D&D 5E Separating challenge and complexity in monster design

[ProgBard]

I think that matter is covered just fine via the basic conversation of the game (Basic Rules page 3) and the chapter on ability checks. Nowhere does it say players are limited to just the standard options listed in the Combat section or that monsters are limited to their stat blocks. You just say what you want to do and the DM handles the rest. Or the DM just says what the monsters do.

Sure, but to [MENTION=6804638]NotActuallyTim[/MENTION]'s point, that bit of the ruleset is super fuzzy and doesn't actually scratch the itch of someone who wants a little more crunch in the "Okay, but what else can I do?" department. That seems like a pretty good candidate for some plug-in optional mechanics of the sort that we hear rumors of being in the works these days.

 

[iserith]

Sure, but to [MENTION=6804638]NotActuallyTim[/MENTION]'s point, that bit of the ruleset is super fuzzy and doesn't actually scratch the itch of someone who wants a little more crunch in the "Okay, but what else can I do?" department. That seems like a pretty good candidate for some plug-in optional mechanics of the sort that we hear rumors of being in the works these days.

I guess the disconnect for me is that the answer to "Okay, but what else can I do?" is "Whatever you can imagine that is appropriate to the fictional circumstances."

I mean, among the first three lines of the Basic Rules, it says, "It shares elements with childhood games of make-believe. Like those games, D&D is driven by imagination." Are folks just skipping past that bit and trying to find mechanics? I don't think we should look to the system first to find solutions to challenges. What mechanics may be employed by the DM to resolve uncertainty is a consideration, sure, but what makes D&D great in my view is that your options aren't limited as in a board game.

 

[ProgBard]

I guess the disconnect for me is that the answer to "Okay, but what else can I do?" is "Whatever you can imagine that is appropriate to the fictional circumstances."

I mean, among the first three lines of the Basic Rules, it says, "It shares elements with childhood games of make-believe. Like those games, D&D is driven by imagination." Are folks just skipping past that bit and trying to find mechanics? I don't think we should look to the system first to find solutions to challenges. What mechanics may be employed by the DM to resolve uncertainty is a consideration, sure, but what makes D&D great in my view is that your options aren't limited as in a board game.

Well, sure, that's how I play too. (Mostly.) I'm okay with players who have a different style wanting more structure, though - especially in combat, where the issue of "okay, what counts as an action" can make it feel safer to stick to a predetermined menu. And even squishy narrativists like me can sometimes benefit from being inspired by a list of possibilities we might not have thought of.

 

[NotActuallyTim]

I don't want limited options. I want creativity presented in such a way that people feel encouraged to make stuff up when they feel like it, and I don't think the core books do that.

Which, in turn, makes the readers who don't understand that the monsters can just do stuff feel like the monsters are far more boring than they are. And that PCs need more and more extra special abilities with excessively clear labels rather than just writing a few paragraphs on handling freer form actions in the actions section.

 

[iserith]

I don't want limited options. I want creativity presented in such a way that people feel encouraged to make stuff up when they feel like it, and I don't think the core books do that.

Which, in turn, makes the readers who don't understand that the monsters can just do stuff feel like the monsters are far more boring than they are. And that PCs need more and more extra special abilities with excessively clear labels rather than just writing a few paragraphs on handling freer form actions in the actions section.

Page 2 and 3 of Basic Rules. Page 70 - "Other Activity on Your Turn." Chapter 8 - "Adventuring." The Basic Rules are loaded with this sort of thing. Maybe I'm just taking for granted that some people think they are limited only to certain things. I've never seen that sort of behavior before in my games (even in the crunchier 3.Xe and 4e) and I run for an awful lot of pickup groups. I wonder how much of that stems from having DMs that are likely to say "No," directly or indirectly, if a player tries to have the character do something that is not listed in the "standard" array of options.

 

[NotActuallyTim]

I went I read "Other activity on Your Turn" and I gotta say, this is exactly what I find so frustrating. Since it doesn't go over, in downright excruciating detail, multiple actual play examples with imaginary players and DMs, and then proceed to give the DM further advice on using creative actions in play, most people will never, ever get it. EVER. EVVVVVVVVEEEEERRRRRRRRR.

If it's not more than a full page, it's not communicated well enough by the designers.

 

[Bawylie]

I went I read "Other activity on Your Turn" and I gotta say, this is exactly what I find so frustrating. Since it doesn't go over, in downright excruciating detail, multiple actual play examples with imaginary players and DMs, and then proceed to give the DM further advice on using creative actions in play, most people will never, ever get it. EVER. EVVVVVVVVEEEEERRRRRRRRR.

If it's not more than a full page, it's not communicated well enough by the designers.

We probably can't help what most people do. Or don't do.

So let's focus on us.

Why don't we start having our monsters pull the hinky stuff? Pull rugs out from under the adventurer's feet, carry bags of pocket sand for blindness attacks, whip used batteries at people that displease them, overturn tables for cover, use the smallest PC as a club against the other PCs and whatnot.

Maybe the monkey-see/do phenomenon will apply?


-Brad

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Why don't we start having our monsters pull the hinky stuff? Pull rugs out from under the adventurer's feet, carry bags of pocket sand for blindness attacks, whip used batteries at people that displease them, overturn tables for cover, use the smallest PC as a club against the other PCs and whatnot.

It still doesn't solve the improvised-efficacy dilemma. If the improvised stunts are better or more effective than codified powers, then the players will follow suit, and their codified powers become worthless since they can get better results through improvising. If the improvised stunts are worse than codified powers, then the monsters will be even less effective than they already are, and players won't repeat that mistake.

 

[Bawylie]

It still doesn't solve the improvised-efficacy dilemma. If the improvised stunts are better or more effective than codified powers, then the players will follow suit, and their codified powers become worthless since they can get better results through improvising. If the improvised stunts are worse than codified powers, then the monsters will be even less effective than they already are, and players won't repeat that mistake.

Seems like you have guidance for that right in the stat block.

Just have the improvised pro-wrestling move deal roughly the same damage as their basic attack entry. Adjust up or down for multiple targets or status effect riders, etc.

Then they're always roughly equal.


-Brad

 

[ProgBard]

5e's selection of feats seem pretty well-designed to me in that they all "break the rules" in some way - they give you action economy options or bonuses you wouldn't normally be able to get, or avoid limitations you otherwise can't get around. So, e.g., anyone can probably use their action to strike with the butt of their halberd instead of the blade, but only a Polearm Master can make that move as a bonus action when they score a hit.

But saying, "Can I make an Acrobatics check as part of my Disengage action to grab hold of the chandelier and swing out of reach?" isn't something that steps into a feat's territory; it's a legit creative move that no halfway-decent DM should even think of prohibiting (unless of course there's a good environmental reason it wouldn't be possible).