D&D General Reification versus ludification in 5E/6E

[Remathilis]

I both respect and boggle at your use of Light Mode.

Considering that HP and damage is abstract anyway, yeah it makes sense that a warrior could end up doing more than 1d6 with a shortsword. Perhaps 2d6!
BUT one must question designer intent behind More Attacks vs More Damage: do we get More Attacks because it's more fun for players to roll more dice? More chances for crits = more fun?
But also yeah, rolling more to-hit dice = more time per player turn :'( screw that

To be honest, it's an element ease of play. How many people want would rather have a hobgoblin attack once for 4d8 damage vs attack four times for 1d8 each? There are advantages for each. But the idea of a DM having to roll 16 attack rolls per round in a fight against four hobgoblins is both time consuming and repetitive (not to mention much more random since there is a higher chance if missing and crits). That's what turns D&D into a slog for combat.

 

[Maxperson]

Ok, cool. A hobgoblins training allows them to do more damage with a longsword, almost to a supernatural degree.

That was easy..

Except that they can't. Look at the stat block. They have no such power. See, justifications for things after the fact are weak and unsatisfactory. They need to be reasons set up before hand and written down in the stat block.

 

[ezo]

That's what turns D&D into a slog for combat.

That and Hit Point bloat. Of course, bumping up damage "due to skill" helps combat (pun intended) that.

 

[Maxperson]

So it's fine to omit all the various traits for X creatures, but not for Y creatures. Again, I argue that it's simply due to change: we didn't get all the possible traits for 2014 stat blocks, and thus we don't even miss them. But now they've omitted a few more? Unacceptable. I see this as utterly inconsistent.


It's fine to leave out the details of the mage "class" and why it gets a d8 HD and why it gets to cast X spells and why it has those skills, etc. Do all Mages have those skills? Are they always part of Mage training? The saving throws? Can a Mage have different saving throw proficiencies? Do they always cast wizard spells? Can they have "subclass" spells?

That it's a mage class and not a wizard class means that details will be different. That detail isn't omitted, it's right there in the stat block. 1d8. If they had called it a wizard, the hit dice would have to be d6.

If they could have subclass spells that are different from the stat block, the stat block would have to say it. Unless the DM decided to make an alteration to the NPC and give it a subclass. DMs can modify stat blocks. Same with proficiencies and anything else.

None of that is included. It's all arbitrary. Yet, that's fine. (Because we got used to it.) Now we have stat blocks that can deal extra dice of damage with a single attack and there's no trait for it? Ok, that's crossing the line. Entire classes that are never detailed? Completely fine! A single trait not detailed? Unacceptable.

Nothing that is necessary isn't detailed in the 2014 mage stat block. There is nothing it gives me that is inconsistent with how things work with PCs. It's not using a 3rd level slot to cast fireball and do 12d6 damage. It isn't going to be hitting you with a dagger and doing 4d6 damage with no explanation for how.

 

[Remathilis]

Except that they can't. Look at the stat block. They have no such power. See, justifications for things after the fact are weak and unsatisfactory. They need to be reasons set up before hand and written down in the stat block.

Can the hobgoblin use any weapon but a longsword or longbow and wear armor other than half-plate? I don't see weapon and armor training in their stat block. I guess not. A hobgoblin warrior would have disadvantage using a dagger or wearing leather armor.

 

[Maxperson]

Can the hobgoblin use any weapon but a longsword or longbow and wear armor other than half-plate? I don't see weapon and armor training in their stat block. I guess not. A hobgoblin warrior would have disadvantage using a dagger or wearing leather armor.

That is up to the DM, but if he does, they should be consistent in damage and AC with the same items worn by a PC.

Edit: Plus there is this. We have a pre-established rule that allows and explains such changes.

"You can equip monsters with additional gear and trinkets however you like, using the equipment chapter of the Player's Handbook for inspiration, and you decide how much of a monster's equipment is recoverable after the creature is slain and whether any of that equipment is still usable."

 

[Micah Sweet]

Yes, I realize the hypocrisy. It appears that when they want fighters to break the laws of physics, any excuse (or no excuse) is fine, but a hobgoblin doing extra damage? Sorry, I need a full audit and paragraph of rules and lore to explain it.

I would like both hobgoblins and fighters to make logical sense within the setting please.

 

[Remathilis]

That it's a mage class and not a wizard class means that details will be different. That detail isn't omitted, it's right there in the stat block. 1d8. If they had called it a wizard, the hit dice would have to be d6.

If they could have subclass spells that are different from the stat block, the stat block would have to say it. Unless the DM decided to make an alteration to the NPC and give it a subclass. DMs can modify stat blocks. Same with proficiencies and anything else.

Nothing that is necessary isn't detailed in the 2014 mage stat block. There is nothing it gives me that is inconsistent with how things work with PCs. It's not using a 3rd level slot to cast fireball and do 12d6 damage. It isn't going to be hitting you with a dagger and doing 4d6 damage with no explanation for how.

I'm going to need you to sit down for this one.

https://www.dndbeyond.com/monsters/4831023-mage

Mage. 2024. Please justify all abilities in the stat block. I'll wait.

 

[Remathilis]

I would like both hobgoblins and fighters to make logical sense within the setting please.

Are you willing to accept that at the cost of long sloggy fights where monsters make dozens of attacks and do middling damage to PCs?

 

[Micah Sweet]

The problem is no matter what they would have done, people would find fault in it.

The 24 Aarakroca has a magical javelin that deals thunder damage and returns to its hand, but only the aarakroca can use this magical weapon and people complained it can't be looted and used by PCs.

The 24 hobgoblin uses a mundane longsword that can be looted but deals more damage when used by a hobgoblin to account for it's CR and people complain about that. You could say that they have special hobgoblin fey metal longswords, but the PCs would absolutely want to loot those for 2d10 damage.

So no matter which way you go with weapons, you lose. Magical weapon tied to the monster? No good. Mundane weapon scaled to appropriate damage per CR? No good. I guess give every monster claw and bite attacks? Or maybe give every creature over CR 1 three or more weapon attacks per round that do minor damage and hope you can win by attrition? (And drag each fight out to multiple round grinds)

Yeah, something has to give.

Because those are all gamist solutions. Perhaps the best way is simply to cut down on how high levels get for everyone. Or give monsters magic weapons that actually exist in the world outside of them and let the PCs loot them if they want. Or treat high CR humanoids as highly trained specialists like the PCs. There are plenty of ways to do this that make better setting logic.