D&D 5E 5e Hobgoblin stat block

[Kobold Stew]

I view it as whinging to dismiss stuff as subjective in a fundamentally subjective argument, but obviously that's quite subjective! I believe I did provide an argument, but you dismissed it as subjective, which is totally find. It's not the same as not providing one at all, though.

You seem more interested in semantics than meaning, though, which kind of makes me less keen to discuss stuff with you (less so than certain people, admittedly! ). Fr'ex, re: ogre/hobbie, I think naturally one would assume I meant "hits like an ogre", which you seem to have skipped as option! (and is indeed what I was implying)

When presented with sustained, engaged response, you choose to dismiss. That's just poor form. But I shall persevere.

Did you mean to claim, as you do here, the hobgoblin "hits like an ogre"? No, not that either. It's the hobgoblin working with allies. And it is to be completely expected that a CR 1/2 creature working with unspecified others is capable of combat effectiveness equivalent to a single CR 2 creature. That's trivially true. It is still not evidence of bad design.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

When presented with sustained, engaged response, you choose to dismiss. That's just poor form. But I shall persevere.

That seems hypocritical, given how much you've dismissed, but there we are.

Did you mean to claim, as you do here, the hobgoblin "hits like an ogre"? No, not that either. It's the hobgoblin working with allies. And it is to be completely expected that a CR 1/2 creature working with unspecified others is capable of combat effectiveness equivalent to a single CR 2 creature. That's trivially true. It is still not evidence of bad design.

I believe that it is, because CR is a "you need to be this tall" measure, not, as you seem to be incorrectly implying, an encounter-size building block (that's XP). At best, it illustrates a flaw with the CR system, in that a Hobby with any allies should probably be CR2 (and to be real - Hobgoblins have NEVER been a typical L1 enemy in any edition of D&D, that I'm aware of - they're usually encountered at levels 2-6 - I've rarely seen them before 3-4, so I see no problem with this), assuming CR2 = Level 2, which I am given to understand it does, given the relatively easily-accessible, not trivially subverted (RAW) high-damage attack that it possesses.

It's a very 4E-style design, in that if we assume PCs have 100% understanding of and knowledge of the Hobbie ability, he's significantly more manageable (though, still, I feel, CR2 RAW). Unfortunately 5E, unlike 4E, has no such proviso regarding enemy abilities.

 

[Klaus]

Trip isn't in 5E, afaik (except as a Battlemaster Fighter ability maybe?). Grapple is, and can potentially hold one in place.

Anything can be attempted via an ability score contest. The options given in the combat chapter of the playtest are just examples. A simple Str vs. Str-or-Dex contest can knock an opponent prone or pushed 5 feet away from the other hobgoblin. A prone hobgoblin would have disadvantage on attacks, while a PC that moves the fight out of the other hobgoblin's melee reach will force the hobgoblin to use ranged weapons.

What is the Cleric's "strength of arms"? Grapple? They need to already be separated for grapple to have any value, though. Your entire strategy has an apparent presumption that Hobbies started separated in such a way that you can keep them that way, which may or may not be valid.

A 1st-level cleric begins with AC 18, and could easily have +4 to hit (Str 14 +2 prof). Factor in a buff like Bless, and the cleric has a far better chance of hitting the hobgoblin than the hob has of returning the attack. This is enough to keep a hobgoblin in place or risk opportunity attacks from the cleric.

 

[Kobold Stew]

I believe that it is, because CR is a "you need to be this tall" measure, not, as you seem to be incorrectly implying, an encounter-size building block (that's XP). At best, it illustrates a flaw with the CR system, in that a Hobby with any allies should probably be CR2 (and to be real - Hobgoblins have NEVER been a typical L1 enemy in any edition of D&D, that I'm aware of - they're usually encountered at levels 2-6 - I've rarely seen them before 3-4, so I see no problem with this), assuming CR2 = Level 2, which I am given to understand it does, given the relatively easily-accessible, not trivially subverted (RAW) high-damage attack that it possesses.

It's a very 4E-style design, in that if we assume PCs have 100% understanding of and knowledge of the Hobbie ability, he's significantly more manageable (though, still, I feel, CR2 RAW). Unfortunately 5E, unlike 4E, has no such proviso regarding enemy abilities.

I fail to see how any of this bears on the question of whether the hobgoblin is "virtually equivalent" to an Ogre. I do see (in the parts I've bolded) new concerns that the 5e hobgoblin is unlike the hobgoblin in other editions. This may be true, but it's irrelevant to the claim you initially made, and I'm not interested in edition warring.

We agree that there are problems with the ability as written. We disagree on the where those problems lie.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Anything can be attempted via an ability score contest. The options given in the combat chapter of the playtest are just examples. A simple Str vs. Str-or-Dex contest can knock an opponent prone or pushed 5 feet away from the other hobgoblin. A prone hobgoblin would have disadvantage on attacks, while a PC that moves the fight out of the other hobgoblin's melee reach will force the hobgoblin to use ranged weapons.

Interesting. So STR vs DEX allow you to KD? Wow, that's quite a thing. Where in the rules is that?

A 1st-level cleric begins with AC 18, and could easily have +4 to hit (Str 14 +2 prof). Factor in a buff like Bless, and the cleric has a far better chance of hitting the hobgoblin than the hob has of returning the attack. This is enough to keep a hobgoblin in place or risk opportunity attacks from the cleric.

Assuming he's already separated from his allies, this is helpful, but not otherwise.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

The hobby is indeed dangerous and I would still label it as CR2 (100xp) monster, as they are too dangerous to lower level parties and should be used in numbers. But maybe CR with fractions are used differently than CR with integer. The convention may be:

Use monsters of CR 1 for LVL 1 characters, 1 and 2 for LVL 2 characters.
Monsters with fractional CR have very low hp, but have a rather high damage output.

I don´t really have a good explanation, how to use them, but maybe the designers have them.

 

[Klaus]

Interesting. So STR vs DEX allow you to KD? Wow, that's quite a thing. Where in the rules is that?

Ghosts of Dragonspear Castle, page 158, "Knock Down" action. A few lines underneath the "Improvising An Action" sidebar.

Assuming he's already separated from his allies, this is helpful, but not otherwise.

That's why the Fighter pushed a hobgoblin away from the other (either through a Strength contest, or by grappling the hobgoblin and moving it).

 

[SkidAce]

I don't quite follow this. As long as the hobgoblins are adjacent can't they get the buff even if attacking different targets?


I think I find it a bit disappointing that when the party confronts a serious military challenge, the best response for the party (non-archer) fighter or barbarian is to hang back and let the mages and archers handle it.

RW tactics. I find destroying stuff before they can stick me with pointy things being the best solution.

Not fantasy narratively dramatic or fair to melee characters, but that whats happens when we (various soldiers, policemen, MP, security forces etc.) play.

YMMV.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I fail to see how any of this bears on the question of whether the hobgoblin is "virtually equivalent" to an Ogre. I do see (in the parts I've bolded) new concerns that the 5e hobgoblin is unlike the hobgoblin in other editions. This may be true, but it's irrelevant to the claim you initially made, and I'm not interested in edition warring.

Pointing out how a design appears rely on a 4E philosophy no longer present is "edition warring"? That's truly beyond belief, considering I largely like 4E and 5E. Good lord.

Also, you didn't discuss the CR issue, which is an actual design issue.

We agree that there are problems with the ability as written. We disagree on the where those problems lie.

Indeed. My main assertion earlier was that most people seem to agree that there are some problems with the ability, which was disputed.

 

[the Jester]

I think I find it a bit disappointing that when the party confronts a serious military challenge, the best response for the party (non-archer) fighter or barbarian is to hang back and let the mages and archers handle it.

Whereas I would find it disappointing if the same tactic- CHARGE!!!- was always the best choice for the non-archery fighters and barbarians.