DM is perturbed that we killed his BBEG too easily.

[mgshamster]

Our young DM says he's a bit grumpy that what he thought was a big tough guy that would be a major challenge ended up being way too easy.

As an experienced DM, this kind of this doesn't bother me. Don't sweat it, let the players feel big and awesome. Sometimes what you think is hard will get steamrolled by the PCs, and sometimes what you think is easy will end up being a major challenge.

However, I'd like to convey that message in a way a teenager could understand.

What kind of advice would you give this DM? Any good blogs out there that can teach the same lesson?

Thanks!

[Tanarii]

-Don't get attached to your bad guys*, or how hard a fight they're going to be.

-Don't use BBEG solo or duos. Always include at least three creatures in a BBEG fight.

-Deadly difficulty fights aren't, taken out of context.

-If they're the final fight of a full adventuring day per DMG guidelines, Deadly fights might actually be dangerous.

- If you want a really dangerous Deadly fight, one way is to seriously over-level the fight. This often flips the switch from not dangerous to TPK, so be careful with this. Rocket Tag quickly becomes a thing.

- another way is to subvert expectations. Have a Deadly fight that looks like the BBEG fight ... right before the real, possibly slightly less difficult, BBEG fight. The players will often blow many Long Rest resources in the first fight. (To be fair to players they should probably get a short rest after any Deadly Fight. Those fights are 1/3 of an adventuring day in theory.)

- have a way for the BBEG to stay the hell away from the party.
Terrain, magic, whatever. If he gets cornered by melee types, usually he's screwed. If he gets teamed up on by 3 or more damage focused players, he's dead in no more than 2 rounds.

*Definitely don't assume they'll get away or live to see another day. Trust me, they're going to die.

Edit as far as the non-combat side of things on how to good villain, I always recommend Angry DM for how to be a 'good' DM.
http://theangrygm.com/villains-and-characters-villains-as-characters/
&
http://theangrygm.com/villains-and-plots-the-villain-as-plot/

[fbelanger]

Our young DM says he's a bit grumpy that what he thought was a big tough guy that would be a major challenge ended up being way too easy.

As an experienced DM, this kind of this doesn't bother me. Don't sweat it, let the players feel big and awesome. Sometimes what you think is hard will get steamrolled by the PCs, and sometimes what you think is easy will end up being a major challenge.

However, I'd like to convey that message in a way a teenager could understand.

What kind of advice would you give this DM? Any good blogs out there that can teach the same lesson?

Thanks!

Tell him that you're very happy to have blow it out.
Easy victory is not the fault of the DM.
Open a way for future fight, tell him you fear some retribution might come from BBEG allies.

A good player may help the DM setup look better than it was.
Your pc found explanation for missing links, worry about a too easy victory, etc...

[pwykersotz]

That's a tough one. When I was a new GM about 8 years ago, I conflated "making things tough" with "making things fun" a lot. There's also a good bit of ego that can go into encounter design, and having that stepped on is unpleasant. He may have even DMPC'd the bad guy a little, making it his expression of himself in that world, even if only for a moment. It's not something that's easy to understand, even if you're directly told.

The only thing that I can think that would be a bit of balm on that wound is to make sure he knows that everyone had a good time. Beyond that, maybe offer to critique his design a bit. If he wants to make a big awesome guy and he got short-changed, helping him achieve that might help him feel better. If it was just dice rolls and circumstance though, honestly, let him be grumpy. There's nothing wrong with him being a bit down as he rebuilds his expectations. It's happened to me plenty of times. Just make sure to talk up his game for all the things that you enjoy between now and next game. It will help inspire confidence and help him turn this into something positive to learn from.

[Unoriginal]

Our young DM says he's a bit grumpy that what he thought was a big tough guy that would be a major challenge ended up being way too easy.

As an experienced DM, this kind of this doesn't bother me. Don't sweat it, let the players feel big and awesome. Sometimes what you think is hard will get steamrolled by the PCs, and sometimes what you think is easy will end up being a major challenge.

However, I'd like to convey that message in a way a teenager could understand.

What kind of advice would you give this DM? Any good blogs out there that can teach the same lesson?

Thanks!

Well, could you tell us how you managed to easily defeat the BBEG?

[Gignere]

When throwing one BBEG make sure it comes out over triple deadly if he wants a challenge. In a fight of mooks a triple deadly would wipe the party for sure.

[mgshamster]

Well, could you tell us how you managed to easily defeat the BBEG?

That's irrelevant to the topic at hand.

[PeteNutButter]

If the players do enough damage to kill the BBEG in one round, increase his hit points. That's right, cheat.

On occasion if players play incredibly smart and do something you didn't think of it's ok to trivialize a boss type foe, but it shouldn't be something they luck into.

I had a campaign where the PCs had to kill seven evil sorcerers before killing the big bad, in a typical video game style plot. On sorcerer number four, they managed to bypass the fight entirely by having the rogue sneak past his guards and poison him in his sleep, Hamlet style.

The PCs were expecting to weaken him for the upcoming fight. When he died outright they were surprised and pleased. It makes the players feel like they can actually have choices and not always follow the DMs plan when things like that work.


That's irrelevant to the topic at hand.

Not at all. If the players did something like research the foe's weakness and exploit it then they should be rewarded with an easier fight. If it was just smashing d20s together and the foe came up short... well that happens. It happens to the best of DMs. Even the best planned encounters can go by in a flash once chance gets involved.

[Unoriginal]

That's irrelevant to the topic at hand.

Not really, no.

If the BBEG got defeated because the players were clever, it's quite a different feeling the DM would have than if they just miscalculated the threat level of the BBEG or if they made a mistake with the rules.

[mgshamster]

Not really, no.

If the BBEG got defeated because the players were clever, it's quite a different feeling the DM would have than if they just miscalculated the threat level of the BBEG or if they made a mistake with the rules.

Players were clever.

[TIPOT]

That's irrelevant to the topic at hand.

I mean I could understand getting annoyed if he died in a single round to quicken hold person double smite. Especially if this was literally a big bad he'd been planning out for ages. If he died to a series of lucky crits that's one thing but if it was something like that it clearly wasn't as challenging as he hoped.

edit:

Players were clever.
and this tells us nothing. You might see it as the players being clever. He could easily see it as him being unaware of what your characters could do and being punished for it. Was it you outsmarting the villain or outsmarting the dm?

[PeteNutButter]

Players were clever.

All is well that ends well. Players should be rewarded when they are clever. Sounds like things went just fine.

[JNAProductions]

I too would like a little more detail on what you did to beat the BBEG, but overall, I'd just let the DM know that you had fun. Maybe give him some advice on more durable or survivable BBEGs, maybe explain to him that losing a bad guy isn't the end of the world, I dunno. What's he mostly upset about?

[Mith]

I planned a small mini arc to give the regular DM a break and a chance to play. The paladin player always saved spell slots for smites. Which is fine, but it means that solo fights went down really fast.

My solution was to make a two form fight, where the death of the giant half dragon spawned a weakended dragon. This meant that birning resources to eliminate the first scary threat left them with less resources for dealing with the more mobile second threat.

[Aelyn]

Players were clever.

Sorry if it feels like we're harping on this, but this really could change the appropriate response. Was it cleverness relating to a specific weakness in the way the BBEG was built / the setting etc, was it careful planning coming to fruition, or was it - with the best will in the world - some sort of rules exploit?

The fact that you seem unwilling to discuss this makes me concerned that the problem lies more with the players than you have accept.

[Specter]

If you want to advise your DM, tell him to run simulations beforehand. As a rule of thumb, a BBEG should be able to withstand at least 2 rounds of average damage from the PCS, and have at least 60% chance of passing major saves like Hold Monster (unless legendary stuff is in play).

Many DMs think only about the BBEG's offense, and then are surprised when they roll a 1 in initiative and get bamboozled.

[mgshamster]

Sorry if it feels like we're harping on this, but this really could change the appropriate response. Was it cleverness relating to a specific weakness in the way the BBEG was built / the setting etc, was it careful planning coming to fruition, or was it - with the best will in the world - some sort of rules exploit?

The fact that you seem unwilling to discuss this makes me concerned that the problem lies more with the players than you have accept.

I'm avoiding it because every time Unoriginal has ever asked for details, he nitpicks and harps on irrelevant rules minutiae in some attempt to "win" an argument, instead of focusing on the topic or actually trying to help.

I didn't want to deal with that kind of BS when I was just looking for some advice to give to a teenage DM who felt like he was somehow losing the game because the players trivialized what he thought would be a challenge.

[Unoriginal]

I'm avoiding it because every time Unoriginal has ever asked for details, he nitpicks and harps on irrelevant rules minutiae in some attempt to "win" an argument, instead of focusing on the topic or actually trying to help.

I didn't want to deal with that kind of BS

I beg your pardon? No, this is not something I do. If I discuss rule details, it is when rules are relevant to my point, which is not the case for this thread.

And accusing me of not trying to help is just asinine. Especially by implying I'm just creeping around to "win" arguments.

If you loath me that much, just tell me "I don't want to talk with you", or block me.



when I was just looking for some advice to give to a teenage DM who felt like he was somehow losing the game because the players trivialized what he thought would be a challenge.

A) "No reason to see it like it's DM vs Players, we're all playing together to have fun."

B) "Don't worry, you'll have other occasions to get us good."

C) "Sorry we've upset you, did you have some special plans for this bad guy?"

D) "It's not easy to design bad guys who ends up like you want on the field. You've learned a bit on what to do with this encounter."

E) "Thanks for DMing, I had fun. Hope you did too, overall."

[MrStabby]

What to say may depend on the SMs personality and what you and they want out of the conversation.

If they just want to feel better, talk about how fun the whole campaign is. Talk about how cool the aspects were you enjoyed. No dishonesty and job done.

Will the DM get more out of dissecting the event? Maybe. I would appreciate knowing why things didn't go to plan. Let me beat myself up over mistakes I should have spotted but just learn from the things I am happy to not have guessed at.


My guess would be the bad guy didn't prepare. He didn't research, didn't acquire defensive magic items, didn't use contingency spells, didn't surround himself with enough hirelings, didn't leave trails of misinformation and so on. Antagonists with personality do things outside of combat to influence and respond to the world.

[Spiritchaser]

I'd start out by talking about what he did right, give some positive support

Then I'd suggest what specter did:


If you want to advise your DM, tell him to run simulations beforehand.

If they're likely to be fighting at the end of the day, run the simulation with them tapped out of resources. If they could end up fighting him/her/it fresh, run it fresh.

Don't sweat the details on the tactics too too much, but he'll have to know what the party's DPR range and survivable damage is likely to be with or without the likes of bless, haste, holds, soft controls etc. and account for it.

If he discovers that the party, running flat out, can bag the big guy in 2 rounds, he'll find his own solutions.

And be as tolerant as you can if he overcompensates a bit on the next BBEG.

[lebefrei]

The DM should take this as a learning opportunity. "Failure" to get the results you want is part of being a DM, and it's a good lesson to learn early. You aren't playing a solo game; you're playing with (not against!) other, actual human beings, and no computer is in the middle to set hard rules. Sometimes things go off the rails, and if you can roll with that and not force railroading, let it happen. Sometimes the players are just big heroes and the bad guy, no matter how strong, just wasn't strong enough. Figure out why it happened, let the word be spread in the world that Boss 1 got beat because the players figured out X, and then control for that in the next fight because it has become a bit of a legend.

[Sigreid]

If it was easy because the players were clever, tell him to be proud that he's got the players to the point they feel the need to be clever.

[Seclora]

The first thing I'd say is; The best villains have ways to recover from that kind of defeat. Liches, Death Knights, and Vampires are classic foes precisely because they can just absorb the loss. Other sorts of enemies should have either a contingency escape plan, or allies who can resurrect them. Most of the minionoids(Goblins, Orcs, Kobolds, etc...), are truly replaceable: a defeated warlord or chieftan can be replaced easily enough with a more dangerous successor with rather similar goals and motivations, but better stats.

Secondly, Players will always surprise you. It cannot, and should not be avoided. Try not to get too mad about it. You are challenging the players and working with them to tell a story, not to defeat them with big numbers and unforeseeable plot twists.

[Zergrinch]

I am one of the players in question.

In my view, DM was not prepared for the damage spike a PC gains once they reach 5th level in a class.

More specifically, he allowed me to play a UA Mystic, and was not expecting me to have access to what is essentially 5x back to back Fireballs (Detonation, from Mastery of Fire) in a short period of time.

And to give even more detail, we were infiltrating a castle full of goblins, hobgoblins, and bugbears. Beforehand, my character was given the One Piece ability to change his physical appearance into anything he touches, such as, for example, an easily ambushable goblin guard. He also had glamored studded leather (without the extra AC) to change clothing appearance too.

And so, taking the identity of one of the goblin guards, my Mystic traipsed into a packed banquet hall that had his big bad evil hobgoblin.

My initial plan was to lure out the BBEG into an ambush by our party. But, the room only had two entrances, and, gosh, that looks like a tempting target for a Fireball or two, right? :D

And so, change of plans. I felt safe changing plans because we were all fresh, this was the first real encounter of the day.

The first Detonation killed all the weaker mooks. And our cleric was kind enough to shield my puny mystic long enough for him to nuke the boss two more times - once to finish off the stragglers, and once more to vaporize the 15 reinforcements he sent in through a single door... :X

[King of Nowhere]

Many good arguments here. The two copper pieces I can add is this:

tell your DM that he was a good DM because he didn't try to railroad the plot.

For a bad DM will enforce a hard fight when he wants one. That will frustrate the players, because all their efforts will be for nothing. No matter how welll they plan, no matter how well they prepare, they are gonna suck it up. This eventually makes for unfun games, for everyone (maybe the DM will have fun if he's a control freak).
Instead a good DM must let the players influence the plot. That includes turning a difficult fight into an easy fight with the right strategy, or getting killed with a wrong one (a bad DM is also one who goes out of his way to rescue a dieing PC. One should not be a sadistic DM, but the players must feel in danger when fighting, which they won't if they know they'll always be rescued). The very fact that the players did good preparation showcases that the DM did a good job: he made them feel threatened, which in turn caused them to not take the encounter lightly. Purpose achieved.

Also, which fights will be difficult will depend much more on the dice roll than on anything else. The best fights I've had, both as DM and as player, were often not those meant to be such, but those that the dice dictated as such. That awesome boss just ended up doing nothing because he rolled low offensively. That bunch of mooks managed to find the party in a moment of weakness, throw in a good strategy, some good rolls, and suddenly it becomes an epic life-or-death combat. As much as you can try to prepare, you should savor the best fights as something that cannot be reproduced intentionally.

[Pex]

Make sure he understands he's not the players' enemy. The BBEGs are but not him as DM. Also, when you think about it, DMs "lose" every combat save for TPKs or when the party makes a tactical withdrawal. The players are supposed to win the fight. As long as the game was fun to play he's doing everything right.

The BBEG lost sooner than the DM anticipated. If it was an encounter design error, you learn from mistakes. A player I know who has tried DMing a couple of adventures keeps making the mistake of using solo monsters/bad guys. We overwhelm him in action economy we win in three rounds at most because of the hit points it has. He's earning XP as a DM learning how to do it better.

[ghost_warlock]

Make sure he understands he's not the players' enemy. The BBEGs are but not him as DM. Also, when you think about it, DMs "lose" every combat save for TPKs or when the party makes a tactical withdrawal. The players are supposed to win the fight. As long as the game was fun to play he's doing everything right.

The BBEG lost sooner than the DM anticipated. If it was an encounter design error, you learn from mistakes. A player I know who has tried DMing a couple of adventures keeps making the mistake of using solo monsters/bad guys. We overwhelm him in action economy we win in three rounds at most because of the hit points it has. He's earning XP as a DM learning how to do it better.

Yep.

Also, solos are never a good idea when you've got a paladin in the party. To a lesser degree, the same goes for a warlock with the Eldritch Smite invocation. A couple lucky crits on a smite will make mincemeat out of any monster.

Example: In my game today, our party of 10th level characters slaughtered a CR 21 lich in less than than two rounds because the paladin landed three (haste) smites in the first round for around ~140 damage. The only reason the lich lasted another turn was because the DM buffed its hp to 200.

And this was after the party had already fought an adult black dragon and some 3rd-party flying undead monster that paralyzes with a gaze attack. We didn't even have a rest between the fights.

[Thrudd]

A few lessons come out of this :
1. Don't sweat it. Now you have a better idea what the characters can really do, and in the future you can give them enemies that will be more challenging.

2. Don't ever plan on what will happen once dice start rolling. That's how the game goes- tough characters sometimes bite it and ones you think will be easy sometimes cause problems. Roll with it.

3. Be careful about handing out extra abilities, powerful magic items, and allowing homebrew or unofficial characters. Obviously the mystic is an overpowered class in general, and they were then given even more extra powers and items on top of that- this is the sort if thing that happens. Consider being more strict with what you allow and how much powerful stuff you give out.

[Waterdeep Merch]

-snip-
It sounds like he just had some expectations for an epic boss fight without taking into account the players' recent strength gain, further exasperated by a setup that he wanted to be cinematic but was instead a complete death trap.

It happens. Let the DM know he didn't necessarily do anything wrong if the players enjoyed what they did. If he wants to try his hand at something like this in the future, be more careful with enemy fortifications and terrain placement. People in your average high-magic D&D worlds ought to prepare some pretty serious protections against common spells like fireball if they at all value their lives.

[BurgerBeast]

This article by The Alexandrian is great: http://thealexandrian.net/wordpress/36383/roleplaying-games/dont-prep-plots-you-will-rue-this-day-heroes-the-principles-of-rpg-villainy

[Throne12]

For a single boss encounters I give the boss a extra attack or ability to do in between pc turns. I also add hp to boss monsters. I'll also lower damage dice if I'm hitting to hard. Now I do all this one because I don't use al lot of monsters from the MM because I have 2 DM's as players and meta leaks in. But I make all my rolls in the open. And for the most part I roll shety so my BBEG's end up doing one big hit or never hit at all.

[rollingForInit]

I've always liked the idea of having epic boss fights in phases. E.g. when the boss reaches half hit points, something changes. The boss changes tactics, it gains new abilities and loses some old ones, and so on.

I had a boss fight at one point that was an archangel, with 3 phases.

Phase 1: Pretty standard. Ended when the angel lost "all" its hit points, thematically when someone broke its shield.
Phase 2: The angel raised a magical wall around itself that the party had to break down with a skill challenge. A very short challenge, as to not break the flow.
Phase 3: When the wall broke, it exploded outwards, causing fires to erupt across the room, turning it into a more complicated battlefield. The angel had been healed from all debilitating conditions, and now used its sword with both hands, and stopped using some abilities. It was bleeding, and the blood actually hurt the PC's.

I got the idea from a blog post (can't find it now), but the idea is basically that it prevents the monster from being insta-killed, while it adds variety to the fight, making it closer to an action scene from a story, instead of an HP-grind.

[NorthernPhoenix]

I've always liked the idea of having epic boss fights in phases. E.g. when the boss reaches half hit points, something changes. The boss changes tactics, it gains new abilities and loses some old ones, and so on.

I had a boss fight at one point that was an archangel, with 3 phases.

Phase 1: Pretty standard. Ended when the angel lost "all" its hit points, thematically when someone broke its shield.
Phase 2: The angel raised a magical wall around itself that the party had to break down with a skill challenge. A very short challenge, as to not break the flow.
Phase 3: When the wall broke, it exploded outwards, causing fires to erupt across the room, turning it into a more complicated battlefield. The angel had been healed from all debilitating conditions, and now used its sword with both hands, and stopped using some abilities. It was bleeding, and the blood actually hurt the PC's.

I got the idea from a blog post (can't find it now), but the idea is basically that it prevents the monster from being insta-killed, while it adds variety to the fight, making it closer to an action scene from a story, instead of an HP-grind.


This is a amazing suggestion! Along with the already existing rules for legendary/lair actions and resistance, 5E can totally support awesome solo bosses without cluttering them with nooks!

[Joe the Rat]

Sounds like what made this go so quickly is the classic Psion Nova: Dump a crapton of resources into a few high-impact effects. Spell Point Variant lets you do the same thing with casters, so it's not 100% on the class. Without that... it'd probably have taken another round or two at best.

From the DM side, you want things to challenge the players - have a chance of failure, burn resources to succeed, and have the possibility of death-saves occurring. But you also want them to be clever. Use their resources in creative ways, minimize risk with strategy, and get themselves set up for a whammy because they over-thought a situation, or made one too many assumptions. Vizzini and Wesley.

You guys out-thought the DM, and he was disappointed in how easy/ low-risk it went for the party. I get that. The first time my players one-shotted a freaking Giant (good stealth + slew of hireling archers + assassin + ambush), it was a bit of a wake-up call.

Lessons learned: Not knowing what he actually had in place, some of this may have been done, but these are the things I would suggest for a similar future scenario.

Minions: He had a good plan here - mixing a bunch of minions with his heavy. He even had a reserve on hand (this is a useful trick - if things go too easy, bring them in, if they're getting trounced, leave them out, or use them as a suggestion to retreat.). Something that can help here are Lieutenants - something midway between mook and master, and can survive a round of explosions and make havoc. If they do no more than trade blows with the martials, they are doing their job. Goblin Bosses are fun in this regard, as they have the ability to deflect blows to adjacent goblin minions. Gotta love that.

Escape routes: if this is supposed to be a major, campaign-recurring villain, he really ought to run away before defeat. A good threshold is when BBEG is at half hit points, or 1/4 minions, and the party is not taking a significant beating, he should cut and run. If this is a proper boss lair, give him an escape route - possibly secret, but be fair about it - know where it is, the percep DC to spot, and what the boss needs to do to open it. I like a trap door under a rug myself - but make sure the players know there's a rug. Spellcasters have an easier time of it, as most have access to some sort of movement power.

Big Bad Build: Minions or no, there's something you should consider for every Boss: Legendary Actions. This can increase their longevity and threat significantly. A mob boss like this could have "make an attack" (which wouldn't have helped here), and a "minion command" (x many creatures that can see or hear him may use a reaction to make an attack) - which could up the threat on the party. You don't have to go the full three points - one or two is enough for a lesser. A hit point boost is not unreasonable. I like 75% max for the truly tough. These may bump you enough that CR and xp values need rechecked.

Tighter Security: Passwords are something even goblins can use. They might have only one, and never change it, but until the players get it, they're bluffing (or sneak-KOing) their way through checkpoints, preferably at resource cost.

Counterintelligence: If there is a reasonable way for the BBEG to have learned of the party's capabilities or specific tricks, then he should be able to counter them. This is why you don't have minions fight to the last man. Keep in mind the quality of the runner - visible numbers, notable appearances (Clerics tend to stand out), and basic tactics. "They throw around a lot of fire" is more likely than "knows the following spells."

Always a Bigger Fish: Behind the scenes, give the ex BBEG a bigger boss - the man behind the man. This doesn't help change this scenario, but does let you extend the thread (threat?) a little longer.

[Mitth'raw'nuruo]

Players were clever.

Sounds like you have a DM a good bit less experienced in RPGs than the group.

So do we, and there is a nearly a generation between us and our DM.

We threw him into deep water, told him to suck it up. He is a good DM, puts the time in to make the story, which is something we all appreciate.

Starting a new campaign we just fought a mummy. Think we were level two. Thankfully I passed my mummy rot save. After the night was done we looked it up....had anyone failed, they would have died, no ifs ands or butts.

IT wasn't a hard fight, it could have been deadly. He didn't realize it :-)

[UrielAwakened]

See the thing a lot of people are missing here is a lot of DMs (and players, mind you) want a BBEG to feel cinematic and theatrical.

If it just rolls over because of a gameplay mechanic oversight, it's a hollow victory.

It's the difference between a player who wants to grind to trivialize an RPG final boss and one who wants to barely win.

The players who want to barely win will be disappointed in a situation like this. Unfortunately, D&D just really doesn't do theatrical boss fights well (except 4e).

[rollingForInit]

The players who want to barely win will be disappointed in a situation like this. Unfortunately, D&D just really doesn't do theatrical boss fights well (except 4e).

Really? 4e felt like much more of a slog with solo bosses. 5e at least has stuff like legendary actions.

But D&D really can, if you do boss phases or something similar. At least that brings it much closer to being theatrical, because that's how most bosses work in video games, and typically what final action scenes are like in movies.

[UrielAwakened]

None of that is D&D as-written.

They're techniques and house rules that other frustrated DMs invented to fix that glaring weakness.

Other systems can do theatrical, cinematic combat out-of-the-box.

And yes 4e could be a slog but it at least made an effort with Solos who were expected to be as strong as 4-5 monsters of their level, complete with action economy. Legendary monsters in 5e are still as durable as any other monster of their CR and just as susceptible to being nova'd.

5e completely abandoned monster roles and levels of "importance" in battle like standards, elites, and solos, doing DMs everywhere a major disservice.

[Unoriginal]

I consider that doing DMs a major service, but eh, it's a matter of tastes.


Also, I'm curious about which systems can do theatrical, out-of-the-box boss battles.

[Contrast]

I've always liked the idea of having epic boss fights in phases. E.g. when the boss reaches half hit points, something changes. The boss changes tactics, it gains new abilities and loses some old ones, and so on.

-Snip-

I got the idea from a blog post (can't find it now), but the idea is basically that it prevents the monster from being insta-killed, while it adds variety to the fight, making it closer to an action scene from a story, instead of an HP-grind.

I'm going to guess Angry GM (http://theangrygm.com/return-of-the-son-of-the-dd-boss-fight-now-in-5e/)

[UrielAwakened]

I consider that doing DMs a major service, but eh, it's a matter of tastes.

Also, I'm curious about which systems can do theatrical, out-of-the-box boss battles.

Exalted does it well, especially 3e. The entire system is built around withering and then finishing damage.

Fate I believe is also largely cinematic combat-wise.

Mutants and Masterminds has a much more cinematic approach to combat as well.

Basically any system without hit points.

Also nothing about 5e combat building is a service to DMs. Compared to 4e it's a hot mess.

[Unoriginal]

Also nothing about 5e combat building is a service to DMs. Compared to 4e it's a hot mess.

Let's agree to disagree on that.

[UrielAwakened]

No?

4es combat making rules were much more clear. They were organized around the role of a monster in combat across two dimensions, and battles had clear experience budgets and were fairly balanced according to those budgets. You really could not screw up making a 4e encounter as long as you followed the rules.

You can hate 4e for whatever nostalgic reasons you want but nothing about that is up to opinion. Call it "video-gamey" if you want but this is a game and having good rules trumps personal preference.

I let people wear rose-colored glassed about 5e vs. 4e all the time here but I'm not gonna let the only advancement in DMing in 30 years get swept under the rug because we should "agree to disagree."

[pwykersotz]

No?

4es combat making rules were much more clear. They were organized around the role of a monster in combat across two dimensions, and battles had clear experience budgets and were fairly balanced according to those budgets. You really could not screw up making a 4e encounter as long as you followed the rules.

You can hate 4e for whatever nostalgic reasons you want but nothing about that is up to opinion. Call it "video-gamey" if you want but this is a game and having good rules trumps personal preference.

I let people wear rose-colored glassed about 5e vs. 4e all the time here but I'm not gonna let the only advancement in DMing in 30 years get swept under the rug because we should "agree to disagree."

I never played 4e, so I don't know how good the encounter building rules were. But calling 5e's rules a hot mess makes me ignore any good points you would otherwise raise completely. 5e's encounter building rules work wonderfully in the paradigm in which they are designed. In my experience in talking about this subject on this forum, most dissenters try to use the system for things it wasn't designed to handle, then complain when it doesn't do what they want.

You can criticize 5e legitimately for a number of issues, including that it's encounter building has limitations. But it's still fantastic, and comparing it to another system by trashing it isn't winning a lot of people over who aren't already like-minded.

[BurgerBeast]

I never played 4e, so I don't know how good the encounter building rules were. But calling 5e's rules a hot mess makes me ignore any good points you would otherwise raise completely.

Frankly, that's a shame. If you read the 4e rules for encounter building, you'll almost certainly agree with the person who wrote this.

4e encounter building was simple: 1 standard monster per PC. Sub an elite for 2 standards if you like. Sub 2 elites for a Solo if you like. Or you can go the other way and sub out one standard for 4 minions. It's that simple.

If you want to use monsters of different levels, the experience award math is easy enough that the swaps are (relative to 5e) almost effortless.


5e's encounter building rules work wonderfully in the paradigm in which they are designed. In my experience in talking about this subject on this forum, most dissenters try to use the system for things it wasn't designed to handle, then complain when it doesn't do what they want.

But calling dissenters people who "try to use the system for things it wasn't designed to handle, then complain when it doesn't do what they want" makes me ignore any good points you would otherwise raise completely.

4e got a lot of things wrong, but from the DM's side of the screen, they did encounter design better than any D&D edition, ever. By a mile.


You can criticize 5e legitimately for a number of issues, including that it's encounter building has limitations. But it's still fantastic, and comparing it to another system by trashing it isn't winning a lot of people over who aren't already like-minded.

I'm not personally trying to trash 5e's encounter building, and in fairness I don't think the commenter who raised this issue was either. The point is that 4e's system was so good that abandoning it borders on insanity. And I think it could have been worked into 5e "behind the scenes" relatively easily.

In fact, I've personally gone to effort to shoehorn the 4e encounter design into 5e just to make my life easier.

In my experience, planning for 5e whenever there's uncertainty about the number of PCs is a gong show. I used to plan adventures for 3-6 PCs, and I cared (perhaps overly cared) about encounter balance. I had to write up the encounters for 3, 4, 5, or 6 PCs and almost never found it intuitive.

[Tanarii]

4e was designed to build an encounter from the ground up using the system. It didn't work so well if you wanted to go outside the limits of the encounter building system, and it took time. It wasn't fast. It wasn't 3e slow, but it wasn't fast.

5e doesn't have an 'encounter building' or 'adventuring day' system. What it has is rough guidelines you can use to guestimate how difficult the encounter you've already thrown together will be, and a rough guideline for how far the players can push before they over extend themselves. If you're trying to use them to build a budget, you're going to end up falling into traps sooner or later. One thing it's really nice for is quickly seeing if multiple encounters come together, how much more difficult it will be. (For example, I recently used it heavily in caves of chaos to do quick estimates of things like: what is about to happen when the players push on after several groups of Hobgoblins retreat from early fights, and the players are now going to face them all at once.)

The thing it does tell you is if you're not challenging your players enough, with not enough encounters in the day or overly deadly encounters for the day. For example the classic 5 min workday will either be a single multiple time Deadly encounter, or not even close to the adventuring day total.

[rollingForInit]

None of that is D&D as-written.

They're techniques and house rules that other frustrated DMs invented to fix that glaring weakness.


Modifying monsters is D&D as written. There's even the assumption that DM's are going to create monsters of their own or modify those that exist. The rest is just encounter-building. Having an encounter that's more than just "Here are X enemies, now chop them to death while they stand still and don't interact with the environment" isn't houserules.


I'm going to guess Angry GM (http://theangrygm.com/return-of-the-son-of-the-dd-boss-fight-now-in-5e/)

Nice! But that wasn't it. The one I read was a bit specific about 4e and had several examples. Don't remember what it was called. The gist was the same, though.

[BurgerBeast]

Nice! But that wasn't it. The one I read was a bit specific about 4e and had several examples. Don't remember what it was called. The gist was the same, though.

Are you sure? Angry wrote the 4e one and then later he updated it to 5e.

http://theangrygm.com/the-dd-boss-fight-part-1/

[Tanarii]

[QUOTE=rollingForInit;22464030]Really? 4e felt like much more of a slog with solo bosses. 5e at least has stuff like legendary actions. /QUOTE]Missed this one earlier. Yeah, 4e completely failed at creatures fighting solo, as written. But so does 5e. So did BECMI, both editions of AD&D, and 3e. So it's not like 4e has anything special in regard to the general rule: always give the BBEG minions, and never have them fight alone.

Unless the BBEG can one-shot multiple PCs in a single round, of course. But if the players are fighting that fight, someone probably messed up. :smallamused:

[Zakhara]

In my experience, the "solution" is simply not to write villains (elaborate schemes optional). Write interesting NPCs who simply don't agree with the PC's or their goals.

If they're not capable, they're not capable. If they survive to cause trouble, they survive to cause trouble. It's less disappointing when a BBEG bites the dust if there's more where that came from, and it doesn't have to pull out the rug under players to ensure they stick around for your novel. The Alexandrian basically hit the nail on the head: "write lots of villains". I did the same for my campaign, to the point of absurdity.

An (arguably) significant villain was unexpectedly obliterated in a fight that I expected would go much better. But at the end of the day, the players earned the victory. And having to deal with the fallout of a plot-savvy villain's information being lost had unique triumphs and repercussions--ones I don't think I could have dreamed up if I wasn't pleasantly surprised.

[Kane0]

Could be worse, could be a DM that hates being outsmarted.

[Deleted]

Our young DM says he's a bit grumpy that what he thought was a big tough guy that would be a major challenge ended up being way too easy.

As an experienced DM, this kind of this doesn't bother me. Don't sweat it, let the players feel big and awesome. Sometimes what you think is hard will get steamrolled by the PCs, and sometimes what you think is easy will end up being a major challenge.

However, I'd like to convey that message in a way a teenager could understand.

What kind of advice would you give this DM? Any good blogs out there that can teach the same lesson?

Thanks!

I would tell the DM to play off the easy win.

Have the same BBEG show up again, say the same things and use *slightly* better tactics this time.

Then do it again with better tactics.

Then do it again with better tactics.

All the while... The BBEG acts as if everything is normal. If they say anything weird, have the BBEG play it off as the PCs trying to confuse her/him.

Between fights have other things happen and have some clues drop about someone in the shadows manipulating things.

Eventually I would hope that the pkayers would use Gentle Repose and bring a body with them for their next meeting or start interupting the BBEG with what the BBEG is about to say...

The BBEG will then be all "wait... What..."

Then the BBEG joins the party as a NPC or whatever and helps the party to find the puppet master who has apparently been using them.

Like Blade Runner meets Doctor Strange sort of plot. If your encounter isn't top tier then have a top tier overarching plot.

[djreynolds]

This is an actual conversation from George Washington and Martha Washington

"Were you angry when Boba Fett went down like a chump, or were you happy?" said George Washington to Martha Washington as she was knitting the American Flag.

Martha turned in reply, "I was more angry when Darth Maul went out like a chump. I mean who gets cut in half, George?"

Do not allow your BBEG to go down like a chump? Have contingencies? Have a get away plan?

Don't invest hours in character design if your main villain is going to go out like a chump

But as a DM, don't whine about it, if you were un-prepared as a DM and the party was?