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

[Helldritch]

Ok, then set aside 5 minutes before the session. Read the stat bloc and pencil in the margin, “shield, finger of frost, pet tarrasque”.

Solved.

If I were to prep my self on such a short notice, I would consider that on the fly. I am a bit more disciplined than that. But thank you for your advice.

 

[Bill Zebub]

My main takeaway from this thread is that I wish we had named our new puppy Vecna.

 

[DND_Reborn]

My main takeaway from this thread is that I wish we had named our new puppy Vecna.

Which would be hilarious if you also had a cat named "Kas".

 

[Bill Zebub]

If I were to prep my self on such a short notice, I would consider that on the fly. I am a bit more disciplined than that. But thank you for your advice.

Oh. Then you have LOTS of time to add the spells you want. Problem still solved.

I’m being a little bit facetious of course. But my point is that the only way this change is actually a problem is if you are as lazy and incompetent as some folks are accusing/imagining others to be.

Now, what I suspect is true is that this is one of many signs that WotC is shifting their focus from one subset of the fan base to another, for obvious reasons, and that if you’re a member of the first group (which really I am, too, but I’m just not as vested I guess) then this feels bad.

It happens.

 

[DND_Reborn]

to add the spells you want

It still goes back to the fact: it is easier to remove then add.

Again, keep spellcasting normal for Vecna, along with the features, and if a new DM doesn't want to use spellcasting provided, they don't have to. Not using a provided option is easier than having to add one that is missing (but was formerly provided for).

 

[Helldritch]

It still goes back to the fact: it is easier to remove then add.

Again, keep spellcasting normal for Vecna, along with the features, and if a new DM doesn't want to use spellcasting provided, they don't have to. Not using a provided option is easier than having to add one that is missing (but was formerly provided for).

You are right on spot.

 

[beancounter]

I agree completely, but others will argue:

Why use magic missile, a cantrip doesn't cost any spell slots and does equal or better damage (in tier 3/4)...

To which, I say:

Yep, a guaranteed hit is better than a possible hit and/or a successful save.

Also, some people have argued that there is no need to use low level spells at higher tiers..to which I say..well then, mm is a perfect spell to use for the low level spell slots.

 

[dave2008]

4ed had a lot of good going for it. But the part that was against it was its downfall. Casters.

Yep, casters. They all felt like the same class, fighters with funny names for their powers. The wizards and clerics in particular felt bland and tasteless and guess what? It was the same on the monster's side. Monster spell casters felt bland and tasteless to run. Just like the PCs as casters were bland and tasteless. They all lack the versatility of choosing their spells, the preparation for a definite situation which might not be the same as the one before or the next.

The caster strength is not in the damage it can dish out, it is in the variatiety of the situations it can cope with. Like it or hate it, the spell slot system of BECMI, 1ed, 2ed, 3.xed and 5ed did and still do the job almost perfectly. Be it on the PC's side or NPC's, it does the job. It might looks confusing for the inexperienced, but it is simply a matter of presentation in the MM and nothing else. Had they presented casting foes with highlighted spells useful In combat instead of jamming the selection with useless spells it would have been easier.

I do the exact thing I said with novice DM. I make a photocopy of the mage NPC in the MM and simply highlight the useful stuff for an encounter and guess what? It is almost as if I was a god to them. The new stat block simply do the same but it removes the rest. And that is this removal that makes these NPC special in the first place.

Prestidigitation might not do a lot in combat, but in an RP scene it might do quite a lot. And it is these small details that makes the game so much more believable and poignant. Adding details is not the the first instinctual thing to do when you start DMing and it is why the presence of some spell filler for RP is important. Because for the beginning DMs, if it is not written, it simply does not exists. And the new stat blocks just remove those. And like in 4ed, some foes suddenly becomes bland and tasteless automatons fit only for combat...

That wasn't my experience, but I was a DM and not a player. I didn't have any issue with spell casting monsters or NPCs. However, I also understand then, as I do now, that a statblock is just a starting point. 4e (and 5e too) had some good tools for improvising monsters / NPCs. Now, I only ran 2 groups through 4e:

1. Long time group that has played since HS (1e) and are pretty casual. They pick mostly fighter/rogue/ranger martial types, but we did have one wizard. I didn't hear any complaints from the Wizard player.
2. Group 2 was new to D&D (my children and their friends). They had a mix of classes and included: druid, fighter, ranger, warlock, wizard, and a rogue. I don't recall any complaints from this group either. But then again they were new to the game and didn't have any expectations.

So, IME, 4e didn't have any issue with caster characters or monsters / NPCs. Just pointing out that this argument is subjective. Caster and martials felt plenty different to at least some players. I know it wasn't just me as I was fairly active on the WotC 4e forums back in the day.

 

[dave2008]

It still goes back to the fact: it is easier to remove then add.

Again, keep spellcasting normal for Vecna, along with the features, and if a new DM doesn't want to use spellcasting provided, they don't have to. Not using a provided option is easier than having to add one that is missing (but was formerly provided for).

While that is the logical assumption, that is not always how the human mind works. If we have learned anything from neuroscience, psychology, and behavioral economics it is that humans often act illogically, and even to their own detriment. For some people it is easier to add than subtract. I know because that is basically me.

As an example: If I had a red dragon that was a 5th level spellcaster and the statblock had all the spells and slots of such a caster, I am likely to skip those completely. However, if a want a plain old red dragon to cast a fireball, well I know that spell well and I can just do it. No fuss, no worry. In game it is more stressful for me to look through a list of spells and pick versus just going with my "gut."

But I realize everyone is different and has different needs.

 

[Bill Zebub]

It still goes back to the fact: it is easier to remove then add.

Wait, I thought the argument was that you can't change the statbloc without messing up WotC's carefully tuned and extensively playtested CR computation? Why would removal be less likely to disrupt this perfect harmony?

But, also, maybe easier for you and me. But we aren't the audience here. I'm ok with that.