D&D General D&D 2024 does not deserve to succeed

[Maxperson]

Are you seriously suggesting that these rules are a real alternative to TPKs, without both the DM and the players hand waving things?

There are also the DMG chase rules.

 

[Oofta]

That's the problem. The CR design rules for monsters in the DMG are crap and incomplete. Unless you've very diligently disassembled existing monsters to puzzle out how they're supposed to work - which takes time and experience from actual play. By the time you get it right, you've probably already got a campaign or two under your belt and could do monster design without the crappy guidelines in the DMG.

As you can probably tell, I hate the current monster building guidelines, and I've literally done over 600 monster blocks so far for 5E.

I'm hopeful for the 2024 DMG, especially after seeing how they reorganized the PHB (even if I have some minor issues). In the meantime, there's monster CR on a card from BlogOfHolding or other guidance. Another thing I simply do is just take monsters of similar CR and then mix and match what I want.

I don't do nearly as many as you have, I'm far more likely to just make notes of tweaks to existing monsters for the session.

 

[Maxperson]

Superheroes are often captured instead of killed. It's part of the genre convention. Is that the genre you think D&D is emulating?

I mean, James Bond and almost every other book and movie that involves combat also involves being captured instead of killed. Being captured instead of killed isn't a super hero thing. It's a protagonist thing, which crosses all genres.

 

[Oofta]

Are you seriously suggesting that these rules are a real alternative to TPKs, without both the DM and the players hand waving things?

If I have a really tough fight I will sometimes think of ways to ensure the PCs can run away. Provide a door they can shut and locked behind them to slow the enemy down, a pathway that an be blocked, some other hazard they can make more difficult to cross once they get a certain distance.

Doesn't come up often in my games though, even though on a fairly regularly basis I knock one or more PCs unconscious in a combat.

 

[Oofta]

Folks treat TSR like it was terrible because ultimately the company folded. I'm saying they had a good long run, and made a ton of product, much of which was very good. I wouldn't trade that away from a consumer standpoint for a better run business that produced a lot less and lasted longer.

I would trade it for a company that had a stable business plan, conducted surveys to gauge customer interest and allowed and supported 3PP for both other companies and amateurs. Material doesn't have to be from the primary IP holder to be good.

 

[Minigiant]

Folks treat TSR like it was terrible because ultimately the company folded. I'm saying they had a good long run, and made a ton of product, much of which was very good. I wouldn't trade that away from a consumer standpoint for a better run business that produced a lot less and lasted longer.

TSR's product production and their business sense were connected.

They supplied more than they could afford.

Only one Ttrpg company can afford to provide everything.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I mean, James Bond and almost every other book and movie that involves combat also involves being captured instead of killed. Being captured instead of killed isn't a super hero thing. It's a protagonist thing, which crosses all genres.

That's my problem with it in D&D and it's relatives: it's a protagonist thing, which means it's a narrative thing, and in a game context that often means it happens for narrativist and gamist reasons (it makes a better story and/or it keeps the PCs alive no matter what they do) rather than diagetic/simulationist ones (it makes logical sense under the circumstances). That works for a lot of games, superhero stuff for example, but not for me in D&D-style games.

 

[Stormonu]

I disagree. The CR guidelines in the DMG work well and are very accurate to published monsters, particularly ones after the MM. The issues I see are:

1. People don't follow the guidelines completely. Some people just look at the table and say that it is it - but it is a lot more involved than that. If you follow them correctly, they work.
2. They can't cover everything. The DMG had a list of monster features that affected a creature's CR - easy. However, this list has not been updated with all the new monster features. So their is some guess work one needs to do to account for unique monster features with no exact precedent.
3. Guidelines, not rules. The monster creation guideline is not a set of hard rules that can't be modified or even "gamed." They are made to allow freedom of design which is a good thing IMO. However, can lead to places that stretch our ability to define CR.
4. Situational benefits. Some creatures/abilities/features are very potent against some groups or in some situations, but much less so to other groups or other situations. That is, and should be IMO, in the fold of the DM to understand the monster and their group.

The vast majority of the time when I see a monster with a CR out of line, it is because they didn't use the guide correctly. The biggest issues I often see are:

1. people don't account for saving throws (+0 or +2 or +4 to AC depending on how many)
2. people don't account for monster features (use the list or find something that is close)
3. people misapply the offensive or defensive CR adjustment(s).

"Didn't use the guide correctly".

Because the guidelines are very poor. They should be newbie friendly, not take a masters in monster design to use.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I would trade it for a company that had a stable business plan, conducted surveys to gauge customer interest and allowed and supported 3PP for both other companies and amateurs. Material doesn't have to be from the primary IP holder to be good.

Of course it doesn't. Who's saying that? Much of my favorite 3pp material from before Level Up was licensed from WotC during the 3e era. I'm saying TSR made good product, and they would have made a lot less of it if they were run differently, and some of that would not have existed at all, even in a 3pp form. I'm happy with how it turned out.

You obviously feel differently. Agree to disagree.

 

[Micah Sweet]

TSR's product production and their business sense were connected.

They supplied more than they could afford.

Only one Ttrpg company can afford to provide everything.

Yup. Still happy with the result. Most of my favorite D&D products would never have been made otherwise.