Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
How Big Do You Like To Party?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="DND_Reborn" data-source="post: 7956679" data-attributes="member: 6987520"><p>Thanks everyone so far for voting and your replies! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></p><p></p><p>I think the baseline 4-5 PCs is probably close to the norm, but a lot of groups do have "extras" in the way of companions, hirelings, etc. For the most part, I would usually equate a number of these to add +1 members (or more) to the effective number of PCs in the party.</p><p></p><p>Since it seems to me from the evidence I've seen online and IRL discussions, most tables use feats, and roughly half or so use MCing to some degree or another.</p><p></p><p>With those things in mind, I am not surprised to see several DMs complain about how easy a solo BBEG is defeated if you use the default guidelines in 5E. Experienced DM will adjust accordingly, but novice DMs will be surprised at how easily the party dealt with "Monster X".</p><p></p><p>In our CoS game, the DM is novice and has only played for a bit less than a year. He runs the game well and we all have fun, but he is surprised how easily we defeat foes that he feared would be too much for us. This is due largely to the fact that myself and our normal DM are gamers-of-ol' and know how to min/max and exploit synergies--even without intending to do so sometimes (what can I say, it has become subconscious in some ways because in AD&D you more had to in order to survive--not so much in 5E normally).</p><p></p><p>While I understand WotC's desire to make the base game easy to play, and a lot of variant rules are offered, I wonder sometimes if they should design more for the middle (some feat use, some MC, some synergies, etc.) instead of the low-end or the high-end.</p><p></p><p>I think other than in some cases, it is part of the reason why the game loses some appeal after 10th level or so, maybe a bit higher. A while ago I worked on an L10 variant, but I am convinced now L12 is really the sweet spot for the end game. I'll be working on tweaking the classes, etc. but keeping them somewhat towards a lower-end of power, so that when feats and other features <em>are</em> used, the balance of power between party and encounters is more even.</p><p></p><p>Anyway, please keep voting if you haven't already, and thanks for your input!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="DND_Reborn, post: 7956679, member: 6987520"] Thanks everyone so far for voting and your replies! :) I think the baseline 4-5 PCs is probably close to the norm, but a lot of groups do have "extras" in the way of companions, hirelings, etc. For the most part, I would usually equate a number of these to add +1 members (or more) to the effective number of PCs in the party. Since it seems to me from the evidence I've seen online and IRL discussions, most tables use feats, and roughly half or so use MCing to some degree or another. With those things in mind, I am not surprised to see several DMs complain about how easy a solo BBEG is defeated if you use the default guidelines in 5E. Experienced DM will adjust accordingly, but novice DMs will be surprised at how easily the party dealt with "Monster X". In our CoS game, the DM is novice and has only played for a bit less than a year. He runs the game well and we all have fun, but he is surprised how easily we defeat foes that he feared would be too much for us. This is due largely to the fact that myself and our normal DM are gamers-of-ol' and know how to min/max and exploit synergies--even without intending to do so sometimes (what can I say, it has become subconscious in some ways because in AD&D you more had to in order to survive--not so much in 5E normally). While I understand WotC's desire to make the base game easy to play, and a lot of variant rules are offered, I wonder sometimes if they should design more for the middle (some feat use, some MC, some synergies, etc.) instead of the low-end or the high-end. I think other than in some cases, it is part of the reason why the game loses some appeal after 10th level or so, maybe a bit higher. A while ago I worked on an L10 variant, but I am convinced now L12 is really the sweet spot for the end game. I'll be working on tweaking the classes, etc. but keeping them somewhat towards a lower-end of power, so that when feats and other features [I]are[/I] used, the balance of power between party and encounters is more even. Anyway, please keep voting if you haven't already, and thanks for your input! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
How Big Do You Like To Party?
Top