D&D 5E Low CRs and "Boring" Monsters: Ogre

[Tony Vargas]

I think you're applying the 3.5 mindset where the goal of the rules was to be a precise simulation of the fantasy world, and everything followed all the same rules all the time. So lock DCs are set, the Balance DC to walk on a cloud is like 140 or something, and there are no special rules for monsters vs. PCs.

This is very distinct from 4e, where there was no simulation at all, and all rules constantly mutate to perfectly cradle the PCs at whatever level they are at... so the iron door at level 1 takes DC 15 and the iron door at level 30 takes DC 35. Monsters and PCs are not even recognizable from each other, both using totally distinct systems and following different rules.

OK, hyperbole noted. At least it's to make a point. ;P

5e is neither of these... because it is a little bit of both.

And a lot of neither. 3e and 4e, regardless of how gratuitously you may have misrepresented them, above, were very player-focused (player 'entitled' or empowered) versions of the game. 5e swings the pendulum the other way and is very DM-focused, DM Empowerment being it's biggest feature, and, (look! relevance!) with that Empowerment the DM can fix any problem, real or imagined, including making boring ogres interesting.
(Though he can't keep random folks on the internet from denying the problem exists.)

Due to bounded accuracy, DCs can and should be grounded objectively in the world.

Yet they aren't, they are entirely determined by DM judgement. The DM is free to ground his judgment out on objectivity, like a trawler caught on a sandbar, but he's not obliged to.

The DM even decides whether to call for a check or just narrate the results. Can't get less objective that outright fiat.

But monsters also constantly do things that PCs cannot necessarily emulate, and that's generally okay.

And, really, has been in every edition (arguably least so in 3e, when Polymorph could likely misappropriate many otherwise-unique abilities).

So an ogre can topple a tree because it seems like the ogre ought to be able to. It may not need a heavy grounding in minutia of mechanics.

Here!Here!
Nor would the ogre need a grounding in the objective minutia of the world, where it'd realistically have some serious back problems.... ;P

Although, if you really want one, the Ogre does have double the carrying, lifting, and pushing capacity that a PC with the same strength would have. So that's a pretty clear mechanically-based justification for an action like this to be easy for an ogre and hard for a PC, if you need one.

Or you could let 20 STR PCs knock down the occasional tree, too. How bad could it be?

 

[MostlyDm]

OK, hyperbole noted. At least it's to make a point. ;P

And a lot of neither. 3e and 4e, regardless of how gratuitously you may have misrepresented them, above, were very player-focused (player 'entitled' or empowered) versions of the game. 5e swings the pendulum the other way and is very DM-focused, DM Empowerment being it's biggest feature, and, (look! relevance!) with that Empowerment the DM can fix any problem, real or imagined, including making boring ogres interesting.
(Though he can't keep random folks on the internet from denying the problem exists.)

Yet they aren't, they are entirely determined by DM judgement. The DM is free to ground his judgment out on objectivity, like a trawler caught on a sandbar, but he's not obliged to.

The DM even decides whether to call for a check or just narrate the results. Can't get less objective that outright fiat.

And, really, has been in every edition (arguably least so in 3e, when Polymorph could likely misappropriate many otherwise-unique abilities).

Here!Here!
Nor would the ogre need a grounding in the objective minutia of the world, where it'd realistically have some serious back problems.... ;P

Or you could let 20 STR PCs knock down the occasional tree, too. How bad could it be?

I was pretty sure the hyperbole would be apparent enough that even battle-scarred edition warriors wouldn't get too bothered. Glad it was received in the spirit it was intended.

You're absolutely right about the DM vs. Player empowerment angle, good point. That's hugely relevant here, too. If it makes sense to the DM that an Ogre can do it, then it gets narrated as done. If the DM thinks a player trying to do the same thing sounds more uncertain, and calls for a check, then that's perfectly in line with 5e rules.

And finally... yeah, in some games it wouldn't even be an issue. But I'll admit that in my personally preferred level of gonzo, I'd probably make it a decently hard DC for a PC to pull off, but fairly easy for an ogre (using the carrying capacity as a justification if needed.)

 

[pemerton]

4e, where there was no simulation at all, and all rules constantly mutate to perfectly cradle the PCs at whatever level they are at... so the iron door at level 1 takes DC 15 and the iron door at level 30 takes DC 35.

I've never encountered a single 4e GM who runs the game this way.

The rules certainly don't call for it (eg DMG p 64 - Iron Door DC 25, appropriate for level 18 PCs; Adamantine Door DC 29, approprite for level 29 PCs).


EDIT:

I was pretty sure the hyperbole would be apparent enough that even battle-scarred edition warriors wouldn't get too bothered. Glad it was received in the spirit it was intended.

Perhaps not in my case. I'm still not 100% sure what the intention was.

"Subjective" DCs is not the same thing as "inconsistent fiction".

 

[pemerton]

Or you could let 20 STR PCs knock down the occasional tree, too. How bad could it be?

Well, the problem is they could do it all day long . . .

 

[pemerton]

There have been examples provided. CaptZapps' thread from the other day for example. You were part of that thread, so you must be aware of it.

None of these involve people playing as WofA. So no, they're not examples.

People didn't say they weren't "excited or interested" about the improv'd ideas, they said it (improve ideas) won't happen because it's not better than the standard DPR attack and therefore all the ogre will do is base attack. Several people have literally described their play with an ogre as nothing more than a bag of HP that doesn't do anything but base attack every round. We've even had people flat out say that the flavor text of the ogre has no impact in the combat encounter at all. The way people have described their play is no different than how one plays Wrath of A or any other D&D boardgame.

See, this is what I am disagreeing with. What you are equating to WoA is not like WoA. WoA does not permit any moves to be made that aren't defined. Eg you can't break through the walls on the edges of tiles.

No one here is playing a game like that. And the fact that they want their ogre stats - even stats for thrown cows - in their statblocks makes no difference to that fact.

The GM thinking up some story about ogres, and then telling the players their PCs see an ogre eating a cow, and then telling the players that the ogre throws the cow at their PCs, does not make anything a RPG. That could happen in a choose your own adventure book! It doesn't become a RPG until the fiction actually matters to the resolution.

I'm using the industry universal definition of what a TTRPG is, and you made the argument that Vincent Baker disagrees*, so I must be wrong.

<snip>

*Which is an odd claim to make, since you're saying he disagrees with a position that I never defined my personal opinion on to begin with. So unless you're telepathic and can read my mind, how would you know what he disagrees with me on, and on what level?

Perhaps you might share your opinion on what RPGing is?

I've been imputing it based on what you've presented as examples of it (eg the ogre throwing a cow) and what you've criticised as an absence of it (eg relying on stat blocks to establish action declarations for monsters).

And I don't know of any "industry universal" definition where those are particularly important. Without more, the ogre throwing the cow is just colour. A M:tG card could have that sort of flavour written on it. And the players could even implement a rule that you must read out the flavour before you actually play your card. Or when you make an attack with it. Or whatever. But that wouldn't make it an RPG, because the fiction still wouldn't matter to the resolution.

 

[MostlyDm]

Well, the problem is they could do it all day long . . .

After knocking down their fifth tree of the day, make a Con check or suffer a level of exhaustion.

Or something. Doesn't seem like a real issue.

 

[MostlyDm]

I've never encountered a single 4e GM who runs the game this way.

The rules certainly don't call for it (eg DMG p 64 - Iron Door DC 25, appropriate for level 18 PCs; Adamantine Door DC 29, approprite for level 29 PCs).


EDITerhaps not in my case. I'm still not 100% sure what the intention was.

"Subjective" DCs is not the same thing as "inconsistent fiction".

You're right, my bad.

Better hope nobody makes doors out of Iron in your Heroic Tier instanced zones, though. Yikes!

Sorry, that was more sarcasm. I liked several things about 4e, but the leveling world was definitely a huge downer for me. Having a dozen different levels of orc or demon minions was the same sort of issue in my mind. At level 5 all doors you encounter are made of wood and orc minions are all Level 5 Orc Shmucks. At level 18, doors are made of iron and orc minions are level 18 Orc Badasses. And at level 29, doors are made of adamantine and orc minions are level 29 Infernal Orc Legionnaires.

It felt very much like inconsistency in the fiction. The world is designed to scale up with you in a straightforward, linear fashion. This had been an issue in 3.x as well, but it seemed to become even more exaggerated in 4e.

But I think 4e-bashing is pretty frowned upon, and I don't want to start a big thing over it. I'm glad 4e works so well for its fans. I really do think they had some good ideas, and I see lots of 4e influences in 5e, which is great.

 

[pemerton]

Having a dozen different levels of orc or demon minions was the same sort of issue in my mind. At level 5 all doors you encounter are made of wood and orc minions are all Level 5 Orc Shmucks. At level 18, doors are made of iron and orc minions are level 18 Orc Badasses. And at level 29, doors are made of adamantine and orc minions are level 29 Infernal Orc Legionnaires.

I don't want to be rude to your GM (or you, if that's mostly you . . .) - but that sounds like boring scenario design.

It felt very much like inconsistency in the fiction. The world is designed to scale up with you in a straightforward, linear fashion.

I look at it differently - high level PCs deal with different sorts of things from low level ones. Eg when paragon PCs deal with hobgoblins, they're phalanxes (statted up as swarms), not individual soldiers.

 

[S'mon]

Sorry, that was more sarcasm. I liked several things about 4e, but the leveling world was definitely a huge downer for me. Having a dozen different levels of orc or demon minions was the same sort of issue in my mind. At level 5 all doors you encounter are made of wood and orc minions are all Level 5 Orc Shmucks. At level 18, doors are made of iron and orc minions are level 18 Orc Badasses. And at level 29, doors are made of adamantine and orc minions are level 29 Infernal Orc Legionnaires.

It felt very much like inconsistency in the fiction.

Seems like most computer games (Diablo, Oblivion et al) and even in a Gygaxian megadungeon you'd have 1 hd orcs on level 1, 10 hd infernal orc legionnaires or similar on level 10. My Classic BECM D&D PC group (ca level 15) are currently in a high level 1e AD&D published dungeon from 1981 (The Nine Doctrines of Darkness pt II - using it for the Master of the Desert Nomads' base) and it's got hordes of mook Fighter-7 & higher; last session the PCs waded through the temple guard cohorts killing a total of 25 Ftr 7, 6 Clr 9 and 4 Clr 12 on their way to facing the Clr 30 Master BBEG.

Of course those 15th level BECM PCs do have the choice of going hunting 1 hd orcs, and I would probably play it out, whereas in 4e I'd probably handwave it, or else convert all the standard orcs to minions 8 levels higher, the elite orcs to minions 12 levels higher.

 

[pemerton]

even in a Gygaxian megadungeon you'd have 1 hd orcs on level 1, 10 hd infernal orc legionnaires or similar on level 10.

This prompted a tangential thought - there are a lot of high level fighters in Gygaxian towns and cities: per Appendix C of the DMG, about 2% of day encounters and 1% of night encounters are with "well-dressed fighter-types of 7th to 10th level (d4 + 6) with 1-4 friends of the same abilities", and 2% of day encounters and 4% of night encounters are with "2-5 young gentlemen fighters of 5th to 10th level (d6 + 4)." That's a lot of serious fighting talent hanging about! (Or maybe they're all the same people, and the PCs just keep bumping into them, as a running gag?)