D&D 5E Every Fight a Nova: Consequences and Considerations

[FrogReaver]

One of the issues with making every fight a nova is the balance between classes. Some classes have much more nova potential, but it's tied up in limited resources that means that they have a strictly limited (often 1) "nova encounters" per long rest. Other classes, especially at-will classes or short-rest classes, explicitly can't bring as much in a single nova battle, but would be balanced over multiple battles per day.

Basically, the varying recovery models of the different classes in 5e are not compatible with the concept of every battle being a nova. Other RPGs, including D&D 4e (pre-essentials) where everyone has the same resources, could do it.

I agree but if they know up front then they can pick accordingly. Seems fair to me.

 

[Mort]

But we aren't talking about "Deadly++" encounters, especially if they don't work. Why would we continue to push an idea that inherently invalidates the play style on it's face?

Otherwise I was just suggesting with my question that there isn't any actual math people are using to get to "5% TPK chance." It's just a guess, at best.

But that's the question, right?

IF you only have 1 encounter per long rest - What are the consequences and implications (and with the implied - how do you make it interesting and challenging)?

I gave my full answer - make encounter goals be something other than "Eliminate all enemies."

But I also commented on why the suggestion of Deadly++ (which wasn't my suggestion). Because if you don't and the goal is "eliminate all enemies" any encounter of less than deadly++ will likely be a cakewalk but any encounter of Deadly++ can easily backfire and result in a TPK.

 

[Reynard]

But I also commented on why the suggestion of Deadly++ (which wasn't my suggestion). Because if you don't and the goal is "eliminate all enemies" any encounter of less than deadly++ will have likely be a cakewalk but any encounter of Deadly++ can easily backfire and result in a TPK.

I agree that we can put the Deadly++ idea to bed. And I also think that it is definitely important to make the encounter dynamic and interesting in addition to difficult.
In the past I have made some really bad nova battles -- lone BBEG, static environment, not considering the full capabilities of high level casters, etc... One of the reasons in starting the thread was finding out if it was me (spoiler: it was) or if it just wasn't a worthwhile form (jury is still out).
Plus I have learned something I did not consider before: how short and long rest classes differ in their potential output when novaing. It's worth digging into.

 

[Ixal]

There's also a roleplay side to this: presumably we're not going to be doing any dungeon-delving, so what are we going to be doing? That will influence what type of personality r backstory will fit the best and be the most fun, and that in turn might influence my choice of race/class/background.

I just got Dragon Age 2 PTSD where waves after waves of thiefs and robbers were rappling down from buildings for exactly the reasons mentioned here, to have threads appear mid combat.

It was not a fun design (and neither were the HP bag bosses).

 

[Xetheral]

Keep in mind that with larger battlefields you can safely increase the number of opponents without risk of TPK far beyond the number possible in a short-range encounter. There are several reasons this is so:

1. When a sufficient fraction of the opponents are too far away to get into effective attack range on the first turn (either due to pure distance or the need to get around full cover), there's minimal danger that a failed initiative roll will doom the party, since they'll always get at least one action that can be used to try to prevent the enemies from being able to attack effectively.
2. Enemy groups that start the encounter out of line of sight to each other may have a hard time coordinating effectively once the fight begins. If the DM roleplays the enemies' coordination difficulties, the confusion of a larger battlefield works in favor of the smaller, more-cohesive party.
3. So long as the enemies don't start together, it will take time for the enemies to concentrate their forces to the point that they'd be able to overwhelm the party in a single round. During that time the PCs can whittle down their foe, take actions to prevent the enemy from concentrating, or position the PCs with AoE abilities to exploit that concentration.
4. Fights on a larger battlefield spread out incoming damage over more rounds, which gives the party more opportunity to recognize that the battle is not going their way and decide to escape. The larger distances between foes on a larger battlefield also makes escape mechanically easier (so long as the enemy doesn't have a mobility advantage over the PCs).

So even if you do decide to employ ostensibly Deadly++ encounters, if you make the battlefield large enough with the opponents sufficiently dispersed, you can all but remove the chance of an inadvertant TPK.

 

[Mort]

I agree that we can put the Deadly++ idea to bed. And I also think that it is definitely important to make the encounter dynamic and interesting in addition to difficult.
In the past I have made some really bad nova battles -- lone BBEG, static environment, not considering the full capabilities of high level casters, etc... One of the reasons in starting the thread was finding out if it was me (spoiler: it was) or if it just wasn't a worthwhile form (jury is still out).
Plus I have learned something I did not consider before: how short and long rest classes differ in their potential output when novaing. It's worth digging into.

So my experiences, with the various classes and NOVA capability (there will be holes, since my group heavily gravitates toward certain classes):

Artificer - A hole for me right of the bat (have seen exactly 1 artificer played in 5e, no one took one even in my Eberron campaign): But it's a half-caster with a lot of magic item related powers. Does not SEEM to be a big NOVA class, more of a long haul class. But, I'll leave specifics to someone more familiar.

Barbarian - Not a big NOVA class. BUT with this paradigm rage will be active nearly 100% of the time for any given fight (unless there are conditions that make it suboptimal). This means putting the Barbarian down will be very difficult. That's about the only (but big) NOVA issue though.

Bard - A full caster with some serious oomph, if they want. going NOVA means no regard for holding back - so expect Bardic inspiration every round. Expect serious spells like sleep, Fairie fire (low level), Hypnotic Pattern, Fear (mid levels), forcecage, charm/dominate monster etc. (high levels) and other encounter stopping spells.

Cleric - Full caster again. The big thing with the cleric going full bore every encounter? Healing word means, even IF someone drops, they won't stay dropped -and since the cleric isn't conserving slots this will just keep happening. Since it's got an ok range, the cleric can even do this from the back line. AND can do it and still attack from range (with a cantrip, but still). All the while they will have spirit guardians etc. to make enemies regret closing. If you have a twilight or a peace cleric and your group is only expecting the one encounter? at mid+ levels, you will not be able to keep a party member down without ludicrous damage and/or effects.

Druid - Another full caster. And has healing word and other spells to keep the party up just fine. At low levels, Moon Druids will LOVE being able to morph into bears etc. with no regard/worry as to saving shapes (though you CAN make them regret it with a nice exploration challenge later). Not quite the oomph of the cleric, but near enough to make anyone in the party going and staying down a fairly difficult endeavor.

Fighter - Not a NOVA friendly class. Except, expect the fighter to action surge in every encounter. And since he will be buffed and attacking with advantage (even at level one with things like Fairie fire) this will do a ton of damage and needs to be accounted for. The BM fighter will be using a maneuver die near every round (why not, most fights take 4ish rounds, they get 4 dice) which will increase their output a lot. But the impact will, almost certainly be less dramatic than the casters. Especially as levels rise.\

Monk - The monks primary worry is always running out of Ki. With this paradigm, at all but the low levels, that's less a concern. So at 5+ expect multiple stunning strikes on any given round - this means solitary monsters are done for, unless you pile on the legendary resistances. And even then, the monk is softening them up for the caster. Still, I don't see too much challenge designing around this as necessary.

Paladin - Half caster, but with smite, So they NOVA quite well. Smites every round will crank up the damage and the paladin aura (for 6+ level) means save effects are lessened. Frankly a pretty good martial to have in the party if this paradigm is expected. Plus, spamming lay on hands means little worry of after effects of the fight (though usually suboptimal during the fight).

Ranger - half caster. Unlike the others (except for maybe monk) this one will be a bit subclass dependent. Gllomstalkers in particular will thrive as that initial oomph (the first round) can change the flow from moment one (plus they can push a dramatic initiative bonus). I can just see a bugbear gloomstalker ranger make even the paladin player gape at the first round damage. Plus, since other encounters will not be combat but exploration etc. - they can REALLY make a big difference. depends on what there will be outside of combat though.

Rogue - No NOVA at all really other than a bit for the arcane trickster (and a tiny bit on the soulknife). But rogues are pretty solid, so should be able to hang in there. Plus, hopefully serious out of combat utility. Depending on what surrounds the one NOVA encounter, this class may end up being avoided.

Sorcerer - Full caster with lots of NOVA potential. getting to spam sorcery points AND spells means the sorcerer can make this paradigm his wheelhouse and significantly affect every encounter (since they essentially have double nova potential).

Warlock - A "kind of" on the full caster. But because we're expecting only 1 encounter, their small spell output isn't nearly as limiting as it could be. Plus all their lower level spells being at "max" level will help a lot. Could excel here, with the right build. And certainly wouldn't be too far behind otherwise.

Wizard - Hey look, another full caster. Full and huge NOVA potential. A wizard not having to conserve spells is a terrible thing to behold -expect ALL the biggies to make an appearance. So the DM then has to focus on legendary resistance, spell immunities etc.


Well those are my quick takes on the classes under this paradigm.

Thoughts?

 

[Blue]

Shirt rest classes like Monk & warlock can do quite well with nova>rest>repeat.

Stopping there - you are quoting a message that said that there are classes that due to resource management only get a single nova battle a day. So there is no "repeat" that can be assumed in the concept that all battles are nova battles.

 

[tetrasodium]

This is sort of an aside, but if there is inherent class imbalance with single nova encounters then there must be inherent class imbalance with multiple medium encounters. No one seems to talk much about that issue (that I have seen).

There is but the rules are structured with math to ensure that situation never really occurs due to too many encounters being allotted in the budget for PCs in 5e itself& short rest classes nova>shortrest>repeat like warlock & monk getting to blow their entire wad on single fights never running dry.

Long rest classes should be able to shine in that alternate state by still having some gas in the tank & big guns leftover when the monk & warlock run dry over the span if 6-8 encounters but instead you have monk & warlock with 6-8x more ki points &spell slots over those 6-8 encounters so they never run dry & nova through all of them. The short rest nova classes wind up stealing the show at both extremes along with everything between so it creates the problem designed into 5e itself.

 

[Reynard]

So my experiences, with the various classes and NOVA capability (there will be holes, since my group heavily gravitates toward certain classes):

Artificer - A hole for me right of the bat (have seen exactly 1 artificer played in 5e, no one took one even in my Eberron campaign): But it's a half-caster with a lot of magic item related powers. Does not SEEM to be a big NOVA class, more of a long haul class. But, I'll leave specifics to someone more familiar.

Barbarian - Not a big NOVA class. BUT with this paradigm rage will be active nearly 100% of the time for any given fight (unless there are conditions that make it suboptimal). This means putting the Barbarian down will be very difficult. That's about the only (but big) NOVA issue though.

Bard - A full caster with some serious oomph, if they want. going NOVA means no regard for holding back - so expect Bardic inspiration every round. Expect serious spells like sleep, Fairie fire (low level), Hypnotic Pattern, Fear (mid levels), forcecage, charm/dominate monster etc. (high levels) and other encounter stopping spells.

Cleric - Full caster again. The big thing with the cleric going full bore every encounter? Healing word means, even IF someone drops, they won't stay dropped -and since the cleric isn't conserving slots this will just keep happening. Since it's got an ok range, the cleric can even do this from the back line. AND can do it and still attack from range (with a cantrip, but still). All the while they will have spirit guardians etc. to make enemies regret closing. If you have a twilight or a peace cleric and your group is only expecting the one encounter? at mid+ levels, you will not be able to keep a party member down without ludicrous damage and/or effects.

Druid - Another full caster. And has healing word and other spells to keep the party up just fine. At low levels, Moon Druids will LOVE being able to morph into bears etc. with no regard/worry as to saving shapes (though you CAN make them regret it with a nice exploration challenge later). Not quite the oomph of the cleric, but near enough to make anyone in the party going and staying down a fairly difficult endeavor.

Fighter - Not a NOVA friendly class. Except, expect the fighter to action surge in every encounter. And since he will be buffed and attacking with advantage (even at level one with things like Fairie fire) this will do a ton of damage and needs to be accounted for. The BM fighter will be using a maneuver die near every round (why not, most fights take 4ish rounds, they get 4 dice) which will increase their output a lot. But the impact will, almost certainly be less dramatic than the casters. Especially as levels rise.\

Monk - The monks primary worry is always running out of Ki. With this paradigm, at all but the low levels, that's less a concern. So at 5+ expect multiple stunning strikes on any given round - this means solitary monsters are done for, unless you pile on the legendary resistances. And even then, the monk is softening them up for the caster. Still, I don't see too much challenge designing around this as necessary.

Paladin - Half caster, but with smite, So they NOVA quite well. Smites every round will crank up the damage and the paladin aura (for 6+ level) means save effects are lessened. Frankly a pretty good martial to have in the party if this paradigm is expected. Plus, spamming lay on hands means little worry of after effects of the fight (though usually suboptimal during the fight).

Ranger - half caster. Unlike the others (except for maybe monk) this one will be a bit subclass dependent. Gllomstalkers in particular will thrive as that initial oomph (the first round) can change the flow from moment one (plus they can push a dramatic initiative bonus). I can just see a bugbear gloomstalker ranger make even the paladin player gape at the first round damage. Plus, since other encounters will not be combat but exploration etc. - they can REALLY make a big difference. depends on what there will be outside of combat though.

Rogue - No NOVA at all really other than a bit for the arcane trickster (and a tiny bit on the soulknife). But rogues are pretty solid, so should be able to hang in there. Plus, hopefully serious out of combat utility. Depending on what surrounds the one NOVA encounter, this class may end up being avoided.

Sorcerer - Full caster with lots of NOVA potential. getting to spam sorcery points AND spells means the sorcerer can make this paradigm his wheelhouse and significantly affect every encounter (since they essentially have double nova potential).

Warlock - A "kind of" on the full caster. But because we're expecting only 1 encounter, their small spell output isn't nearly as limiting as it could be. Plus all their lower level spells being at "max" level will help a lot. Could excel here, with the right build. And certainly wouldn't be too far behind otherwise.

Wizard - Hey look, another full caster. Full and huge NOVA potential. A wizard not having to conserve spells is a terrible thing to behold -expect ALL the biggies to make an appearance. So the DM then has to focus on legendary resistance, spell immunities etc.


Well those are my quick takes on the classes under this paradigm.

Thoughts?

Thank you very much for that breakdown.

 

[Jer]

This is sort of an aside, but if there is inherent class imbalance with single nova encounters then there must be inherent class imbalance with multiple medium encounters. No one seems to talk much about that issue (that I have seen).

If you're playing both the long rest and short rest classes as "expected" and have an encounter schedule as given in the DMG it won't show up. Because the long rest classes are conserving their resources according to the daily resource refresh schedule and the short rest classes are conserving their resources according to the short rest refresh schedule - meaning that if you know your GM is going to give you 2-3 encounters before you get a short rest, that's how you're going to use your short rest abilities and so you'll be spending your resources on the same budget as the long rest classes.

If you have a short rest after every encounter you'd see the imbalance start to show up in that direction - the short rest classes can blow through their resources then rest up and be at close to full strength for the next encounter every time, so they can basically nova every encounter without trying. However their nova potential is much smaller than the long rest classes because they're built to spend all of their resources over 2-3 encounters and then refresh. So it won't be as obvious or as extreme as the long rest class in a single battle (and honestly I tend to give 3-4 double strength encounters per long rest and a short rest every 1 or 2 combat encounters and mostly even at high levels I think it's only noticeable to me because I'm looking for it).

Another place where you'd spot it is if you have many more encounters before a long rest. Like if you had 11-12 encounters before a long rest instead of 6-8. You'd see the short rest classes peforming at roughly the same power level through all of those encounters while the long rest classes would either have to tone down their spell slot usage per encounter a lot or would burn through their spells and be doing nothing but throwing cantrips for most of the encounters. But I doubt that anyone does this - 6-8 encounters already feels like it's at the high end of what can be considered an "adventuring day" - but if they do I bet their players gravitate towards short rest classes over long rest ones.