Search results

The strangest thing for me (and I'm no simulationist either) is that it seems to me that they really intend the Hobgoblin to have an 18 AC, and to use 2d10 for the longsword, and to use their bow, all at once, and that they (WotC designers) leave it up to us to worry about whether we doff a...

I think that the utility is fine, in that if you are about to run a session where your PCs face a horde of orcs, you have a ton of orcs to use. Sure, your standard "grunt" orcs are "toughs" but you have orc scouts, orc berserkers, orc cultists, orc guards, orc captains, etc. It's pretty...

Surprisingly, no! My staff at my store used to make jokes with D&D books (particularly 4e ones) about "how quick can you find a mistake?" (It was usually four or five in a few minutes of fast flipping-through.) And as we all know, some day1 errata (like the donning time of a shield) was needed...

Yeah, I'd rather a Tough had less HP and did more damage. Maybe not as much less HP and not as much more damage as a 2014 Orc, though - something in the middle. Like you say, 25 HP and at least give 'em a d8 weapon, if not also a +3 stat to work with.

They were always clear that it was 85 new statblocks.

I thought that I might be misremembering that. Probably should have double-checked before posting. Thanks for clearing that up. Ooh! I missed that.

I find it weird that the conversion guide suggests Berserker (IIRC) for an Eye of Grumsh. I would have imagined them more as a Cultist Fanatic or something. The Lloth Priestess, they suggest a Fiend(?) Cultist, which probably works fine. In fact, it might be really similar - I have yet to...

I agree that it took me a moment to be able to read "tough" as a noun. (Though heavy has the same issue of being a adjective first). But I probably won't use any of those name in-game anyhow. I'll call 'em something more individually descriptive in an actual game. Maybe even by name!

Sure, I suppose. What significant difference does it make? Much like spell schools, moster types are a somewhat arbitrary grouping where many things could fit into multiple groups. They pick one based on internal logic of the moment and print it. I've said before and I'll say again: I don't...

No, that's using magic. As someone said above, they go beyond using magic to having it in their core. Again it's not the only choice they could have made, or necessarily the best one, but it's not without reason. It works "fine" for what the fluff is.

I'm not sure I can answer this satisfactorily, as not only have I not read every single statblock, but I wouldn't remember them if I had. I can more easily check specific stuff than something that broad. But I CAN say that they've stopped with the design choice to replace Legendary Actions with...

You are right. My answer to that question can be taken with a grain of salt, or at least, understood for its biases: But I was assuming that my answer was based on whether I thought it was "worth it" for someone other than me to spend the money, and under the assumption that they have the means...

I think there would be something of a backlash if WotC were to replace "Orc" with "Thug", given that one of the whole points of changing Orcs is that they've been (unfortunately) conflated with marginalized groups. It would be to continue the trend, not end it.

Absolutely. I would rather play 2024 D&D than 2014 D&D. Though I'm perfectly happy to mix the two.

I'm not sure what you mean by it "not having the core rules you need to play". I'm pretty sure it DOES. Now, I agree with you that I'd like an orc statblock (and I would like a dwarf, elf, gnome, whatever statblock) but I don't NEED one, or I wouldn't have been able to play D&D for the past 10...

I do. Much like all of 2024, I think that it is a - slightly - better version of 5e D&D (overall). And I like 5e D&D. I don't think that it's perfect. There are bits and pieces that I think aren't great, but overall? Perfectly playable D&D.

Yes, I was coming on here to point that out - that I was mistaken that Toughs are the same as 2014 Thugs. They have a higher DEX so their range attack doesn't suck quite as bad, and they lost multiattack (and they lost Intimidation proficiency). Otherwise they're the same. But definitely not as...

They DID!

I mean, do what you like, but I think that "jarring and off-putting" is awfully strong for something like a descriptor line that I barely ever think about myself. You can think that WotC is silly for the change if you like, but I think anything beyond "shrug, I like my way better" is a gross...

What do you mean? Do you stat 'em up like PCs or handwave them or something in between? Apparently I do, so I can cut-n' paste now! Here's the answer to your question: Gear Monsters have proficiency with their equipment. If a monster has equipment that can be given away or retrieved, the items...