D&D 5E New Spellcasting Blocks for Monsters --- Why?!

[Voadam]

I know that Crawford clarified on Twitter somewhere, though I believe that he goes into it a bit here:

OK I just watched that and it says monster spells are still spells but magical abilities like a mind flayer's mind blast are magical but not spells.

That seems to support Vecna's explicit spells under spellcasting being spells and his other magical abilities being not spells even if they act a lot like spells.

Same as it has been throughout 5e.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

OK I just watched that and it says monster spells are still spells but magical abilities like a mind flayer's mind blast are magical but not spells.

That seems to support Vecna's explicit spells under spellcasting being spells and his other magical abilities being not spells even if they act a lot like spells.

Same as it has been throughout 5e.

If you want a fluff explanation, an individual's personal customised spells are not identifiable.

 

[Charlaquin]

Somewhat more situational. Worse, I don't know about that.

Being useful in more situations is better, therefore being more situational is worse. It’s still a useful spell, it’s just useful less often and therefore not as good.

 

[Charlaquin]

I make errors when playing chess, too, and that game is perfect.

Is it though?

 

[happyhermit]

I have had a TON of fun with 5e, more than I ever would have expected in the years before I tried it. I introduced dozens of players to the hobby with it, ran an ongoing campaign with 4 generations of our family involved, it's been great. But... a lot of these recent changes are really eroding the reasons I have been using it.

Support for "strategy" as opposed to "tactics" was not fantastic in 5e, but I understood that other preferences are very popular and all that I needed was that there was "enough" for the game to just work. But changes like these are really eroding that level to where it just might be easier to play a different system, because even playing "pre-motmv" or whatever has it's issues for my preferences that I had held out small hope would be improved over time.

When people point out that you can just give a spellcaster whatever spells they need on the fly or combat only occurs as a specific few rounds and never a prolonged strategic engagement, it's obvious that they are playing a very different game than we often have been. Which is not just fine, I think it was great that we could all enjoy the same game, which makes me just a bit sad to wander away again. It seems so trivially easy to leave in the level of support for players like us, many have pointed out how it could be done, that it makes me sad.

 

[Charlaquin]

OK I just watched that and it says monster spells are still spells but magical abilities like a mind flayer's mind blast are magical but not spells.

That seems to support Vecna's explicit spells under spellcasting being spells and his other magical abilities being not spells even if they act a lot like spells.

Same as it has been throughout 5e.

Correct. What’s different now though is that many monsters which previously got a lot of their offensive CR from spells now get more of their offensive CR from magical abilities that are not spells than they do from spells.

 

[Parmandur]

OK I just watched that and it says monster spells are still spells but magical abilities like a mind flayer's mind blast are magical but not spells.

That seems to support Vecna's explicit spells under spellcasting being spells and his other magical abilities being not spells even if they act a lot like spells.

Same as it has been throughout 5e.

Yes, exactly, but now the spread has been changed on a block by block basis. There are more magical ability Monsters of the Multiverse, replacing what were Spells in Volo's and Mordenkainen's.

Not a rule change, but an evolution in Monster design philosophy.

 

[Parmandur]

Being useful in more situations is better, therefore being more situational is worse. It’s still a useful spell, it’s just useful less often and therefore not as good.

Worse just seems like strong word for it.

 

[Undrave]

I don't see it that way. it forces the PCs to get creative, and maybe retreat and reassess and build tactics off gained knowledge.

One thing that feels weird in a lot of these discussions is how it is assumed that the players know whatever information we, as GMs, are poo-pooing on WotC about. Ostensibly, the players don't know that information, and if they do, they are supposed to partition it.

So, the first time you try and take out the BBEG you hit a brick wall because you didn't know you needed X and have to retreat. GOOD.

Creative how? It's literally "You cannot open the blue door without the blue key" in a video game. And most of the folks who can get Dispell would, at worse, have to take a long rest. It's not like you have to trick him into entering a magic circle or touching a specific material. It's only 1 BORING solution to a problem and it boils down to, once again, "the right spell at the right moment". It's just morefodder for that Wizard player to go "AHAH! I had prepared this spell for this exact situation!" and be all self-congratulating on outwitting the DM.

And if you can't do anything to the guy, I find it hard to imagine he'd just let you walk away that easily.

Only if they want to deal damage to him. Can they reduce his hit points instead? Trap him? Maybe poke out his eye and cut off his hand.

He's invulnerable, how the HECK do you reduce his HP, or inflict grievous wounds like that?

 

[Undrave]

Yes, exactly, but now the spread has been changed on a block by block basis. There are more magical ability Monsters of the Multiverse, replacing what were Spells in Volo's and Mordenkainen's.

Not a rule change, but an evolution in Monster design philosophy.

Eh, the less counterspelling the better. It's a do-nothing mechanic. Both side have expended a ressource, but nobody's any closer to being defeated. It dosn't progress the game state.