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

[Celtavian]

I was interested to see the character sheets.


Wow. Dude, you REALLY don't see what you're doing here? I didn't get past the first character's magic items. The character has five permanent magic items including what can only be described as an artifact+++ type item (the whip) which has the combined powers (in ONE magic item) of:

• +3 weapons (very rare)
• dancing (very rare - requires attunement)
• defender (legendary requires attunement) Do you let this character get the +3 weapon bonus to AC when he casts a spell? If yes, go read Defender weapon again.
• ring of spell turning (legendary - requires attunement)
• ring of protection (rare - requires attunment) (double the protection bonus when blade singing)
• wand of warmage +3 (very rare - requires attunement) (ignores half cover with spell attacks)
• (extends spell ranges by five feet including touch spells)
• (absorbs 5 extra hp when using song of defense)

Seriously? You don't see that this amount of magic is going to monstrously increase this character's power? At a minimum the character is +3 to hit and damage on every attack roll it makes above the default expectation. +3 is a freaking TON! The character also has +1 (most of the time +2) to all of his defenses. Again, that's freaking HUGE.

Reminder: a PC can only be attuned to 3 items. You've given this character FIVE attuned items (and some extra gravy) in ONE item. C'mon, man!

This campaign is not a great example of the problem. Though I did think two to three times deadly would at least provide a medium to hard type of challenge. I built it to be very epic. I'm experimenting with encounter building for PCs of this power level. So far I haven't found a sweet spot yet for challenging them.

I wanted to build very powerful demon lords. I needed the PCs to be very powerful to fight them. They have their first demon lord coming up. We'll see how that fight goes. I've built that one to drain resources prior to fighting the demon lord.

So you think two to three times deadly is insufficient for the equivalent of a medium to hard encounter against PCs with this level of power. I'm going to have to do some more experimenting.

 

[Celtavian]

[MENTION=6787650]Hemlock[/MENTION], interesting. Many similarities, but the differences are huge.

We play out the five minute (or less) combat against the solo troll. It gives the players a chance to quickly use their kewl p0werz and wreck the poor bastard and it costs practically nothing.

We're definitely not a Combat as War group. The other players' heads would explode if we started playing that way. I'd probably have fun with it for a while, but then it would start to feel like work (as DM or player). No thanks.

We like to sit around the table, throw dice, kill bad guys, and take their stuff. We have some reasonable story and RP elements going on to make it all hang together, but it's really just a chance to do some butt-kicking power fantasy while we forget about real life for a few hours every week. We're definitely not trying to learn any life lessons or anything as heady as that.

I'd be interested to see an example of the 3x and 4x deadly encounters you set up to challenge your PCs and what the PC builds are. Are you finding this is necessary because you only run a couple of encounters per day? It blows my mind that you are using such encounters on a regular basis.

[MENTION=6788736]Flamestrike[/MENTION], re: PC deaths
My current campaign (3 DMs rotating duty from adventure to adventure): 39 sessions, 3 - 6 characters played in each session, total of 32 characters (each player has at least 3 characters), we've had 4 character deaths and 1 character petrified by a medusa. PCs range from level 3 to level 7. Only about half a dozen characters are level 6 or 7, and those are also the only characters that have been played in 10 or more sessions.

Side note: I've DM'd 14 of the 39 sessions, and I've been the DM every time a PC has died and when the medusa petrified a PC. Apparently I'm the "killer DM" in our group.

Level 3 to 7 seems to be a sweet spot in 5E. Those were levels you had to be careful not to kill people as a DM. Paladin Aura of Protection isn't online yet. Not many ASI/Feat increases. Multiclassing combinations don't kick in yet. Double proficiency bonus means +2 to +3 to a roll at best. The growing gap in PC power is at its smallest at those lower levels. Even a medusa chained to a wall was scary at those levels if you know the reference.

In my experience so far, it all seems to start changing around level 8 to 9. All the campaigns I've done so far seem to see a marked change in capability when they transition from 8 to 9. It's very strange. I wonder if that is by design.

 

[dave2008]

I remade the marilith. I went in a little different direction. I might give that one a try some time. Always room to boost them a bit more.

What's interesting is that it is still a CR 16. I only boosted damage minimally and upped AC and HP a little, but it still calculated to be a CR 16. I guess it kinda a proves the MM version might be a little on the weak side

 

[Celtavian]

What's interesting is that it is still a CR 16. I only boosted damage minimally and upped AC and HP a little, but it still calculated to be a CR 16. I guess it kinda a proves the MM version might be a little on the weak side

If you were playing with no magic weapons, pure melee characters like the Sharpshooter or Great Weapon Fighter would be substantially weaker. I think the base monster manual monsters may have been built with that default level in mind. Then again I think another poster showed mathematical proof that you are expected by have a certain number of magic items as you level according to the DMG guidelines. I do wonder sometimes what the designers had in mind when they were designing monsters.

 

[pemerton]

Im 'obliged' to do no such thing.

My job is to create a challenging and fun adventure. That involves more than just simply being reactive to the players tactics and plans. It also involves forcing them to react to what the environment and the monsters are doing. It involves being proactive and having the world move around the players, as much (or more than) it does sitting back and reacting to what the players want and do.

If that means an extra unplanned encounter here or there, or doubling a monsters HP mid fight to keep it intresting or occasionally fudging rolls for or against the players, so be it.

OK, but this just confirms that you're not running a Gygaxian dungeon crawl.

The dice don't decide to roll themselves.

And? At a casino, the dice don't roll themselves either - does that mean that no rules bind any of the participants at a craps table?

When I talk about the GM being bound, I'm talking about the rules and practices of the game, not the physics (and physiology) of dice rolls.

 

[MostlyDm]

If you were playing with no magic weapons, pure melee characters like the Sharpshooter or Great Weapon Fighter would be substantially weaker. I think the base monster manual monsters may have been built with that default level in mind. Then again I think another poster showed mathematical proof that you are expected by have a certain number of magic items as you level according to the DMG guidelines. I do wonder sometimes what the designers had in mind when they were designing monsters.

I don't think it's really a mystery that the monsters are balanced assuming no magic items. That's been pretty widely known and publicized, hasn't it?

 

[Celtavian]

I don't think it's really a mystery that the monsters are balanced assuming no magic items. That's been pretty widely known and publicized, hasn't it?

Not that I know of. Do you have a designer quote? Another poster said the default seems to be a certain number of magic items according to level per DMG guidelines. It's expected at higher level that a fighter have a magic sword, even if only +1. And that the default game is expecting you to have one including monster design. I used to think no magic items was the default. Someone mentioned the DMG guideline and I don't recall a designer saying no magic items is the default design. And every module WotC has produced has magic items in it. I'm wondering if there is a certain number of magic items assumed in the monster design, but not sure what level that might be.

It is pretty obvious the game isn't built with the idea of squeezing every drop of power out of feats and multiclassing. But I think magic items may be an expected part of the game and base monster design assumes a certain level of magic.

 

[Flamestrike]

So, most "days" have zero encounters, and some days have one or two or three, but it would be a rare day indeed where you had EIGHT encounters in a single twenty-four hour period.

Sounds like the 'longer rest' variant is for you. 0-3 encounters per [day/ short rest], and around 6-8 per [week/ long rest] and youre on the money.

 

[Flamestrike]

OK, but this just confirms that you're not running a Gygaxian dungeon crawl.

Gygax actively encouraged ignoring dice rolls when they produced an unfair result (with the exception of system shock rolls);

Now and then a player will die through no fault of his own. He or she will have doneeverything correctly, taken every reasonable precaution, but still the freakish roll of thedice will kill the character. In the long run you should let such things pass as the playerswill kill more than one opponent with their own freakish rolls at some later time. Yetyou do have the right to arbitrate the situation. You can rule that the player, instead ofdying, is knocked unconscious, loses a limb, is blinded in one eye or invoke anyreasonably severe penalty that still takes into account what the monster has done. It isvery demoralizing to the players to lose a cared-for-player character when they haveplayed well. When they have done something stupid or not taken precautions, then letthe dice fall where they may! Yet one die roll that you should NEVERtamper with is the SYSTEM SHOCK ROLL to be raised from the dead. If a character failsthat roll, which he or she should make him or herself, he or she is FOREVER DEAD.There MUST be some final death or immortality will take over and again the game willbecome boring because the player characters will have 9+ lives each!-Gary Gygax - Dungeon Master's Guide, 1st Edition, page 110

In summary, if the player does something stupid, let the dice fall where they may, but its OK to ignore the dice when they produce an unfair or arbitrary result.

The game isnt run by a computer. Its run by a person.

http://www.pentyria.com/lore/THE WISDOM OF GYGAX.pdf

Making rulings, ignoring a bad dice roll, or ignoring a good one, or even rolling the dice and pretending to look at a chart for no other reason other than to keep your players guessing is entirely Gygaxian.

And? At a casino, the dice don't roll themselves either - does that mean that no rules bind any of the participants at a craps table?

Craps is not a roleplaying game, where the players are working with the referee to create a story and shared campaign.

Its a false analogy.

When I talk about the GM being bound, I'm talking about the rules and practices of the game, not the physics (and physiology) of dice rolls.

And yet Gygax himself advocated RAI over RAW, and rulings over rules:

It is the spirit of the game, not the letter of the rules, which is important. Never hold to the letter written, nor allow some barracks room lawyer to force quotations from the rule books upon you, if it goes against the obvious intent of the game. As you hew the line with respect to conformity to major systems and uniformity of play in general, also be certain the game is mastered by you and not by your players. Within the broad parameters given in the Advanced Dungeons and Dragons volumes, you are creator and final arbiter by ordering things as they should be, the game as a whole first, your campaign next, and your participants thereafter, you will be playing Advanced Dungeons and Dragons as it was meant to be. May you find as much pleasure in doing so as much as the rest of us do. - Gary Gygax - Dungeon Master's Guide, 1st Edition, page 230

Run the game in a proactive way, ensuring balance, challenge, pacing, percieved danger and threat and reward and success are in equal order. Its as much of an art as it is a scientific mathmatical formula or strict adherence to any rules.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Sounds like the 'longer rest' variant is for you. 0-3 encounters per [day/ short rest], and around 6-8 per [week/ long rest] and youre on the money.

When all you've got a hammer, everything looks like a nail, eh, Flamestrike?

In other words, no. A linear, encounter-centric attrition-based gameplay model would be a poor fit for my campaign and DMing style/play goals.