D&D 5E How much magic do you have in your game?

[Laurefindel]

I only really played 1E and 2E before (and older versions), my experience with 3E was very limited and I never even looked at 4E.

So, I can only compare the bloat to the editions I know. In which case, 5E has severe bloat (e.g. an Ogre going from AC "15"/HP 19 to AC 11/ HP 59!).

@dave2008 has a point however; whether 5e suffers from hp bloat has little to do with bounded accuracy*. Hp bloat has been a thing for the last 20 years (since 2e AD&D really), the fact that you haven't experienced 3rd or 4th editions doesn't change that.

*except in the lower range of creatures; orcs and goblins and kobolds don't have just 4 or 5 hp anymore. Upper level creatures now have less hp than their 3e counterparts however, so bounded accuracy does have an impact on hp in an attempt to "flatten en curve", but not in straight hp bloat.

And as stated earlier, the "bag of hp" syndrome of 5e has less to do with the fact that monsters have a lot of hp, and more with the fact that they don't have much (in terms of abilities) outside their hp. A flaw I wished they addressed, but not one attributable to bounded accuracy.

 

[DND_Reborn]

@dave2008 has a point however; whether 5e suffers from hp bloat has little to do with bounded accuracy*. Hp bloat has been a thing for the last 20 years (since 2e AD&D really), the fact that you haven't experienced 3rd or 4th editions doesn't change that.

Respectfully, I disagree. As I have discovered from my house-rule experiment, there is a direct tie between HP and AC (i.e. bounded accuracy).

Changes made in 2E, to creatures such as dragons, was to make the creatures harder to kill, not because of "bloat". Creatures such as Ogres, remained the exact same from 1E to 2E. As far as 3E is concerned, it was nearly 15 years ago when I played it (for less than a year) so my memory isn't so good on that. I seem to recall both ACs and HP getting out of hand.

As I understand it, bounded accuracy was to stop the escalation treadmill race between attack bonuses and higher ACs. The theory was AC would stop around 25, allowing many lower CR creatures a chance to still be a threat over the long run. However, to compensate for the fact you would get hit more often, they had to make things tougher, so they boosted HP to compensate (hence, the bloat). To keep things on par with HP bloat, bonuses to damage are more freely accepted than bonuses to attack rolls.

When you fight something, you are either harder to hit (high AC) or can take more hits (high HP) -- truly hard things are high in both. If you want to keep ACs lower (and reasonable within the design of BA) but make things harder to kill, your easiest option is to increase HP (resulting in bloat).

And as stated earlier, the "bag of hp" syndrome of 5e has less to do with the fact that monsters have a lot of hp, and more with the fact that they don't have much (in terms of abilities) outside their hp.

What abilities would they have that would make them harder to defeat?

Defense in D&D comes in three forms: AC, HP, and saves. Saves are not universally applicable and are the "other side" of AC in many ways. HP is no universal either, but often the most applicable in improving defenses. Other abilities, such as resistances, are mere reflections on HP.

And regardless, the "bag of hp" syndrome is still there.

 

[dave2008]

And as stated earlier, the "bag of hp" syndrome of 5e has less to do with the fact that monsters have a lot of hp, and more with the fact that they don't have much (in terms of abilities) outside their hp. A flaw I wished they addressed, but not one attributable to bounded accuracy.

I agree with the sentiment, but I will say a lot of WotC monsters have become more interesting in books after the MM. Some MM monsters are pretty interesting too.

 

[dave2008]

As I understand it, bounded accuracy was to stop the escalation treadmill race between attack bonuses and higher ACs. The theory was AC would stop around 25, allowing many lower CR creatures a chance to still be a threat over the long run. However, to compensate for the fact you would get hit more often, they had to make things tougher, so they boosted HP to compensate (hence, the bloat).

This is an incorrect statement though. Bloat happened 2 editions prior, at least, to BA existing in D&D. So the bloat was not because of BA. BA just made it easier to deal with because you hit a lot, thus you do a lot of damage, and the effective HP bloat is actually less compared to at least 4e and probably 3e too (but I didn't play that edition).

What abilities would they have that would make them harder to defeat?

Defense in D&D comes in three forms: AC, HP, and saves. Saves are not universally applicable and are the "other side" of AC in many ways. HP is no universal either, but often the most applicable in improving defenses. Other abilities, such as resistances, are mere reflections on HP.

And regardless, the "bag of hp" syndrome is still there.

Abilities that allow a creature to avoid being locked down, doing enough damage to be threat, methods to do more things beside straight damage. Attacks that inflict conditions or force movement. There are lots of ways to make monsters more interesting (and tougher) that don't include HP or AC.

Many of the MM monsters have few or no traits and simply have one attack with B, P, or S damage. That is what creates a "bag-of-HP," not simply more HP.

 

[dave2008]

What abilities would they have that would make them harder to defeat?

Here are few that 5e already uses:

Nimble Escape. The goblin can take the Disengage or Hide action as a bonus action on each of its turns.

Blurred Movement. Attack rolls against the quickling have disadvantage unless the quickling is incapacitated or restrained.

Evasion. If the quickling is subjected to an effect that allows it to make a Dexterity saving throw to take only half damage, it instead takes no damage if it succeeds on the saving throw, and only half damage if it fails.

Reckless. At the start of its turn, the minotaur can gain advantage on all melee weapon attack rolls it makes during that turn, but attack rolls against it have advantage until the start of its next turn.

Charge. If the minotaur moves at least 10 feet straight toward a target and then hits it with a gore attack on the same turn, the target takes an extra 9 (2d8) piercing damage. If the target is a creature, it must succeed on a DC 14 Strength saving throw or be pushed up to 10 feet away and knocked prone.

Undead Fortitude. If damage reduces the zombie to 0 hit points, it must make a Constitution saving throw with a DC of 5 + the damage taken, unless the damage is radiant or from a critical hit. On a success, the zombie drops to 1 hit point instead.

Avoidance. If the demilich is subjected to an effect that allows it to make a saving throw to take only half damage, it instead takes no damage if it succeeds on the saving throw, and only half damage if it fails.

Legendary Resistance (3/Day). If the demilich fails a saving throw, it can choose to succeed instead.

Rampage. When the gnoll reduces a creature to 0 hit points with a melee attack on its turn, the gnoll can take a bonus action to move up to half its speed and make a bite attack.

Longbow. Ranged Weapon Attack: +4 to hit, range 150/600 ft., one target. Hit: 6 (1d8 + 2) piercing damage, and the target’s speed is reduced by 10 feet until the end of its next turn.

Pack Tactics. The wolf has advantage on attack rolls against a creature if at least one of the wolf's allies is within 5 feet of the creature and the ally isn't incapacitated.

Pounce. If the tiger moves at least 20 feet straight toward a creature and then hits it with a claw attack on the same turn, that target must succeed on a DC 13 Strength saving throw or be knocked prone. If the target is prone, the tiger can make one bite attack against it as a bonus action.

Magic Resistance. The slaad has advantage on saving throws against spells and other magical effects.

Stench. Any creature other than a troglodyte that starts its turn within 5 feet of the troglodyte must succeed on a DC 12 Constitution saving throw or be poisoned until the start of the creature’s next turn. On a successful saving throw, the creature is immune to the stench of all troglodytes for 1 hour.

 

[DND_Reborn]

This is an incorrect statement though. Bloat happened 2 editions prior, at least, to BA existing in D&D. So the bloat was not because of BA. BA just made it easier to deal with because you hit a lot, thus you do a lot of damage, and the effective HP bloat is actually less compared to at least 4e and probably 3e too (but I didn't play that edition).

If bloat was an issue in 3E and 4E, it was for other reasons possibly (maybe PCs were doing too much damage? ), but it doesn't change the fact of the relationship between limited AC and the need for increasing HP. The escalation took on a different path. Instead of rising AC and attack bonuses, it became rising HP and increasing damage.

Here are few that 5e already uses:

Other than the movement features, all of these deal with the same aspects of the game I've already addressed in the three forms of defense. Your examples point out that movement could easily be the fourth form of defense.

• Nimble Escape - movement
• Blurred Movement - effective AC boost
• Evasion - effective HP boost
• Reckless - trade attack boost for AC penalty
• Charge - damage boost
• Undead Fortitude - effective HP boost
• Avoidance - effective HP boost
• Legendary Resistance - save boost
• Rampage - effective damage boost
• Longbow - (homebrew movement penalty)
• Pack Tactics - effective attack boost
• Pounce - effective damage boost
• Magic Resistance - save boost
• Stench - effective AC boost

Although these might be colorful in their fashion, most simply accomplish a limited form of a boost of some nature. In a fashion, they add a complexity to the game (not saying that is good or bad).

My point is regardless of how you achieve it, monsters are just bags of HP meant to be defeated in some fashion. They always have been, but 5E bloated the HP by implementing bounded accuracy (i.e. keeping AC lower). Its a trade-off, one or the other. shrug

 

[dave2008]

If bloat was an issue in 3E and 4E, it was for other reasons possibly (maybe PCs were doing too much damage? ), but it doesn't change the fact of the relationship between limited AC and the need for increasing HP. The escalation took on a different path. Instead of rising AC and attack bonuses, it became rising HP and increasing damage.


Other than the movement features, all of these deal with the same aspects of the game I've already addressed in the three forms of defense. Your examples point out that movement could easily be the fourth form of defense.

• Nimble Escape - movement
• Blurred Movement - effective AC boost
• Evasion - effective HP boost
• Reckless - trade attack boost for AC penalty
• Charge - damage boost
• Undead Fortitude - effective HP boost
• Avoidance - effective HP boost
• Legendary Resistance - save boost
• Rampage - effective damage boost
• Longbow - (homebrew movement penalty)
• Pack Tactics - effective attack boost
• Pounce - effective damage boost
• Magic Resistance - save boost
• Stench - effective AC boost

Although these might be colorful in their fashion, most simply accomplish a limited form of a boost of some nature. In a fashion, they add a complexity to the game (not saying that is good or bad).

My point is regardless of how you achieve it, monsters are just bags of HP meant to be defeated in some fashion. They always have been, but 5E bloated the HP by implementing bounded accuracy (i.e. keeping AC lower). Its a trade-off, one or the other. shrug

Well IMO, there are several issues with your opinion. However, it ultimately comes down to a different viewpoint or opinion and I don't think we are going to agree on this so I will stop here.

I've presented my thoughts, you disagree. That is all there is to it. I do have one question: Why do you call the gnoll hunters longbow attack a "homebrew" movement penalty? That is straight out of VGtM.

 

[dave2008]

If bloat was an issue in 3E and 4E, it was for other reasons possibly (maybe PCs were doing too much damage? ), but it doesn't change the fact of the relationship between limited AC and the need for increasing HP. The escalation took on a different path. Instead of rising AC and attack bonuses, it became rising HP and increasing damage.

One last comment. It is completely possible to have BA without bloat. 5e could have HP more akin to 1e or 2e and retain BA. They can be related, but they don't need to be.

 

[Laurefindel]

Respectfully, I disagree. As I have discovered from my house-rule experiment, there is a direct tie between HP and AC (i.e. bounded accuracy).

Changes made in 2E, to creatures such as dragons, was to make the creatures harder to kill, not because of "bloat". Creatures such as Ogres, remained the exact same from 1E to 2E. As far as 3E is concerned, it was nearly 15 years ago when I played it (for less than a year) so my memory isn't so good on that. I seem to recall both ACs and HP getting out of hand.

As I understand it, bounded accuracy was to stop the escalation treadmill race between attack bonuses and higher ACs. The theory was AC would stop around 25, allowing many lower CR creatures a chance to still be a threat over the long run. However, to compensate for the fact you would get hit more often, they had to make things tougher, so they boosted HP to compensate (hence, the bloat). To keep things on par with HP bloat, bonuses to damage are more freely accepted than bonuses to attack rolls.

When you fight something, you are either harder to hit (high AC) or can take more hits (high HP) -- truly hard things are high in both. If you want to keep ACs lower (and reasonable within the design of BA) but make things harder to kill, your easiest option is to increase HP (resulting in bloat).


What abilities would they have that would make them harder to defeat?

Defense in D&D comes in three forms: AC, HP, and saves. Saves are not universally applicable and are the "other side" of AC in many ways. HP is no universal either, but often the most applicable in improving defenses. Other abilities, such as resistances, are mere reflections on HP.

And regardless, the "bag of hp" syndrome is still there.

AC, to hit bonus, saves, and hp are all interlinked; so yes there is a direct tie, obviously.

Your statement about bounded accuracy's goal to stop the escalation treadmill race between attack bonuses and higher ACs is correct.

The hp bloat compensation however, isn't, at least not over the whole range of creatures. Most "monstrous" humanoid (orcs, goblins, gnolls etc) have more hp than their 3e counterparts because in parallel to bounded accuracy, 5e moved away from the symmetry between PC and "monsters". The basic orc is not a level 1 warrior with 13,12,11,10,9,8 array and orc traits anymore; it's a 2 hit dice creature with no class levels and a custom stat array.

Most other creatures are within 3-7 hp of one another in both editions. A hill giant in 5e has about the same hp (105hp) as 3e version (102 hp), but an attack bonus of +8 (5e )instead of +20 (3.5), and a AC of 13 (5e) vs 20 (3.5). An adult red dragon also have similar hp (256 for 5e vs 253 for 3.5). So assuming their AC went down proportionally to how the PC's attack bonus went down, they remain virtually the same threat. No bloat here.

At least not since 2000. Perhaps you feel their hp are bloated compared to that of the PCs, or compared to their fighting abilities? That is perhaps the case, but the introduction of bounded accuracy didn't prompt the hp of monsters to go higher than their previous iterations in the last two editions preceding this one.

 

[Puddles]

For me I voted cantrips, because it's rare for the party to encounter any friendly spell casters at all, and enemy spell casters usually have 1 or 2 spells and nothing more.

Even cantrips like 'mending' seem to be near miracles to me, and if these were wide spread in the world I think it would very quickly stop resembling a typical late-medieval fantasy world that my players expect.

As soon as the PCs in my campaign had completed their first quest, their magical powers were already revered by the powerful lords of the starting town, a settlement of 1000 that has only 2 NPCs that even "dabble" in spell casting.