Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mengu" data-source="post: 5236726" data-attributes="member: 65726">So I'm looking at the damage expressions, and I'm looking at a level 10 encounter I had prepped for my level 8 party before taking the new damage expressions into account. The damage expressions on the monsters I'm using (levels 8-10) are:at-will single target: 1d8+7, 1d6+7, 1d6+7 (ongoing 10), 1d12+5, 1d8+5, 2d6+5, 1d10+1d6+5, 2d10+5limited single target: 2d8+5 (ongoing 5), 1d8+5+5limited multi target: 2d8+5, 3d8+5If I switch to the new damage expressions, the picture will look something like this:at-will single target: 2d8+9, 2d8+9, 1d6+5? (ongoing 10), 1d12+11, 2d8+9, 2d6+11, 1d10+1d6+8, 2d10+5limited single target: 2d8+9 (ongoing 5), 2d8+9+10limited multi target: 2d8+9, 3d8+5I think the level 10 encounter was going to be hard for them to begin with, because they are likely going into it a bit weathered from previous 3 encounters. I feel like if I do these damage bumps, my players will exhaust all of their resources, and they will probably survive, but there will be a discussion after the encounter.I have no doubt, the conclusion they will come to is that they need more healing because they are getting the pants beat off them. The paladin will probably say, okay, I'm dumping this junky punching bag of a paladin, and I'll lpay a cleric so we have two leaders to keep us alive. Then rest of the characters will start discussing what to multiclass into for more healing.I really don't like that direction. Inadequate healing should never be the reason for failure or difficulty in an encounter. And the more damage monsters do, the more healing PC's will look for.Level+2 encounters have always been hard for my PC's before, and I use Level+3 encounters sparingly. Adopting the new damage expressions would mean I'd start using Level-1 encounters as standard, and probably Level+1 encounters as difficult. I have no problem with this approach, as it will likely result in faster combat.But I don't think this has been made clear to the DM's out there. A DM who just adapts the new damage expressions and does nothing else, is likely to find that the players are starting to have shorter and shorter adventuring days, and looking for more and more healing, neither of which are beneficial to a "play what you want" approach.Personally, I will simply consider this update of damage expressions, a suggestion for optimized parties who play 3-encounter delves (or maybe LFR). Because in any other context, at least for the high heroic levels, these damage expressions combined with recommended variation in encounter difficulty seem a little high. I'm afraid they may turn the 6-7 encounter days into a thing of the past because no one's going to have any surges left after encounter 3 or 4, assuming skill challenges haven't cost them any surges.I will attempt to use lower level encounters with the higher damage expressions to challenge the PC's and see where that takes me. But for high heroic levels, I don't think my players are quite ready for the sticker shock of a level+2 or level+3 encounter where round one, everyone is bloodied, immobilized, dazed, and defenders are down before they go. Best approach for me (and possibly for others like me), maybe to vary the damage expressions up or down based on the needs of the story, the adventure, or the encounter.For paragon and epic, we've been complaining that monsters don't do enough damage, so things may be a little different. I only have some experience in paragon and none in epic. For instance playing Revenge of the Giants, it did seem a little on the easy side, so the damage bumps may certainly help that particular module. But for home games, I feel the DM typically has enough tools to challenge the PC's, so I'm a little skeptical about the intended impact of the damage expression change verses the actual impact on player behavior.</blockquote>

Verification