Here's the Abyssal Sibriex From Mordenkainen's Tome

CapnZapp · Apr 26, 2018

MechaTarrasque said:
I think "brute" is probably more accurate than "lurker", since not many of them are that sneaky.

I think his point was the low hp, not any actual ability to lurk. He mentioned lurkers because they have low hp, and to implicate that ALL monsters better lurk in 5E unless they have a death wish.

CapnZapp · Apr 26, 2018

MechaTarrasque said:
I do think that hps should have been one of those "dials" that they were talking about in the playtest, possibly via templates (to avoid the "it's too much like 4e" complaint where the monster gets more powerful just because it is fighting 8 PCs with 24 magic items) --something like horde breaker--add 100 hps to a large-size giant* who can do horde breakers stuff (sorry I haven't seen one in a while so I forgot the specifics of what they do)

<snip>

Or, in other words, support the game they offer in the PHB.

Saying "if you use feats, Mc and magic items, you're on your own" is a piss-poor approach.

If there had been an Advanced Monster Manual released maybe two years after 5E came out, we wouldn't be having these kinds of discussions.

CapnZapp · Apr 26, 2018

jadrax said:
They already are on a dial; any monster can have anywhere between its minimum and maximum HP. This thing can have anything from 84 to 216 without having to alter its stat block.

He meant official discussion and support.

Not "I need Jadrax' approval to tweak my monsters".

Parmandur · Apr 26, 2018

CapnZapp said:
That's what irks me the most.

I'm supposed to come up with this brilliant plan... Based on what? Seeing the number 20 in a particular ability field in the stat block!? Come on!

Not the number, no, but the spell list and abilities should be a clue. This beastie has modest HP, but then he isn't going to need too much if played well. Turn around is fair play, of the party plota and optimizes why not their enemies?

Parmandur · Apr 26, 2018

CapnZapp said:
Or, in other words, support the game they offer in the PHB.

Saying "if you use feats, Mc and magic items, you're on your own" is a piss-poor approach.

If there had been an Advanced Monster Manual released maybe two years after 5E came out, we wouldn't be having these kinds of discussions.

Magic items aren't in the PHB, and I think it would have been better to leave out Feats and multiclassing for other material (more spells, Backgrounds or Subclasses, maybe). But, variant rules are not something that needs to be assumed, that is literally why there is a DM to adjudicate and tweak the game to an individual table.

jadrax · Apr 26, 2018

dave2008 said:
Not entirely true. Having more or less HP does affect the CR (per the DMG), and thus the stat block. Now, what they should have done (could do) is explain how different groups abilities change the CR calculus and how you can adjust for that by modifying the HP within the range.

Thus, for groups who are chewing through Deadly encounters like no tomorrow; adjust the HP to the maximum, but leave the CR and XP the same.

I don't think its intended that you apply the 'Modifying a Monster' rules in these circumstances; average Hit Points are pretty clearly labeled as 'average hit points'. Which to me implys that members of the same stat block can differ. After all, why even bother listing the dice expression if that is not the case?

Of course, generating Challenge for official monsters often deviates significantly from either f the two DMG monster generation system sin the DMG as well, anyway - so I don't think doing it either way is a huge deal.

Of course, YMMV as always.

dave2008 · Apr 26, 2018

jadrax said:
I don't think its intended that you apply the 'Modifying a Monster' rules in these circumstances; average Hit Points are pretty clearly labeled as 'average hit points'. Which to me implys that members of the same stat block can differ. After all, why even bother listing the dice expression if that is not the case?

I believe that is highly unlikely. Just because they are listed as average doesn't mean a creature with above average HP would have the same CR as an average monster. I find that logic very questionable. Are you suggesting changing the HP of an Ancient red dragon from 546 to 812 doesn't make it more challenging? That it shouldn't change the CR? If a group is challenged by CR 24 average red dragon, wouldn't be more challenged by the same dragon, but with 49% more hit points? Now, all I think is needed is a little description of how dialing up or down the HP affect the CR of the monster or the challenge of the encounter (however you want to track it).

jadrax said:
Of course, generating Challenge for official monsters often deviates significantly from either f the two DMG monster generation system sin the DMG as well, anyway - so I don't think doing it either way is a huge deal.

I don't know if you have made a lot of custom monsters or not, but I have posted over 200 on these boards. And I have made more. I am very familiar with the DMG monster creation guidelines, and with checking the CR of "official" WotC publications. And they have a very high hit rate for accuracy against the DMG (usually within .5 CR +/-). The major area where you get some questions is when it comes to spellcasters. The DMG doesn't have much guidance on how to handle non-damage spells, so we don't know the best method for how these affect CR.

Paul Farquhar · Apr 26, 2018

Tweaking hp within the HD range is likely to have a much less significant effect on an encounter that tactical circumstances - surprise, terrain factors, and so on.

But I think people set to much store by "CR". It's not a magic number that will magically guarantee a fun encounter. It's a very very rough estimate. Look at the monster, look at the party, and decide for yourself if a creature is suitable at is, needs some modding (after all, even monsters are individuals, unless they at modrones) or if a different creature would be better.

hawkeyefan · Apr 26, 2018

Superman can utterly destroy Lex Luthor in a fight.

But does anyone think that's what Lex should do? Get into a fist fight with Superman?

It doesn't take a genius to realize that certain monsters are not meant for a toe to toe fight with the PCs. And the DM has so many resources at his disposal to replicate the monster's genius intellect that it's easy to do so.

Looking at this thing's stat block, I can easily see how to give my PCs a lot of trouble. This thing is nasty. I'd probably bump it's HP up to about 200, but that's within the range for this thing, so I don't really see the issue.

dave2008 · Apr 26, 2018

Paul Farquhar said:
Tweaking hp within the HD range is likely to have a much less significant effect on an encounter that tactical circumstances - surprise, terrain factors, and so on.

I agree, it is more about all other things being equal, increasing the HP will increase the Challenge

Paul Farquhar said:
But I think people set to much store by "CR". It's not a magic number that will magically guarantee a fun encounter. It's a very very rough estimate. Look at the monster, look at the party, and decide for yourself if a creature is suitable at is, needs some modding (after all, even monsters are individuals, unless they at modrones) or if a different creature would be better.

I completely agree with you. I think people are thrown off by the CR actually. There are used to 4e or 3.5e were it meant something different than it does in 5e. It is really just there to show a relative difficult between monsters and a starting point for encounter design. It is best to look at 5e like 1e / 2e were you just compare what the monster can do vs. what the party can do and make a judgement from there.

Here's the Abyssal Sibriex From Mordenkainen's Tome

CapnZapp

Legend

CapnZapp

Legend

CapnZapp

Legend

Parmandur

Book-Friend

Parmandur

Book-Friend

jadrax

Adventurer

dave2008

Legend

Paul Farquhar

Legend

hawkeyefan

Legend

dave2008

Legend

Similar Threads

Related Articles