D&D 5E (2024) Mike Mearls explains why your boss monsters die too easily

[payn]

I wonder if it is possible to thread the needle for pacing between encounter and daily.

Switch all class features to encounter powers and at-wills, for better math and robust balance.

Then add "rituals". These rituals are magic items, that then have specific requirements to fulfill in order to perform. So there can be big powers that get exhausted, but the DM has more say if, when, and how they happen. The DM can more easily account for such novas.

That wont work for me because I want the adventure day attrition model. More importantly, I want those resources in the hands of the players not the GM.

Also narratively, this combination of reliable encounters plus special big rituals is how most stories about magic work.

Based on what? I think the issue I have is folks seem to use "the community" and "most stories" as weights to their arguments. Its not convincing and Id prefer just to hear folks preferences instead of their take on why their preferences are more important.

 

[Yaarel]

That wont work for me because I want the adventure day attrition model. More importantly, I want those resources in the hands of the players not the GM.

Ok, but this daily attrition model is at the cost of unreliable combat math, and a disparity between Fighter and fullcasters.

Based on what? I think the issue I have is folks seem to use "the community" and "most stories" as weights to their arguments. Its not convincing and Id prefer just to hear folks preferences instead of their take on why their preferences are more important.

Most movies, tv shows, and novels that I have viewed, employ a combination of reliable powers plus big one-off rituals. And it is very many stories, including medievalesque fantasy, contemporary magical realism, superheroes, hi tech, etcetera. Even D&D stuff relies on vague rituals to explain the nonrepeatable big magical events.

 

[lepharaon33]

Mearls helped design 5e and he crunches the numbers.

Interesting that Johnathan Tweet chime in about timing with rests changes the balance which is out of the designers hands. Why not make a control part of the design? Like in the One Ring?

https://bsky.app/profile/mearls.bsky.social%2Fpost%2F3m2pjmp526c2h

Yeah, that’s a good point — rest timing really does shape balance more than most people realize. Making it part of the design, like The One Ring does, would give DMs and players clearer structure instead of leaving it so open-ended.

 

[SkidAce]

The narrative of short rests implies fatigue and refresh. This is better for psionic and other magic narratives, where personal energy is being expended.

The narrative of long rests is a bit weirder, imply that magic is refreshed during dreams.

Or long rests are recuperating from a long work day and waking up "refreshed" the next day.

 

[payn]

Ok, but this daily attrition model is at the cost of unreliable combat math, and a disparity between Fighter and fullcasters.

That unreliable combat math is exciting because its not predicable across the entire adventure. Adventure day is a marathon not a sprint so obviously it isnt gonna work entirely the way you want an encounters based game to. 5E is trying to give us both what we want, but I suspect neither will ever be entirely satisfied.

Most movies, tv shows, and novels that I have viewed, employ a combination of reliable powers plus big one-off rituals. And it is very many stories, including medievalesque fantasy, contemporary magical realism, superheroes, hi tech, etcetera. Even D&D stuff relies on vague rituals to explain the nonrepeatable big magical events.

TV shows are not games and more importantly they are not games that involve multiple people. While RPGs lean on genre conventions, they also have to produce unpredictable outcomes. Perhaps a storygame where you have better control over the narrative would be more enjoyable?

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Ok, but this daily attrition model is at the cost of unreliable combat math, and a disparity between Fighter and fullcasters.

Math is not unreliable, it is more reliable. Balancing around full-resource encounter whilst keeping the fights still challenging means the game becomes very randomly deadly. Or alternatively fights become pointless. And if you assume attrition, there is no reason why you cannot balance different classes with it.

Most movies, tv shows, and novels that I have viewed, employ a combination of reliable powers plus big one-off rituals. And it is very many stories, including medievalesque fantasy, contemporary magical realism, superheroes, hi tech, etcetera. Even D&D stuff relies on vague rituals to explain the nonrepeatable big magical events.

How about healing? Is it impossible for characters to sustain injuries that could not be instantly shrugged off in most fantasy fiction?

 

[Parmandur]

Ok, but this daily attrition model is at the cost of unreliable combat math, and a disparity between Fighter and fullcasters.

The disparity disappears if the full Adventure Day is followed, as with the published Advebture material. Both of those are features of the design, not bugs. Combat having a little swinginess gives it thst spice of gambling, hence dopamine.

 

[SkidAce]

It may be true that pi proves that we live in a non-euclidian reality but the math you are using for this claim seems to be more in the r'lyehthian style used by the elder gods.

I'm not sure I follow all your logic...BUT I FREAKIN LOVE THIS QUOTE!

 

[SkidAce]

Well 5E popularity has locked in D&Ds design until the fan base organically gets sick of it en masse.

I expect that to take around 17-26 years.

So they will be keeping things similar for the duration of my life expectancy?

In my dotage I will certainly appreciate that....

 

[Yaarel]

That unreliable combat math is exciting because its not predicable across the entire adventure. Adventure day is a marathon not a sprint so obviously it isnt gonna work entirely the way you want an encounters based game to. 5E is trying to give us both what we want, but I suspect neither will ever be entirely satisfied.

That is why I said I was "unsure" if daily attrition is a "benefit". Maybe the unpredictability is a benefit, at least according to the personal taste of some.

Because a daily caster can choose to go nova or not, any particular encounter can be trivialized. This choice that dailiers have makes combat math difficult or impossible.

Math is not unreliable, it is more reliable. Balancing around full-resource encounter whilst keeping the fights still challenging means the game becomes very randomly deadly. Or alternatively fights become pointless.

In other words, little or no combat math.

And if you assume attrition, there is no reason why you cannot balance different classes with it.

During 4e and 2014, player feedback was often highly resistant to giving Fighters daily powers because it felt too magical for them.

Maybe in 2024, the Proficiency Bonus times per day is a compromise, but this comes with very much bookkeeping if a number of Fighter powers work this way.

How about healing? Is it impossible for characters to sustain injuries that could not be instantly shrugged off in most fantasy fiction?

Healing is its own narrative and balance issue. After 4e, 2025 seems to be getting used to the idea of spending hit dice. Also, I like the way the new Exhaustion mechanic works. As DM I can impose it without feeling too guilty, and it might signify injuries once reaching zero hit points, without too much of a death spiral.

Then again, there are still no "broken bones" in D&D, mechanically speaking.

TV shows are not games and more importantly they are not games that involve multiple people. While RPGs lean on genre conventions, they also have to produce unpredictable outcomes. Perhaps a storygame where you have better control over the narrative would be more enjoyable?

Sure, but if you are arguing from the perspective of good game mechanics, then wonky disparity between Fighter and fullcasters is dubious.