Critical Role Critical Role Season 4 DM says encounters will not be balanced.

[Charlaquin]

They did not say "level appropriate areas." They said zones that fit into a CR range. That's good design.

She, but yes, this! Thank you.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I thought Enworlders would be thrilled to hear this??

Yes, the collective unified ENWorld hivemind we've all heard so much about.

 

[TheSword]

Someone is advocating for "dull, performative combat"? Weird, but I guess there's no accounting for taste. Do you see a lot of that in earlier seasons of Critical Role or Dimension 20?

My point was that unbalanced encounters are bad. Not just because when encounters are too deadly they kill characters but because they can also be too easy which is dull. It wasn’t an either/or thing.

 

[MichaelSomething]

Yes, the collective unified ENWorld hivemind we've all heard so much about.

At the very least, the subfaction that hates balance should. I know they're around here somewhere...

 

[Charlaquin]

At the very least, the subfaction that hates balance should. I know they're around here somewhere...

I think the crossover of that subfaction and critical role fans is limited

 

[bedir than]

My point was that unbalanced encounters are bad. Not just because when encounters are too deadly they kill characters but because they can also be too easy which is dull. It wasn’t an either/or thing.

Some easy encounters are great. It helps to clearly demonstrate to the players that their characters are gaining power.

 

[Charlaquin]

Some easy encounters are great. It helps to clearly demonstrate to the players that their characters are gaining power.

Ideally, you want that tension sine wave. Peaks of high difficulty, valleys of low difficulty, and periods of rising/falling difficulty between.

If I had my druthers, this would be built into the encounter building rules. “Recommended” encounters would be easier at some levels, harder at some levels, and average difficulty at some levels. In fact, ideally you could break it into 3-level chunks where everything feels just a bit too hard until you level up, then they feel just right, then you level up again and they start feeling nice and easy. Until you level up again and they start feeling too hard again. Rinse and repeat.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

In fact, ideally you could break it into 3-level chunks where everything feels just a bit too hard until you level up, then they feel just right, then you level up again and they start feeling nice and easy. Until you level up again and they start feeling too hard again. Rinse and repeat.

This sounds very much like the MMO power curve each expansion, where players go from being able to stomp demigods to having to sweat wolves and bears all over again, and then, relatively quickly, starting the climb back up to stomping demigods again.

 

[Charlaquin]

This sounds very much like the MMO power curve each expansion, where players go from being able to stomp demigods to having to sweat wolves and bears all over again, and then, relatively quickly, starting the climb back up to stomping demigods again.

I mean, I wouldn’t go from gods to wolves. More like goblins to hobgoblins (to orcs to trolls to giants, etc, etc…) But, fundamentally, yes. A lot of games are designed that way, MMOs included, because it’s a highly engaging play pattern.

 

[Retros_x]

My point was that unbalanced encounters are bad.

Thats wrong. I don't balance and I get great feedback from my players. So I know at least two tables where unbalanced encounter work, so there is clearly not a definite answer possible to the question if unbalanced encounters are good or bad. As usual it depends on play style, table preferences etc. for example my players and me in general don't enjoy combat as sport and find always perfectly balanced encounter dull and boring. Similar to how I find the level scaling in Skyrim boring.