D&D 5E (2014) Design Debate: 13th-level PCs vs. 6- to 8-Encounter Adventuring Day

[Celtavian]

Well, the guidelines are just guidelines. I think folks on both sides of the discussion tend to treat them as if they are absolute, or that they should be expected to be absolute. I don't think that's the case....they're there as a tool that can be used to approximate challenges to aid in encounter design.

Personally, I don't even look at them at all anymore, and only glanced at them a bit earlier on in our 5E campaign. At this point, I feel like I have a strong enough feeling for what is needed to challenge my players.

For instance, I used a Marilith and I did modify her in a couple of minor ways. Teleport was a move action, and she could use her parry against ranged attacks as well as melee attacks, so she was able to use her reactive ability to counter ranged attacks as well.

I also gave her a couple of potions that she used prior to combat.

The fight went pretty well, all around. She did scare the PCs and impress upon them how capable she was, but at the same time, she probably wouldn't have lasted all too long if she simply stayed there and went toe to toe with the party.

I think the fact that my players haven't already memorized all the monsters in the MM also helps. When players know the monsters' capabilities ahead of time, it's that much harder to challenge them. I think in cases like that, you must modify the monsters. Every Marilith being exactly the same is no less ridiculous than every adventurer or every elf or every fighter being exactly the same.

People have mentioned how smart such creatures are, and yet none of them ever seem to flee, unless the ability to to so is baked into the stats. I doubt a genius tactician who's survived in the Abyss for centuries would just accept that a group of primes can slaughter her because she can't innately teleport without error as a bonus action. So if a Marilith finds herself in trouble....have her cut and run like she likely has done over her centuries of life. Then have her come back later at a time of her choosing, far more prepared to deal with the adventurers in question. Seems pretty simple and likely, actually.

As others have said, if she's a general type, why not have her with other foes to assist her? And if she's solo, why would she not be cautious? Certainly a tactical genius would realize how deadly a group of adventurers can be, and would plan accordingly. Have her prep and be ready for the trouble she's likely to face.

Those are good modifications to the marilith. I thought about making teleport a bonus action, but I wanted to test some of these monsters as they were designed. This is my first time running higher level 5E. I played as a player in a campaign to 15 and I think I have a good feel for dragons, not so much demons. I'm definitely getting a feel for some of the things I need to do to match the players such as improving mobility for melee creatures and increasing the number of abilities for monsters like higher end demons.

 

[Celtavian]

Or she could be designed to challenge a part in 3 rounds. Hell, you could make a monster that last only 1-2 rounds challenge the party in those 1 or 2 rounds.

You could make this type of monster, but that isn't the marilith. Her rounds were spent closing the distance to attack while getting annihilated by the Sharpshooter. She got a round of attacks on the Bladesinger who used shield to boost this AC to 26 or more to survive her onslaught quite easily.

If I do nothing else, Sharpshooter is getting toned down. It removes too many tools a DM can use to counter ranged attacks. One feat eliminating ranged penalties and making anything less than total cover pointless as well as boosting damage is way too much.

 

[Celtavian]

When players are focused on finding low resource cost, highly effective abilities that work against a vast majority of encounters, the 6 to 8 encountering day doesn't work quite as well. Not to say you can't occasionally make interesting 6 to 8 encounter days that work, especially when you add a powerful environmental effect, but it's hardly a panacea for the lack of challenging monsters in 5E. I'm used to the weakness of D&D monsters. I can't think of a version of D&D that wasn't poorly designed past level 8 to 12. I think there is a real lack of high level design experience in the RPG design community. They're great from 1st to 8 or 12. Once players start reaching the higher level game, they don't seem to know what to do. I wouldn't be surprised if the majority of game designers haven't played in many higher level games. And given the data that most groups don't play higher level D&D, they don't spend much time focusing on levels 12 and up. This lack of focus has shown up in every edition of D&D I've ever played including 5E.

 

[CapnZapp]

Re: the total cover thing (and sharpshooter). I think it's important to remember you can move, shoot, and move back again.

In other words, there's no reason to take half cover, like ever.

An artillery monster can step out of total cover, fire, and move back into total cover.

The sharpshooter can set up a rection shot, sure, but that reduces him by 2/3rds.

A melee monster that starts out several rounds away simply must have conveniently placed chunks of total cover to end its movement behind each round. Period.

(And of course this doesn't protect it from attacks that can round corners, such as Fireball)

Of course, you can fix this in other ways, such as making the archers preoccupied with other monsters. Either monsters that have snuck up on the party to distract them while the big bruiser lumbers on; or simply by not having a single monster rush at them. If you know the archers will take down 1,8 Marilith on average in the time it takes to run towards the party; then have three of them start out.

But all this boils down to the one solution we don't want: more monsters. The challenge is to make the solo challenging while staying solo.

 

[CapnZapp]

That said, I'm not sure I like peek-a-boo as a "solution". I'd much rather have a rule that encouraged the realistic action of shooting from behind cover.

(Something like "if you move before you shoot, you get disadvantage". Please don't get hung up on the specifics here - I just made that up on the spot. It's meant as an example of how the game could encourage you to keep line of sight to your target even if this means the target keeps line of sight to you)

And then nothave a stupid feat take all that away. If the feat reduced the cover penalty by two steps, that'd be more reasonable.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Those are good modifications to the marilith. I thought about making teleport a bonus action, but I wanted to test some of these monsters as they were designed. This is my first time running higher level 5E. I played as a player in a campaign to 15 and I think I have a good feel for dragons, not so much demons. I'm definitely getting a feel for some of the things I need to do to match the players such as improving mobility for melee creatures and increasing the number of abilities for monsters like higher end demons.

Well she's been a recurring villain over several levels, so I was able to test it out a bit without it being a major issue. She first fought my party when they were level 5, so she was just toying with them, and it was more a case of them realizing they were outclassed before something major happened that interrupted the fight.

That gave me a foundation for what to expect with them a bit. So I decided to make teleport a move action just because I feel that's easily justified and I felt a bonus action allowed for a bit too much. Blocking missiles seemed thematically cool, and one player is an archer with sharpshooter, so I was ready for that, and used that to effect the second time they fought.

I was thinking about adding some spells or spell like abilities for their next encounter (which I expect will be the last), but I think I'll just give her some potions and then one or two other items to help her be able to withdtand the onslaught they can release. Adding spells would require more prep beforehand, which I try to keep to a minimum, if possible. If I really think an opportunity presents itself to use a particular spell that seems appropriate for the Marilith, then I'd likely just go ahead and have her do it. But I'm very improvisational at the table, and many DMs don't seem to like that approach.

She will have some underlings with her, some lesser demons, so that will be a factor.

I think one of the abilities I miss, and correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think they have it anymore, is the ability to gate in other demons. None of them still do that do they? I forget off the top of my head, and don't have my book handy. But I think that's an easy way to add to the Marilith which doesn't require a lot of mechanical tinkering. If she's getting her ass beat, boom she hates in a few vrocks or a couple of glabrezu or hezrou.

And if you want or need to calculate it by the guidelines, you simply treat them as additional creatures and calculate the difficulty that way.

 

[CapnZapp]

Teleport was a move action

What's a move action?

Or do you mean you gave her a "teleport speed"?

Or perhaps you let her teleport at the cost of her full speed? Much like "standing up" costs you half your speed?

Unquiring minds want to know!

 

[CapnZapp]

I think one of the abilities I miss, and correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think they have it anymore, is the ability to gate in other demons. None of them still do that do they? I forget off the top of my head, and don't have my book handy.

Variant right there in the MM:

A marilith has a 50 percent chance of summoning 1d6 vrocks, 1d4 hezrous, ld3 glabrezus, 1d2 nalfeshnees, or one marilith.

Your welcome

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

You could make this type of monster, but that isn't the marilith. Her rounds were spent closing the distance to attack while getting annihilated by the Sharpshooter. She got a round of attacks on the Bladesinger who used shield to boost this AC to 26 or more to survive her onslaught quite easily.

If I do nothing else, Sharpshooter is getting toned down. It removes too many tools a DM can use to counter ranged attacks. One feat eliminating ranged penalties and making anything less than total cover pointless as well as boosting damage is way too much.

You can just lie prone. Sharpshooter doesn't remove the disadvantage from firing at prone targets.

A marilith might consider this beneath her dignity though.

 

[Celtavian]

Hey Flamestrike, I actually completely agree with you, more encounters and proper environmental design is key. That advice was specifically aimed [MENTION=5834]Celtavian[/MENTION], so that he can challenge his PCs when he drops them in a grass field against a solo monster. Do that with highly optimized PCs using highly optimized tactics, and of course the encounter guidelines won't work, they're not supposed to. They are supposed to work for casual players who do not have a high degree of system mastery. The higher the system mastery from the player, the more needed from the DM to use every trick in the MM and DMG to counter it. Or just be lazy and throw higher CR creatures at them until the PCs break.

As for me, when it's time for the big mission that the PCs have been working towards to accomplish their current goal, I design 10-14 encounters and purposefully go over the xp budget. PCs then go into the mission trying to avoid as many as they can, since they probably won't make their objective if they fight everything along the way. The best part of this is watching them decide if it's worth storming the treasure room full of shiny things but guarded by a deadly encounter and risk their primary objective. If they've successfully been avoiding other encounters along the way, they may have the resources to go for it, if not, well, does the princess really need saving anyhow?

Why do you think making a challenging environment is any different than redesigning a creature to be challenging in a neutral environment? What makes one a better idea than the other? Why would it be any more challenging fighting the death slaad in a demiplane of darkness than fighting a death slaad that can challenge a party in a stone room? Flamestrike makes a harsh environment to increase the challenge. I redesign the death slaad to be challenging against a party. I'm not sure why one is viewed as better than the other.