Level Up (A5E) Removing Pointless Death (+)

[Tessarael]

Do you provide any forewarning or hints at the danger level to an encounter? For example, you could permit the party members entering the room an Insight check to realize that it is in fact quite dangerous, and permit them to change their course of action. You could also have deep claw marks on the walls nearby, or show a wererat in human form "magically" healing a scratch as the group enters.

Part of the issue seems to be tactical. A clever party will snipe from outside the room, ducking back into the corridor after firing, and position the party tanks to limit combatants exiting through the doorway to attack the softer party members. Walking into a room to be surrounded by enemy combatants is a bad idea.

Now if the players you have are not tactically clever, even after such problems and feedback as to how they could have handled it better, I suggest tailoring the encounters differently to them. Some players prefer non-grid based combatant, where you could just specify what is going on in the encounter without a battlemap - 4 wererats vs. 4 PCs, that's one wererat per PC, and each of them gets to fight it out, with some assistant from each other, but little care about where exactly things are positioned.

I will also note that sneak attack and ambushes can be really nasty. The damage output is high. So maybe go for tough enemies (more HP or higher AC if needed) that do less damage. At least with enemies that inflict damage more slowly, the party has the opportunity to rearrange how they are handling a bad situation, attempt to flee, etc.

 

[Anonymous3]

@Anonymous3 Party comes across room of 4 men who are actually wererats. Rogue gets drop on Initiative and walks into room and attempts to sneak attack - hoping to kill "just a regular dude." She fails. Is dropped on next round. The paladin who had just stepped into room is flanked and sneak attacked to death in one round. Final wererat moves past dead paladin and engages cleric, who attempts to run and is dropped.
This leaves back rank wizard to be utterly surrounded and killed the following round.

Thank you.

I quickly looked up Wererat - CR2; 33hp; 12AC; multi-attack (2); bloodied (bonus action attack); um no sneak attack (D14/24 and A5e). One CR2 creature is a challenge for a level two party of four members - "A monster with a CR equal to a party's level is considered a medium-difficulty challenge, assuming the party is rested and has all its resources.". I mean one of these guys is enough for a level 3 party and I'm not even trying to calculate threat level here. Your party was doomed with four of them even with the best rolls. Maybe a super optimized party would have survived but I'm doubtful. I would retcon the whole thing with one wererat and when the party sees how challenging it is they will be better informed about what four of these terrors actually are and make better decisions. And... if they aren't cautious then you can remind them that they struggled with one and a retreat is likely the best option. Remember that your players aren't warriors, their characters are - give them the information required for them to make decisions as if they are the warriors.

It also appears that you make optimal tactical decisions while your players are the embodiment of "oh look, little ducks in a row" type of strategy.

If you are genuinely reaching out for help, which I believe you are, then I would say that you have an adversarial problem at your table from all sides. The players are trying to beat you but are ignorant of how stacked the table is on your side. Your players should be sharing their strategies with you and you should be helping them solve their solutions.

 

[lichmaster]

3rd level.

That's all we need to know. 4 CR 2 creatures vs 4 Level 3 characters is really deadly encounter.

 

[Cergorach]

This is literally every campaign I've run since around the year 2000.

I'm going to be harsh here: You're really bad at encounter building!

Especially D&D 3(.5)e was just a bunch of math for encounter building. Possibly modified by your specific party choices, something you would figure out via normal and eventually slightly more dangerous encounters. It also sounds like you're constantly searching that knives edge between challenging and deadly encounters, erring on the side of deadly. Deadly encounters indicate, that everyone could easily die.

I'm currently DMing a D&D 5e 2024 game where I'm 'cheating' when the characters die, instead of rerolling, they wake up at a fixed date and time in the past (groundhog day), they keep their xp, but not their equipment. I've essentially made their deaths a resource they can spend, death is not without it's downsides, but it can also be a benefit.

Why did I do this? A couple of reasons, one is inspiration by media like the movies 'Groundhog Day' and 'Edge of Tomorrow', a ton of anime and books. The other is that we've had some encounter 'imbalances' before during other DMs (we rotate) and I noticed that my fellow players tended to front load the resource economy (as a Warlock I was less effected by this). It also allowed me as a DM to experiment WAY more, I needed to mind less the 'balance' of the game, so I could give them special powers and weird magical items down the road without being concerned if my encounters would kill them or not. This would of course not work for every campaign, but it can for one big one.

I can understand why many would not like this kind of thing, but people need to understand that pnp RPGs are generally not a simulator, they are a fun activity we share with a bunch of people. The goal is to have as many as people as possible to have fun and have a satisfying session. If that means letting go of certain 'holy cows' that only exist in our minds, then so be it. What I also found VERY important is to have a session zero. When we were younger we had oodles of time and we talked a TON with each other about the characters we were building and were going to play, so by the time we would start, everyone had adapted to each others characters. Now we're older, we don't have oodles of time anymore, and if we make our own characters independently, they might not fit together well or at all. I've learned that you don't just make a character you like, but that the whole group likes. That cooperative character building also helps in cooperation during encounters as everyone understands each others character better. We've seen the difference now and we've instituted that we'll have a session zero not for a whole new party, but also for when someone plays a new character. This is not only important for the players, but also for the DM, as the players are now more optimally equipped to confront your encounters.

They're now 3 1st level characters going into Undermountain, (Dungeon of the Mad Mage), an adventure for 4 5th level characters... And they've done exceptionally well, died far less then I ever expected, they had a bit of luck, but mostly due to superior cooperation. And when they found out what happens when they die (it was a surprise to them), they slowly adjusted to the idea and are now also more willing to experiment during the session. I've added some other mechanics to the game so as to not make the same string of encounters they have to get through extremely boring, but that's all part of the story (the players just found out they are there to stop Undermountain from gaining sentience, and event that will make most of the Sword Coast fall into the sea).

I'm already noticing that they are more aware about the D&D 5e 2024 resource economy as players. They know when they are encountering something incredibly dangerous that will probably kill them, where they were lucky, where they were skilled, and the difference between the two. We've in the past had situations where we as players realized the DM had F-ed up and made an encounter that was FAR too difficult, that absolutely kills the atmosphere amongst the players, especially when death means either rerolling your character or some invented cop-out because the DM realizes they F-ed up (been there, done that).