D&D General 2024 Monster Creation

[FitzTheRuke]

Then why have they not said such rules are (or will be) in the MM? Why do we have to speculate about it? It's a yes or no question they know the answer to right now.

That's simple to answer: Because they have other things to do and they plan to show what they have cooked up for the MM soon enough. WE might care to know the answer to that question right now, but they have everyone asking a billion questions about every little aspect of the current two books. This is just us being impatient.

 

[Minigiant]

I will do that the instant I want to sell something, and not one moment before.

My point is people acting as customers often...

No

NEVER think about what the seller has to do to provide a service they as a customer and other possible customers request.

Otherwise my day job would be so much easier.

 

[mamba]

Sometimes the customer asks for something they won't like once they get it. Or won't like the form.

sure, but removing it rather than improving it might not be the best move either. If you complain in a restaurant about the dish you got, they do not just take it away and ask you to pay for it anyway

One part of The community wants something that is completely contradictory to something that another part of the community wants.

I doubt that is true for monster creation rules, and even if it is, not having any just upsets everyone

 

[Minigiant]

sure, but removing it rather than improving it might not be the best move either. If you complain in a restaurant about the dish you got, they do not just take it away and ask you to pay for it anyway

Restaurants take items off the menu all the time.

I doubt that is true for monster creation rules, and even if it is, not having any just upsets everyone

The Monster by CR chart creates boring blob monsters that the community constantly complained about.

 

[Micah Sweet]

That's simple to answer: Because they have other things to do and they plan to show what they have cooked up for the MM soon enough. WE might care to know the answer to that question right now, but they have everyone asking a billion questions about every little aspect of the current two books. This is just us being impatient.

This question seems important, as rules that have been in the DMG every time in the past (when they appeared at all) now aren't. We don't know where and if they will appear, but they do, and the rules in question are of unquestionable value to a number of folks.

 

[mamba]

Restaurants take items off the menu all the time.

that is a very different case from what I described, that is a lot more like movie theaters changing the movie

The Monster by CR chart creates boring blob monsters that the community constantly complained about.

then improve on it, not offering anything is not making it better… if you cannot see that, then I doubt this will go anywhere

 

[FitzTheRuke]

This question seems important, as rules that have been in the DMG every time in the past (when they appeared at all) now aren't. We don't know where and if they will appear, but they do, and the rules in question are of unquestionable value to a number of folks.

Sure, sure, you can try to argue that they are doing something wrong by not answering the question now if you like, but you are being impatient. They've told you that they see the books as "one big book" and we've seen that they were not against moving things around if it made sense to them, so it being in the DMG in the past means nothing.

OTOH, if it's NOT THERE in the MM, I think they might have something to answer for.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

Now I'm getting a bit concerned. I only intend to use bits and bobs from 2024 (vastly prefer 2014 for almost everything), but I was hoping there might be tweaks to this particular system to take advantage of some of the math and procedure tweakings. This is the kind of tool I should be able to use to make monsters that stick with 2014 standards (real spells, less hp bloat, normal weapon damage values that aren't artificially inflated and/or changed to force, etc) without any problem. So the possibility that they actually won't exist would be a disappointment.

I really like the monster creation rules in the 2014 DMG. I do hope they updated to include their obviously revised math (for high CR monsters), but other than that I hope they don't change much. I think they work great. They are my favorite monster creation rules in any D&D edition.

So I'm not the only one who hasn't had real problems using the system a written!

That being said, are there any of the monster features you have felt aren't very accurate? Just recently I was doing some monster design and seeing how much they seem to over value Nimble Escape, for example. The only way to use it like they expect (hide every round) is to only fight from range, which is not how I've ever experienced goblins. I'd rather see how valuable it is in melee.

The value they assign to damage resistance and immunity I have also found to be wrong. Even assuming the baseline comparison party of Champion, Thief, Life Cleric, and Evoker Wizard, they seem to assume that those without access to magical weapon damage will just stand around doing nothing those turns, rather than supporting the fight in other ways, and their assumption for how long it should take for everyone to have access to magical damage completely negating the value of both resistance and immunity seem a little overly conservative even with the class/subclass assumptions.

There are other monster features that likewise seem over or under valued to me. Since you've done a lot of quality work with the system, I was wondering what you think about those kinds of issues with the details.

 

[Minigiant]

that is a very different case from what I described, that is a lot more like movie theaters changing the movie

That's the situation that happened

The bad table was removed from the menu.

No replacement was added.

then improve on it, not offering anything is not making it better… if you cannot see that, then I doubt this will go anywhere

Again

Increased page count.
Increased cost.
Increased complaining.

Sometimes I wonder if D&D fans realize how much the D&D community complains about stuff.

 

[dave2008]

The value they assign to damage resistance and immunity I have also found to be wrong. Even assuming the baseline comparison party of Champion, Thief, Life Cleric, and Evoker Wizard, they seem to assume that those without access to magical weapon damage will just stand around doing nothing those turns, rather than supporting the fight in other ways, and their assumption for how long it should take for everyone to have access to magical damage completely negating the value of both resistance and immunity seem a little overly conservative even with the class/subclass assumptions.

Regarding resistances and immunities, remember it only comes into affect when there are 3 or more:

"Giving a monster resistances and immunities to three or more damage types (especially bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage) is like giving it extra hit points."

and only if your group doesn't have countermeasures:

" If a monster has resistance or immunity to several damage types—especially bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage from nonmagical weapons—and not all the characters in the party possess the means to counteract that resistance or immunity, you need to take these defenses into account when comparing your monster’s hit points to its expected challenge rating"

So they should only be applied when they are relevant to your group.

There are other monster features that likewise seem over or under valued to me. Since you've done a lot of quality work with the system, I was wondering what you think about those kinds of issues with the details.

Yes, some feel off with nimble escape being the big one. I also wonder if having 5-6 saves is really worth +4 to AC, but that seems more accurate than nimble escape. Most of the rest of the modifiers are too small for me to really worry about if they are slightly off. I do wonder sometimes, but have not done any type of analysis to see if their values are justified.