Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="GrimCo" data-source="post: 9838577" data-attributes="member: 7044462">Action economy is king in D&D. That's why high level fights against single boss monsters sucks. 4-5 PCs with multiple attacks have way more actions and can do much more per turn than boss. On the flip side, if you use 3:1 or 4:1 ratio of lower leveled monsters vs PCs, they won't have good time. Like you said, damage is best unless you can use save or suck spell with high probability chance of sticking. Defense can work in a game with time limit and where draw is also positive outcome. First thing that comes to mind is Inter Milan in seasons 2004/5. They had 18 draws,18 wins, 2 losses. That's Serie A record for draws and they finished 3rd. Not bad. Defense was Italy's main tactics in 80s and 90s, specially in tournaments where it's more important not to lose, than to win, specially in early phases. In football, there were and still are two main schools of tought. One is defend first, then try to score if you can. Other one is "goal more" philosophy, where it doesn't matter if opponent scores, so long as you score more. Both have their merits, but second one is way more enjoyable to watch. Unlike sports game, d&d fights usually don't have clock. Also, most of the times, there is no resource attrition since basic attacks are limitless. What's even worse is when 2 defensive specialists clash. Then you get slogfest, where round after round nothing happens (both side mostly miss, or they use abilities to negate hits/damage). That's how you get 1-2h fights. Low damage defense specialist vs high damage offense specialist is interesting. One chips away slowly, other misses a lot, but when it connects, it hurts bad. Then it's just matter of lasting long enough to land those 2-3 strong attacks needed to take down enemy.</blockquote>

Verification