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

[Stoutstien]

The basic foes are quite nice for my needs as they are in the MM right now. If I need to make a change it is what? A minute or two? A spell selection here and there and voilà ! It is done.

But with this new stat block, I will need to take the DMG and adjust things, retrofit the whole stat block to respect both the intent and the appropriate CR.

Jist take Vecna, at the base it is a caster, a lich. Now I need to add spell slots, choose the spells and new abilities and compare these new abities to the current stat block and the evaluate with the guidelines in the DMG if I did a good approximated job.

With the classic stat block, if a spell is not to my taste, I simply pick an other one of the same level and I am done and good to go. Whether you acknowledge it or not, for those that play with the MM and 5ed starting design, this is a huge change. Much more drastic than the alignment change they attempted a few books ago.

I think you think CR is a lot better than it is. It's nothing more than a rough estimate so trying to figure out how isolated changes effect it is a waste a time. If you want him at will force cage then just do it. How it effects his CR is irrelevant because it only matters for your table.

 

[Thomas Rainsborough]

The basic foes are quite nice for my needs as they are in the MM right now. If I need to make a change it is what? A minute or two? A spell selection here and there and voilà ! It is done.

But with this new stat block, I will need to take the DMG and adjust things, retrofit the whole stat block to respect both the intent and the appropriate CR.

Jist take Vecna, at the base it is a caster, a lich. Now I need to add spell slots, choose the spells and new abilities and compare these new abities to the current stat block and the evaluate with the guidelines in the DMG if I did a good approximated job.

With the classic stat block, if a spell is not to my taste, I simply pick an other one of the same level and I am done and good to go. Whether you acknowledge it or not, for those that play with the MM and 5ed starting design, this is a huge change. Much more drastic than the alignment change they attempted a few books ago.

The work required as you accurately described goes up by a factor of 10. Only DM's that do what you do understand this. Players never, ever do. But most DM's, the good ones at least, have gone through the process you described for altering a MM monster. My Mord's and Volo casters never have the set of spells some designer at WOTC who clearly has never tested their designs, has slapped together.

Maybe that is the reason all along why WOTC is going this route. It is a lot easier to game test a non caster than a spell casting monster.

 

[Helldritch]

Why?

If he can't cast them all in a fight without a TPK.

Simple, not all encounters ends in a TPK. A fight can be fled, if the foe is encountered later, it might have some spell slots missing because of the previous encounter. Player might restored their strength faster than the foe and come for a second try.

With the new stat blocks, there are no such things as ressources attrition for the foes as their ressources are at will now (see Vecna). At least, with spell slots, when used up, they are used up.

 

[Stoutstien]

No.
A drow can be played by a player and all drow NPCs follow the pattern.

The NPC appendices follow the pattern too. Only monstrous NPCs use the other rule that is now the new standard.

Not true. Spell casting is the only thing they have in common sort of sometimes. Multiattck vs attack action, taunt vs cutting word, leadership vs battle master dice, grapple/restrained on hit vs grapple/shove/feat, twf vs just more attacks, and so on.

 

[Minigiant]

Simple, not all encounters ends in a TPK. A fight can be fled, if the foes is encountered later, it might have some spell slots missing because of the previous encounter. Player might restored their strength faster than the foe and come for a second try.

With the new stat blocks, there are no such things as ressources attrition for the foes as their ressources are at will now (see Vecna). At least, with spell slots, when used up, they are used up.

The Monsters are not designed to be fought multiple times.

Monsters can only be designed for ONE encounter paradigm. You fight and one side dies, flees, or surrenders.

You can't design a monster for one encounter, 2 encounters, and 5 encounters in a single state block.

But when I said 5e could and should have variant rules for different playstyles over and over and over and over, a bunch of folk say they told need it. They the complain here about something that gets fixed with a variant rules and chart.

 

[Thomas Rainsborough]

Yup...The fact that

Simple, not all encounters ends in a TPK. A fight can be fled, if the foes is encountered later, it might have some spell slots missing because of the previous encounter. Player might restored their strength faster than the foe and come for a second try.

With the new stat blocks, there are no such things as ressources attrition for the foes as their ressources are at will now (see Vecna). At least, with spell slots, when used up, they are used up.

Vecna has Dimension Door is ample proof that Vecna can book it any time things get a little too hot.

 

[Thomas Rainsborough]

The Monsters are not designed to be fought multiple times.

Monsters can only be designed for ONE encounter paradigm. You fight and one side dies, flees, or surrenders.

You can't design a monster for one encounter, 2 encounters, and 5 encounters in a single state block.

But when I said 5e could and should have variant rules for different playstyles over and over and over and over, a bunch of folk say they told need it. They the complain here about something that gets fixed with a variant rules and chart.

See my post above. If monsters are not designed to flee, why does even the new Vecna have Dimension Door?

 

[DND_Reborn]

Vecna has Dimension Door is ample proof that Vecna can book it any time things get a little too hot.

LOL book it where? Up to 500 feet away, to a spot he can see? It is a sad spell for a creature like Vecna IMO... where is his teleport???

 

[Minigiant]

Because without 1st level Magic Missile (where the spell is), you can't upcast it using a higher level slot.

You know you can prepare a spell of a level and never cast it with that levels spell spot?

A 12 HD mage has NO USE for a 1st level spell slots (unless he is a sorcerer and cannibalizing it into points but just give it points) since he deals more damage with cantrip.

You know... that's the ticket. Convert the lower 3rd of slots into sorcery points.

 

[Thomas Rainsborough]

LOL book it where? Up to 500 feet away, to a spot he can see? It is a sad spell for a creature like Vecna IMO... where is his teleport???

I have no issue with Vecna having teleport. Of course he should. He has access to all spells, with a good DM.

As for why Dimension Door, here is the spell description: "You teleport yourself from your current location to any other spot within range. You arrive at exactly the spot desired. It can be a place you can see, one you can visualize, or one you can describe by stating distance and direction, such as "200 feet straight downward" or "upward to the northwest at a 45-degree angle, 300 feet.""

And why burn a 7th level slot when a 4th level slot gets you to some inner sanctum 500 feet away that the players don't know about/can't reach?