Hello guys. I've been a GM for long, pretty new to Pathfinder tho.
I am currently running a Kingmaker and also Curse of the Crimson Throne game with friends, however I've always had a problem: the encounters I run usually become Final Fantasy in a couple rounds; I hit you, you hit me, rinse and repeat. Even when knowing the monster statblocks and tactics, I feel there's always a way for the PCs to lock them down and make me lose interest on narrating what goes on.
An example was last night's Kingmaker session, where they found a fey that could become invisible by standing still for 1 round, then to reapear and use sneak attacks on the PCs. Tho they had to retire, our Cavalier used Call Out to lock him in combat for about 4 rounds. Since all the party was badly injured, he distracted him, however it became boring since both sides kept rolling 1s and low numbers, the Fey couldn't disengage because of Call Out, and it turned into 4 rounds of dice rolling.
Last night I finished reading Curse of the Crimson Throne, and the last battle against Ileosa makes me cringe, since it seems instead of a heated up battle, I have to roleplay an enemy that would rather tell the PCs to drop their weapons and go away, hard to imagine this tactic on a final battle, maybe because I am afraid I won't be able to roleplay said encounter.
What I mean is, I have problems looking at the game table as anything but a tactic minis game, and I haven't found a way to make battles interesting enough to roleplay while keeping the tactical aspect alive.
Any tips?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hello guys. I've been a GM for long, pretty new to Pathfinder tho.
I am currently running a Kingmaker and also Curse of the Crimson Throne game with friends, however I've always had a problem: the encounters I run usually become Final Fantasy in a couple rounds; I hit you, you hit me, rinse and repeat. Even when knowing the monster statblocks and tactics, I feel there's always a way for the PCs to lock them down and make me lose interest on narrating what goes on.
An example was last night's Kingmaker session, where they found a fey that could become invisible by standing still for 1 round, then to reapear and use sneak attacks on the PCs. Tho they had to retire, our Cavalier used Call Out to lock him in combat for about 4 rounds. Since all the party was badly injured, he distracted him, however it became boring since both sides kept rolling 1s and low numbers, the Fey couldn't disengage because of Call Out, and it turned into 4 rounds of dice rolling.
Last night I finished reading Curse of the Crimson Throne, and the last battle against Ileosa makes me cringe, since it seems instead of a heated up battle, I have to roleplay an enemy that would rather tell the PCs to drop their weapons and go away, hard to imagine this tactic on a final battle, maybe because I am afraid I won't be able to roleplay said encounter.
What I mean is, I have problems looking at the game table as anything but a tactic minis game, and I haven't found a way to make battles interesting enough to roleplay while keeping the tactical aspect alive.
Any tips?
A little context to my post, just so there isn't any misunderstanding - my view of what roleplaying means is that it is fundamentally about making decisions in the shoes of a character.
The thing about combat is that it is more or less a thing that at least one side decides is the best way to solve a problem. That is, there is role playing occurring by deciding to fight instead of talk or back off or whatever. However, once initiative is rolled the goal of either side is usually to murder the other side. Sometimes the goals are slightly different, but "drop the guys on the other team" is the go-to result for combat. This means that you aren't going to see many interesting choices being made beyond tactical decisions. Which isn't surprising in the slightest - once you decide the other side needs to be murdered, the only thing left is to choose how to do that best, which is what tactics is all about. So long as the group of PCs are all reasonably competent adventurers who don't skip over smart options and make moronic decisions for whatever reason, there is going to be little to differentiate between characters aside from what numbers and abilities are written on their sheet because the only relevant goal for the PCs usually is winning the fight, and the only relevant factors in decisions pertaining to the PCs' goal are tactical ones.
Now for how to try to solve this...you more or less can't, or at least not consistently. Treat combat as an extremely complicated way of solving a problem, just like a Disable Device checks or a Fly spell would be. That isn't to say that role playing opportunities can't come up from time to time(mostly by accident), but for the most part you really have to accept that combat will have about as much interesting role play as picking a lock. There will be exceptions, but they will be few and far between, and a lot of them will be completely by accident.
Here is the thing though - combat shouldn't just be something that happens. Many fights, especially big, important ones, should be the culmination of a whole bunch of events and choices that lead to two groups of sentient beings deciding that the only way to achieve their goals is to end the existence of another group of sentient beings. This is when you should be seeing the interesting role-playing happening. Ideally even the initiation of combat itself should be a role-playing choice, either directly done by the PCs when they decide that their goals or motivations and the existence of the opposition are mutually exclusive, or done indirectly where the PCs intentionally place themselves in a position where the opposition has to choose between attacking the PCs or furthering their goals. In the interest of making the role-play interesting, it should often be entirely possible to opt to *not* fight it out. Instead of having a group of cutthroats immediately attack the professional monster hunters who are interrupting their robbery, have them offer the PCs a cut to look the other way. Let the PCs walk away, or let them make it clear that if the cutthroats don't take anything they won't be stopped from leaving. Throw in one of the cutthroats holding someone hostage and threatening to kill them. Do the PCs care more about bringing a group of dangerous criminals to justice, or do they place more weight on the threat to an innocent's life. If the PCs offered to let the cutthroats walk, will they still be willing to do so if the criminals try to flee after half of them are killed by the party? Note that all of this should be happening before combat. Once they decide how they want to handle it, that's it. Meaningful role play is pretty much over. Now it's just time for resolution. Maybe resolution is rolling a diplomacy check to persuade the thugs to leave. Maybe it is taking the bribe and going to the tavern for a mug of stout. Maybe it is rolling intimidate to scare the criminals into running. Or maybe it is picking out the biggest guy and ramming a sword through their gut, or blasting them with rays of arcane fire. In any case, the deep decisions that show what sort of people the PCs really are have been done, and now all that's left are the decisions that are intended to best achieve the aims of the PCs. In combat, this is called tactics.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hm. I can think of two options here.
The first one is, of course, maintaining character. Yes, you're trying to destroy the other side, but there's still the little embellishments that make things fun, or at least take the edge off of all those crappy 1s you're throwing. Insults, taunts, boasts, threats, and the occasional ham can liven things up. Especially if a strange, unusual, or just weird ability gets used. (Animal Fury + skeleton + town sheriff = spitting bone fragments at ground near party members while sheriff reconsiders alliance with party.)
The other? Sometimes a group's goal isn't to just wipe out the other group. Maybe a holding action of some sort. Or a way to drive them off. Even evil can want to not slaughter a group of adventurers sometimes. It could be to leave witnesses to tell the tale. It could be not wanting to waste their time on such tripe. And it could be that they know they're toast and they're just trying to hold you off for a scant few seconds ...
Maybe see if there's ways you can spice things up that way.
Don't use monsters as published.
Make PCs put points into knowledge skills.
Introduce new monsters.
Metagaming is bad.
The level of metagaming you described is... normal...
change little details, like the fact that they have to stand still to be invisible.
NO THEY DON'T!
It's a regional variant, that ANYONE who rolled high enough would know.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Try not to get married to any of your villains as the PCs always find a way to make them seem foolish. Nothing sucks worse than getting all excited about the big final battle and the players just blow the baddies out of the water without breaking a sweat. Just remind yourself it's a game not a movie. Sometimes the dice favor the heroes and things go their way. There will be other encounters and other days when fortune might go the other way.
However, if you want to make sure that your PCs have a decent challenge, never shy away from increasing the CR of your encounter to make it appropriately difficult. Add a few extra minions when needed or make the one tough creature into a pair of creatures.
In the end, the goal is to challenge the PCs. Give them something to remember but don't worry when they blow it away. That's what they're supposed to do.
Try not to get married to any of your villains as the PCs always find a way to make them seem foolish. Nothing sucks worse than getting all excited about the big final battle and the players just blow the baddies out of the water without breaking a sweat. Just remind yourself it's a game not a movie. Sometimes the dice favor the heroes and things go their way. There will be other encounters and other days when fortune might go the other way.
However, if you want to make sure that your PCs have a decent challenge, never shy away from increasing the CR of your encounter to make it appropriately difficult. Add a few extra minions when needed or make the one tough creature into a pair of creatures.
In the end, the goal is to challenge the PCs. Give them something to remember but don't worry when they blow it away. That's what they're supposed to do.
That BBEG they just steamrollered? Just the minion of the REAL BBEG.
:D
Lots of data gathered by the real BBEG scrying on his willing minion during THAT fight, oh yes.
By the time high level (10-12+) rolls around, I assume the BBEG have at least basic knowledge of the party and their 'usual' tactics.
It's stupid not to do that.
Try not to get married to any of your villains as the PCs always find a way to make them seem foolish. Nothing sucks worse than getting all excited about the big final battle and the players just blow the baddies out of the water without breaking a sweat. Just remind yourself it's a game not a movie. Sometimes the dice favor the heroes and things go their way. There will be other encounters and other days when fortune might go the other way.
However, if you want to make sure that your PCs have a decent challenge, never shy away from increasing the CR of your encounter to make it appropriately difficult. Add a few extra minions when needed or make the one tough creature into a pair of creatures.
In the end, the goal is to challenge the PCs. Give them something to remember but don't worry when they blow it away. That's what they're supposed to do.
Our GM did that in a modern-set game. Apparently he wasn't expecting me to stick the muzzle of an AG36 through the minimal space I had available and send some 40mm into the guy's office.
He rolled with it, though. Seems our group of spies was investigating someone making cybernetic monstrosities, so ... well ...
Considering what Ileosa is up to in that final encounter, it makes perfect sense she'd want the PC's to "go away".
Look at these battles like a comic book; for some reason there is plenty of room to monologue one another, even in mid-swing.
Let the PC's talk smack. Let the villain talk smack. Heck, give everyone a swift action to "talk smack" for purposes of Intimidation. "Did you think I would reveal my master plan to you if I knew you had any chance of stopping me?"
Give players a +1 to their next attack if they do it "with style".
Don't let anyone roll initiative if there is no surprise round until everyone is done talking smack.
And if I may say so, get past the idea of "they fight to the death" in every scene. Let the enemy think tactically, and make an escape if possible. It sets up some neat scenes.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Considering what Ileosa is up to in that final encounter, it makes perfect sense she'd want the PC's to "go away".
Look at these battles like a comic book; for some reason there is plenty of room to monologue one another, even in mid-swing.
Let the PC's talk smack. Let the villain talk smack. Heck, give everyone a swift action to "talk smack" for purposes of Intimidation. "Did you think I would reveal my master plan to you if I knew you had any chance of stopping me?"
Give players a +1 to their next attack if they do it "with style".
Don't let anyone roll initiative if there is no surprise round until everyone is done talking smack.
And if I may say so, get past the idea of "they fight to the death" in every scene. Let the enemy think tactically, and make an escape if possible. It sets up some neat scenes.
You should probably make sure the "monologues and method acting" style play is the sort of game your players actually want to play, first.
There are at least two reasons why players might not want to have the game run this way.
1)All the over the top battle banter isn't role-play. It's acting. In fact, by encouraging acting this way you are actually reducing the amount of role-playing and fun happening for many players. Lets say a player's quiet, vengeance driven, meek looking female PC is silently throwing herself with headlong abandon at the villain who murdered her entire village while the villain mocks her. Sorry, if she doesn't verbally spar with the villain using witty comebacks, she doesn't get style points. Tough fight? She might die if she doesn't make witty comebacks. The mechanic encourages the player to do things the character wouldn't for meta-game purposes. Even the "no interrupting the monologue" thing does the same. Once a villain clearly indicates that they can't be talked out of it, some characters would cut the chatter and charge in or use underhanded tactics to gain an advantage while the villain is distracted. No, wait, they wouldn't do that, because the GM decided that they wouldn't. Sorry, Paladin McJustice and Shanky Mguee, your characters are afflicted by a potentially terminal case of cut-scene stupidity. You can't play your characters the way you would have them act, because the villain needs to monologue uninterrupted, characterization and role-playing be damned.
2)A GM implementing that rules encourages a certain play style and a certain type of character. Specifically, it encourages players to Ham it up with over the top characters for style points. It's a mechanic that tells players that they should ham it up regardless of if they enjoy hamming it up, or if their characters would ham it up. Got a quiet player who isn't comfortable method acting and just wants to say their character shouts a battle cry and charges in. Sorry, if you want that +1 you better stand up on top of your chair and shout praises to your character's god of justice at the top of your voice. Don't enjoy it? Cool, enjoy your lower chance to hit. A character is intended to be a silent killer type? Nah, make them a wacky Joker proxy so they have an excuse to make witty remarks in life and death situations so their daggers are more likely to hit. On top of this, players who do like hamming it up are likely to go extra over the top constantly because they might not get rewarded otherwise, which others can easily find uncomfortable. It becomes a problem when the player running a boisterous knight shouts their battle cry extra loud in order to impress the GM while the other players at the table would rather the knight player use their inside voice.
I love how Alex plays Devil's Advocate so often -sometimes evil is fun. Imp would be a perfect avatar for ya ^_^.
Thou art the DM. Interpret Queen Ileosa Arvanxi as you see fit. Make her demands free actions (one-liners don't take that much effort) in addition to her competent action economy that you will formulate and employ. A PC goes down -demand surrender imperiously. A PC flubs a roll... exultation at the PC's expense. Pretend it's PvP banter, and gauge your players' reactions.
As deluded and possessed as she is... Ileosa (and the being dominating her) would be that arrogant, but she doesn't have to be foolish in the process. Instead of petulant demands, her roleplaying could be demoralizing psychological warfare that she employs on the PCs as the encounters run on.
Only if they are getting whupped by the dice (as in they did not deliberately bring it upon themselves) should the villains start hamming it up and literally performing instead of fighting. Your fey scenario was unfortunate, but hey, odd situations like that happen. Make a call that you believe would be fair to the party and story both. That way the players do not develop a dependency on Deus ex Machina, nor can they be disillusioned by a domino effect of events that may not have been under their control.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The most important thing I've learned as a GM is this: no matter how clever I think I am or how clever the Module/Scenario writer is, the PCs are a networked system of 4-6 brains and I only have one brain (2, if you count the scenario writer). They are, on average, going to be able to find a solution to any problem I present them with that will be radically different to what I had in mind and for which I am totally unprepared.
Being a GM is a bit like taking the Kobyashi Maru test over and over: you will never win, but that's not the point. The point is how interesting you can make losing today.
So: when you are Role-playing villains in combat, don't worry about effectiveness. Worry about what the villains are thinking/feeling and what they would do. Think about how to make them memorable: what would they say? How would they react as their best laid plans fall apart. Don't be afraid to play out their frustrations and fears. Maybe they beg for mercy? Or maybe they let themselves get captured and try to escape later.Maybe they take one look at the PCs and run like ninnies.
And don't be afraid to go off-script. Sometimes you just have to.
The simple solution is don't say "you hit" or "you miss" and describe every action; use different descriptions with increasing severity of success or failure based on the natural roll and over all roll relative to DC. Let the players capitalize on things via dirty trick (and give everyone improved dirty trick for free) to apply conditions based on situation.
The complex solution is you still describe the situation and let players capitalize but they can say whatever they want to do with their turn and you prescribe actions/checks to make it possible. (Works best when GM collects character sheets (but leaves a copy of spell books) and only gives them back for level up). When players are narrating and you are keeping track of what is actually happening and narrating back, it stops being beneficial to just say "I swing my club."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
usually....I try a synopsis:
what this means is I have everyone roll for init.
People with the LOWEST init score declare first, those with highest declare last.
This means the higher init people (larger number) get to know what the "slower" people are going to do.
ex:
slow orcs say they are moving forward to attack XYZ.
Faster elf says I shoot orc on his way to XYZ.
Then once everyone knows who is doing what, I have the orc start moving but let the elf shoot him before he gets there, if he's still alive he gets to finish his move/action.
This helps resolve things like cover...elf couldnt shoot him before he moved etc.
once all this has finished, rolls, numbers of damage etc...
THEN I explain:
The orcs moved forward, Elf shot and got the orc in ribs
One orc hit the dwarf the and slashed his arm, another orc swung high, missing.
the third orc glanced off he dwarfs shield.
the dwarf broke the first orcs knee cap, finishing off what the elf started,
I describe near misses like hitting armor or shields, I describe bad missed like dodging or swinging high.
Some near misses I actually have hit but the magic of the armor absorbs the blow (they would have hit and done damage if there wasnt a +2 bonus_
In terms of one of the specific encounters you have mentioned.
Don't forget Ileosa is a high level bard. Tie in her statements to her bardic performance abilities. Her "Leave now" statements can be linked to the Frightening Tune performance for example and there are many other ways to use her grandstanding as other bardic abilities.
Also you may want to convert her to the Pathfinder rule set from the 3rd edition stats if you haven't already as written she's no where near a CR20 encounter under Pathfinder.
In general though I always found that if you describe the fights in a vivid manner rather than a mechanistic one the players usually follow after a while.
This was probably the most fun fight I ran for my kids. I'll see what I can remember.
They had tracked bandits to their lair, in the cellar under a ruined tower. They failed to take out the lookout so the bandits were forewarned, if I remember right. The bandits were in a large room in use for stabling mules, and got up onto the galleries armed with bows (where there was hay and straw stacked). They had a net trap ready to drop near the doorway. they were accompanied by a hobgoblin and his worg mount.
The initial combat was in the doorway against the worg, which turned tail and ran when it got too injured (I think it took a critical?). The bandits opened fire on the PC in the doorway (a halfling monk) and all missed. (She might have got to use deflect arrows once).
And then they were off!
"Can I run across and up the ladder?" Yes. looks like it.
"Can my wolf (druid animal companion, so easy to push) run across and up the ladder?" Well, it can run fast enough, how high can it jump? Oh, high enough"
"He (the target) collapses" "Does he fall off the balcony?"
"Um" (rolls d8) "he falls in the right direction" roll some sort of save that he failed, mostly for cinematic reasons "yes he goes over" - describe swan dive, and son on.
And the wizard was running a ball of fire along the gallery, deliberately setting fire to the straw, and the sorceror used mage hand to throw burning straw into a fighter's face (I think I had him roll a reflex save that was poor enough I decided he dropped the knife-I'd use dirty tricks now) and the mules kicked down the doors and stampeded, and nobody stood under the net, and it was complete mayhem. Glorious! And exhausting to run, but so rewarding.
I'm not sure if this is much help with Ileosa, though, but I would suggest you look at what your bad girl has and use it all as creatively as possible.
Pehaps in the run up, some of the guards might retreat here? Extra numbers are the most help
Encouraging banter sounds good in theory, in practice, however...
it felt like trying to extract teeth, sometimes, trying to get back-chat. I suppose if you keep persevering, though...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well first the biggest thing you need to do is lead by example if you are hoping your players do more RP during a fight have monsters and NPC's do so as well.
Don't run static fight to the death enemies. Fighting a group of mooks have some flee. Have another betray his fellow mooks and offer to help the PCs after all he does not want to be murdered. When the fight turns obviously against the PCs he works to save his skin. Fighting several hungry animals. When one of the party goes unconscious have one of the monsters start to feed. If one of the other monsters are closer to the fallen party than the rest have it turn on the one trying to feed or steal a bite. "Oh crap they are eating the Barbarian."
I was running a group through Skull and Shackles we for a number reasons ended up jumping the rails and I use almost all of another book from Serpent Skull. It was great they went treasure hunting and ended up fighting their way through the city of 7 Spears. I was trying to figure out how to cut down encounters but keep them challenging. So I figured combining a couple of fights might kill 2 birds with one stone. So I pulled to major encounters together. 1 giant monster was being attacked by 3 other monsters when the PCs found them. Separately both fights were challenging. The watched for a minute and the advantage was leaning toward the big monster. The PCs figured they could use the situation and from a safe distance started working against both sides. One of the smaller monsters offered treasure to the PCs if they would help. Together they took down the big monster but not before the last small monster betrayed the PCs. The PCs had to decide to help this thing, and then had to deal with the thing betraying them.
Use the environment. The enemy archer flips over a table in the corner and uses it as cover poping up to take a shot and then ducking. A different enemy hops up on a table and roars barking a challenge at the PCs. If one of your PCs steals your play and hops up on a table for a high ground bonus or just coolness. Have one of the cowardly NPCs attack the table leg.
All of us have had party disagreements about what to do with the enemy survivor. Almost always it happens after the fight. Why? Because that is when GM's pose the dilemma. Why not propose the dilemma right in the middle of the fight. The Paladin is busy fighting and the rogue drops a guy who might just be unconscious. Remind the rogue that last time the Paladin demanded we leave the guy alive despite all the dangers. When the rogue's next turn comes up ask him what he wants to do. Sure you can move on to the next enemy but this guy might be still alive. And Brightarmor Fancybriches won't let you kill him later. Watch how fast the rest of the party asks if they see this.
Introduce some enemies before they actually fight the PCs especially ones you want them to hate. Let them witness the enemy from a distance. You are playing Kingmaker, they see the Staglord and some of his bandits from the other side of river. The Staglord raises the head of one of his victims and tosses it toward the PCs. By the time they get there (crossing the river oooohhh fun skill challenges) they find dead caravan guards, wounded victims and then they get ambushed by mooks the Staglord sent back. No sign of the Staglord.
The PCs fight assassins have them meet an assassin early the assassin grabs and kisses a surprised PC (contact poison lipstick) and then gaseous form out.
Going on a dragonhunt. They see smoke on the horizon, burned out village tons of wounded needing help. The dragon is a red dot in the sky flying away.
In Crimson Throne there are plenty of times to show off powerful political figures in situations the PC's can hope to win. Executions, being rude to peasants while people return necklaces, government proclamations and so on. Anything to give the villain a personality before engagement.
So think about your NPCs plans and motives.
Why are they fighting?
-Are they over-confident?
-Are they fighting to the death? If so, why? If they lose who are they failing?
-if they're not going to fight to the death, how are they going to escape or will they surrender? Do they look desperate or frightened or calculating?
There's a lot to play with whether they try to escape, or judge if they should give up, or try some last desperate gamble.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
A little context to my post, just so there isn't any misunderstanding - my view of what roleplaying means is that it is fundamentally about making decisions in the shoes of a character.
Bingo. Often, when people complain about a lack of "roleplay", what they really mean is a lack of talking.
Talking is not roleplay.
Doing as the character would do is roleplay.
Therefore, talking when and how the character would talk is roleplay, but talking when or in a way the character wouldn't is NOT roleplay.
When you look at a situation, think "What would this character actually do here?" When you come up with an answer, then implementing that answer is roleplay, while everything else is a failure to roleplay.
Aldath, I suggest re-evaluating your experiences with this in mind. You might discover that there's not actually a lack of roleplay happening, or you might discover that there is but have a better idea of what to do about it. Hope that helps!
STUFFMORE STUFF
While this is all true: Would personally highly encourage fostering "ham-it-up" playstyles for anything like a superhero campaign.
Anyway, a personal tip (might have glossed over but didn't see) for RP'ing NPCs in encounters:
1. Research them. Look at their personality especially, and in APs - the notes on morale, or what have you.
2. Condense this into easy main points, ala flashcard style.
3. Each time you make them do something, find a way to describe the NPC doing something that fits one or more of those points.
4. If difficult to perform 3 on the fly during combat, develop a longer checklist of descriptions to use for certain things, such as celebrating a dead PC, or venting frustrations (or dismissing it, for arrogant characters) over a natural 1 or a miss.
|
Like Jiggy, I believe that tactics can be a form of roleplay.
Combat objectives don't always boil down to killing the other side. Whenever there's something else that a character cares about, you can roleplay that character making certain tradeoffs. As a GM, you can engage character motivation by presenting more complicated objectives. Include hostages (sparingly) - do PCs try to free them during the battle even if it means subjecting themselves to additional attacks? Establish that killing the opponent may cause social problems for the PCs - do they hold back? Alternatively, is the BBEG interested in humiliating the PCs as much as defeating them? Proving a philosophical point? Is there anyone else on the battlefield the enemy will risk themselves for?
Many tactical situations are ambiguous, with no obviously smart or stupid answer. In these cases, you can roleplay a risk-taking, cowardly, or self-sacrificing bent. As a GM, you can portray these traits in enemies. Have they buffed themselves in preparation for the party? Do they send in minions first, or charge? Do they confront a particular PC directly?
Situations in which a character departs from preferred tactics can also be very interesting. When a character built to deal nonlethal damage switches to lethal and goes for the kill, it's usually a big deal - and you might be able to provoke such a moment in a PC or portray it in a recurring adversary or ally. More frequently, enemies may shift tactics in-battle in response to some condition. Would an otherwise subtle opponent fly into a blind rage if a PC were to insult them in the right way? If the hulking melee brute is confronted with a flying witch, will he hurl improvised missiles? Does the cocky BBEG suddenly panic and call for aid if reduced below 25% HP?
I watched this movie today. Its actually a review of Dungeon World and applying things to 5e but the principal kinda stuck out and reminded me of this thread.
What struck me was that as a DM its easy to just have a baddie use an ability and have people roll their saves and its on to the next turn.
But a little description and some stylistic quip and a good description of what happened. The will be rolling spellcraft checks just to know more as opposed to for system advantage.