• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

D&D 5E Do you like the simplicity of 5E monsters?

MightyZehir

Explorer
As more information on monsters is revealed, different opinions arise. Some people think the monsters are boring because they lack a wide range of tactical options. For example, without lairs, the only difference between dragons is their breath damage type.

Personally, I don't mind the simplicity but I can see why some people would think that way. So I would like to share some of my thoughts on this matter.

While monsters have similar attacks and abilities, they don't have to play the same. It all depends on how you design and run the encounter.

A black dragon may be an ambusher that attacks from dark swamp and drags characters to the bottom of the pool to drown.


You don't need special rules to do that. It just moves out of water, uses multiattack(replace one attack with grapple), then move back down into the water with the character. If you feel like it, you could even rule that it can grapple the target when the dragon hits with its attacks.

There are so many things you could do, nothings stop the dragon from grabbing characters and throwing them around like rag dolls. It could also summon reptiles to fight for him, just throw in a couple of poisonous snake swarms and add their xp to the encounter. Easy.

Use the environment, the lair action is great, but why stop there, acid breath could bring down trees on characters, create aicd pools and difficult terrains.


DMs shouldn't just focus on how the characters and monsters interact with each other, think about how their actions can impact the surroundings. It creates more interesting and dynamic encounters.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

Li Shenron

Legend
I prefer complex monsters, but I understand that WotC designers wanted a low-complexity baseline for monsters too.

As long as we get guidelines on how to advance monsters with additional abilities and adjust CR/XP accordingly, I am fine.

I also want low-complexity monsters myself anyway. One unique special ability per monster can be enough to make them interesting, without the need for a DM to have good ideas of her own ready.
 

Ravenheart87

Explorer
I prefer DCC RPG's simplicity, but the Monster Manual isn't bad either. It's pretty clear and straightforward, although I would've been happier with smaller stat blocks and less wordy abilities.
 

YourSwordIsMine

First Post
After running a 4e game, I longed for the days of simple monsters...

I just wanted Goblins...

Not Bootlicker Goblins (Brute), or Nosepicker Goblins (Soldier), or Goblin Prostitutes (Controller)

Prepping for each session, I dreaded Monsters... It always took far longer than needed. After an hour I wanted to dig my brain out of my head with a rusty spoon... through my rectum...

5e looks to be a return to simpler times as far as monsters go. For which I am very very glad.
 

Paraxis

Explorer
Some of the monsters are fine and have a couple unique tricks or options, some have spells that reference things not in the stat block which is horrible I want ALL the information I need in one place, and others are just boring sacks of hit points that have a boring just plain damage attack.

13th Age does a pretty good job with monster stat blocks I wish 5e had the same layout and system.

But, ehh I will spice up the boring monsters myself, and not use the spell casting ones as written.
 

Raith5

Adventurer
I prefer more complicated monsters - especially for the big monsters like the bulette. The 5e bulette just looked like big (and admittedly scary) bag of hit points.

But even for simple monsters I like the idea of group abilities and tactics that were present in 4e.

However, I dont want overcomplicated monsters but i dont want to see them do the same thing every round.
 


Bumamgar

First Post
If you think 5e monsters are simple, take a look at the 1e monster manual sometime :). If anything 5e seems to be a throwback to 2e monsterous compendium style, with a decent amount of background info and fluff to help the DM be creative in world / encounter building. There's never been much to differentiate kobolds from goblins (mechanically) but prior editions had no problem providing descriptive fluff to allow DMs to portray them differently and create memorable encounters.
 



Remove ads

Top