D&D 5E Expansion Rules Gift Sets start to show up in the wild.

I am still not very fond of the new spell like abilities and how they work with magic resistance and counterspell.

But since they are usually just damage spells, countering them is not that crucial.

Right now I just rationalize it by assuming that NPCs have some kind of signature spell trait that makes them able to cast those spells subtlety and lets them bypass magic resistance.
I mean PCs have similar kind of abilites that NPCs won't ever get.

Also having NPC spells on a different recharge mechanic seems fine, as otherwise they have a lot more flexibility as a PC caster. Actually I might try to hae som kind of restriction against casti g the same spell over and over again for prepared spwllcasters.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Azzy

KMF DM
So, for those that know, is Mordekainen's also going to include class items (and I suppose the races from it as well while we are at it) from SCAG or is that something we still should get separately if we are buying a new set of books?
No, the new Mordy book won't be including any class stuff, nor any SCAG races that weren't already reprinted in Volo's or the first Mordenkainen's book. Though there isn't much left, mechanically, from SCAG that hasn't already been reprinted.
 

pukunui

Legend
So has anyone who has the book done a comprehensive comparison of the new monster stats bs the old ones? I want to know what all is different.
 

Li Shenron

Legend
I don't care what spell slots or recharge rules monsters and NPC use, but if it is true that suddenly they're not counterspellable anymore, then it sounds like a serious oversight. One that makes me wonder how they playtested this material or if the designers are even currently playing the game they're selling
 

I don't care what spell slots or recharge rules monsters and NPC use, but if it is true that suddenly they're not counterspellable anymore, then it sounds like a serious oversight. One that makes me wonder how they playtested this material or if the designers are even currently playing the game they're selling
I would assume the utility spells they have and what not can be counterspellable. It's the "Spell-Like Attacks," such as the Drow Matron's Divine Flame attack that seem like it's not counterspellable.

Despite, ya know, the Drow Matron having a hella spell sounding name such as Divine Flame for an attack.
 

vincegetorix

Jewel of the North
I dont understand the whole ''but they are now not counterspell-able!!'' thing.

It's not new that creatures had spell-like abilities that can be counterspelled. As an example:
(First click on my data base, no need to look for more than 1 second)

Balor: Can teleport 120 feet and conjure demons.
Aboleth: Enslave (aka Dominate Person)
Formorian: Evil Eye (aka Bestow Curse)


A wizard cant counterspell those effects.
 

I don't care what spell slots or recharge rules monsters and NPC use, but if it is true that suddenly they're not counterspellable anymore, then it sounds like a serious oversight. One that makes me wonder how they playtested this material or if the designers are even currently playing the game they're selling
I believe they see this as a feature, so that the most important aspects of a monster meeting its CR can't just be shut down by Counterspell. Spellcasting monsters still have other effects that can be. Whether or not this is a good thing is, of course, up to the user.
 


SkidAce

Legend
I dont understand the whole ''but they are now not counterspell-able!!'' thing.

It's not new that creatures had spell-like abilities that can be counterspelled. As an example:
(First click on my data base, no need to look for more than 1 second)

Balor: Can teleport 120 feet and conjure demons.
Aboleth: Enslave (aka Dominate Person)
Formorian: Evil Eye (aka Bestow Curse)


A wizard cant counterspell those effects.
For me, thats not the problem. (i.e. creature special abilities)

Its when they take an obvious character class that is casting a spell, and change it to a special ability. And I don't mind some characters/npcs having special abilities, its just when they changed it from a spell to an ability for a "meta" reason.

BL, if the players are facing a "classed" "spellcasting" spellcaster, then I expect counterspell and such tactics to be effective.

side note: if getting special abilities that cant be countered are so effective, such such as an ability Fire Blast replacing a spell Fireball, you would think all the cool kids in the evocation school would do it, i.e. the PC classes.
 

Stormonu

Legend
Most of the changes to stat blocks over the years have been good changes, but I think the spellcasting changes are not. I'd be glad to see the primary spells/abilities they would most likely use expanded in the block themselves so I don't have to hunt them down in the middle of a combat (as well as notated as an actual spell & level its cast at for counterspell/dispel/ect.), but I'd also like to see somewhere in the entry their "full" spell list (maybe in one of those green note blocks) for general (non-combat) encounters, or if I want to do some swapping about.
 




ad_hoc

(he/they)
Monnsters of the Multiverse

42610579-B9A9-494E-B546-5217B4E5A5B0.jpeg
 

Honestly the decision to replace the magic weapons trait with force damage is such a ridiculously terrible idea that it's moved me to the "probably won't buy" camp. Making a change that severely nerfs the core shtick of the Barbarian class doesn't bode well for other design decisions.
 

Honestly the decision to replace the magic weapons trait with force damage is such a ridiculously terrible idea that it's moved me to the "probably won't buy" camp. Making a change that severely nerfs the core shtick of the Barbarian class doesn't bode well for other design decisions.
It’s the same as if the magic weapon trait worked in barbs, but it’s not just force damage.
Not that I mind rage damage resistance being weakened a bit.
 

pukunui

Legend
I really would like it if WotC opened up and explained their reasoning behind all these changes.* They should do an AMA on Reddit.

*Not because I’m necessarily opposed to any of the changes but because I’m curious and like to know how things work. (As a kid, I drove my older siblings crazy asking “why” all the time.)
 

Honestly the decision to replace the magic weapons trait with force damage is such a ridiculously terrible idea that it's moved me to the "probably won't buy" camp. Making a change that severely nerfs the core shtick of the Barbarian class doesn't bode well for other design decisions.
Orcus still does bludgeoning damage.
So having a type of monsters that cuts through barbarian resistance can be seen as a feature.
 



Level Up!

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top