D&D 5E Helping melee combat to be more competitive to ranged.

[Flamestrike]

The same could be said of the Balor or Marilith. Really? That's what you picture as a great cinematic encounter? A balor being forced to play hide and seek in special terrain because if he shows his face the Sharpshooter Archer turns it into a living pincusshio with help from the smiting warlock and paladin that kill it so fast it was better off running? That's you're image of a great encounter?

Why can't a Balor throw itself into the middle of a group of PCs and challenge them without special help from terrain or minions and survive past a few rounds? I don't think that is asking too much, but I guess it is to some of you.

Sigh.

'As you walk down the hallway, a shimmering fills the air as a rip in reality forms around you. Through the tear you see the fires of some hellish realm, everchanging and the stuff of nightmares. Suddenly, emerging from the hole is a large winged demon carrying whip and sword; a lordly Balor, screaming in rage! Roll initiative.'

(Now set up your minis with the Balor adjacent to the archer, and smack in the middle of the party. Ensure that as each PCs turn comes around they get no more than 2 seconds to declare actions, or they take the dodge action and their turn ends)

That wasnt that hard was it? I didnt change anything mathmatically. The thing just got plane shifted in there by (a Demon lord who is pissed at the party, an ancient trap, the PCs Imp betraying the party, or whatever other macguffin is appropriate).

From there go nuts. If you also want to make it a solo challenge for high level PCs kitted out with artifacts and similar, I suggest bumping its CR up by 3-4 and adding 10 HD, 125 HP, +1 natural armor, legendary actions of [teleport] [whip or sword] and [20d8 fireball, costs 3 actions] and 3 legendary saves. This also adds +1 to its Prof bonus. Name it as well (Grolthamak). Increase all damage die by 1 step per die.

Solo creatures wiithout legendary saves/ actions suck badly. Thats why they're there. Use them.

This is why we'll never, ever see eye to eye and why folks like you and Flamestrike continue to prove my point that monsters as written are not a very good challenge for the PCs. They have to play "smart" and use their "INT and WIS" to challenge the PCs rather than the PCs having to play smart and use their INT and WIS to beat the fearsome, destructive demonic warlord or awe-inspiring dragon.

You (the DM) can play them as smart as you want to. You have no problem with several Int 8 PCs (everyone barring the Wizard) running as a well oiled tactical emotionless killing machine. Run your Int 20 emotionless killing machines smarter.

For example, they dont sit in rooms waiting for the PCs. They come and get them. Using better tactics designed (by you and them) to beat the PCs tactics.

Why can't a dragon fly out of its lair, spot the PCs wandering about, and force them to run for cover rather than vice versa even at high level?

Because you designed and run the encounter, and you designed and ran it that way.

You're the DM, and instead of having the dragon sit in its lair waiting for the PCs, you can simply say:

'As you wind along the narrow mountain path in your approach to the dragons lair, you hear a terrible roar from behind you. Looking around you notice a large winged lizard like creature with red scales diving down to attack from your blind spot, swooping around from the cliffs you have just traversed. It's about 120' away on a 90' degree angle from the ground, flames billowing from its mouth. Roll initiative'

(You the DM have determined the dragon noticed the PCs coming with its Perception +16, network of spies, magical sensors on the path, and whatever other macguffin you need. It sneaks up on the party (flying around the cliffs to engage them on the path... as planned - thats why it lairs in this area) with its Stealth +7 - rolling as arbitrarily high a number on its Stealth check as you the DM think is appropriate... lets go with a roll of 15 for a total result of 22. Anyone without a passive perception of 22 is surprised on round 1).

Regardless, I'm going to build what I want. For me the monsters in the Monster Manual are too weak. They don't accomplish my desires in the narrative. Given that is their job, they're not accomplishing their job. I want ancient dragons that can make lvl 15 or 20 characters flee and have to work their asses off to beat them. I want balors that PCs fear to engage because they know they're in a battle to death. I want mariliths that deflect arrows and spell beams while slicing and dicing any PCs that approach them. I want the PCs scared of my monsters. I want the PCs to have to use their INT and WIS to beat the monsters regardless of the terrain or environment. The monsters in the Monster Manual are not getting it done.

This is totally cool as well. I do the same thing (mix it up, add abilities to monsters etc).

For a solo creature, I strongly suggest adding legendary resistances and actions if it doesnt already have them (as suggested above). Solo creatures havent worked well for a while (due to the action economy).

Drop one of them in the middle of your party of PCs and see how they like it.

 

[Satyrn]

Hiya!



I think of it not so much as "how easy is it to fire off or throw the weapon", as it is "how easy is it to fire off or throw the weapon...when I'm underground, with only flickering torchlight, wounded from 3rd degree acid burns, sporting a cracked jaw, surrounded by vicious monsters trying to eat my face, and judge the timing just right so that I hit the war-chief monster without hitting my two companions fighting him".

Standing 50' away from a stationary target with bright colours painted on it, in the middle of a field on a sunny day with a hushed crowd waiting to see how close to the bullseye I can get after taking careful aim for 15 seconds....well, kinda different I would imagine.

But 5e D&D isn't about minutia...the minutia the rules would have to have in order to account at least somewhat for such disparity between circumstances. Hence "You can take the Attack action", with "attack" being pretty freaking vague if you think about it. Fast and loose, baby, fast and loose! In this case "Shooting = 2/round ; Throwing = 1/round" keeps with that idea.

^_^

Paul L. Ming

That was a much no longer response than I expected for a joke about 2e dart specialists.

 

[Flamestrike]

Im working on a few variant rules at present for a scaled down version of the game for peeps that are having these issues.

Banning all feats other than half feats (or re writing all feats to be half feats) is probably the way to go.

Also looking at turning all casters into pseudo-warlocks, and converting all long rest abilities into short rest abilities.

 

[smbakeresq]

Im working on a few variant rules at present for a scaled down version of the game for peeps that are having these issues.

Banning all feats other than half feats (or re writing all feats to be half feats) is probably the way to go.

Also looking at turning all casters into pseudo-warlocks, and converting all long rest abilities into short rest abilities.

More but less powerful feats would be a good idea. Players could then take feats that never get taken, like Actor or the one with languages. Who would ever design those thinking they would get picked?

 

[Flamestrike]

More but less powerful feats would be a good idea. Players could then take feats that never get taken, like Actor or the one with languages. Who would ever design those thinking they would get picked?

They dont see much love in my game. Although the PCs have been struggling with lack of languages lately.

Some half feat ideas would be (retain all the current half feats) and strip -5/+10 to GWM (+1 Str), strip the bonus action attack from PAM (+1 Str) strip the -5/+10 from sharpshooter (+1 dex) and add a bonus action ranged attack 'cleave' option instead of the ignore cover, an 'Expertise' feat that doubles your prof bonus in a skill (and gives you +1 to the relevant stat). Lucky gets nerfed to one re-roll and +1 to any stat. Martial adept gets a flat +1 to Str or Dex. Shield master loses the bonus action shove, but gains +1 to Str or Dex. The caster feats (ritual caster, elemental adept and magic adept) get you +1 to Int, Wis or Cha.

Charger gets you a bonus action dash and +1 Str, Con or Dex. Savage attacker is just beyond repair.

You would need to boost two handers a bit to compensate and make heavy and versatile str builds worth it. Maybe have a weapon wielded in two hands doing Str x 1.5 like in 3.5 (round down). Id also allow two weapon fighting with a single light weapon and another weapon of choice.

 

[CapnZapp]

I've never taken those feats and have never felt screwed or weak.

That's not a serious argument either way. But I'm glad you're having a great time.

 

[CapnZapp]

More but less powerful feats would be a good idea. Players could then take feats that never get taken, like Actor or the one with languages. Who would ever design those thinking they would get picked?

My current thinking is that Linguist & friends should be converted to backgrounds.

Essentially, the proposal is to add a single "trained background" where a player is allowed to pick a feat (from a list containing Keen Mind, Linguist etc) in return for spinning a tale as to how that character came to that type of specialized training. The feat would be the Feature of that background.

Actor on the other hand is borderline too-strong for this, since getting advantage on deception is close to a free pass on talking your way past guards and such, and can often replace even magic. (Actually, in my review, I gave Actor an overall grade of blue, so I'm definitely planning to let it stand as-is)

So the list definitely contains Keen Mind and Linguist, but that's about it. Observant would be on the list if not for the +5 passive perception (which is very strong, since in practice it means no monster or trap can ever surprise you again).

 

[CapnZapp]

That wasnt that hard was it? I didnt change anything mathmatically. The thing just got plane shifted in there by (a Demon lord who is pissed at the party, an ancient trap, the PCs Imp betraying the party, or whatever other macguffin is appropriate).

(You the DM have determined the dragon noticed the PCs coming with its Perception +16, network of spies, magical sensors on the path, and whatever other macguffin you need.

You're digging yourself into a hole without even realizing it Flamestrike.

The basis for our entire criticism of the 5th Edition Monster Manual is exactly this.

The Balor shouldn't need macguffins, it should have the tools right there in the stat block.

The dragon shouldn't need to cheat by made-up "networks of spies", it should have the tools right there in the statblock.

The difference between you and I is that I understand that you can play the game the way you like to, but you deny me the ability to play the game the way I want to.

I don't want to invent "macguffins" when the statblocks previously contained a good measure of tricks and treats that a DM can use right out of the box.

I don't want to gloss over the facts:

How, exactly, does the Dragon notice the PCs coming? I mean, without the PCs - with far superior Perception abilities - also noticing the Dragon?

If a Balor can spot the characters, the characters are likely to have spotted the Balor two rounds earlier. I'm not saying this to brag. I'm not saying this to tell you wrong. I'm saying this as fact of something going wrong in the edition.

I want Balors and Dragons to do cool stuff, just like you. I just want the numbers to support it.

Don't misunderstand me. I'm completely cool with you shortcircuiting the players abilities and stratagems and just plop down the monsters next to the heroes, time and time again.

But where you go wrong is when you stubbornly refuses to accept that for those DMs that do not want to play the game that way, this edition leaves them out in the cold, like 3E never did.

I don't want to play the game like a videogame where it doesn't matter what precautions the heroes take, the monsters just emerge from the darkness and enter melee regardless.

I myself hate it when my DM says "the swamp creatures rise from the black depths and charge you - roll initiative".

How could these creatures get past all the scouts and alarms? How come nobody saw them coming? The rules make it extremely unlikely they would all roll high on their Stealth.

There simply is no rules support for the cool exciting battles you lay out for us Flamestrike.

And that is our complaint.

No matter how often you say you can fix this as a DM (or more obnoxiously, when you insinuate a DM does a poor job for not fixing it) and no matter how much you talk about player INT and WIS, you're simply trying to deflect away discussion from the real complain we're having.

The rules simply do not support the kind of encounters we all want it to support.

Not when the players expertly use all the spells, features and abilities at their disposal, anyway.

In the end, the inescapable impression I'm getting remains one where the designers simply aren't aware enough of the tactics and combinations that veteran players can and do employ.

The game and its monsters simply come across as defenseless against well-built heroes run by veteran players mindful of effectiveness and party combat cooperation (once you leave single-digit levels anyhow).

It feels like Mariliths are playing in the junior league.

And that's simply not good enough for a game in its fifth iteration.

I expect more out of WotC than this.

In short: the player side of the rules are probably the best ever. The monster side of the rules need a complete overhaul, significantly restoring abilities to high-level monsters to give DMs the tools they need to challenge high-level parties without having to resort to macguffins.

 

[Yunru]

More but less powerful feats would be a good idea. Players could then take feats that never get taken, like Actor or the one with languages. Who would ever design those thinking they would get picked?

Actor is one of the single most powerful feats in the game. Anyone who doesn't think so has a DM that doesn't pay enough attention to the Socialisation pillar.

 

[Yunru]

You're digging yourself into a hole without even realizing it Flamestrike.

The basis for our entire criticism of the 5th Edition Monster Manual is exactly this.

The Balor shouldn't need macguffins, it should have the tools right there in the stat block.

The dragon shouldn't need to cheat by made-up "networks of spies", it should have the tools right there in the statblock.

The difference between you and I is that I understand that you can play the game the way you like to, but you deny me the ability to play the game the way I want to.

I don't want to invent "macguffins" when the statblocks previously contained a good measure of tricks and treats that a DM can use right out of the box.

I don't want to gloss over the facts:

How, exactly, does the Dragon notice the PCs coming? I mean, without the PCs - with far superior Perception abilities - also noticing the Dragon?

If a Balor can spot the characters, the characters are likely to have spotted the Balor two rounds earlier. I'm not saying this to brag. I'm not saying this to tell you wrong. I'm saying this as fact of something going wrong in the edition.

I want Balors and Dragons to do cool stuff, just like you. I just want the numbers to support it.

Don't misunderstand me. I'm completely cool with you shortcircuiting the players abilities and stratagems and just plop down the monsters next to the heroes, time and time again.

But where you go wrong is when you stubbornly refuses to accept that for those DMs that do not want to play the game that way, this edition leaves them out in the cold, like 3E never did.

I don't want to play the game like a videogame where it doesn't matter what precautions the heroes take, the monsters just emerge from the darkness and enter melee regardless.

I myself hate it when my DM says "the swamp creatures rise from the black depths and charge you - roll initiative".

How could these creatures get past all the scouts and alarms? How come nobody saw them coming? The rules make it extremely unlikely they would all roll high on their Stealth.

There simply is no rules support for the cool exciting battles you lay out for us Flamestrike.

And that is our complaint.

No matter how often you say you can fix this as a DM (or more obnoxiously, when you insinuate a DM does a poor job for not fixing it) and no matter how much you talk about player INT and WIS, you're simply trying to deflect away discussion from the real complain we're having.

The rules simply do not support the kind of encounters we all want it to support.

Not when the players expertly use all the spells, features and abilities at their disposal, anyway.

In the end, the inescapable impression I'm getting remains one where the designers simply aren't aware enough of the tactics and combinations that veteran players can and do employ.

The game and its monsters simply come across as defenseless against well-built heroes run by veteran players mindful of effectiveness and party combat cooperation (once you leave single-digit levels anyhow).

It feels like Mariliths are playing in the junior league.

And that's simply not good enough for a game in its fifth iteration.

I expect more out of WotC than this.

In short: the player side of the rules are probably the best ever. The monster side of the rules need a complete overhaul, significantly restoring abilities to high-level monsters to give DMs the tools they need to challenge high-level parties without having to resort to macguffins.

Stop speaking for me.