D&D General Mike Mearls says control spells are ruining 5th Edition

[Upper_Krust]

Peopke see CR 16 and think lvl 16. Its not its more like 8-10 depending on party size. Think o had CR 17 raw at 9.

I agree, it's not obvious how to incorporate it (unlike 4e).

on top of that a lot of monsters do not meet the target CR, because the devs think secondary factors are a swinging factor which they are not.

But then another factor is players going nova for 1-3 rounds. Rest, rinse, repeat.

So to properly (IMO) determine a monster's CR, you need to use the DMG. listed damage per round (and forget secondary factors) and then you probably* need to maximise its damage when Bloodied (to punish early nova-ing).

*I say probably because it's not something I would implement wholesale, at least not as yet, still testing it.

Better encounter design is lower CR boss but has support. CR 2-4 are cheap and have enough HP to be distracting.

To few get wrecked by control. Fodders useless to many its a grind.

A simpler way is just to fix Boss monsters.

Give it Legendary Resistance uses equal to Proficiency Bonus, make each use of LR. both cost a Legendary Action (or Reaction) and have it apply -1 Proficiency Bonus (as per 2024 Exhaustion rules).

 

[AnotherGuy]

It's very very very doable.
5e PCs punch waaay above their weight class.

I ask because we have homebrewed so much to the point where I cannot honestly comment on RAW PC versus monsters anymore - also we have been focusing on higher levels last few years.
The PCs are more powerful at our table due to the use of HD but that is reined in via our exhaustion track, the Resting Mechanic and monster upgrade.

 

[Upper_Krust]

I would say an Elder Vampire is equal to a Mummy Lord and CR 15-17.

That seems to be the best fit.

I'm thinking more the super powerful epic level summon a forest full of night creature, 2 seasons of plot to kill, vampire.

If that's just wolves and bats I'd assume a Kingdom would survive. If it was werewolves and/or ghouls then maybe it's more of a problem.

 

[Upper_Krust]

It's very very very doable.
5e PCs punch waaay above their weight class.

Agreed. We beat Graz'zt, 2 Marilith, a Storm Giant and a bunch of other minions a few months ago...easily...and that was after 2 other encounters. Average PC 15th.

 

[Upper_Krust]

I don't know I'd agree that Dracula is a continent-style threat. Even if you account for him controlling a country... I guess in Hellsing it might be true?

Hellsing Dracula defeated a Demigod.

 

[Distracted DM]

More 5e monster have no chin.

Whole point of the thread.

Yes. Either the PCs are too powerful, or the monsters aren't powerful enough. I'd rather pare back PC power than up monster power, 'cuz I'd rather have things a little more "grounded" and avoid even more math via more numbers and more dice, but I guess either way you're rewriting a book.. either the PHB or the MM. And I understand it's hard to sell "being less powerful" to players (hi there power creep).

 

[Minigiant]

If that's just wolves and bats I'd assume a Kingdom would survive. If it was werewolves and/or ghouls then maybe it's more of a problem

Dracula is epic mostly because in media he's vampire +.

He's basically one of those "snowballs out of control if you let him" villain.

It starts as wolves and bats but after a few victories, the minions get stronger and stronger.

 

[Zardnaar]

Yes. Either the PCs are too powerful, or the monsters aren't powerful enough. I'd rather pare back PC power than up monster power, 'cuz I'd rather have things a little more "grounded" and avoid even more math via more numbers and more dice, but I guess either way you're rewriting a book.. either the PHB or the MM. And I understand it's hard to sell "being less powerful" to players (hi there power creep).

Greater magic resistance, +3 AC, double hp.

 

[Lanefan]

WOTC and many 3PP writers don't know how to write "If we don't stop X, the World as we know it will end" adventures.

Everything beyond the kingdom red level requires whole new style of adventure.

A few things to this:

1 - most "If we don't stop X, the world as we know it will end" style adventures are - or work much better when - bespoke to the specific setting and campaign they appear in. The best a generic adventure of that style can hope to do is give some DMs some ideas that can then be molded into their own campaigns; and if the adventure isn't generic the DM then has to build a lot of the campaign around it.

2 - these adventures work fine as capstone "this is the climax - and end - of the campaign" pieces but are of limited use at best for campaigns intended to continue open-ended or indefinitely; you can only save the world so many times before it becomes old hat. This cuts into the projected market for these adventures.

3 - capstone-style adventures like this work best when they have lots of buildup and-or foreshadowing during the campaign. Sadly, this means the best presentation for them is as the final chapter in a whole-campaign book that can build in that foreshadowing; the drawback of course is that those full-campaign books tend to be very anti-sandbox and often anti-downtime meaning the players/PCs aren't encouraged at all to interact with the greater setting.

 

[Minigiant]

Yes. Either the PCs are too powerful, or the monsters aren't powerful enough. I'd rather pare back PC power than up monster power, 'cuz I'd rather have things a little more "grounded" and avoid even more math via more numbers and more dice, but I guess either way you're rewriting a book.. either the PHB or the MM. And I understand it's hard to sell "being less powerful" to players (hi there power creep).

Again

It's really just the defenses.

They really low balled monster defenses in 2014.