D&D (2024) The Focus Fire Problem

[billd91]

Focus fire isn't the problem, focus fire is the solution to the problem that monsters and PCs in D&D have huge pools of Hit Points that need to be whittled down to 0 before any of the attacks that hit actually matter.

I don't think it's literally the pool of hit points, per se. Rather, it's the high degree of defenses before the unit targeted, whether PC or monster, can no longer take actions on the battlefield. Those defenses could be a lot of hit points, a high armor class, high saves, lots of STUN with high PD/ED, etc. Pretty much any defense that requires multiple attacks to either ablate those defenses or pierce those defenses with multiple attempts, barring a lucky initial shot.
And, honestly, that's pretty hard to design away, for most RPGs. And that's assuming we even want to do so since a whole lot of people also seem to want to avoid taking out BBEGs with a single shot, so they need some kind of ablative defenses.

If you want to encourage spreading attacks around, give them more effects than plain damage, so that attacking multiple targets can actually be useful in controlling the battlefield.

I think there is some potential here. And I think making sure that all units on the board pose some degree of threat helps as well. Bounded accuracy has been helping me with that because the PC ACs in the groups I'm running for are all in reach for most of their opponents. They don't post strong threats, but they do wear the PCs down and are worth taking out. They also don't necessarily go down in one hit, meaning they can keep the attention of the players longer.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

In my games, shooting into melee is done at disadvantage to represent trying to be careful to not hit a friend - and if an ally provides cover, there is a chance of hitting them on a miss. I never considered doing it any other way based on the rules as they exist.

Okay, but that's totally not what the rules say, and if you go watch other people play D&D, you'll see that's not even a slightly common take.

I mean, that's fine, it's your home game, run it how you like, but that's not even hinted at by the rules, I'd suggest.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

And, honestly, that's pretty hard to design away, for most RPGs. And that's assuming we even want to do so since a whole lot of people also seem to want to avoid taking out BBEGs with a single shot, so they need some kind of ablative defenses.

You're accidentally illustrating the real problem.

Only BBEGs need to not sometimes die in a single round or a single flurry of blows.

Yet D&D 5E applies gigantic amount of HP to all monsters. It doesn't have monsters who have distinctly lower amounts of HP but are still a threat other ways. It doesn't have various different defences you describe. It just has "bags of HP". Even lower-end monsters typically can't be one-shot by higher-end PCs, because they just have so many HP (barring flashy high-level spells).

 

[el-remmen]

but that's not even hinted at by the rules, I'd suggest.

I'd say the "rulings, not rules" philosophy suggests it.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I'd say the "rulings, not rules" philosophy suggests it.

Sure, that's viable, I just think it's a bold ruling, given it's sort of flipping RAI. It also means that, playing tactically, you just get two focus-fire targets instead of one - melee burn-down target, and ranged burn-down. Don't cross the streams.

 

[billd91]

You're accidentally illustrating the real problem.

Only BBEGs need to not sometimes die in a single round or a single flurry of blows.

Yet D&D 5E applies gigantic amount of HP to all monsters. It doesn't have monsters who have distinctly lower amounts of HP but are still a threat other ways. It doesn't have various different defences you describe. It just has "bags of HP". Even lower-end monsters typically can't be one-shot by higher-end PCs, because they just have so many HP (barring flashy high-level spells).

But if they can be one-shot, that just defers the focus fire for what? A round? Then it's right back to the focus fire.
Back to the OP, one of the aspects of the superhero genre with characters facing off into individual fights is that most of them don't go down in a single exchange of blows. They tie the various members of the hero team up while BBEG Doctor Apocalypse monologues to the hero who engages him and doesn't get overwhelmed by numbers.

 

[Shardstone]

I don't want to derail the thread, but I'm curious about these!

• Bleeding. A creature that is bleeding takes 1d4 piercing damage at the start of each of its turn. This condition ends when the creature regains hit points, or after the listed duration ends.
• Distracted. A creature that is crippled can only take actions or bonus actions on its turn, and not both. This condition ends when the creature regains hit points, or after the listed duration ends.
• Disoriented. Can’t make opportunity attacks.
• Staggered. Creature has -2 to its armor class. This condition ends after an attack hits the creature, or when the listed duration ends.
• Maimed. Creature lowers its speed by -10 and has disadvantage on Dexterity saving throws. This condition ends when the creature regains hit points, or after the listed duration ends.
• Marked for Death. A creature that is marked for death takes an additional 1d8 force damage the next time the creature that marked it for death hits it with a weapon attack. This condition ends after the bonus damage is dealt, or after the listed duration ends.
• Provoked The creature has disadvantage on all attacks except the creature that provoked it. The duration depends on the ability that applies it.
• Weakened. This creature's resistances are removed, and its immunities are treated as resistances. (least fave)

 

[el-remmen]

it's sort of flipping RAI.

As in interpreting literature, the intention of the creator (if you can even ever know it or trust their claims as to what it is) is just one frame of interpretation that has no more value than any other contextualized interpretation of the text.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

As in interpreting literature, the intention of the creator (if you can even ever know it or trust their claims as to what it is) is just one frame of interpretation that has no more value than any other contextualized interpretation of the text.

Alright Barthes, steady on!

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Weakened. This creature's resistances are removed, and its immunities are treated as resistances. (least fave)

Least fave? Really? That actually mirrors a ton of fantasy fiction. Just tie the weakening to certain specific substances, places, people, spells.

Generically applying it would be pretty lame I admit unless you had some kind of "Executioner" or "Judge"-themed class.