D&D 5E (2024) Better Monster Design. 6E/BG3 Ideas

[Zardnaar]

Probably the same as in 5e. Though internet wasn’t as widespread then so maybe to less effect.

Yeah. A lot of tge problems with 3.5 I think were theorycraft. Even Druid with natural spell level 6 wasn't tgat bad. At least game warping bad.

3.0 not so much some of those PrCs were a problem early on. 3.5 mostly nuked that.

Free metamagic was a big thing to watch out for back then. If casuals like 4E it wouldn't have gone out with a whimper.

The problem (of its an actual problem) is the user base. No modern version of D&D has actually got encounter design right.

Its a fooks errand because its impossible to account fir how people actually play and casuals vs veterans vs powergamers.

Sone peopke actually like what's on offer. Even without various OSRisms conceptually would the be fine with a crit reducing them to 0 HP.

Because if people are doing 4 round work days (4RWD) thats what needs to happen. Or you just go with it and whatever.

 

[AnotherGuy]

@Stalker0 the escalating damage is a nice touch.
I usually have monsters (the larger types) do more than just damage
i.e. shove, push, grab fly and drop, create difficult terrain especially on misses, create damage yielding terrain (ongoing fire/cold damage from a breath weapon)...etc

I have been exploring the idea that monsters 2x larger than the PC require the PC attacked to have 5 feet of movement available to attempt to avoid their melee attacks, otherwise the monsters gain ADV on their attacks. If you have the 5 feet of movement you move 5 feet and they make their attack roll. It feels like it ensures the participants are always moving, and the terrain becomes more important.

Auras are great.
Threatening Reach (3.x style)
Bloodied Abilities - abilities that come online when a monster is bloodied
Mythic Monster template
Touch attacks for incorporeal creatures
Inflicting exhaustion should be limited to few specific creatures
Swarms should provide more than +3 to hit, with x damage - they should rather auto inflict a condition in their space

 

[Chaltab]

I've literally never had a problem challenging my players in 4E or 5E and I don't have a particularly high opinion of Mearls' game design chops.

The problem we're dealing with is fundamentally a player problem: players that want to optimize any fun or tension out of the game make the game worse for everyone else. If you can't get them to cut that crap out then you just have to choose not to play with them.

 

[Zardnaar]

I've literally never had a problem challenging my players in 4E or 5E and I don't have a particularly high opinion of Mearls' game design chops.

The problem we're dealing with is fundamentally a player problem: players that want to optimize any fun or tension out of the game make the game worse for everyone else. If you can't get them to cut that crap out then you just have to choose not to play with them.

Maybe but 90% of the player base may play that way.

My newbies tend to adapt to more veterans players. I tend to run living world with consequences.

Imagine D-Day Omaha beach. Burger and coke time we'll come back tomorrow. What happens if you give the enemies 12 hours to prepare? Human.

Adventures dont tend to do that though. Its usually static clear 1 room at a time wash rinse repeat. Very video gamey tbh.

Mearls is just the messenger maybe slightly exaggerating.

 

[Blue]

I have lots of good things to say about your basic premise, but I wanted to break out one thing first.

Its a modern problem (post 3.0) ramped up since 4E and D&D becoming easy mode by default.

D&D 5e is 'easy mode' because of the DMs, not the rules. We can put in place rule fixes so that DMs mess up less, but it in no way 'defaults' to easy mode, it's just run that way.

If played by designer expectations it's fine. Designer expectations include (but aren't limited to):

• 6-7 encounters per day, with 2 short rests about 1/3 and 2/3 of the way through (2014!DMG, but since the math hasn't changed much this still stands). And remember, 6-7 average encounters means that day you only run 3, also run a day of 10.
• Standard array or point buy. Rolling both can give higher starting numbers which means feats sooner, and "somehow" seems to average a lot higher than statistics says it should unless the DM witnesses all rolls.
• 5e expected amount of magic item. They took item math out of character advancement, but many DMs are still calibrated to earlier edition amounts of treasure. It's much lower then expected. There's a chart in Xanathar's on pg 135 that breaks it down for the whole party, yet many DMs give out more than that per character. BTW, if you strictly rolled on the 2014!DMG charts (and had no magic items shops) it would average out to these numbers, that's where they got them.
• Round-up-Average HPs (max at 1st)
• No house rules giving more, like a 1st level feat. Something I was just told was the #2 most common house rule in some parts.

Play with these, which are all in the rules, and you'll match what the designer expectations, and find that it's not defaulting to easy mode but a more reasonable difficulty.

I've jumped out of 5e for a bit, about to run 13th Age 2nd ed, but my next planned 5e game I was going to use something akin to the Gritty Realism variant of the 2014 DMG, where overnight is a short rest and between adventures/sanctuary like Elrond's is a long rest. Between that and me being conscious of the rest I can meet those expectations.

The problem isn't the mechanics per se, it's that designer expectations and how people actually run differ a lot. They don't even follow these well in their adventures. So it is a mechanically fixable problem, but saying the D&D 5e is easy mode is just an incorrect statement -- played as expected it is not.

 

[Zardnaar]

I have lots of good things to say about your basic premise, but I wanted to break out one thing first.

D&D 5e is 'easy mode' because of the DMs, not the rules. We can put in place rule fixes so that DMs mess up less, but it in no way 'defaults' to easy mode, it's just run that way.

If played by designer expectations it's fine. Designer expectations include (but aren't limited to):

• 6-7 encounters per day, with 2 short rests about 1/3 and 2/3 of the way through (2014!DMG, but since the math hasn't changed much this still stands). And remember, 6-7 average encounters means that day you only run 3, also run a day of 10.
• Standard array or point buy. Rolling both can give higher starting numbers which means feats sooner, and "somehow" seems to average a lot higher than statistics says it should unless the DM witnesses all rolls.
• 5e expected amount of magic item. They took item math out of character advancement, but many DMs are still calibrated to earlier edition amounts of treasure. It's much lower then expected. There's a chart in Xanathar's on pg 135 that breaks it down for the whole party, yet many DMs give out more than that per character. BTW, if you strictly rolled on the 2014!DMG charts (and had no magic items shops) it would average out to these numbers, that's where they got them.
• Round-up-Average HPs (max at 1st)
• No house rules giving more, like a 1st level feat. Something I was just told was the #2 most common house rule in some parts.

Play with these, which are all in the rules, and you'll match what the designer expectations, and find that it's not defaulting to easy mode but a more reasonable difficulty.

I've jumped out of 5e for a bit, about to run 13th Age 2nd ed, but my next planned 5e game I was going to use something akin to the Gritty Realism variant of the 2014 DMG, where overnight is a short rest and between adventures/sanctuary like Elrond's is a long rest. Between that and me being conscious of the rest I can meet those expectations.

The problem isn't the mechanics per se, it's that designer expectations and how people actually run differ a lot. They don't even follow these well in their adventures. So it is a mechanically fixable problem, but saying the D&D 5e is easy mode is just an incorrect statement -- played as expected it is not.

I stress tested it. 10 encounters up to deadlyx5 in 2014.

5.5 is better but there no 6-8 expectation.


Players were getting antsy either 4 high encounters,2 medium and one easy.

Thats around 2 sessions dungeonhack. Level 10-12.

 

[Blue]

I stress tested it. 10 encounters up to deadlyx5 in 2014.

5.t is better but there no 6-8 expectation.


Players were getting antsy either 4 high encounters,2 medium snd sn easy.

Thst tsles around 2 sessions dungeonhack. Level 10-12.

If you insist that still resulted in easy mode, then there's little common ground in our experience. I won't be able to meaningfully contribute to you this thread.

 

[Zardnaar]

If you insist that still resulted in easy mode, then there's little common ground in our experience. I won't be able to meaningfully contribute to you this thread.

I meant low encounter. 5.5 jargon that post was a mess apologies.

The 5.0 one with the multiplier didnt work.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Maybe but 90% of the player base may play that way.

My newbies tend to adapt to more veterans players. I tend to run living world with consequences.

Imagine D-Day Omaha beach. Burger and coke time we'll come back tomorrow. What happens if you give the enemies 12 hours to prepare? Human.

Adventures dont tend to do that though. Its usually static clear 1 room at a time wash rinse repeat. Very video gamey tbh.

Really? A lot of adventures have strategical notes. What happens if you retreat and come back. What happens if they hear a fight

The Lost Mine of Phandelver has such notes right in the first goblin cave. And if you follow those guidelines, the adventure is deadly right out of the gate.

Mearls is just the messenger maybe slightly exaggerating.

Yeah. He is not wrong. But the game can handle power gamers just fine. Just don't have solo monsters.

In 4e they really tried. But if the PCs can chose the time of fighting and are at full resources, the fight is over fast.

On the other hand, add a few low level creatures that don't take up a lot of the xp budget, and suddenly it gets a lot more difficult. If the fight still goes sideways, have the enemies retreat. Let 1 min pass until buffs wear off. And reengage with reenforcements.

If you as a DM allow players to clear one room after the other, it is a DM problem, not a system failure.

That does not mean, 5e is perfect.
I really wished for a more symmetrical game.

But the lower HP of PCs on average means that damage spells against them are a bit more punishing.
So a single spellcaster on the enemy team can do serious damage.

And more swingyness. Going up and down in HP is what excites players.