D&D isn't a video game
One of the most frequent issues I see with newer players and DMs is treating adventures like video games. Players assume every encounter is balanced—enough that combat is the default action. New DMs often build campaigns as little more than a string of pre-planned fights.
Roleplaying games don’t have to be railroads. They’re at their best when they offer far more player agency than a video game ever can. In this video, the Baron covers the history of encounter balancing and how to work around its problems. His channel is excellent—well worth a subscribe.
As a DM, I try to break my student players of video-game habits. I reward strong roleplay with bonus experience points, individually. I also use “cinematic advantage”: if a player invents a creative way to attack, they get advantage on the roll. Both tactics nudge people toward better play.
I’ve used severely unbalanced encounters in most of my recent campaigns. In one, the party faced copies of their own characters—I played their abilities to the fullest—to show them how much more they could do. In another, a third-level party reached their goal only to find it guarded by three hill giants, a couple dozen orcs, and at least fifty goblins. Obviously far too much for a low-level group—but it set them up to return later at higher level, with an army they’d need to raise.
I was especially proud of my son when he ran a second- or third-level party against a pair of beholders. The challenge was meant to be stealth: the beholders were asleep, and the party needed to sneak past. When one woke, everyone had to scramble away before it reached full power.
Those sessions showed the players that encounters don’t need to be “balanced” to be fun. Heavily unbalanced ones can be even better.