D&D 5E Here's some 5E monsters

[surfarcher]

Just bacuse its not getting as much feedback as the Volt.

I made a conversion of the Demon: Despoiler (13th Age)over at the Homebrew forum if anyone is interested.

OK the numbers I use aren't just for the Doppleganger. They are also based on what my analysis of the SS monsters and Basic/SS PCs suggest MM monsters will look like.

AC is within a +/- 6 variance of the average 13 I expect we'll see at 8HD so shouldn't be any kind of issue.

I think average max attribute for 8HD is going to be in the neighbourhood of 17, so an 18 in Int should be ok. But my modelling suggests an 8HD creature will typically have an average attribute of around 12-ish. Yours has an average of 16 so it might worth dropping a couple of attributes down a bit. The Doppelganger is max 18, average 13.3.

Attack bonus is a little below what I think we'll see, but not an issue on it's own. And damage looks at the bottom of what I expect to be average for an 8HD. The Doppleganger is +6, 14 damage. I suggest you give this creature a Multiattack of some kind or beef up it's attack bonus (change it's weapon to a Dex weapon, bump and give it proficiency with it (swap Wis and Dex). Of course, if it's not going to rely on that reaction for damage you can ignore the attack/damage commentary ;-)

 

[jadrax]

OK the numbers I use aren't just for the Doppleganger. They are also based on what my analysis of the SS monsters and Basic/SS PCs suggest MM monsters will look like.

Woohoo, Feedback! I have made some changes.

Interestingly you seem to be saying your going to base your modelling on the number of 'Hit Dice' rather than the Challenge?


Given the following tweet exchange I have pretty much been ignoring 'Hit Dice' and focusing purely on CR. Do you think that's not going to work out well?

Evan ‏@wordsncode Jul 16
@Wizards_DnD @mikemearls Will monsters in the MM have a proficiency bonus? in LMoP it looks like most have a prof-bon of 2. #guessing#DnD5e

Mike Mearls @mikemearls · Jul 16
@wordsncode @Wizards_DnD yes, they have one based on their CR.

 

[JEB]

Well, that tweet-revelation clears some stuff up.
- Challenge-as-Level explains the young green dragon's apparent +3 proficiency (it's Challenge 8). Unfortunately, that doesn't help much with higher-level conversions, since we don't have a reliable way to calculate Challenge yet. But it's something to keep an eye on as we learn more.
- If that's always how it works, then natural attacks for some monsters must be finesse attacks, since some melee attacks make sense as PB+Dex but not as PB+Str. (Though this isn't consistent - the stirge, twig blight, and wolf make sense that way, but the spectator does not.)

Speaking of conversions (as I do), I completed the 2E/1E guidelines.
- Full version
- Quick reference

 

[surfarcher]

Woohoo, Feedback! I have made some changes.

Interestingly you seem to be saying your going to base your modelling on the number of 'Hit Dice' rather than the Challenge?

Not exactly.

Given the following tweet exchange I have pretty much been ignoring 'Hit Dice' and focusing purely on CR. Do you think that's not going to work out well?

It's also clearly spelled out in the <i>Basic D&D</i> PDF.

The thing is I don't think CR is actually a building block in the process-oriented approach. I believe that it's more something used to evaluate a creature. I think "intended CR" is, in a manner of speaking, a factor. But I think that drives somewhat off HD.

There's more on this in the blog post I am currently working on.

Well, that tweet-revelation clears some stuff up.

- Challenge-as-Level explains the young green dragon's apparent +3 proficiency (it's Challenge 8). Unfortunately, that doesn't help much with higher-level conversions, since we don't have a reliable way to calculate Challenge yet. But it's something to keep an eye on as we learn more.

Like I said, it's also in the <i>Basic D&D</i> PDF. You can use the PC proficiency table and monster CR to figure out monster proficiency.

- If that's always how it works, then natural attacks for some monsters must be finesse attacks, since some melee attacks make sense as PB+Dex but not as PB+Str. (Though this isn't consistent - the stirge, twig blight, and wolf make sense that way, but the spectator does not.)

Not all monsters use their proficiency on their attack. Especially "caster" monsters.

Speaking of conversions (as I do), I completed the 2E/1E guidelines.
- Full version
- Quick reference

And how do you think those conversions scale up?

 

[Remathilis]

Speaking of conversions (as I do), I completed the 2E/1E guidelines.
- Full version
- Quick reference

Looks good.

If you are interested: DMO: High Level Campaigns had rules for finding the remaining ability scores for a monster. Since they were supposed to be for "unique" monsters (and thus you rolled 3d6 and consulted a table) they aren't great for "averages" Still, they present a range of averages. Note, they also recommended using the Humanoid's Handbook for humanoids and saving these for inhuman monsters, but they can still work.

Physical Score are determined by Size Category. Below are the ranges.

STR: T 2-15, S 4-16, M 6-18, L 13-20, H 15-23, G 18-25
DEX: T 13-25, S 11-23, M 9-21, L 7-19, H 5-17, G 3-15
CON: T 3-15, S 5-17, M 7-19, L 9-21, H 11-23, G 13-25

Mental Scores are determined by Intelligence Score.

INT Use Score Range Listed
WIS A 1-5, S 2-6, L 3-9, Av 6-12, V 8-14, H 10-17, E 12-19, G 14-21, Sg 16-23, G 18-25
CHA A 1-3, S 1-6, L 3-9, Av 6-12, V 8-14, H 11-17, E 13-17, G 15-21 Sg 17-23, G 19-25

Obviously, they would need further conversion to 5e, but something like this might help.

 

[JEB]

Like I said, it's also in the <i>Basic D&D</i> PDF. You can use the PC proficiency table and monster CR to figure out monster proficiency.

That they use proficiency is spelled out, but not that they use Challenge as their level. That tweet seems to make it pretty clear, though.

Not all monsters use their proficiency on their attack. Especially "caster" monsters.

Actually, I just spent the day breaking the Starter Set monsters down further. If proficiency is based on Challenge-as-Level, and unarmed attacks tend to be finesse, the vast majority do appear to be using proficiency, including caster monsters for spell attacks. The only exception seemed to be the ghoul's bite, which almost makes me think it's an error, since it's otherwise consistent.

And how do you think those conversions scale up?

Same as when you asked that before, not well past Challenge 8, due to the limited sample. Though now I'm suspecting the main trouble will be with proficiency bonuses, less with the other aspects. (And I might have an optional approach to guesstimating proficiency on the way, now.)

If you are interested: DMO: High Level Campaigns had rules for finding the remaining ability scores for a monster.

Nice find, I'll probably add that and the Humanoids book as suggested resources in a later update...

 

[surfarcher]

Looks good.

If you are interested: DMO: High Level Campaigns had rules for finding the remaining ability scores for a monster. Since they were supposed to be for "unique" monsters (and thus you rolled 3d6 and consulted a table) they aren't great for "averages" Still, they present a range of averages. Note, they also recommended using the Humanoid's Handbook for humanoids and saving these for inhuman monsters, but they can still work.

...snip...

Obviously, they would need further conversion to 5e, but something like this might help.

I've generally been going with average max and attribute and average attribute by HD/CR. It's working out very well in my analysis and I've estimated what I believe it'll look like in the MM. But time will tell.

That they use proficiency is spelled out, but not that they use Challenge as their level. That tweet seems to make it pretty clear, though.

Well the fact that CR is always used in the comparison to PC level is a huge clue IMHO. But the proof is in the fact that it's a perfect fit for every monster in the SS. Those that don't use it in ther attack instead use it in their spell DC.

Actually, I just spent the day breaking the Starter Set monsters down further. If proficiency is based on Challenge-as-Level, and unarmed attacks tend to be finesse, the vast majority do appear to be using proficiency, including caster monsters for spell attacks. The only exception seemed to be the ghoul's bite, which almost makes me think it's an error, since it's otherwise consistent.

Yeah I agree with that. I simply put the Ghoul down as not using bite.

Now explain to me why the Nothic only has +4 on it's Claws, instead of +5 or +3 - my guess is they used Strength instead of Dex, which is weird.

And why the Spectator's Spell DC is 13 instead of 12. Now that one I suspect may be an error.

Same as when you asked that before, not well past Challenge 8, due to the limited sample. Though now I'm suspecting the main trouble will be with proficiency bonuses, less with the other aspects. (And I might have an optional approach to guesstimating proficiency on the way, now.)

Oops sorry :-( Didn't mean to ask twice :-(

 

[JEB]

Now explain to me why the Nothic only has +4 on it's Claws, instead of +5 or +3 - my guess is they used Strength instead of Dex, which is weird.

And why the Spectator's Spell DC is 13 instead of 12. Now that one I suspect may be an error.

Agreed, the Nothic is odd. Note the Spectator's bite also uses Strength (making it +1) instead of Dexterity (which would make it +4). Maybe that's an aberration thing? Or an arbitrary judgment call for creatures that are intended to have weaker melee attacks...

As for the Spectator's eye rays, agreed that should be DC 12. That one's a mystery to me right now, doesn't fit with any theory so far. (Maybe it's 10+CR, who knows.)

 

[surfarcher]

Agreed, the Nothic is odd. Note the Spectator's bite also uses Strength (making it +1) instead of Dexterity (which would make it +4). Maybe that's an aberration thing? Or an arbitrary judgment call for creatures that are intended to have weaker melee attacks...

As for the Spectator's eye rays, agreed that should be DC 12. That one's a mystery to me right now, doesn't fit with any theory so far. (Maybe it's 10+CR, who knows.)

Either way I think both are either quirky design decisions or errors. But both seem like good examples that the build methods are guidelines and that a small proportion of creatures can be tweaked outside those guidelines but still fall within CR.

 

[Quickleaf]

[MENTION=10148]JEB[/MENTION] thanks for those handy conversion guides!

I've decided to try my hand at converting an old 2e monster from Planescape, the Astral Searcher.

Right away there's a dilemma. The astral searcher has 2 HD (and so it should be worth about 35 XP), but instead it is valued at 175 XP! What gives?

Well, there a three potent characteristics of the monster:

1. It can only be hit by +1 or better weapons and it has 50% magic resistance. It also seems to be implied that they're incorporeal.
2. Its ghostly claws are touch attacks that bypass armor, treating all targets as AC 5, yet strangely allowing the target to apply their Wisdom modifier to their AC against this attack.
3. When it reduces you to 0 HP, it kills you outright and possesses your body.

Those are potent, so it makes sense it has a higher than normal XP value, but I'm thinking I can tone some of those down a bit and come up with a Challenge 1/4 (50 XP) or 1/2 (100 XP) monster.

I'm thinking leaving it as a 2 HD monster (rather than upgrading it to 3) because it's meant to be a fragile tenuous being made of emotional echoes & because it already has the "+1 or better to hit" feature. Speaking of, I'll convert that to "resistance to bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage from non-magic weapons."

I'll probably get rid of its 50% magic resistance altogether, since it's not an iconic feature like it is for the flame skull (which in 2e has 88% resistance and spell turning).

Not sure yet how I'll handle it being incorporeal, or maybe the above sufficiently covers it. There were no rules in 2e for its incorporeality, but it was strongly suggested in the flavor.

With its strange touch attack, I'm considering making it a melee attack that involves a Dexterity or Wisdom saving throw (target's choice to avoid or endure), rather than an attack versus AC. Still, the wraith attacks AC, so maybe the astral searcher should too? I'm thinking this is one of its main features so I shouldn't nix it altogether.

As for it's possession ability, I'm thinking of modifying it so that it doesn't automatically kill when it redux you to 0 HP but rather puts the target's consciousness in a comatose state, which slowly deteriorates to death while possessed. I'm thinking the astral searcher can be expelled from the target with one of the restoration spells or a plot device, so there's a chance to save an ally who has been possessed by a searcher, which sounds like a great adventure hook.

I'd like to get your critique on these ideas before I post the converted monster.