5E Does anyone who got an mm at Gencon want to offer up spoilers to us?

charlesearth

Villager
Spoiler 0: The best thing, Hit Points of monsters is way jacked up over the last playtests. These monsters can take hits! My biggest playtest complaint was that monsters died too easily.

Spoiler 2: I was surprised at how different a monster's Hit Dice were from its Challenge Rating. For example: an Ogre is Challenge Rating 2, but has 7d10 Hit Dice. I guess since AC and Hit are flat, all the difficulty comes from the HP and Damage. There are monsters that have Hit Dice over 20. There are a bunch of monsters that have stat scores over 20 also.
I think WoTC seriously underestimated low level characters damage output. At level 3 almost every class can deal huge amounts of damage per turn, even if limited to a few times a day.
 

pemerton

Legend
Lore is interchangeable. If you don't like what they're doing with it, change it.
Sure. But this advice is equally applicable to [MENTION=11697]Shemeska[/MENTION]. And it is not relevant to WotC's decisions as to what lore to include.

It seems to me that wotc went through a lot of trouble to figure out what the majority of players preferred.
You may disagree with how they came to their conclusions, but if the 4e changes are in fact your preference in lore, sadly it looks like you're in the minority.
Why so? Succubi aren't demons. And Rakshasa come from the Hells (which is the plane they were associated with in 1st ed AD&D). It is Shemeska who is complaining about the 5e lore, not me.

I'd dare to say that most of the 4e players outside of those inclined to post to forums are largely unaware or indifferent to most the lore differences, whereas those lost players from other additions are more inclined to dislike or be confused by some of the greater changes.
If lost players from other editions are confused by lore changes, or dislike them, why would 4e players - who presumably are customers that WotC is hoping to retain, on the "bird in the hand" principle - not be confused by, or dislike, lore changes?
 

bogmad

Villager
Sure. But this advice is equally applicable to @Shemeska. And it is not relevant to WotC's decisions as to what lore to include.

Why so? Succubi aren't demons. And Rakshasa come from the Hells (which is the plane they were associated with in 1st ed AD&D). It is Shemeska who is complaining about the 5e lore, not me.

If lost players from other editions are confused by lore changes, or dislike them, why would 4e players - who presumably are customers that WotC is hoping to retain, on the "bird in the hand" principle - not be confused by, or dislike, lore changes?
My point was, I think you're overestimating the degree that 4e players would dislike or be confused by the lore changes. Now, if you're saying they might be confused by the spell system or action economy I'd probably agree with you since I've seen that at the table with people I've played with who never played earlier editions.

Most 4e players haven't spent the time with the lore that older lapsed players have, nor are there as many of them with as strong opinions on lore [outside of forums!] as there are players of other editions.

Of course, that's only my opinion based on my small anecdotal sample size, and may not reflect other's (also-anecdotal) evidence
 

pemerton

Legend
My point was, I think you're overestimating the degree that 4e players would dislike or be confused by the lore changes.

<snip>

Most 4e players haven't spent the time with the lore that older lapsed players have, nor are there as many of them with as strong opinions on lore [outside of forums!] as there are players of other editions.
Fair enough.

For what it's worth, I think that older player forum-ites are probably more concerned with lore than older players more generally. Of the group I play with, all but 1 of the 6 of us has been playing since the early 80s. But I suspect that I'm the only one who even knows what plane a Rakshasa has come from in past editions, and for me the association was The Hells (from MM2), not Acheron (from Planescape).

I don't even know if my players noticed succubi moving from demons to devils - in my experience they tend to think of demons and devils as somewhat interchangeable bad guys, at least until some particular decision in play turns on the details of some particular NPC/monster's origin.
 

Roger

Villager
I'm not sure if there's any way to answer this without typing up the power, but I'll ask anyway: What does the shrieker's shriek actually do? If it's just sort of a handwaved "yeah monsters might show up in they're hanging around nearby" then that's fine.
 

Thaumaturge

thaumaturging
I'm not sure if there's any way to answer this without typing up the power, but I'll ask anyway: What does the shrieker's shriek actually do? If it's just sort of a handwaved "yeah monsters might show up in they're hanging around nearby" then that's fine.
The shriek is audible for 300' and continues for 1d4 rounds. Repercussions seem left up to the DM.

Thaumaturge.
 

TwoSix

Lover of things you hate
For what it's worth, I think that older player forum-ites are probably more concerned with lore than older players more generally. Of the group I play with, all but 1 of the 6 of us has been playing since the early 80s. But I suspect that I'm the only one who even knows what plane a Rakshasa has come from in past editions, and for me the association was The Hells (from MM2), not Acheron (from Planescape).
I think it's a big jump to say that the fact that most veteran players know "something" about the Great Wheel necessarily leads to "all 1e, 2e, and 3e material ever published for the planes must be respected."

There are some broad concepts in the Great Wheel that are pretty critical to the lore of D&D as a whole and should be respected. There's a plane for every alignment and for the in-between alignments. Devils live in the Nine Hells and are Lawful Evil. Demons live in the Abyss and are Chaotic Evil. Celestia is a big mountain with angels in it, and is Lawful Good. (Oh wait, angels are actually any good and live all over the place, and there's a different kind of angel that lives in Celestia. Because reasons.)

But other than that, none of the material is so evocative and memorable that it can't be retconned. The important thing is to preserve that which has made the most impression on the gestalt memory of D&D fandom as a whole. The origin of one particular race of supernatural baddies in a game with a hundred races of supernatural baddies is a concern only of comic-book level pedantry.
 

gyor

Adventurer
Looking at Mousefortu's monster sorter there is a celestial CR 4 creature, the Coutl, and a CR 5 Creature, a Unicorn!

I was expecting the Unicorn to be fey, not a celestial, is there any edition of d&d where the unicorn is a celestial instead of fey?
 

gyor

Adventurer
I just found the answer to my question, according to the SRD there is a type of unicorn called a celestial charger that is a Celestial Unicorn. In 4e I believe the celestial charger was just a celestial horse, but maybe I'm wrong. I remember the Unicorni 4e being a fey being. Of course in 4e elves and gnomes where fey too, and now its just a linger ancestory in elves and nothing in gnomes.

Still its a legendary creature, so when a Cleric or Bard who uses his magical secrets to gain the spell summons it, it should be able to use legendary actions right?
 

Sword of Spirit

Adventurer
As @Lancelot noted, this is a return to 1st ed AD&D lore. The table that @Lancelot refers to is found in MM2 (under the Devil entry). And in Dragon 75, Ed Greenwood's discussion of the 2nd Hell (Dis) refers to the role of rakshasas on that plane.
Well that's okay then.

They can choose their own alignment and lose the immunity to compulsion trait. Modrons should be as PC-race-able as any of the standard MM critters (orcs, lizardmen, etc.). They range from CR 1/8 to CR 2, with the main difference being number of attacks and stats. They all get truesight, which may or may not be an issue. Pentadrones also get a recharging paralysis gas.
Sounds like they're saving the heirarch modrons for later. Given the amount of both fey and exemplar creatures that have been discussed in James Wyatt's Wandering Monsters articles, but which are not in the MM, I really hope they are planning a supplement that includes the rest of them in the very near future (like 2015). Whether it's a Manual of the Planes, or a Planescape Campaign Setting, I don't care. I just want them to finish filling out the planes, and give us those fey we were teased with.
 

Thaumaturge

thaumaturging
Hi

Can someone spoil the Animated object, rug of smothering and the flying sword? Thanks.

-JT
Let's see.

They all have a cool ability "False Appearance", which lets them look like something else from a distance. Other things have this ability, too.

They're susceptible to antimagic.

Animated Armor, CR 1
Flying Sword, CR 1/4
Rug of Smothering, CR 2

Thaumaturge.
 

JTorres

Villager
Thaumaturge
Thanks! A follow-up question: what are the hit dice and the attacks on the rug?


MonsterEnvy
Thanks for the suggestion but, while I found the flying sword, I don't think the rug of smothering is in the basic update.

-JT
 

pemerton

Legend
is there any edition of d&d where the unicorn is a celestial instead of fey?
Well, ki-rin can be seen as a form of unicorn, and they are celestial.

(I see I've been ninja-ed by your self-reply, but thought I'd post this anyway. Also, you are correct that a 4e celestial charger is not a unicorn, just a horse.)
 

Gradine

Archivist
I know a Sahuagin question was answering early (either here or in Morrus's thread) but I'm just wondering in Sahuagin have a unique racial ability similar to the Goblin's Nimble Escape or the Gnoll's Rampage and what that ability might be. Starting my Eberron campaign tomorrow and the little guys play a pretty prominent role.

Edit:
  • Sahuagin (CR 1/2)
  • Sahuagin Priestess (CR 2)
  • Sahuagin Baron (CR 5)

They all get blood frenzy, they have advantage on mêlée attacks against creatures who don't have their full hit points, so ouch. They can also telepathically talk to sharks, and they only need to return to the water every 4 hours or so to avoid suffocation.

Thaumaturge.


Just looked again and found this. Ouch indeed. This should be fun
:]
 
Last edited:

Advertisement

Top