Revivify good? Why?

[Snails]

Well in my game it's exceptional anyway, though I've been begging the DM to be a little meaner to us so I can shine a bit more as a tank.

Not much in my experience either, but perhaps that is a peculiarity of my table. A Hill Giant is CR 5 (3d8+5 damage), so a critical could do 40 on a big roll. But no one is actually surprised about it being unhealthy to stand next to a giant with single digit HPs.

PCs seem very very robust in 5e compared to previous editions. I see TPKs or near TPKs more often than individual PC deaths, because what goes wrong is not one PC down but back luck with multiple PC failing their saves and the whole party is sent reeling. One PC down can usually be popped back up with Healing Word or similar.

[HappyDaze]

One point on the combat as war side, there are things you can do that "make sense" that are also very likely to end up with hurt feelings.

Example:

Goblins. I love using goblins because people think they are weak, but they are ambushers. Let us say you have a fairly standard party, that includes heavily armored knight, rogue, heavily armored cleric, and wizard. First off, the Goblins are cowards intelligent fighters, they aren't going to attack unless they have more than double your number. So, 10 of them.

They also have very good stealth, so it is likely they are hidden at the start of combat.

Out of the targets available, the rogue and wizard are the best choices. Goblins know magic is a thing, and they know they can out run men in heavy armor.

So, 10 attacks with advantage go to the Rogue. Who has a 16 AC. That means, by rough math, 2/3rds hit. Let's say that is seven arrows. That is 7d6+14 damage or approximately 38 damage. Which is a 5th level rogues average hp. (and surprise round means he can't react)

Then all the goblins scatter back into hiding with their bonus actions.

So, round 1 is "drop a player character" and then the enemies can just stay hidden, running and hiding until the party drops their guard. And do it again.

And again

and again.

Wizard readies an action to cast Fireball? Great. You wasted a spell slot. Because the Goblins don't reappear the next round. They wait three rounds. After all, if they still have visual on you, they can see you casting, and the fighter with their bow pulled taut waiting to fire, so they wait.


And sure, some people might find this fun, it could be an interesting scenario. But a lot of other people would find this terrible. Just like if you encountered a group of wizards, and they unleashed 5 fireballs on your location. Even if you succeed the saves, half of 40d6 damage is 70 damage, that is devastating for most of the party.

And then they do the same thing next round.

Hidden helps against AoE?

[MaxWilson]

Hidden helps against AoE?

Sometimes. Depends how good the Wizard is at guessing goblin positions blindly. In this case, it's more about denying the Wizard the trigger they apparently declared for their action.

[Chaosmancer]

Chaosmancer:

Exactly. In your example the Goblins act as if they are real living creatures who want to live and make decent decisions and use decent tactics. My feelings don't get hurt if my enemy fights better than my party.

Or, the Goblins are as dumb as zombies. When the DM decides they attack the party (regardless of how many or how powerful they appear) the goblins slowly plod forward (in fireball formation) attacking the closest enemy indiscriminately. Even though they are proficient at hiding, they don't use their BA to take cover or hide, because they are unthinking pools of Hp. This way the PC's feelings don't get hurt because they feel superior to the mindless, tactic-less enemy.

(Yes, I exaggerate to make my point)

Every party / table has a preference. There is no 'right' answer. Personally, beating Goblins that act like zombies is unfulfilling and unrealistic for me - I prefer an enemy who tries to win and live - I like the challenge.

To each their own. If you and your party prefer unthinking enemies, you do you, enjoy your game - that's all that matters. There is no one right way to have fun.

I agree, and I don't want to imply that people shouldn't have fun at their own tables.

But, I've run into more than one situation where I've realized that if I play it "real" I kill the party. It is so easy to do so. And it isn't fun for the people I play with to constantly have their teeth kicked in with no recourse.

So, I make decisions to mitigate the deadliness. I find a reason why the party might survive an encounter with a Mind Flayer city, despite the fact that it is a death sentence

And yet, I see people get upset with us DMs who do that. Who don't attack downed players and kill them off. Who don't focus fire and slaughter a PC. Who refer to our designs as fighting a "mindless tactic-less pool of hp"

And as much as I don't want to judge people for their fun, I feel awfully judged at times for protecting the fun of my players.

Combat As War is a playstyle, and not everyone enjoys it. But those who do would probably not find this scenario un-fun per se, although they'd likely view it as a sign of personal failure somewhere along the line, and asking themselves what they should have done differently. (At minimum the Rogue is probably kicking himself for not hiding and not scouting out the goblins ahead of time.)

Probably true.

But, can we at least acknowledge that some people would find it unfun? And they aren't wrong for feeling that way?

Hidden helps against AoE?

Sometimes. Depends how good the Wizard is at guessing goblin positions blindly. In this case, it's more about denying the Wizard the trigger they apparently declared for their action.

Yep, it was more the wizard declaring "I fireball the goblins when they reappear".

You certainly can fireball blindly, but I'd give even odds of hitting between 0 and 2 goblins out of 10.


Watching critical role season 2 again is just reminding me that readying a spell is incredibly risky, and since I often see it brought up as a solution for hiding goblins, I thought I would bring it up here.

[MaxWilson]

But, can we at least acknowledge that some people would find it unfun? And they aren't wrong for feeling that way?

Haven't I spent basically this whole thread acknowledging exactly that, and advocating for finding reasons _not_ to make combat a contest between the DM's tactical acumen and the players' tactical acumen? Haven't I explicitly advocated for making intelligent opponents relatively rare? I could have sworn I did, but maybe I'm getting my threads mixed up.

I love Combat As War as a playstyle, but there are lots of ways to run CAW, and unless I knew the players loved CAW for its own sake as well (some do not) I would not normally run the goblin ambush without some form of telegraphing first, such as a hexcrawl conveniently increasing in monster difficulty the further you got from civilization and the closer you got to a ley line. Giving players as much information as I can is core to my DMing agenda--when bad things happen, I want the players kicking themselves for decisions that they could have made differently, not feeling like they were at the mercy of the DM. That is how I measure player empowerment/agency.

[Chaosmancer]

Haven't I spent basically this whole thread acknowledging exactly that, and advocating for finding reasons _not_ to make combat a contest between the DM's tactical acumen and the players' tactical acumen? Haven't I explicitly advocated for making intelligent opponents relatively rare? I could have sworn I did, but maybe I'm getting my threads mixed up.

I love Combat As War as a playstyle, but there are lots of ways to run CAW, and unless I knew the players loved CAW for its own sake as well (some do not) I would not normally run the goblin ambush without some form of telegraphing first, such as a hexcrawl conveniently increasing in monster difficulty the further you got from civilization and the closer you got to a ley line. Giving players as much information as I can is core to my DMing agenda--when bad things happen, I want the players kicking themselves for decisions that they could have made differently, not feeling like they were at the mercy of the DM. That is how I measure player empowerment/agency.

Then I feel like we are in agreement.

(I get my threads mixed up too, so I honestly don't know)

[HappyDaze]

You certainly can fireball blindly, but I'd give even odds of hitting between 0 and 2 goblins out of 10.

I guess the problem I've seen (pun unintended) is that, if the hidden goblins are on the battle map, then fireball is still placed for maximum effect and being hidden means nothing. Likewise with throwing fireball fog/smoke/darkness. Representing hidden foes is a definite problem with playing on a battle map (which I hate, but my players won't even try the least bit of TotM combat).

[Pex]

I guess the problem I've seen (pun unintended) is that, if the hidden goblins are on the battle map, then fireball is still placed for maximum effect and being hidden means nothing. Likewise with throwing fireball fog/smoke/darkness. Representing hidden foes is a definite problem with playing on a battle map (which I hate, but my players won't even try the least bit of TotM combat).

Then the DM should take them off the battlemap. The DM keeps it in mind which space they're in. Keep the goblins on the map and do the same thing. They're not necessarily in the square the miniature is in. In any case being hidden would usually mean having cover, and the cover bonus applies to Dex saving throws if the spellcaster got lucky and they're in the area.

[LudicSavant]

I guess the problem I've seen (pun unintended) is that, if the hidden goblins are on the battle map, then fireball is still placed for maximum effect and being hidden means nothing. Likewise with throwing fireball fog/smoke/darkness. Representing hidden foes is a definite problem with playing on a battle map (which I hate, but my players won't even try the least bit of TotM combat).

I just use a big touch tablet with a digital map and a GM layer. Nobody gets to see the goblins but me.