D&D 5E Monster Creation in D&D Next

Frostmarrow · Jul 23, 2012

Just as you make a character by merging the four pieces race, class, background and theme I expect you form monsters in the same way.

I guess we have size, quality, theme, and type. The minotaur is a large, elite, bull, humanoid.

A spinx migh be described as a huge, solo, riddling, m.beast.

A cat is a tiny, mook, feline, animal.

Mustrum_Ridcully · Jul 23, 2012

Interesting, I could probably live with these rules. They seem a mix of 4E simplicity and 3E simulation approach. It acknowledges that at a certain leve, the enemy must have certain stats, but also acknowledges that these stats must come from somewhere (even if "hide and fure" is a bit flimsy as source for the AC bonus. But that is not more flimsy then giving some random outsider a +22 natural armor bonus. At least you can gather a narrative out of the stats).

Connorsrpg · Jul 23, 2012

Well, I am another that likes what I am hearing. I love that stats are based on what the creature really is in the world (as opposed to just level).

I especially love the idea of big clumsy giants having a poor attack bonus, but, if it hits you, you are in trouble.

That was an idea we had to get used to in Savage Worlds (and one I loved). At first a fellow GM who tried couldn't believe ogres etc had such low Fighting die, but when explained this way it made perfect sense...and DnDNext does to me.

The HP thing didn't seem confusing to me. Normally the minotaur would have 5HD, but b/c it is Large it gets the benefits of being elite and they therefore double. I too would like to see Large non-elites though. Especially creatures that are big but not bulky, etc.

I can't wait to start converting a heap of monsters to try this out

Underman · Jul 23, 2012

I like the organic versatility of this monster design. Yet the top-rated comments under that article include complaints that monster design in D&DN is confusing/complicated compared to 4E's simplicity. Those would support the argument that 4E monster roles are prescriptive and not descriptive, and I'm glad that D&DN is moving towards monster metagame elements that truly are descriptive and not prescriptive.

Chris_Nightwing · Jul 23, 2012

Hm, without reading the guidelines he has to create that minotaur from, it's hard to judge.

I am a big fan of an integrated mechanical system that makes it clear where each of the relevant modifiers is coming from. In this case, the minotaur has a to-hit bonus and damage that are clearly derived. His mention of hobgoblins confused this though - mentioning that they were being given a higher bonus because they are a martial race. Will this be clearly described? +1 to-hit if trained as a soldier, +2 if trained as an elite, +3 if you are the world's greatest swordsman. Should these bonuses be for specific weapons?

He also discusses the minotaur's special abilities and makes mention that some of these will be represented in other monsters - Rage for instance. Finally! An end to the tyranny of monsters having wholly unique, but incredibly similar abilities. In fact, here's a suggestion if it doesn't already exist - harking back to the (broken) build-your-own-class rules I remember from 2E - give us a laundry list of abilities to choose from, and suggest a cost for each one. You want a 5th level monster, here, have 5x points to spend on things and you won't go far wrong:

+1 to hit costs 1
+2 to hit costs 3, discount of 1 for single weapon
+3 to hit costs 5, discount of 1 for single weapon

Armor costs 1 per point up to the recommended AC, 2 beyond that.
Similarly for extra damage.

Rage costs 3
Keen senses costs 2
And so on..

I'm just worried about the use of mechanical derivations for some things ("the attack bonus is about right because of his strength") vs. non-sensical fixes to bring things into line with expectations ("this creatures isn't strong enough so I guess he has weapon training to get his to-hit up to scratch").

GX.Sigma · Jul 23, 2012

Sounds cool. I like the little tidbit that each role+level will have a set of "generic" stats that you can just slap a few abilities onto and mash go.

As a side note, what's the deal with having elites and solos? I thought the flat math was supposed to make it possible to use higher-level monsters as elites/solos?

Mustrum_Ridcully · Jul 23, 2012

GX.Sigma said:
Sounds cool. I like the little tidbit that each role+level will have a set of "generic" stats that you can just slap a few abilities onto and mash go.

As a side note, what's the deal with having elites and solos? I thought the flat math was supposed to make it possible to use higher-level monsters as elites/solos?

Hmm, good question. It has 10d10 hit dice, though, so maybe it's a 10th level monster technically, but could also be described as Level 5 Elite?

Chris_Nightwing · Jul 23, 2012

I would much rather see a system in which a creature twice your level is an appropriate elite, 4 times your level an appropriate solo, than explicit elite and solo creatures of your level. It all depends on how XP values and damage output increase with level though. If it's flat/linear, this works, if it's higher than linear it doesn't.

Jack99 · Jul 23, 2012

Mustrum_Ridcully said:
Hmm, good question. It has 10d10 hit dice, though, so maybe it's a 10th level monster technically, but could also be described as Level 5 Elite?

Nah, it's a 5th level monster with double HD and double CON-modifier of a 5th level monster because it is elite. It's AC damage are based on the 5th level template, not the 10th level template, so it can't be technically a 10th level monster. Such a monster would (presumably) do more damage, better AC, and probably have a bit more to hit?

Underman · Jul 23, 2012

This is a side issue, but the Rage ability states "If that attack misses but either die roll was 10 or higher, the attack is instead a glancing blow that deals 5 damage". I don't have a problem with the fluff, but I'm confused by the terminology. If a miss is a glancing blow and a hit can also be a glancing blow (when hit points are abstracted that way instead of a large axe blade embedded through plate armor and 5 inches into flesh and bone), then what's the difference between a miss's glancing blow and a hit's glancing blow?