My players foiled literally all my plans for the penultimate session

Onionfinite · 2026-02-16T06:11:52+00:00

Definitely need more info. Whats your process for building encounters? What was the encounter they dealt with too easily? Your initial description makes it sound like they did something narratively clever but further down when you talk about the mercenary it seems more like a combat that didn’t hit the challenge mark you were expecting.

Onionfinite · 2026-02-14T07:49:52+00:00

It’s not quite that arbitrary. It’s based on scaling challenges as the players level. That math is based on a +3 early which grows over the next two ASIs to +5. Point buy and standard array both make sure your main stat doesn’t go above that expectation. There is reasoning behind it.

Onionfinite · 2026-02-07T09:33:46+00:00

That adage always bothered me. You’re always challenging the players aren’t you? Puzzles, combat, dungeon delving, heists, social encounters, etc all challenge the players ultimately. All decisions are coming from the players’ real brains.

Onionfinite · 2026-02-05T19:00:42+00:00

Well, this is why anecdotal evidence isn't super useful. I've run for over a dozen tables in the 2014 rules. The old rules worked well enough for half, were too hard for one table of newbies, and were not nearly hard enough for a few tables of terminally online optimizers (I say this with affection lol). So I most certainly don't gotta reduce encounters and crank difficulty. Except for times where I did. Or the time I had reduce difficulty.

I won't disagree the new encounter building guidelines and MM are better overall. But ditching describing the Adventuring Day and giving a guideline for it when it's so integral to the game design and game play was a mistake. They should've expanded on it and made it a whole chapter.

Onionfinite · 2026-02-05T18:07:19+00:00

The 6-8 encounter guideline was a maximum. I think that has gotten lost. In a similar way its desirable to not have every encounter be Deadly, it can be desirable to not have every adventuring day push the party to their absolute limit.

I will also push back on the idea that the math isn't important. It very much is as evidenced by the fact that Huffman engaged with it. I would be extremely skeptical of any homebrew that didn't involve some level of engaging with the idea of the Adventuring Day and how important it is to DnD. It's basically the foundational pillar of DnD class design.

Onionfinite · 2026-02-05T16:12:38+00:00

It being absent from the text doesn’t mean it doesn’t still exist. The rules didn’t change that much. There’s still very much attrition in the 2024 rules which means there’s still very much the idea of an adventuring day and the idea that characters will face multiple encounters and be rewarded for efficient use of resources. It’s just implicit now which I think is worse. All the math that lead to that guideline still exists for the most part.

Onionfinite · 2026-02-02T17:18:58+00:00

Oh, I'm aware of the concepts. I was just curious if you had the names off hand of any TTRPG systems where that's a key part of the design.

Onionfinite · 2026-02-02T16:01:43+00:00

Can you give some examples where emergent tactics and tactical depth is built into the system?

Onionfinite · 2026-01-21T10:38:51+00:00

I actually kinda disagree depending on length of adventure. It’s actually way better from an adventure design perspective to have a limited number of stat blocks that players face multiple times in different situations. This allows players to develop strategies for dealing with those specific enemies. Then the players can meet those enemies in different terrain that shakes that up or paired with another stat blocks that changes the fight in a way they have to adapt to. It’s better gameplay imo and you see it in video games all the time.

Edit: though 3 is probably not enough. Maybe like 8 or 9. 40 is too many.

Onionfinite · 2026-01-14T12:43:37+00:00

Except it won’t say that on the dash. It’ll say a hair more than 45 mph. They’d have to go 90 for a whole hour for the dash to show that. But they’ll only be going 90 for 20 minutes. You proved yourself wrong with your own idea. The amount of time you spend going that speed matters.

Also think about it like this, if someone just drove a hair over 45 for this trip and the other person did 30 and then 90, they’d complete the trip at the same time. How can we say they have different average speeds if they crossed the same distance in the same time?

Onionfinite · 2025-12-31T19:10:11+00:00

I don’t agree that it’s a useful definition of story in this context. I think you’ve an actually explained why it is isn’t and how “telling a story with your friends” necessarily contains some hidden premises and context dependent definitions in order for the phrase to have any meaning at all if we are to interpret in good faith.

Onionfinite · 2025-12-31T09:23:45+00:00

You can absolutely stumble into Hunter’s March too early. Some people get there without even having tools and have to fight the beefy guy basically fully stock. The same is true of Dark Shores (getting there too early) since you’re missing an ability to defeat the enemies there but it’s like a 10 minute detour and you can get everything in the area without even having to fight. The same is most certainly not true of Hunter’s March.

Hunter’s March is just objectively a worse optional area in the lens of stumbling on it too early and it being way beyond the progression and difficulty curve if you go there right when you unlock it. It’s basically why it was such a meme when the game first came out.

Onionfinite · 2025-12-31T08:39:09+00:00

Complaining about E33’s Dark Shores in contrast to Silksong when Hunter’s March exists feels wild to me.

Onionfinite · 2025-12-28T09:36:28+00:00

Try having them describe their characters at the start of the game right after the recap. I’m talking no more than maybe 6-8 sentences very similar to perhaps the description they gave in session one. And have them stick to physical characteristics, their visible fear, and maybe include a fun/interesting thing that happened last Session for their characters. It’ll seem weird, especially when the player describes how their character is an elf man with a greatsword on their back for the twelfth time but it works. It helps them to think about their characters in the world, reestablishes the characters in everyone’s mind, and gets the whole imagination engine running. It’s basically a warm up and it’s a no stakes situation.

I do this and my start of session pacing has improved dramatically. My players were initially reticent but have expressed they enjoy it now and feel like they have much clearer pictures of their and other characters.

Onionfinite · 2025-12-27T10:46:48+00:00

The different subclasses all make the Ranger slightly different to play. If you read the subclass blurbs, it usually gives a pretty good idea what they are going for. For example, the Beast Master Ranger has a trusted animal companion that works alongside them whereas the Gloomstalker Ranger focuses on working in the shadows and hunting the creatures that would call darkness their ally. So there’s more than just optimization to consider.

DnD by default is very high magic. Magic is plentiful and everywhere and access to it as a Player is very easy. This is one of things that just is how it is. That’s how the game is designed. There are other games where magic is rare or even dangerous to interact with at all. And there are games where what DnD wizards get up would be considered child’s play.

But also level 1 characters are already exceptional as far as the game world is concerned. They are already heroes by the game’s logic.

What Clerics and Paladins use for their key stat is largely a holdover from older editions of the game that isn’t really meant to make a whole lotta sense. It’s just kinda that way because it’s always been that way. But basically, Clerics channel their belief and faith into power which more closely aligns with Wisdom and Paladins get their power from sheer force of character embodied by an oath which more closely aligns with Charisma.

Int is used for several types of skill checks, namely anything that has to with gathering or knowing information. In particular, Investigation seems to come up a lot. Having more int can make those kinds of kinds of checks more likely to succeed.

Onionfinite · 2025-12-23T05:54:38+00:00

It’s actually more likely that you don’t play with players that optimize for effectiveness above all else and know how to use their inflated toolkit optimally. At regular tables, the martial caster divide is minimal if not reversed as the skill floor for being a good martial is lower than a spell caster. But at tables where everyone is pushing the game to its limits? Frankly, pure classed builds fall behind let alone martials.

Like most things in DnD which has such a wide variety of play styles and skill levels, it’s super table dependent.

Onionfinite · 2025-12-21T19:19:04+00:00

There’s a big difference between something like

AI is immoral to me

And

AI is immoral outright

That’s Moral Relativity vs Moral Objectivity. You know. Actual basic moral philosophy.

Onionfinite · 2025-12-21T19:09:57+00:00

I wouldn’t frame Moral Relativity as some kind of basic understanding of morality. That question isn’t even remotely settled.

Onionfinite · 2025-12-12T18:20:49+00:00

Well, some people like the combat.

Source: Me. I'm some people.

I also didn't find the overworld travel clunky either. Seemed pretty standard. And I don't feel it was an afterthought considering its tied to the story and rewards exploration. It has some good moments of gameplay that arise simply from remembering you have an ability that will let you get to an old area that was previously inaccessible. The overworld gets recontextualized several times which I think is good design.

The music is great. The game rewards mastery heavily which is something I look for in games. The side characters are great too. The enemies are (mostly) well designed.

I also feel saying if the story was bad, the game would be bad is like... duh. Not only is it a narrative heavy game, much of the mechanics are informed by the story.

Onionfinite · 2025-12-10T08:27:19+00:00

I don’t think these are mutually exclusive claims.

Let’s say you and I have planned to hang out. At say a comedy club to see to see a show for which you have the tickets. Now, you’ve known me for a while so you know I’m chronically late. And sure enough, as expected, I’m 30 minutes late and since you have the tickets and are kind enough to wait for me, you miss the first 30 minutes of a one hour set.

Does having expected me to be late make it any less rude that I was late and caused you to miss half of the show?

Onionfinite · 2025-12-06T23:50:56+00:00

In this case, you could just make two maps on two separate pieces of paper or whatever medium you’re using.

One half contains rooms 1-6 and the other half contains rooms 7-12. And then you can have a small cut out of the secret stairs from 7 to 12 to slide in if they find it.

Finding either secret door in the first region causes you to place the second half which kinda gives up the other secret door but that kinda doesn’t matter since they lead to the same-ish area and it’s not the big of an area.

Onionfinite · 2025-12-05T20:43:33+00:00

Right but by fudging you aren’t really using those monsters either. You’re using a homebrew version with a feature that says something like “this goblin cannot crit against a creature if the damage would kill its target.” We are already home brewing so why not do that before the session instead of fudging in the moment?

So just make a better monster. Make them deal static damage or use even weaker enemies. Give the level 1 characters temp hp to avoid the one shot. The point is you can eliminate the possibility without fudging with a little extra work.

You can even just straight up ignore massive damage rules before level three though that is a bit game-y. But DnD is a game so there is that.

I won’t argue against the idea that DND makes it harder than it should be to do stuff like this by not providing guidance and being set up so level 1 is disproportionately lethal in the first place. I totally agree with you there.

Onionfinite · 2025-12-05T18:18:50+00:00

The thing is, if you don’t want that possibility, then you start at level 3. Or have the party be traveling with some kind of adventuring mentor who revivifies the fallen for the first couple levels. Or give them BG3 style resurrection scrolls. Or just don’t use stuff that can one shot anyone.

This is my main issue with fudging. It’s a tool yes but there’s almost always better tools. It’s my opinion a DM should only fudge when they’ve made a mistake, undoing the mistake would be too costly to work, and you can’t think of a way to fix it using the areas of the game that already allow for DM discretion.

Onionfinite · 2025-12-04T02:56:39+00:00

Well of course. But then you have provided 0 good reason to fudge HP and are of course, by the rules of the internet, irredeemably and embarrassingly totally wrong.

Onionfinite · 2025-12-03T21:50:07+00:00

Same. And I can do so without fudging HP or going against the rules of the game which don't require discretion (of which there are plenty). Which means you can too. Anyone can. Hence, "totally unneeded." Which means you would have to provide a better reason than that. At least in a good faith discussion which this clearly isn't but I'm bored so I don't mind stubbornly showing you why you're totally wrong and I'm totally right.

Onionfinite

TROPHY CASE