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

[Minigiant]

Do not forget shield. Do not forget it. Or mirror image and any other low level spell. Do not tunnel vision the fact.that a magic missile can be upcast for a 7th level spell... It is but one possibility that spell slot offers.

Stacking low level buffs because the spells deal low damage is how 3e broke.

 

[Zubatcarteira]

For me, I've never been much of a fan of caster statblocks, lots of underwhelming spells that keep you wondering why they'd choose those, no list for what other spells they have in their spellbook (for wizards), and with how ridiculously op high level spells are the monster can get broken as hell if you wanna change them much. So, this kind of statblock seems fine for a one-off encounter, although they'll lose a lot of versatility for a reocurring villain.

 

[Reynard]

Stacking low level buffs because the spells deal low damage is how 3e broke.

They solved that problem with concentration, so that is a different issue.

 

[Thomas Rainsborough]

For me, I've never been much of a fan of caster statblocks, lots of underwhelming spells that keep you wondering why they'd choose those, no list for what other spells they have in their spellbook (for wizards), and with how ridiculously op high level spells are the monster can get broken as hell if you wanna change them much. So, this kind of statblock seems fine for a one-off encounter, although they'll lose a lot of versatility for a reocurring villain.

You are conflating incompetent WOTC designers populating a decent design with a useless spell list compared to simply a bad design. I am vastly superior to any designer at WOTC when it comes to populating spell lists. I have learned that with through the experience of tearing out garbage and replacing them with spells that make sense.

Mord's Deathlock Mastermind is a favourite monster of mine. But the spell list had to be gutted, the Invocations gutted.

 

[Minigiant]

They solved that problem with concentration, so that is a different issue.

Exactly.

What do you do with your 1st level spell slots after you cast a concentration spell.

Not creat more concentration spells.

 

[Reynard]

Exactly.

What do you do with your 1st level spell slots after you cast a concentration spell.

Not creat more concentration spells.

I think I may have been unclear. What I was asking is did 5E make something better by forcing you to cast Magic Missile at a higher level, rather than having your caster level increase the power of Magic Missile.

 

[Zubatcarteira]

For the caster level discussion, it could matter for things like Polymorph and other spells that rely on level, a PC Archmage can turn into an Ancient Dragon, but an NPC one couldn't if we just use their CR that's usually lower than level. You might wanna use level to keep them more in line with the PCs.

 

[Helldritch]

Exactly.

What do you do with your 1st level spell slots after you cast a concentration spell.

Not creat more concentration spells.

I think I may have been unclear. What I was asking is did 5E make something better by forcing you to cast Magic Missile at a higher level, rather than having your caster level increase the power of Magic Missile.

Both of these can be answered.
Versatility.
Casting at higher level is but an option.
What we see in 5ed is that lower spell gets use for utility spells (mirror image, haste, and so on) and reaction spells such as shield, counterspells... This is what players are doing with their characters and this is what their foes should do too. Hey, at some point, improved invisibility can be a killer thing!

Spell slots offers a versatility that stat blocks do not. Special abilities, as I said earlier, is another ball game altogether.

 

[Charlaquin]

This is actually an interesting question: has the change from "low level spells stay relevant" to "use a higher slot" been a net positive?

It has certainly helped keep the LFQW problem in check.

 

[Ondath]

Never assume that the person whom you are talking to is ignorant of these. Yes, many do not read the DMG, but for those that do, some changes that seems inconspicuous are actually a big change in the philosophy of the 5ed design.

Remember that 5ed was built with the players input and went for what the majority of that time wanted. Not everything that I or we wanted needed up in the 5ed. But it was mostly what we all wanted it to be. Now they are changing their stances and it is seen as a betrayal by many. If they want to make a new edition, let them go ahead but leave the premises of 5ed alone.

And guess what? I would buy 6ed in a heart beat. I would buy it with the monster stat block they are using now. I was a big fan of 4ed. And I recognize they way they are going in how they are doing things, but this is not the 5ed they had offered and promised. We got what we got and we were happy with it. If WotC really want a 4ed revised into 6ed,so be it. But they should go ahead and do it. Not that sneaking around like what they are doing right now.

This is exactly my stance with the changes they've adopted post-Tasha's. I'd be genuinely interested in seeing the kind of streamlined, more gamist design philosophy they are developing if it were a new edition. But since it's under the 5E banner, I do have to change my home games because my players will want to use the new things that, to their eyes, is 100% same as the core of the game. But it's clear that there's been a change in design philosophy, and that leads to subtle things no longer working the way I want them to. If the current design philosophy was what we had bought into, this would not be an issue. If they explicitly stated that what they are doing is under a new design philosophy (and spelled out that design philosophy), it would not be an issue. As it is, it feels like a betrayal to the edition that I liked since 2014.

Also, I find it rather odd that there are arguments about how it would be impossible to design a monster stat block that simulates the monster's full capabilities, delivers that information in a concise manner, and makes it easy to run, when A5E did just that. You can have a spellcasting block that lists every single spell the monster would know, while still presenting the important spells in a concise way. Couple that with Monstrous Menagerie's "Tactics" section that tells you what the monster is likely to use in its 2-3 turn combat algorithm, and you've got pretty much the best of both worlds. And you don't need to rename Fireball into "Fiery Ball" and make it uncounterable in order to get it.