Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Aegeri" data-source="post: 5502871" data-attributes="member: 78116">This isn't actually entirely true, because there are many other very subtle but important distinctions with how recent monsters are built compared with older monsters. Newer monsters outdo their previous counterparts not just in the damage they do, but the powers and abilities they have as well. Newer skirmishers can more reliably move about compared to older ones, recent soldiers tend to have marks as effects and similar. While you can get away with basic math changes in heroic, by paragon and epic you can put lipstick on MM pigs - but they are still pigs. They need their powers readdressed and fixed as well.As for the OPs complaints as mentioned in the thread: It doesn't matter what the monsters damage dice are - so long as it's the same average. So if you need 16 average damage, you can do that with a damage expression of d10+10 (or so), or 2d10+5. In the d10+10 case, you front load more damage consistently while the d210+5 is more variable. This actually can have some important - but extremely subtle - gameplay differences. The more "reliable" the monsters damage is, which means the more static bonus that doesn't rely on dice the more chance it can have of dropping a character consistently and similar. At the same time, it's critical hits feel a lot weaker.So while they ARE by the new maths doing the same average damage, the impact their attacks have feel distinctly different.Edit:I wrote a <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/4e-discussion/285294-doing-monster-math-original-monster-manual.html" target="_blank">reasonably competent summary of changes</a> in this thread some time back. It's worth noting that I am going to update this thread with far better examples and more of the inner nitty gritty I was talking about. For example many monsters are now designed with effects on powers, such as a soldier who imposes a mark regardless if he hits or misses. On a hit the mark is save ends, but on a miss the mark is simply until the end of the creatures next turn (and such forth). These are much more common and generally consistent across monsters than they were originally. It's one reason other than the higher damage of newer monsters that they perform considerably better.</blockquote>

Verification