D&D 5E (2024) Is 5E better because of Crawford and Perkins leaving?

[AlViking]

Wow... you are demonstrating the problem of how the default invites players to poison the social dynamic and can't even discuss it without twisting the point into something that paints the gm as some kind of monster killer gm.



I ran 2e and 3.x. even PC's died it was a neutral thing because everyone could accept that it was the monsters not the gm putting in "a bit of effort" to execute their pc. Back then there was always something that the party could have done different and after recap discussion wil likely do better at in the future, that's no longer the case when a pc is killed due to the bar being raised to one that looks like the same execution as the gm deciding "I want to kill off characters on a regular basis'. You aren't even responding the topic being discussed in either of my previous posts.

There's a vast spectrum between no-harm DMs and killer DMs. It is and always has been up to the DM and players where they end up on that spectrum. There are far fewer "Oops you're dead" options than there were in the past - you seem to ignore the many ways characters could die in the TSR era that could not be prevented. There were plenty of times when one of my characters died and there was nothing I could have done differently. Meanwhile the lethality of my campaigns I run hasn't changed much over decades of play, I rarely killed off PCs in back in 1e and it's just as rare for me to kill off PCs now.

Do the current rules limit how often characters die because of something out of their control? Yes, and I think that's a good thing. Meanwhile if my players wanted a more gritty campaign with higher lethality I could do that as well. What end of the spectrum people fall on has always been a preference and still is.

 

[AlViking]

RAW its kind of hard to kill PCs off. Outside level 1-3 and crits.
Unless you cheese the encounter rules.

The encounter rules are simply there as a guideline, there is no "cheesing" the encounter rules to throw something other than easy encounters and letting the characters getting a long rest on demand.

 

[ECMO3]

Why? You didn't quote me saying it. You quoted me saying, "it does not strike the heart or even the body if they have enough hit points." which means over 50% hit points and, "The only time you get struck for huge gory wounds like a stab in the heart is when you drop to 0." which means dropped to 0 per RAW and does not eliminate the minor damage that happens in-between 50% and 0 hit points.

I didn't quote you at all in that post. I linked your post #269 (Ironically you claimed earlier to have linked a post 3 times but never did in this thead that I see). Go read your last sentence on the post #269 that I linked .... i.e. "at the very bottom of the post" like I instructed you to do in the part you quoted.

Here is what you said:

"It is RAW, though, that the hit that brings you to 0 is the one that does the real damage to you."

Nothing in that sentence about huge gory wounds and it is right there in the linked post which was written by you .... unless someone else hacked your account.

And "minor damage" is real damage.

I am still waiting for explanations on how the DMG says "injury" and "wounded" in relation to losing/recovering hit points and how adventurers go "to an inch of their lives" when they have not even sustained "real damage" according to you, and finally that there are multiple monsters that go into blood frenzy against wounded enemies. It is not just sharks, but at least 4 creatures off the top of my head.

You are clinging to this odd interpretation of one sentence which you are using well out of context it was written for and which is refuted by mechanics in multiple other places in both the 2014 and 2024 rules. Like I said, you are just plain wrong.

 

[Zardnaar]

The encounter rules are simply there as a guideline, there is no "cheesing" the encounter rules to throw something other than easy encounters and letting the characters getting a long rest on demand.

Its easy to kill PCs if you use whatever from the MM.

If you actually bother following the rules its a lot harder. You kinda have to select combos or cheap for CR critters or cheap AoE critters to do it.

Outside level 1-3.

 

[AlViking]

Its easy to kill PCs if you use whatever from the MM.

If you actually bother following the rules its a lot harder. You kinda have to select combos or cheap for CR critters or cheap AoE critters to do it.

Outside level 1-3.

Every group is different so a DM is always going to have to adjust difficulty to be appropriate for their table. There is no way guidelines could account for the variability of mix of classes, player capability, DM capability, number of rests, resources magical and otherwise. The guidelines are just a starting point and I am following the rules if I use them as a starting point and not a straightjacket.

So I don't know what you mean by "actually bother following the rules". Where does it say I should or should not throw 10 hard encounters between long rests? In the 2014 DMG they mention the adventuring day budget ... as an option that you do not have to follow. In the 2024 DMG all they discuss a single encounter and the range of difficulty. Proper balance of resources, encounter difficulty and pacing have always been something a DM needs to learn through experience.

 

[Zardnaar]

Every group is different so a DM is always going to have to adjust difficulty to be appropriate for their table. There is no way guidelines could account for the variability of mix of classes, player capability, DM capability, number of rests, resources magical and otherwise. The guidelines are just a starting point and I am following the rules if I use them as a starting point and not a straightjacket.

So I don't know what you mean by "actually bother following the rules". Where does it say I should or should not throw 10 hard encounters between long rests? In the 2014 DMG they mention the adventuring day budget ... as an option that you do not have to follow. In the 2024 DMG all they discuss a single encounter and the range of difficulty. Proper balance of resources, encounter difficulty and pacing have always been something a DM needs to learn through experience.

It means that t really challenge the PCs you either grind them down (4-5 high encounters or 8-10 mixed at higher levels) o you ignore the rules and give them higher CR threats or use lots of crap (which makes combat grind due to 5E hp bloat).

For some reason ENworld doesn't like posting their encounters. I suspect theyre very easy or ignore the rules entirely.

 

[Maxperson]

I didn't quote you at all in that post. I linked your post #269 (Ironically you claimed earlier to have linked a post 3 times but never did in this thead that I see). Go read your last sentence on the post #269 that I linked .... i.e. "at the very bottom of the post" like I instructed you to do in the part you quoted.

Here is what you said:

"It is RAW, though, that the hit that brings you to 0 is the one that does the real damage to you."

Nothing in that sentence about huge gory wounds and it is right there in the linked post which was written by you .... unless someone else hacked your account.

And "minor damage" is real damage.

I am still waiting for explanations on how the DMG says "injury" and "wounded" in relation to losing/recovering hit points and how adventurers go "to an inch of their lives" when they have not even sustained "real damage" according to you, and finally that there are multiple monsters that go into blood frenzy against wounded enemies. It is not just sharks, but at least 4 creatures off the top of my head.

You are clinging to this odd interpretation of one sentence which you are using well out of context it was written for and which is refuted by mechanics in multiple other places in both the 2014 and 2024 rules. Like I said, you are just plain wrong.

It's not worth my time anymore to deal with your internet antics.

 

[AlViking]

It means that t really challenge the PCs you either grind them down (4-5 high encounters or 8-10 mixed at higher levels) o you ignore the rules and give them higher CR threats or use lots of crap (which makes combat grind due to 5E hp bloat).

I typically do between 3 and 5 encounters, a mix of medium and high.

For some reason ENworld doesn't like posting their encounters. I suspect theyre very easy or ignore the rules entirely.

What kind of encounter details would you like?

From my last game the 4 PCs were level 9 so a low difficulty encounter is 5,200 XP. The encounter was one Black Abishai and a couple of Dhergoloths for 5,800 XP which is lower then I frequently throw but I was taking into account that both monsters can see in the dark and for story reasons they couldn't detect the Black Abishai before combat started for story reasons. Encounter started with the Black Abishai casting darkness followed by the Dhergoloth running around doing their flailing claws attack. The Dhergoloth do force damage so the raging barbarian took full damage. The monsters were attacking with advantage, the PCs disadvantage, although I gave them a break and made the room big enough that the entire area wasn't covered with darkness. That was the first fight since their last long rest and I almost took out the cleric, hurt the barbarian badly and they've already used up a lot of resources.

I could go on, but I regularly drop PCs to 0 without throwing hordes of dragons at them.

 

[Zardnaar]

I typically do between 3 and 5 encounters, a mix of medium and high.



What kind of encounter details would you like?

From my last game the 4 PCs were level 9 so a low difficulty encounter is 5,200 XP. The encounter was one Black Abishai and a couple of Dhergoloths for 5,800 XP which is lower then I frequently throw but I was taking into account that both monsters can see in the dark and for story reasons they couldn't detect the Black Abishai before combat started for story reasons. Encounter started with the Black Abishai casting darkness followed by the Dhergoloth running around doing their flailing claws attack. The Dhergoloth do force damage so the raging barbarian took full damage. The monsters were attacking with advantage, the PCs disadvantage, although I gave them a break and made the room big enough that the entire area wasn't covered with darkness. That was the first fight since their last long rest and I almost took out the cleric, hurt the barbarian badly and they've already used up a lot of resources.

I could go on, but I regularly drop PCs to 0 without throwing hordes of dragons at them.

Well +4 wisdom saves on black abashed, AC 15 and 58 hit points. Dhergoloth shouldn't be hard either. Neither one hits very hard.

 

[ECMO3]

It's not worth my time anymore to deal with your internet antics.

Yep because you know you are wrong and you did say it.