Okay so first off, i have no problem with my player using this tactic because it is very good and i also don't want to nullify them.

Basically what is coming up, The party has captured a small ship. When they go out sailing they will encounter a set of two rafts filled with kuo-toa that are going to be approaching the ship. In the party there is a sorcerer with the elemental adept feat that is focussing of fire magic who will most definetally fireball these rafts before they even get close enough for the actual fighting to begin.

Do I somehow let the creatures survive the blasts even tho their hitpoints arent even going to be CLOSE enough to do that, Sould i just let the sorcerer destroy the encounter and let him feel awesome whilst the other players must sit by and do nothing? Or should I not give them the option to even attack the kuo-toa beforehand by just having the kuo-toa show up on the ship?

The player has only recently run into enemies that have been counterspelling him so giving the kuo toa that isn't really a viable option.


I would love some help with how I can make this encounter fun for everyone whilst both not making the other players feel worthless nor making the sorcerer feel like his investment in making these spells super powerful less useful.

The two kuo-toa rafts were a decoy, bait to be used to allow the actual force claw through the ship's hull and start their attack.

After all, why would amphibious fish people need a raft?

I agree with Stardust, they can swim and breathe underwater.

Also, you could adopt the minion rules from 4e, they only have 1 hit point but if they succeed on their saving throw they do not die.

I agree... they should swim through the water. 

Will a Fireball even do anything to someone underwater? I wouldn't think so.

Quote from BioWizard >>

I agree... they should swim through the water. 

Will a Fireball even do anything to someone underwater? I wouldn't think so.

 If a creature is underwater they have resistance to fire (RAW)
The Elemental adapt feat ignores resistances to the specific element (in this case fire) So the water wont really protect them from it. Spells range is also not impared by water

Well, Fireball is somewhat randomly overpowered for its level (it should be doing 6d6, they just made it do more damage because it's an iconic spell), but in general it's strong in any situation where it can hit multiple targets (without hitting allies), less so if it can't.

Given that Kuo-Tuo have a swim speed I have to agree with other people that there's no reason to have rafts at all, though RAW the effect of water on fireball is "Creatures and objects that are fully immersed in water have resistance to fire damage.", which is negated by elemental adept, so swimming will hardly make them immune. However, what they certainly can do is be spaced. A reasonable approach formation is an inverted V formation that collapses in on the target (and might have some of the kuo-tuo underwater); if you have 24 kuo-tuo, which is a perfectly reasonable encounter size given that the party can probably rest immediately after the fight, one round before the attack the V is a 120' line or so, and if you have two formations at different heights, they're at 10' spacing on each line and a fireball will hit one line, killing 4 of them. Or he can wait until they reach the ship and hit more, but even with Careful Spell he probably sets the ship on fire.

I agree with the others … have the Kuo-Tuo jump in the water as the fireball is flying in their direction and after it bursts a couple of them climb back onto the raft.  The player thinks they wiped out most of the K-Ts but none in truth.  The ones in the water just swim to the players boat and the real fun begins.  It would be very reasonable for the K-Ts to react quickly to any fire attack.  It is an iconic sea battle maneuver from the days of wooden sailing ships.

My other favorite options are A) 1 use ring of spell turning B) creature specific Armor of fire Immunity

these can be on many or as few as you like 

This is going to sound like some iffy advice,  but if you think the caster is going to take them out before they reach the boat, then why don't you count on it and plan accordingly? Maybe you create the encounter with four rafts, each one quickly approaching, and will board in about two turns. If you accurately anticipated your player's behaviour, they'll start blasting, using their turns to fwoosh the first two, and the remaining two rafts are the ones you planned to make it through. 

That way, your caster still gets to be a badass explosionmancer, and you still have your encounter. 

If they *don't* blow up all four rafts, you can either divide up the baddies you were going to have for just 2 among all 4 and run the encounter with the same number of enemies, or you could decide to increase the difficulty of the encounter by adding a few more enemies, even if you don't double them if you think that's too much for them to handle. 

(As they why Kuo-tuo would use a raft?: gotta transport all the loot they're planning to steal from your ship somehow) 

I agree with Charles to a great degree. However, I think it's a slippery slope you need to be careful of.

I think it's 100% acceptable for the bad guys to make plans taking the Player abilities into account, if they have some means of knowing them, but not if they don't.

It's not "good form" when the GM is having the bad guys make plans ( or have items/abilities ) that take the Players' abilities into account where the bad guys should have no clue.

Changing their HP, giving them magic items, having them coincidently all have dived into the water to negate the fireball's effects (when there is no mechanic to allow Characters to do this, if the roles were reversed), etc. - all to negate the Player ability - this is fair if-and-only-if it makes sense in world. Otherwise it's just the GM trying to screw over the Player, and negating their good choices and planning, because the GM doesn't know how to deal with the situation. That's the GM being lazy and cheating to win.

Fortunately, you don't need to resort to this. Playing the Kuo-tuo with some tactical intelligence is probably enough. The Players' ship will be an unknown quantity, and the Kuo-tuo are aquatic. If they are careful and crafty, they would probe the ships' defenses and the Party's intentions first. They would likely not all approach openly and obviously on a raft. Even if fireball wielding wizards are rare in your world, bows exist - they would not expose themselves to ranged fire like that. They might be using a raft as a decoy to test the intentions/capabilities of the ship's crew, first. If the Party demonstrates their hostility by fireball nuking the raft - well, then the Kuo-tuo swimming under the ship in the water can swarm aboard and attack, without being wiped out at one stroke. Then the whole Party can participate in the shipboard combat trying to repel the boarders. If they were using the raft to test the Characters' abilities - well, then the sorcerer just self-identified as a powerful enemy, and the Kuo-tuo shaman in the boarding party can concentrate on them. 

However, what if the Party is not hostile? Then you need to know what the Kuo-tuo actually want. Why are they approaching the ship anyway, rather than letting it go by unmolested? Do they want to trade? Are they a hunting/raiding party? Are they trying to extract tribute for sailing over their territory? Only you can answer that, and then decide what will happen if combat does not break out. Who knows, you might use the the Kuo-tuo delegation to plant a whole new side-quest adventure hook.

set things up so that the monsters are not clumped together all the time.  One  of my party just got fireball so now I have 2 that can cast it. 

As a DM I also apply laws of physics.  if they cast a fireball in a room that isn't much larger than the fireball it is going to cause a compression. 

I definitely agree that the monsters shouldn't just "know" what the GM knows and automatically counter it.

Monsters shouldn't be stupid, either, though. Approaching a sailing ship on a pair of flimsy rafts is stupid for all kinds of reasons, not just fireball (for instance, what if the ship has a catapult or ballista on it?). Are the Kuo-Toa stupid? If so then it makes sense to have them behave stupidly. If not, then they shouldn't do something that is blatantly and obviously stupid. Using a raft also seems unnecessary given Kuo-Toa innate abilities. They can swim as fast as they can walk, are amphibious, and can breathe in water. Their INT and WIS are 10 or 11-ish so I'm not seeing "stupid" in those stats either, although neither necessarily measures actual "smarts." Although the text indicates that they're rather mad, so they might not be sane enough to make a good and careful plan.

They also have problems in full sunlight, so would they not be attacking at night? Does the sorcerer have darkvision, or anyone in the party? How high up is the ship's deck? Is it high enough that the darkvision would only get you basically to the surface of the water, and anything farther out would be hard to see? 

All these things could affect just exactly how the encounter goes down.

Give your players less time to rest between encounters. If they can just nuke every encounter with fireballs, then you need to give them situations which make them think "hang on, we don't know when we can rest up again. Let's not waste all of our spell slots."  Also, make some of the Kua Toa like... knights, riding like a giant crawfish or something. You can have them flank, so the attack is coming from two different directions and lessen the potential of everything going boom before other players can do something.

The main problem, I think you're having, is that spellcasters become significantly beefier if they don't have to economise on their spell slots. So, maybe have the encounter come in several waves. So if the kua toa get nuked before they arrive, well, that was just the vanguard.

Quote from bobberuchi >>

set things up so that the monsters are not clumped together all the time.  One  of my party just got fireball so now I have 2 that can cast it. 

As a DM I also apply laws of physics.  if they cast a fireball in a room that isn't much larger than the fireball it is going to cause a compression. 

 

 Why?  No where does it state Fireball is a high pressure explosive, it is more like a flammable substance, it is akin to letting your gas stove run for a minute and then lighting it, no explosion, just a ball of flame...

1.  You are missing the point of the Kuo-Toa being underwater:  If they are 10' or more deep in open water they are impossible to see without polarized vision/glasses/lens.  Hence they can't be targeted at all.

2.  The Fireball would impact with the surface of the water.  Think of the surface of the water as a "floor" to the above water portion of the world.  It would be akin to trying to cast fireball through a glass window.

3.  Kuo-Toa have no need for a raft as stated above.  They would attack at night, and the first the party would know of them would be as they climb the guardrails of the ship.  A la Pirates of the Caribbean final ship boarding scene.

If one is to take the position that even a pane of glass can provide cover preventing a direct line to the target, one has to apply the same logic to one inch, one foot, ten feet of water. The fireball would extend from the caster and impact on the surface of the water.

Or you can just say screw it and let it go off at whatever point within range, but resistance to fire damage while submerged would still apply.

A gust of wind rocks the ship and creates disadvantage for the caster that needs to stay upright on a slippery deck. 

Not in the case of this particular caster. Thanks to the elemental adept feat the resistance is ignored.

A flock of seagulls is disturbed by the first blast and starts dropping guano

And when do all these amazing coincidences of gusts of wind and pooping seagulls kick in and benefit the Players randomly? Or are they just for the GM's benefit?

The GM changing the way the world works, to specifically sabotage Player choice & Player agency, in an asymmetric way that the Players cannot also benefit from, without Player knowledge or consent, is cheating. It's also damn lazy.

The rules-as-written are in no way symmetric, and Players and Monsters both have advantages over each other in given situations. Player Feats and creature Legendary Actions are examples of these - but in those cases the Players are fully aware of the structure of the rules ( or at least can be - they are literally written down where they can read them). I am also of the opinion that homebrew rules introduced to the game need to be well communicated, discussed, and agreed upon by all participants at the table.

Role playing is about people making choices as if they were their Characters. Meaningful choices need to be informed - that is, the Players need information as to the situation, and they need to have an idea of how the world works - that is, the game mechanics. Information can be incomplete, or wrong - in fact part of the game is the Players uncovering and putting information together - but having the mechanics of the world change at the whim of the GM, without Player knowledge, is to negate the Players' ability to make meaningful choices in the game. They make choices as if one set of rules are in effect, and the GM has secretly changed those rules without telling them. 

If you can't find a way to shape events without literally breaking the mechanics of the game, you need to become a better GM.

If the mechanics of the game don't suit the style of the gaming group, by all means, you are free to change them to match your style - but those changes need to be communicated and agreed upon by your Players as well. You don't get to keep the rules & mechanics a secret, and you don't get to lie to your Players about how the mechanics of the world work.

Have you read the section on Kuo Toa tactics from Keith Ammann's excellent blog The Monsters Know What They're Doing?