New OOTS products from CafePress
New OOTS t-shirts, ornaments, mugs, bags, and more
Page 1 of 8 12345678 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 228
  1. - Top - End - #1
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    BlackDragon

    Join Date
    Apr 2020

    Default D&D 5e is not balanced around a 6-8 encounter, 2 SR day.

    While I am conscious of the contention that the title, and therefore the topic of this thread, creates. I cannot, without an earnest effort, watch as DM's and Players tear themselves apart in an attempt to attain a rare relic of a bygone era.

    This relic is a system balanced around and designed for a static number of encounters within an adventuring day while also having a specific amount of resources allotted throughout this adventuring day. I wish to encourage further thought within this community about this irregularity between the reality of the designers intents and how those within Forums treat the balance of a game system.

    Before you leave wanton replies as I am certain many have the urge to do, I request for you to instead place your thoughts into retrospection. Ask yourself, Why do you believe the game was balanced with only the thought of 6-8 encounters and 2 short rests? Then, ask yourself if this reasoning must be the only way that the designers could possibly design their system.


    Your first thought about where you heard this may come from the DMG. The text in question would be this:

    Quote Originally Posted by DMG
    Assuming typical adventuring conditions and average luck, most adventuring parties can handle about six to eight medium or hard encounters in a day. If the adventure has more easy encounters, the adventurers can get through more. If it has more deadly encounters, they can handle fewer.
    This text does not tell you anything about the balance of the game. It is merely offering advice to the DM about a potential TPK. Not about how the adventuring day was meant to be constructed.

    Jeremy Crawford himself has confirmed this:

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeremy Crawford
    We do not design the game thinking the correct adventuring day is 6-8 encounters, because many adventuring days might have only 1, some will have 3, some will have 4, that's fine. Those are all legitimate ways to construct a D&D adventure.
    Source Link

    This means that balance in the game is not derived from a certain number of encounters during an adventuring day. The designers acknowledge that such a definitive stance would not go well in all adventures.




    So, in what must a DM lean to for balance? How many encounters will provide a worthy challenge for a party? A DM can lean onto the adventuring day table. This table allows a DM to construct even a solo monster, single encounter day to be quite a challenge for a party.

    Imagine, for instance, a party of 5th-level characters. We know that we need 14000 exp within the adventuring day to make them tired enough for needing a long rest. Since its only one encounter and one monster, you'll need a monster with a CR of 15 to reach 13000 exp. That would be a 5th-level party fighting a Purple Worm equivalent.

    This appears hopeless, but this fight is under the assumption that the party has all their spell slots, all their HP, and have an immense advantage of action economy. Meanwhile, a party must be extremely careful. It's no longer about having enough damage to ORKO or having enough defense to chip them down. The party would need to strategize in an extremely efficient manner. A paladin no longer steals the spotlight as NOVA doesn't work, not enough to prevent a TPK. A warlock no longer needs to be shy about their spell slots, they can use them all on this encounter while having powerful and diverse other features both at-will and on-command.

    If this overwhelms your group, a DM can easily introduce a CR 11 creature or a CR 12 creature. This balance is left to the DM's care. However, a DM should not feel as though they are doing a disservice to balance if they don't abide by some 6-8 encounter gospel that.

    Again, I ask that you reflect upon yourself. Has balancing encounters truly been easier to you as a DM while abiding by this strict regiment of encounter building. Not only does it limit DM's creatively, it forces an adventuring day into a form of uniformity which cannot do anything but drain the group of their excitement and zeal for adventure knowing that every encounter leads to at least another 5 in a day with no true agency unless they spawn the ire of a tired DM that feels the need to account for every choice a party may have that would have them stray from their perfectly configured dungeon of medium encounters.

  2. - Top - End - #2
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    MadBear's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Seattle
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: D&D 5e is not balanced around a 6-8 encounter, 2 SR day.

    I'd feel so bad for the 5th level party that tries to fight a purple worm. That's one battle that's definitely going to end in multiple dead adventurers.

  3. - Top - End - #3
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    BlackDragon

    Join Date
    Apr 2020

    Default Re: D&D 5e is not balanced around a 6-8 encounter, 2 SR day.

    Quote Originally Posted by MadBear View Post
    I'd feel so bad for the 5th level party that tries to fight a purple worm. That's one battle that's definitely going to end in multiple dead adventurers.
    For sure, though I can only recommend it for those that swear up and down that their party yearns for exciting and dangerous encounters.

    Once you realize most parties only want enough of a challenge to be satisfied but not enough to be in any danger outside of their control, you'll find a balance point. Which is precisely why putting balance in the DM's hands are efficient and effective.

  4. - Top - End - #4
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Imp

    Join Date
    Feb 2017

    Default Re: D&D 5e is not balanced around a 6-8 encounter, 2 SR day.

    You're kind of conflating two different uses of the term "balance".

    Like the DMG says, the expectation is that a party will be able to handle 6-8 Medium encounters with 2 short rests before running out of ressources and being in a very dire spot, regardless of party composition.

    In other words, it can be said that "all classes are balanced to be able to handle 6-8 Medium encounters with 2 short rests before running out of ressources". Why use the term "balance" here? Because the different classes do *not* handle their ressources the same. An all-Rogue party would be able to "handle 6-8 Medium encounters with 2 short rests before running out of ressources" with the caveat that the only ressource those PCs can run out off is HPs and HDs (baring feats and the like). Meanwhile an all-Warlock party would be able to "handle 6-8 Medium encounters with 2 short rests before running out of ressources" but would have most of the PCs' ressources depend on those 2 short rests.

    If all classes can accomplish the same thing, but in different ways, it is balanced.


    Now, what this *does not mean* is that all adventuring days must/should be calibrated on a set number of encounter of a set difficulty with a set number of short rest. A D&D party can handle a large and varied amount of threats of different composition, with how difficult each threat is depending on party composition and of how they handled the previous ones, and if some of the PCs have to grind their teeth and run low on ressources for a while it's not a problem.

    In other words, it's not "an adventure day is balanced if it has the equivalent of 6-8 Medium encounter with 2 short rests".

    To use an analogy: take a large lineup of different cars. Saying "all those cars can do 250km of distance with only two stops at the station service" is not the same thing as saying "all those cars will give the same performance in every way and it's only fair if you do drive 250km". Taking the jungle jeep to go to the grocery shop in a crowded city won't be as efficient as using it to drive in the jungle, and taking the 7-places family car to drive in the jungle alone will wield poor, if interesting to watch results.

    That's it. It is less that the thread title or the topic creates contention, it's just that "balance" is a large term which can be used in a lot of different ways.

  5. - Top - End - #5
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    GnomeWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2017

    Default Re: D&D 5e is not balanced around a 6-8 encounter, 2 SR day.

    You asked for "wanton" replies, so here comes one.

    I never paid attention to the 6 to 8 encounter 2 SR thing. Haven't you ever watched "Pirates of the Caribbean"? Yes, the Code really is more of a "guideline", and the rules for DnD have always been that, too - at some tables less so - at other tables more so. So I really don't get the desperate, "feels like the world is ending" tone you invoke - at least that's how I read it. I mean, come on - snap out of it - it feels to me like you've let yourself get entangled in a super-funk - your plane has stalled perhaps - just pull out of the stall before you nose into the ground!

    I sometimes play Adventurer's League, and it's great - because unless you're doing a hardcover you never know who will be at your table - maybe 2 brand new people to DnD - maybe an old grognard - and we do modules (but DMs can modify them) - it lasts 3-4 hours and it's done. We typically get 3 fights in that time and several role play encounters or social encounters - and maybe a puzzle or a hard trap. It's hard to do four or more full fights in that time frame, especially because not all players are quick or disciplined and can do their turns fast - some players are very slow - but it's still fun - and if they're open to being helped or receiving suggestions, you can nicely do that (but don't overwhelm them, if they're new) - we play DnD - and this panic thing you talk about in your post … it's not there.

    Sometimes I play a home game. We set our own hours, and I don't artificially impose "no, no short rest for YOU" on them - I only do that if there's a darn good reason for it. I'm usually DMing these, but we have fun - and maybe they have 1 encounter in a gaming day, then a long rest, and four encounters the next day, and no encounters the next day, and two encounters the next day - it doesn't matter - they don't know how many encounters they're going to have after the fight they're on, so they have to try to win it not blowing all their resources. And I don't have to throw a Purple Worm at lvl 5s to create a challenge. As long as they feel some fear, as long as the enemy threatens them and they have to look at what they can do and think "what is the best thing I can do here...?" and then "Oh, I know! That!" And it either works or it doesn't - if it doesn't I remind them it was just because they did a really bad dice roll - and they can try it again, and they do and next time it works, and they feel happy they picked this thing.

    Look, you obviously feel DnD's "sky" is "falling" or something. I don't. I'm having a lot of fun. The people I play with are mostly having fun. Some burn out, some don't. We're all different.

    You're free to feel panicked or bad about this topic you've brought up - maybe I don't understand your context - maybe the DMs you play with don't understand how to adjust on the fly and make encounters work for the conditions their group gives them. I try to adjust what I throw at the party to the abilities of the players. We all have different contexts in life - I obviously do not understand where you are coming from - I'm guessing you won't understand me. But the simple answer to what you're talking about is to take a deep breath, calm down, and let your intuitive mind speak to you - have faith that there are solutions - and let them come to you.

    And break your concerns into bite sized pieces. We can't help you if you throw a tidal wave of concern at us. If you break it down into smaller problems, a few at a time or one at a time, we can. I don't mean to be insulting you. I do want to help. But we do need to get past this "wanton" comments thing - yeah, I'm not a fan of that statement. I'm not "upset" about it. If we were talking face to face you could tell I'm not upset - I'm trying to understand what would drive you to say something like that. That's all.
    Last edited by Chugger; 2020-09-30 at 01:09 AM.

  6. - Top - End - #6
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Zhorn's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Location
    Space Australia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: D&D 5e is not balanced around a 6-8 encounter, 2 SR day.

    Worth noting that context matters a lot in this discussion.

    6-8 encounters in an adventuring day doesn't mean it must be 6-8 COMBAT encounters.
    Environmental hazards and impediments are encounters
    Traps are encounters
    Social interactions can be encounters
    Exploration, navigation
    Investigations and tracking
    puzzles even

    Pretty much anything that can be boiled down to having a goal and a fail state will be an encounter. If they players have agency and it can consume resources then it's an encounter. Combat with a monster is just one of many options. Assigning XP budgets to non-combat encounters can get rather fiddly, so I can understand why folks tend to ignore them as encounters when working out an adventuring day.

    Also the timestamp of OP's link is partway into the conversation that is cutting out the context of the discussion.
    For those wanting to listed in, jump back to here for the start of that question.
    The topic is about the legitimacy of people's games if they don't do 6-8 encounters in an adventuring day.
    6-8 medium encounters is just the recommended point for if you want to run the character's dry on their resources for the day, not that you NEED 6-8 to classify as a legitimate adventuring day.

    Next is XP budgets and calculations.
    You've taken the Adventuring Day XP (DMG p84) to get the 5th level value of 3,500, multiplied by 4 to get your 14,000, but are ignoring the calculations from the previous section on recommended encounter thresholds and encounter multipliers (DMG p82)
    A single deadly encounter for a party of four 5th level adventurers will have a budget of 4,400 XP (1,100 XP per character)
    You can exceed that with single Abominable Yeti (CR9) for 5,000 XP (1,250 XP per character)
    or
    6 Bugbears (CR1) and 1 Bugbear Chief (CR3) awarding 1,900 XP (475 XP per character), but for a budgeted value of 4,750 XP (1,188 XP per character)

    Neither encounter is anywhere near Purple Worm territory, which as a solo CR15 monster is almost three times the XP budget for a deadly encounter for four 5th level adventurers.


    also @Unoriginal, I like your post.

  7. - Top - End - #7
    Troll in the Playground
     
    DruidGuy

    Join Date
    May 2019

    Default Re: D&D 5e is not balanced around a 6-8 encounter, 2 SR day.

    The post seems a bit redundant in light of the quotes used, it clearly states that if the difficulty is higher then the number of encounters will decrease and if the difficulty is lower it will increase. Some things that should be considered for DMs in relation to this topic:

    -Not every adventuring day needs to take the party down to the wire
    -Not all encounters are combat, I bait players into resource expenditure with roleplay all the time on purpose and they choose to spend them independently other times
    -The CR system is very bad and should be more used as a rule of thumb or a way to inspire yourself to somewhat level relevant monsters if you don't know what to use.
    -Touching on the above two points, traps, puzzles and environmental effects are non-straightforward but can have a meaningful impact on player resources and strategy

    My current campaign is 3 level 12 PCs with a few bespoke boons and a mix of DMG and homebrew items, the party leans far more into roleplay and so attempting 6-8 combats would be a demoralising slog of a session for them. I achieved this (kind of) once just to see what would happen by giving them an arena competition to earn needed cash (and magical loot) in a 2/SR/2/SR/boss fight structure.

    Every party is different, from prefernces to composition and you should balance for the party you play with, this isn't something the DMG can hand you neatly nor is it something you can just be taught. Real balance comes with experience and it's okay to get it wrong on your way t othat point and even afterwards, the important part isn't how relatively challenging an adventuring day is, it's how fun it was.

    Somewhat ninja'd by Zhorn, good show ol' chap.
    Last edited by Dork_Forge; 2020-09-30 at 01:29 AM.
    For D&D 5e Builds, Tips, News and more see our Youtube Channel Dork Forge

    Feel free to message for any build requests or challenges

  8. - Top - End - #8
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jun 2019

    Default Re: D&D 5e is not balanced around a 6-8 encounter, 2 SR day.

    Game actually is more resilient to lower encounter adventuring days than most believe. Even the 1 encounter day scenario isn't so far off as many believe.

    There's alot of mitigating factors:

    Most efficient spells are concentration and so you only get 1 up in any given fight.
    Most efficient non concentration spells tend to be AOE damage spells and they aren't easy to efficiently use after the first round or so of most encounters.
    Short rest abilities can now all be used in one encounter
    With 1 encounter more time is spent out of combat - giving a boost classes like rogues
    In combat healing becomes more important as players are more likely to drop in 1 hard fight.
    Defense becomes more important for the same reason - meaning high AC front liners have a purpose here.

    It still isn't totally mitigated but these things help alot.

  9. - Top - End - #9
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Edea's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    In your head.
    Gender
    Female

    Default Re: D&D 5e is not balanced around a 6-8 encounter, 2 SR day.

    It's a bit frustrating that not all classes are on the same page for 'short rest recharging'.

    Certain classes really suffer for it (sorcerers in particular), but then on the flipside if you try to condense the adventuring day into a couple of encounters before a long rest and just don't bother with short rest mechanics, those aforementioned classes can just nova the daylights out of said encounters, while the ones with better recovery methods and lower max output just sit there and twiddle their thumbs.
    "Come play in the darkness with me."
    Thanks for the avatar, banjo1985!

    Spoiler
    Show

    I guess I'm a Neutral Good Human Wizard (4th Level)
    Ability Scores:
    Strength- 14
    Dexterity- 15
    Constitution- 17
    Intelligence- 20
    Wisdom- 20
    Charisma- 12
    Take the 'What D&D Character am I?" Quiz!


    Somehow I doubt the veracity of this quiz :P
    Which Final Fantasy Character Are You?

  10. - Top - End - #10
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Zhorn's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Location
    Space Australia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: D&D 5e is not balanced around a 6-8 encounter, 2 SR day.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dork_Forge View Post
    Somewhat ninja'd by Zhorn, good show ol' chap.
    If it's any consolation, you beat me to the punch in many other threads

    And you do bring up a point worth considering, trying to do ONLY combat encounters in the 6-8 range can turn into a slog if you're only doing them as 'here's some monsters in a white room. next here's some monsters in a white room. next ..."
    It would have been nice if the DMG made it more clear that encounters are not strictly combats. If you read the whole thing it becomes a lot more obvious, but with so much of the mechanics being combat orientated it can be easy to miss.

    In a standard game session, I will usually run up to 3 combat encounters, but for an adventuring day I'll try to have a lot of different encounters packed up based on what the players are up to at the time.
    Dungeon crawl? Traps, puzzles, obstacles.
    Overland travel? Foraging/hunting, navigation, environmental hazards
    Urban? Roleplay barter/negotiations, chase scene, skill challenges
    Some sessions might end up with zero combats, but the party has been fully tapped for resources by the end.

    Then sometimes there's just rest days.
    Uneventful research and resupply in town
    Clear skies and peaceful roads,
    Empty crypt/tombs/cave cleared out by another adventuring group
    Gives the characters some time for doing their own thing without adventuring getting in the way. The wizard gets to scribe in a bunch of their spells, the artificer coordinates their infusions with the party, the bard gets to perform in the tavern, the ranger spends some time training their new beast companion.
    Actual encounter numbers are near 0-1, with everyone pretty topped off with all their spell slots and features.

    Adventuring days don't need to be EVERY day occurrences. Some games I've been in have had the adventuring day only be the dungeons, and outside of that there were weeks of roleplay narrative focused session.
    But as others have covered (such as Edea just above), when having an adventuring day, going nova in single combats, having short rest recharges, and having long rest recharges, different classes are suited to different aspects of the adventuring day, and having few encounters will yield a lopsided performance. More encounters in a day (and importantly more varied encounter types) will result in a more balanced distribution of displaying different classes strengths and capabilities.

  11. - Top - End - #11
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Imp

    Join Date
    Feb 2017

    Default Re: D&D 5e is not balanced around a 6-8 encounter, 2 SR day.

    Quote Originally Posted by Chugger View Post
    You asked for "wanton" replies, so here comes one.

    I never paid attention to the 6 to 8 encounter 2 SR thing. Haven't you ever watched "Pirates of the Caribbean"? Yes, the Code really is more of a "guideline", and the rules for DnD have always been that, too - at some tables less so - at other tables more so. So I really don't get the desperate, "feels like the world is ending" tone you invoke - at least that's how I read it. I mean, come on - snap out of it - it feels to me like you've let yourself get entangled in a super-funk - your plane has stalled perhaps - just pull out of the stall before you nose into the ground!
    The 6-8 encounter thing isn't even a rule, it's the devs saying "by the way, adventurers tend to be running on fumes after X point of the day."

  12. - Top - End - #12
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    MonkGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: D&D 5e is not balanced around a 6-8 encounter, 2 SR day.

    Classes are balanced against each other in terms of a certain ratio of long rests : short rests : at will ability uses, with the clearest example being the warlock / bard spellcasting balance.

    Disturbing this balance makes different classes shine. The bard will do much better than the warlock in a day where there is just one encounter with one long rest. The warlock will do much better than the bard in a day with eight short rests and no long rest.

    But the game as a whole isn't balanced to start with. Rogues are the class that most benefits from many encounters, as they are a pure at will class (barring certain archetypes and high level features). But the purple worm has PP9, and level 5 rogues literally cannot roll below an 11 on a Stealth check, so an all level 5 rogue party cannot lose against a purple worm if they just have some means of obscuration to enable hiding.
    Last edited by MinotaurWarrior; 2020-09-30 at 06:24 AM.

  13. - Top - End - #13
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    RedWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2020

    Default Re: D&D 5e is not balanced around a 6-8 encounter, 2 SR day.

    The game may or may not have been balanced around 6-8 encounters and 2 short rests per day.

    It sure as hell wasn't balanced around a 5 minute adventuring day and one deadly encounter per long rest.

  14. - Top - End - #14
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    BlackDragon

    Join Date
    Apr 2020

    Default Re: D&D 5e is not balanced around a 6-8 encounter, 2 SR day.

    Quote Originally Posted by Chugger View Post
    You asked for "wanton" replies, so here comes one.

    I never paid attention to the 6 to 8 encounter 2 SR thing. Haven't you ever watched "Pirates of the Caribbean"? Yes, the Code really is more of a "guideline", and the rules for DnD have always been that, too - at some tables less so - at other tables more so. So I really don't get the desperate, "feels like the world is ending" tone you invoke - at least that's how I read it. I mean, come on - snap out of it - it feels to me like you've let yourself get entangled in a super-funk - your plane has stalled perhaps - just pull out of the stall before you nose into the ground!

    I sometimes play Adventurer's League, and it's great - because unless you're doing a hardcover you never know who will be at your table - maybe 2 brand new people to DnD - maybe an old grognard - and we do modules (but DMs can modify them) - it lasts 3-4 hours and it's done. We typically get 3 fights in that time and several role play encounters or social encounters - and maybe a puzzle or a hard trap. It's hard to do four or more full fights in that time frame, especially because not all players are quick or disciplined and can do their turns fast - some players are very slow - but it's still fun - and if they're open to being helped or receiving suggestions, you can nicely do that (but don't overwhelm them, if they're new) - we play DnD - and this panic thing you talk about in your post … it's not there.

    Sometimes I play a home game. We set our own hours, and I don't artificially impose "no, no short rest for YOU" on them - I only do that if there's a darn good reason for it. I'm usually DMing these, but we have fun - and maybe they have 1 encounter in a gaming day, then a long rest, and four encounters the next day, and no encounters the next day, and two encounters the next day - it doesn't matter - they don't know how many encounters they're going to have after the fight they're on, so they have to try to win it not blowing all their resources. And I don't have to throw a Purple Worm at lvl 5s to create a challenge. As long as they feel some fear, as long as the enemy threatens them and they have to look at what they can do and think "what is the best thing I can do here...?" and then "Oh, I know! That!" And it either works or it doesn't - if it doesn't I remind them it was just because they did a really bad dice roll - and they can try it again, and they do and next time it works, and they feel happy they picked this thing.

    Look, you obviously feel DnD's "sky" is "falling" or something. I don't. I'm having a lot of fun. The people I play with are mostly having fun. Some burn out, some don't. We're all different.

    You're free to feel panicked or bad about this topic you've brought up - maybe I don't understand your context - maybe the DMs you play with don't understand how to adjust on the fly and make encounters work for the conditions their group gives them. I try to adjust what I throw at the party to the abilities of the players. We all have different contexts in life - I obviously do not understand where you are coming from - I'm guessing you won't understand me. But the simple answer to what you're talking about is to take a deep breath, calm down, and let your intuitive mind speak to you - have faith that there are solutions - and let them come to you.

    And break your concerns into bite sized pieces. We can't help you if you throw a tidal wave of concern at us. If you break it down into smaller problems, a few at a time or one at a time, we can. I don't mean to be insulting you. I do want to help. But we do need to get past this "wanton" comments thing - yeah, I'm not a fan of that statement. I'm not "upset" about it. If we were talking face to face you could tell I'm not upset - I'm trying to understand what would drive you to say something like that. That's all.
    I'm not of the mind that D&D is in a crises, for what it's worth. I'm more concerned with dispelling a myth than to defend myself. I use Wanton, though it's a reckless use of the word.

    Truly, I have been met with malice over my controversial opinions but most in this community at least takes the time to think about the topic before providing condescending answers and curses. That said, I still want people to actually engage in the argument rather than needlessly tear it down.

  15. - Top - End - #15
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    BlueKnightGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    Gatineau, Québec, Canada
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: D&D 5e is not balanced around a 6-8 encounter, 2 SR day.

    The CR system, along with the daily XP budget for encounters and the concept of an "adventure day", are all concepts that were designed as a means to guide the DM in fine-tuning his encounters while trying to avoid TPK and player death.

    The choice of word may have been problematic. Nobody really expects every day in the life of an adventurer to be made up of full "adventuring days"; this issue is further compounded by the fact that we tend to associate a "day" with 1 long rest (which normally marks the passing of time from one day to another). Maybe the system would have been better understood if it was called "adventure time between long rest" instead.

    As for being "balanced", again, it's a very subjective choice of word by the OP. Normally, people who use the word "balance" in relation to the adventure day, especially on these forums, do so in response to DM asking (or complaining) about encounters being too easy or too difficult, or groups of players destroying every encounter. It's usually in light of these complaints (which often have the same root causes, such as a DM allowing the players to continually live through 5-minutes adventuring days) that others will respond with an explanation of how the system is built (and designed), and how it's normal for players to not be fully challenged if they never have more than 1 or 2 encounters per day (even worse so when they know for a fact they will not have any other encounter).

    I also think the way a lot of "public games" are played these days (on twitch and various other streams), with an emphasis on larger groups (6-7 players) and fewer combats (because they take a lot of time, so it turns out into every fight being a boss fight), while still having the story progressing quickly in terms of passage of time, further add to the confusion some DMs feel.

    Add to that the fact that multiple tables use houserules that produce stronger player characters (everyone gets a free Feat at Lvl 1, using potions as a free action, etc.), as well as the fact that many DM just play the opposition as dumb AI (like using a dice roll to randomly determine which player a monster will attack; did anyone ever see a player choosing his target this way!?!), and you also have a lot of DM who undermine the system while complaining about it.

    The game does provide a system to help us assess challenge difficulty and deadliness of encounters. It's not perfect, some aspects of it are more finicky than others, and it is oriented strongly toward combat, but it exist, and it is based on other assumptions and design that are core to the way the game was created (such as the various class powers per level, the usual composition of a party, etc.). And I think one of the goals of such a system is precisely to help DMs avoid situations where they throw a Purple Worm at a group of Level 5 players.

  16. - Top - End - #16
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Chimera

    Join Date
    Dec 2015

    Default Re: D&D 5e is not balanced around a 6-8 encounter, 2 SR day.

    Quote Originally Posted by Asisreo1 View Post
    I'm not of the mind that D&D is in a crises, for what it's worth. I'm more concerned with dispelling a myth than to defend myself. I use Wanton, though it's a reckless use of the word.

    Truly, I have been met with malice over my controversial opinions but most in this community at least takes the time to think about the topic before providing condescending answers and curses. That said, I still want people to actually engage in the argument rather than needlessly tear it down.
    The tone of your initial post comes off highly as 'someone trying to declare themselves as the adult in the conversation, without doing the work of showing evidence thereof.' If this is your normal form of communication, it might not be your opinions that are the source of the malice.

    I think others have answered much of the initial points very well. Here is a sub-point I noticed:

    as DM's and Players tear themselves apart in an attempt to attain a rare relic of a bygone era.

    This relic is a system balanced around and designed for a static number of encounters within an adventuring day while also having a specific amount of resources allotted throughout this adventuring day.
    What specifically do you mean by relic of a bygone era? Do you mean that playstyles have changed? They certainly have, overall, but I'm not sure that they have specifically in this regard. In my experience, games of D&D have always vacillated between significantly more encounters per day than 6-8 moderately challenging encounters (the archetypal dungeon-crawl) and significantly fewer (wilderness travel or hexcrawling, most in-town situations). That bimodal distribution has always been a challenge for the designers, as (assuming inter-class balance is a goal) it makes balancing always-available abilities and expended-resource abilities difficult. Regardless, I don't think that has specifically changed.

  17. - Top - End - #17
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    BlackDragon

    Join Date
    Apr 2020

    Default Re: D&D 5e is not balanced around a 6-8 encounter, 2 SR day.

    Quote Originally Posted by SiCK_Boy View Post
    And I think one of the goals of such a system is precisely to help DMs avoid situations where they throw a Purple Worm at a group of Level 5 players.
    I agree with much of what you said. I do want to add, the Purple Worm encounter should absolutely be treated with careful thought and consideration. Using the tables, even eyeballing it, a DM will know for certain that an encounter like this brings a more than unlikely chance of TPK. This encounter would be a campaign-ending single-encounter fight and it would be the type of fight that would make the players take the final boss extremely seriously.

    Again, I do not recommend running this type of EXP expenditure all at once unless you're absolutely certain that your party is comfortable in their abilities and tactics and even then understand that the dice may be unusually cruel.

    But it's a perfect fight for those DM's who complain D&D is too easy, because this fight is everything but. Spellcasters, in this particular fight, are extremely useful. They can target the worm's god-awful saves to help prevent them from getting a turn, which is essential. While this gives spellcasters a good use, it's ultimately a delay unless the worm takes damage, which is where the martials come in. The martials also come in if the worm ever gets a turn to act as they sometimes have enough AC and HP to withstand around 1 turn of damage which buys time for the spellcasters.

  18. - Top - End - #18
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    RedWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2020

    Default Re: D&D 5e is not balanced around a 6-8 encounter, 2 SR day.

    Quote Originally Posted by Asisreo1 View Post
    Spellcasters, in this particular fight, are extremely useful. They can target the worm's god-awful saves to help prevent them from getting a turn, which is essential.
    Because they took Purple Worm Slaying as an elective in wizard school?

    A 5th level party would need to rely on both great tactics and teamwork and meta-knowledge about the creature to survive that encounter. Without that knowledge, they might try ranged attacks and reflex-save evocations to chip away at its hp; making that caster a tasty morsel for swallowing.

    The encounter guidelines are in place, in part, to prevent that sort of thing. If you know your players can handle it, you don't need the guidelines.

  19. - Top - End - #19
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    BlackDragon

    Join Date
    Apr 2020

    Default Re: D&D 5e is not balanced around a 6-8 encounter, 2 SR day.

    Quote Originally Posted by Willie the Duck View Post
    The tone of your initial post comes off highly as 'someone trying to declare themselves as the adult in the conversation, without doing the work of showing evidence thereof.' If this is your normal form of communication, it might not be your opinions that are the source of the malice.
    The main topic of this thread has been provided evidence, as the link to Jeremy Crawford's interview should give a credible account to how the designers intend to design the game.

    My claim, however, is not that D&D was designed around some other encounter distribution, though. My claim was merely that it was not balanced around the specific 6-8 encounters. I do believe that it was balanced to include a day of 6-8 encounters but that was not my original claim and therefore needs no evidence thus far.

    I think others have answered much of the initial points very well. Here is a sub-point I noticed:



    What specifically do you mean by relic of a bygone era? Do you mean that playstyles have changed? They certainly have, overall, but I'm not sure that they have specifically in this regard. In my experience, games of D&D have always vacillated between significantly more encounters per day than 6-8 moderately challenging encounters (the archetypal dungeon-crawl) and significantly fewer (wilderness travel or hexcrawling, most in-town situations). That bimodal distribution has always been a challenge for the designers, as (assuming inter-class balance is a goal) it makes balancing always-available abilities and expended-resource abilities difficult. Regardless, I don't think that has specifically changed.
    Excellent question.

    The bygone era is a time when the designers actually did balance the game over a certain expectation between encounters and their distribution. As you say, there has always been an expected dungeon-crawl into wilderness areas with a predictable number of encounters within. Now, though, the designers have moved away from DM-controlled resource management.

    Things like encounter-based resources like in 4e no longer exist because it set an expectation on when and how a player should use their resource. Unmarrying resources from the designer's expectations allow both the DM and Player themselves to facilitate resource management in a pace they are comfortable with.

  20. - Top - End - #20
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    RedWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2020

    Default Re: D&D 5e is not balanced around a 6-8 encounter, 2 SR day.

    Quote Originally Posted by Asisreo1 View Post
    Now, though, the designers have moved away from DM-controlled resource management.

    DMs still hold near-complete control over resource management; more than in 4e, as the short rest resources require the DM to acquiesce to a much longer rest period.

    That some DMs are happy to do this doesn't change the fact the power to deny a short rest is in their hands.

  21. - Top - End - #21
    Titan in the Playground
     
    KorvinStarmast's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Texas
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: D&D 5e is not balanced around a 6-8 encounter, 2 SR day.

    Quote Originally Posted by Asisreo1 View Post
    While I am conscious of the contention that the title, and therefore the topic of this thread, creates I cannot, without an earnest effort, watch as DM's and Players tear themselves apart in an attempt to attain a rare relic of a bygone era.
    We don't, because we don't play D&D for pay.

    I have never tried to put 8 encounters into an adventure day. Never, ever. Sometimes we have reached six, and the only time we had seven was by accident; but that was the old serial encounters that all pointed to the big battle in the big room in Sunless Citadel ... it was nearly by accident that they just kep moving like that. In another hardcover adventure, had my party been 'on task' I think they'd have had 8 encounters in the Salt Marsh haunted house, but I'll just say that events conspired to make that not true (and they accidentally frustrated Ned's designs without realizing that they had done so ....)

    Here's a core problem with the syndrome that you are dealing with: there is no way to standardize party composition.

    The typical party is four, plus or minus one, and there are 12 PC classes, each with two to eight sub classes, each with some differences in what they contribute to an encounter.

    Now, you could just play the four PCs in the Basic Rules: Life Cleric, Champion Fighter, Evoker Wizard, and Thief Rogue, and see how six encounters with two Short Rests go for you. Medium Encounters. Do it for tier 1, tier 2, tier 3, using just those four PCs. One of the things that we see is that spell selection and preparation throws in a variable that is kind of tough to control for.

    Have you done this? Until you try this, I think it's quite hard to evaluate the overall concept in the DMG. I've had the chance to play quite a few one-shots and this I have discovered, regardless of tier. Party composition matters, and party size matters. But more than that, player skill influences results.

    Example: we tend to have four or five of the seven in our big group show up on a given session. I can predict as a DM which set will have an easier time than another set, based on how they do, or do not, think tactically. When I am not DMing (same group) I as a player assess who shows up and how we all fit together to inform what I do, because I never stop thinking tactically. That's me. The other players phase in and out of that: sometimes, they are all in on tactical thinking and communication. Other times, we're just here for the beer. I assess the group's mood, which is OOC, and adjust with a single goal: team success and no bodies left behind.

    In some other groups, the personality mix and style mix will be completely different.

    But here's the other deal. I have found in play that the difference in action economy between four PCs and five PCs is significant during the first three rounds of a battle. I had not expected that, but it's one of the few takeaways for me from this edition. With 3 PCs in the party, the swinginess amplifies.
    Jeremy Crawford himself has confirmed this:

    Source Link
    I play around with the "daily xp budget" and mix up the encounters when I am making my own. 3-5 for an adventure day's my target.
    Last edited by KorvinStarmast; 2020-09-30 at 09:45 AM.
    Avatar by linklele. How Teleport Works
    a. Malifice (paraphrased):
    Rulings are not 'House Rules.' Rulings are a DM doing what DMs are supposed to do.
    b. greenstone (paraphrased):
    Agency means that they {players} control their character's actions; you control the world's reactions to the character's actions.
    Gosh, 2D8HP, you are so very correct!
    Second known member of the Greyview Appreciation Society

  22. - Top - End - #22
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    EvilClericGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Somewhere
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: D&D 5e is not balanced around a 6-8 encounter, 2 SR day.

    Quote Originally Posted by MinotaurWarrior View Post
    But the game as a whole isn't balanced to start with. Rogues are the class that most benefits from many encounters, as they are a pure at will class (barring certain archetypes and high level features). But the purple worm has PP9, and level 5 rogues literally cannot roll below an 11 on a Stealth check, so an all level 5 rogue party cannot lose against a purple worm if they just have some means of obscuration to enable hiding.
    Rogues literally can get Stealth under 11 at level 5. Maxing your Dex and putting your expertise into Stealth is not the only way to play a rogue. Not that it matters, as purple worm has blindsight and tremorsense, making obscurement irrelevant and Stealth impossible unless all your rogues can fly.
    It's Eberron, not ebberon.
    It's not high magic, it's wide magic.
    And it's definitely not steampunk. The only time steam gets involved is when the fire and water elementals break loose.

  23. - Top - End - #23
    Titan in the Playground
     
    KorvinStarmast's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Texas
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: D&D 5e is not balanced around a 6-8 encounter, 2 SR day.

    Quote Originally Posted by cutlery View Post
    making obscurement irrelevant and Stealth impossible unless all your rogues can fly.
    Five aaracokra rogues fly into a bar ...
    Avatar by linklele. How Teleport Works
    a. Malifice (paraphrased):
    Rulings are not 'House Rules.' Rulings are a DM doing what DMs are supposed to do.
    b. greenstone (paraphrased):
    Agency means that they {players} control their character's actions; you control the world's reactions to the character's actions.
    Gosh, 2D8HP, you are so very correct!
    Second known member of the Greyview Appreciation Society

  24. - Top - End - #24
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    BardGuy

    Join Date
    Oct 2015

    Default Re: D&D 5e is not balanced around a 6-8 encounter, 2 SR day.

    I was under the impression that an encounter doesn't nessesarily mean a "combat encounter."

    When you expand this into all encounters, including social ones, puzzles, etc. It becomes a lot more reasonable and I think many people follow close to it without realizing.

  25. - Top - End - #25
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    MadBear's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Seattle
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: D&D 5e is not balanced around a 6-8 encounter, 2 SR day.

    Quote Originally Posted by Unoriginal View Post
    You're kind of conflating two different uses of the term "balance".

    Like the DMG says, the expectation is that a party will be able to handle 6-8 Medium encounters with 2 short rests before running out of ressources and being in a very dire spot, regardless of party composition.

    In other words, it can be said that "all classes are balanced to be able to handle 6-8 Medium encounters with 2 short rests before running out of ressources". Why use the term "balance" here? Because the different classes do *not* handle their ressources the same. An all-Rogue party would be able to "handle 6-8 Medium encounters with 2 short rests before running out of ressources" with the caveat that the only ressource those PCs can run out off is HPs and HDs (baring feats and the like). Meanwhile an all-Warlock party would be able to "handle 6-8 Medium encounters with 2 short rests before running out of ressources" but would have most of the PCs' ressources depend on those 2 short rests.

    If all classes can accomplish the same thing, but in different ways, it is balanced.


    Now, what this *does not mean* is that all adventuring days must/should be calibrated on a set number of encounter of a set difficulty with a set number of short rest. A D&D party can handle a large and varied amount of threats of different composition, with how difficult each threat is depending on party composition and of how they handled the previous ones, and if some of the PCs have to grind their teeth and run low on ressources for a while it's not a problem.

    In other words, it's not "an adventure day is balanced if it has the equivalent of 6-8 Medium encounter with 2 short rests".

    To use an analogy: take a large lineup of different cars. Saying "all those cars can do 250km of distance with only two stops at the station service" is not the same thing as saying "all those cars will give the same performance in every way and it's only fair if you do drive 250km". Taking the jungle jeep to go to the grocery shop in a crowded city won't be as efficient as using it to drive in the jungle, and taking the 7-places family car to drive in the jungle alone will wield poor, if interesting to watch results.

    That's it. It is less that the thread title or the topic creates contention, it's just that "balance" is a large term which can be used in a lot of different ways.
    This pretty much says everything I have to say on the matter.

  26. - Top - End - #26
    Titan in the Playground
     
    KorvinStarmast's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Texas
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: D&D 5e is not balanced around a 6-8 encounter, 2 SR day.

    Quote Originally Posted by sophontteks View Post
    I was under the impression that an encounter doesn't nessesarily mean a "combat encounter."
    I agree. A trap can be an encounter. A conversation with a couple of giants can be an encounter without combat. We once bribed two hill giants with a keg of beer to let us pass by the narrow gorge that they were guarding.
    The cost in resources was a keg of beer (from our wagon) and one tongues spell from our cleric.
    Avatar by linklele. How Teleport Works
    a. Malifice (paraphrased):
    Rulings are not 'House Rules.' Rulings are a DM doing what DMs are supposed to do.
    b. greenstone (paraphrased):
    Agency means that they {players} control their character's actions; you control the world's reactions to the character's actions.
    Gosh, 2D8HP, you are so very correct!
    Second known member of the Greyview Appreciation Society

  27. - Top - End - #27
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    RedWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2020

    Default Re: D&D 5e is not balanced around a 6-8 encounter, 2 SR day.

    Quote Originally Posted by sophontteks View Post
    I was under the impression that an encounter doesn't nessesarily mean a "combat encounter."

    When you expand this into all encounters, including social ones, puzzles, etc. It becomes a lot more reasonable and I think many people follow close to it without realizing.
    The 6-8 encounters guideline is in the chapter on adventures; specifically the section on combat encounters and awarding experience for combat.

    The briefest of discussions about experience for noncombat encounters is on DMG p. 261; where it stats "As a starting point, use the rules for building combat encounters in chapter 3".

    The entire discussion around number of encounters per day in chapter 3 is centered around combat - social or investigative encounters may use no resources at all (and some classes that can be designed to excel at these sorts of encounters can be designed to do so without the use of any resources at all).

    There could be infinite social encounters or trips to the library in the adventuring day. There cannot be infinite combat encounters, as players will eventually get hit and die via chip damage.
    Last edited by cutlery; 2020-09-30 at 11:29 AM.

  28. - Top - End - #28
    Troll in the Playground
     
    jaappleton's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2016

    Default Re: D&D 5e is not balanced around a 6-8 encounter, 2 SR day.

    So... You're right. It's not balanced around that.

    I want to be clear, an encounter doesn't have to mean combat. Its anything that's designed to expend resources. Could be the Sorc twins the Fly spell on some allies so they can all get up the steep cliff.

    Initially, 5E's combat design assumed always that the party had all their resources. This was said by Crawford a few different times. And that's proven to be a mistake.

    Case in point: Tyranny of Dragons. If you've read the first few chapters, you know exactly what I'm talking about.

    Its a philosophy they've backtracked on a bit in the last 18 months or so, even re-releasing and altering the beginning of that adventure.

  29. - Top - End - #29
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Imp

    Join Date
    Feb 2017

    Default Re: D&D 5e is not balanced around a 6-8 encounter, 2 SR day.

    Quote Originally Posted by KorvinStarmast View Post
    Five aaracokra rogues fly into a bar ...
    They take 1d6 bludgeoning damage and need to pass a DC 10 DEX save to not fall prone.


    Quote Originally Posted by jaappleton View Post
    Its a philosophy they've backtracked on a bit in the last 18 months or so, even re-releasing and altering the beginning of that adventure.
    I never figured what they altered in that adventure's beginning. Would you mind telling me?
    Last edited by Unoriginal; 2020-09-30 at 11:35 AM.

  30. - Top - End - #30

    Default Re: D&D 5e is not balanced around a 6-8 encounter, 2 SR day.

    Quote Originally Posted by MadBear View Post
    I'd feel so bad for the 5th level party that tries to fight a purple worm. That's one battle that's definitely going to end in multiple dead adventurers.
    Huh. I think it sounds awesome, a game session worth remembering. I would totally sign up to play Tremors in 5E. I'd rather do that than one of WotC's canned Save The World quests that expect me to spend months playing before getting to the climax. Fifth level Tremors vs. a Purple Worm is a tough adventure, probably will result in dead PCs, but might be winnable and most importantly is respectful of my time: can be won or lost in maybe three to eight hours depending, not months. Then if I liked it I can play again or play a different game with the same or different PCs.

    Remember: Tremors didn't happen in eighteen seconds. There's foreshadowing, NPCs, terrain manipulation, a fake victory with the first kill then the reveal of additional antagonists, multiple chances to rest and regroup, logistical concerns, an escape plan which almost works, etc.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •