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

[Paul Farquhar]

Bounded Accuracy is the core of an (IMO) bad design philosophy.

Speaking as a veteran of 1st, 2nd and 3rd edition, UNbounded accuracy was a much bigger problem.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Speaking as a veteran of 1st, 2nd and 3rd edition, UNbounded accuracy was a much bigger problem.

I'm not saying it wasn't an issue, but I find 'aggressively bland' and 'poor progression pacing' worse than 'unbalanced'.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I'm not saying it wasn't an issue, but I find 'aggressively bland' and 'poor progression pacing' worse than 'unbalanced'.

I find "works" better than "broken".

 

[Vaalingrade]

I find "works" better than "broken".

That's assuming it 'works' if there's people bored by the game about adventure.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

That's assuming it 'works' if there's people bored by the game about adventure.

I find boredom sets in eventually no matter what you do. The system you are looking for is a unicorn. I alleviate boredom by switching between different game systems.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

The design philosophy is:

- Make monsters 'useful' across levels so they don't have to make a higher level version to fit the known CR bands that exist with or without making numbers flat and sad.

- Placate people for whom +2 was 'too complicated' apparently.

This philosophy has led to and encouraged lazy monster design and 'simple' design for the people everyone keeps assuming can't operate Rage.

yeah when we can have a CR 2 oger and a CR 9 Oger CHeif but the cheif has 3 special abilities the regular one didn't it worked better...

 

[Reynard]

yeah when we can have a CR 2 oger and a CR 9 Oger CHeif but the cheif has 3 special abilities the regular one didn't it worked better...

I think it works better when the CR 2 ogre has special abilities, too. For me, anyway, the core of the problem is bags of hit points without much to do besides stand and punch PCs.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Speaking as a veteran of 1st, 2nd and 3rd edition, UNbounded accuracy was a much bigger problem.

yes but when they BOUND accuracy they shot HP into crazy levels...
a 20th level fighter in 2e had 9d10+33+(1/2/3 x9 from con) and in 5e they have 20d10+100 most times...
with only a +1 or +2 con it would not be unheard or for a maxed level fighter to just be at or below 100hp... in 5e 11th level fighters with a 'low for this edition' +3 con would have 11d10+33 98hp on average...

take SOME of the BA away and rebind HP (but front load them like 4e) and you have a MUCH better game.

my suggestion was start with 3hd no con bonus, at even levels add only a modfire (+1/2/3 based on over 10th in 2e) and at odd levels add a HD, but again no con bonus. the Con bonus comes when you spend HD to heal.

so a 1st level fighter would have 3d10, a first level warlock 3d8. but at level 11 that fighter 8d10+15 hp so if we max 1st 3 it is 71hp and if we only max 1 of those 1st 3 HD it would be 62... at 20th level it would be either 97 or 88 hp on average... lower monster hp too to match

 

[Vaalingrade]

I think it works better when the CR 2 ogre has special abilities, too. For me, anyway, the core of the problem is bags of hit points without much to do besides stand and punch PCs.

True. If an ogre can't pick up a PC and use them as a weapon, why are we even playing this game?

I also had a 'luchad-orge' who could grab you and literally pile drive you into the ground so you were stuck in the dirt like a cartoon character.

 

[billd91]

yes but when they BOUND accuracy they shot HP into crazy levels...
a 20th level fighter in 2e had 9d10+33+(1/2/3 x9 from con) and in 5e they have 20d10+100 most times...

Did you skip 3e? Because going to 20d10+high Con bonus was introduced with 3e, long before bounded accuracy.

 

[Minigiant]

Creature, not statblock. The designers wanted the same creature to be usable across more levels, so they bounded accuracy to allow that to happen.

I was taking about a generic humanoid mage stat locks

We very rarely have more than three combat encounters. One is common, six is never.

So I don't know how you are not using the ranger nova spells by mid levels.

There is no way you'd use half your spell if you don't.

 

[Minigiant]

I also had a 'luchad-orge' who could grab you and literally pile drive you into the ground so you were stuck in the dirt like a cartoon character

My luchadogre had a hurricarana reaction attack and a crossbody attack.

 

[Maxperson]

The usual target of my ire: BA.

I'm split on this. I like the concept, since I felt that 3e and from what I hear 4e had too much number inflation, but I think they bounded it too much. We start at +2 and get 4 more pluses over 20 levels. They should have started at +1 and added 9 more over 20 levels for a total of +10.

 

[Stoutstien]

You can definitely say that a lot of npc blocks are boring sacks of HP but you can't blame bounded accuracy for that. It has no impact on anything but the accuracy of said features.

 

[Maxperson]

The design philosophy is:

- Make monsters 'useful' across levels so they don't have to make a higher level version to fit the known CR bands that exist with or without making numbers flat and sad.

- Placate people for whom +2 was 'too complicated' apparently.

This philosophy has led to and encouraged lazy monster design and 'simple' design for the people everyone keeps assuming can't operate Rage.

I've taken to using 3rd party monsters mostly. I love the A5e Monstrous Managerie monsters, as well as those from @dave2008 here. I rarely take a monster directly from the MM any longer.

 

[LizardWizard00]

I'm not saying it wasn't an issue, but I find 'aggressively bland' and 'poor progression pacing' worse than 'unbalanced'.

What does that have to do with BA?

I like BA, but I could see it being extended a bit.

 

[dave2008]

I've taken to using 3rd party monsters mostly. I love the A5e Monstrous Managerie monsters, as well as those from @dave2008 here. I rarely take a monster directly from the MM any longer.

I wish I had time to make a lot more!

 

[Vaalingrade]

I'm split on this. I like the concept, since I felt that 3e and from what I hear 4e had too much number inflation, but I think they bounded it too much. We start at +2 and get 4 more pluses over 20 levels. They should have started at +1 and added 9 more over 20 levels for a total of +10.

That's basically 4e's way of doing it, only they went to +15 for 30 levels and had to patch in an extra +1 when it turned out players lagged behind monsters.

 

[Reynard]

True. If an ogre can't pick up a PC and use them as a weapon, why are we even playing this game?

I also had a 'luchad-orge' who could grab you and literally pile drive you into the ground so you were stuck in the dirt like a cartoon character.

^^^This guy ogres.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I think it works better when the CR 2 ogre has special abilities, too. For me, anyway, the core of the problem is bags of hit points without much to do besides stand and punch PCs.

yeah I agree... each monster should have at least 1 cool feature and "Hit hard with big HP" isn't a cool feature

again even 4e fell down on this basicly giving them a 1 time power attack: Once per encounter the ogre can perform a Grand Slam, which does double the damage of a normal club attack and yeets pushes the target 2 squares on a hit.