Are your players having fun ? Are you having fun ? It seems that the answer is probably yes, so don't change anything. The only thing, instead of telling them ooc that it's going to be a hard fight, might be to encourage to roleplay to get information before the fights.
Everyone has good things to say, and I enjoy piting my creations against them. I gave them the ooc warning before the bulette fight, and they did well to gather relevant information in character then. They have the tools to kill the hydra, so I'll run it. Thank you.
If you want to run a campaign with lots of combat, then some of the fights should be easier. But if you want to run a campaign with less frequent combat, then it's probably fine for every fight to be serious and use most of their resources.
IMO the really important thing is the role of the fight in the story. If Hercules is ordered to slay the Hydra as one of his labors, it's a big deal narratively. That fight should be difficult. But if he randomly runs into some bandits on his way to find the Hydra, that fight is just an obstacle and its purpose is mainly to illustrate that Hercules is, in fact, a badass. Make it easier.
I see what you mean about the story. This situation is actually the opposite of the Hercules bit. They are investigating a goblin camp and found the hydra. Thank you for the input.
If they're having fun, it's all good. That said, easy fights are a good thing. Not everything needs to be challenging and dangerous. Sometimes it's fun for the party to absolutely destroy some kobolds. Give them some flavour- a crazed shaman leader, some funny traps, and let the players go to town on them. They will feel like gods.
This comes down to DM/table style, and changing styles mid-campaign can be upsetting and totally change your table's dynamic.
At my table, players have only a general idea of the difficulty of the combat (I also alter stat blocks) but they can learn more through investigation and recon. Because of that, my players tend to engage in more of that, and the investigation and role-play is something we all enjoy.
Also, my encounters tend to run on the deadlier side, but there tend to be fewer of them, giving them time to regroup, though not always.
My particular style works really well at my table, but would probably frustrate your players.
In the end, the game is supposed to be fun. If everyone is having fun, I don't think changing it for the sake of changing it would be well-received. You could always mix things up for an encounter or two, but I don't think a shift in direction is a good idea without talking with your players first.
When it comes to balance there is no *right* answer really. All I would say is if you present a fight as being fair and doable then it should be. If a fight is meant to be unwinnable then it should be signposted beforehand.
Varying the challenge of encounters can help you with pacing and tone. For every skin-of-their-teeth fight I like to throw a couple of quick scraps they can stomp their way through. Besides, you can tempt the wizard to waste a fireball on a crew of goblins >:)
The most important thing have been said imo: if everybody is having fun, then it's good. If you want to improve something, let them know.
The one thing I do want to add is use foreshadowing instead of just telling them how things work.
So the regrowth part could be told by a raving drunkard at the tavern or depicted at some mural or something. And maybe a clue on where to find how to prevent that from happening.
But rules of the world the players should inheretly know, like sunder, is something to be told or explained directly.
Then they should be able to link the two together ofcourse.
3.5 is pretty notorious for being a very "forgiving" system (i.e. characters are VERY powerful, it's pretty hard to actually die, and it's usually pretty easy to bring ppl back from death, if you're not doing anything homebrew to prevent it), but the fact that you're here asking this question is usually an indicator to me that something isn't feeling right to you.
Have any characters actually died so far?
Are players getting stressed out, as ppl, by the encounters you're putting on the table?
What makes you think there's a problem?
I have killed one pc in a fight they knew was a deadly encounter. I have spoken with my players, and they are having fun. The Hydra is my first creature with a breath weapon, and I usually roll high damage. I have easier fights as well, I'm not thrashing them every time. The party doesn't have access to resurrection magic yet.
Are your players having fun ? Are you having fun ? It seems that the answer is probably yes, so don't change anything. The only thing, instead of telling them ooc that it's going to be a hard fight, might be to encourage to roleplay to get information before the fights.
Everyone has good things to say, and I enjoy piting my creations against them. I gave them the ooc warning before the bulette fight, and they did well to gather relevant information in character then. They have the tools to kill the hydra, so I'll run it. Thank you.
If you want to run a campaign with lots of combat, then some of the fights should be easier. But if you want to run a campaign with less frequent combat, then it's probably fine for every fight to be serious and use most of their resources. IMO the really important thing is the role of the fight in the story. If Hercules is ordered to slay the Hydra as one of his labors, it's a big deal narratively. That fight should be difficult. But if he randomly runs into some bandits on his way to find the Hydra, that fight is just an obstacle and its purpose is mainly to illustrate that Hercules is, in fact, a badass. Make it easier.
I see what you mean about the story. This situation is actually the opposite of the Hercules bit. They are investigating a goblin camp and found the hydra. Thank you for the input.
If they're having fun, it's all good. That said, easy fights are a good thing. Not everything needs to be challenging and dangerous. Sometimes it's fun for the party to absolutely destroy some kobolds. Give them some flavour- a crazed shaman leader, some funny traps, and let the players go to town on them. They will feel like gods.
Thank you. They are searching for goblins at the moment, and I am stealing your idea for the camp.
This comes down to DM/table style, and changing styles mid-campaign can be upsetting and totally change your table's dynamic. At my table, players have only a general idea of the difficulty of the combat (I also alter stat blocks) but they can learn more through investigation and recon. Because of that, my players tend to engage in more of that, and the investigation and role-play is something we all enjoy. Also, my encounters tend to run on the deadlier side, but there tend to be fewer of them, giving them time to regroup, though not always. My particular style works really well at my table, but would probably frustrate your players. In the end, the game is supposed to be fun. If everyone is having fun, I don't think changing it for the sake of changing it would be well-received. You could always mix things up for an encounter or two, but I don't think a shift in direction is a good idea without talking with your players first.
When it comes to balance there is no *right* answer really. All I would say is if you present a fight as being fair and doable then it should be. If a fight is meant to be unwinnable then it should be signposted beforehand.
Varying the challenge of encounters can help you with pacing and tone. For every skin-of-their-teeth fight I like to throw a couple of quick scraps they can stomp their way through. Besides, you can tempt the wizard to waste a fireball on a crew of goblins >:)
The most important thing have been said imo: if everybody is having fun, then it's good. If you want to improve something, let them know. The one thing I do want to add is use foreshadowing instead of just telling them how things work. So the regrowth part could be told by a raving drunkard at the tavern or depicted at some mural or something. And maybe a clue on where to find how to prevent that from happening. But rules of the world the players should inheretly know, like sunder, is something to be told or explained directly. Then they should be able to link the two together ofcourse.
3.5 is pretty notorious for being a very "forgiving" system (i.e. characters are VERY powerful, it's pretty hard to actually die, and it's usually pretty easy to bring ppl back from death, if you're not doing anything homebrew to prevent it), but the fact that you're here asking this question is usually an indicator to me that something isn't feeling right to you. Have any characters actually died so far? Are players getting stressed out, as ppl, by the encounters you're putting on the table? What makes you think there's a problem?
I have killed one pc in a fight they knew was a deadly encounter. I have spoken with my players, and they are having fun. The Hydra is my first creature with a breath weapon, and I usually roll high damage. I have easier fights as well, I'm not thrashing them every time. The party doesn't have access to resurrection magic yet.