Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="MonkeyWrench" data-source="post: 6987718" data-attributes="member: 20730">I'm not 100% sure why I didn't have that issue in 3e - we'd usually have 2-3 combats per session, very few instances of PCs going full nova, and avoided rocket tag combats for the most part. I suspect it's mostly group playstyle as my players tended to be very cautious and conservative with their resources when we played 3e. In 5e they go all out every combat and if I cannot stay within the recommended encounter guidelines I find I have to make significant modifications to the standard monsters to keep things fun and interesting. I used to not mind making those modifications, but I also have way less time to tinker with the game now.For me the biggest issue I have with the 6-8 encounter guidelines is that they impose what I see as an artificial structure on my campaign. I like combat encounters to be a consequence of PC actions and NPC/Monster response and that doesn't always mean 6-8 encounters. I know those are guidelines and that I can use more or less encounters of varying difficulty to mix things up, but for some reason I find 5e remarkably inflexible when it comes to what it takes to have fun and interesting combats. As for how this relates to high-level play, those times I can include multiple encounters per adventuring day, everything works great. The chief example I would use is my players' assault on a drow household - lots of encounters with variable difficulty, a time constraint factor that kept them moving forward, and a multiple moments where everyone's PC got to shine or standout. What I've found with high-level campaigns is that the party very often has greater resources at their disposal to influence when and where they fight.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="MonkeyWrench, post: 6987718, member: 20730"] I'm not 100% sure why I didn't have that issue in 3e - we'd usually have 2-3 combats per session, very few instances of PCs going full nova, and avoided rocket tag combats for the most part. I suspect it's mostly group playstyle as my players tended to be very cautious and conservative with their resources when we played 3e. In 5e they go all out every combat and if I cannot stay within the recommended encounter guidelines I find I have to make significant modifications to the standard monsters to keep things fun and interesting. I used to not mind making those modifications, but I also have way less time to tinker with the game now. For me the biggest issue I have with the 6-8 encounter guidelines is that they impose what I see as an artificial structure on my campaign. I like combat encounters to be a consequence of PC actions and NPC/Monster response and that doesn't always mean 6-8 encounters. I know those are guidelines and that I can use more or less encounters of varying difficulty to mix things up, but for some reason I find 5e remarkably inflexible when it comes to what it takes to have fun and interesting combats. As for how this relates to high-level play, those times I can include multiple encounters per adventuring day, everything works great. The chief example I would use is my players' assault on a drow household - lots of encounters with variable difficulty, a time constraint factor that kept them moving forward, and a multiple moments where everyone's PC got to shine or standout. What I've found with high-level campaigns is that the party very often has greater resources at their disposal to influence when and where they fight. [/QUOTE]

Verification