not depend on anyone's class.

If all you are doing in the game is having combat, or pseudo-combat social interactions and skill challenges, then it might matter if some classes underperform. But this has never been all that D&D has been about, and hence why it might seem not to work if that is all you do.

Or you can have enjoyable encounters where dice are rolled, and they go badly. Sometimes the consequences of bad rolls can be more fun than good rolls.

Another encounter I had last session, the party spent ages trying to work out the best way to get tactical advantage over an NPC. That discussion took much longer than the actual combat, because what they didn't know was, he was well below them in terms of power. Encounters do not have to be balanced and fair for the players to enjoy them.

As a DM, I like characters with back-stories I can use to hook into the adventure, not characters with equally balanced power levels.

 

[Krachek]

This recurring debate, show the need for some players to face fixed challenge where ressource, build, leveling, decision, matter at the end of the day.

This need to challenge is only a short aspect of DND, and DnD offer only few and imprecise tools to help it. But on the other side DND is very good to give the illusion of a fixed and calculated challenge, but that’s itch those players in need.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

As you say in your opening, it's gamist. It assumes that the players' enjoyment of the game comes purely from the interaction of their character's stats with rules.

yeah

Last session, my players had an enjoyable encounter role-playing their character's first encounter with coffee. No dice where rolled, but fun was had, and it did not depend on anyone's class.

we have a lot of that too. The thing is that the wizard, the bard and the druid have the same amount of fun as the fighter... until things bring out dice then if the answer isn't 'do more damage' the fighter loses out.

Or you can have enjoyable encounters where dice are rolled, and they go badly. Sometimes the consequences of bad rolls can be more fun than good rolls.

the best encounter I ever played in 3e/3.5 was a tpk so I completely agree. (and it was session 1 encounter 2)

Another encounter I had last session, the party spent ages trying to work out the best way to get tactical advantage over an NPC. That discussion took much longer than the actual combat, because what they didn't know was, he was well below them in terms of power. Encounters do not have to be balanced and fair for the players to enjoy them.

100% agree... one of the best campaigns I ever ran had my variant of lex luther as the BBEG... with 19hp and 13 AC for a 15th level party... all the planning all the worry, and 1 hit from the weakest character would ko him.

As a DM, I like characters with back-stories I can use to hook into the adventure, not characters with equally balanced power levels.

yes and that is great... what you are talking about though effects everyone

 

[Paul Farquhar]

until things bring out dice then if the answer isn't 'do more damage' the fighter loses out.

And in a highly social situation, quiet shy players can lose out. It's up to the DM to arrange encounters so everyone gets something to do. And that's going to depend on the players as much as the characters

And a player doesn't have to be rolling dice in order to be contributing. A fighter who says "why doesn't Wizard-Bob cast Detect Magic?" is contributing more than Wizard-Bob.

 

[aco175]

I would think an encounter needs more than some roleplay. There needs to be HP loss possibility or uses resources that weaken the overall strength of the group. If the DM wants to roleplay getting up in the morning and what the PCs have for breakfast in the inn, it should not count.

Not sure if I would count it if bandits came in and joined the PCs for a drink before heading off to the 'toll' road. Maybe if there was a reason that the food was going to be poisoned and the PCs thought to cast a detect spell and the bandits then came in and threats were made but no fighting actually took place. Yes if the bandits came in and a fight started and one of the PCs needed to save the innkeepers child from a bandit while the others were knocking heads.

 

[Charlaquin]

Exactly.

Where I disagree with how people interpret that is 6-8 medium to hard encounters is not a necessary condition to maintain class balance, nor is it advice for designing an adventure. It's a guideline for how many encounters a party has the resources to handle in the course of a day, and serves primarily as a baseline from which to judge if and when they can handle a deadly encounter (which does not necessarily mean "possible TPK" encounter).

The math definitely supports the idea that classes are best balanced in terms of DPR when there are 6-8 encounters (or equivalent resource expenditure) with two short tests between them per day. That doesn’t by any means mean that this benchmark must be met. It’s just the point of closest DPR balance.

It's most applicable in a high-encounter frequency setting, i.e., a dungeon.

Very true, 6-8 encounters is much more reasonable in a dungeon or similar adventure location than it is, say, in a city or while traveling overland.

 

[Charlaquin]

Yeah, but an encounter where the PCs circumvent it without expending resources is kind of the point.

It means they have more gas in the tank for the BBEG at the end of the day or whatever.

Why blow slots on levitating the party over a trap (for example) when they can use ropes and skill checks? Why blow rages, sup dice, hp, HD, Action surge, slots etc, when a Social skill check or two and some RP might be all that is needed?

It encourages good resource management, problem solving skills, and thinking by the players.

This is true, but entirely unrelated to the fact that classes are balanced around the assumption of 6-8 combat encounters with two short rests per day.

 

[Maxperson]

Wait, that doesn't add up. 24,000 at Level 6 assumes a party of six. The encounter difficulty tables are for a party of 3 to 5.

That will teach me not to post at midnight. Well, not really, but I apparently shouldn't try to do math when tired.

A 6th level party of 5 can be expected to get 20,000 XP (4,000 XP per character) over the adventuring day before needing a rest. Their thresholds are Easy: 1,500, Medium: 3,000, Hard: 4,500, and Deadly, 7,000. So, basically 2 Deadly encounters and 2 Medium Encounters. Or 5 Hard encounters. Or 6 Medium and 1 Easy. They don't have to meet the threshold, just not go over it.

I don't agree with the bolded portion. If you are expected to get 20,000xp, then not reaching that mark makes the encounters easier than the game is balanced for. The lower the amount of XP, the easier the day gets.

 

[Yaarel]

A character only has 2 long rests PER LEVEL. Everything else works out.

(Maybe 3 long rests per level depending on taste.)

So, everything is a short rest. Except, twice per level, a player who needs it can convert one of the short rests into a long rest.

 

[Yaarel]

A question.

If all spellcasters switch to short rests, what classes would still be at odds?