Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Li Shenron" data-source="post: 9497973" data-attributes="member: 1465">I didn't have the impression that the 5.0 DMG rules for building encounters of a wanted difficulty and for creating new monsters have been exactly popular in the last 10 years. And now that the 5.5 DMG content is getting revealed, there are already discussions about how once again encounters build and monsters creation rules aren't good enough once again. I think WotC designers have mentioned that they actually took good effort to "revise" these rules for the new DMG, which got me thinking... what exactly does it mean they "revised" them? <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> I know it sounds like a dumb question, but bear with me...For sure WotC does create encounters in their published adventures and monsters in most of their manuals. Therefore, WotC at least has been using a method for doing these things. It doesn't necessarily mean they use rules, but they aren't just doing it randomly. But do the DMG rules really match with the methods WotC use in their published material?If indeed the DMG rules or guidelines are the same as what they use, this presumably is the result of 10 years of designing adventure encounters and monsters for this edition: what really did they have to work on so hard for the new DMG, other than simply put in words the method they already use? If on the other hand the DMG rules are something else, well the question is why are they even coming up with something like that instead of just telling us how they do it? This made sense back in 2014 when they had to write a DMG before actually designing many adventures and their encounters, and before knowing well enough if the MM entries were balanced enough, but after 10 years they should just either know how, or know they don't know how.I can imagine that some of you at this point are already thinking, that maybe WotC doesn't really use any "rules" because building encounters and creating monsters "are an art, not a science". Well then, why doesn't WotC very honestly say so in the DMG? If the book's purpose is to teach people how to be an effective DM, and the truth is that you can't define "rules" for certain stuff, then it would be a good idea to teach that as well.</blockquote>

Verification