D&D General Mike Mearls says control spells are ruining 5th Edition

@DEFCON 1 how do you come to terms with the fact that you as DM are essentially writing a story with all these narrative fingerprints everywhere?

EDIT: To put it another way, in that situation the entire experience for me as DM would feel contrived which would lessen my enjoyment of it all.
I'm not writing a story, I'm working with the players to create a story as a group. A narratively-fulfilling one. One that has a beginning, middle, and end. One that gives us ups and downs, ins and outs, an arching build rising up to a climax against the supervillain that has plagued the party for months if not years with a satisfying conclusion and denouement. And the reason I'm not "writing" it is because we are using dice to randomize certain aspects of the story. I have no control over those dice rolls, and neither do the players. Parts of the story are at the whims of the dice and we as a group will follow them quite often. All I can control is how much those randomized elements don't completely screw up the story for the worse. If that means creating a reason why the party cannot take a long rest immediately prior to the supposedly climactic final battle...then I'll do that. If that means having more minions come swarming out at the party in a couple rounds because the roadblock that I thought I was throwing up with a bunch of minions ended up being no roadblock at all because my guesstimations on how the party would be able to handle them were way off... then I'll do that. If that means the ritual that I thought would last for five rounds before going off ended up having to be postponed for a couple rounds because the party decided to monologue at the BBEG for a couple rounds before the fight even began and they were enjoying the back and forth with the supervillain... then I'll do that.

Assuming of course that I WANT to see a story like that at that moment in time.

Maybe I won't. Maybe I won't care. Maybe that one time I'm perfectly happy to let the party steamroll the BBEG in one round for whatever reason. But that's me reacting in the moment to what the players seem to be hoping for with regards to this fight. I mean, it's not that hard to see and learn when my players are thrilled by accomplishing a one-round curbstomp of an enemy, or when they are a little underwhelmed by how easy it was. So I'll play it by ear and react in the moment like the proper improvisor I am as a Dungeon Master and throw out additional offers to the scene to help drive it forward.

Now as far as your situation as you mentioned in your edit... if you think nudging the game such that there's a better shot at ending up with a five-round build of a fight that leads to a massive, skin-of-their-teeth, party barely survived, successful climax of a fight with the BBEG is contrived and lessens your enjoyment... then you don't have to do that. That's fine. There's nothing at all that says that's the kind of result you might want. If you want to play the board game via the board game rules and whatever happens, happens... that's great. But if that's the case, then there's no reason to ever be annoyed by the circumstances of what this thread is talking about, which is "control spells" supposedly ruining one's fights.

If you don't feel control spells are causing issues at your table and you are perfectly fine with any combat result-- ones that last a round, three rounds, five rounds, ten rounds or whatever-- then my post doesn't really apply to you. No harm, no foul. Instead, I was talking to the people who WANT a climactic fight with the party versus the BBEG when they decide they want it, but somehow expect the D&D board game to be designed to accomplish that by the snap of their fingers. Like the game rules can be built such that they receive exactly the type of fight they want at the time they want it... without them ever having to "write the story" themselves as you put it. Like it'll just somehow magically happen if the encounter is just "built the right way" using the game rules in the book.

Well... unfortunately that can't happen. That's not how the D&D board game rules work. The board game is just too complex and with too many variables to be able to be assured of getting a specific outcome. And no amount of rules design will accomplish it, especially when these fights are connected to one another with no way of knowing if and when the party can "reset" things. So if you want those outcomes to have a better chance of happening... you're going to have to rely on yourself and not the board game.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

The idea of "Dungeon as Encounter" or "Dungeon as Boss" isn't "Megadungeon".

It's "The dungeon itself, independent of the enemies scattered around it, should consume player resources."

There should be traps, doors that are hard to pick, pits and gaps so wide someone needs to cast Fly or the party risks the grappling hook and getting violently slammed into the far side of the chasm, etc.

The dungeon, itself, should be dangerous, should have complications, should be a problem. Not just the foes inside.

That's not to say that having dungeons which are -just- environments is a bad idea. Castles and Keeps and people's Houses probably shouldn't be stuffed with traps and bottomless pits and the like. After all, that's how you lose the well trained butler in an accident.

But when it makes sense to do so, make the dungeon, itself, dangerous. And hey. You can always complicate the party's attack on the castle or manor house or other non-dangerous-by-nature environment by having it be on fire and collapsing in sections while they're trying to get to the BBEG.
When PCs are tuned with resource allotments scaled for 6-8 encounters per long rest "megadungeon" fits quite well given the number of sessions involved in plowing through that slog
 

The idea of "Dungeon as Encounter" or "Dungeon as Boss" isn't "Megadungeon".

It's "The dungeon itself, independent of the enemies scattered around it, should consume player resources."
...
The dungeon, itself, should be dangerous, should have complications, should be a problem. Not just the foes insde.

I would add to this, in a simulationist and "skilled play" orientation, the dungeon should react to the players. Inhabitants notice the party and redeploy. Traps can be reset or improvised. The big boss actively strategizes to slow the party down, or divert them.

Personally, for me the fun part of this type of play is not the rules exploits but the feeling that my PC is navigating a challenging environment that has its own existence and objectives, idependent of notions of "drama" or DM improv.
 

Ive noticed OCs lije using them. They don't lije gearing hit by them.

CR2 abd 3 often includes soelkcasters with level 3 spells. Scatter a few of them into an encounter with hold person and counterspell mixes things up.
DC 12-14 was hitting a few of my pc more often than I thought. They had things like lucky feat as well.
 

If the issue is simply making the "boss" last longer, consider giving them maximum hit points per die. It usually won't give them more than an additional round or two, but it can help make the PCs sweat a bit for how the enemy won't go down as easily as expected...

Going back to this for a moment, I find that giving bosses other form of hit points is more satisfactory for players that just increasing the hit points raw.

Example: That behir in a cave that you have as a boss fight? It spends the fight snaking through the stalagmites (and when spider climbing, through the stalactites!), and turns successful attacks into damage to the stone pillars (which have a hit point pool of their own, and which provide less cover as the fight progresses). Plus, since the natural stone formation apply and AC bonus due to cover, when the PCs can destroy the stalagmites directly, making attacks on the behir more effective as the fight progresses.
 

Going back to this for a moment, I find that giving bosses other form of hit points is more satisfactory for players that just increasing the hit points raw.

Example: That behir in a cave that you have as a boss fight? It spends the fight snaking through the stalagmites (and when spider climbing, through the stalactites!), and turns successful attacks into damage to the stone pillars (which have a hit point pool of their own, and which provide less cover as the fight progresses). Plus, since the natural stone formation apply and AC bonus due to cover, when the PCs can destroy the stalagmites directly, making attacks on the behir more effective as the fight progresses.
That's a cool idea!

I love this idea for promoting creative play. I could see an ultrafast creature that you can't target until you have reduced it speed to 60 ft or less. Conditions might reduce its speed rather than affect it while it is in that mode. You can encourage creative play and novel encounters without reinventing the system from scratch.
 

What if

A high level monster had proficiency in 5 out of 6 Saving throws and high base Ability scores.

Joe the Axe Swinging ng Slasher with +10 or more in all saves.
 

Yeah, well, I'm built different, I guess!

While you're happy to have one of your players sitting around on their cell phone or whatever for an hour or so while everyone else at the friend group hangout we built is having fun in a group activity, I'm trying to make sure everyone at the part is enjoying themselves.

Honestly, this conversation makes me feel like the window is shifting hard enough that within the next few years 3e is gonna be "OSR Content" 'cause this really feels like someone shouting "Life isn't fair!" and me responding "So make it fair."
"Life isn't fair." gets from me the response "Deal with it."

There's always going to be times when not everyone is involved at once:

--- a character gets taken out early in a combat (held, webbed, slept, killed, petrified, polymorphed into a toad, whatever)
--- the party splits, intentionally or otherwise (a scout gets sent out alone, someone hits a teleport trap, etc.)
--- a character gets captured or kidnapped
--- the party is doing something a given character just isn't suited to help with

IMO the expectation that these sort of things can and will happen needs to be set in stone right from session one; that while much of the time it's an ensemble, sometimes you'll be the star and other times you'll be offstage.
 


"Life isn't fair." gets from me the response "Deal with it."
All the problems in the world encapsulated in a single sentence!

"We should make things better than they are, now!"

"No!"

I get that it probably makes you feel rugged and individualistic and heroic or whatever... but it just comes across as being mean.
 

Remove ads

Top