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

[Minigiant]

You might feel like you cant do any of those things or that WotC must do them for you, but I certainly dont. I think its time for you to read the DMG again.

I can do.

The point is people want it to be core rules.

There is no point have any conversation about a DM doing things for themselves.

 

[Yaarel]

I'm not saying my preference I'm saying:

boss monsters die too easily:​

But
You can't nerf spell power
You can't nerf spell quantity
You can't spell flexibility
You can't default to short rests
You can't can't switch to a longer rest schedule
You can't convert to item or gold based resource systems
You introduce new resources
You can't make bosses have flat immunity to low tier features
You can't make bosses have antideath mechanics
You can't give bosses features that counter basic ways to defeat them
You can't make minion monster not use regular monster mechanics

Why can't WOTC just make bosses not die so easy?

If a DM is running an official adventure as-is, then I can understand these issues.

But a DM who is homebrewing the adventure can do whatever the DM wants. A DM can make a boss that is tougher, and add more monsters to reinforce it.

If combat encounters feel generally too easy, the DM can cautiously, gradually, beef them up to find the right amount of challenge (most of the time).

 

[mamba]

So WOTC actually listens to the community, it's their fault

not what I said, as I pointed out they discarded some things that the polls actually approved and did decide some things without ever polling them.

So they are making their own decisions, whether they poll at all or not. So they get the blame for the result. They also get the blame for how naughty word their polling approach is…

 

[payn]

I can do.

The point is people want it to be core rules.

There is no point have any conversation about a DM doing things for themselves.

Some people do. Some people want what you want. Not everyone does. Please speak for yourself.

 

[Yaarel]

I can do.

The point is people want it to be core rules.

There is no point have any conversation about a DM doing things for themselves.

As far as I can tell, the "core rules" for monster math are still evolving. Look how monster updates still see significant changes. It might be too soon to bake rules into core.

 

[mamba]

I prefer the WotC designers consult with the majority of players when designing products. This democracy sotospeak doesnt always go my way.

I did not say they should not poll, I agree they should.

 

[Parmandur]

sure, and yet they decided to not just go with what the UA polls said despite that.

Also, I sure wish they had better polls if they actually want to figure out what preople want and act on it. Their current approach is pretty useless, except for identifying total duds

They do have other standard detailed market research: UA specifically is, in fact, for avoiding dud choices.

 

[AnotherGuy]

Do we have an idea as to why designers make monsters on the easier side?

 

[Mort]

5e mechanics are easier to handle and OP characters are less OP. But actual guidance is pretty crap and was much better in previous editions. I'm pretty sure that my 5e game works as well as it does is because I just imported practices and principles from older editions and other games and I am not shy to houserule.

That actually tracks.

The biggest difference, for me, has been sticking to a more 4e approach to NPC'S, which is still quite easy with 5e. Namely that they just need to serve the purpose they are for. Where 3e really preached designing the monsters and NPCs just like PCs. Which got more and more time consuming!

 

[Maxperson]

I'm not the one arguing that financial success is the one and only standard that ever matters.

Wouldn't the financial success be better if it sold super well for more than 5 years?