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

[Minigiant]

I did not read that thread at all but @Charlaquin seems to put her finger right on it. A streamlined stat block breaks a bit (a lot?) of the "high concept sim" as the "unnecessary" information for non combat is missing.

Does it?

There are many noncombat spells on many of the new model spellcasters.

And again. Wouldn't it better to have NPCs stated out for the combat load outs?

My ranger has 3 character sheets. One for the city when he isn't wearing all his war gear and loaded with investigation spells. One for the wilderness in his light combat shrimish lineup with portable meals. And one for his dungeon delving in his best armor and weapon and just snacks.

My wizard has 5 premade spell lists.

Now it would be get to have the monster have optional spell list but WOTC doesn't want to do it and lose the art and page space.

So would it not make sense to make the book versions to be in the "Mostly for Combat" modes

 

[Parmandur]

It isn't tho. It's an assumption based on baggage from older editions and a misinterpretation of what the DMG actually says. It is not a baseline or assumed pacing requirement whatsoever

No, it's the most that a part of 4 can handle without running low on resources. As you.go down from that max, the easier the game gets. Which is also fine.

 

[Helldritch]

Does it?

There are many noncombat spells on many of the new model spellcasters.

And again. Wouldn't it better to have NPCs stated out for the combat load outs?

My ranger has 3 character sheets. One for the city when he isn't wearing all his war gear and loaded with investigation spells. One for the wilderness in his light combat shrimish lineup with portable meals. And one for his dungeon delving in his best armor and weapon and just snacks.

My wizard has 5 premade spell lists.

Now it would be get to have the monster have optional spell list but WOTC doesn't want to do it and lose the art and page space.

So would it not make sense to make the book versions to be in the "Mostly for Combat" modes

Point given. The original stat block of 5ed covered both ways at once without trouble. Seems to me that my initial view on the new stat block stays true. It is an inferior design as it cover only one aspect correctly.

 

[Minigiant]

They never made any claim in min or max side of encounters per recovery cycle. They are adamant that they didn't even give a suggestion.

The last sentence is the point.

WOTC doesn't want to say that the game breaks down with 1 encounter or post level 13.

5th edition is all "I'm not saying 5th edition doesn't work or starts falling apart if you do X. A DM has adjust things to make it work. You are a good DM, right? Advice? Naaaaaaaaaah. You know what you're doing."

 

[Minigiant]

Point given. The original stat block of 5ed covered both ways at once without trouble. Seems to me that my initial view on the new stat block stays true. It is an inferior design as it cover only one aspect correctly.

The original way only worked assuming you went ALL COMBAT for high level spell slots and QUIRKS And UTILITY for low level spell slots

If you use all the slots for 1 purpose, you exceed the CR. Because it's too many spell slots.

 

[Parmandur]

The last sentence is the point.

WOTC doesn't want to say that the game breaks down with 1 encounter or post level 13.

5th edition is all "I'm not saying 5th edition doesn't work or starts falling apart if you do X. A DM has adjust things to make it work. You are a good DM, right? Advice? Naaaaaaaaaah. You know what you're doing."

It doesn't break if you do only 1 Encounter, it's just not going to be a challenge. The books say as much.

 

[Helldritch]

The original way only worked assuming you went ALL COMBAT for high level spell slots and QUIRKS And UTILITY for low level spell slots

If you use all the slots for 1 purpose, you exceed the CR. Because it's too many spell slots.

So far, I have not seen any problems in how things are handled at high level. Currently group 1 is level 12 now and casters, even high level are not a big problem but multiple low level (CR5 or so) can be detrimental depending on the set up.

Second group is nearing 19th and a lich is no match for them if it is alone. They too have trouble with lower CR casters when they are in groups of 4 or.more and not alone. The one thing they hate above all else are Babau demon with their zounds of dispel magic... They are currently in the Abyss hunting for an artifact lost in the layer of Ruins and Babau are no match in small numbers but the current Demon Lord, an Obyrith, is sending her cultists at them as the character are safe from her powers of ruination because of an artifact they have.

Running the spell slot is absolutely not hard and it is quite effective.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Point given. The original stat block of 5ed covered both ways at once without trouble. Seems to me that my initial view on the new stat block stays true. It is an inferior design as it cover only one aspect correctly.

Again, “correctly” based on a particular (and, I suspect, increasingly rare) philosophy of world-building.

 

[Helldritch]

Again, “correctly” based on a particular (and, I suspect, increasingly rare) philosophy of world-building.

I speak for my self of course. Others seem to be sharing my views. Maybe we are the voice of the silent majority. Or the voice of a silent minority. Who knows? One thing is sure, the new way is quite a departure from the original.

 

[Shardstone]

I speak for my self of course. Others seem to be sharing my views. Maybe we are the voice of the silent majority. Or the voice of a silent minority. Who knows? One thing is sure, the new way is quite a departure from the original.

On one hand, you guys dismiss it when I bring up other social medias where people prefer the newer method. Then on another hand, you say that others share your view, so maybe your view is the legitimate one. These ideas are contradictory. I am baffled at how someone who is clearly as intelligent as you, and I'm not being sarcastic with this, just cannot realize that the standards you uphold yourself are not fair to pin onto others.