Did that and when the monk was engulfed in the cloud of poison taking no damage he felt like quite the badass going for a flurry of blows with advantage (I told him with advantage because the dragon wasn’t expecting him to be unfazed and he kept himself concealed in the cloud on his approach).
That’s also when the rest of the party found out the monk was immune to poison.
10/10 would do that again
Your monk can catch arrows now? Don’t stop shooting them. Shoot them more.
Monk - burns reaction catching arrow
Dm - “and now they turn the balista on you”
Monk - O_O
I’d like to imagine the monk catching the ballista projectile and getting whisked away by it
In a comedically Looney Toons style
DM- “Catch this, monk boy”
Even better, just have that inscribed on the ballista bolt/arrow/the flying tree.
Yes! Shoot your Monk is standard GM advice! they took those powers to look badass, just give them one useless archer per combat and they will shine! And throw arrows!
I once let our monk deflect a ballista bolt because he said he was going to do the redirecting with his flying kick instead of his hands, so I had him roll acrobatics with disadvantage since his reaction time would have to be through the roof to pull it off.
rolled two nat 20’s. Not only did that ballista go sailing right back at the machine that fired it, it utterly destroyed it and the three dudes manning it, because after kicking half a telephone pole back at your enemies, you’ve earned the right to walk away from an explosion without looking at it.
I also made him roll to see if he hurt himself landing and he did, so he had to deal with a bad ankle the rest of the encounter (-3 dex, I am a jealous god)
And if you still want to throw them a curveball you can always throw in the occasional bit of exotic ammunition that messes with them when they catch it (Use sparingly so they still get to feel cool)
Look, they’re the main characters of the story, they’re supposed to look badass sometimes…
Plus it’s just far more fun when players get to actually use the character building decisions they made. I think it’s much more fun to base enemy actions on what they can reasonably perceive. If someone has innate fire resistance, let the enemy sorcerer cast burning hands on them once to figure that out. If it’s a fabled and well-known Robe of Fire Resistance that they’re wearing, any half-intelligent spellcaster will know not to use fire spells on them, but the goblins with flaming arrows might not be so savvy.
But you see, that’s not how 5e works. 5e just throws an endless amount of instant problem solving abilities at your players to the point where there are no problems left except for “How do I deal even more damage?”. It still kind of works with characters up to level 7ish, but everything after is just cool™ character moments without any problem left to overcome. Iean, there’s a reason why almost no one plays double digit levels in DnD.
I just finished my last DnD campaign and am now enjoying my life with systems that allow me as the DM to actually challenge my players without the need to spend several days of preparation to make sure my encounters won’t just be solved by a single “Um actshually…” sentence.
I’ve run campaigns all the way up the level 20. It’s still possible that to challenge the PCs, just increasingly difficult. Eventually it gets to be so much work on the DM that it’s not really worth it anymore.
I don’t want to sit here defending 5e but 80% of the complaints I hear about always seem to boil down to “why isn’t the system creative for me?!”. It’s a lot of people self-limiting and then being mad.
You can instantly create a harder, thoughtful encounter by simply introducing more enemies than just one they can beat on, and/or by doing WHAT THE BOOK SAYS and get the players used to multiple encounters per day so they need to manage their resources. My DM wanted to make fights harder and I simply mentioned that a stronger enemy is cool and all but what would be better is making us have to make choices. I was a stupid accurate fighter and focused on range, and while feats and stuff made me a dangerous close-quarters fighter I was also the only one who could reliably down other ranged enemies. We played up to level 13 in that campaign and there were a lot of fights that were pretty stressful and fun. We even had a tournament arc and that was wild.
Your inability to create complex encounters is not the fault of the system, especially when the system literally tells you how to make it work and you ignore what’s in the book. But, of course, not reading the material is pretty standard procedure for D&D players.
Wrong. I’m perfectly capable of creating comex encounters. It’s just a fact that the system actively punishes any DM who tries to set up a FUN encounter because there’s so many special abilities that just simply solve any inconvenience at the cost of an action.
My players should feel rewarded because they managed to build a campfire from discarded boxes so that they have a steady source of light during an important fight and not feel punished because they picked one of the threeish races that don’t have darkvision.
My players should feel clever because they managed to fashion a pulley system to move a significant amount of treasure out of the dungeon and not because they just stuffed everything into their bag of holding and forgot about it.
5e is boring by design and making it interesting means fighting against the system every step of the way!
“Wrong, I don’t reward players for being smart so it’s bad!” Dude my group went into town and bought a bunch of fertilizer and other things(because I checked and making explosives actually isn’t that difficult apparently) and that, plus a bomb-crazy dwarf we knew nearby, let us do some crazy damage to a golem.
You like a certain style of play, fine, but acting like that’s the only way to feel rewarded is showing your limitations, not the system’s.
You just gave a perfect example for my “How do I deal even more damage?” point and you don’t even realize it. Do you? If all you have is a hammer…
I very much did not. He was complaining about D&D having spells that made him feel bad and I offered an example of how there’s more to 5e than spellslots to get the job done.
Do you think we don’t also talk our way out of problems? We do that all the time. I routinely, even with -1 charisma, would do shit all the time to get us out of dangerous fights and solve problems in more ways than “gun”.
And none of you have even given examples as to why other systems are better so please, do go on.
Any favorites? Our DnD campaign just fizzled out due to several unsatisfying sessions - mostly due to an increasingly boring combat experience.
I think my biggest complaint might actually be that no matter what you plan to do, you’re pretty much always better off just bonking your opponent and doing damage.
Taking an extra turn to sneak around enemies and take them out stealthily? Hitting two turns in a row is better! Grapling an enemy to give your teammate a better chance at succeeding his attack? Still, two bonks will do twice as much damage. Healing? Complete waste of time as long as your HP stays above zero (and even then it only matter when you’re still down by the start of your mext turn).
But I think my biggest paint points are not even combat related. It’s stuff like dark vision, spider climb, passive perception or Alarm, fly or breathless nature. A lot of characters start with these get out of jail free cards from level 1. 5e players will never experience the sense of dread and excitement that comes from exploring a deep windy dungeon with only a couple of torches that may run out at any given moment. 5e players will never struggle to hunt down enough prey in the arctic wilderness because someone will just cast goodberry.
DnD takes everything that makes the journey just as interesting as the goal and throws it away. There’s only this fight and then a ling/short rest followed by the next fight. That’s really all the fun DnD allows its players to have.
See, my question here would be “Why is combat boring in your games?” Because I see a lot of people try to fix D&D by focusing on making the most interesting board game possible, but roleplaying games aren’t board games, they’re stories.
For me, combat in systems like Shadowrun, D&D, WFRP, Storyteller and so on is boring because it brings the game to a crashing halt. The fact that it can takes hours of table time to play out a few rounds of combat in most of those systems is, to my mind, a far bigger issue than their relative quality as tactical gameplay experiences. Shadowrun tried to layer on more and more special moves and manuevers and combat abilities in the name of making combat more “interesting” and the effect was the exact opposite as so much more of the game became looking up the mechanics for the specific action you’re trying to take.
Combat should be fast and vibrant, and sometimes really scary. A firefight in Shadowrun - my go-to because it’s the game I run the most - should feel like a shootout from Heat or Ronin, or a John Wick movie. And it’s impossible to make anything feel like that when it takes an hour for everyone to get a single turn in.
This is just my take at the end of the day, but I don’t think the solution to boring combat is more or better rules. I tried that for years and nothing ever worked. What did work was finally shifting to more narrative focused systems with minimal, versatile rules that allowed me to treat combat just like anything else in the game. That way I could stop focusing on tracking hit-points and initiative, and I can make combat flow into the rest of the rest of the story in a way that feels natural, fluid, and visceral.
Completely agree. Combat should feel fast and dangerous. With 5e It feels exactly like what it is. A bunch of sweaty nerds having a make believe d*ck measuring contest of whose made up character is the most awesome. But combat is far from the only problem here.
I’ve switched to GURPS because the mechanics aren’t so combat-focused, but it has interesting combat mechanics too. A lot of people think it’s too complicated, but I’ve always started off super simple and slow-dripped additional mechanics as players get comfortable with the system and start actively looking for more crunch.
I do think it balances the super involved, tactical combat well by making rounds much shorter. Instead of 6 second rounds with Action, Reaction, Bonus Action, Movement, you have 1 second rounds that give you a single Action. There are ways to squeeze in a bit more on your turn, but it comes with trade-offs, like sacrificing active defense.
Active defense is also a great mechanic. Instead of just swinging at an AC, the defender actually gets an opportunity to Parry, Block, or Dodge. This means a lot less damage gets done every round, but that’s balanced by having way fewer Hit Points. I always thought people chipping away at each other’s mountains of HP until one dies to be kinda boring and unrealistic. In real fights, it’s generally a back and forth of attack and defense until an attack finally gets through and does significant damage.
And I won’t really get into all the details of the many different maneuvers available to you, or the techniques you can train. I’ll just say that it’s extremely tactical and provides for suspenseful combat with real stakes.
I can graft parts on my character, so after I put spectator stalks on my head, now all the encounters are summons ☹️
This was always frustrating. One particular dm did that a lot. Oh, x was showing up so someone took y ability to deal with it? X no longer shows up ever again. Cool. Feels bad.
I have started to balance the game less and less and its getting more and more fun.
First, hell yes.
Second, if you like being an adversarial DM, just let them know that’s the type of game you like to run. They don’t have to play and you will have to find some players that like that style.
“Oh the monk is immune to poison?! Well hah! …I completely forgot”
I would argue that both are bad game/story design. Unless the skill is a plot point, it should not change the chance encounters in the world your players are in. Both of these examples are meta-gaming. The NPCs of the world didn’t know the player characters had that ability, and should not change their actions until it is known to them.
I had one DM who was huge on meta-gaming, and at first I thought it was just some peev of his, but honestly after a while and understanding it better- it made a better experience. It now makes me annoyed to see it used and I better understand his rants…
I get where you’re coming from, but I disagree on a couple points:
Game design relies heavily on finding uses for the player character’s abilities. Imagine a metroidvania where you pick up a cool new grappling hook, only to realize there’s no terrain that can be grappled, and most enemies aren’t affected. What’s the point?
In terms of good/bad game design in TTRPGs, my philosophy is pretty simple; If everyone at the table is having a good time, it’s good game design. For my players, getting to use the abilities that they picked or earned throughout the game is super rewarding. For me as a GM, I can scale encounters a little higher knowing that they have a built-in edge.
In fact, my number one resource for game prep is my players’ character sheets. Did someone pick an obscure language as part of their backstory? You’d better believe it’s going to show up in the game! Dragonchess proficiency? Guess what the game of choice is at the local tavern?
Conversely, if an ability becomes the only thing a PC relies on, it can be interesting to add a foil to that ability. For example, one of my players built a Kensei Monk with a specialization in firearms. It was a fun character for him, but the sheer damage output he could do kind of overshadowed everyone else. My solution was to introduce a combat encounter where he could use the weapon, but doing so had a chance to attract more hostile creatures.
Anyway, all this to say that in my opinion, playing to your player characters’ strengths is not only rewarding for them, it can help a GM create some really cool moments.
They removed that from monk in 2024 😭
It’s honestly really funny to me how frequently some DMs forget basic writing principles. If something is set-up, either by yourself or your players, you should find a way to pay it off. It’s a really lame story if your monk has developed an immunity to poison and it never comes up a single time. Chekov’s gun was made to be fired!
I mean, the Monk being immune to poison doesn’t save anyone else in the breath attack.
Part of D&D is building synergy between the classes and operating as a team. At the same time, it’s the group’s biggest vulnerability.
Mind-splort the meat shield, gum up the support, grapple the damage dealer, or backstab the controller. Suddenly, the team is scrambling as their game plan falls apart.
And green dragons have so many tricks up their sleeves! The last thing I’m worried about is the breath weapon. It’s our horny bard falling for her damned come-hither smile that keeps me up at night.
Honestly, why do DMs feel the need to try and wipe the party? DMs should be hoping the party succeeds because the party is usually going to find a way to wipe without their assistance.
Usually it is one of two things. Either the person is just a toxic asshole who wants to fuck over everyone, which is not that rare or they think of themselves as a player as well a bit too much. While the Dungeon Master is a part of the game and a player, sometimes the line can get a bit blurred where it seems like the Dungeon Master is playing against you to win. Does not mean that they’re a bad dungeon master. Sometimes mistakes just happen or people get swept up, or other things they’re going on. Soft reminders like saying that you enjoy all playing the game together or other such language that makes it seem cooperative helps to extinguish this behavior from a dungeon master. Using language like you’re beating the dungeon master, even if it’s in a joking way, can instill that behavior in the dungeon master themselves.
My favorite dragon encounter was a dragon that I still don’t know the species of. The damn thing was puce. My DM didn’t want us to have any meta knowledge.
It was fun though because of how we got to, and dealt with, said dragon. Dragon was in a mountain lair that, when scryed upon it was revealed, was full of traps and minions.
My wizard figured out that she had just enough 8th and 9th level spell slots to cast Xorn Movement, and Improved Invisibility on the entire party (no invisibility on herself though), and still have 2 casts of Unfailing Missiles (9th level spell she created). We successfully snuck into the dragons lair, and took positions. Our monk was ready to grapple its tail, our rogue was ready to backstab, and was flying because he had a magic item, our cleric was prepping Harm,and our fighter was annoyed that I put her behind myself.
I tapped said sleeping dragon on the nose, and said in Draconic, “Wakey wakey.” The dragon opened its mouth to use whatever breath weapon it had, and I said, “That’s not a good idea, that will just make me and my friends angry.”
The dragon then realized I was speaking draconic and parlayed with us. We explained that we didn’t even want to be there, but the gods had tasked us with the eviction of the few dragons that weren’t supposed to be on this particular prime material plane in the first place. We also explained that we had brought with us 20 empty bags of holding, and would prefer to relocate them off the plane to a plane of their choice. Thankfully that dragon took the deal. The other three ended up with their souls in rather large black diamonds, that the God of Knowledge had provided us.
You also don’t need to make every enemy an idiot like a videogame. Monk catches an arrow? Archer wastes a turn figuring that out, calls it out to his teammates start of next turn and targets someone else.
A green dragon, depending on your source books, should be more than smart enough to notice its breath attack didn’t work on someone and change tactics.
It doesn’t work in every situation, like with enemies that shouldn’t be smart enough to figure it out, but there’s some great room for fun reminding your players that the enemies aren’t always braindead.
It also can add an extra layer to combat. Take out the commander that’s noticing this stuff to prevent it. Kill the archer before he can call out the monk caught his arrow, so another archer wastes a turn.
I dunno if the new books do this, but when I started DMing, I was surprised that actually the NPCs are like a video game. They have rules for their behavior that dictates what they will attempt to do, and will be fairly stupid if you just do things by the book.
Talking is a free action. He’d say it right away.
