Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Do the Monster Building Guidelines Work?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 9155075" data-attributes="member: 87792"><p>This is a strong disagreement about philosophy.</p><p></p><p>The Creating Quick Monster Stats section has literally 4 steps, not 20. And it is presented after "modifying a monster" but before the full "creating a monster stat block".</p><p></p><p>From the Creating Quick Monster Stats section on P274 we get </p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Step 1: Expected Challenge Rating</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Step 2: Basic Statistics</li> </ul><p>This is literally how the DMG tells you to create quick monsters - and it does that <em>before</em> going through the longer process. If it's not how you are supposed to use it then the DMG shouldn't tell you to use it that way - and tell you to do it that way before giving you the more involved and intimidating process.</p><p></p><p>Design is not easy - but we should have tools to make design easier at multiple levels. The creating a quick monster rules (and remember the Monster Stats by Challenge Rating are explicitly presented there not under the 20 step section) fails. The 20 step section is long and involved and <em>shouldn't</em> lead to different outcomes (and indeed doesn't necessarily).</p><p></p><p>Design is not easy - but 5e makes it actively harder and breaks the easier methods.</p><p></p><p>What I listed are all <em>explicitly</em> <em>and unambiguously</em> listed on page 280 - 281 of the DMG under the Monster Features table. Section 13 at the top of page 279 says "The Monster Features table lists various features that you can plunder from the Monster Manual. The table notes which features increase a monster's effective Armour Class, hit points, attack bonus or damage output for the purpose of determining its challenge rating". </p><p></p><p>We aren't talking about "spellcasting". We are talking about using those explicit monster features you were actively praising in the exact way you are told to use them. Somehow you think they are good - but when I show them being used in what I believe to be their intended way you talk about how the spellcasting section isn't explicit enough?</p><p></p><p>Seriously, this sounds like "the features table is a great thing to have - just don't try to use it". I'm not using spellcasting, I'm using the explicit features.</p><p></p><p>I literally quoted the rules for calculating monster CR on p274 under the quick monster creation rules. You know what the Step 16: Final Challenge Rating says to do to calculate Monster CR? "This step is identical to Step 4 under 'Creating quick monster stats'."</p><p></p><p>It is absolutely and 100% explicit that "If your monster's AC is at least two points higher or lower than that number, adjust the challenge rating suggested by its hit points by 1 for every 2 points of difference.".</p><p></p><p>So no, that +1 to effective AC would not change things under the DMG unless there was another +1 involved. And it doesn't say to use fractions. It says <em>by 1 for every 2 points</em> <em>if the difference is at least 2</em>.</p><p></p><p>Now you might personally do things differently - but those would appear to be your personal house rules.</p><p></p><p>However that excuse doesn't hold water. There is an art to this - but that doesn't mean that applying the simple <em>WotC recommended</em> defaults should lead to a huge negative play experience. Applying the default options should lead to perfectly functional options not complete messes.</p><p></p><p>I <em>did</em> follow the creation rules on page 274. And they lead to a complete and utter mess.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Neonchameleon, post: 9155075, member: 87792"] This is a strong disagreement about philosophy. The Creating Quick Monster Stats section has literally 4 steps, not 20. And it is presented after "modifying a monster" but before the full "creating a monster stat block". From the Creating Quick Monster Stats section on P274 we get [LIST] [*]Step 1: Expected Challenge Rating [*]Step 2: Basic Statistics [/LIST] This is literally how the DMG tells you to create quick monsters - and it does that [I]before[/I] going through the longer process. If it's not how you are supposed to use it then the DMG shouldn't tell you to use it that way - and tell you to do it that way before giving you the more involved and intimidating process. Design is not easy - but we should have tools to make design easier at multiple levels. The creating a quick monster rules (and remember the Monster Stats by Challenge Rating are explicitly presented there not under the 20 step section) fails. The 20 step section is long and involved and [I]shouldn't[/I] lead to different outcomes (and indeed doesn't necessarily). Design is not easy - but 5e makes it actively harder and breaks the easier methods. What I listed are all [I]explicitly[/I] [I]and unambiguously[/I] listed on page 280 - 281 of the DMG under the Monster Features table. Section 13 at the top of page 279 says "The Monster Features table lists various features that you can plunder from the Monster Manual. The table notes which features increase a monster's effective Armour Class, hit points, attack bonus or damage output for the purpose of determining its challenge rating". We aren't talking about "spellcasting". We are talking about using those explicit monster features you were actively praising in the exact way you are told to use them. Somehow you think they are good - but when I show them being used in what I believe to be their intended way you talk about how the spellcasting section isn't explicit enough? Seriously, this sounds like "the features table is a great thing to have - just don't try to use it". I'm not using spellcasting, I'm using the explicit features. I literally quoted the rules for calculating monster CR on p274 under the quick monster creation rules. You know what the Step 16: Final Challenge Rating says to do to calculate Monster CR? "This step is identical to Step 4 under 'Creating quick monster stats'." It is absolutely and 100% explicit that "If your monster's AC is at least two points higher or lower than that number, adjust the challenge rating suggested by its hit points by 1 for every 2 points of difference.". So no, that +1 to effective AC would not change things under the DMG unless there was another +1 involved. And it doesn't say to use fractions. It says [I]by 1 for every 2 points[/I] [I]if the difference is at least 2[/I]. Now you might personally do things differently - but those would appear to be your personal house rules. However that excuse doesn't hold water. There is an art to this - but that doesn't mean that applying the simple [I]WotC recommended[/I] defaults should lead to a huge negative play experience. Applying the default options should lead to perfectly functional options not complete messes. I [I]did[/I] follow the creation rules on page 274. And they lead to a complete and utter mess. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Do the Monster Building Guidelines Work?
Top