Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DEFCON 1" data-source="post: 8822931" data-attributes="member: 7006">So you made the purposeful choice NOT to send most of the monsters after the cleric and warlock to wipe them off the battlefield?  Am I understanding you properly?  (I may be misunderstanding how you ran your encounter based on what you wrote, so if I did, my apologies and you can ignore the rest of this post as it's about faulty assumptions on my part.)Why would you find reasons not to attack the cleric and warlock?  What's the point in ignoring them?  Because they are squishy?  To me that's all the reason TO attack people in the back... so that the other Martial players are forced to make hard decisions and not just all gang up on the BBEG.  And if you were worried that if you attacked the cleric and killed them that this would only result in the 3 Martials up front spiraling towards death because they now had no healing to back them up... that's the entire point of the exercise, isn't it?  To teach the Martial characters they can't just ignore all the enemies to focus on just one?If I understood how you ran this particular encounter based upon how you wrote it above (and again, it's quite possible that I did not, and that's on me)... to me, this does not appear to be a game design issue-- this to me is a "DM style" issue.  You are making choices as a DM that to me emphasize to your players what they should do and focus on, and that you are teaching them that you will ignore squishy characters and just surround the Martial PCs with bags of HP for them to whittle away until they win.  That's not 5E's fault in design per se... that is all down to how you chose to run this fight.  If it was 8 enemies versus 5 PCs and three of the PCs could just tank all the enemies... and the two in back were never at risk, it's no wonder that it doesn't feel like a challenge.</blockquote>

Verification