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

[UngainlyTitan]

Whoops. I was looking at level 4. The point still stance, for the 5MWD not to be an issue, the entire xp budget needs to be usable in one single encounter with no pulling of punches by me. So at level 5, that means 14000xp in one fight.

What that means is that I have to be able to use a Beholder and 9 Ogres or M mummy lord and Something else or an Adult Black dragon and a hundred or so Kobolds. By the rules I could use all 1250 kobolds to flesh out the last 2500xp since their CR is significantly below the average CR of the monsters in the group, but I think 100 with an adult black dragon is sufficient to TPK a 5th level party of 4.

There's no way for me to hit them in one encounter with the full daily budget(or anything close), which is necessary for a 5MWD environment.

Yes, of course they aren't talking 5 minutes. It means that you can fight, rest, fight, rest, fight, rest, and so on. Since the group can decide to go rest after a single fight, one fight needs to be doable with the full daily budget.

Ok I am confused, why do you need 14k fight vs 5th level party of 4 for balance reasons, who is this balance for? What purpose does it serve?

 

[Maxperson]

Ok I am confused, why do you need 14k fight vs 5th level party of 4 for balance reasons, who is this balance for? What purpose does it serve?

That's the expected xp budge for a group of that level per adventuring day. They give guidance for balancing that number vs 6-8 encounters, but give no guidance for how to balance it in one encounter. There no way to know what xp amount(and it varies, because monsters vary vs. PCs) would be a challenge that would take up all 4 PCs fully using every power and spell they have in a combat, and dish back without killing them. The monster has to be able to survive a full multi-round nova from 4 PCs and dish back each round. That takes a significantly higher CR than the party can handle.

 

[Fanaelialae]

That is my point. The DM plans; players laugh!

The players can derail away from the encounters that the DM intended to do.

The game needs a mechanic that can flexibly follow the story in real time. Maybe the players will go back that same afternoon to face the Big Bad. Maybe the players decide to go back a week later. Maybe the players decide to go recruit help.

There can be encounters happening that are noncombat.

Perhaps. I just don't agree that recovery on level up is it. It's too gamist for me, and I think there are too many problematic complications that arise from it (like being forced to level up via non-combat encounters because you're out of combat resources).

If you want to use it, I'm certainly not going to show up at your table to wag my finger at you. Nor will I dispatch my ninjas to do so on my behalf (in part because I have no ninjas, but also because I wouldn't even if I did). But if it were in a hypothetical 6e, I'd either ignore it, or, if it were too baked into the system, it would be a change that would almost certainly make that hypothetical 6e the first new edition of D&D I'd refuse to adopt.

 

[Yaarel]

Perhaps. I just don't agree that recovery on level up is it. It's too gamist for me, and I think there are too many problematic complications that arise from it (like being forced to level up via non-combat encounters because you're out of combat resources).

If you want to use it, I'm certainly not going to show up at your table to wag my finger at you. Nor will I dispatch my ninjas to do so on my behalf (in part because I have no ninjas, but also because I wouldn't even if I did). But if it were in a hypothetical 6e, I'd either ignore it, or, if it were too baked into the system, it would be a change that would almost certainly make that hypothetical 6e the first new edition of D&D I'd refuse to adopt.

One of the few things in 5e that I ignore is: seven combats per sleep. Nothing feels more gamist than seven combats per sleep.



I also ignore light source radius.

Delete objectively existing gods.

Bards can count their voice as a musical instrument for the purpose of a spell focus.

I think that is it.

Everything else is pretty much by the book.



The poll of this thread currently has about 59% of gamers rejecting seven combats per sleep. I seem in good company.

 

[Krachek]

This is very narrow thinking. You can have classes that are similarly viable without removing asymmetry. Like what, you think that if we give the fighter a few exploration abilities and maybe a social feature we'll suddenly be playing 4e?

Also, can we leave the edition war nonsense at the door please?

It’s not an edition war, but more a play style preference.
The search for more symmetry, and more ressource management for fighters send the game into more strategic, management, balance concerns. It may be narrow thinking, but if the game insist more on those aspects, those who find satisfaction on other aspects will find less space.
Having a social encounter, and push all classes and players into the same ressource management paradigm make the game less fun in my sense.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

That's the expected xp budge for a group of that level per adventuring day. They give guidance for balancing that number vs 6-8 encounters, but give no guidance for how to balance it in one encounter. There no way to know what xp amount(and it varies, because monsters vary vs. PCs) would be a challenge that would take up all 4 PCs fully using every power and spell they have in a combat, and dish back without killing them. The monster has to be able to survive a full multi-round nova from 4 PCs and dish back each round. That takes a significantly higher CR than the party can handle.

What do you mean by balance here? Balance is not a word used anywhere in the encounter guidelines nor is there anything that indicated an absolute mandate to anyone that a party is not allowed to have a long rest if they have not overcome the daily XP budget.

 

[Maxperson]

What do you mean by balance here? Balance is not a word used anywhere in the encounter guidelines nor is there anything that indicated an absolute mandate to anyone that a party is not allowed to have a long rest if they have not overcome the daily XP budget.

Very clearly the game math is designed around 6-8 encounters of medium and hard difficulty that add up to the expected daily xp allotment. That's the number that drains the resources of the party to the point where by the end they are tapped and it was a challenging day.

That's the balance point. If you drop it to a single encounter, there's no way to know how to balance it properly so that it is a challenge that uses up all of the players' resources over multiple rounds and can dish back without killing them. The monsters capable of surviving multiple rounds of 4 PCs going full nova are enough higher in CR that they will wipe the party up.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

Very clearly the game math is designed around 6-8 encounters of medium and hard difficulty that add up to the expected daily xp allotment. That's the number that drains the resources of the party to the point where by the end they are tapped and it was a challenging day.

Well OK.

That's the balance point. If you drop it to a single encounter, there's no way to know how to balance it properly so that it is a challenge that uses up all of the players' resources over multiple rounds and can dish back without killing them. The monsters capable of surviving multiple rounds of 4 PCs going full nova are enough higher in CR that they will wipe the party up.

Here is where I do not follow, just because the party can expect complete 6 to 8 medium to hard encounters per long rest is not a mandate that they must or that the daily allotment can be delivered in a single encounter.
It seems to me that you are taking a suggestion and turning it into a mandate or requirement. I do not agree that because they (the party) can that means that they must.
I see what you are driving at, but I do not agree with what you are saying here.

 

[Maxperson]

Here is where I do not follow, just because the party can expect complete 6 to 8 medium to hard encounters per long rest is not a mandate that they must or that the daily allotment can be delivered in a single encounter.

Game balance in 5e is centered around resource management. If they are not using up all or very nearly all of their resources, they were not challenged.

 

[Fanaelialae]

One of the few things in 5e that I ignore is: seven combats per sleep. Nothing feels more gamist than seven combats per sleep.



I also ignore light source radius.

Delete objectively existing gods.

Bards can count their voice as a musical instrument for the purpose of a spell focus.

I think that is it.

Everything else is pretty much by the book.



The poll of this thread currently has about 59% of gamers rejecting seven combats per sleep. I seem in good company.

Seven combats per sleep is a strawman. It's a guideline. Like any guideline, you can ignore it, particularly if you have some idea as to what you're doing.

As to the poll, all the 59% means is that those folks don't hold fast to the 6-8 rule. Which technically includes me, although I voted for the option above it. It doesn't mean that they'd be happy with replacing resting recovery with recovery only on a level up.