D&D 5E Damage thread

[FrogReaver]

I guess we run fairly different styles of games. Even in dungeons, I often have the hallways interconnect. The denizens know the tunnels while (unless they've already explored the area) the PCs don't. So turtling like that is a good way to have your back line flanked.

But yeah, it can work if the terrain allows for it. More often than not, in my campaigns, it does not, because I generally like to set up my encounter areas to encourage the characters to move around. To me, standing in a doorway slugging it out with a monster while the party attacks from behind is about the most boring form a combat can take. YMMV

An abjuration wizard with a single level dip into cleric or fighter can cast a flaming sphere and then take the dodge action each turn. The flaming sphere in a tight space is going to wreck team enemy and all enemies will have disadvantage against the wizard, who will have as much hp and abjuration shield as a typical fighter has HP, as much AC as a shield using fighter and can cast shield when needed.

I think a wizard focused on defense likely makes a better doorway/hallway blocker than the fighter, while providing an absolutely devasting effect for team enemy to deal with (and higher level wizards only tend to get better spells for that situation).

 

[Baldurs_Underdark]

I guess we run fairly different styles of games. Even in dungeons, I often have the hallways interconnect. The denizens know the tunnels while (unless they've already explored the area) the PCs don't. So turtling like that is a good way to have your back line flanked.

But yeah, it can work if the terrain allows for it. More often than not, in my campaigns, it does not, because I generally like to set up my encounter areas to encourage the characters to move around. To me, standing in a doorway slugging it out with a monster while the party attacks from behind is about the most boring form a combat can take. YMMV

I usually build my maps so that the melee fighter/barbarian have a possibility to be useful. And I will sacrifice a little immersion / realism to achieve this if needed, but that is often not necessary. Mansions or lairs often have a few entrances and a system of hallways and rooms that give plenty of dead ends, narrow doorways and other choke points. If the party acts like a good team they shouldn't get ambushed from the back.

Also, I will sometimes deliberately add some low-Int monsters to a fight in open field which the high-Int bad guys deliberately use as cannon fodder, and have those rush at the melee guys.

If the party will always be outflanked and outsmarted then strategic positioning is not much fun, and my PCs would all start to complain: The squishy Sorc for being attacked all the time and making (and failing) too many concentration checks, the fighter and barbarian for not being attacked enough, etc.

But of course I keep them sharp by not being nice all the time.

 

[Fanaelialae]

I usually build my maps so that the melee fighter/barbarian have a possibility to be useful. And I will sacrifice a little immersion / realism to achieve this if needed, but that is often not necessary. Mansions or lairs often have a few entrances and a system of hallways and rooms that give plenty of dead ends, narrow doorways and other choke points. If the party acts like a good team they shouldn't get ambushed from the back.

Also, I will sometimes deliberately add some low-Int monsters to a fight in open field which the high-Int bad guys deliberately use as cannon fodder, and have those rush at the melee guys.

If the party will always be outflanked and outsmarted then strategic positioning is not much fun, and my PCs would all start to complain: The squishy Sorc for being attacked all the time and making (and failing) too many concentration checks, the fighter and barbarian for not being attacked enough, etc.

But of course I keep them sharp by not being nice all the time.

Yeah, I achieve the same thing performatively. Enemies often (but not always) will attack the melee, even if it's not the most tactically optimal choice. I typically use more open (or interconnected) areas and try to include a few useful things on the field, to encourage characters to move to them and take advantage. These can include cover, concealment, damaging or hindering terrain, etc. I feel like it makes encounters more interesting and exciting when the participants have an incentive to move around.

Admittedly, it does make me miss the days of 4e, when the performative engagement wasn't necessary whatsoever, because defenders had effective tools built into their class to efficiently do their job.

Agreed on not being nice all the time.