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).

 

[FrogReaver]

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.

Were rats do d6+2 x2 they have about a 50% hit chance on the rogue. Probably a 40% on the Paladin.

That’s 5.5 average damage per wererat on the rogue and 4.4 per the Paladin. Rogue probably has 24 hp. Paladin probably has 28.

Wererats probably shouldn’t have killed the Paladin in 1 turn and with a little bit of luck not the rogue either.

However it seems these were special were rats with sneak attack.

A few take aways.

1. Don’t have all the enemies go in 1 initiative block (DMs often roll once for all the same enemy, this can be very swingy for PCs).

2. Player tactics here were the biggest issue (stringing in 1 at a time) but if it’s how they typically play then the dm needs to take that into account for encounter building.

3. Be very careful about giving large numbers of enemies special abilities. In this case +1d6 sneak attack may have been an extra +4d6 per round because 4 such enemies. That’s a lot of extra damage going toward 20-30 hp PCs.

 

[Retreater]

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

I didn't design that encounter. It was in a published adventure, and I ran it as-is, with the details provided, and the tactics the author gave.
I was running a published adventure because of the following...

1) A weekly game that runs 3+ hours
2) A full-time job
3) Household responsibilities
4) Working on my Masters degree
5) A lack of trust in my abilities to design encounters
6) Inability to get everyone on board with original plots
7) A bookshelf stuffed of gaming stuff I've already bought

 

[Selganor]

I think the "sneak attack" from the A5E wererats was the result of the advantage from pack tactics which allow them to add +2d6 damage.
This could result in 2 attacks at +(5+8) with advantage (plus expertise from flanking) dealing 3d6+2 damage each. That still might need a crit or above average damage to drop the paladin but he won't look good at any pace.

If the paladin engages one of the rats another just has to engage him so both would get pack tactics in one round (otherwise only one of them would get pack tactics unless they somehow coordinate and one readies his attack until the other has engaged)

What was the other wererat that granted the cleric's attacker pack tactics? Just a normal 1d6+2 hit and another one if the cleric just ran (and didn't disengage) don't seem to be enough to threaten him.

But nontheless... 4 CR2 wererats are a total CR of 8, which cost 4 encounter points (out of the 2 encounter points per day that 4 level 3 characters have).

And three other assessments from Sly Flourish's 5e Encounter calculator:

Encounter Assessment​

Base Monster XP: 1800
Party: 4 characters, average level 3

Lazy Encounter Benchmark
Total Character Levels: 12 | Total Monster CR: 8
Potentially deadly if total monster CR ≥ 3
Potentially deadly single monster if CR ≥ 3
Assessment: POTENTIALLY DEADLY

D&D 2024 Method
Base Thresholds (level 3): Low 150 | Moderate 225 | High 400
Party Thresholds (×4 characters): Low 600 | Moderate 900 | High 1600
Base Monster XP: 1800 | Above HIGH

D&D 2014 Method
Thresholds: Easy 300 | Medium 600 | Hard 900 | Deadly 1600
Multiplier (4 customMonsters): ×2 | Adjusted XP: 3600 | DEADLY

So, even if the party was fully rested, and somewhat prepared things might have gone not so great...

Stumbling "blind" (the rogue "thought" that he might just kill one (or more) of those 4 guys so he charged into danger) and not really using tactics (at least I can't see much of it in the description) doesn't really help them.

2 of those rats might have been a better fight while also making pack tactics way harder for them to get... unless the room also contained "allied" normal rats that the wererats could interpret as allies even if those normal rats don't have that much personal impact on the combat.

 

[Distracted DM]

Yep. They are usually secretive about their goals and plans so I can't even fudge properly to help them succeed. They discuss strategies in text messages at the table to try to get one over on me. Even if I try telling them I want them to win.
Still, I have the problem of frequent TPKs with most groups, not just this one.

Have you flat-out told them that you want to see them succeed, and that them discussing stuff in the open can lead to them being right (because maybe they come up with a better idea than you, and you snag it)? I've had the experience with players thinking that if they discuss stuff in front of me, I'll come up with counters to it, but when I told them they eased up on it. They still do like to surprise me with things, but they're a lot less secretive about it now.

 

[Selganor]

Also... you (as the gm) might notice problems with their plans that their characters could also know but if they just rely on what the players know (probably also "reduced" for low level characters that are inexperienced) they might think that it's "good roleplay" to act like a newb even if the character probably has had years of (not that "adventurous" but still valid) experience living in the world.

 

[Bagpuss]

In Dune: Adventures in the Imperium, there are things you can do if characters are going to die.

If it would happen to an ally, you can come to their aid.

If the defeat would have a lasting or permanent effect (death, adding a new character trait, or some other long-lasting consequence), then you may attempt to prevent that lasting effect. Describe how you wish to aid the defeated character and attempt a skill test with a Difficulty of 2. If you pass, then the ally is still defeated, but the lasting effect is prevented.

Also if you are going to defeated you can instead sacrifice an uncontrolled character in the scene (ie: an allied supporting character), it costs 1 momentum and whatever fate would have befallen your character instead happens to them. So you can kill an NPC to save yourself.

The Walking Dead Universe RPG also has a sacrifice mechanic, you might want to use when facing a swarm of undead. You can make an opposed Force roll to push a character NPC or PC into the swarm so you automatically make your escape if successful. The character pushed into the swarm is automatically going to be attacked by the swarm.