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

[dave2008]

I have. Met them in droves when running 5E. It‘s one of the many reasons I quit running it. The players pushed to rest as often as possible and refused to push through. Town invaded? Don‘t care. Prince sacrificed? Don‘t care. If they couldn‘t start every fight as close to full as possible they‘d simply shrug and wait. They had zero interest in risk or challenge of any kind.

There are lots of ways to handle that, but if that is what your players want to do they will probably not be happy with the solutions. Though some may change there attitude - you never know.

However, it seems to me that you need to find players that suite your style of play more than anything. It seems you have a square peg and round hole situation that is simply unlikely to ever work.

 

[Yaarel]

But a Cantrip is just as useful as swinging a sword...ao of they want to contribute something more in the moment than the Fighter, they have to spend a Slot. Hence the important of keeping up the narrative pace, if a challenge is desired.

Cantrips deal subpar damage, compared to the martial features that use weapons. Even an invoked up Warlock Eldritch Blast is the floor of per-round standard damage. Cantrips are a minimal contribution to combat.

Fullcasters must use slots and choose class features, in order to contribute effectively to combat.

Fullcasters have the advantage at the highest levels, because of game-changer spells. Martials have the advantage at the lowest levels because of survivability and heavy damage-dealing.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

The thing I don't understand is when someone casts Leomund's, if the bad guys spot them (in any adventure), they can go get reinforcements - like a lot of them. There are drawbacks to that hut. There are, of course, other ways the hut can be made to hurt PCs as well, like trapping the area around where the PCs are resting. Creating glyphs in the next room. Leaving the area and going somewhere else to do your dirty work. Identifying exactly who is in the hut, where they live, and then leaving to go harm someone they care about. Etc, etc, etc.

I really like the spell and have used it many times without incidence. In Tomb, I used it to create a bug free sleeping zone. In another adventure, I used it to thwart the extreme cold that would have brought the exhausted condition. And of course I have used it for rests. But it never seemed like an issue. Of course, I have always played in a game where narrative consequences matter.

This means you need to specifically concoct enemies that would take such actions. Like some random encounter dire owlbear is not going to do that. It invalidates a huge section of enemies. It simply is a terrible spell that goes against the core idea of the encounter balance design. It should have never been included in its current form and it makes seriously consider the competence of the designers that it was retained in 5.5.

 

[Minigiant]

Instead of trying to bring back attrition, what's the best way to challenge a party that do just want to be at full HP and slots the entire time?

Lower amount of spell slots and daily resources

 

[Minigiant]

So I am not actually sure it is necessary for high level casters to still have the lowest levels of slots. It results of having a lot of slots, and is also annoying to manage. I think at some point the lowest level slots should just start converting to higher level slots instead of being retained.

That's what 13 age did.

Your lower slots disappear as you get access to higher slots

You have to cast shield with 3rd level slots.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Way of looking at this is, should an adventure include encounters that players should run away from?

I feel, yes. I intentionally add encounters that are too powerful in combat, that require players to avoid, sneak past, or resolve via noncombat. I consider this part of verisimilitude.

I prefer tighter math, so I can do this kind of thing on purpose. The current wonkier math accomplishes a similar goal, albeit more randomly.

First, running away, especially if you have already taken some beating is insanely difficult in 5e. Most likely you just get killed even more easily.

And second, if effective retreat was possible, then the full-refresh encounter model would become even more unworkable, as the character could just retreat and keep retrying the encounter until they beat it.

And yes, there can be encounters that are too difficult and you should avoid them, but if that and only autowinnable encounters are an option, we do not need combat rules. Just say that if the CR is lover than the party level, the characters win and if it is higher they lose.

But what I am asking, is about a situation where the fights are still challenging, but the cost cannot be attrition. So what does this look like? No one seems to be willing to answer this.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

But a Cantrip is just as useful as swinging a sword...ao of they want to contribute something more in the moment than the Fighter, they have to spend a Slot. Hence the important of keeping up the narrative pace, if a challenge is desired.

Well, the Fighter has Action Surge once per day and maybe something like superiority dice or whatever to boost his effectiveness a few times in combat. So the spellcasters option per combat doesn't need to ever more than that, so 2-3 spells loosened per combat should be enough, and maybe the wizard just can't store enough mana to ever do more than that per between short rests. And now, you can run a few game sessions with or without time pressure, balance between classes is independent of that, and the Wizard can still have a bunch of utility spells that make him remerkable and useful even outside combat and still throw the occassional fireball, stinking cloud or haste to benefit his party each combat.

 

[Minigiant]

This means you need to specifically concoct enemies that would take such actions. Like some random encounter dire owlbear is not going to do that. It invalidates a huge section of enemies. It simply is a terrible spell that goes against the core idea of the encounter balance design. It should have never been included in its current form and it makes seriously consider the competence of the designers that it was retained in 5.5.

Especially since most worlds and settings have their enemies be a lot more primitive than the PCs.

What can 5 random bandits do in 8 hours?

 

[SkidAce]

This means you need to specifically concoct enemies that would take such actions. Like some random encounter dire owlbear is not going to do that. It invalidates a huge section of enemies. It simply is a terrible spell that goes against the core idea of the encounter balance design. It should have never been included in its current form and it makes seriously consider the competence of the designers that it was retained in 5.5.

Certain defenses should negate certain enemies. IMO.

Owlbears may not be problem solvers. (Or are they? Hmm)

 

[Parmandur]

Well, the Fighter has Action Surge once per day and maybe something like superiority dice or whatever to boost his effectiveness a few times in combat. So the spellcasters option per combat doesn't need to ever more than that, so 2-3 spells loosened per combat should be enough, and maybe the wizard just can't store enough mana to ever do more than that per between short rests. And now, you can run a few game sessions with or without time pressure, balance between classes is independent of that, and the Wizard can still have a bunch of utility spells that make him remerkable and useful even outside combat and still throw the occassional fireball, stinking cloud or haste to benefit his party each combat.

Yup, and Fighters outside combat can now use their resources to excel at Skill checks...everyone gets a time to shine.