Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pawsplay" data-source="post: 9589303" data-attributes="member: 15538">Like, one striking example of reification for me was when a hobgoblin in 3e always had to have a bunch of class levels, because they were a humanoid with no extra HD. But they also weren't a normal playable race because they were ever so slightly superior to a normal PC race. So if you have a hobgoblin fort, you had a dozen hobgoblin warrior 1s on the walls, a few hobgoblin Warrior 4 guards, some hobgoblin Ranger 2 archers, two hobgoblin Fighter 6 guards, and the chieftain, who was a Fighter 8/Barbarian 1/Blackguard 3. And that's something I don't miss at all. I was raised on earlier editions of D&amp;D, where there were human &quot;monsters&quot; who obviously resembled members of classes but lacked any details that weren't worth bothering with. Like, the Rules Cyclopedia had Mystics as an encounter, who were equivalent to the Mystic PC class and had Mystic saving throws and so forth, but didn't have laundry lists of abilities, and didn't actually have ability scores apart from Intelligence. That's still slightly more reified than 5e (Mystics are Mystics, after a fashion, and elves are Elves). 5e moved toward the notecard method, very simplified stats for most monsters. Which makes sense for how they are used! But even though the DMG demurely suggests it, it's rare to see an NPC statted up as an actual 7th level Wizard or whatever. So the whole process of giving NPCs appropriate skills isn't as rich, and tools and other proficiencies are mostly glossed over. Late 5e and then 6E goes further by taking a handful of &quot;spells&quot; and simplifying them into one spell attack as an Action. NPCs don't have to follow PC rules, and why should they? That's as old as NPC thieves with full Hit Dice, executioners who could behead you on a nat 20, special dwarf clerics of high level, and &quot;legendary heroes&quot; with illegal multiclasses.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pawsplay, post: 9589303, member: 15538"] Like, one striking example of reification for me was when a hobgoblin in 3e always had to have a bunch of class levels, because they were a humanoid with no extra HD. But they also weren't a normal playable race because they were ever so slightly superior to a normal PC race. So if you have a hobgoblin fort, you had a dozen hobgoblin warrior 1s on the walls, a few hobgoblin Warrior 4 guards, some hobgoblin Ranger 2 archers, two hobgoblin Fighter 6 guards, and the chieftain, who was a Fighter 8/Barbarian 1/Blackguard 3. And that's something I don't miss at all. I was raised on earlier editions of D&D, where there were human "monsters" who obviously resembled members of classes but lacked any details that weren't worth bothering with. Like, the Rules Cyclopedia had Mystics as an encounter, who were equivalent to the Mystic PC class and had Mystic saving throws and so forth, but didn't have laundry lists of abilities, and didn't actually have ability scores apart from Intelligence. That's still slightly more reified than 5e (Mystics are Mystics, after a fashion, and elves are Elves). 5e moved toward the notecard method, very simplified stats for most monsters. Which makes sense for how they are used! But even though the DMG demurely suggests it, it's rare to see an NPC statted up as an actual 7th level Wizard or whatever. So the whole process of giving NPCs appropriate skills isn't as rich, and tools and other proficiencies are mostly glossed over. Late 5e and then 6E goes further by taking a handful of "spells" and simplifying them into one spell attack as an Action. NPCs don't have to follow PC rules, and why should they? That's as old as NPC thieves with full Hit Dice, executioners who could behead you on a nat 20, special dwarf clerics of high level, and "legendary heroes" with illegal multiclasses. [/QUOTE]

Verification