Are 5e monsters boring bags of HPs? PROVE IT!

[Scripten]

To be thread relevant, you did not address how the 5e Pitfiend is as interesting or more interesting than the PF Pitfiend.

Because comparatively the 5e Pitfiend does feel like just a sack of hit points.

It (the 5E Pit Fiend) is interesting because the comparatively limited set of abilities, spells, and various attacks are roughly on par with the usefulness of the PF Pit Fiend in the context of the system itself. In PF, a good portion of the battle is the counter metagame where players and monsters engage in a superpower arm wrestling match before slugging it out. That's a component of how the system works. 5E's lack of a complex counter metagame means that it doesn't require the same number of abilities to offer a comparatively interesting encounter. (And also makes it a lot easier to run.)

In 5E, the intention is that each monster statblock brings different things to the table. In the case of the Pit Fiend, it has multiattack with long reach on three attacks and a poisonous bite on the last. It also has supplemental innate magic and an impressive defensive structure. This is intended to be used with other monsters, if needed, such that each brings something to the table. That doesn't make the Pit Fiend boring or just a sack of hit points; it just means that its purpose in the system is different from the PF Pit Fiend. (This should be obvious when the PF Pit Fiend has enough abilities that it becomes more complex to run by itself than a combat with a 5E Pit Fiend and multiple other monsters.)

having a chance in hell beating it.

Heh.

In other words, if you don't like bounded accuracy, bounded accuracy is a problem with the system. Yes, that's circular, but it's an accurate statement of preference.

Sure, and I'm not attacking anyone's preference. I'm just stating that one person's preference does not, and should not, have precedence over anothers', especially when each can be satisfied by playing the system they prefer.

[Rhedyn]

HOW did your group of 7 level 8 PCs kill a Pit Fiend?

At that level, a Pit Fiend can just trap all of you in a Wall of Fire and then Fireball you to death, while Multiattacking anyone who manages to get out into a bloody pulp.

Sorcerer twin Polymorphs two party members into Giant Apes and then runs away out of the room to hide. Oath of Ancients Paladin stands next to them. Sharpshooter Arcane Archer Fighter/Monk plinks him to death while running around obstacles.
Wizard faffs about. Protection fighter hangs out with the apes not doing much.

A Bard and another fighter were the apes.

Range power forces it to close. Walls of fire are walked through with ease. Pitfiend engages ape squad and manages to kill one ape.

Could the Pitfiend have had better tactics? Maybe, but our tactics could have been better too. And no one at our table thinks such a cosmic force needs perfect play to handle this encounter.

EDIT: Yes the apes were doing half damage. It's the sharpshooter with the Oathbow that was doing most of the damage.

[KorvinStarmast]

HOW are they more interesting? Having a bunch of abilities doesn't make a monster inherently more interesting.

Might make it more dangerous, though. More ways to hurt the party ... or a given character.

Take a goblin. Remove their shortbow, and give them the capacity to use Firebolt. Does that make the goblin more interesting?

It makes it easier for the Goblin to start a fire.

Not giving a thoughtful response to a person whose reply oozes condensation, says nothing of my points merits.

If you don't know what a word is, or what it means, I suggest that you use a different word that you do know the meaning of. I am going to guess that you meant to use condescension there. (A shorter word, scorn, might have fit, but that gets into choices and preferences).

not do this same edition wars crap all over again?

The OP apparently wants one.

Just to reiterate, I'm looking for examples, especially examples from other editions - and, even better, examples from other editions that are absent in 5e.

[Scripten]

Sorcerer twin Polymorphs two party members into Giant Apes and then runs away out of the room to hide. Oath of Ancients Paladin stands next to them. Sharpshooter Arcane Archer Fighter/Monk plinks him to death while running around obstacles.
Wizard faffs about. Protection fighter hangs out with the apes not doing much.

A Bard and another fighter were the apes.

Range power forces it to close. Walls of fire are walked through with ease. Pitfiend engages ape squad and manages to kill one ape.

Could the Pitfiend have had better tactics? Maybe, but our tactics could have been better too. And no one at our table thinks such a cosmic force needs perfect play to handle this encounter.

EDIT: Yes the apes were doing half damage. It's the sharpshooter with the Oathbow that was doing most of the damage.

So the Pit Fiend is taken out by a large party with at least one Very Rare (PC lvl 11+) magical weapon and a decent amount of resources spent by the sorcerer. That sounds about right for a "Hard" encounter with a large party, especially when the Pit Fiend is being played without competent tactics. It could have flown past the party, engaged the monk/fighter at melee range, and wrapped itself in a Wall of Fire, or done so many more things than just going toe-to-toe with the giant apes. (Proof enough, I think, that monsters are more than just bags-of-HP in 5E.) What about the fear aura? Did everyone succeed on their saves or what?

Yes, if you don't use the powers that monsters have or understand how to build a challenging combat, then combat is trivial and boring. If you don't pay attention to what monsters are capable of, then they will appear incapable. I'm not sure why you're surprised by this?

[Rhedyn]

1. It wouldn't have happened in PF. blasphemy sla

2. To fear aura: Paladin

3. Fire Wall is not a barrier. You can just walk through it. Between aura of warding and paladin saves, the wall does an average of 5.625 fire damage. It's a nothing power.

4. The bow came from the cr16 blue dragon we killed at level 7.

5. Sorcerer used his second Polymorph for the day on the Pitfiend after 3 encounters of demons/devils.

[Unoriginal]

Sorcerer twin Polymorphs two party members into Giant Apes and then runs away out of the room to hide. Oath of Ancients Paladin stands next to them. Sharpshooter Arcane Archer Fighter/Monk plinks him to death while running around obstacles.
Wizard faffs about. Protection fighter hangs out with the apes not doing much.

A Bard and another fighter were the apes.

Range power forces it to close. Walls of fire are walked through with ease. Pitfiend engages ape squad and manages to kill one ape.

...

So, you're telling me that you had a combat where you had to have two persons transformed in giant gorillas fight a huge devil through walls of fire, with two knights helping protecting them and with an archer using a weapon just shy of being legendary firing at it, and a wizard casting their spells at it...

And that it was boring to you?

Jeez, it's something that could be an awesome heavy metal album cover. How it could be boring is beyond me.

Could the Pitfiend have had better tactics? Maybe, but our tactics could have been better too. And no one at our table thinks such a cosmic force needs perfect play to handle this encounter.

The Pit Fiend didn't need perfect play. It just needed to have a basic level of intelligence.

The Pit Fiend had no reason to stay and engage with the apes. It could just have used its wings to go up and thrown Fireballs at the archer or the Wizard. Heck, it could have just went out of the room, searched for the Sorcerer who was maintaining their spell via Detect Magic, and murdered them.

Also, about those Wall of Fire you "walked through with ease": crossing a Wall of Fire, or just standing near one, damages you about 1/6th of your typical level 8 Barbarian's health, on average. That's not "with ease".

To say nothing of the fact that the wall is not see-through, so your archer couldn't have done **** if one of them was between them and the enemy.

So, what you're saying is "my DM made the CR 20 super-genius act like a moron by doing nothing but hitting our big brutes while getting hit, and we still used a lot of ressources to take it down. Man, this CR 20 super-genius is just a boring bag of HPs".

1. It wouldn't have happened in PF. blasphemy sla

"In Pathfinder, my DM wouldn't have made the devil act like a moron."

2. To fear aura: Paladin

Yes? That's still a DC 21 effect. Even imagigning you have a +5 due to the Paladin maxing CHA early, you still have a DC 16 to pass. And two of the PCs were WIS 10 apes with no proficiency in WIS save, at the time.

3. Fire Wall is not a barrier. You can just walk through it. Between aura of warding and paladin saves, the wall does an average of 5.625 fire damage. It's a nothing power.

You don't get a save if you cross the fire or if you stand within 10 feet of it. The save when the wall appears.

So no, even with Aura of Warding it does the double of what you say. Anytime you're within 10 feet of it.

4. The bow came from the cr16 blue dragon we killed at level 7.

Solo blue dragon is a legitimate encounter for this level, yes.

5. Sorcerer used his second Polymorph for the day on the Pitfiend after 3 encounters of demons/devils.

So he used his last most powerful spell slot on this encounter.

[Chaosmancer]

To the OP, i never really played any edition as much as I've played 5th. I have experience with 4e but the monsters were never run with the type of encounters or mindsets people attribute to the edition

I will say 4e has some really interesting abilities that I like to add in occassionally. But, I think the truth is a little more complicated than the monsters. You need to know what the monster and the players are capable of, and match things up so they are interesting

1. It wouldn't have happened in PF. blasphemy sla

2. To fear aura: Paladin

3. Fire Wall is not a barrier. You can just walk through it. Between aura of warding and paladin saves, the wall does an average of 5.625 fire damage. It's a nothing power.

4. The bow came from the cr16 blue dragon we killed at level 7.

5. Sorcerer used his second Polymorph for the day on the Pitfiend after 3 encounters of demons/devils.

To this...

I'm highly confused.

Assuming the Pit Fiend hits (+14 to hit makes that highly likely) and assuming the poison damage is NOT included, it averages 99 damage a turn.

A level 7 paladin with a con of 20 averages 81 hp. So how did the paladin survive running up to the pit fiend? Then, with the paladin and his save boosting and magic negation gone the pit fiend heads to the ranger, potentially casting a dc 21 hold monster if he can't reach him in a single move, and hits him for 120 average damage, taking the bow out of the fight.

Apes last a turn or two each unless the pit fiend finds the sorcerer, and the pit fiend has speed on the Kong Brothers there.

I mean, something else may be going on, but on paper getting out without casualties is a matter of lots of luck and the DM playing the monster very very poorly. I hate saying that but... I don't know how else to make sense of it

[Scripten]

1. It wouldn't have happened in PF. blasphemy sla

Just because you hate bounded accuracy doesn't mean it's universally bad nor that the Pit Fiend is just a bag of HP. Save-or-die is incredibly boring to me, so you're not really arguing for anything but personal preference.

2. To fear aura: Paladin

How? Is the Paladin level 8 or level 10? The Pit Fiend's Fear Aura isn't a spell, so it must be the Aura of Protection. If the Paladin is helping everyone save with an Aura of Protection, then the Pit Fiend should have worked to break up the party with a fireball, then approached to 20 ft. to frighten at least the apes, who will only have a wisdom of 12. (Even with the pally right there, they would need to roll at least a 15 to save.) That's not a particularly difficult strategy.

3. Fire Wall is not a barrier. You can just walk through it. Between aura of warding and paladin saves, the wall does an average of 5.625 fire damage. It's a nothing power.

The argument that powers aren't enough to counter your large party isn't really doing much to address the OP. Nevertheless, 5 damage per turn on top of the Pit Fiend's multiattack should have it downing the sharpshooter or pally in the first few turns, before trying to take on the apes. Pit Fiends have a high intelligence and should be prioritizing targets or flying out of reach. Moreover, they should be paired with other creatures to make the battle more interesting, since your party is so large.

4. The bow came from the cr16 blue dragon we killed at level 7.

So you got an overpowered weapon from a "Medium" difficulty encounter which helped trivialize another encounter. Your DM doesn't understand how to calculate encounters, unfortunately. You should be facing more difficult encounters due to the size of your group. This also has nothing to do with the argument that 5E monsters are bags-of-HP.

5. Sorcerer used his second Polymorph for the day on the Pitfiend after 3 encounters of demons/devils.

Your sorcerer finished his nova for the day with 3 more encounters to go. Considering that your DM appears to only pit you against less challenging encounters, this sounds about right. The Pit Fiend should have been accompanied by more enemies or using the environment if he'd intended for it to be a memorable encounter.

I'm sorry, but your DM is just not any good at playing monsters, judging by this encounter.

EDIT: And why in the world did the Pit Fiend not chase the sorcerer?! There's no way he moved more than the Pit Fiend's 60 ft. fly speed.

[Rhedyn]

Monk Archer could handle fireballs just fine. The wizard basically did nothing of note. Running around looking for the sorcerer while the monkfighter kills him is a bad idea.

And I didn't say the encounter was boring. It's just after it, the MM has little left for our party outside of fighting small armies.

The Pitfiend is less interesting than the PF encounter would have been. We would have needed to be level 15 to be within striking distance of the Lord's of hell not level 8. That Pitfiend can better handle what a party can throw at it. The 5e Pitfiend is just a few low level abilities from being trivialized.

[Vaz]

Oto thise who think that 5e monsters aren't boring bags of HP, half, or even quarter the monsters HP, and see what changes.

5e monsters ARE boring bags of HP, because they are nothing more than a resource expender. The game is built around medium encounters, removing 1/8th of your resources, and build around a coin toss on whether you can deal damage. More difficult fights feel nothing more than a simply upscaled version of a resource expending fight.

The game is literally built around damage having no effect. If it wasn't you wouldn't be complaining about minions. Saying that monsters are not boring bags of HP because the game is built around having boring bags of HP stopping you from doing that to the one significant resource expenditure during a day.

[Scripten]

Monk Archer could handle fireballs just fine. The wizard basically did nothing of note. Running around looking for the sorcerer while the monkfighter kills him is a bad idea.

The maximum amount of health that your monkfighter could have would be 123 HP. Between the multiattack and the poison, there's no way he should have lasted more than one turn. From there on, the Pit Fiend should be moving far past your party's range of movement and going for the sorcerer.

And I didn't say the encounter was boring. It's just after it, the MM has little left for our party outside of fighting small armies.

Or, y'know, two Pit Fiends. Or a Pit Fiend and just about anything else in the MM. Or a Pit Fiend in an actual lair. Or a Pit Fiend that does something other than stand there and trade blows with the obvious walls of HP. You don't have to like the system, but you're certainly not making a strong argument for the thread topic, is all.

The Pitfiend is less interesting than the PF encounter would have been. We would have needed to be level 15 to be within striking distance of the Lord's of hell not level 8. That Pitfiend can better handle what a party can throw at it. The 5e Pitfiend is just a few low level abilities from being trivialized.

So what, a save-or-die automatically makes the encounter more interesting? Would you consider that to be the case if the 5E Pit Fiend had the same abilities?

[JNAProductions]

Monk Archer could handle fireballs just fine. The wizard basically did nothing of note. Running around looking for the sorcerer while the monkfighter kills him is a bad idea.

And I didn't say the encounter was boring. It's just after it, the MM has little left for our party outside of fighting small armies.

The Pitfiend is less interesting than the PF encounter would have been. We would have needed to be level 15 to be within striking distance of the Lord's of hell not level 8. That Pitfiend can better handle what a party can throw at it. The 5e Pitfiend is just a few low level abilities from being trivialized.

How so? What abilities trivialize it?

Because, let's face it, that was a STUPID Pit Fiend. I like to think I'm smart-let's call me Int 14, with no real battle experience-and see what tactics I can come up with.

Step 1: Fly above the party. That means that your apes are useless, your Paladin has to resort to plinking with a bow, your Wizard and Sorcerer are quite probably useless, if they rely on firebolt, and in general, the party's DPR drops immensely. There is still the Oathbow Fighter, who I'll assume has a Wisdom of 16, but no save Proficiency in that stat. Which leads to step 2...

Step 2: Cast Hold Person on the Oathbow wielder. At DC 21, and maybe +8 to saves (20 Cha on the Paladin, 16 Wis on the wielder) he's likely to fail, and if the pit fiend takes two rounds to Hold him? No big deal. 300 HP will let him weather the storm.

Step 3: Spam Fireballs. With only paltry ranged damage, this is a slug-out the Pit Fiend WILL win.

Edit: How would you feel if, in 3.5, you fought a Pit Fiend, and the Pit Fiend just flew at you and engaged your big bruisers in melee combat?

[Chaosmancer]

Monk Archer could handle fireballs just fine. The wizard basically did nothing of note. Running around looking for the sorcerer while the monkfighter kills him is a bad idea.

And I didn't say the encounter was boring. It's just after it, the MM has little left for our party outside of fighting small armies.

The Pitfiend is less interesting than the PF encounter would have been. We would have needed to be level 15 to be within striking distance of the Lord's of hell not level 8. That Pitfiend can better handle what a party can throw at it. The 5e Pitfiend is just a few low level abilities from being trivialized.

A few mid-level abilities, high level items, and a lot of mismanagement.

Anecdotes are anecdotes, but i nearly TPK'd my level 16 party with a single CR 18 Dragon (they fought thru the lair, but were able to heal to max before the fight). And I have yet to meet someone who could give me a reasonable way to defeat a well-prepared and intelligently played Lich in his own lair.

I'm not saying that lower leveled groups don't punch well above their weight class, they most certainly do, but I've rarely personally encountered the massive disparities that sometimes get reported like this. To the point where i have trouble understanding how it happens

[JNAProductions]

Also, let me get the party comp straight.

You had...

1 Sorcerer
1 Protection Fighter
1 Multiclass Arcane Archer/Monk (What levels?)
1 Bard
1 Other Fighter
1 Paladin
1 Wizard

Correct?

Edit: And, unless that multiclass was a Fighter 5/Monk 3 (or more Fighter), they lacked Extra Attack, which means their damage output would be pretty low even WITH the Oathbow.

[Rhedyn]

Some are attacking my DM now. We switched that campaign to PF and played it to level 20 without issue and the combats were fun against interesting monsters.

Same DM. Same players. Same campaign. Different system. One system clearly has more interesting monsters.

[JNAProductions]

Some are attacking my DM now. We switched that campaign to PF and played it to level 20 without issue and the combats were fun against interesting monsters.

Same DM. Same players. Same campaign. Different system. One system clearly has more interesting monsters.

Perhaps your DM just doesn't put as much effort into 5E?

Because, again, all he had the Pit Fiend do was rush at the melee bruisers. That's an intelligent enemy played stupidly.

[Unoriginal]

Oto thise who think that 5e monsters aren't boring bags of HP, half, or even quarter the monsters HP, and see what changes.

This is just as relevant as saying "half, or even quarter the monster's AC, and see what changes" or "half, or even quarter the monster's damage output, and see what changes".

So really, I don't see what you're trying to prove, aside that making monsters weaker make them weaker.

5e monsters ARE boring bags of HP, because they are nothing more than a resource expender.

They're ressources expenders, sure. But they're awesome ressource expenders.

Some are attacking my DM now. We switched that campaign to PF and played it to level 20 without issue and the combats were fun against interesting monsters.

Same DM. Same players. Same campaign. Different system. One system clearly has more interesting monsters.

It's not because you GM one game well that you GM all games well. I'm certainly better at GMing Pathfinder than I am at GMing Exalted.

Your DM handled this Pit Fiend very badly. And from the rest you've said, they probably handled most 5e encounters the same way. It's not a problem to have a system that doesn't fit you or your playstyle, and it's not the system's fault if it happens.

Pathfinder monsters, and probably Pathfinder in general, fits what you want better than 5e. There is no issue with that. But it doesn't make 5e's monsters inherently boring, especially since what you've presented in an anecdote about a mis-handled encounter.

[Eric Diaz]

The OP apparently wants one.

That is unfair... I said repeatedly that I'm looking for good examples to use in my 5e games. But then again...

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Have a nice day!

[War_lord]

Someone else made the point earlier that if all your combats are white room slugfests, PF monsters are going to seem more interesting because a long list of abilities covers up a lack of tactical acumen on the part of the DM nicely.

[Rhedyn]

This is just as relevant as saying "half, or even quarter the monster's AC, and see what changes" or "half, or even quarter the monster's damage output, and see what changes".

So really, I don't see what you're trying to prove, aside that making monsters weaker make them weaker.



They're ressources expenders, sure. But they're awesome ressource expenders.



It's not because you GM one game well that you GM all games well. I'm certainly better at GMing Pathfinder than I am at GMing Exalted.

Your DM handled this Pit Fiend very badly. And from the rest you've said, they probably handled most 5e encounters the same way. It's not a problem to have a system that doesn't fit you or your playstyle, and it's not the system's fault if it happens.

Pathfinder monsters, and probably Pathfinder in general, fits what you want better than 5e. There is no issue with that. But it doesn't make 5e's monsters inherently boring, especially since what you've presented in an anecdote about a mis-handled encounter.

So far all your tactical suggestions involved the 5e Pitfiend dying faster.

Some other guy also thought giant apes didn't have range attacks. (As in you guys should actually look at the stated abilities before making incorrect statements)

Have you ever considered that you guys may be the ones that don't know what you are talking about and haven't ran across a more optimised party?

It's one thing to just call the DM/Pitfiend dumb. It's another to actually suggest any tactics that would have let it win. You are only assuming it was dumb because in your minds the game shouldn't be that broken, but many have pointed out that per the DMG, the encounter was very doable by the systems estimation system.

Maybe you are the one with a problem with 5e if you think a Pitfiend isn't an easy low level party challenge?

[War_lord]

A Pit fiend is a hard encounter for seven level 8 players. In addition as a variant they can summon 2d4 bearded devils, 1d4 barbed devils, or one Erinyes with no chance of failure. Even fought alone with an oversized party with full resources, fighting a Pit Fiend should not be "easy". The fact that it was easy was down to your DM's decision to give it the combat loop of a zombie.

[Scripten]

Spoiler: Rhedyn

Show

So far all your tactical suggestions involved the 5e Pitfiend dying faster.

Some other guy also thought giant apes didn't have range attacks. (As in you guys should actually look at the stated abilities before making incorrect statements)

A Pit Fiend has a fly speed of 60 feet. Even if it attacks and moves in the same turn, the apes attack once, with disadvantage. If it dashes, it can be out of range and shooting fireballs down with no problem.

Have you ever considered that you guys may be the ones that don't know what you are talking about and haven't ran across a more optimised party?

Most DMs run with the suggested party size of 4-6. If you run a party bigger than that, then you should be making more difficult challenges for them. This is a DM problem, not a system problem.

It's one thing to just call the DM/Pitfiend dumb. It's another to actually suggest any tactics that would have let it win. You are only assuming it was dumb because in your minds the game shouldn't be that broken, but many have pointed out that per the DMG, the encounter was very doable by the systems estimation system.

Maybe you are the one with a problem with 5e if you think a Pitfiend isn't an easy low level party challenge?

It's also perfectly reasonable to note that the encounter was both possible and that the DM ran it poorly. Because both were true. Also, if the system math indicates that a battle is possible and it is, that doesn't count as being broken. In fact, it suggests pretty much the complete opposite.

Spoiler: Vaz

Show

Oto thise who think that 5e monsters aren't boring bags of HP, half, or even quarter the monsters HP, and see what changes.

If you half or quarter most monsters' HP, they will die before doing anything. Duh. The point of having higher HP is to allow monsters to work together for more than a single turn. Otherwise you're just playing a demented form of checkers with fantasy paint on.

If you quarter the players' HP, then they will die in just about one hit. Therefore players are nothing but boring bags of HP with no interesting mechanics to set them apart. Obviously everyone who plays 5E just loves sitting in white rooms hitting bland enemies with no distinguishing traits while playing characters who are all the exact same.

5e monsters ARE boring bags of HP, because they are nothing more than a resource expender. The game is built around medium encounters, removing 1/8th of your resources, and build around a coin toss on whether you can deal damage. More difficult fights feel nothing more than a simply upscaled version of a resource expending fight.

What? No, really... what? Are you trolling? This is utterly ridiculous.

"Upscaling" a resource expenditure is called "dying". You know, when that resource called HP is gone? This is accomplished by a combination of strategy and mechanics that your post completely ignores. Or did I imagine the importance of tactics, positioning, and mechanical synergy that goes into every good 5E encounter?

The game is literally built around damage having no effect. If it wasn't you wouldn't be complaining about minions. Saying that monsters are not boring bags of HP because the game is built around having boring bags of HP stopping you from doing that to the one significant resource expenditure during a day.

I would argue that, based on this post, you don't understand the basic fundamentals of gaming. Every single game in existence is a balance of resource expenditure of some type. You're literally saying "D&D 5E is a game, therefore enemies in it are boring bags of HP", which is a non-sequitur. Adding minions is nothing more than creating the (oh no!) resource expenditure of having to spend attacks to clean them up before they do their thing. The difference being, of course, that it completely breaks immersion and adds nothing of value that a normal monster couldn't add.

5E strikes a balance between 4E and Pathfinder that a lot of people enjoy. Coming into this forum just to attack it based on personal preference is pretty tactless, because you're just belittling people for enjoying something you don't.

(If this is supposed to be humor, I apologize. There's no blue text so I assumed it not sarcasm.)

@War_lord: Considering the description of the combat Ryedyn describes, I find that a very apt observation. Pathfinder does not need to be a white room slugfest, but it supports them better than 5E does, which for some DMs may be a plus.

[Aett_Thorn]

So far all your tactical suggestions involved the 5e Pitfiend dying faster.

Some other guy also thought giant apes didn't have range attacks. (As in you guys should actually look at the stated abilities before making incorrect statements)

Have you ever considered that you guys may be the ones that don't know what you are talking about and haven't ran across a more optimised party?

It's one thing to just call the DM/Pitfiend dumb. It's another to actually suggest any tactics that would have let it win. You are only assuming it was dumb because in your minds the game shouldn't be that broken, but many have pointed out that per the DMG, the encounter was very doable by the systems estimation system.

Maybe you are the one with a problem with 5e if you think a Pitfiend isn't an easy low level party challenge?

Pit Fiend flies 60 feet up. Giant Apes now have disadvantage on their rock attacks. Meanwhile, the Pit Fiend can lob Fireball after Fireball at them.

Pit Fiend SHOULD have gone after the weaker players, or done something to separate the party to make them easier to deal with. A Wall of Fire in between the ranged and melee characters should force them to take some damage, especially if the Pit Fiend keeps moving back and forth in the air to make the melees keep going through it. The Paladin's Aura would only help them if they were still within 10 feet of the Paladin when they walked through it. Meaning that the initiative order would hurt the aura here if the Wall was well-placed.

How was the Sorc able to run away in the first place? Why wasn't that the first target of a Fireball or a Multi-Attack? Any intelligent creature probably could tell what had just happened, and known to go after the caster of the spell instead of the targets.

Where was this fight happening? Why didn't the Pit Fiend grapple a player and fly up with them and drop them?

[Unoriginal]

So far all your tactical suggestions involved the 5e Pitfiend dying faster.

Some other guy also thought giant apes didn't have range attacks. (As in you guys should actually look at the stated abilities before making incorrect statements)

Ahaha.

The Giant Ape's ranged attacks are "pick a big rock up and throw it at the enemy".

Was the room filled with disposable big boulders?

Furthermore, it doesn't change that the Pit Fiend would have been easily able to fly up to the archer and kill them within three rounds, if it wanted.

Have you ever considered that you guys may be the ones that don't know what you are talking about and haven't ran across a more optimised party?

I always consider if I'm the one who don't know what he's talking about. My conclusion for this topic was "nope, it's not me."

It's one thing to just call the DM/Pitfiend dumb. It's another to actually suggest any tactics that would have let it win. You are only assuming it was dumb because in your minds the game shouldn't be that broken, but many have pointed out that per the DMG, the encounter was very doable by the systems estimation system.

And those who pointed that are mistaken.

By 5e's encounter estimation system, a CR 20 monster is a Deadly Encounter for 6 level 8 adventurers, and an Hard one for 7.

Of course, it's an only estimation, and it's not ridiculously outlandish to think a smaller party has a chance to win.

What you've presented, though? It was because the Pit Fiend acted in an incredibly dumb manner. Along with things like you party having good look, the apes being lucky on their WIS save, the Wall of Fire not doing as much damage as it should nor blocking the archer's line of sight, and, admittedly, important ressources well spent.

Note that I'm not saying your DM is dumb. I just think he either doesn't know how to run an encounter for 5e, or that he deliberately made the fiend act dumb so you could kill it more easily.

Maybe you are the one with a problem with 5e if you think a Pitfiend isn't an easy low level party challenge?

Interesting hypothesis. Completely false on both premise and conclusion, though.

[UrielAwakened]

All of this is irrelevant since the 4e Pit Fiend is clearly the coolest one of them all.

Its entire schtick is it commands hoards of devils to match into battle and suicide bomb the PCs.

Metal af.

[Rhedyn]

We got the drop on the Pitfiend after it and a Balor fought armies. Since our bosses normally have maximum HD, this one had normal HP to represent wounds.

The Pitfiend never saw the Sorcerer.

We were also underground in a chamber, flying completely out of range wasn't an option.

There monk wasn't by the Paladin/apes.

He could have fought the monk with fireball and died since the monkfighter outdamaged him enough that he would win the exchange. His only hope was to get in melee. Unfortunately for it, apes intercepted and were better at Athletics than the Pitfiend because they actually get proficiency. So it got caught in melee and the monk could run up side walls to shoot over the firewall.

In hindsight ranged was a better option for resource draining, but the Pitfiend wanted to win.

[Scripten]

And those who pointed that are mistaken.

By 5e's encounter estimation system, a CR 20 monster is a Deadly Encounter for *11* level 8 adventurers.

Are you sure you did the math right? You have to half the monster XP for parties above 6 PCs when they are fighting only one monster.

We got the drop on the Pitfiend after it and a Balor fought armies. Since our bosses normally have maximum HD, this one had normal HP to represent wounds.

That's still 300 HP, which is enough to weather several attacks for optimum circumstances. You also didn't mention this before. So your party is getting buffs and your enemies are getting debuffs?

The Pitfiend never saw the Sorcerer.

How? Even if you got a surprise round, which you never should have gotten, Pit Fiends have Truesight to a range of 120 ft.

We were also underground in a chamber, flying completely out of range wasn't an option.

So the Pit Fiend was also fought in an environment that further gimped its efficiency? And it didn't go somewhere else to fight in a more optimum location?

There monk wasn't by the Paladin/apes.

So they and the sorcerer should should never have gotten the pally auras.

He could have fought the monk with fireball and died since the monkfighter outdamaged him enough that he would win the exchange. His only hope was to get in melee. Unfortunately for it, apes intercepted and were better at Athletics than the Pitfiend because they actually get proficiency. So it got caught in melee and the monk could run up side walls to shoot over the firewall.

Athletics for what? Grappling? This is sounding more and more like a farce.

And even so, how is that boring?

In hindsight ranged was a better option for resource draining, but the Pitfiend wanted to win.

So its 22 Int and 18 Wis weren't enough to make it do anything except get into a punching match with two giant apes in an environment where most of its abilities were negated?

[Unoriginal]

Are you sure you did the math right? You have to half the monster XP for parties above 6 PCs when they are fighting only one monster.

Nah, I messed that up. Corrected it afterward.

He could have fought the monk with fireball and died since the monkfighter outdamaged him enough that he would win the exchange.

How much damage did the monk do?

[War_lord]

So you fought it while it was weakened in an environment that took away much of its mobility? Like, I don't understand what the desire is here, should it have five save or die effects attached?

[Scripten]

Like, I don't understand what the desire is here, should it have five save or die effects attached?

So far this is all I've been able to reason out: he wanted to have some of his friends taken out of the fight immediately so the combat would be harder, instead of using all of the powers and strategies available to the Pit Fiend, which were taken from it.