Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 3274884" data-attributes="member: 18280">That's what I mean.And, while I can see that you don't feel this is a rules issue, I do.  If the primary conflict is with the dungeon (what I called setting), then not every fight has to be tactically interesting.  Some fights are simply part of the color....in the same way that some fight scenes in a Howard story are fairly glossed over, while other fights are critical to the story as a whole.  You can do this is 3e, using lower CR foes for the "glossed over fights", but since the combat engine is so rigorous (a real strength for tactically interesting fights) for myself and for some others, the length of time a combat takes makes the "glossed over fights" sometimes seem fairly boring.  I didn't have that experience knocking in the head of an occasional kobold in 1e.One might view this in a way similar to encounters overall.  Some encounters are intended to be important, others are intended to be minor, while still other "encounters" are intended to provide nothing more than color and verisimilitude to a setting.  That final group includes things like finding the tracks of a monster, sighting occasional animals, and so on.  IMHO, raiding a giant ant's nest (say) should include all kinds of "color combats" that don't necessarily strain the PCs too much, and shouldn't take up too much game time.I envision something, perhaps, where mooks have mook-level stat blocks and the important fights have advanced stat blocks.  I think (though not having tried it yet, I don't know) that it ought to be possible.I suppose this all comes down to "Different puddings for different people".</blockquote>

Verification