“The PCs are too powerful, I can’t keep up!”
Many D&D 4e DMs have experienced a shift in their gaming group’s performance since they started playing this edition. PCs become capable of taking absolutely everything thrown at them with more ease than we DMs are led to believe by the game rules. Encounters at the PCs’ level barely make a dent in their resources anymore.
“Dude, I lost, like, just one Healing Surge.”
By that point, baring a statistical outlier, higher level encounters are often dealt with relative ease.
I’m now quite sure this is behind the persistent myth about ‘Unkillable PCs’ in 4e. I call this the ‘Secret Synergy Bonus’ and I’m convinced if DMs don’t recognize its existence (or keep blaming it on something else, like ‘Power Creep’) they’ll be stuck with this problem and may see campaigns crash because of it.
The secret synergy bonus (SSB) theory is simple. Gaming groups that play D&D 4e cooperatively over an extended period eventually discover how the 4e rules and abilities, much like Magic: The Gathering, encourages them to build and play their characters as if they as a group were an extension of the same ‘creature’. For those who know Collectible Card Game terminology, a D&D 4e party is exactly like a good ‘combo deck’. If built or played sloppily, the party will perform significantly under its potential, making it easier for the DM to challenge, or even defeat. This sometime forces fudging and other DMing tricks to prevent TPKs. On the other hand, if the party is built with great power combinations within and across character sheets and if they are played tightly with high focus, they will shoot over the power curve every single encounter.
Spotting the Bonus in Action
It’s extremely easy to spot groups who have stumbled onto this ‘secret’ when you listen to table chatter. They ask each other questions and listen to each other. They inquire how other PCs’ abilities and powers do and they check how they can work together in some form of synergy. The really invested groups even level up and choose new character options as a team.
During combat, such a group asks what others plan to do and, very importantly, start using the delay and ready actions to maximize the effect of each other’s powers. They ask each other what targets they plan to take down and start planning as a single tactical unit to make sure PCs aren’t all over the map, spreading their attacks over too many threats.
When players start doing that, the results are phenomenal and it becomes a positive feedback loop, making encounters easier and faster (for a 4e definition of faster). The ‘average’ encounter becomes a trivial challenge unless you become creative (Is this foreshadowing?). It’s gaming synergy at its best.
The thing is, many DMs focused on prepping session, weaving story arcs, or using pre-published adventures don’t necessarily spot or adjust their material to unlocking of the SSB. They often find themselves left with a feeling that a key enjoyment of the game (i.e. challenging players) is slipping out of their control, making them frustrated and concerned with giving players a sense the game is too easy.
Fortunately, we’ll get to solutions in part 2.
What about you? Have you experienced this yet in your gaming group (as a player or as DM)? If so, has everyone adapted? If not, what do you think is preventing this from happening?
It’s a Win/ Wi… Hmm yeah. I win that one for sure.
Love ya Chatty.
Hey! My first commenter here, I’d give you the Super Secret Bacon Prize, but I gave it away earlier this week. You’ll have to settle for my eternal gratitude and this giant virtual cardboard fake check for a gazillion dollars (Australian).
I’m wondering if a quick fix when you notice parties wiping through too easily is to make minions 2 hit kills instead of 1 hit. Just something that popped into my head as a quick, easy mechanic.
Oh, and ‘grats on the easy move. I didn’t even notice at first, since I use an RSS bookmark to find posts.
@Dean: Two hits minions are excellent quick fixes (altough they should likely be worth more XPs) and both my friend Yan and I used them.
As for the unnoticeable move for RSS readers, that was the idea!
Welcome back 🙂
Hello, Chatty. You’ll find the role of prima donna writer is quite taken, thank you very much.
Re: Synergy- I think its working the opposite way in one of our campaigns. We have a small cast of regular players (4) and our PCs don’t necessarily mesh very well… Dreadnaught Fighter, Adroit Explorer Rogue, Cold Specialist Druid, and Healy Shaman have made things pretty tough. The rogue has a heck of a time keeping combat advantage and the Primal characters end up having to scamper away from our thin line of defense provided by the melee people. I guess my point is 4E really promotes the heck out of teamwork, but its extremely difficult to attach a tangible value to it…
My party actually automatically did this the first time they made characters. I recently started DMing for a group of complete newbies (I played a lot in college, but these friends randomly picked up the started set at Toys R Us and needed guidance to understand it). As they made their first characters they all talked among themselves and meshed powers (not doubling up on rituals, made sure there was enough healing, balanced out ranged vs. melee, etc.). I think it came from making teams in video games (Dragon Age, Final Fantasy, etc.), since they have no previous RPG experience at all.
I’ve noticed this as well. I’m incredibly curious about part 2. For now, I’ve found increasing the encounter level helps somewhat as does creating a monster group with their own synergies. I think I’ll give those two hit minions a try.
.-= Sarah Darkmagic´s last blog ..First Glance: Shrouded Agendas for D&D 4E: The Purifiers =-.
@TheMainEvent: You are right. Less than ideal class mixes can do that. Although in you guys’ case, I’d suggest considering a Defender Companion Character to allow your striker to actually do what he’s supposed to do. Also there may be a chance that your DM already uses some of the tricks I’m going to talk about while you guys can’t get over the curve.
@Jason: Interesting insight. I’d also argue that they are likely the first generation of geeks who grew up on collectible card games. So building, Optimizing and, in some games’ case, cooperating has been ingrained. Great comment.
@Sarah: Hey! Another familiar face! I’ll get cracking on part 2 tonight promise! 🙂
@ChattyDM That is a good point, one of the players did do Pokemon (yeah, they are all pretty young), but the other 4 haven’t done any thing like that at all. Two are jocks with some video game experience, one has played some Killer Bunnies and the last has only had fantasy-like experience from movies. The group just meshes well, I bet. Might help that we are 3 sets of couples.
@Jason: Also, sometimes group just fuse instantly and ‘get’ the secret right away. Chances are this is what you stumbled upon.
.-= ChattyDM´s last blog ..Inq. of the Week: Welcome to the New Digs / Hero Minis =-.
First off, congrats on the move!
Aaah, it makes so much sense now! I recently started DMing a large group that has been playing D&D together for a long time (I’m a relative new-comer to this group). I recently lamented that my players were blowing through encounters like a tornado of death. The only solution I could come up with was the addition of trash mobs, but that just makes combat longer, not harder. I keep approaching the solution from a MMO perspective, and I think that’s what keeps tripping me up. I’ll keep toying around with ideas, and hope that one works for this particular group.
Anyway, I’m looking forward to part two of this post, you horrible, horrible tease. 🙂
.-= fanzabura´s last blog ..A Stitch in Time =-.
The secret still eludes my players. I encouraged them to discuss their PCs with each other during our initial session where we talked about character creation, but most of the players are very focused on the individual aspects of their PC, and don’t give much thought to how powers might complement or interact with each other. I think that the fact that most of us didn’t know each other before we started playing, and don’t really socialize outside of the game is a contributing factor. I think some of the players also operate under the mindset that sharing such information is meta-gaming, something I haven’t done much to counter as a DM, though I haven’t done anything–to my knowledge–to discouraged it either.
.-= Kameron´s last blog ..Finding the Friendly Arm Inn =-.
The PC’s get to know their characters over the entire course of the campaign while DMs live with their monsters 1/3 of the play session. No wonder the PCs have better synergy. As soon as your players learn the rule of winning at 4e D&D though the DM needs to make a point to step up on the synergy.
Rule of winning at 4e D&D: At the beginning of the challenging encounter the party will be at a disadvantage and be less likely to hit the bad guys, i.e. it will take a roll > 10 to hit. Through use of power, tactics and positioning the players will flip this and by the end of the encounter will be more likely to hit the bad guys, i.e. rolls < 10. The DM has to figure out a way to make that path constantly interesting.
.-= Captain Cursor´s last blog ..toonlet: No Sense of Time =-.
fanzabura: I think part of your issue may be the phrase “large group.” I had a similar experience when we regularly had 8 players. There’s just too much PCs can do with those numbers that work together, even against a challenging encounter for that number. It scales way up for the PCs but not necessarily for the monsters… which (I assume) will be part of Part 2 🙂
Welcome to your new place. It looks great.
Nice article. This is something that the group I play in, have been noticing as well. We have a 5 person party, and we are totally group focused, which has given us that bump in power that has been making many of our encounters go much easier than I think the DM was expecting.
Cannot wait to see your list of solutions. Though I may not enjoy them as much, when my group gets run over by them….
@fanzabura: Thanks! As Dave said, the large group may be part of the problem. The synergies can become explosive while adding more monsters makes the DM’s job harder, not easier as he has just one brain (Foreshadowing!).
@Kameron: Don’t you just love Cargo Culting and self-imposed limits based on vague ‘it should be played like that” axioms? Well, the game still works with PCs under the curve and many quite enjoy it. The socializing aspect may be a very important aspect of your case.
Interesting!
@The Game: Hmmm, yeah, of course it will! (Phil adjusts his writing plan)
@DNAPhil: My focus will be to give DMs solutions to bring game back in the ‘fun’ groove, not the ‘Arghhh he’s killing us!’ one. 🙂
.-= ChattyDM´s last blog ..Inq. of the Week: Welcome to the New Digs / Hero Minis =-.
And this article right here is exactly why WoC has changed D&D from a “standard” RPG with flavor and imagination to something more along the lines of a wargame with a few character concepts thrown in to give it something resembling the flavor of an RPG. This game mechanic encourages not only Munchkins, but entire TEAMS of Munchkins who play the game to “win” rather than to play for any real substance. The “purity” of the RPG is quickly being overcome by the mechanics of power over play. Of course, that’s just my opinion….YMMV.
I’ve noticed this as well. The group I play in has a very hard time with almost every encounter and almost always have at least 1 or 2 people drop to 0 hp every fight. The group has been together playing rpgs for almost two years, but we really haven’t found our group synergy yet for 4e. We don’t socialize at all away from the game table once a week.
ON the other hand I just started Dming for a group of first time RPG players, and even though they’ve only fought two combat encounters I can already see them getting into a groove as a group. I think the big difference here is that the group consists of three couples and we hang out and talk during the week and they talk to eachother alot about what they are doing during combat as well.
@Thud105: I’d encourage you to dig in my archive to see that I don’t agree with most of your assessment (although I’m cool with dissenting opinions).
@BlessedMisery: Foor sure, group dynamics will likely dictate if the party finds/uses the Bonus or not. Its interesting to note that you are the second to note that couples gaming together show that trait.
Is it a couples thing or is it a ‘women at the table’ thing… that’s worth discussing!
.-= ChattyDM´s last blog ..Inq. of the Week: Welcome to the New Digs / Hero Minis =-.
Actually, I run two D&D 4e campaigns and I have yet to see this happen. I’m actually HOPING it does, because I feel that the Players are not living up to their Characters’ true potential unless they start building synergy.
Every once in a while, a combat will go splendidly for my PCs, and a boss mob will go down like it was made of wet cardboard. They will mesh powers, chat amongst themselves, and play off each others’ strengths. But then next time, they’ll be back to “every man for himself” combats. I shrug and beat them senseless… because my NPCs and Monsters ALWAYS try and build synergy.
Btw, if I just stepped on your toes Chatty by suggesting one way to combat party synergy, my humblest apologies. But I design encounters looking for how the monsters can build on each other to produce devastating effects whenever possible.
One day, I hope my PCs can find a permanent synergy… I really do!
.-= Neuroglyph´s last blog ..Review: Blackdirge’s Bargain Bestiaries – Baleful Bugs by Blackdirge Publishing =-.
@Neuroglyph: No worries, that’s kinda to be expected when the blogger is being such a tease by posing the problem first without hinting at the solutions. Some good ones were already alluded to so far and will likely make it to the the next part(s) or be referred to.
.-= ChattyDM´s last blog ..Inq. of the Week: Welcome to the New Digs / Hero Minis =-.
The first post from the new home! Well-done. I know I’m kinda familiar with the problem, at least from the player’s side, although I’ve yet to see real effectiveness amongst the people I’ve played with. Most of it comes from the tacticians advising the less-able players. However, the big powergamer we had was very individualist in his approach, so that’s probably one big factor.
.-= Andy´s last blog ..An Examination of Epic, Part II =-.
Lack of PC synergy is not a problem… its an opportunity! Its not for everyone, but a little interparty conflict can be a lot of fun and create its own little side story arc. The way I see it, interparty conflict would come more naturally out of a PC party lacking in synergy. Of course, interparty conflict can be a serious problem at the gaming table with the wrong players for it. But if the players wouldn’t have an issue with it, then the lack of synergy shouldn’t really be an issue either.
@ChattyDm (about @@BlessedMisery): It could be the “woman at the table” idea, but my group is 2 gay boys and 4 lesbians. While I’ve got women, their not your typical ones. 🙂
@Thud105 – I don’t really think this sort of thing is totally unique to 4E, my 3.5 group has some of the same stuff going on. We think about what holes need to be filled when we level up and we’re pretty good at working together to maximum effect (including delaying and readying actions). If anything when what is essentially the same group (just with me DMing and the old DM playing) plays 4E, they’re still pretty bad at working together. They’re definitely “below the curve” in the system, but we’re all having fun and telling good stories (Personally I much prefer 4E’s mechanics which make telling those stories easier and more exciting for me).
I notice that solo monsters at lvl 14+ are a waste of my time. The PC’s know a lot of stunning/dazing/proning etc. moves, making my supposedly recurring for-now-indefeatable monster as easy as a breeze. However, increasing the lvl of the encounter and using some surprise elements (enemies from the floor or air, traps) make an encounter a lot more fun, without focusing on completely killing off the PC’s. They’re still in danger and should mind their steps thought. What I noticed was that my PC’s tend to focus their attacks on one creature, great tactics. So I started using monsters with luring abilities, like marking. Also monsters with defense lowering capabliities make the PC’s a lot more fragile all of a sudden. Using these combinations I try to make combat fun for both them and me.
@Andy: The Bonus tends to explode into action when the tactician and the Power Gamer realize what they have been missing. Then they become drivers (hopefully positive ones) to get the others in on the fun.
@Tiorn: Exactly. It’s a bonus, nothing else. However synergy and low-tension intra-party conflict isn’t exclusive in my mind. I believe that meaningful PC vs PC conflict should occur around significant, story issues… not about who gets to heal who and refusing to move one square to the left to allow combat advantage.
But maybe that’s just me.
@Jason: Oh man, I make a cliché sexually-biased generalization about women being communicators and you pull a triple LBGM on me? You win this round kid! Now I just need the ‘playing D&D with Porn Star’ blogger and we’d cover a large swat of D&D’s lifestyle range. 🙂
So rather than me doing my dumb hetero bit, let me ask you.. are you guys/gals communication-focused or play-focused or both around the table?
@Illum: Agreed. High level solos are probably expected to be used in conjunction with other monsters
and or other encounter elements. Your tricks and solutions mirror many that I have in mind for the next parts.
.-= ChattyDM´s last blog ..Inq. of the Week: Welcome to the New Digs / Hero Minis =-.
I have one of these parties too, and discussed it a bit on my blog as well. Part of the problem as well may be a side effect of any hp reduction you as a DM do on your monsters, with the intention of decreasing the length of combats.
My PCs aren’t quite as synergistic, but they’re almost there. Part of the problem also is that they’re all very ‘risk adverse’ it seems (ie they all have emphasized healing or temporary hp and such), and the Cleric player has optimized his character into healing.
There’s the link to my post:
.-= Dean´s last blog ..Challenging the PCs =-.
@ Captain Cursor: That’s why I suggested on my blog that there should be a forum somewhere to discuss DM encounter design, optimizing and tactics. The players have six heads thinking about the game, whereas the DM has one. Makes it tough.
Interesting idea about the Rule of Winning at 4e. I’m almost sure that my players can hit most monsters with <10 right from the start of the encounter.
@ Chatty DM: I've really taken to Mike Shea's idea of adding a power to Solos that allows them to decrease the power of dazes and stuns on them. You don't want to eliminate it but stunning a solo just has soooo much more impact on the combat than stunning a Standard Monster.
.-= Dean´s last blog ..Challenging the PCs =-.
Yeah, its no secret that I think player power is greater than monster power above the paragon level. I have a whole pile of house rules to make up for this and now that I’ve sort of accepted these, I’m much happier.
I have a total of seven players but its a rare night where all seven show up. Instead its usually six and six players with two leaders is pretty hard to challenge (now we’re at epic where its even harder).
A few simple house rules can make a big difference:
1. The above mentioned “elite solo” boost that reduces the power of dazes and stuns.
2. The “hard mode” boost that gives monsters +5 damage at paragon and +10 at epic (still playing with the math on this).
Those two alone can make a big difference and threaten a lot of parties.
.-= Mike Shea´s last blog ..Monster Optimization: Foulspawn Mangler + Foulspawn Seer =-.
I like the idea of reducing stuns/dazes on paragon and epic solos while making sure it still does something. My gut solution to the solo problem would be to just add one or two more reaction powers to the solo creature so that it really feels like it’s taking a bunch of extra actions. Even if they’re dazed or stunned, you can have them make an attack, with a dragon just pass it off as a natural instinct it can do without even thinking (like a flick of the tail at a flanking enemy).
@Mike Shea: I will most likely be adopting the “hard mode” you suggest, as I’ve been lamenting low damage lately in my encounters.
Also I wanted to mention that I’ve started using up player’s healing surges for addition things such as feats of great strength or if they want to use a ritual in a short amount of time mid encounter I’m happy to let them spend action points and surges to get particularly heroic and cool things done.
@Phil: Yeah, I saw that when I played with you guys last year – the combat when 98% meta and turned into some sort of cool board game. (Cool when you like that sort of stuff)
We don’t get that at our table – only 3 players could do it, and one is always the the DM… the other 3 players don’t care much about rules and synergy all that much. That, and we try not to go too meta so as not to kill the RP aspect.
I wonder if how this “efficiency factor” is affected by the meta-speak.
.-= Eric Maziade´s last blog ..Good bye ChattyDM.net – hello Critical-Hits.com =-.
@Eric: I still think these aren’t exclusive. The whole Meta discussion is, in my eyes, pseudo-BS. This is a game and the level of rulesy language will vary from group to group and within a group through a gaming session and has relatively little to do with synergy.
I’ve no problem imagining a Storytelling-focused group go through a 4e combat with flourishly described moves AND the synergy bonus. We aren’t such a group. We create our stories after the fight in our retelling of our games and my reports. 🙂
In fact, I would challenge you with this… How much RP was going on in your 4e games during combat? Knowing how meta you become at the table you probably could not handle the crunch of the game AND a story on top of it. I’d bet our next beer on it.
And as I said before, if all players don’t have at least a bit of the Tactician/Slayer in them, 4e is not a RPG for them. In fact, given your less crunchy players, I would suggest Mouseguard in a minute if it didn’t threaten you with a brain explosion for worrying so much about GMing it right. 🙂
@Phil: Nah, meta and RP are not exclusive… but there are some boundaries we like to try and respect (we, as in our particular table, and definitely not as in “all players should be this way”).
For example, as newbie characters, we encounter creatures that we know as players, but that our PCs should not be too savvy about. We try not to use our player knowledge.
We’ve once decided to roll against knowledge to see if the player actually knew a weak spot, failed the roll and skipped the “correct” strategy.
When a PC knows information and did not have a chance to share the info with the other PCs, we do not allow ourselves to use it.
We also try to respect the pacing – we won’t allow a 15 minute discussion on how to best use triggered abilities within a turn that represents a few second of time in game; meaning we won’t do our best combos if we don’t discuss strategy before the combat.
If we manage to stock to PCs for more than a few levels, we should see better strategies learned from less-than-optimal combats.
Of course, we still talk XP, HPs, healing surges, dailies and whatnot.
Playing with your group where (to my eyes) all meta was allowed was a very different experience. Then again, the PCs were much more seasoned than the ones we played at our table, so maybe we were role playing that 🙂
.-= Eric Maziade´s last blog ..Good bye ChattyDM.net – hello Critical-Hits.com =-.
@Eric: Understood and it makes sense. Again, the bonus is something that can come up in a gaming group and shouldn’t, IMO, be stamped out by the DM (which I know is not what you’re saying). I think it’s one of the natural evolutions of group dynamics.
If it doesn’t come up, either because it never manifests itself or because the group chooses to stifle it, then the game still works and is actually easier to DM!
i used to experience this problem a lot. my solution was a homebrew game that relies on naration as much as character abilities, it has helped keep combat quick while still intense and nail biting and pressure my pc’s when i want to.
The fact i went from a homebrew based on 3.5 to one based on a giant list of stolen ideas (i’m not going to kid myself and say it is an original system, more a frankenstein) has really helped me achieve everything i want in my game. Anyway this has nothing to do with 4e synergy and power curve, i just wanted to throw my two cents in. Hahah
Great post chatty and thanks for letting me steal your ideas for the gaming table
Scott
@Eric: It kind of evolve that way, never though that we where “meta” during combat.
It’s a lot easier to describe the stuff with the mechanics. I don’t see the time to be uncalled for though. These character represent trained professional they would know how to access a situation and get the best out of what they can do probably more then the player playing them. Also they would talk to each other in a fight, although we do not play it, it is somewhat implied. So discussing your plan of action is note that much meta and giving counsel to another player can be view as insight the character could have that you as player do not.
All of this could be done in fluff if you want to preserve the impression that you are not meta but in the end it comes down to the same thing. To work as a team you need to communicate.
What probably accentuate the impression is that in our group we have two players that are somewhat risk averse and will try to use the best possible action. And then there is me which, after Phil, is the loudest at the table suggesting course of action to anyone without taking care to mask it in a pretense of story as I find it annoying at best to describe my attack this is the part where my tactical side takes over and my storyteller side takes the backseat.
@Yan: We might be describing the same elephant from different ends as Eric’s group and ours are from opposite ends of the spectrum. The 2 games I was there and from what I can piece of Eric’s tales of his games, Casual laid-back rules along with low-level story-driven intra-party conflict (i.e. blame the instigator). We’re a very much action-focused group who happen to enjoy the tactical aspect of combat.
And that’s fine!
Oh man! When’s our next game already?
I know that. I just wanted to highlight that even a story-driven group can put the tool in place to do this kind of thing while still keeping the pretense of fluff on.
Let’s say, I want to say to Roco the rogue that I will move to flanking position so he should delay and wait for me to be in position. I could say in stead I point to the enemy and make a sign that we should both attack simultaneously. Same info one with mechanic the other with fluff in game.
Or lets say a want to tell you a counsel on your next course of action. An idea fuel by your past experience as come to you why not do this. Yes it is not you character but it’s as though the idea came from the character experience that is player does not have.
After a day of work we usually have our plate full as it is and we do not make the extra effort to keep the combat in story mode but a group wanting it, could do it and still be able to work as a team.
@ ChattyDM: I’m not 100% sure what you mean by being a “communication-focused or play-focused” group, but I’d guess we are more communication-focused, as a whole. The group likes to discuss things before an encounter a lot, all except one girl, she’s in it for the killing and just wants to burst down that next door.
Is there an article or something on those classifications I can browse?
@Yan:
Have to agree 🙂
.-= Eric Maziade´s last blog ..Good bye ChattyDM.net – hello Critical-Hits.com =-.
Given that the PCs stay together for a much longer period of time than the players themselves, I see tactical discussion during combat as very much in line with roleplaying.
Consider that these PCs spend 8+ hours a day hanging out with each other killing people for a living, I would expect them to develop some awesome synergies. I mean, Xena/Gabrielle, the Leverage crew and the Serenity crew manage to develop tactics and cons…why not your PCs?
And honestly, if there is one character with 18 int, or 16 Cha, it is no surprise that these SUPER GENIUSES have probably communicated some kind of strategem to the team before hand.
I mean, your average US Infantry Soldier is a by definition, average guy, 10 all across the board in stats, probably level 1 or 2. These guys rarely see full blown combats every day of every hour like PCs do, and they’re commanded by officers of ‘average’ ability. These are NORMAL people with fantastic ability to coordinate…why not PCs, which are the stars of the show?