Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="billd91" data-source="post: 6156095" data-attributes="member: 3400">It was harder to multiattack in 1e/2e if you played by the letter of the rules as well. But I have doubts that most groups did, in which case ghouls would have been attacking much like they were in the D&D Next play test. Of course, with surprise, ghouls would have been pretty dangerous in that edition as well - treating every segment of surprise essentially as a round for making attacks.I notice also that level scaling of saves, like in 1e, isn't necessarily a panacea. The saving throw values for 5th level PCs in 1e/2e are quite similar to the DC 12 the PCs needed to make. And in that edition, they wouldn't have been able to make saves each round to try to throw off the paralysis effect like they can under D&D Next. Overall, the D&D Next isn't that different from the AD&D ghoul (his attack value is even very close at +5 in the play test bestiary to the AD&D ghoul's THAC0 of 16). The newer ghoul has about 5 more hit points, does a couple points of damage more with his claws, but has lost a couple point of AC. So it's not like this ghoul is all that different from all predecessors. So what, exactly is the problem?I think it's expectations. I think 3e ghouls spoiled the designers a little bit. Ghouls they were pretty weak opponents in that edition. Their hit points were fairly low considering the damage some PCs could do. Their attack bonuses were feeble (even compared to 1e) at +2 for the bite, +0 for claws. Their save DC for paralysis was the same, but about half the PCs you'd expect in the party had an extra +2 on their Fort saves over their Constitution modifiers to undermine the danger. I think they have built the ghoul they used in the podcast around 1e's model but still have their expectations based on the 3e weaker version and that's causing a disconnect. They probably need to think in 1e terms more with some of these issues.</blockquote>

Verification