D&D 5E 4/18/2013 D&D Next Q&A

[jodyjohnson]

http://community.wizards.com/dndnex...ties,_two-weapon_fighting__signature_abilties

Dual wielding throw weapons didn't occur to me.

 

[Gadget]

I like what he said about immunities, with emphasis on the fact that they need to be implemented sparingly. Two weapon fighting is something that I'm a little ambivalent about; I'm not a 'process-sim' type of person, but I've never seen the need to elevate this particular and rare fighting style to the level of sword & board and two-hander styles.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I'm a little curious about how they'll ensure that these things are actually used sparingly.

Okay, you make golems basically immune to magic. That's fine and it's iconic and in most games no sweat. But then a DM goes and builds a multi-month adventure arc around a mad inventor and his army of golems, and what...you're going to tell him he can't? Or tell the wizard to sit that adventure out?

I'm a big fan of certain binary elements (SEE HERE), but if you don't keep them limited to particular, unique creatures, you might as well re-write the game from scratch with the immunities in place.

 

[SatanasOz]

I'm a little curious about how they'll ensure that these things are actually used sparingly.

Okay, you make golems basically immune to magic. That's fine and it's iconic and in most games no sweat. But then a DM goes and builds a multi-month adventure arc around a mad inventor and his army of golems, and what...you're going to tell him he can't? Or tell the wizard to sit that adventure out?

I'm a big fan of certain binary elements (SEE HERE), but if you don't keep them limited to particular, unique creatures, you might as well re-write the game from scratch with the immunities in place.

You constructed quite the corner case here. Golems are discribed as quite rare. But whatever the case, if the DM feels like that kind of adventure is fun to play than it is his responsibility to adjudicate. Knowing his players, he can either acept it, an thus create a tough challenge for the wizard player (maybe that is the whole point for the BBEG to have such defenders). Or he can Throw them a bone and, for example, hand out the ring of "golem immunity disruption" and be done with it. A great DM might combine those two, creating an atmosphere of dispair for the Wiz in the beginning, and than carefully allowing them to gain such an advantage and thus increasing the sense of empowerment and accomplishment for the whole gang.

However, none of these options are valid if there just is no immunity or such things and every mob in the book is crafted as a level appropriate challenge for x players of y.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Happy to speculate that rakshasha and blessed crossbow bolts will likely retain their special relationship.

And I have a special spot for an old NPC dwarf ranger who dual-wielded throwing axes as "Machine-Axe Kelly".

 

[I'm A Banana]

You constructed quite the corner case here. Golems are discribed as quite rare. But whatever the case, if the DM feels like that kind of adventure is fun to play than it is his responsibility to adjudicate. Knowing his players, he can either acept it, an thus create a tough challenge for the wizard player (maybe that is the whole point for the BBEG to have such defenders). Or he can Throw them a bone and, for example, hand out the ring of "golem immunity disruption" and be done with it. A great DM might combine those two, creating an atmosphere of dispair for the Wiz in the beginning, and than carefully allowing them to gain such an advantage and thus increasing the sense of empowerment and accomplishment for the whole gang.

However, none of these options are valid if there just is no immunity or such things and every mob in the book is crafted as a level appropriate challenge for x players of y.

So, "golems are supposed to be rare!" isn't going to be a very good defense. In a particular DM's game, they might not be so rare.

Of course, limiting this to named NPC-style monsters helps that. If ORCUS is immune to magic, that's probably fine. There's only one orcus.

Your other solutions work peachy, but they do rely on a DM pre-empting problems that they might not even know about before they're problems. The system should probably help DMs avoid those mistakes in the first place.

 

[dd.stevenson]

I suppose the "golem army" campaign could feature a side quest to find the long-lost arcane spell lower magic resistance, mass.

That'll learn 'em.

 

[GX.Sigma]

So, "golems are supposed to be rare!" isn't going to be a very good defense. In a particular DM's game, they might not be so rare.

The golem described in the Monster Manual is rare and is immune to magic. If you want to have golems that are common, that means you're not using the golem from the Monster Manual. Which is fine. The other part of monster design is making it easy for DMs to create their own monsters.

In other words: Golems, and all monsters like this, are designed as "sometimes" monsters. If you want to use them as "all the time" monsters, you'll have to redesign them. Which the game lets you do easily.

This should be made clear in the DM advice.

 

[Texicles]

...they do rely on a DM pre-empting problems that they might not even know about before they're problems. The system should probably help DMs avoid those mistakes in the first place.

This should be made clear in the DM advice.

I'll +1 this sentiment. I don't think there's anything wrong with having golems (et. al.) having resistances, and there's nothing stopping a DM from populating an adventure with such things (nor should there be IMO), as long as they know what the implications of doing so are.

Assuming the majority of people don't take issue with resistances being part of the game, and that most people favor freedom over restriction in terms of DMing, then the solution is to teach DMs how to do their jobs. Come to think of it, I might create a separate thread on this.

 

[SatanasOz]

So, "golems are supposed to be rare!" isn't going to be a very good defense. In a particular DM's game, they might not be so rare.

First: Sorry, my post was not intended to come on that strong - it is great to be able to have civilized discussions about the game . But regarding the argument GX.Sigma and Texicles have said it quite well for me.

The key (and I must admit, I have very high hopes in that regard, especially after some of Mike Mearls comments) is rock solid DM advice. Because no matter whether potentially imbalancing "unique" abilities like Immunities make it into the MM or not - there will always be the DM that wants it just the other way around. She should be guided to the solution (like the ones most of us come up with on the fly, just from experience).

Be it a sidebar "About introducing monsters with X into your campaign" or the reverse "how to spice up the MM monsters with this list of unique (but STRONG) abilites"