cmad1977
Hero
All. Of. Them.
D&D 5E How would you improve monsters?
- Thread starter Morrus
- Start date
All. Of. Them.
They aren't affected "proportionately the same" because a character that has multiple weaker attacks vrs one bigger attack has multiple chances to deal a fraction of their damage while the character who has fewer big strikes is all or nothing. For 5e specifically the character with multiple smaller attacks gets to multiply +n /extra dice weapons and ability mod to damage across each attack for further deck stacking. Resist 50%puts -all- of the benefits towards multiple smaller hits and none of the disadvantages there
Last edited:
Istbor
Dances with Gnolls
He asked what I would change about monsters. That is my answer. If they have to print out more books to give me that variety, which isn't unreasonable, then fine.
I can fiddle around on my own, but if this suggested change makes my life as DM a little easier I will take it.
Otherwise, there is no point in any of us answering what we could change. "Just tweak it yourself and buy more books!"
Bring back OD&D HD-and-stars.
But maybe with tweaks.
5- HD is "5 HD, but weak".
5 HD is "5 HD, normal; tends to be easier to run".
5+ HD is "5 HD, extra tough. Worth double".
5* HD is "5 HD, crazy tough. Worth 4x".
5! HD is "5 HD, trap creature" (like an intellect devourer)
Encounter building becomes adding up HD.
This is also similar to the 4e minion/normal/elite/solo system, except for minions we just tend to use lower HD normal monsters.
The explicit marking of (!) on trap monsters -- swingy or whatever -- is just there to give the DM a sign of possible issues. So they don't stumble on it.
HD doesn't depend on the monster's size under such a system (although it can tend to).
The monster building rules would start with the monster's HD, then tell you if it is a -, normal, + or * based off of its damage output, defences, and HP. You'd have to use your own judgement for !.
Encounter building would take your PCs and map them to a HD total threshold for easy/medium/hard/deadly. DMs would be encouraged to ramp up/down the PC budget based off experience (tactics, build, gear, etc).
---
The monsters themselves, the - + * would align with how complex the creature can be to run.
Explicit squad rules would exist to simplify running "6 goblins"; instead of tracking resources per goblin, they can be per squad, and the squad can even have a morale system. (for example, a goblin could have 1/encounter "force a reroll on an attack; if it misses, counter attack"; doing that for a bunch of goblins sucks. A squad of goblins could have a collective "1 per turn" ability similar to that; less tracking)
The individual goblins remain individual goblins. We just get rules for handing 6 of them at once.
With HP-like morale rules on squads, defeating 6 goblins doesn't have to involve killing all 6. Drop their leader and they lose morale. Kill 2 more, and the goblins break and flee.
---
Like many said, more creatures with 4e like abilities, especially + and * monsters. Normal and - monsters can be more boring when they don't form a squad.
But maybe with tweaks.
5- HD is "5 HD, but weak".
5 HD is "5 HD, normal; tends to be easier to run".
5+ HD is "5 HD, extra tough. Worth double".
5* HD is "5 HD, crazy tough. Worth 4x".
5! HD is "5 HD, trap creature" (like an intellect devourer)
Encounter building becomes adding up HD.
This is also similar to the 4e minion/normal/elite/solo system, except for minions we just tend to use lower HD normal monsters.
The explicit marking of (!) on trap monsters -- swingy or whatever -- is just there to give the DM a sign of possible issues. So they don't stumble on it.
HD doesn't depend on the monster's size under such a system (although it can tend to).
The monster building rules would start with the monster's HD, then tell you if it is a -, normal, + or * based off of its damage output, defences, and HP. You'd have to use your own judgement for !.
Encounter building would take your PCs and map them to a HD total threshold for easy/medium/hard/deadly. DMs would be encouraged to ramp up/down the PC budget based off experience (tactics, build, gear, etc).
---
The monsters themselves, the - + * would align with how complex the creature can be to run.
Explicit squad rules would exist to simplify running "6 goblins"; instead of tracking resources per goblin, they can be per squad, and the squad can even have a morale system. (for example, a goblin could have 1/encounter "force a reroll on an attack; if it misses, counter attack"; doing that for a bunch of goblins sucks. A squad of goblins could have a collective "1 per turn" ability similar to that; less tracking)
The individual goblins remain individual goblins. We just get rules for handing 6 of them at once.
With HP-like morale rules on squads, defeating 6 goblins doesn't have to involve killing all 6. Drop their leader and they lose morale. Kill 2 more, and the goblins break and flee.
---
Like many said, more creatures with 4e like abilities, especially + and * monsters. Normal and - monsters can be more boring when they don't form a squad.
Last edited:
embee
Lawyer by day. Rules lawyer by night.
Not "and."
OR.
There are a ton of third-party books out there that have the variety you're looking for. I use them. Often. Want a goblin shaman? A gnoll witch doctor? A troglodyte myrmidon?
There are any number of them on the market right now. Personally, I recommend MM Expanded. Plus, you're supporting individual hobbyists in their love.
But asking for them to just put a huge variety into the official WOTC MM isn't really viable. The book at present is 350 pages and weighs in at more than 2 1/2 pounds.
You can spend money to have someone do the legwork for you or you can save money and tinker with what's in MM yourself. Goblin shaman? Okay. Increase his CHA, give him Eldritch Blast, etc.
But you're not going to be able to cram the variety that I believe you want into the existing 350 pages at the same price point.
Istbor
Dances with Gnolls
I guess I will ask you for permission to answer another's question in the future. To make sure it is viable and all that.
Swarmkeeper
Hero
Fixed that for you...
Also, I'm with you and do think it is AND. I tweak monsters AND I can't stop buying whatever new WotC monster book or Kobold Press baddie tome is released. Just a taste, they said...
MechaTarrasque
Hero
Not quite what the OP asked for, but I would take out the humanoid monster entries and work them into the NPC classes as examples. Speaking of the NPC classes, there should be blocks for small and medium humanoids.
Add a couple of "here is the monster with a couple of levels of warlock" stat blocks. You can probably get away with half the CR's level of warlock without actually changing the CR value of the monster. Think about it: you can swing your giant sword (with your superhuman strength) three times (from the monster's regular stat block) or cast a single beam of eldritch blast once with your action, how much has the warlock levels added to your CR?
Add a couple of "here is the monster with a couple of levels of warlock" stat blocks. You can probably get away with half the CR's level of warlock without actually changing the CR value of the monster. Think about it: you can swing your giant sword (with your superhuman strength) three times (from the monster's regular stat block) or cast a single beam of eldritch blast once with your action, how much has the warlock levels added to your CR?
CleverNickName
Limit Break Dancing (He/They)
I would love to see a whole slew of monster templates. They are one of the few things I miss about 3rd Edition/Pathfinder.
Similar Threads
- Poll
