Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Quickleaf" data-source="post: 9257839" data-attributes="member: 20323">&quot;The Decker Problem&quot; is a matter of degree though.If it's being resolved within two minutes, I think that falls within something the whole group can enjoy. That's a lot like resolving a Persuasion check with a tiny bit of role-play and stakes setting, or a PC casting pass wall with a bit of back-and-forth dialogue with the GM.It's also a matter of varying the spice used.One player defeating a sentry quick to allow the group to penetrate deeper into hostile territory doesn't exclude more challenging fights within that territory that do involve the whole party.The key with these mini-combats is not to get bogged down. If the monster doesn't go down on the &quot;surprise round&quot; (I know those aren't a thing 5e RAW, it's just easier language for me because I use them in my house rules), the GM needs to either (a) get the rest of the party involved, or (b) make a narrative scene transition playing out the consequences.In my opinion, it's not &quot;The Decker Problem&quot;, rather it's a whole domino of systemic issues within 5e – how does a creature break away from combat (there are no escape/evasion rules)? why does the surprise system allow for wonkiness with the surprised creature's initiative coming first so they're no longer surprised? does the inflating of monster hit points surpass average PC damage inflation and does that discourage Assassin's Creed style play? are the Stealth rules really meant to be followed exactingly?Rather the problem is the system (and the table culture I've seen coalesce around it) not facilitating quick mini-combats that were extremely common in our AD&amp;D / BD&amp;D games. These can be done in 5e, and I have done them, but it definitely takes some experience and finagling to make it work.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Quickleaf, post: 9257839, member: 20323"] "The Decker Problem" is a matter of degree though. If it's being resolved within two minutes, I think that falls within something the whole group can enjoy. That's a lot like resolving a Persuasion check with a tiny bit of role-play and stakes setting, or a PC casting [I]pass wall [/I]with a bit of back-and-forth dialogue with the GM. It's also a matter of varying the spice used. One player defeating a sentry quick to allow the group to penetrate deeper into hostile territory doesn't exclude more challenging fights within that territory that do involve the whole party. The key with these mini-combats is not to get bogged down. If the monster doesn't go down on the "surprise round" (I know those aren't a thing 5e RAW, it's just easier language for me because I use them in my house rules), the GM needs to either (a) get the rest of the party involved, or (b) make a narrative scene transition playing out the consequences. In my opinion, it's not "The Decker Problem", rather it's a whole domino of systemic issues within 5e – how does a creature break away from combat (there are no escape/evasion rules)? why does the surprise system allow for wonkiness with the surprised creature's initiative coming first so they're no longer surprised? does the inflating of monster hit points surpass average PC damage inflation and does that discourage Assassin's Creed style play? are the Stealth rules really meant to be followed exactingly? Rather the problem is the system (and the table culture I've seen coalesce around it) not facilitating quick mini-combats that were extremely common in our AD&D / BD&D games. These can be done in 5e, and I have done them, but it definitely takes some experience and finagling to make it work. [/QUOTE]

Verification