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

[FitzTheRuke]

Yeah, I don't worry about encounter balance, and haven't for decades, but... I've played weekly (sometimes daily) for thirty-five years. Heck, I might even use the encounter-building rules if they were simple and y'know... worked. I do feel for my son and his friends trying to do it by the book. (For an example of new players).

 

[pemerton]

Can you expand on that?

It's a cool system that uses material components as enhancers for spell-casting.

There's a semi-active thread here.

 

[Bill Zebub]

But what about inexperienced DM's?

I’m guessing the CR system works well enough for them, too. Then again, I’m one of them dirty fudgers, so if an encounter turns out to be too hard I might choose that moment to introduce a friendly NPC, or otherwise alter the situation for the heroes benefit, or vice versa.

But, really, I’d love to know how many inexperienced DMs are designing their own adventures.

 

[James Gasik]

Well, if you've been running canned adventures for any length of time, the very first time you design your own encounters, you'd still be "inexperienced", right?

 

[Minigiant]

But, really, I’d love to know how many inexperienced DMs are designing their own adventures.

A lot from my experience.


I know of 5 new DMs with 5e. All of them have run their own adventures. 3 to disastrous results. All 5 of them TPKed the party by level 7.

 

[Reynard]

Well, if you've been running canned adventures for any length of time, the very first time you design your own encounters, you'd still be "inexperienced", right?

Not really. Experience with what was designed and how that went is a good way to get a foundation for building your own.

 

[dave2008]

Hmm... I don't know. I see your point, but you could pretty much say the same thing about a 1982 class or monster compared to a 1992 one. Sure, there were changes, and quite sufficient IMO to be a new edition. But adapting one to the other (in either direction) really wasn't much work, if any. I used a lot of 1E adventures when playing 2E, for example.

I would also expect that you don't have to do any adapting. I will not have a change OotA to run with a '24 party. I don't have to change '14 PC to play alongside a '24 PC. I don't have to change a '14 to play in a new adventure that comes out in '25. I don't expect any adapting will be needed.

Now, they one thing they have previewed that may need adapting would be feats tied to backgrounds. If that becomes the standard, then you would have to grant a feat to anyone with a '14 class.

 

[Faolyn]

It would be nice to have a better estimate for the strength of an enemy when designing encounters than just "winging it". One thing I notice a lot in these discussions are people who, being experienced DM's, naturally go "I know what I'm doing, I can judge the appropriate challenge".

Which is fine. But what about inexperienced DM's? CR and encounter design needs to work without the benefit of years of experience, for anyone attempting to learn how to run the game without either making it a cakewalk, or murdering their parties.

Unfortunately, this may be one of those things that newbies just have to learn as they go along. Monsters can be really swingy depending on a lot of different elements, including party composition and how how intelligently the DM plays them. Anyone remember Tucker's kobolds?

And honestly, there was no CR or encounter design back in the early AD&D days, and I'd say that those DMs managed to figure it out OK.

 

[pemerton]

Anyone remember Tucker's kobolds?

Tucker's kobolds are a mechanical exploit: they exploit the fact that in the classic D&D mechanics the ability to deal with giant's clubs, poison, siren calls, etc scales with level; but the ability to avoid pits, snares and muddy terrain doesn't. Which makes no sense in the fiction, but is purely an artefact of how the mechanical system is put together.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Tucker's kobolds are a mechanical exploit: they exploit the fact that in the classic D&D mechanics the ability to deal with giant's clubs, poison, siren calls, etc scales with level; but the ability to avoid pits, snares and muddy terrain doesn't. Which makes no sense in the fiction, but is purely an artefact of how the mechanical system is put together.

Or it works as intendet. It makes enough sense in the fiction. If you fall into a pit, even the best swordsman can't get out. Or the mage that has prepared the wrong spells. I have seen movies where the hero can esily fight monsters but is then trapped sonewhere.