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

[billd91]

Only because they spend all their spell slots for sending and goofing around.

You mean, like, through role playing quirky adventurers? I mean they could husband all of their resources for combat situations, but that wouldn't be the kind of RPG they want to play - or that we'd want to watch, frankly.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Do events ever cause interruptions of a short rest in your games?

It has, yes.

Had a TPK* because of one, for example, because the GM jumped us with a bandit attack while we were taking a short rest to recover from the absolute butt-whoopin' we'd gotten from the first combat of the day.

*Well, all-but-one PK. But it killed the campaign nonetheless.

 

[Maxperson]

Only because they spend all their spell slots for sending and goofing around.

They also upcast spells a lot. I'm not a fan of upcasting lower level spells. The small extra increases end up being less than if you just cast a spell of the level you are upcasting to.

 

[SkidAce]

It has, yes.

Had a TPK* because of one, for example, because the GM jumped us with a bandit attack while we were taking a short rest to recover from the absolute butt-whoopin' we'd gotten from the first combat of the day.

*Well, all-but-one PK. But it killed the campaign nonetheless.

Yeah, we've had similar. But its rarer than long rest interruptions. (statistically this makes sense, longer you stay in one place etc...)

 

[SkidAce]

They also upcast spells a lot. I'm not a fan of upcasting lower level spells. The small extra increases end up being less than if you just cast a spell of the level you are upcasting to.

My giant alligator got clobbered by an upcast Inflict Wounds that crit.

There was much rejoicing/sadness that day.

 

[BenjaminPey]

To me the revised encounter rules in the DMG24 are an anwser to all of that, changing from an adventure day paradigm to an "each encounter should be considered against a fully rested party". And they work quite well with my usual players. A high difficulty encounter always leaves them in bad shape, to the point that two in a row would almost always TPKed them. A moderate one followed with a short rest, then a high difficulty climactic battle is a good recipe to obtain this "by the skin of the teeth" feeling. It doesn't always work, but often enough.

Hence, these revised rules are, for me and my tables at least, fully compatible with the "two or three encounters a day tops" that seems to be the modern paradigm (and is, in fact, my personal preference). Even one is often enough, as it will make for an entertaining fight in any case.

I also note that it was possible to land around the same kind of pace in 2014 if you followed the "daily XP budget table". Divide the total daily XP budget by three and you would have a good "Big battle, short rest, Big battle, short rest, Big battle, long rest" mode. This metric of a third of the daily budget was my general ceiling for adventures with lowish numbers of encounters, and I used it with good results many times.

 

[SkidAce]

Yeah, I feel you. I had very similar experience. After the party of four fifth level characters cleared an encounter that was about CR 14,* I realised that the CR is a joke and "deadly" means nothing. There was also a few dragons (that were boosted) which I meant to be really tough fights but ended up being cakewalks. So I have just been throwing all sort of crazy stuff on them completely disregarding the guidelines. But I am just eyeballing stuff as there is no guidelines for whether quadruple or sextuple deadly actually is too much.

(* it was not meant to be a combat encounter, but the PCs started a fight against people with overwhelming power and numbers. I though it was suicide. It was not.)

Sounds like how we played 1E.

 

[Parmandur]

I think it is a problem on enough tables that it leads to constant discussion in forums such as these here

Sure...but is it that necessarily enough to be a problem WotC feels they need to solve on the product level? They can't please everyone, and if most people playing on easy mode are having fun and buying...well...

 

[Maxperson]

Yes it is. And Mearls admits it himself in the original article.

Mearls is working on his own game right now and since that started he has been highly vocal against WotC. Not that what he has been saying is wrong, but the way he has been saying it has been inflated and even sometimes pretty hyperbolic. That makes this "admission" suspect from the get go.

Did WotC make a design mistake with 5e's encounter balance? Yes. Is it their fault if people ignore the stated design and run the game incorrectly? No. WotC made the mistake of designing in the balance in a way that a lot of people don't like, but people are responsible for their own choices. That makes their CHOICE to run the game contrary to the design intent their fault, not WotC's.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

You mean, like, through role playing quirky adventurers? I mean they could husband all of their resources for combat situations, but that wouldn't be the kind of RPG they want to play - or that we'd want to watch, frankly.

I did not mean to imply that it is a bad thing, merely that them running out of resources is not due engaging in a lot of combats.