D&D 5E Is 5e the Least-Challenging Edition of D&D?

[tetrasodium]

I'm not saying that 5E combat is toothless and rigged so that death is unlikely (if not impossible), but that certainly seems to be the assumption at my table.

The party was fighting a gang of harpies in the last gaming session. As the monsters were approaching, right before rolling initiative, I asked someone for a History check. I ignored the result and informed them: "You've heard stories of these creatures, and how they delight in pain and suffering. They've been known to 'sing along' to the screams of their victims as if it were music." I paused for effect, then broke the fourth wall: "They are the sort of monster that will keep attacking you even after you drop to zero hit points, so be careful."

Everyone immediately put their phones down and sat up in their chairs. The assumption, up until that point anyway, was that combat wasn't anything to worry about. But now, things just got real...and it was just a random encounter.

In previous editions of the game, especially the Expert Rules of the 1980s, characters actively avoided combat. It was a last resort, something that happened after stealth and negotiation failed. It was far more risky, and resources were far more limited, compared to any other edition of the game that I've played.

Going to take a guess here....
And then they proceeded to nova their way through it if there was ever any risk or if they expected to be fighting harpies over & over again they treated the rest of the session like they were running through tomb of horrors.

 

[jayoungr]

just you bloviating or was there a relevant point that you'd like to make now?

There's no need to be insulting. I also don't appreciate the insinuation that all my games must be "murderhobo vacation."

If everything I've typed just reads to you as me "bloviating," then clearly I'm wasting both our time by trying to engage. So I'll stop.

Have a nice day.

 

[CleverNickName]

But then again we have people arguing that only a jerk DM targets downed characters but (if I understand correctly) using save or die is perfectly kosher and not a jerk DM move.

And I'm suggesting that both premises are false. A jerk monster targets downed characters, the DM is just sitting in a chair rolling dice and following the notes and descriptions in the monster description. The game rules have save-or-die mechanics, not the DM (unless the DM is using a house-rule), and the players expect the DM to play by the rules that everyone agreed to.

All in all, I'm suggesting that people might be blaming the DM for things that aren't really the DM's fault. "The game is only as hard as the DM makes it" is a bit of a cop-out. Yes, as the DM I am allowed to change anything to suit my whim. But that shouldn't mean I'm expected to. Right?

 

[Oofta]

And I'm suggesting that both premises are false. A jerk monster targets downed characters, the DM is just sitting in a chair rolling dice and following the notes and descriptions in the monster description. The game rules have save-or-die mechanics, not the DM (unless the DM is using a house-rule), and the players expect the DM to play by the rules that everyone agreed to.

All in all, I'm suggesting that people might be blaming the DM for things that aren't really the DM's fault. "The game is only as hard as the DM makes it" is a bit of a cop-out. Yes, as the DM I am allowed to change anything to suit my whim. But that shouldn't mean I'm expected to. Right?

I always have a chat with my players during our session 0 about how deadly they want the campaign to be and adjust appropriately. Every once in a while I'll double check and get feedback on the topic. If they want deadly I'll target the healers once the monsters know who they are and double tap etc.

I find 5E as deadly as I want it to be out of the box. In older editions we probably did a lot of homebrew stuff to make it less deadly. I always hated save or die spells back in the day, so I avoided those monsters. In 4E I removed several save or suck options from both monsters and PCs. In older editions we also took a lot of multi-day rests so that the cleric could heal us all or had carts full of healing potions.

I'm sure different groups had different experiences.

 

[TwoSix]

And I'm suggesting that both premises are false. A jerk monster targets downed characters, the DM is just sitting in a chair rolling dice and following the notes and descriptions in the monster description. The game rules have save-or-die mechanics, not the DM (unless the DM is using a house-rule), and the players expect the DM to play by the rules that everyone agreed to.

All in all, I'm suggesting that people might be blaming the DM for things that aren't really the DM's fault. "The game is only as hard as the DM makes it" is a bit of a cop-out. Yes, as the DM I am allowed to change anything to suit my whim. But that shouldn't mean I'm expected to. Right?

Sure, but the game can only have one certain level of difficulty described by the default rules. It could be easy, it could be hard, but it can't be both. I don't see any evidence that the majority of players would prefer a harder default level of difficulty than that selected by the 5e designers.

 

[Salamandyr]

I'd say a lot of the lack of challenge aspect comes from 5e's simplicity. It's has a shallow learning curve, and it's fairly easy to build a character to the expected level of power. Compare this with 3rd edition, where one could easily inadvertantly build a crippled character who couldn't contribute in any meaningful way with his companions, and 1st & 2nd edition where there were very few ways to optimize your character, and death was both omnipresent and somewhat arbitrary.

4e is the only thing really comparable to 5e in challenge (for reasons that should be fairly evident), but there is a mastery/optimization aspect to 4e that is less present in 5e. So

More choices
Few "bad" choices
Lots of cushion built in.

 

[CleverNickName]

I always have a chat with my players during our session 0 about how deadly they want the campaign to be and adjust appropriately. Every once in a while I'll double check and get feedback on the topic. If they want deadly I'll target the healers once the monsters know who they are and double tap etc.

This is excellent advice for every game master and player. SO MANY bruised egos and hurt feelings could be avoided by following this advice.

 

[Undrave]

Save or die isn't a challenge, it's a dumb mechanic that boils down whatever obstacle you might be facing down to a single die roll, whatever posturing you might have about 'picking the wrong fight'.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Save or die isn't a challenge, it's a dumb mechanic that boils down whatever obstacle you might be facing down to a single die roll, whatever posturing you might have about 'picking the wrong fight'.

Yeah, this is why I'm not a big fan of the style.

It just isn't any fun to walk into a room and die because of a single die roll.

 

[Zardnaar]

Save or die isn't a challenge, it's a dumb mechanic that boils down whatever obstacle you might be facing down to a single die roll, whatever posturing you might have about 'picking the wrong fight'.

It's a challenge avoiding it or getting your saves up.

Failing that raise dead.

You don't want to over do it and it sucked in 3E due to the way saves scaled.