D&D General Is WotC's 5E D&D easy? Trust me this isn't what you think... maybe

[Hussar]

The problem with this is that you are literally asking for a nonspecific mountain of math and rejecting it.

Nope?

I'm asking for actual evidence, rather than the mountain of math that you seem to think constitutes proof. I'm actually asking for the exact opposite.

After all, if your way actually worked, we wouldn't need playtesting would we? Every game would be released in absolute perfection, since, the math is so clear. But, since it doesn't actually work and all the theory crafting in the world doesn't actually mean anything until it's put to the test, you can keep crying to the skies all you like, but, you aren't actually proving anything, other than your own confirmation bias.

 

[overgeeked]

The DM runs the game and more often that not the players will follow the DMs lead.

I'm glad you softened your position to something more agreeable. The above is a much softer, more reasonable version of your original stated position...which was frankly wild.

 

[tetrasodium]

Well, your experience simply differs than mine then. In the five years since I've been playing, I've introduced only 25-30 new players and less than a handful of experienced (prior editions) players to 5E. I would estimate 90% of them bought PHBs, about 60% Xanathars, and maybe 30% bought additional books, some a couple, some nearly everything published!

Of course, I already had dice, and so did hte experienced players, but all the new ones purchased an average of 2-3 sets each. Some just a single set, some went crazy and bought 6 or more!

More experienced players (from prior editions) are likely to be more selective than newbies, IME as well.


For my part, I would never consider a player with a few sessions no longer a newbie. It would take many more than that, probably 10 or so IME before someone shows enough proficiency to no longer be a newbie.

It's late so I'm just going to lay out what I think are likely contributing to the difference and let you fill in where your situation differs along with any guesses. In no particular order

• The flgs I run AL games at is fairly large (generally with 4-6 tables going on al night) in a room that was once a whole other store
• The region is a rather dense (sub/ex)urban sprawl as far as population goes
• It's also a place with plenty of tourism
• A lot of newc players start with mtg pokemon or some other tcg then stop in on AL night to check things out on a whim.
• The vast majority of new players I encounter this way also have little if any experience with past editions (usually none). I'm not sure what I said to bring this up?
• Those newbies buying a phb and maybe more eventually is pretty common, but not what I was talking about
• Those newbies wanting to check it out and play for a bit before making a bigger investment than some dice and maybe snacks is very much the norm for me.
• A few sessions is relative. Through osmosis alone, ost players pick up enough to engage in chargen with far more knowledge and confidence than would be possible while the new dice smell is still wearing off the funny math rocks when a pregen often suits them well.

@Hussar I provided you with monster crunch and a spreadsheet you could use for grasping things enough to perhaps ask even one question relevant to the stories and anecdotes you noted with some specificity not to prove anything.. you claimed earlier that you were provided with stories and anecdotes... Pick one that you are interested in and ask pointed questions instead of suggesting vague frustration over not having enough details about some unstated aspect or details of some nonspecific stories or anecdotes. If you can't even manage that much it's strange that you would think it reasonable to expect an extreme like twenty to thirty rounds of details about a story or anecdote that you won't even point out or question with specificity .

 

[Hussar]

@Hussar I provided you with monster crunch and a spreadsheet you could use for grasping things enough to perhaps ask even one question relevant to the stories and anecdotes you noted with some specificity not to prove anything.. you claimed earlier that you were provided with stories and anecdotes... Pick one that you are interested in and ask pointed questions instead of suggesting vague frustration over not having enough details about some unstated aspect or details of some nonspecific stories or anecdotes. If you can't even manage that much it's strange that you would think it reasonable to expect an extreme like twenty to thirty rounds of details about a story or anecdote that you won't even point out or question with specificity .

No. You pointed me to a video which only had theorycrafted math. Zero actual play experience. Now, you can keep being condescending and snarky all you like, but, you still have not actually provided a single thing I've asked. All you insist on is your theory crafting must be accepted as gospel truth.

Twenty to thirty rounds of combat is about one level's worth of combat. Seems a pretty good spread to spot trends. At least, that's what I use when I examine my own games. I was concerned about a class being over powered because my gut was telling met that. Turned out, that I was entirely wrong once I actually started tracking things. The class was maybe a tad on the high side, but, overall? Nope, not over powered at all.

All your theorycrafting does is confirm your bias. Until you actually track things, I reject your white board theory crafting as nothing so much as smoke and mirrors. It's evidence of a potential problem, but, does nothing to actually explain what the problem is.

And, until you actually do the real work of testing the system instead of relying on percentages and probabilities, you cannot come to any sort of conclusion about why you are having these problems. Maybe it's the game math. Maybe it's the DM. Maybe it's a combination of the players. Maybe it's all of the above or maybe it's something else entirely. The "monster math" doesn't prove anything.

Again, if your math actually proved anything, we wouldn't need play testing. Every game would be a perfection of mathematics and any problem would be easily identifiable and corrected. But, your math doesn't prove anything. So, we need actual, in the wild, real world testing of the system to show where the issues are.

 

[Stalker0]

Official material has to be balanced around.

1. New players.
2. New players who have no clue how to optimize.
3. New players who dont optimize and are just stumbling around.

There are no 'difficulty settings'. Its not a video game.

Short answer: Yes.

I don’t agree with this. Now for 1-3rd level adventurers sure, you want to ease players into the system. But if you’re running an adventure for 5+ level chapters, I expect them to have killed a few goblins in their time.

 

[DrJawaPhD]

Do they have to only work for new players though? I swear it seems like WotC really doesn't care about anyone else sometimes.

It annoys me to an extent that WotC balances adventures to be semi-challenging for brand new players and then faceroll easy for optimizers, but I have to admit that it completely makes sense to do things this way. New players/DMs won't know how to make a brutal adventure easier, but experienced players/DMs will easily know how to make a trivial adventure harder and generally will have more fun modifying the adventure to fit their particular world than playing it straight out of the box anyhow.

WotC adventures mostly seem focused on writing cool stories where the DM has to fill in the actual combat parts. I don't mind it because I love the story ideas and want to come up with my own balancing for combat, loot, etc anyways.

 

[ezo]

It's late so I'm just going to lay out what I think are likely contributing to the difference and let you fill in where your situation differs along with any guesses. In no particular order

I briefly read this last night, but my bed was more enticing than replying then.

Generally, yes, we have very different experiences:

• The flgs I run AL games at is fairly large (generally with 4-6 tables going on al night) in a room that was once a whole other store
• The region is a rather dense (sub/ex)urban sprawl as far as population goes
• It's also a place with plenty of tourism
• A lot of newc players start with mtg pokemon or some other tcg then stop in on AL night to check things out on a whim.
• The vast majority of new players I encounter this way also have little if any experience with past editions (usually none). I'm not sure what I said to bring this up?

• We always play in private settings (often my place, but sometimes another group member's home).
• My region is more rural/suburban than urban. From the sounds of it you are in or on the edge of major city? The closest major city is at least an hour away from where I live (we have several smaller cities all around though).
• We get a fair amount of tourism (upstate NY), but no one joining our groups would be a tourist--everyone lives locally.
• New players join by word-of-mouth typically. Only once, when we were first starting out, did I post online looking for players.
• You probably brought up the experience issue because I did. Only five of the 30+ players I've played with played prior editions.

• Those newbies buying a phb and maybe more eventually is pretty common, but not what I was talking about
• Those newbies wanting to check it out and play for a bit before making a bigger investment than some dice and maybe snacks is very much the norm for me.
• A few sessions is relative. Through osmosis alone, ost players pick up enough to engage in chargen with far more knowledge and confidence than would be possible while the new dice smell is still wearing off the funny math rocks when a pregen often suits them well.

But those newbies buying a few "player's" books are a significant part of why WotC caters to the demographic.
Sure, I get that. I sounds like you have a LOT more turn-over given you play in public with strangers. Only 3 players I can recall in my 5 years were "strangers" to the group--usuaully someone knows them before they join (friend, co-worker).
True, it is subjective. I think from your experience, newbies are also more likely to hang around and watch for a while before jumping in?

I don’t agree with this. Now for 1-3rd level adventurers sure, you want to ease players into the system. But if you’re running an adventure for 5+ level chapters, I expect them to have killed a few goblins in their time.

My two cents:

If you're playing a 5th level PC you started at 1st, you shouldn't be a newbie really. It took our group 3 months of weekly sessions to get there the first time we played 5E. But by the time you reach 5th level, the game is even more in easy mode as far as PC survivability is concerned.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Whereas I’ve rarely had so few encounters in an adventuring day. Phandelver is a perfect example. Cragmaw hideout has six or eight encounters before you can long rest. Redbrand Hideout, same. Thindertree could have but the party withdrew. Still had four.

This Terrible Tavern to Swallow has eight before they can long rest.

Keeping the pressure on is key to making things dangerous.

Sure, but I just find that much combat to be tiresome and awkward for the pacing. YMMV.

 

[Hussar]

Sure, but I just find that much combat to be tiresome and awkward for the pacing. YMMV.

I get that. But, it depends on how you do the combats as well. My current group has no core casters (yay) which means rounds are MUCH faster. In a 3 hour session, we can get through 4 combats pretty easily with lots of time for doing other stuff. I mean, we finished off the Cragmaw Lair (6 encounters? 7? They kinda chained together at the end) and the Redbrand hideout in 3 and a bit sessions, and still had lots of time for other stuff.

When you can run fairly straight forward encounters where the players aren't using fifteen different effects all the time, it can massively speed things along.

I find that if I use more deadly encounters, particularly in my last campaign where we had so many casters, it would take blood forever to get through encounters. Just too much stuff going on.

But, at the end of that day, that's the price. If you want D&D to not be on easy mode, you have to pile on encounters. There are no other real solutions.

 

[ezo]

IME combat usually takes about 30-60 minutes unless it is a really biggie. Since we play for 4-8 hours, we average probably 6 per sesssion.

If you want D&D to not be on easy mode, you have to pile on encounters. There are no other real solutions.

As I see it, you have three options (not exclusive):
1. Have more encounters per rest, to create strain on the PCs' resources and enforce attrition.
2. Have harder encounters which can quickly drain hit points. Since in combat healing generally won't keep up, this creates danger.
3. House-rule It to Hell!!