D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.

[Maxperson]

I didn't even think that was an argument. I'm reasonably sure that was the point.

@Hussar may have a different take than me, which is fine, but I definitely had no problem using a standard block for level 1 goblins and making the same "group" of goblins into minions around level 6 or so.

Yep. That seems to be the point to me as well. That @Lanefan for the CRs wrong with his ogre example doesn't mean that he is getting that argument/point wrong. Calling him out that way is picking nits.

 

[Umbran]

And we're back to, "what does simulation mean"? I mean process and physics emulation, not simulation of genre or narrative conventions.

Simulation of a world with processes and physics that results in matching a genre is not cleanly separable from genre simulation.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Simulation of a world with processes and physics that results in matching a genre is not cleanly separable from genre simulation.

It depends on primary intent. For me, genre emulation is secondary.

 

[CreamCloud0]

You start off really well. CR is inherently flawed because a monster is going to be easy against some groups of its CR and hard against others, depending on class make-up, ability picks, player ability, etc.

Where you go off the path, though, is the argument that an ogre with 111 hit points and an ogre with 1 hit point are fine as different expressions of the same monster. Even though the ogre with 111 hit points is intended for parties with single digit levels, and the one with 1 hit point is intended for parties with double digit hit point, a cat can't possibly kill the "easier" ogre. It can however kill the "harder" ogre with a single roll of natural 20. It gets even more ridiculous when you realize that 20 house cats WILL kill the minion ogre, but cannot kill the "easier" ogre with the 111 hit points.

This isn't a situation where monsters simply have different expressions like thugs, scouts, etc. where their stats will vary a bit. This is purely a narrative construct so that DMs can hit players with lots of dangerous monsters that go down quickly. That's the intended role for minions.

wait why is the minion ogre the 'harder' ogre and the normal one 'easier'?

but regardless, you shouldn't ever be putting the cat up against the ogre with the minion template unless it's some sort of divinely empowered super cat or something, because this minion/elite system works off relativity of power,

 

[Micah Sweet]

wait why is the minion ogre the 'harder' ogre and the normal one 'easier'?

but regardless, you shouldn't ever be putting the cat up against the ogre with the minion template unless it's some sort of divinely empowered super cat or something, because this minion/elite system works off relativity of power,

Right, because it's a narrative device. This is what some folks have a problem with.

 

[Enrahim]

I don't think it's anywhere near that ambitious.

Remember that the skill challenge and the combat have completely different goals.

The skill challenge's goal is merely to survive and/or escape. It's the Fellowship running from the Balrog. Is that incompatible with Merry later getting the first stab against the Witch-King, objectively one of the most powerful of Sauron's forces? Doesn't seem to be so to me. Sure, the Witch-King and the Balrog aren't the same class of being, but the conceptual framework still stands.

If you're actually engaging in combat, the goal isn't mere survival, it's overcoming. Different goals, different process, different results.

All of the others are simply differences of degree, not kind. You generally wouldn't be using literally the exact same statblock 17 times in a row such that the players repeatedly fight literally the same mechanics and then all of a sudden they binary switch over. I mean, you could do that, but I'm pretty sure it would be really boring for both you and the players by the time you'd hit the 10th fight against literally identical enemies.

Instead, you space it out--a single Bloodcursed Ogre (solo) at level 5, a mere scout sent by its commander. Then, multiple levels later, you fight a squad of Bloodcursed Ogres (elite) at, say, level 9. Now it's a whole squad, with goblin scouts and conscripted local bandits and (etc.) because they're on a mission. Perhaps the squad might even feature different variants, where it now matters that one is a sapper and another is heavily-armored, because before, simply being a Bloodcursed Ogre was the most relevant detail. Then, again multiple levels later, at say level 12, you fight through a stronghold where Bloodcursed Ogres (standard) are the main type of enemy, and thus you see lots of them. And then finally at (say) level 16, you assault their horrendous overlord's keep, and you're cutting through mere Bloodcursed Ogres (minions) like a scythe through wheat, because now, only the overlord's commanders and underbosses are powerful enough to actually challenge you--and you finish by slaying that demonic overlord, breaking the blood curse and freeing the remaining ogres to whatever life they were leading beforehand.

Yes, it requires that you think carefully. Yes, it means that you can't literally just constantly reuse the same statblock over and over again. You shouldn't be doing that in any game. It gets horrendously boring to fight the exact same enemy a hundred times over just to gain a level!

Changing rule paradigm, I can sort of get abord with. Changing stat block for the same creature however should be completely unnecessary, and IMO bad design in a D&D context.

The reason is that changing down stat block is basically doing the same as pre 3 and 4ed adventures were infameous for doing with DCs, just the other way around. It effectively just make the opposition weaker compared to the hero's faster.

You could design a game around representing the hero advancement solely in terms of such changing stat blocks. There actually is some virtue in it in terms of keeping number sizes in check.

However D&D with family has opted for a numbers go up design, where the power increase of the heroes are represented by their numbers going up. This has some obvious psychological benefits, and allow consistent standard statblocks. Handling and designing dozen hero classes for advancement is also a much lighter workload than having deflating statblocks for hundreds of monsters.

So trying to mix these paradigms just seem to provide the worst from both worlds. The escalating math, and the unstable monster stat block. If you want variations in your monsters, it is better to actually grab a statblock for something more unique (the horde of minion ogres, too lazy to be entrusted more than basic guard duty, rather than the individualistic ogres of the expeditary force for instance).

 

[Maxperson]

And yet they do.

They literally do. In 5e as much as any WotC edition--indeed, moreso!

You change the nature of your physical being every time you hit not just an arbitrary point of growth overall, but an arbitrary point of growth within one specific discipline.

Consider a character who gains level 3 Fighter, and then level 3 Rogue, and then level 3 Bard, and then level 3 Paladin, and then level 3 Sorcerer. They are now a level 15 Fighter/Rogue/Bard/Paladin/Sorcerer. They have never changed their ability scores one iota since they first started. Then, upon gaining each of levels 16, 17, 18, 19, and 20, they gain one more level of each class they had previously advanced. They increase their ability scores for five consecutive levels.

Meanwhile, the character who started as Wizard and ended as Wizard with no deviations along the way...gained those perks spread out across their entire run. Exactly the same five, but gained one every four-or-almost levels (the last is accelerated 1 level.)

You literally do change the nature of your character's being as they level just by virtue of the core rules, without a specific diegetic cause.

That's why 3e did it better by tying it to character level and not class level.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Simulation of a world with processes and physics that results in matching a genre is not cleanly separable from genre simulation.

Sometimes it has to be, because part of the genre is not acknowledging within the world some genre conventions. One can, of course, argue how common that is within fantasy, but its absolutely true within most horror and superhero genre usage, and sometimes the former overlaps with fantasy.

 

[Maxperson]

wait why is the minion ogre the 'harder' ogre and the normal one 'easier'?

Because the game says so. It's CR 11 or CR 16 and the one with 111 is CR 8. While CR is inaccurate, it still gives the games intended approximate power levels.

but regardless, you shouldn't ever be putting the cat up against the ogre with the minion template unless it's some sort of divinely empowered super cat or something, because this minion/elite system works off relativity of power,

A group of level 11 PCs is in a big minion ogre encounter and one steps backwards into a pen with 20 house cats, upsetting them and ending up dead to a single scratch.

Or that group is fighting those ogres and some kid who doesn't know any better throws a rock from the top of a nearby building and rolls a 20. Dead ogre minion.

Switch that to level 8 PCs fighting the level 8 ogre with 111 hit points and the above two situations can't happen. At least not the dead ogre parts.

 

[Umbran]

Sometimes it has to be, because part of the genre is not acknowledging within the world some genre conventions.

Eh. That just means the people in the world don't know the physics and processes.

There's nothing weird about that - most humans don't know the physics that drive their smartphones, much less the actually mysterious stuff.