DM perspective is this fair? I've been enlightened about guards

[AMFV]

It is a useful idea for illustration purposes, because we every so often hear the complaint "Gee, this Skill system sucks because a 13th level Rogue can do X, and that is completely unrealistic without magic." And the answer, of course, is "Good! Because once you get into the middling levels, the difference between very skilled and magic starts to become ambiguous, in our mundane lowish level eyes."

When it comes to detailed specific combat examples, D&D is designed to be unrealistic. So your suggestion that there may be a problem with how the system models fencers may not be a problem, but a feature.

I've never really heard anybody complain that the rogue was too powerful or really complain about realism in D&D at all. Realism isn't a design goal of the system as you say, even for skills. I have heard many people assert that "all real world humans are level five or below" which is kind of absurd, since people have no levels, but it becomes a problem when they go on to assert: "Therefore, no character could be more powerful than that if they aren't uberhighpowered" It's entirely possible to run a mid-level D&D game that isn't superheroes.

[VoxRationis]

Well, I've complained about things being unrealistic in D&D a lot, but thank you for your assertion about a more down-to-earth mid-game.

[AMFV]

Well, I've complained about things being unrealistic in D&D a lot, but thank you for your assertion about a more down-to-earth mid-game.

Well to be absolutely fair, most of the complaints I've seen from this aren't really all that grounded in how things work in reality, in any case. I'll amend my statement some, I've seen people complain about it, but never in a way I thought was significant.

The point is that if you file off and alter the numbers you can create similar sort of challenges for a mid-level or even a high-level party as a low level party. At low levels 5 Orc Warrior 1s could provide a challenge at mid Level 5 Orc Warblade 5s could, and so on and so on. It's a matter of upping the abilities of enemies. Of course this does create certain problems if you've started from low level, if you continually increase lower level enemies power players don't feel like they're progressing.

[Blink Knight]

Well to be absolutely fair, most of the complaints I've seen from this aren't really all that grounded in how things work in reality, in any case. I'll amend my statement some, I've seen people complain about it, but never in a way I thought was significant.

The point is that if you file off and alter the numbers you can create similar sort of challenges for a mid-level or even a high-level party as a low level party. At low levels 5 Orc Warrior 1s could provide a challenge at mid Level 5 Orc Warblade 5s could, and so on and so on. It's a matter of upping the abilities of enemies. Of course this does create certain problems if you've started from low level, if you continually increase lower level enemies power players don't feel like they're progressing.

This is completely false.

You could do that at low or even sometimes mid levels, but a lot of concepts flat out don't scale at high levels.

At high levels you don't care how many warriors or giant scorpions or Tarrasques there are, they're not on your level.

Conversely there are certain enemy types that don't scale DOWN very much as you outlevel them, and say... a group of 8 Shadows is more dangerous for a level 8 party than a pair of Shadows is for a level 4 party. Even though those are both level + 1 encounters and even though the level 4 characters aren't that far ahead of a Shadow.

[SowZ]

why are all your guards low level :\

their job is literally to participate in encounters all day every day, get paid for it with a monthly stipend, and that doesnt count bribes and or random stuff dropped from criminals that isnt catalogued. I dont see why a guard has to be low level when level one characters level up doing less than them.

Maybe the Dmg says otherwise, but if it does you should discount that. Theres nothing within ranges 1-8 that players will do that it isnt perfectly ordinary for people to expect guards to do as well... So, rather than murdering players with focused fire, why not make some of those guards a higher level an make it a fair fight :D

Well, part of it is that most guards have probably killed very few real warriors. It's the same reason most soldiers in war don't get any kills. For every soldier that gets a kill, another soldier doesn't, (and is dead.) So unless everyone takes turns, (person A kills B who is killed by C who is killed by D and so on,) or literally half of each side is dead, most veterans of a war haven't killed anybody. The same is true of guards. They may have been in a number of fights, most of them non-lethal, but the majority of guards won't have had enough real action to be higher than level 3 or so. Look at cops. Most cops never discharge their weapon on someone in a whole career. Nothing prevents you from having special forces, though.

Those guys that get to level 3? The ones who want to improve and show the most promise, (maybe a higher array of stats,) get promoted to the equivalent of SWAT team. Most the time, they do the same crap as everyone else. So any given unit of guards may have one or two SWAT guys on patrol. But when a criminal hide out needs to be raided or a stronger monster/adventurer is in town causing problems? SWAT is who is called. So, yeah, you can have level 5-8 guards, but those guys are probably selected to get the most action. You will, inevitably, have mostly 1-3 level guards. A big part of this is because these guys wait for trouble to come to them. They don't go looking for trouble.

A caravan is not limited to guards, though. He can hire shady goons and mercs. They might be a few levels higher. After all, they go looking for trouble. And while mercs and goons are mostly not going to have kills under their belt either, the ones that have never killed anyone are mostly dead themselves. Most mercs are still going to be levels 2-5 or so, but one or two might be 6 or 7. The caravan dude is going to hire the best guys, guys better than all but the elite guardsman, because the outside world is very dangerous.

TL;DR. While I agree that guards are mostly low level, a few can be pretty strong. But it doesn't matter, because caravan guards are +1 to city guards.

[icefractal]

I think the key thing is to be consistent. If a standard city watchman is a 10th level Warblade, then fine. That means that most creatures are no threat to a city. Troll shows up in the marketplace causing havoc? Nearest guard dices it up in a few seconds. Dragon flying around? If it's not Ancient+, it's going to be a pincushion the second it starts making trouble. Very different than the typical campaign, but not impossible to work with.

The thing that's just bad is when the guards scale to the level of the party. So back at 1st level, the guards were 2nd level Warriors, but now the party is 15th level and suddenly all the guards are also. That **** was terrible in Oblivion, and it's even worse in a TTRPG.

[AMFV]

This is completely false.

You could do that at low or even sometimes mid levels, but a lot of concepts flat out don't scale at high levels.

At high levels you don't care how many warriors or giant scorpions or Tarrasques there are, they're not on your level.

Conversely there are certain enemy types that don't scale DOWN very much as you outlevel them, and say... a group of 8 Shadows is more dangerous for a level 8 party than a pair of Shadows is for a level 4 party. Even though those are both level + 1 encounters and even though the level 4 characters aren't that far ahead of a Shadow.

You are mistaken sir. I was never talking about how many, if you'll note the numbers remained identical but the levels and degrees of optimization shifted. It just takes optimization to create a challenge of the same type at a higher level. For example you can make a melee monster terrifying, you just need to give it the appropriate immunities and such to make it frightening for a few levels. You can make a horde of Orcs, terrifying, give them all Mad Foam Rager, and Instantaneous Frenzy, make them Frenzied Berserkers... now they are immune to death through damage (because Frenzy), and they can ignore one effect till the end of their Frenzy... so even on a failed save they may still be in the fight.

That's a pretty tough encounter, manageable, but it's likely to be pretty frightening for a mid-high level of people playing at anything under the very highest echelons of optimization. Of course if they are at the higher levels of optimization you'll have to construct different encounters. Remember if everybody's high level, nobody is.

I think the key thing is to be consistent. If a standard city watchman is a 10th level Warblade, then fine. That means that most creatures are no threat to a city. Troll shows up in the marketplace causing havoc? Nearest guard dices it up in a few seconds. Dragon flying around? If it's not Ancient+, it's going to be a pincushion the second it starts making trouble. Very different than the typical campaign, but not impossible to work with.

The thing that's just bad is when the guards scale to the level of the party. So back at 1st level, the guards were 2nd level Warriors, but now the party is 15th level and suddenly all the guards are also. That **** was terrible in Oblivion, and it's even worse in a TTRPG.

Well it depends, the guards scaling to the level of the party, may prove irritating or not. You can have the average guards remain low level (and note that may be different in different campaigns), and then have the players start to encounter Elite Special units and such. It really depends on the sort of campaign. Also a non-Ancient Dragon could shred a level 10 Warblade, remember Dragons can be optimized too, and Warblades have very few mobility options.

[Blink Knight]

You are mistaken sir. I was never talking about how many, if you'll note the numbers remained identical but the levels and degrees of optimization shifted. It just takes optimization to create a challenge of the same type at a higher level. For example you can make a melee monster terrifying, you just need to give it the appropriate immunities and such to make it frightening for a few levels. You can make a horde of Orcs, terrifying, give them all Mad Foam Rager, and Instantaneous Frenzy, make them Frenzied Berserkers... now they are immune to death through damage (because Frenzy), and they can ignore one effect till the end of their Frenzy... so even on a failed save they may still be in the fight.

That's a pretty tough encounter, manageable, but it's likely to be pretty frightening for a mid-high level of people playing at anything under the very highest echelons of optimization. Of course if they are at the higher levels of optimization you'll have to construct different encounters. Remember if everybody's high level, nobody is.

They're melee only, you're flying. Or invisible. Or teleporting. See what I mean? You have no reason to ever get down there and trade hits even if you encounter them at all. Know what level of optimization that takes? Near zero. Just using core only abilities as intended. (By the way, Frenzy does absolutely nothing to prevent unconsciousness via nonlethal damage, it also inflicts nonlethal damage and therefore literally does nothing because they will be KOed, drop from frenzy, then die)

Now you can send a dragon in the sky after the party, and said dragon could even make melee attacks on the party or even be good in melee combat but we're no longer talking about any number of ground bound melee humanoids. We're talking about an entirely different sort of encounter (that doesn't scale to low levels, because even a weak creature with aerial ability would kill a low level party).

There is more to scaling than level or HD, and if you still don't believe that I'm gonna let you think whatever you want and keep talking to someone else about it.

[AMFV]

They're melee only, you're flying. Or invisible. Or teleporting. See what I mean? You have no reason to ever get down there and trade hits even if you encounter them at all. Know what level of optimization that takes? Near zero. Just using core only abilities as intended. (By the way, Frenzy does absolutely nothing to prevent unconsciousness via nonlethal damage, it also inflicts nonlethal damage and therefore literally does nothing because they will be KOed, drop from frenzy, then die)

Now you can send a dragon in the sky after the party, and said dragon could even make melee attacks on the party or even be good in melee combat but we're no longer talking about any number of ground bound melee humanoids. We're talking about an entirely different sort of encounter (that doesn't scale to low levels, because even a weak creature with aerial ability would kill a low level party).

There is more to scaling than level or HD, and if you still don't believe that I'm gonna let you think whatever you want and keep talking to someone else about it.

There are lots of ways for melee characters to get flight... and my NPCs always have equipment... And if your first thought on encountered a Horde of Orcs is "Nonlethal damage," and you have effective ways of delivering it... Then you might just be Schrodinger's Wizard.

Your complaints are only valid if you take away the NPC's ability to have the same items. Furthermore, there are ways to force your players to fight in areas they can't fly... Some kind of thing... maybe something in the very name of the game Dungeons and Dragons.

There are also tons of ways to force things down... A shaman who casts Downdraft or Control Weather. Enemy Wizards making the top of the battlefield the exact place you don't want to be.

And yes, there are ways to beat the encounter, but remember a DM isn't trying to kill the PCs, he's trying to challenge them, and a horde of Barbarians who can't die, works really well as a challenge.

Also, Mad Foam Rager works just fine to stop unconsciousness.

[icefractal]

Well it depends, the guards scaling to the level of the party, may prove irritating or not. You can have the average guards remain low level (and note that may be different in different campaigns), and then have the players start to encounter Elite Special units and such. It really depends on the sort of campaign.

If they're explicitly different in the game-world, that's fine. I don't think anyone would complain that the emperor's personal bodyguards are more competent than a watchman in a small village. However, I do think they need to be taken into account from the beginning. If early in the campaign you have a plot like "a band of trolls is blocking all travel along [major trading route] and nobody can stop them", and then later on the Merchant's Guild employs 10th level guards for their caravans, that's going to seem pretty questionable.

Also, one thing that's as annoying as Oblivion syndrome, but different, is jRPG syndrome. That's where you start out in Corneria, a medium-sized village, and the guards are 2nd level. Then after quite a while, you end up in Airenroc, another medium-sized village, not particularly different in significance, but the guards there are 15th level (and the inn costs 10x as much ) Going to a new place won't explain a shift in level, unless the new place actually has a reason for being different.

[AMFV]

If they're explicitly different in the game-world, that's fine. I don't think anyone would complain that the emperor's personal bodyguards are more competent than a watchman in a small village. However, I do think they need to be taken into account from the beginning. If early in the campaign you have a plot like "a band of trolls is blocking all travel along [major trading route] and nobody can stop them", and then later on the Merchant's Guild employs 10th level guards for their caravans, that's going to seem pretty questionable.

Also, one thing that's as annoying as Oblivion syndrome, but different, is jRPG syndrome. That's where you start out in Corneria, a medium-sized village, and the guards are 2nd level. Then after quite a while, you end up in Airenroc, another medium-sized village, not particularly different in significance, but the guards there are 15th level (and the inn costs 10x as much ) Going to a new place won't explain a shift in level, unless the new place actually has a reason for being different.

Well as long as level is an in-world construct, it's quite possible to have a game (like many video games) where level doesn't actually really exist in-world at all. So while you're getting more cool abilities and options, you don't become relatively that much more powerful. That's kind of the Oblivion way of looking at it, I think. I imagine it'd be fine as long as it was discussed with players first.

[Blink Knight]

There are lots of ways for melee characters to get flight... and my NPCs always have equipment... And if your first thought on encountered a Horde of Orcs is "Nonlethal damage," and you have effective ways of delivering it... Then you might just be Schrodinger's Wizard.

You weren't paying attention to what I said. Here it is again:

Your Frenzied Berserkers are constantly inflicting nonlethal damage to themselves. That's what Frenzy does. Frenzy does not prevent unconsciousness from nonlethal damage, it also ends on unconsciousness. Your Frenzied Berserkers drop at the same moment they normally would (perhaps a little sooner). Unconsciousness ends Frenzy, killing them. Working as intended? Probably not, but any experienced D&D player is well used to these sorts of trollish game mechanics that lead you to think something is a good idea or will work when the truth is anything but.

The high level party (and some mid level parties) are not traveling on the ground if they're traveling in an interruptible form at all. If desired, they could hang out in the sky and watch the angry Orcs jump around and slowly knock themselves out with self inflicted damage.

Your complaints are only valid if you take away the NPC's ability to have the same items. Furthermore, there are ways to force your players to fight in areas they can't fly... Some kind of thing... maybe something in the very name of the game Dungeons and Dragons.

1: You're not talking about the same encounters with bigger number anymore, meaning you understand there's more to scaling than more levels or HD. 2: NPCs have low wealth. 3: Dungeons are the arch example of "concepts that scale horribly with level". You were better off with the Orcs outside. Location based adventures stop functioning at mid and high levels.

There are also tons of ways to force things down... A shaman who casts Downdraft or Control Weather. Enemy Wizards making the top of the battlefield the exact place you don't want to be.

And yes, there are ways to beat the encounter, but remember a DM isn't trying to kill the PCs, he's trying to challenge them, and a horde of Barbarians who can't die, works really well as a challenge.

Throwing in casters = no longer the same encounter.

And if your idea actually did work the way you thought it did, in no way, shape, or form is a literally undefeatable opponent a "challenge", and not a "you die now" so it's quite fortunate they lack the ability to even engage you, and their so called immortality does not function the way you think it does.

[sleepyphoenixx]

Your complaints are only valid if you take away the NPC's ability to have the same items. Furthermore, there are ways to force your players to fight in areas they can't fly... Some kind of thing... maybe something in the very name of the game Dungeons and Dragons.

The problem is that you kind of have to. Giving every melee monster items of flight, Freedom of Movement, etc. goes way above the normal treasure scale. Each encounter the party wins throws WBL off more, making it harder and harder to challenge the party.
Even switching to potions is not really feasible because in the time it takes to drink enough for the standard buffs the encounter will effectively be over.

The more options the party gets the more you need to rely on innate abilities to counter at least some of them for your monsters to keep up.

Regarding your example, frenzied berserkers are not really a challenge to any half-competent party. They are stopped cold by anything that forces a balance check, breaks LoS (where they will instead start killing each other), appropiate BFC or just leaving and coming back a few minutes later. You'd have to force the party to actually engage in melee which is pretty hard to do with mid-high level PCs that don't want to.

[AMFV]

The problem is that you kind of have to. Giving every melee monster items of flight, Freedom of Movement, etc. goes way above the normal treasure scale. Each encounter the party wins throws WBL off more, making it harder and harder to challenge the party.
Even switching to potions is not really feasible because in the time it takes to drink enough for the standard buffs the encounter will effectively be over.

Those come in potions, and furthermore, items of fly are certainly outside of a monster's treasure portions at mid level. NPCs get valuables too, and they should be set not to throw off wealth by level. Monster treasure is just fine, and you can adjust wealth by level as necessary.

The more options the party gets the more you need to rely on innate abilities to counter at least some of them for your monsters to keep up.

Regarding your example, frenzied berserkers are not really a challenge to any half-competent party. They are stopped cold by anything that forces a balance check, breaks LoS (where they will instead start killing each other), appropiate BFC or just leaving and coming back a few minutes later. You'd have to force the party to actually engage in melee which is pretty hard to do with mid-high level PCs that don't want to.

It can be, although it's not impossible, that was an example at moderate optimization, it's possible to have a similar example at higher optimization. I optimize my encounters to my players. But you can build a horde encounter that's still frightening for other reasons. Also even regular Barbarians with Mad Foam Rager are pretty aggravating for most parties, that and Thrall of Demogorgon, and you're looking at some serious problems for almost everybody. And flight is relatively easy to obtain, or to beat.

I'm not going to point out that most things can be countered at least temporarily, that's a known thing, the optimization level of my party and tone of my campaign determines if I deal with fliers by having the melee drink potions of fly, somebody cast downdraft, or an invisible flying Warlock with Reaving Dispel.

The issue is that as a DM you should know all of your party's strengths, and that's not fair, but it should allow you to present them with challenges that will prove to be difficult for them.

Edit: Also it's worth noting that Mad Foam Rager disables grease or most ways to force a Balance check and the Barbarians can do it twice, since they have both Rage and Frenzy.

[Threadnaught]

Your complaints are only valid if you take away the NPC's ability to have the same items. Furthermore, there are ways to force your players to fight in areas they can't fly... Some kind of thing... maybe something in the very name of the game Dungeons and Dragons.

Yes, there are ways to force Players, it's called railroading.
Your Wizard doesn't Cast Fly, or fight the Orc Army in a canyon where you have reinforcements, you go underground where they can reach you without going through a storm of arrows and cast Disjunction on yourself to destroy all Magic Items and previously cast buffs, because it's challenging.

There are also tons of ways to force things down... A shaman who casts Downdraft or Control Weather. Enemy Wizards making the top of the battlefield the exact place you don't want to be.

Control Weather requires 10 minutes Casting and another 10 minutes for the effect to take place. You're either looking at some pretty lengthy combat lasting at least 200 rounds, or someone who is very prepared for a very specific enemy.

And yes, there are ways to beat the encounter, but remember a DM isn't trying to kill the PCs, he's trying to challenge them, and a horde of Barbarians who can't die, works really well as a challenge.

A horde of Barbarians who can't die are effectively the Tarrasque, that thing can't die either, but it's pretty easy to contain based on the numerous times someone has wrote up a method of keeping it locked up for eternity. The Barbarians are just slightly more numerous/dangerous.

[AMFV]

Yes, there are ways to force Players, it's called railroading.
Your Wizard doesn't Cast Fly, or fight the Orc Army in a canyon where you have reinforcements, you go underground where they can reach you without going through a storm of arrows and cast Disjunction on yourself to destroy all Magic Items and previously cast buffs, because it's challenging.

And not all railroading is bad. Else there'd be no plot and it'd just be sandboxes.

Control Weather requires 10 minutes Casting and another 10 minutes for the effect to take place. You're either looking at some pretty lengthy combat lasting at least 200 rounds, or someone who is very prepared for a very specific enemy.

Like somebody who is prepared for legendary heroes that they've used divination spells to study, seems pretty likely.

A horde of Barbarians who can't die are effectively the Tarrasque, that thing can't die either, but it's pretty easy to contain based on the numerous times someone has wrote up a method of keeping it locked up for eternity. The Barbarians are just slightly more numerous/dangerous.

The Tarrasque is actually easy to kill, and can't ignore any spell or attack for a long period of time, twice actually, and more if we include IHS.

[Blink Knight]

Or the players could be legitimately interested in what is going on in the game and voluntarily go in that direction.

In a game where higher level enemies are literal palette swaps of lower level enemies, just increasing numerical statistics as a means of increasing challenge makes sense. In a more open ended, flexible and dynamic game (like any tabletop game) creatures are expected to get different and more numerous as well as stronger abilities.

Treating a tabletop game like a video game is at best missing the entire point of a tabletop game. It inevitably results in complaints that [Powerful One Dimensional Creature] was easily slain via non HP damage based means or bypassed outright.

If a high level party encounters bandits, the bandits won't be doing the robbing. If you want to threaten them for their financial resources make a territorial dragon do it.

[ddude987]

And not all railroading is bad. Else there'd be no plot and it'd just be sandboxes.

I disagree there, you don't need railroading to generate a story. If the characters (being played by players) act in a realistic manner, they could very well create a story without the DM railroading.

[Story]

Your Frenzied Berserkers are constantly inflicting nonlethal damage to themselves. That's what Frenzy does. Frenzy does not prevent unconsciousness from nonlethal damage, it also ends on unconsciousness. Your Frenzied Berserkers drop at the same moment they normally would (perhaps a little sooner).

Obviously the solution is for everyone to be a Warforged Juggernaut Frenzied Berserker

The Tarrasque is actually easy to kill, and can't ignore any spell or attack for a long period of time, twice actually, and more if we include IHS.

The Tarrasque is only easy to kill if you have access to Wish (or Knowledge Affiliation, I guess)

[ddude987]

Which technically can be purchased via scroll pretty easily.

[Story]

Yeah but WBL is an issue.

[AMFV]

Your Frenzied Berserkers are constantly inflicting nonlethal damage to themselves. That's what Frenzy does. Frenzy does not prevent unconsciousness from nonlethal damage, it also ends on unconsciousness. Your Frenzied Berserkers drop at the same moment they normally would (perhaps a little sooner).

Which is when they're supposed to drop, after the players have had a little bit of fear and an exciting combat. I assure you I could build an unbeatable enemy (particularly since I can rule anything I like to my advantage). But that's poor form and it makes the game less fun, the tricky part is to make an enemy that fights well enough to frighten the players to have dramatic tension.

As to the palette swaps comment. I addressed it, two posts ago, if you aren't going to even read the things I'm typing then I'm not going to waste my time which is fairly valuable to type up complex and thought out answers to your posts.

[Blink Knight]

As to the palette swaps comment. I addressed it, two posts ago, if you aren't going to even read the things I'm typing then I'm not going to waste my time which is fairly valuable to type up complex and thought out answers to your posts.

I read it. It's not directed at me and does not address that point. Though given that you're arguing in favor of using low level concepts at high levels by replacing the low level concepts with high level concepts I'm not sure that you're reading your own posts.

Although if your answer is seriously that you'll make an unkillable enemy and then kill it when you get bored we've went a bit past the lack of creativity and adaptability present in a video game like experience. Do tell, what are the players actually doing here if they have no control over what happens on a micro or macro scale?

[AMFV]

I read it. It's not directed at me and does not address that point. Though given that you're arguing in favor of using low level concepts at high levels by replacing the low level concepts with high level concepts I'm not sure that you're reading your own posts.

I'm arguing that high level play can replicate lower level play if necessary without too much work (although it does take more work). I haven't argued FOR ANYTHING. I've only argued that certain things were possible, then when I pointed out how they were possible you then responded by accusing me of claiming that those things were the only things that were possible, which is a misrepresentation of my entire argument, again... are you going to actually read my posts? I've never said that anything was the way it should be done, only that it was possible.

Although if your answer is seriously that you'll make an unkillable enemy and then kill it when you get bored we've went a bit past the lack of creativity and adaptability present in a video game like experience. Do tell, what are the players actually doing here if they have no control over what happens on a micro or macro scale?

The players have control, and several ways to stop the Frenzied Berserkers were pointed out. The point I was making is that they can ignore one or two of those, which is probably two turns of game time, that's enough to make a battle significant and memorable instead of being: "The wizard sleeps everybody" or "the wizard casts grease". It would be "The Wizard casts grease, but the Barbarians sheer rage allows them to overcome it..." and a few rounds of that, allowing for a more memorable combat, using enemies that are functionally equivalent to lower level enemies.

As an important note, High level concepts are very hard to make work at lower levels. At higher levels you have so many more options it's not even funny, and a good DM will use them to great effect.

[The Insanity]

I'm arguing that high level play can replicate lower level play if necessary without too much work (although it does take more work).

Then why won't you just, you know, play low level instead? It kinda misses the point of playing high level if it's the same as low level...

[AMFV]

Then why won't you just, you know, play low level instead? It kinda misses the point of playing high level if it's the same as low level...

I don't like playing low level, first off. Second off, the point I'm making, and have been stating repeatedly, in fact in the very post before this one, and I believe in almost every post prior to that since this discussion, is that it is possible to use the same type of encounters in higher level. It gives you more options, it doesn't necessarily limit them.

[Vaz]

Yeah but WBL is an issue.

Not really. Dischargeable goodies like Contingent Spells, Skull Talismans, Potions or Scrolls are fantastic. You can then give stuff to the party via Wands or Staffs, but for the more broken stuff lets you shore up defences to make your encounters more difficult. You do burn an action possibly, but you should have ways around that.

If you're using melee characters that can be got around by flying, you might as well save the time on stating them out and put a wall in its place. It's the same result in the end, a spent spell slot to avoid the hazard. It also shouldn't offer XP - it's hardly a challenge, or a significant reduction in resources.

It would be like saying you're a party with a Cleric 20 put on a desert island with a load of refugees from a crashed boat, giving them the shaken condition, some of them sickened . You must survive for 10 days. It can create food and drink (at most, having to wait a day), or it can even get off of the island on its own. It's no challenge, really waiting that long. A low level party however who does not have a Cleric with access to Food and Drink would be reliant on having to scavenge for food through the survival skill. The extremes of temperature might need shelters to be created etc. It's not just a matter of "expending resources", but to be challenging to do so. For example, a high level ranger with the ability to hit DC40 checks on a take 10 at each attempt with Survival lets it easily look after those people who crashed on the island, and it's not a challenge. One who has to scavenge for food for 15 people (DC40) with a total check of 15 on a take 10 might require him to teach some people how to forage (Retraining etc). That is what would be a use of the resources.

Now, like I said, a Fighter who cannot harm a caster thanks to Friendly Fire and Flying is no challenge whatsoever - especially if there is something like Echoing Spell or Persist going on with it. It is no challenge and has not reduced the resources massively. There should be no xp. If there is no xp, why should the party fight it? Either use small amount of resources to avoid, or use a few more and get more XP? Bear in mind this might be considered houserules, but we know that the CR system is screwy, and so used as nothing more than a guideline, so I've not got a problem with recognising that less resources used = less XP given to the party. A ninja who sneaks around hidden will get more XP if it has a higher chance of being spotted (risk = reward, basically). One which is wandering around with Darkstalker and a hide/move silently check of the targets spot/listen check +21 is not going to get as much XP as one with a check of +1 and no darkstalker - but only if they're successful.

I'm sure you're all going to tell me how terrible a DM I am that I don't let my party play using their abilities to the full - but that's a rare occurence - for example, against the ninja, I might use See Invisibility, and Touchsight, with boosted Wisdom scores for Listen/Move Silently, etc.

Against a flying ubercharger melee fighter with an insane Spell Resistance and AC, you can bet your bottom dollar that I have wings and some form of touch attack at range.

[AMFV]

Before I start, I want to note that I'm not disagreeing at all, your post was excellent, and I agree fully with it. I just have a few tangential points to add.

Not really. Dischargeable goodies like Contingent Spells, Skull Talismans, Potions or Scrolls are fantastic. You can then give stuff to the party via Wands or Staffs, but for the more broken stuff lets you shore up defences to make your encounters more difficult. You do burn an action possibly, but you should have ways around that.

If you're using melee characters that can be got around by flying, you might as well save the time on stating them out and put a wall in its place. It's the same result in the end, a spent spell slot to avoid the hazard. It also shouldn't offer XP - it's hardly a challenge, or a significant reduction in resources.

This is true, you definitely need to plan your hazards to your specific party, as I was saying with a flying party, you need the adversaries to have ways for the enemies to fly, which comes in potions, as I said. Or some way to keep them on the ground, Downdraft, a precast control weather, a really big scary flying hazard that makes the ground seem safer. Or hell somebody could use a familiar to cast a fog spell in the sky above the enemies, that would block LoE and force your party down if they have to engage.

It would be like saying you're a party with a Cleric 20 put on a desert island with a load of refugees from a crashed boat, giving them the shaken condition, some of them sickened . You must survive for 10 days. It can create food and drink (at most, having to wait a day), or it can even get off of the island on its own. It's no challenge, really waiting that long. A low level party however who does not have a Cleric with access to Food and Drink would be reliant on having to scavenge for food through the survival skill. The extremes of temperature might need shelters to be created etc. It's not just a matter of "expending resources", but to be challenging to do so. For example, a high level ranger with the ability to hit DC40 checks on a take 10 at each attempt with Survival lets it easily look after those people who crashed on the island, and it's not a challenge. One who has to scavenge for food for 15 people (DC40) with a total check of 15 on a take 10 might require him to teach some people how to forage (Retraining etc). That is what would be a use of the resources.

Which is why you alter the encounter somewhat, you put the Cleric 20 on a desert island in a dead magic zone, or a wild magic zone. You put the island on the Elemental Plane of Fire, or Tartarus. You could make the Survivors all contract Mummy Rot, or something worse. You could make more survivors than the cleric could feed and have the local food supplies be corrupted.

Now, like I said, a Fighter who cannot harm a caster thanks to Friendly Fire and Flying is no challenge whatsoever - especially if there is something like Echoing Spell or Persist going on with it. It is no challenge and has not reduced the resources massively. There should be no xp. If there is no xp, why should the party fight it? Either use small amount of resources to avoid, or use a few more and get more XP? Bear in mind this might be considered houserules, but we know that the CR system is screwy, and so used as nothing more than a guideline, so I've not got a problem with recognising that less resources used = less XP given to the party. A ninja who sneaks around hidden will get more XP if it has a higher chance of being spotted (risk = reward, basically). One which is wandering around with Darkstalker and a hide/move silently check of the targets spot/listen check +21 is not going to get as much XP as one with a check of +1 and no darkstalker - but only if they're successful.

I'm sure you're all going to tell me how terrible a DM I am that I don't let my party play using their abilities to the full - but that's a rare occurence - for example, against the ninja, I might use See Invisibility, and Touchsight, with boosted Wisdom scores for Listen/Move Silently, etc.

Against a flying ubercharger melee fighter with an insane Spell Resistance and AC, you can bet your bottom dollar that I have wings and some form of touch attack at range.

I agree with this, however I want to add that building adversaries for each PC to be overcome by, can make them start to feel superfluous, at least to my thinking, you want a happy medium.