D&D 5E Monsters taking PC classes: I want it in Next.

slobster

Hero
4th edition design covers one area of generating monster and I find that it's not enough. If I want fast monsters on the fly then yes it's good but it doesn't provide enough in-depth building for my tastes.

The joy about "organic design" is the fact that it can be anything from simple to complex depending on the way you want to build your monsters. "Plug and Play" monster building is fine but I find it can be very limiting when I want to more depth.

What about 4E monster design meant that you couldn't take your time and lovingly craft a detailed monster? Just because you can deliver a playable opponent for your PCs in five minutes doesn't mean you have to stop there. If it doesn't deliver what you want from it yet, continue to modify and tweak it. If it does deliver what you want, where's the problem?

A system with the option to quickly design a monster doesn't stop you from taking your time. A system where you have to take your time to make a monster means that you can't just make one quickly.

Guess which one I prefer. :)
 

log in or register to remove this ad

ForeverSlayer

Banned
Banned
What about 4E monster design meant that you couldn't take your time and lovingly craft a detailed monster? Just because you can deliver a playable opponent for your PCs in five minutes doesn't mean you have to stop there. If it doesn't deliver what you want from it yet, continue to modify and tweak it. If it does deliver what you want, where's the problem?

A system with the option to quickly design a monster doesn't stop you from taking your time. A system where you have to take your time to make a monster means that you can't just make one quickly.

Guess which one I prefer. :)

It's not about taking your time, it's about the monster design and the rules overall in general.

I can take my time with any set of rules so that's not the issue here. 3rd edition has a quick monster creation option so it presents both which is what I like.
 

Magil

First Post
It's not about taking your time, it's about the monster design and the rules overall in general.

I can take my time with any set of rules so that's not the issue here. 3rd edition has a quick monster creation option so it presents both which is what I like.

The monster creation rules for 3.5 include such fiddling things as picking out spells and feats, assigning skill points, etc. I'm looking at the rules in the MM right now and they are not what I'd call quick, particular if you don't have a lot of basic feats memorized. 4E's monster creation rules are much more concise and just as effective.
 

ForeverSlayer

Banned
Banned
The monster creation rules for 3.5 include such fiddling things as picking out spells and feats, assigning skill points, etc. I'm looking at the rules in the MM right now and they are not what I'd call quick, particular if you don't have a lot of basic feats memorized. 4E's monster creation rules are much more concise and just as effective.

And if you are looking at the MM then you will notice that there aren't many feats for monsters to choose from. You don't have to use other feats for monsters but they are there if you decide to.

Unless you are randomly giving your spellcaster spells then you have a pretty good idea what spells you want and the PHB has them all listed out before you get to the spell descriptions so it's not like you have to go digging for them.

I like feats and I like the way they work with monsters. 4th edition monsters don't have feats and I don't like that.
 

Lanefan

Victoria Rules
I'm not sure if anyone has brought this up but it's something that I really hope makes a come back to D&D Next. I loved back in 3rd edition where I could take a class or even a PrC and add it to a monster.

I have had anything from Ogre Wizards to Half-Celestial Satyr Bards and I liked it. I do not want to see 4th edition's monster design because I just didn't like it. I like when monsters and PC's read off the same hymn sheet because it allows me to use PC classes and PrC's very easily.

Discuss.
I've always found at least in 1e that it's trivially easy to just tack some levels on to a monster if and when it makes sense.

Want a Frost Giant Cleric? Assuming Frosties have a deity in your setting (Clerics without deities are kinda pointless) just give one some wisdom and some Cleric levels. It's still a Frost Giant and can still whale you senseless with its axe; but it can cure itself as well, and have a brief chat with you after you're dead!

Most if not all Leprechauns in my games have a level or three of Thief to 'em - it just makes sense! :) And all Drow are trained to at least 5th level of magic use while in school, much the same as we are all trained to read and write in the real world - it's just a cultural expectation.

Ogre Wizard is a tougher sell for me - the minimum Int. for a Wizard in my game is 9, and the racial max. for Ogres is about...well, 9. That's why they invented the Ogre Mage. :)

Some classes are just not really suited for monsters no matter how you spin it. What monster could ever be a Cavalier, for example; or a Monk? And some monsters are not suited for any classes. Dire Wolf Ranger? Displacer Beast Bard? I don't think so.

Lanefan
 

ForeverSlayer

Banned
Banned
I've always found at least in 1e that it's trivially easy to just tack some levels on to a monster if and when it makes sense.

Want a Frost Giant Cleric? Assuming Frosties have a deity in your setting (Clerics without deities are kinda pointless) just give one some wisdom and some Cleric levels. It's still a Frost Giant and can still whale you senseless with its axe; but it can cure itself as well, and have a brief chat with you after you're dead!

Most if not all Leprechauns in my games have a level or three of Thief to 'em - it just makes sense! :) And all Drow are trained to at least 5th level of magic use while in school, much the same as we are all trained to read and write in the real world - it's just a cultural expectation.

Ogre Wizard is a tougher sell for me - the minimum Int. for a Wizard in my game is 9, and the racial max. for Ogres is about...well, 9. That's why they invented the Ogre Mage. :)

Some classes are just not really suited for monsters no matter how you spin it. What monster could ever be a Cavalier, for example; or a Monk? And some monsters are not suited for any classes. Dire Wolf Ranger? Displacer Beast Bard? I don't think so.

Lanefan

I had an ogre come across a Headband of Intellect then learned to be a wizard.

What's stopping an orc from being a cavalier, or a hobgoblin?

There are several races that could be great monks. Satyr, medusa, Erinyes etc...
 

Ratskinner

Adventurer
"Generally speaking" is a loose term that can be read several ways. I don't play, nor do I run a lot of "story" based games where PC's are protagonists. They have the same amount of equality when it comes to succeeding as well as failure. There are other "adventurer's" out in the world and sometimes the enemy does win, and not because I wrote it that way but because the dice wasn't with the PC's during specific encounters and they lost. I don't want "all" non PC's to follow a universal "built for combat" style of design and I don't want to have to sit there and scratch my head when it comes to coming up with something the creatures can do out of combat.

No point in your list here demands that PCs and their opponents be constructed by the same rules.
 


Henry

Autoexreginated
I REALLY missed a quick and easy monster design system in 3.x. Not even pathfinder really has one. Frankly, I would be glad to see both a formulaic system ( a la 4th edition) as well as a custom monster option as in 3E, for those who prefer it. For me, I want to be able to make a monster from scratch for any party, for whom I don't have to pore over its stats for 20 seconds every time I want to know its next action, or how the PC wizard's dispel magic or entangling spell affected it in combat.
 


Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top