D&D 5E Does anyone else feel like the action economy and the way actions work in general in 5e both just suck?

[JeffB]

Ogre

Size/Strength Large; Level 3rd; Role Troop; Type Giant	Initiative +5
Big honkin’ club +7 vs. AC; 18 damage Miss: Half damage. Big shove +9 vs. PD (each enemy engaged with ogre); 1d6 damage, and the target pops free from the ogre Quick use: This power only requires a quick action (once per round) instead of a standard action when the escalation die is even. Nastier Specials: Tough skin: Whenever the ogre takes weapon damage, reduce that damage by 1d8 points.

 

[JeffB]

So the formatting was weird and I could not add anything. ^

"pop free" means you are no longer engaged with the creature. IOW you've been knocked out of melee range. And as you can see on certain rounds the Ogre can Attack one target and then attempt to knock everyone who is engaged with it away because it's a quick action. This is so fun to use on Melee PCs.

 

[JeffB]

And here is the Ettin

Ettin

Size/Strength Large; Level 5th; Role Troop; Type Giant	Initiative +9
First big swing +10 vs. AC; 25 damage, and the target pops free from the ettin; then as a free action, the ettin can move (or choose not to move) and make a second swing attack. [Special trigger] Second swing +10 vs. AC (different target from first big swing); 15 damage Two-headed save: If an ettin’s first save against an effect fails, it can roll a second save. Nastier Specials: Big bully: The ettin deals double damage with its attacks against staggered enemies. Escalating agreement: If the escalation die is 3+, the ettin can target two engaged enemies with its first big swing attack.
21	18	14	160
AC	PD	MD	HP

 

[Imaro]

Makes being a DM much more work to me and I can change the details just as easy as I can add things.


It is easier to changea[[rpxo and maintain well lets call it approximate "balance".

Balance is obviously less important monster side but I like somewhat predictable results for encounter design any way. A bland monster I am always inclined to add to shrug just lacks value as much more than flavor text in a way.

Have you tried Pathfinder 2e?

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

And here is the Ettin

I wished for a long time that WotC would release a bestiary with a list of possible ''modular traits/actions'' to add to a creatures of specific type like they did with the additional abilities for giants in SKT, and AiME did with its monsters in the Loremaster Guide.

 

[JeffB]

I wished for a long time that WotC would release a bestiary with a list of possible ''modular traits/actions'' to add to a creatures of specific type like they did with the additional abilities for giants in SKT, and AiME did with its monsters in the Loremaster Guide.

Though not Official, you might want to take a look at this author and their works- Monster Manual Expanded


and especially Monster Talents

 

[TheSword]

Makes being a DM much more work to me and I can change the details just as easy as I can add things.


It is easier to changea[[rpxo and maintain well lets call it approximate "balance".

Balance is obviously less important monster side but I like somewhat predictable results for encounter design any way. A bland monster I am always inclined to add to shrug just lacks value as much more than flavor text in a way.

I think having to learn a load of extra abilities when combat is complicated enough is also extra work. The difference is an experienced DM can choose to add stuff. A new DM doesn’t have the choice of what to add or subtract they have to take it at face value.

 

[tetrasodium]

There are some people who would like a more complex system with firmer boundaries and see the fact that their ideas aren’t hardwired into the game as a flaw.

I personally like the fact that monsters are basic and can be easily improved. For instance my demons and devils all have one or two abilities or spells that vary by individual. The 3e stat blocks are the inspiration. This keeps fiends varied and interesting.

However me expecting that to be hardwired into the game forces my preferences on people who might like something simpler or who don’t have my preconceived ideas of what Osyluth can and should do.

It’s easier to add than it is to take away!

Incorrect. I'm a second voice who will say that it makes being a gm much more work for me and I'll bring examples.
In another thread I was arguing with someone about how 5e's meaningless AoA structure complicates certain types of encounters when they said that 4e had the same AoO rules that allow you to run circles around a monster without an AoO. After pointing out the shift and walk actions they admitted that they either forgot or were playing it wrong without noticing. Do even though a variant rule of "you could optionally choose to remove opportunity attacks for moving from one threatened square to another" would accomplish 5e AoOs I as a gm need to design much more complex encounters with many more baddies if I don't want my pcs to simply walk past the guards and nooks to gank the bbeg they work for

 

[Oofta]

Incorrect. I'm a second voice who will say that it makes being a gm much more work for me and I'll bring examples.
In another thread I was arguing with someone about how 5e's meaningless AoA structure complicates certain types of encounters when they said that 4e had the same AoO rules that allow you to run circles around a monster without an AoO. After pointing out the shift and walk actions they admitted that they either forgot or were playing it wrong without noticing. Do even though a variant rule of "you could optionally choose to remove opportunity attacks for moving from one threatened square to another" would accomplish 5e AoOs I as a gm need to design much more complex encounters with many more baddies if I don't want my pcs to simply walk past the guards and nooks to gank the bbeg they work for

You may not agree, that does not make the statement incorrect.

I have no idea what you're talking about with OAs. Just have the BBEG a little further away. I've regularly had the bad guys run around the front line PCs in all editions, unless you use the optional flanking rules nothing much as changed.

You're entitled to your opinion, but maybe PF2 would be a better fit.

 

[JeffB]

As a DM, I'd rather have the work done for me when it comes to interesting monster abilities. That's what I am paying someone to do. It doesn't have to be complex. But it does need to be interesting. 13TH Age is a perfect example of interesting and varied monster design without beating a DM over the head with complexity (though certainly other parts of the game are designed with experience in mind, Monster design was specifically built that way).

5E sorely lacks in this and it is one of my biggest hang-ups with the system, Yes, as written the monster's are ieasy. But there are no "advanced" MM's or much (if any) guidance on making unique interesting monsters and adding fun/varied abilities to them in any meaningful way (as another poster alluded to, above) As DMs become better or for those of us who are not beginners it's still Bland monsters or build from scratch on the WOTC menu.

Certainly, in older editions we had much the same. But 5E took a big step backwards from 4E, and I'm sure that is why the Company and Products I linked to above are such massive sellers for 5E fans.