D&D 5E (2024) Mike Mearls explains why your boss monsters die too easily

[EzekielRaiden]

So 3 attacks per ghoul per round that had like a 50% Chance to inflict paralysis?
Damn.

Two attacks, claw-claw. But yes, two attacks. If both hit, each had a chance to inflict the save.

 

[M_Natas]

Two attacks, claw-claw. But yes, two attacks. If both hit, each had a chance to inflict the save.

Now I may run those ghoul ^^.

To restat the current ghoul and with saving throws in mind - it gets Multiattack back, 1 claw attacks, +4 to hit, doing 1d4+2 damage and DC12 or maybe 13 con save.l for paralysis. 3 of those shod have a decent chance to paralysis 2 PCs (levels 1 to 4) per round if they get into melee range.

 

[Maxperson]

Of course, as I said back when it was still the incredibly stupidly-named "One D&D" playtest, 5.5e won't have the longevity 5.0 had. Revisions are always diminishing returns. 3rd edition got three of them (3.5, PF1e, PF1e "Unchained"), and none of them lasted more than ~5 ish years. That does mean that they managed to squeeze like 15 years of continuous active development out of iterations on a single theme....but it also means that 15-ish years is about all you can expect out of a single game. Contra Zardnaar's position on this, I don't think iterating on a flawed engine actually makes much progress, for the very reason you cite--major changes will always be resisted, no matter how useful or even necessary they might be.

While I agree with your general premise, I don't think the bolded necessarily follows. One example isn't enough to establish a pattern. I think that 3e/3.5e/Pathfinder 1e/Pathfinder 1e Unchained all pumped out products at an incredible pace, and that contributed to shortening its lifespan.

 

[Maxperson]

Greyhawk as its own setting book would likely not sell well enough to 5e's current audience and customer base for WOTC.

An Adventure sure. But a generic setting with many fill in the box areas doesn't have the exciting bits to pull the numbers a major publisher would want.

I disagree. Generic fill in the box settings are all WotC is giving us. Every setting has every race and class in it. Magic works the same. And so on.

A unique setting like Dark Sun or Birthright doesn't happen anymore, because they need/want to appeal to the widest audience possible, and that means generic fill in the box.

 

[Parmandur]

While I agree with your general premise, I don't think the bolded necessarily follows. One example isn't enough to establish a pattern. I think that 3e/3.5e/Pathfinder 1e/Pathfinder 1e Unchained all pumped out products at an incredible pace, and that contributed to shortening its lifespan.

I don't think the TTRPG medium is actually old enough to speak of absolute musts or must nots in terms of historical parallels.

A counter example is Call of Cthulu: it has had 7 Editions so far in the past 45 years...but they are about as different as 2014 to 2024 D&D. And that is one of the best selling and widely played RPGs around consistently to this day.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I do, yes.

Because I genuinely believe that a competently-designed game can actually deliver on the real, practical version of the airy-fairy "modularity" that they talked up all througout the "D&D Next" playtest, which then was 90% DOA when the books finally arrived.

What evidence do you have that WotC is at all interested in doing the sort of rigorous design and playtesting needed to make the game you want? It's not a matter of can the designers do it. It's a matter of will their corporate masters see the short-term profit they require to change course in any significant way.

 

[Parmandur]

I disagree. Generic fill in the box settings are all WotC is giving us. Every setting has every race and class in it. Magic works the same. And so on.

A unique setting like Dark Sun or Birthright doesn't happen anymore, because they need/want to appeal to the widest audience possible, and that means generic fill in the box.

Soooo...

Providing utterly different Settings down to having different magic systems is also something the Plotweaver engine behind the Cosmere RPG is designed to do. Word is that the generic version coming to Kickstarter in 2026 will come with methods to create new magic systems for a homebrew Setting, even.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Greyhawk as its own setting book would likely not sell well enough to 5e's current audience and customer base for WOTC.

An Adventure sure. But a generic setting with many fill in the box areas doesn't have the exciting bits to pull the numbers a major publisher would want.

Probably, but I'm talking about a better product, not a better profit margin.

 

[TwoSix]

A level 5 wizard.

A level 5 wizard has 4 1st level spells, 3 2nd level spell, and 2 3rd level spells along with the ability to regain 3 levels of spells.

They wake up from a long rest with that. This is under the expectation of having 20 combat rounds.

But nothing stops them from burning all that magic in 8 rounds.

We are all focused on fixing the rest

But no one questions why we start they with 9 magic bullets in the first place.

Why not start them with 3 then give the other 6 later.

Like a warlock?

D&D "challenge" would absolutely work better if the warlock charge model was the standard.