log in or register to remove this ad

 

5E Is 5e "Easy Mode?"

Garthanos

Arcadian Knight
that ignores the nova problem that rears it's head as you step away from 6-8 encounters/long rest so you don't even get a reasonably balanced result.
well you have the problem of not everyone being able to ummm play in the same nova game... rudolph has no offensive longrest resources.

That said 3 to 4 that are double sized could even be seen as approximate 4e standard... if it was 3 rounds in 4e it was a flavor battle or part of a bigger skill challenge and not the main point.

One might let short rest users a partial resource recovery too.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

tetrasodium

Adventurer
well you have the problem of not everyone being able to ummm play in the same nova game... rudolph has no offensive longrest resources.

That said 3 to 4 that are double sized could even be seen as approximate 4e standard... if it was 3 rounds in 4e it was a flavor battle or part of a bigger skill challenge and not the main point.

One might let short rest users a partial resource recovery too.
the problem isn't "how could I fix it", it's what @Ilbranteloth said here that I was responding to when I detailed the variant options & how they miss the mark in ways that are either deliberate or as carelessly incomplete spitballs.
 

Garthanos

Arcadian Knight
the problem isn't "how could I fix it", it's what @Ilbranteloth said here that I was responding to when I detailed the variant options & how they miss the mark in ways that are either deliberate or as carelessly incomplete spitballs.
Yeh I do not have any conflict with that statement I think I more a confirming your opinion and nitpicking a detail ... the healing surge could be used as a limit. The second wind could be used to stabilize fighting bigger battles IF they had done as more than carelessly incomplete spitballs.
 
Last edited:

Garthanos

Arcadian Knight
Heck you could even make the Second wind item only work if the fight hits 5 rounds and that would be kind of cool. (strangely more realistic but unneeded limit given the action cost but ok that seems 5e style)

Or make it a bonus action if used after 5 rounds...
 
Last edited:


Lanefan

Victoria Rules
I like concept of the world being a dark place and the heroes being "points of light" in a dark world. That is not a problem. The dark tone of a world can be conveyed without hosing PCs.
I see "points of light" as being more the remaining outposts of decent civilization in a world going wild, but the same general idea applies.

Also, no that does not explain certain levels of random F ery. The completely random monster ecology that was present in many early games of D&D (1E and before) made no sense. For example having a room full of rust monsters in one room, right next to a room of goblins in another room, right next to a room full of wights with gelatinous cube in the hall way right in front of some randomly placed trap does not make sense unless you are maybe entering the menagarie of some mad wizard maze keeper or something. Many dungeons in early D&D were like this.
Both as player and DM I love dungeons like this! In fact, one of the few of my own modules I've ever put together into vaguely-publishable form is just like this: completely random stuff that makes no sense whatsoever until and unless (it's not at all guaranteed) the PCs figure out the underlying reason for it all.

Also, there's not that many of them. Judges Guild put out a few doozies but I'm not completely sure whether they were supposed to be entirely taken seriously or not. A couple of others e.g. EX-1 and 2 were intentionally supposed to be wacko. After those, most things I've found to be more or less explainable.

Some early modules very much had random ultra deadly monsters and traps that were present without warning. This was not all that rare.
Because, as I said earlier, the world is out to get you. Be careful, and take the time to search.
Also even if clues are given for a group of non-veterans players it may not be so easy to tell. I can describe cockatrices for example in a way that a veteran may use player knowledge and know what they are but newer players or players even who have never encountered them before would not necessarily recognize them and know how deadly they are for a party of a certain level.
Obviously. Some things have to be learned by trial and error; and the first time a cockatrice turns someone to stone the rest of the party will learn about 'em real fast! (that said, it'd be a truly nasty DM who didn't have the party meet just one the first time)

Probably the nastiest trick I've used along these lines is the Magic-User Medusa whose favourite trick was to cast Invisibility on herself, wait until a PC got close to her, and then suddenly appear in front of said PC as her snakes attacked with surprise.... :devilish:

No one has mentioned winning every time. If you are going to make an argument don't create a strawman and address something not said address what was said. Yes. there will be times that players have to flee in frustration. There will on the rare occasion be a character death but those instances should be just that rare.
Death, particularly in the modern editions, is the biggest risk a character can face; and thus if death isn't threatened one can argue the challenge is reduced greatly. And this is why these debates always end up revolving around lethality: the other major risks are all gone.

In older editions you could also threaten level loss, item loss, limb loss, and so forth; meaning death didn't have to be the only major risk.
For the most part the PCs are heroes above the common person in ability even if they come from common or lower backgrounds. D&D has embraced this philosophy since 3E and the change has bettered the game.
I thoroughly disagree that this change has bettered the game.

I'd far rather see the PCs become heroes through play, rather than start there before play even begins.
 
Last edited:


doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
I think out of the abyss or one of its AL uppliments (ie aldmg)even had a sidebar or something reiterating that.

@doctorbadwolf if your position is that those tools exist but you can not show even a few examples then you've not even shown that you understand the complaint or realized what kinds of tools that are missing from a dm's toolbox.
Bud, I gave examples to the other person in this discussion who knows how to discuss things in a civil manner. I ain’t going out of my way for you.
 

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
that ignores the nova problem that rears it's head as you step away from 6-8 encounters/long rest so you don't even get a reasonably balanced result.... unless of course the gm removes all the other healing or have none in the group.
Have you actually run a game and experienced balance issues from not running 6-8 encounters?
 


Mepher

Explorer
Have you actually run a game and experienced balance issues from not running 6-8 encounters?
I have plenty of times. After DMing AD&D 1E/2E for the last 30 years the idea of a 6-8 encounter work day was just not part of my thought process. 6-8 encounters per day exists because of the giant action economy that the players have.

If you either don't throw enough encounters at your players to use up their action economy OR you allow them to rest easily then the game truly becomes easy mode. Once you aren't going to easily run out of abilities then the nova problem occurs.

The problem I have with this design philosophy is that 6-8 encounters per game day @ 10-60 minutes per encounter in real time means game sessions just become hack and slash. I prefer less encounters and more roleplay, that means I have to push my lower number of encounters more into the deadly range to use up their actions without them just blowing away all the encounters. The other option is to make changes to healing, rest, and how easily they get their abilities back.

If your players enjoy 6-8 easy-medium encounters per long rest then more power to them.
 

Sadras

Hero
Wait?

Y'all getting long rests without going back to the city or setting up a camp after clearing out a whole forest first?

When was this? Did I miss a union meeting?
By RAW yes unless you use the optional rule of a week or homebrew.
Also what kind of DM requires exterminating every vermin in the forest before taking a nap.
Remember you need 1 hour of fighting to interrupt your Long Rest.
Let me say that again - 1 HOUR

EDIT: So if you are NOT playing this, then you are not going by RAW, and you should not be arguing on the side of 5e is not easy mode. The great thing about 5e though is that it is easy mode with user friendly dials.
 
Last edited:

Mepher

Explorer
Remember you need 1 hour of fighting to interrupt your Long Rest.
Let me say that again - 1 HOUR
That has to be one of the dumbest rules in the book by far. I challenge you to run 1 hour of combat. It just doesn't happen and no party would have enough abilities to withstand an hour of combat unless they seriously overpowered it and didn't have to use any of their limited abilities. Your 5 round combat took 30 seconds.

Lets look at it realistically though. You make camp, you fall asleep. 2 hours into your sleep a group of Orcs start surrounding your camp. The watch sees them and calls the alarm. You jump out of your sleep, adrenaline pumping and you grab your sword to prepare for battle. That 30-40 second battle concludes. It's not as if your immediately asleep. You just killed those orcs. At this point you probably want to get the corpses out of the middle of the camp, you want to scout around the area and make sure there are no more enemies, might need to heal people, fix the camp, etc.

By the time you get back down to rest I would say at LEAST and hour has gone by. I don't take that rule literally, it just doesn't make sense. If you get interrupted during your long rest with combat, an hour or more is gone before everything is resolved imo.
 

Flamestrike

Adventurer
The problem I have with this design philosophy is that 6-8 encounters per game day @ 10-60 minutes per encounter in real time means game sessions just become hack and slash.
A game day is not a session.

If your players enjoy 6-8 easy-medium encounters per long rest then more power to them.
You dont have to maintain 6-8 medium to deadly encounters per long rest.

You have an adventuring day with (say) 6 hard encounters, and time for 3 short rests.
The you have one with 2 deadly encounters (and the one short rest)
Then you have one with 3 hard encounters, 2 easy encounters, 3 medium encounters and a deadly encounter and time for several short rests.
Then you have a day with 1 very deadly encounter.
Then you have one with 1 easy, 2 hards and 1 deadly and no short rests.
Etc etc etc

If you mix it up, and try to keep PCs on the clock as much as possible, your Players will start to naturally conserve resources for the BBEG fight at the end of the day, not knowing how many encounters there are yet to come before their next long (or short) rest.
 

Mepher

Explorer
A game day is not a session.
How long does combat take with your group? Throw a hard encounter at a group of 5 and its easily in the realm for that combat to take 30 minutes. Push 6 of them before a long rest and you just spent your game session in combat. If that is your style of game that is great but honestly why not just play a miniature wargame at that point.

You dont have to maintain 6-8 medium to deadly encounters per long rest.

You have an adventuring day with (say) 6 hard encounters, and time for 3 short rests.
The you have one with 2 deadly encounters (and the one short rest)
Then you have one with 3 hard encounters, 2 easy encounters, 3 medium encounters and a deadly encounter and time for several short rests.
Then you have a day with 1 very deadly encounter.
Then you have one with 1 easy, 2 hards and 1 deadly and no short rests.
Etc etc etc
Your examples are just making my point. You list each day with encounters and short rests but you are ignoring the fact that those players are taking a long rest between each day. They are getting their full action economy and hit points back each day. The lighter days gives them the opportunity to nova the later encounters when they know rest is coming. Take away their full healing overnight and watch them start holding resources "just in case".

If you mix it up, and try to keep PCs on the clock as much as possible, your Players will start to naturally conserve resources for the BBEG fight at the end of the day, not knowing how many encounters there are yet to come before their next long (or short) rest.
What you are describing is exactly how the game plays out in AD&D. When you have less abilities to spend you learn to conserve them. 5E is all about big flashy heroic actions, it doesn't lend itself to holding back and most people don't play it that way.
 

jmartkdr2

Explorer
How long does combat take with your group? Throw a hard encounter at a group of 5 and its easily in the realm for that combat to take 30 minutes. Push 6 of them before a long rest and you just spent your game session in combat. If that is your style of game that is great but honestly why not just play a miniature wargame at that point.
Or just run two combats, some roleplay, maybe a trap, and continue the same adventuring day next session.

A session does not need to end in a long rest. You can put one day on hold and come back to it in the next session. Just because a session ended does not mean the adventuring day has, therefore you can have as many encounters between long rests as the fiction allows, even if it takes several sessions to do so.

Your examples are just making my point. You list each day with encounters and short rests but you are ignoring the fact that those players are taking a long rest between each day. They are getting their full action economy and hit points back each day. The lighter days gives them the opportunity to nova the later encounters when they know rest is coming. Take away their full healing overnight and watch them start holding resources "just in case".
How would they know that the next encounter is the last one of the day? How can they be certain enough of that that they decide they no longer need to conserve resources, unless you outright tell them that?

What you are describing is exactly how the game plays out in AD&D. When you have less abilities to spend you learn to conserve them. 5E is all about big flashy heroic actions, it doesn't lend itself to holding back and most people don't play it that way.
It's also how the game plays out in 5e if you make sure you have enough encounters per long rest to make them conserve resources. Alternatively, if you let the party fully heal up after every encounter, this isn't how AD&D works at all.
 

Umbran

Mod Squad
Staff member
Mod Note:
Please, everyone - there's a lot of real unpleasant things going on in the world. Please don't add to it. Folks can feel an urge, or have an old habit towards being rude or dismissive. We hope you can be big enough to not fall to it right now.

@doctorbadwolf and @tetrasodium - this goes for you two especially. You two just can't seem to not poke at each other needlessly. Please stop.
 

Oofta

Title? I don't need no stinkin' title.
The 15 minute work day is an issue in most editions in my experience, it's hardly unique to 5E.

Like others I throw a mix. Sometimes we have 3 hard/deadly encounters other times (rarely) I may have as many as 10 encounters. Typical is 4-6 between long rests. I count an encounter as anything that will likely use limited resources.

We simply go from one session to the next without a long rest.
 

Flamestrike

Adventurer
How long does combat take with your group? Throw a hard encounter at a group of 5 and its easily in the realm for that combat to take 30 minutes.
10-20 minutes on average. The higher the level, and the more dangerous the fight, the longer it takes.

I enforce strict 6 second time limits from the time a players turn starts to the time they announce actions. If they fail to announce what they're doing within 6 seconds of their turn starting, they take the Dodge action and their turn ends.

Push 6 of them before a long rest and you just spent your game session in combat. If that is your style of game that is great but honestly why not just play a miniature wargame at that point.
A game session is not an adventuring day. You dont need to have 6 encounters in a session. You 'need' 6 in an adventuring day. That adventuring day could take several sessions of play.

Your examples are just making my point. You list each day with encounters and short rests but you are ignoring the fact that those players are taking a long rest between each day. They are getting their full action economy and hit points back each day.
Good. They're supposed to start each adventuring day at full strength.

The lighter days gives them the opportunity to nova the later encounters when they know rest is coming.
How do they know rest is coming?

I can assure you they cant. Even on fights which they thought was the 'BBEG' (end boss, time to unload) I've intentionally sprung extra encounters on them a few times after the BBEG fight.

Keep them on their toes.

I often use doom clocks also. Some times the players dont know they're on the clock till after an encounter or two, when they find out.

Do stuff like this often enough, and they hold back and pace themselves and it becomes self policing.
 


Most Liked Threads

Advertisement2

Advertisement4

Top