D&D 5E Ramping up the Challenge in 5e Combats

[Flexor the Mighty!]

As my last campaign went along I went from rolling HP to max HP in a lot of cases and giving the foes a bonus to their attack rolls, along with bumping up damage dice to a larger die. It helped a little but unless I was in a situation where I could sent in waves of enemies fights were still not much of a challenge for the most part unless they were fighting a TPK level foe, but even then things like crits would wildly swing the outcome of a fight, usually in the PC favor. Adding in feats is a cool idea but I don't want more feats to keep track of.

 

[Sleepy Walker]

I am personally against maxing out the health and upping damage dice in an attempt to match the PCs. I am much more about playing the foe appropriately and keeping a certain amount of consistency. Often times weaker foes have numbers, defensive positions, wit, or any combination of those bonuses.

*+5 to AC due to 3/4 cover is big
*ambushes are a good equalizer
*multiple big groups in the initiative can be very concerning (usually good for zombies or archer formations)
*not giving the PCs the entire tactical picture due to magic, stealth, or simply too much action in-between to see
*throw flasks of poison, acid, fire, etc
*place obvious traps to allow an ambush
*have scouts and a perimeter defenses
*use intelligence to learn after falling back (ex: one caster has serious fire spells, attempt to adapt)
*use environmental factors to spice the combat up. Gravity and restricted corridors can do wonders.

*big one* have opponents make full use of their turns (if able). Move, grapple, shove, intimidate, stealth, beg, ready actions, tactically fall back, surrender, activate traps/equipment, use tactical spells (silence on spell casters + grapple, heat metal on heavy infantry, illusions, darkness, etc). A dragon grabbing a PC and dropping it more than a turn away from combat, zombies gang grappling for restrained, or archers peppering a given area containing spell casters can all change an encounter dramatically.

Working with a creature's strengths and (if able) downplaying weaknesses makes for compelling combat and encounters, regardless of level or PC combat power. At least, that is what I think.

 

[Stalker0]

Those are all good ideas, but before modifying the monster I would consider these even simpler ideas:

1) Play the monsters better.

2) Add more monsters to each encounter.

3) Use higher CR monsters.

These 3 are to me a no-brainer. So why aren't these being done?

In my opinion 1) is not always as easy as it sounds, plus many DM are just afraid of being better than players (hint: you aren't) and assume they need to hold back.

On the other hand 2) and 3) are really basic DM options. The fact that they would result in too many XP thus too fast level advancement just tells me that the flaw is not in the monsters but in the XP/level numbers themselves.

My notes here:

1) not every dm is a tactical person, you have to accept this not always an option.

2) more monsters mean combats take longer and more time is spent on the monsters than the pcs. Good to a point but taken too much it can be a problem.

3) most people who complain of high level easy fights have tried this. When your party is routinely beating encounters 5-10 cr over their pay grade, you just accept that crs don’t mean much at that point.

Further, higher cr monsters are rarer in the current books (maybe the next one will change that). So to get higher cr monsters you often have to go custom. Some dms love doing that, for others it’s a chore.

 

[Satyrn]

On the other hand 2) and 3) are really basic DM options. The fact that they would result in too many XP thus too fast level advancement just tells me that the flaw is not in the monsters but in the XP/level numbers themselves.

But then that is easily fixed by halving (or quartering, whatever) the XP awards to get the progression rate the table enjoys.

And I think this is something a lot of tables should already be doing, because it's inconceivable to me that any level rate they offered would satisfy every group well enough.

 

[Gadget]

For option 3), I'd just like to point out that this is not 3e; you don't have to meticulously comb through a monster's stat black and PHB to add the right class levels, spells and abilities. I much prefer the 4e way adding abilities to monsters to make them more challenging and/or interesting.

 

[Satyrn]

For option 3), I'd just like to point out that this is not 3e; you don't have to meticulously comb through a monster's stat black and PHB to add the right class levels, spells and abilities. I much prefer the 4e way adding abilities to monsters to make them more challenging and/or interesting.

I'd just like to (lightheartedly) point out that even in 3e that wasn't necessary. I mean, I hope not, otherwise I was Doing It Wrong.

And that's inconceivable.

 

[Hussar]

As far as adjusting the CR of monsters goes, meh, it's not a huge deal. Adding 3 levels of barbarian to a Frost Giant might bump it +1 CR. But, really, who cares? The CR is not meant to be a rock solid guideline anyway.

 

[Raith5]

I think giving higher level monsters damaging/disabling auras, cooler reactions and/or actions on multiple points of the initiative to make them more unpredictable and ups the threat level. It is one thing I did like in 4e.

 

[Ratskinner]

Water, or other inaccessible terrain.

Aquatic/amphibious critters can really mess with a party. Riddle the area with underground tunnels full of water. Don't be afraid to drag/grapple PCs into the water.

Poor-man's version in a dungeon is little tunnels that only small critters can fit through easily. Little Kobold/goblin commandos popping in an out to harass people can really drive them nuts. Tossing out bear traps or caltrops is always fun.

Poorer-man's version is a 3D environment, like a city, + monsters with climb speeds or flying. That can combo pretty well with the small tunnels. Also, that can help to shorten visible ranges for casters and shooters. Long, straight lines are usually better for the PCs than the monsters.

I've had reasonable luck tempting the party into blowing all their abilities with feints. That is, enemies show up, maybe fire an arrow or two. Then, after everybody turns on their rages and the like...they beat feet. You might loose a few, but keep it up and wear them down. Remember to Move-attack-move, the OA is better than taking a full attack.

The biggest thing, IME, is don't fight in open terrain. Monsters really need to use cover, darkness, drowning, cliffs, etc. to make the most of it. Especially don't forget things like grappling, pushing, etc. NEVER have monsters just march up to the PCs, if you can avoid it...that's a recipe for challengeless slaughter. (I suppose if you want a slaughter, go ahead.)

Second biggest thing, but also goes with that. Do anything you can to trickle-out the fight and make it last longer. (Waves are awesome, but terrain can make it work also.) Turn the fight into a chase, if you can. That gives the Players a chance to get frustrated, and burn more slots/abilities on lesser foes.

Also, IMO, the encounter guidelines are pretty useless. I mean, its good for sorta keeping the XP stuff in line with expectations, but not much else as far as difficulty goes. Heck, even CR doesn't seem to mean much.

 

[Shiroiken]

I ran a campaign that ended at 18th level, and found that I could still challenge (and kill) high level PCs, because I don't use the encounter building guidelines. After an interesting session, I decided to figure out the encounter difficulties for fun. They easily handled 4 Average encounters and 3 Deadly encounters (one of which was 2.5x the base xp for Deadly) of Frost Giants, but struggled with a Hard encounter of 2 White Dragons (I even killed the Bard). The Dragon encounter was after a long rest, so they were completely fresh, but the Frost Giants were consecutive, with no short/long rest in between. This simply proved to me that the encounter guidelines were pretty much garbage at higher levels (I still don't find them that useful at lower levels either).

The downside, as someone already mentioned, is that you can level very quickly if using xp. After the aforementioned session, they leveled, after having just leveled the session before. The players actually didn't like how quickly they leveled, because it didn't give them time to enjoy their new abilities before they got more.