Quote from: Razor 007;1114456I've watched 5E games posted to YouTube, wherein the players succeed at least 90% of the time.  "I rolled a 6, but I get plus 3 for this, and plus 2 for that; so I have an 11."

That is terrible forcing a Player to go through simple addition.  Monsters!

Quote from: Shasarak;1114463That is terrible forcing a Player to go through simple addition.  Monsters!

No, I was complaining about the almost guaranteed success at everything the players try to do.  They might as well just tell their story, and omit the dice rolls.....

Quote from: Shasarak;1114463That is terrible forcing a Player to go through simple addition.  Monsters!

I have had a couple players who legitimately could not properly add the results of 3d6 together, using either numerals or pips. Other players at the table would constantly have to read their rolls for them or correct their declarations ("I got a 14!" "actually bud, that's a 13..."). You should have seen the looks on their faces trying to puzzle out "cutting damage: multiply damage that exceeds DR by 1.5 and round down."

Absolutely mystifying and downright frustrating.

Quote from: Razor 007;1114456I've watched 5E games posted to YouTube, wherein the players succeed at least 90% of the time.  "I rolled a 6, but I get plus 3 for this, and plus 2 for that; so I have an 11."

Yup thats mostly how I found it working. But eventually I found that super unsatisfying as a player.

Quote from: estar;1114455If Amos Doe, 1st level Fighter, tries to confront Ancelegorn the Black a 16 HD Red Dragon, it will be a instakill.

I should have been more specific: the actual "Save or die" monsters.

But if you're going to talk about that design philosophy in specific: It can go to hell (Where other grognards that enjoy it are invited to have fun).

Now just to be clear: I don't pussyfoot around with my players. If they go to invade the HQ of their foes unprepared and at the doors prepare to just die. That's actually what I have had done before where players just stormed the gate of an enemy stronghold and all proceeded to get mostly shot to death by the defenders (And flame-grilled by traps). To be fair they tried to stealth it at first, but then when that failed, they tried to force their way in. Made so much noise it attracted all the defenders.

But past grognard design was much more GM Vs player. The designers wouldn't have described their joy in killing other players' characters in brutal nonsensical deathtraps otherwise.
There are bestiaries FULL of monsters and traps that exist for no reason but to punish logical expectations. "That's not a werewolf, that's actually an ooze that looks like a werewolf and feeds off of silver weapons". Makes about as much sense as half the stuff in those books.

The GM still has to structure the world in a way that won't penalize players in just existing in it.
For instance, why does it break suspension of disbelief that a map was put out by a dragon to lure in fools? Plausibility just can't be your only reason for the design. Because everyone's plausibility is different. Especially in a fantasy world.

Because anything is plausible in one, so the answer is to move an inch per minute and plan for every possible and impossible eventuality?

Quote from: Shrieking Banshee;1114468(And flame-grilled by traps)

The Burger King truly is merciless in his stronghold design.

Quote from: Razor 007;1114466No, I was complaining about the almost guaranteed success at everything the players try to do.  They might as well just tell their story, and omit the dice rolls.....

Oh, it seemed like you were complaining about having to add numbers.  That made more sense to me then complaining about succeeding on an 11.

Quote from: Razor 007;1114466No, I was complaining about the almost guaranteed success at everything the players try to do.  They might as well just tell their story, and omit the dice rolls.....

This is 5e? In the 5e game I'm running, the characters are just getting to level 3, but the failure rate at levels 1-2 has been really high.

Quote from: HappyDaze;1114478This is 5e? In the 5e game I'm running, the characters are just getting to level 3, but the failure rate at levels 1-2 has been really high.

May have something to do with the guidelines of difficulty being so vague that success rates vary wildly between tables?

Hm. Shouldn't success be based on the decisions of the players? Or at least influenced by them?

Quote from: Shrieking Banshee;1114479May have something to do with the guidelines of difficulty being so vague that success rates vary wildly between tables?

A big part of it is that some of the most basic mooks (like Bandits) are pretty tough 1v1 fights for 1st-level PCs, and it gets worse when the numbers of bad guys go up.

Quote from: Ratman_tf;1114480Hm. Shouldn't success be based on the decisions of the players? Or at least influenced by them?

Sure, but at least in my games, the unpredictability of the d20 for resolution is still a big determiner of success/failure. Well that and rolling 5 damage (on 3d6) for that "alpha strike" burning hands and then watching two of the three bad guys make their saves (so, that's 2 pts, 2pts, and 5pts--they're lightly singed and really pissed off now).

Quote from: HappyDaze;1114481A big part of it is that some of the most basic mooks (like Bandits) are pretty tough 1v1 fights for 1st-level PCs, and it gets worse when the numbers of bad guys go up.

Oh there is that as well. But thats a universal true-ism in D&D, low levels are lethal.

Quote from: Shrieking Banshee;1114484Oh there is that as well. But thats a universal true-ism in D&D, low levels are lethal.

Greetings!

*Sigh* I'm not *quite* sold on the idea that 5E makes player characters nigh invincible. I had an encounter where the group--5 characters--(1 NPC, and 4 Player characters)--encountered a group of bandits on a wilderness road. There were 7 Bandits. Two Bandits were engrossed in plundering a merchant's wagon, picking over the Merchant's body, two dead bodyguards bodies, and raping his young daughter. The other 5 Bandits responded to the approach of the Player group. The Player group's Ranger approached, and was pincushioned by arrows from three of the Bandits, while two Bandits charged forth to engage in hand-to-hand combat.

The rest of the group raced to their wounded comrade. The next round, the Ranger was finished off with concentrated arrow fire, and the Party Cleric charged. The Player group fought two engaged Bandits, while the Bandits crushed the Cleric. Then a Bandit was killed. Two Bandits maintained concentrated archery fire, while a third Bandit charged into hand-to-hand combat. The party Cleric was killed, and the NPC wizard was reduced with critical wounds and captured. The NPC wizard was carried off by one Bandit, while one Bandit remained on guard, and two Bandits remained on Overwatch. The remaining two Players attempted to pursue the captured NPC wizard, but were stopped cold by the Bandit wielding a two-handed sword, who scored a critical, and supported by more concentrated archery fire. The surviving player characters--both heavily wounded--were forced to make a swift retreat. The Bandits were then rejoined by their two wicked comrades, and they regrouped deeper into the forest where their lair was. The NPC Wizard was tortured, raped, and sold into slavery. The surviving two Player characters gradually made their way back along a three day journey to town, where they had to recruit new members of the party, to refit and rebuild the group's membership after such a dismal beginning fighting bandits in the forest.

5 Bandits took on 5 Player Characters, and wiped the floor with them. The Bandits had I recall equal or mostly less hit points than the Player characters. End of the encounter, two Player characters died, one NPC Wizard captured and sold into slavery, and two surviving Player characters that were heavily wounded and forced to retreat in disgrace.

My initial thoughts, based on the CR and looking at the Bandits having 6 to 8 hit points each, fairly modestly armoured and geared, that the Players would stomp them. The Bandits had no wizards, and no healers. They didn't need any. A few criticals, a few good rolls, and arguably, a few less than ideal rolls for the Player characters, and the Player group was annihilated.

The Bandits were armoured in Studded Leather Armour, shortbows, arrows, scimitars, dagger and hand axe. One Bandit had a two-handed sword.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: SHARK;1114488*Sigh* I'm not *quite* sold on the idea that 5E makes player characters nigh invincible.

Depends on the level and the party layout. I remember my time just being the punching bag being knocked unconscious and then the cleric buffing me back up.
5e D&Ds bounded accuracy means that a bunch of mooks with ranged attacks is almost always better than even high levels.

Quote from: Shrieking Banshee;1114489Depends on the level and the party layout. I remember my time just being the punching bag being knocked unconscious and then the cleric buffing me back up.
5e D&Ds bounded accuracy means that a bunch of mooks with ranged attacks is almost always better than even high levels.

Greetings!

Yeah, I carefully noted how the two Bandits in melee, kind of worked in synergy with their three comrades providing archery fire. The Player characters suffered a critical, some more damage, and once one Player went down, the Bandits focused on the Cleric, and he quickly went down, and it sort of snowballed from there. Even without getting another critical, or a few lucky rolls, the deluge of fire and attacks were simply overwhelming for the Player characters to resist effectively. The Players never recovered, and just continued to be annihilated. Even when they killed one Bandit, it was not enough of a counter-attack to turn the tide in their favour. the two surviving Player characters knew if they had stayed, they would have been killed in another round or two. Even three rounds, as they had no illusions about the two of them killing four mostly full-strength Bandits.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK