D&D 5E Kobold Preview

[The Mirrorball Man]

You seem to be saying that unless a specific power is listed, then these differences don't exist. That's bullocks, to be honest. They do exist, and are explicity pointed out for you.

What we're saying - I think - is that throwing generic fluff ideas is one thing, but what we expect from game designers is to turn these ideas into rules, to test these rules, and when they're confident that they work, to print them in the book (the rulebook) so that we can use them as we see fit. I know that kobolds are shifty and cowardly. If I'm the one who has to do the work to turn these things into rules, then I'd better play Fudge, not Dungeons & Dragons. Is that so hard to understand?

 

[Sacrosanct]

Well, by people, you mean [MENTION=13009]Paraxis[/MENTION]. It's no fun to passive-aggressively call people out..

Not just him, that's why I said "people" and not just one person, and "people" is one word to type out rather than a list.

 

[TwoSix]

You seem to be saying that unless a specific power is listed, then these differences don't exist. That's bullocks, to be honest. They do exist, and are explicity pointed out for you.

They exist in fluff, but I personally am not buying the MM for the fluff. I'm buying it to be able to turn to a page or two and find a ready to run monster that isn't a sack of HP and a basic attack. There are plenty of monsters in the MM that aren't like that, why not extend that to some of the basic humanoids that make up proportionally so many encounters?

 

[Sacrosanct]

What we're saying - I think - is that throwing generic fluff ideas is one thing, but what we expect from game designers is to turn these ideas into rules, to test these rules, and when they're confident that they work, to print them in the book (the rulebook) so that we can use them as we see fit. I know that kobolds are shifty and cowardly. If I'm the one who has to do the work to turn these things into rules, then I'd better play Fudge, not Dungeons & Dragons.

The rules already exist. Do you want each monster stat block to repeat the same rule on how a clay pot trap works? do you need each monsters stat block to repeat the same rule on how to use an item?

Is that so hard to understand?

Indeed...

 

[The Mirrorball Man]

The rules already exist. Do you want each monster stat block to repeat the same rule on how a clay pot trap works? do you need each monsters stat block to repeat the same rule on how to use an item?

No, I want options. I want tools that I can use. Right there on the page. And stop pretending that you don't understand what I'm talking about: I'm talking about things that were there in the 3E MM, that were front and center in the 4E MM, and that, apparently, exist in other entries in the 5E MM. Is that clear enough? I want those things because they make my life easier as a DM and that's the reason why I buy these books, NOT because I want a writer to write fluff about Kobolds. You may not agree, but pretending that you don't understand or that it's somehow odd that some people would want these things doesn't help your case.

 

[TwoSix]

The rules already exist. Do you want each monster stat block to repeat the same rule on how a clay pot trap works? do you need each monsters stat block to repeat the same rule on how to use an item?

Yes, if it's something the monster commonly does. Obviously the tarrasque entry doesn't need rules for item use.

 

[steeldragons]

Can someone (or several people ) throw some XP at [MENTION=15700]Sacrosanct[/MENTION] please...for, pretty much everything he's posted in this thread.

I'm busy "spreading it around."

Thanks.

 

[Sacrosanct]

They exist in fluff, but I personally am not buying the MM for the fluff. I'm buying it to be able to turn to a page or two and find a ready to run monster that isn't a sack of HP and a basic attack. There are plenty of monsters in the MM that aren't like that, why not extend that to some of the basic humanoids that make up proportionally so many encounters?

"I'm not buying the book for fluff. I'm buying the book for things that make monsters interesting."




I guess that's a mindset I can't grasp (note: not implying it's "wrong"). IMO, the fluff is what makes the monster interesting. I don't need, nor want, each monster to have stat blocks that take up valuable real estate for pretty much the same thing. I already know how the rules work from other areas.

so it seems very odd to me to hear someone say that monsters are boring when they have this detailed:

"kobolds are shifty and crafty, often utilizing clever traps such as clay pots of burning oil or baskets of giant centepedes"

but somehow are not boring if the above is missing, but has this instead:

"claypot of oil: 5' cube, DC 10 Dex save or 1d8 fire damage"


That is, what makes a monster interesting is how it behaves and tactics it might use. Not a stat block that says it uses item X when I could have inferred that (and much more) anyway from the flavor text. Also, if you have stat blocks like the examples Paraxis gave earlier, it implies that's the only thing kobolds can do. Whereas if you give guideance that kobolds behave a certain way instead, it implies they will use anything handy, and not just those specifically called out options. That, and I don't want half the monsters because the page count for each doubles. Not when it's not needed.


Obviously our opinions are vastly different.

 

[The Mirrorball Man]

I guess that's a mindset I can't grasp (note: not implying it's "wrong"). IMO, the fluff is what makes the monster interesting.

Let's see things from a different perspective. I already own the D&D Basic Set, the Rules Cyclopedia, the 1E MM, the 2E MM, the 3E MM, the 4E MM, and the Monster Vault. I have seven different descriptions of what a Kobold is. Why would I need another one? I can just read any of these entries and come up with the crunch numbers on my own. What's in it for me?

 

[Zaukrie]

Not if the rules say, here some examples, but not the only things they do. By your logic, since it lists standard bullets, that is all they can do. And, they're are no tactics anymore, like in previous monster books. I doubt either side is cunning their mind. Some of us want more options, or ideas, some do not. I have a hard time understanding how giving new DMs the benefit of 40 yeasts of ideas is a bad is, obviously, some disagree.