D&D General Should difficulty increase to match optimization

[Campbell]

I have somewhat complex feelings on this. I think you should look at the overall difficulty of scenario design based on both potency of character build and player skill, but I generally dislike tailoring specific mechanical details to account for the capabilities of individual PCs.

Basically the autonomy to address the scenario as the players wish and make decisions meaningful is far more important to me than the visceral numbers feeling challenging like a well tuned MMO fight that is often basically fake difficulty.

There's a difference between actually being a challenge and just feeling like one.

 

[Umbran]

A spin off from the optimization poll. The question is simple, when players optimize should difficulty be dialed up to match?

If you don't do so, the tactical part of the game is going to get very boring. We dial up the difficulty when they go up in level, why wouldn't we do so if the party is optimized?

Optimization because the players love playing with the numbers is fine. Optimization for sake of having power, however, is pointless, because you are faced with either being bored, or having the GM jack up difficulty, so you are challenged anyway.

 

[FrogReaver]

If you don't do so, the tactical part of the game is going to get very boring. We dial up the difficulty when they go up in level, why wouldn't we do so if the party is optimized?

Optimization because the players love playing with the numbers is fine. Optimization for sake of having power, however, is pointless, because you are faced with either being bored, or having the GM jack up difficulty, so you are challenged anyway.

IMO, players tend to have fun even when they are steamrolling most of the NPC's.

And some players optimize to test their theories about how PC's perform. Part of their satisfaction is seeing how well their theories work out in practice.

 

[prabe]

IMO, players tend to have fun even when they are steamrolling most of the NPC's.

And some players optimize to test their theories about how PC's perform. Part of their satisfaction is seeing how well their theories work out in practice.

I think it's some players who have fun when they aren't being challenged. I think it's worth considering the question of whether their DMs are having much fun.

 

[FrogReaver]

I think it's some players who have fun when they aren't being challenged. I think it's worth considering the question of whether their DMs are having much fun.

Seems a bit adversarial to me. Suggesting the DM only has fun when he's running challenging combat for the players. Something seems off there.

 

[prabe]

Seems a bit adversarial to me. Suggesting the DM only has fun when he's running challenging combat for the players. Something seems off there.

Well, I can think of three ways to look at it, which can all (I think) be various degrees of adversarial.

First, if one thinks of the world as the DM's character, it's perpetually being outshone by the over-optimized characters. That might be ... disheartening, in the same way that playing BMX Bandit might be disheartening if Angel Summoner is in the party.

Second, the DM might find non-stop roflstomps to be boring. Just in the sense of foreordained and obvious and repetitive. And "bored" frequently means "not having fun."

Third, there's the idea that the PCs should earn their accomplishments, and perpetual roflstomping doesn't feel like that.

None of those seems as though it needs to be full-tilt adversarial, though I'll admit I'm looking at it from the perspective that the DM should be having fun, too.

 

[MGibster]

IMO, players tend to have fun even when they are steamrolling most of the NPC's.

As a DM, I can have a lot of fun when they're steamrolling the bad guys. Some of my most memorable combat scenarios involve the PCs easily thwarting major enemies either because of lucky dice rolls or sound strategic thinking on their part. (And sometimes they're on the butt end of lucky dice rolls and sound tactical thinking on my part.) But when they can steamroll every encounter combat becomes less exciting. There's no danger so there's no thrill. It's just extra bookkeeping.

 

[bloodtide]

Do you have a regular group?

I do. I also DM for other groups when, for example none of them want to DM or their DM must stay home and babysit or catches the Big Rona.

Also, optimization is not linear. There is not a Set Way to Optimize. Everyone is different. As a DM I often optimize foes for defense, protection, utility, and escape. The vast majority of optimizing players go only for MoRe DaMaGe! Or some other direct combat effect.

 

[aco175]

Generally as a DM I frequently seek to challenge the players, and use encounters accordingly, because I feel that the game is often more fun for everybody when that happens.

This, but I would add that I feel it part of the DMs job to provide challenge and fun for the players and to some extent, myself. Other posters talk about some easy fights and some where you may die, which provides a rollercoaster of fun for all the play styles.

I play with a table that uses flanking and I tend to provide more magic than the book suggests. This seems to counter the players not being highly optimized, but I still adjust encounters as we go along. Encounters that I plan may change based on field conditions. The party may rest when I planned that they would not, or hire followers, or get an item I thought they would sell. This causes me to change plans on the fly based on what I feel is fun for everyone.

 

[Blue]

I vote no because the players should deal with the natural consequences of their optimization, i.e. boring fights if the PCs are too optimized. Just like magic items, ability scores of 16 in a PC's weapon attack or spellcasting ability score at 1st level should be nice to have, but not required.

Question: You are running a group and it turns out the characters are poorly build with little party synergy and they punch way below their weight, do you feel the players "should deal with the natural consequences of their lack of system master, e.g. TPK.