Matrix Sorcica
Hero
Glad to hear that things will be OK.
-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
D&D 5E 5e EPIC MONSTER UPDATES
- Thread starter dave2008
- Start date
CapnZapp
Legend
Let me add a vote for trying to work with the design assumptions made by the 5e designers as far as possible.
I really feel more is lost than gained by striking out on your own (or emulating a different edition, as it may be)
Consider your core goals for your process: are you primarily trying to fix and patch perceived deficiencies in official monster design, or are you itching to strike out and make your own way?
Myself, I'm squarely in the first camp. I would love CR and progression tables that merely fix the chronic underestimation of optimized high level characters,... and that's it, and then stops there, for a much more official-sounding set of stats.
Assuming your analysis haven't told you the 5e approach simply cannot uphold the challenge, and 4e:ish Solo rules are absolutely required...?
I really feel more is lost than gained by striking out on your own (or emulating a different edition, as it may be)
Consider your core goals for your process: are you primarily trying to fix and patch perceived deficiencies in official monster design, or are you itching to strike out and make your own way?
Myself, I'm squarely in the first camp. I would love CR and progression tables that merely fix the chronic underestimation of optimized high level characters,... and that's it, and then stops there, for a much more official-sounding set of stats.
Assuming your analysis haven't told you the 5e approach simply cannot uphold the challenge, and 4e:ish Solo rules are absolutely required...?
dave2008
Legend
The issue I am seeing is that the current system is, obviously, basically a linear progression. If you have a higher CR you have more hit points, DPR, higher attack bonus and AC, and more XP. They built some flexibility with the defensive and offensive CR calculation; however, if you stray to far from from the expected you get odd creatures with low HP and high attack/DPR (or vice versa) that don't fit well with the encounter building assumptions (they don't live up to the XP reward). If you use "elites" you can have a monster with more HP and does more damage, but has the same AC and attack bonus as a "standard" CR. This works will with the encounter XP budget when you simple double the XP for the elite.
But, like I said. I am still investigating and I could move forward with both. My work on the Marilith lead me to realize that a smaller/slower modification of the DMG Monster by CR table with more interesting design is fairly effective. Doing that with adding "elites" and/or "solos" would, I think, get what I am looking for. But I am not sure yet, that is why I am going to start with some redesign of existing works and see what people think. Maybe I can acheive the same effect I'm looking for by just increasing the HP budget in the table.
CapnZapp
Legend
Let me see if I understand you right. I can't reconcile your two complaints: one, that you get odd creatures; with two, too little xp.
I would have assumed (and bear with me; you have MUCH more experience in this) the problem was the action economy.
If your goal is simply to have the monster last longer you give it more xp. If your goal is simply to have the monster be more threatening you give it more and stronger attacks.
Both these cases increase CR, and... so what?
If you want to properly threaten a level X party (where X is above the fragile first levels; so let's say X=5 or X=10) with a single creature you need to throw a CR X+5 or X*2 creature at them.
So... your problem is... that you're using the standard xp award rules for that?
I mean, let's take a Behir. It's a fairly non-complicated CR 11 creature. It's got reasonable AC and HP for its CR, and no super-strange attack forms (that a lower-leveled party would be powerless against). I think it works as an epic Solo encounter for a level 6 or so party (assuming a reasonable level of both build and play optimizing). And by "epic" I mean "way beyond Deadly, but still doable".
As my party levels up, I'm learning more about whether a good formula is APL+5 or if it's more like APLx2.
And obviously I understand that once you're past CR 20, there really are a) very few monsters to choose from, and b) that the higher the CR, the more the monster underperforms. That problem I see.
But I don't really see the problem you are talking about now... unless you're sole issue is that of xp awards. That a sky-high CR gives too much xp?
But I really must confess I don't see the xp rules as enough of a reason to bring elites and solos (and all the baggage that comes along with it) into 5th edition.
I mean, I don't use xp and I don't use CR (except to eyeball a monster's stat block).
Can't you fix this by saying something like "when the DM deems it necessary a monster gives half xp"? And then use that to have higher-CR monsters as Elites and Solos? (Combined with a sprinkling of the legendary framework, the actions/resistance) With none of the hard work?
I mean, your work on Epic Monsters is great. I just wish you'd see that the main issue (at least for me) is how the designers have underestimated the need for every CR 20ish monster to have a "bag of tricks", and to fix that, without getting sidetracked with completely new Challenge Rating data tables or 4th edition rule additions.
Good luck anyway you slice it!
I would have assumed (and bear with me; you have MUCH more experience in this) the problem was the action economy.
If your goal is simply to have the monster last longer you give it more xp. If your goal is simply to have the monster be more threatening you give it more and stronger attacks.
Both these cases increase CR, and... so what?
If you want to properly threaten a level X party (where X is above the fragile first levels; so let's say X=5 or X=10) with a single creature you need to throw a CR X+5 or X*2 creature at them.
So... your problem is... that you're using the standard xp award rules for that?
I mean, let's take a Behir. It's a fairly non-complicated CR 11 creature. It's got reasonable AC and HP for its CR, and no super-strange attack forms (that a lower-leveled party would be powerless against). I think it works as an epic Solo encounter for a level 6 or so party (assuming a reasonable level of both build and play optimizing). And by "epic" I mean "way beyond Deadly, but still doable".
As my party levels up, I'm learning more about whether a good formula is APL+5 or if it's more like APLx2.
And obviously I understand that once you're past CR 20, there really are a) very few monsters to choose from, and b) that the higher the CR, the more the monster underperforms. That problem I see.
But I don't really see the problem you are talking about now... unless you're sole issue is that of xp awards. That a sky-high CR gives too much xp?
But I really must confess I don't see the xp rules as enough of a reason to bring elites and solos (and all the baggage that comes along with it) into 5th edition.
I mean, I don't use xp and I don't use CR (except to eyeball a monster's stat block).
Can't you fix this by saying something like "when the DM deems it necessary a monster gives half xp"? And then use that to have higher-CR monsters as Elites and Solos? (Combined with a sprinkling of the legendary framework, the actions/resistance) With none of the hard work?
I mean, your work on Epic Monsters is great. I just wish you'd see that the main issue (at least for me) is how the designers have underestimated the need for every CR 20ish monster to have a "bag of tricks", and to fix that, without getting sidetracked with completely new Challenge Rating data tables or 4th edition rule additions.
Good luck anyway you slice it!
dave2008
Legend
I just wish you'd see that the main issue (at least for me) is how the designers have underestimated the need for every CR 20ish monster to have a "bag of tricks", and to fix that, without getting sidetracked with completely new Challenge Rating data tables or 4th edition rule additions.
Good luck anyway you slice it!
CapnZapp, thank you for the comments and this requires a more detailed response (and probably some examples) than I can give right now, but I will come back to this and clarify what I'm exploring. It is an exploration, I'm not set on anything yet.
However, could you clarify the part quoted above? Are you suggesting a codified 'bag of tricks," simply adding a "bag of tricks" or finding a way to get rid of the "bag of tricks," or something else?
Last edited:
CapnZapp
Legend
By "bag of tricks" I merely mean that each epic stat block needs to show evidence of at least minimum awareness of its designer that he or she understands what a high-level party can do.
To just take a single trivial example. Any monster that relies on melee damage but can only simply run up to the players to deliver this damage is completely shut down by repellant eldritch blast (not sure on name).
If the monster wasn't epic, this wouldn't be an issue. No harm done in a cantrip shutting down an Ogre, for instance (regardless of level).
If it is only encountered in groups, it isn't an issue. But the MM doesn't contain such information - there's no indication (except the "legendary" status) which foes can and should be the basis of elites and solos. A pretty good start, however, is to ensure no legendary monsters have such a weakness (unless it's explicitly deliberate).
Compare to Forcecage or Wall of Force. To me it's far more okay that a big stupid brute (a really big one, like CR 20 big) is shut down with spells like these than with a mere cantrip. Yes, I know that in both cases what really is shutting down the monster is the action of a high level hero, but still.
That's just one example. The point is to ensure each epic monster has at least some tools in its toolbox, and this is what I meant by "bag of tricks". One trick is "get to melee". Other tricks that have evolved thru the editions include blindsight. We could make a long list.
You can't take these things for granted. Unfortunately, that is. The way the MM is written we're forced to question the system mastery of its designers. And possibly to fill gaps ourselves (this is where this thread comes in! )
Do note I am not advocating standard bag of tricks. Each legendary or epic monster can and should have an individual if not unique trick! That's an important part in the look and feel of their encounter. (Standard tricks only mean the adventurers can and will anticipate them, abuse them and shut them down)
The goal isn't to make the monster or its tricks invincible or unsurmountable.
The goal is to make the players work for their victory; to try different tactics, and to adapt to what works and doesn't work.
Just Repellant Blasting each big bruiser might seem like an innovative solution on first blush, but it really grows old fast. I want (and you want) more from high CR stat blocks!
For instance, take Juiblex, a demon prince of oozes. Things that show care and attention (IMHO) would be to include abilities to ooze out of any non-epic prison (not even a Wall of Force is that ooze-tight?), and some way to quickly appear in the adventurer's midst (it is NOT okay to trivially kite a demon prince like he was your ordinary black pudding).
Zapp
PS. Perhaps a long reply, but do note I was just trying to be clear about "bag of tricks". I really shouldn't have rambled on this long, since it's only a minor issue here. Feel free to focus your reply (when you have time to write it) on the main question: namely what goals are you pursuing?
To just take a single trivial example. Any monster that relies on melee damage but can only simply run up to the players to deliver this damage is completely shut down by repellant eldritch blast (not sure on name).
If the monster wasn't epic, this wouldn't be an issue. No harm done in a cantrip shutting down an Ogre, for instance (regardless of level).
If it is only encountered in groups, it isn't an issue. But the MM doesn't contain such information - there's no indication (except the "legendary" status) which foes can and should be the basis of elites and solos. A pretty good start, however, is to ensure no legendary monsters have such a weakness (unless it's explicitly deliberate).
Compare to Forcecage or Wall of Force. To me it's far more okay that a big stupid brute (a really big one, like CR 20 big) is shut down with spells like these than with a mere cantrip. Yes, I know that in both cases what really is shutting down the monster is the action of a high level hero, but still.
That's just one example. The point is to ensure each epic monster has at least some tools in its toolbox, and this is what I meant by "bag of tricks". One trick is "get to melee". Other tricks that have evolved thru the editions include blindsight. We could make a long list.
You can't take these things for granted. Unfortunately, that is. The way the MM is written we're forced to question the system mastery of its designers. And possibly to fill gaps ourselves (this is where this thread comes in!
)Do note I am not advocating standard bag of tricks. Each legendary or epic monster can and should have an individual if not unique trick! That's an important part in the look and feel of their encounter. (Standard tricks only mean the adventurers can and will anticipate them, abuse them and shut them down)
The goal isn't to make the monster or its tricks invincible or unsurmountable.
The goal is to make the players work for their victory; to try different tactics, and to adapt to what works and doesn't work.
Just Repellant Blasting each big bruiser might seem like an innovative solution on first blush, but it really grows old fast. I want (and you want) more from high CR stat blocks!
For instance, take Juiblex, a demon prince of oozes. Things that show care and attention (IMHO) would be to include abilities to ooze out of any non-epic prison (not even a Wall of Force is that ooze-tight?), and some way to quickly appear in the adventurer's midst (it is NOT okay to trivially kite a demon prince like he was your ordinary black pudding).
Zapp
PS. Perhaps a long reply, but do note I was just trying to be clear about "bag of tricks". I really shouldn't have rambled on this long, since it's only a minor issue here. Feel free to focus your reply (when you have time to write it) on the main question: namely what goals are you pursuing?
dave2008
Legend
By "bag of tricks" I merely mean that each epic stat block needs to show evidence of at least minimum awareness of its designer that he or she understands what a high-level party can do.
To just take a single trivial example. Any monster that relies on melee damage but can only simply run up to the players to deliver this damage is completely shut down by repellant eldritch blast (not sure on name).
If the monster wasn't epic, this wouldn't be an issue. No harm done in a cantrip shutting down an Ogre, for instance (regardless of level).
If it is only encountered in groups, it isn't an issue. But the MM doesn't contain such information - there's no indication (except the "legendary" status) which foes can and should be the basis of elites and solos. A pretty good start, however, is to ensure no legendary monsters have such a weakness (unless it's explicitly deliberate).
Compare to Forcecage or Wall of Force. To me it's far more okay that a big stupid brute (a really big one, like CR 20 big) is shut down with spells like these than with a mere cantrip. Yes, I know that in both cases what really is shutting down the monster is the action of a high level hero, but still.
That's just one example. The point is to ensure each epic monster has at least some tools in its toolbox, and this is what I meant by "bag of tricks". One trick is "get to melee". Other tricks that have evolved thru the editions include blindsight. We could make a long list.
You can't take these things for granted. Unfortunately, that is. The way the MM is written we're forced to question the system mastery of its designers. And possibly to fill gaps ourselves (this is where this thread comes in!
Do note I am not advocating standard bag of tricks. Each legendary or epic monster can and should have an individual if not unique trick! That's an important part in the look and feel of their encounter. (Standard tricks only mean the adventurers can and will anticipate them, abuse them and shut them down)
The goal isn't to make the monster or its tricks invincible or unsurmountable.
The goal is to make the players work for their victory; to try different tactics, and to adapt to what works and doesn't work.
Just Repellant Blasting each big bruiser might seem like an innovative solution on first blush, but it really grows old fast. I want (and you want) more from high CR stat blocks!
For instance, take Juiblex, a demon prince of oozes. Things that show care and attention (IMHO) would be to include abilities to ooze out of any non-epic prison (not even a Wall of Force is that ooze-tight?), and some way to quickly appear in the adventurer's midst (it is NOT okay to trivially kite a demon prince like he was your ordinary black pudding).
Zapp
PS. Perhaps a long reply, but do note I was just trying to be clear about "bag of tricks". I really shouldn't have rambled on this long, since it's only a minor issue here. Feel free to focus your reply (when you have time to write it) on the main question: namely what goals are you pursuing?
Got it - I thought you were suggesting that I come up with a method to get rid of the bag of tricks! As if you wanted the monster design to work without resorting to a bag of tricks, and that seem like a project far outside the scope of what I'm doing.
dave2008
Legend
Soon I will be able to start posting again. If all goes well this weekend I should be able to start posting again next weekend. I will start by returning that which was lost in the great EnWorld crash of 2016 and then the submissions I have received from contributors.
However, in my long absence I have had a lot of time to think about this project and I have decided to change course slightly when I make my second draft of all of these epic threats. I am still working out the details, but one of the things I am think about is to give some monsters multiple turns instead of, or possibly in addition to, Legendary Actions. I haven't decided 100% so I was wondering what you thought. Should I stick to the 5e style Legendary Actions, go back to multiple turns like some 4e solos, a mixture of both? What do you think. Also, any change will be after I first complete all of the entries on the list (plus maybe a few more). I want to complete this train of thought be I make them move to another.
However, in my long absence I have had a lot of time to think about this project and I have decided to change course slightly when I make my second draft of all of these epic threats. I am still working out the details, but one of the things I am think about is to give some monsters multiple turns instead of, or possibly in addition to, Legendary Actions. I haven't decided 100% so I was wondering what you thought. Should I stick to the 5e style Legendary Actions, go back to multiple turns like some 4e solos, a mixture of both? What do you think. Also, any change will be after I first complete all of the entries on the list (plus maybe a few more). I want to complete this train of thought be I make them move to another.
It depends on what the enemy's behavior, goals, and purpose (as an encounter, not lore-wise) are, I think. Some of the epic level threats we've seen statted up officially have summoning abilities, like Orcus, that allow action economy to be more even between the PC group and team monster. Others have lair actions, which also try and accomplish the same goal to a lesser degree. If an enemy has neither of these options at least semi-reliably, then I'd think that would be a candidate for multiple turns. However, I would be more likely at this point to see about increasing the depth of legendary actions, by increasing the number of points they get and allowing for more versatile ways to spend them. This would hopefully make the monsters much more unpredictable, since they can react to each player's turn as needed, and can't get swarmed and focused as easily.
Similar Threads
