D&D 5E New Spellcasting Blocks for Monsters --- Why?!

[Reynard]

I'm all for winging it when you don't know a rule, just to keep the game going, and for improvisation in general. But I for the life of me can't understand the outright hostility that many folks have for the GM knowing and following the rules, and having a book directed at the GM for applying and adjudicating said rules. If the people that complained about how useless the DMG was actually bothered to read it, they would realize how foolish they sounded. No, it is not comprehensive and not aimed at expert GMs (we need a DMG2 for that) but it isn't a bad or unnecessary book.

Also -- if you are running 5E "exactly like" you ran 1E and 3E, you are doing your game and your players a disservice since all of those are in fact different games.

 

[Vaalingrade]

I'm all for winging it when you don't know a rule, just to keep the game going, and for improvisation in general. But I for the life of me can't understand the outright hostility that many folks have for the GM knowing and following the rules, and having a book directed at the GM for applying and adjudicating said rules. If the people that complained about how useless the DMG was actually bothered to read it, they would realize how foolish they sounded. No, it is not comprehensive and not aimed at expert GMs (we need a DMG2 for that) but it isn't a bad or unnecessary book.

Also -- if you are running 5E "exactly like" you ran 1E and 3E, you are doing your game and your players a disservice since all of those are in fact different games.

I honestly have hostility toward the GM knowing and following the rules because I have read them.

 

[DND_Reborn]

are there still people pro sex based stat mods???? I almost can't believe that... maybe I just don't want to

Yep--in a fashion....

In our mod, females (and male drow) have a slightly lower capacity modifier to the amount they can carry, but their STR can still go to 20, so it doesn't hinder attacks, saves, or ability checks. Females also gain one extra level of exhaustion before feeling any effects (first one is free).

 

[DND_Reborn]

teh only thing I like about it is that it gives weapons things other than damage die... why play a rogue with a knife 1d4 when you can weald the d6 short sword or d8 anarchism? flavor. Why penalize people playing for favor 2pts on average damage? If daggers were faster that would be diffrent... and a choice then.

If you use our critical damage (i.e. exploding damage dice), you are more likely to crit with the d4 dagger than the d6 shortsword, so that helps us to make lower die weapons appealing in some cases. Concealability is also a factor when appropriate.

 

[Reynard]

teh only thing I like about it is that it gives weapons things other than damage die... why play a rogue with a knife 1d4 when you can weald the d6 short sword or d8 anarchism? flavor. Why penalize people playing for favor 2pts on average damage? If daggers were faster that would be diffrent... and a choice then.

I've said this before, perhaps in this very thread, but people ignoring all the fiddly little weapon rules in 1E led directly to at least some of the charges of the fighter being weak and boring. In 1E, played with all those rules engaged, the ability to use every weapon was a big deal.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I've said this before, perhaps in this very thread, but people ignoring all the fiddly little weapon rules in 1E led directly to at least some of the charges of the fighter being weak and boring. In 1E, played with all those rules engaged, the ability to use every weapon was a big deal.

even in 2e there were good reasons to play a fighter... it was 3e that killed the martial characters

 

[Reynard]

even in 2e there were good reasons to play a fighter... it was 3e that killed the martial characters

Not all of them: the rogue got elevated to the point of being the best fighter AND best skill monkey.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Not all of them: the rogue got elevated to the point of being the best fighter AND best skill monkey.

in 3e that was true...

 

[James Gasik]

even in 2e there were good reasons to play a fighter... it was 3e that killed the martial characters

It's weird how that happened, too, since the 3e Fighter has, overall, more stuff than the 2e Fighter. But iterative attack penalties, the loss of the best saves, and the fact that every class got upgrades, and all the Fighter got was the same generic Feats everyone else had (and the fact that Feats couldn't be as strong because the Fighter got so many), and the fact that WotC was loath to fix the class, really led to the downfall of the Fighter.

And then when they finally did something to save martial characters, The Tome of Battle was panned for...uh...reasons.

 

[James Gasik]

Not all of them: the rogue got elevated to the point of being the best fighter AND best skill monkey.

Well their attack bonus was the same as the Cleric's, but only being able to get your Sneak Attack roughly half the time between it's conditions and immunities was kind of rough...