D&D 5E Are solo monsters weaker in 5e?

[SkidAce]

Explanation: in order to have defences (mostly, but not wholly, talking hit points here, and then save resistances) to last long enough to even register as a "solo fight" you need to pick a Legendary so many CRs above the APL that its offense will threaten to oneshot a player character, any player character. This in turn cheapens the value of being a "sturdy" party member.

It cheapens the value versus the super deadly legendary beast from hell capable of fighting entire groups by itself.

Naturally "tanking" is harder in that instance, this beast has slain hundreds!

--------

However, if using the "boss" fight at the end of the adventure segment theory, yeah that would get old quick, and is a valid concern.

 

[jgsugden]

You can create great encounters in 5e using the monsters in the books as solo monsters for characters of any level and any degree of optimization. I've played in enough games and run enough games to have seen it done across the board. One of the keys to this is not confusing a battle for survival with a battle of life and death.

Great battles can occur when the PCs are heavy favorites in the battle. The trick can often be to not have the combat be focused on the PCs surviving the battle, but on having them beat a challenge before something specific happens. As an example, I've used the Tarrasque in several battles over several editions. When I have, it was never a battle between the heroes and the beast where the only concern was the players surviving. Instead, it was a battle where the beast had to be stopped by the PCs before it destroyed something. As another example, in a recent campaign a group of PCs fought their way to the hidden lair of an ancient red dragon... only to find that their attack on his lair prompted the dragon to hunt down and attack their lair. Believing it could escape, when the PCs arrived, the dragon continued to focus on destroying as much of the city as possible.

D&D is not a strategy game of DM versus PCs. It is a role playing game in which heroes face challenges and, usually, win the day as they tell a great story. This is why the DMG advises using easy encounters. People ask, "What is the point of an easy encounters term where the PCs lose no HPS and waste no spells?" My response is that there should be something in that battle that advances the story and provides a different type of challenge, such as information that can be gathered, saving an NPC, preventing the destruction of something, or persuading an enemy to change sides.

 

[Mr. Wilson]

My experience with Solos in 5E (read, legendary creatures) is that their offensive powers are generally fine as long as they have legendary or liar actions.

With that said, I pretty much double to triple their hps so that the fight lasts long enough to be 1.) Exciting 2.) Sufficiently Scary 3.) Befitting of a "boss" encounter. My players are (mostly) all video game players. They expect boss fights to be...boss fights. With a GWM Barbarian, a Sharpshooting Ranger, a Lore Bard debuffing/buffing, and a Sword and Board fighter locking enemies in, and a Wizard controlling the battlefield it's common that my players deal between 100 and 200 points of damage each round.

I've also started adopting the 4E Bloodied is better mentality when designing my own.

 

[Geeknamese]

You can create great encounters in 5e using the monsters in the books as solo monsters for characters of any level and any degree of optimization. I've played in enough games and run enough games to have seen it done across the board. One of the keys to this is not confusing a battle for survival with a battle of life and death.

Great battles can occur when the PCs are heavy favorites in the battle. The trick can often be to not have the combat be focused on the PCs surviving the battle, but on having them beat a challenge before something specific happens. As an example, I've used the Tarrasque in several battles over several editions. When I have, it was never a battle between the heroes and the beast where the only concern was the players surviving. Instead, it was a battle where the beast had to be stopped by the PCs before it destroyed something. As another example, in a recent campaign a group of PCs fought their way to the hidden lair of an ancient red dragon... only to find that their attack on his lair prompted the dragon to hunt down and attack their lair. Believing it could escape, when the PCs arrived, the dragon continued to focus on destroying as much of the city as possible.

D&D is not a strategy game of DM versus PCs. It is a role playing game in which heroes face challenges and, usually, win the day as they tell a great story. This is why the DMG advises using easy encounters. People ask, "What is the point of an easy encounters term where the PCs lose no HPS and waste no spells?" My response is that there should be something in that battle that advances the story and provides a different type of challenge, such as information that can be gathered, saving an NPC, preventing the destruction of something, or persuading an enemy to change sides.

^This guy's got the right idea. If it's a big boss, solo, legendary, climax of the story arc, whatever you want to call it, you can create more memorable and dramatic encounters by tying in other challenges that make sense narratively. Like in the above encounter, it isn't the PCs vs the Tarrasque straight up like a video game, it's the PCs trying to save the town vs a cataclysmic natural disaster of a creature. I would challenge the PCs with not just the Tarrasque but also the collateral damage it causes. PCs would be challenged with choices between attacking the monster or saving townsfolk from impending doom.

Or another good example is how Volo's Guide breaks down the Beholder, it's motivations, its tactics and it's lair. The Beholder is downright scary in Volo's. Solo's don't just sit in a room and wait for PCs to come kill them like a Final Fantasy game. They're extremely intelligent (usually), they plot and plan, they scry, they send minions to recon, they test PCs capabilities, they have contingencies, they fight smart, they have minions (not only because mechanically it balances out the combat but it makes sense narratively). They attack PCs where it hurts narratively.

Solos should be so much more than their stat blocks...


Sent from my iPhone using EN World mobile app

 

[Mistwell]

In my experience I've had to make solo monsters into legendary monsters with lairs that also take actions (even at low levels). Doing that works very well. Not doing that I find tends to be somewhat disappointing.

I really dearly love the legendary monster rules and the lair rules...I just wish WOTC do more with those rules. I'd really like a book full of lairs and legendary monsters, at all levels.

 

[Mr. Wilson]

^This guy's got the right idea. If it's a big boss, solo, legendary, climax of the story arc, whatever you want to call it, you can create more memorable and dramatic encounters by tying in other challenges that make sense narratively. Like in the above encounter, it isn't the PCs vs the Tarrasque straight up like a video game, it's the PCs trying to save the town vs a cataclysmic natural disaster of a creature. I would challenge the PCs with not just the Tarrasque but also the collateral damage it causes. PCs would be challenged with choices between attacking the monster or saving townsfolk from impending doom.

Or another good example is how Volo's Guide breaks down the Beholder, it's motivations, its tactics and it's lair. The Beholder is downright scary in Volo's. Solo's don't just sit in a room and wait for PCs to come kill them like a Final Fantasy game. They're extremely intelligent (usually), they plot and plan, they scry, they send minions to recon, they test PCs capabilities, they have contingencies, they fight smart, they have minions (not only because mechanically it balances out the combat but it makes sense narratively). They attack PCs where it hurts narratively.

Solos should be so much more than their stat blocks...


Sent from my iPhone using EN World mobile app

I agree with most of your post (especially the last paragraph) and in fact my BBEG's do exactly what you listed. However, once you get to the BBEG and the fight lasts 2 rounds or less, it's anti-climatic. YMMV, of course.

 

[Hussar]

Good grief, I just realized that [MENTION=12731]CapnZapp[/MENTION] has been banging this drum for TWO YEARS. Holy crap.

Dude, that's some SERIOUS tenacity.

 

[Stalker0]

In my experience I've had to make solo monsters into legendary monsters with lairs that also take actions (even at low levels). Doing that works very well. Not doing that I find tends to be somewhat disappointing.

I agree here. I think legendary monsters aren't "solo" without the lair actions to provide more actions....especially "area effect ones" so that your tank can't just tank all of the pain. It also helps if the legendary monster burns through its legendary resistances and gets hits with a whammy like a polymorph, confusion, etc.

I also tend to add spells to my higher level ones, especially dragons. I think you really need some kind of magic to truly counter the shenanigans of high level parties.

 

[Zilong]

In my experience I've had to make solo monsters into legendary monsters with lairs that also take actions (even at low levels). Doing that works very well. Not doing that I find tends to be somewhat disappointing.

I really dearly love the legendary monster rules and the lair rules...I just wish WOTC do more with those rules. I'd really like a book full of lairs and legendary monsters, at all levels.

A Lairs and Legendary templates UA would be a welcome addition some time I feel. Monster seem a bit underwhelming? Slap a legendary template of some wort onto it and have fun. I think some time ago someone tried to come up with a coherent system for adding legendary/veteran templates to monsters on this forum. I don't know how that ended up.