D&D (2024) Hobgoblin warriors

[dave2008]

They instead multiattack. Maybe hitting fast does not allow doubling damage dice
And maybe they lose some posion whirling their blades...

Or they don't use poisoned blades? IDK and don't really care that much.

 

[dave2008]

This. I'm definitely not a simulationist to where I'm giving random NPC mooks class levels, but bog-standard humanoids at low levels should all be using a pretty similar baseline of ability. 2d10 on a long sword attack doesn't work for me.

Bespoke mechanics work better on bespoke monsters.

Well it is similar damage to a trait hobgoblins had in 2014:

Also, it is similar damage to PCs using a maneuver. It doesn't seem that crazy to me. Though the simulationist portion of me would prefer it was 2d8.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Or they don't use poisoned blades? IDK and don't really care that much.

Oh. My mistake. Drawing their arrows too fast...

 

[Ruin Explorer]

FYI, I have been told directly by a person who works on monsters at WotC that they do indeed have a system for deriving CR and that the 2014 DMG guidelines were an attempt (though not 100% successful) to express the system for mass consumption.

I believe that, but I also would suggest it's truly ludicrous that they don't think we're fit to be privy to the actual system, and decided to "express it for mass consumption" lol.

Also, I'm not convinced whatever internal system they have is very good, if they're really sticking to it lol. Whereas the 4E system was incredibly, almost disturbingly reliable (once the math got fixed), and so workable you didn't even need to know it, you could literally have the DDI do it for you when making new monsters or adjusting old ones.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Well it is similar damage to a trait hobgoblins had in 2014:

View attachment 395413

Also, it is similar damage to PCs using a maneuver. It doesn't seem that crazy to me. Though the simulationist portion of me would prefer it was 2d8.

Being similar to an earlier trait that was also bad is not good.

And if it's meant to be a manuever, it should have some fiction for why it's so high.

 

[TwoSix]

Well it is similar damage to a trait hobgoblins had in 2014:

View attachment 395413

Also, it is similar damage to PCs using a maneuver. It doesn't seem that crazy to me. Though the simulationist portion of me would prefer it was 2d8.

I'm fine with "sneak attack with any weapon" as a general bonus humanoid trait. But I don't want it to be 2d6 on a 2 HD creature, they should be at least 3 HD for that (since a 3rd level rogue does 2d6 sneak).

As a general rule, I don't let humanoid creatures (NPCs that seem roughly analagous to PCs) break the normal boundaries of what a PC class could accomplish at that level (or if they do, there are heavy tradeoffs involved), although I don't "give them a class" or anything like that.

 

[Chaltab]

The poison damage on the bow is a bit much but (crits are going to kill characters) but it's otherwise pretty much the same as the 2014 version: 18 AC, 11 HP, 13 average melee damage.

 

[Charlaquin]

The 2014 MM had a trait called "Brute" that doubled weapon damage dice. I know bugbears had it before among others. So this is just like the "brute" trait, but not spelled out - which is the 2024 trend

Yeah, I think it’s the same as some monsters having an unexplained initiative bonus. They probably figured it wasn’t worth the multiple lines of text in the stat block telling you the creature has a bonus that still has to be written into the stats anyway.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

The poison damage on the bow is a bit much but (crits are going to kill characters) but it's otherwise pretty much the same as the 2014 version: 18 AC, 11 HP, 13 average melee damage.

No. Hit chance is way higher (advantage) or damage is way higher, because they git their extra damage only in those cases where they now have advantage.

Lets compare damage in both cases:

Assume PC with AC 16. Disregarding crits.

Without advantage:
2014: 0.4*5.5 damage = 2.2 damage
2024: 0.4*12 damage = 4.8 damage

This is more than a 100% increase.

With an ally next to the target, (martial advantage/pack tactics -> advantage) :
2014: 0.4*12.5 damage = 5 damage
2024: (1-0.6^2) * 12 damage = 7.7 damage

That is still more than a 50% increase.

If you roll, the longbow actually has an average of 13 damage. So 5.2 without and 8.3 with advantage.

So again. Whoever says the hobgoblin was not significantly buffed is lying or not doing math.

 

[TwoSix]

Yeah, I think it’s the same as some monsters having an unexplained initiative bonus. They probably figured it wasn’t worth the multiple lines of text in the stat block telling you the creature has a bonus that still has to be written into the stats anyway.

At the end of the day, you either trust them to put in whatever numbers they think work, OR you want to see an algorithm from which those numbers are derived.

And without seeing a stated algorithm (like the monster design of 3e), people who want the assurances of a formula try to derive an algorithm from a data set (the MM) that may not even use an algorithm at all!