D&D 5E DMG's definition of "Deadly" is much less deadly than mine: Data Aggregation?

[Quickleaf]

I've always found that when I DM, I always under estimate the fear that the players feel in encounters. For years I would struggle to make sure that every moment pushed the players to their limits (mostly the 4e years). Now, I realize that sometimes by describing the situation differently, or surprising the players with attackers or traps and attackers, by using terrain to the monsters advantage, or by having monsters do hit and run tactics, using spells and area of effect attacks in addition to ranged or melee attacks, can make even the medium encounters seem more difficult.

I still agree that it would be nice to have a math metric to judge what the encounter will be like, but I am definitely seeing how the variables make a difference, and many times when I think the PCs won more easily than I anticipated, they still say they were scared at moments.

Totally, I feel you. I think in even poising this question, I've come across as some math-fixated encounters-must-balance-out robot, or something. Heh.

As an anecdote along the lines of what you're saying. The creepiest most fear-evoking encounters I've run for my current group have had no combat at all. It was all about evocative description of a compelling scenario, and proper horror storytelling tricks.

 

[Rhenny]

Totally, I feel you. I think in even poising this question, I've come across as some math-fixated encounters-must-balance-out robot, or something. Heh.

As an anecdote along the lines of what you're saying. The creepiest most fear-evoking encounters I've run for my current group have had no combat at all. It was all about evocative description of a compelling scenario, and proper horror storytelling tricks.

Yes...one of my most frightening encounters was during the D&DNext Playtest when the players had to travel the Underdark to find a trading city in the Blingdenstone adventure. When they got there, they had to find some rare roots, and in order to get them they had to negotiate with a mind flayer when they were only 3rd or 4th level. The entire negotiation took place in their minds as they felt the creepy, tickling presence of the mind flayer touching their thoughts. The mind flayer was cloaked so they couldn't see him until later in the negotiations. No combat, but very scary.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Yes...one of my most frightening encounters was during the D&DNext Playtest when the players had to travel the Underdark to find a trading city in the Blingdenstone adventure. When they got there, they had to find some rare roots, and in order to get them they had to negotiate with a mind flayer when they were only 3rd or 4th level. The entire negotiation took place in their minds as they felt the creepy, tickling presence of the mind flayer touching their thoughts. The mind flayer was cloaked so they couldn't see him until later in the negotiations. No combat, but very scary.

To be fair, though, part of the fear presumably comes from the knowledge that they are 3rd or 4th level and that the mindflayer outmatches them. Combat is there in their minds, it's just latent.

On a semi-related note, being a human in the Underdark with no darkvision is scary, up until you realize that, due to the limitations of darkvision, monsters can't see you any better than you can see them unless you light a torch. Then instead of lighting a torch, you relax, use your ears and sense of smell, and fall into stealth mode (with a better Stealth modifier than most monsters have) as the hunted become the hunters. (If combat actually starts, of course, lighting a torch or uncovering an object with Light pre-cast on it is a high priority because monsters with darkvision don't suffer combat penalties in the dark.)

 

[Rhenny]

To be fair, though, part of the fear presumably comes from the knowledge that they are 3rd or 4th level and that the mindflayer outmatches them. Combat is there in their minds, it's just latent.

On a semi-related note, being a human in the Underdark with no darkvision is scary, up until you realize that, due to the limitations of darkvision, monsters can't see you any better than you can see them unless you light a torch. Then instead of lighting a torch, you relax, use your ears and sense of smell, and fall into stealth mode (with a better Stealth modifier than most monsters have) as the hunted become the hunters. (If combat actually starts, of course, lighting a torch or uncovering an object with Light pre-cast on it is a high priority because monsters with darkvision don't suffer combat penalties in the dark.)

Good point about the latent thought of combat. Also, my players had prior knowledge about mind flayer and how they can eat brain so they knew that there was a possibility of death if the mind flayer attacked. (Btw, I also gave the mind flayer 2 warrior body guards/thralls). In this case, I as DM successfully telegraphed the deadliness of the encounter. To be honest, if the party rolled well on initiative and they focused fire, they could have killed the mind flayer. If they fought, they had a chance to take out the mind flayer, but the cost was indeterminate.

As for humans in the underdark, I'd probably make it more difficult for pcs without darkvision to do anything in the dark. The intent is to suffer a handicap without light. If they spend years in the dark practicing movement, then perhaps they could overcome the disadvantage.

 

[Pssthpok]

The DMG guidelines are fine, IMXP. You just need to utilize tactics and roll better than the PCs.
Remember that a deadly encounter, according to the DMG, requires only tactics and quick thinking for the PCs to come through it. It doesn't mean that PCs are guaranteed to drop in such an encounter, just that there's a better chance than in weaker encounters.

I think in general, if you want a deadly encounter, you have to design one. Merely crunching the DMG tables isn't enough, and never has been IMXP. Work against your PCs' strengths and weaknesses, set up the terrain to your advantage, and don't put all your eggs in one statblock.

 

[Rhenny]

The DMG guidelines are fine, IMXP. You just need to utilize tactics and roll better than the PCs.
Remember that a deadly encounter, according to the DMG, requires only tactics and quick thinking for the PCs to come through it. It doesn't mean that PCs are guaranteed to drop in such an encounter, just that there's a better chance than in weaker encounters.

I think in general, if you want a deadly encounter, you have to design one. Merely crunching the DMG tables isn't enough, and never has been IMXP. Work against your PCs' strengths and weaknesses, set up the terrain to your advantage, and don't put all your eggs in one statblock.

And, this was done by design because WoTC didn't want new DMs/players to die too often by accident. It takes years of practice to become a killer DM (lol).

Although, when we played Lost Mines of Phandelver, we had a few deaths at lower levels. (Spoiler....Klarg the bugbear one shot killed the fighter in our party by crit on his first attack...that certainly sets the mood of the adventure).

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

As for humans in the underdark, I'd probably make it more difficult for pcs without darkvision to do anything in the dark. The intent is to suffer a handicap without light. If they spend years in the dark practicing movement, then perhaps they could overcome the disadvantage.

The existing rules on darkness seem punitive enough for me. Consider that the Underdark isn't pitch-black anyway, it's 50% filled with dim light from glowing fungi and magical effects (according to OotA Chapter 2), so the remaining dark areas are likely more akin to nighttime on the surface than to the inside of a cave. (IIRC PHB notes that a particularly brilliant full moon might rise to the level of dim light, but otherwise moonlight is "darkness.") I turned off the lights except for a couple of LEDs on an electronic device to show the players what kind of darkness they were dealing with, but it wasn't the profound darkness of a cave.

I think humans could adapt pretty well and relatively swiftly. It's still handy to have someone with the Dancing Lights cantrip that he can use in tricky spots like climbing up a chimney, and I don't doubt that the patches of dim light would be more psychologically relaxing than darkness (even though in some ways they make things more dangerous because it impairs your stealth). But I don't feel any desire to impose extra penalties on humans who are already moving slowly and cautiously.

Anyway, the point I was getting at is that fear is psychological, and that changing the way you think about a situation can change how frightened you are during it. In this case it means "consider that I'm not the only one who can't see well in this stuff, and consider that I have ears as well as eyes, and consider that I am a scary professional killer with a large pointy sword for stabbing things that can't see me well in this stuff."

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

The DMG guidelines are fine, IMXP. You just need to utilize tactics and roll better than the PCs.
Remember that a deadly encounter, according to the DMG, requires only tactics and quick thinking for the PCs to come through it. It doesn't mean that PCs are guaranteed to drop in such an encounter, just that there's a better chance than in weaker encounters.

And that is why I hate Medium encounters. You don't have to use tactics, or really much of anything, in order to win anyway. As a DM I give my PCs a full range of encounters, from trivial to uberdeadly, with no regard for encounter budgets... but privately I think of Medium/Hard encounters more as social encounters than combat encounters, even if the socializing my players choose is "fill it full of javelins."

 

[Rhenny]

Anyway, the point I was getting at is that fear is psychological, and that changing the way you think about a situation can change how frightened you are during it. In this case it means "consider that I'm not the only one who can't see well in this stuff, and consider that I have ears as well as eyes, and consider that I am a scary professional killer with a large pointy sword for stabbing things that can't see me well in this stuff."

Agreed. In fact, one of the players in my group always says that he likes the fear he experiences when his character is placed in a claustrophobic situation. Real psychology at work here.

 

[cmad1977]

I usually underestimate the threat to my heroes. Last time they wiped out a major fight in about two rounds through a combination of stealth/magic/ambush/sneak attack.... I was disappointed at first.
But after thinking and talking to a couple players they were relieved. They expended a bunch of resources, we're banged up to start and really had a roll or two gone poorly....

So... I don't know if that helps.