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

[AlViking]

The point isn't suicidal dragons. The point is that the dragon facing X commoners with longbows either doesn't attack, attacks and does a bit of damage before running away, or it attacks for multiple rounds and dies.

Commoners with longbows should not be able to keep an ancient dragon from attacking their town or force it to flee. And as you say, the dragon won't be suicidal, so a continued attack isn't happening.

Longbow just add a few points of damage and don't change much. If the villagers are in town, then buildings will be in the way. Dragon flies in low, sets buildings on fire. Next time they have cover from the fire and smoke. Maybe they attack at night. That or the dragon just drops burning logs from 300 feet up.

These hypothetical scenarios keep assuming worst-case for the dragon or dragons that use zero tactics. But yes focused fire from a large enough number will be a threat. So an intelligent dragon won't expose themselves to that risk.

 

[ECMO3]

A light crossbow is a simple weapon, so yes commoners are proficient.

No they are not. RAW they are only proficient in clubs. As DM you can change/rule this differently obviously.

"Your race, class, and feats can grant you proficiency with certain weapons or categories of weapons. The two categories are simple and martial. Most people can use simple weapons with proficiency.

These are the rules for PCs, and also notice it says "most" not all.

From the monster manual: "Monsters have proficiency with their equipment." The only weapon listed in the statblock for a commoner is club.

They removed dragon fear?!

Yes. "Frightful Presence" from 2014 monster manual for Adult and Ancient Dragons is removed.* There is no mechanic generally causing enemies of the 2024 Dragons to be frightened.

* For some reason White and Black Dragons still have "Frightful Presence" as a Legendary action, but it is a different mechanic as they actually cast the Fear spell and other dragons don't have it at all. This far weaker as it is a weak DC (14 on an adult White Dragon), has a much smaller AOE and requires concentration since it is the spell.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I wonder what the minor changes are that could fix it so that it is harder for commoners but doesn't really impact appropriately leveled adventurers. Resistance to non-magical attacks? x% chance of deflecting missile weapons when flying? Damage reduction? etc...

Bring back dragonfear. That generally separates the rookie from the veteran.

 

[Maxperson]

No they are not. RAW they are only proficient in clubs. As DM you can change/rule this differently obviously.

I mean, RAW is the PHB where it says simple weapons. There is no MM rule that gives all of their proficiencies. Or are you mistaking the club being the weapon in the stat block all of their proficiency? Because the weapon given is not the only one they are proficient with.

From the monster manual: "Monsters have only proficiency with their equipment." The only weapon listed in their statblock is club.

Yeah, I added a word in bold that would make your statement true. It's not there, so your statement is not true.

Yes, they are proficient with the weapon listed. No, that does not limit them to ONLY proficiency with that weapon. It just means that the book isn't going to give them a weapon that they aren't proficient with.

Your argument would mean that an NPC knight would not be proficient with maces, morning stars, daggers, long swords, short swords, and on and on. What knight have you ever heard of who is only proficient with greatswords and heavy crossbows?

Edit: Plus you are cherry picking from the MM in any case.

"You can equip monsters with additional gear and trinkets however you like, using the equipment chapter of the Player's Handbook for inspiration"

And..

"Assume that a creature is proficient with its armor, weapons, and tools. If you swap them out, you decide whether the creature is proficient with its new equipment."

So since the PHB says commoners are proficient with simple weapons, crossbows work out juuuuust fine.

Yes. "Frightful Presence" from 2014 is removed.

That's dumb.

 

[Micah Sweet]

The point isn't suicidal dragons. The point is that the dragon facing X commoners with longbows either doesn't attack, attacks and does a bit of damage before running away, or it attacks for multiple rounds and dies.

Commoners with longbows should not be able to keep an ancient dragon from attacking their town or force it to flee. And as you say, the dragon won't be suicidal, so a continued attack isn't happening.

Maybe don't make 20s auto-hits? That always felt silly to me anyway.

 

[Cadence]

Maybe don't make 20s auto-hits? That always felt silly to me anyway.

That's a big change to the entire game.

 

[Maxperson]

Maybe don't make 20s auto-hits? That always felt silly to me anyway.

I think that was added more for the PCs than NPCs. In any case, that's not the issue. The issue is with the removal of needing magic weapons to damage things and/or damage reduction rather than resistance. The 5e rules created this problem.

 

[Micah Sweet]

That's a big change to the entire game.

Maybe. Still don't see a problem. In most circumstances a rolled 20 will hit anyway. How big a change really is it?

 

[AnotherGuy]

5e should have used immunity to non-magical weapons more.

I would have gone with damage reduction (ala heavy armour mastery feat) or damage threshold. I don't see the reason why a dragon should be immune to non-mag weapons.

In fact I do do that for my own campaign.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I think that was added more for the PCs than NPCs. In any case, that's not the issue. The issue is with the removal of needing magic weapons to damage things and/or damage reduction rather than resistance. The 5e rules created this problem.

That would be a great thing to fix too. Also, DR was pretty great, and would also fix this issue in a fiction-appropriate way.