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

[DND_Reborn]

I am sorry for my failure to explain as you are misunderstanding my intent. I don't have the best track record in getting people to understand my point of view, so I will leave at: we just see this differently.

Well, I think (?) I understand your point, I was just showing how what you are doing is not very different from what I suggested.

I can only assume those that have the ability and desire to have this information do and are make decisions based on that information. Of course you know what they say when you assume!

Yes, assuming can be dangerous.

I would think they go off from their polls, etc. but the problem with such metrics is you will typically get way more responses for people who want change then people who like the current system. As such, in these types of changes, I feel WotC is missing a huge audience and only capturing part of the picture.

EDIT: removed content due to other poster deleting their comment.

 

[Charlaquin]

While I basically agree, I think it could have been a better machine.

Oh, definitely! It also got to be a better machine than it started out being. There were some definite mistakes in the math when the game first released, but they did eventually get fixed.

PF2e is a lot of what 4e could have been. I think my ideal is some combination of 4e, PF2e, and 5e. I just need the time (which is really money) to make it!

PF2 does evolve 4e design in some interesting ways, but I think it made some missteps as well, probably due in part to being bound to Pathfinder’s identity as the fiddlier D&D. But blending the best parts of 4e, 5e, and PF2 does sound like exactly my kind of game.

 

[Charlaquin]

They really don't though, because they don't give the beginner any information on how to utilize the features or when to cast spells or what to DO with Vecna.

Interesting. To me, it’s immediately obvious how that Vecna stat block wants to be played. Earlier in the thread I posted a summary of what I’m pretty sure is his optimal line of play. His abilities have so much internal synergy, he feels almost completely foolproof to me.

 

[Reynard]

Interesting. To me, it’s immediately obvious how that Vecna stat block wants to be played. Earlier in the thread I posted a summary of what I’m pretty sure is his optimal line of play. His abilities have so much internal synergy, he feels almost completely foolproof to me.

How many years have you been GMing?

 

[Micah Sweet]

Well, it seems they’re at least moving on from the slot system. Presumably because the game has gotten big enough and accessible enough that they feel the folks who leave over this won’t create the same bottleneck to new players getting into the game that it did in the late 00s.

Precisely. They don't care if some people don't like it, because enough people do to continue increasing their profit margins at an acceptable rate. Its just a numbers game.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Counterspell would be so much more interesting as an unlimited use, but risky, class ability.

Unfortunately, above all else, no PC ability is allowed to be risky.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Counterspell would be so much more interesting as an unlimited use, but risky, class ability.

You mean like 3rd edition?

 

[Stoutstien]

Interesting. To me, it’s immediately obvious how that Vecna stat block wants to be played. Earlier in the thread I posted a summary of what I’m pretty sure is his optimal line of play. His abilities have so much internal synergy, he feels almost completely foolproof to me.

Its ok in that regard but if you changed the format a tad so DMs might realize that opening with flight of the damn(or any cone) even if it's on a cool down isn't always the best opening or how he can yoyo out of his globe of "screw your spells" (what ever level fits your party)with two teleport options and counterspell to be Royal pain. Pretty low key tactics that might be missed.

 

[Micah Sweet]

They’re not going to do that because the new players are attached to 5e. Whatever changes they make, pitching them as a new edition would be a risky shake-up. Pitching them as improvements to 5e that you can choose to incorporate into your current game or not will help smooth the transition.

But it's deceptive. At no point do they say they've had a shift in design philosophy, although they clearly have. And the new players are attached to the 5e that we have had since 2014, not necessarily what they trying to turn it into.

If you change all future products and replace the core of the game with these changes, you're not really asking people to incorporate these changes or not. You're saying get with the program or get off the train.

 

[Maxperson]

I don't have such worries. I concern myself with making the game fun, not meta concerns of statblocks or terrain or encounters or... I do realize everyone is different and as different issues.

I gave my Vecna (Vecna the Archlich) a full slate of spellcasting options as I like to design / create monsters that speak to the whole world. Such detail is really just a design exercise, it is not really useful for me. Actually, I don't usually use the monsters I make and prefer just using MM versions and improvising anything extra I need when we play.

I really like your Vecna!