Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sir Brennen" data-source="post: 6794533" data-attributes="member: 553">Think I'm going to side with  [MENTION=58197]Dausuul[/MENTION] here. If I want a lower-level party to encounter a single creature to battle, not even a "boss" or "solo", it does seem more difficult in 5E to make such an encounter challenging or interesting, and I think it's due to bounded accuracy. In older editions, an encounter against a "level appropriate" creature often lasted longer by virtue of players simply missing more often. It was pretty easy to make a creature more challenging by simply bumping it's AC a bit, especially in 1E. It doesn't matter what tactics or actions the creature has if they die before their first or second turn. In my current game, this is exacerbated by having two monks who often make multiple stunning fist attempts on their turn. Due to bounded accuracy, the odds are much better the creature is going to fail one of those saves. So even if a creature doesn't go down quickly, it's just standing around taking no actions.Plus, I don't want to feel obligated by the system to always rely on the creature being challenging by virtue of it being smart tactically, always having advantageous environments to fight in, or always travelling around with buddies for cannon fodder. Sometimes you want a monster to be tough and scary by virtue of the fact that it's a tough, scary monster. Personally, for those sorts of situations, I've done what was mentioned up-thread and increased hit points to 75 or 100%. Sometimes even that's not enough.On the other hand, combats with the party facing multiple bad guys, especially of mixed types, I've found pretty fun and quick moving in 5E.</blockquote>

Verification