D&D General The Monsters Know What They're Doing ... Are Unsure on 5e24

[mamba]

If somebody wants to complain that 2014 was better because the monsters all feel different in their simulation that's okay. The problem is that when they changed it in 2024 the same people have to admit that 2014 had messed up math in the calculation of the actual monsters.

not sure why that is a problem to admit, do you expect everyone to either love 2024 or mindlessly defend 2014 as the ‘perfect edition’? That monsters do not hit hard enough, esp at higher levels has been pointed out for years, that ranged attacks and mobility actions should be available for higher CRs is also not exactly new.

 

[tetrasodium]

not sure why that is a problem to admit, do you expect everyone to either love 2024 or mindlessly defend 2014 as the ‘perfect edition’? That monsters do not hit hard enough, esp at higher levels has been pointed out for years, that ranged attacks and mobility actions should be available for higher CRs is also not exactly new.

Stickiness too. I'm tired of being told things like "up your gm game... run more interesting encounters... use tactics... Etc" like it's still 4e 3.x or even ad&d2e player options: combat and tactics grid combat where mooks can serve as a functional defensive line speed bump for ranged and caster monsters when 5.14 & 5.24 plus it's splat books like volos tashas and even setting books play out more like the freaking puppy bowl because of rule and monster design choices.

 

[DEFCON 1]

If you complain about X on boards like this and other people's responses are "Do Y instead"... you just have to deal with that. If that annoys you... don't complain about X here on the boards.

Being on a message board does not grant you the ability to rant without responses from other people. You don't HAVE to write your complaints about the game here you know.

 

[tetrasodium]

If you complain about X on boards.lile this and other people's responses are "Do Y instead"... you just have to deal with that. If that annoys you... don't complain about X here on the boards.

Being on a message board does.not.grant you the ability to rant without responses from other people. You don't HAVE to write your complaints about the game here you.know.

Don't you have a tenth or eleventh level 1-20 2024 game to prep your PC for?

 

[SkidAce]

I think it's more like they don't know the intricate details of either ruleset closely enough to notice the difference when their character sheet is changed while they aren't looking. Many players are like that, probably over half I'd estimate

Im kinda astonished that I would be changing their sheets, but everyone does things differently, so its on me.

 

[Rushbolt]

I hear all the time the 2024 revision pushed the power level of classes over the edge compared to 2014. The better abilities, Origin Feats, and Weapon Masteries did increase character power in some builds, but there are also quite a few nerfs that limit character strength in 2024. The nerf to GWM really hurts reckless Barbarians, the Paladin smite nerf is hated for stopping the Paladin's ability to just wreck solo monsters, the nerf to Druid hit points in Wild Shape made them quite a bit more fragile, and the SS nerf really cut the damage on characters that stay way from melee. The nerf of Counterspell is also a strong check on caster balance, and the fact that you can shut Absorb Elements out of your game by only using the 2024 PH spells is another limit on caster strength. There is still only a small chance of a TPK or character death, but that was always the case in D&D 5E. I would not characterize characters as failure-proof at this time. Character frailty and damage is still mostly determined by the build of the character. If you have people that focus on that when they build their characters, it will be harder to challenge them with appropriate level encounters. Still, it's not impossible. I give my monsters Toughness (2 extra HP per die) when I DM for groups where the characters hit above their level. It is surprising how much difference that makes.

 

[SkidAce]

They mostly don't.

That's stuff that rules nerds like us get all fussed about. Most players don't care that much. And how often do those things come up in most games? Healing being buffed is just more numbers and I am here to tell you, with decades of DMing under my belt and years of running D&D Club for beginners, most players don't care about minor changes to mechanics. They just don't even notice.
....

I hear you and agree, but as always it varies; just last night....

Noob characters for a christmas oneshot with DM in training.

1st level bard player accidently makes 2024 character, the rest are 2014. Bard casts Truestrike and talks their way through the attack. Player of the Ranger (who has a previous character that has Truestrike) goes "Wut, thats not right", ....yes it is says bard I'm reading straight from the sheet (D&DB), etc etc

I think players care (especially newer ones) cause it confuses them when they finally thought they were getting the grasp of the game.

But I agree with @Clint_L , while they do CARE, its usually fixed and done, game on. So not too often as the game goes on.

 

[SkidAce]

View attachment 425370

Not to be overly flippant, but both are highly abstract mathematical models to use in a wargame scenario, that some flavor can be hung upon. That the 2024 version is a little more explicitly abstract is actually helpful in my book, but both are actually abstract.

Sometimes "a little more explicitly abstract" is the little more that tips things over into discontent.

Everyone usually has a line or spectrum of these feels, and everyone's tolerance level is different and valid.

 

[SkidAce]

Punish also meant punish. As in, cripple PCs abilities and limit their options. Ravenloft weakened turn undead and most spells to make sure you can't get an advantage against the main antagonists. Planescape would restrict cleric spellcasting based on how many planes you were removed from your deity. Dragonlance forced every caster into the Jedi Order Order of High Sorcery and crippled you if you failed the robe test. Spelljamming cost arcane spell slots, guaranteeing your mage has to rest for hours very time you took off. And don't get me started on Dark Sun. Even good old Faerun required you to worship a god or you could never be resurrected. All rules designed to force players to play the correct way or suffer the consequences.

I found it absolutely liberating to play some of those settings without these punitive restrictions and I have found almost nothing is lost by removing them.

Re: bolded (emphasis mine);

We felt those rules caused players to think in ways inherent to that setting and caused different play, with interesting choices and decisions emerging.

All how you look at it I guess.

 

[Alzrius]

We felt those rules caused players to think in ways inherent to that setting and caused different play, with interesting choices and decisions emerging.

That's how I always looked at it, that restrictions helped to create favor, because when every setting puts every choice on the table, then those settings become that much more interchangeable. It was the same principle behind prerequisites for various classes, races, etc., because when you think about what can't be done you start engaging with why it can't be done and the effects that such restrictions create in the setting, making it more vivid to the imagination.