Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Revised 6E prediction thread
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="dave2008" data-source="post: 8187529" data-attributes="member: 83242"><p>Some of the newer subclass key abilities of proficiency. I think a refreshed 5e will probably unify classes / subclasses around this type of design.</p><p></p><p>First I want to clarify that I am not saying there were not more interesting versions of some monsters (or even most) in 4e. 4e had multiple versions of most monsters from the get go, where as 5e typical had one version, but had more different monsters. However, over time there have been increasing versions of the same monsters. Gnolls are a good example of this. Frost Giants; however, are not. </p><p></p><p>Also, one of the strengths when comparing 4e monsters to 5e monsters is all the movement and conditions they enforce. However, this was indicative of the system as whole. It didn't feel special when play 4e because every monster did it. </p><p></p><p>I also contend legendary monsters do a better job as solo creatures than the 4e "solos" did. And 5e mythic monsters even more so and even more evocative.</p><p></p><p>However, there are certain things I like a lot about 4e monsters:</p><ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Roles (brute, soldier, etc) where interesting, gave you a starting point, and initially had mechanical impact (this became less and less as monster design was revised throughout the edition</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Tiers (minion, standard, elite, & solo): This design allowed a lot of flexibility and really appreciated it. I tried to impliment this in 5e, but it really isn't need with BA, you just use a higher CR monster or the ne mythic monster rules.</li> </ol><p></p><p>I used to agree with you, but I have since change my mind somewhat. My preference is a combination. When I design a 5e monster, i give it all of the traits, spells, and actions spelled out in its stat block to justify the CR. I then add spell casting (per typical 5e design) as needed to round out the monster and give stuff for those who want to do a deeper dive. I like this because I don't have to detail all the spells out in the statblock, but I know they are there if I need them. Official 5e monsters are moving this way too (including at least on spell spelled out in the stat block).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="dave2008, post: 8187529, member: 83242"] Some of the newer subclass key abilities of proficiency. I think a refreshed 5e will probably unify classes / subclasses around this type of design. First I want to clarify that I am not saying there were not more interesting versions of some monsters (or even most) in 4e. 4e had multiple versions of most monsters from the get go, where as 5e typical had one version, but had more different monsters. However, over time there have been increasing versions of the same monsters. Gnolls are a good example of this. Frost Giants; however, are not. Also, one of the strengths when comparing 4e monsters to 5e monsters is all the movement and conditions they enforce. However, this was indicative of the system as whole. It didn't feel special when play 4e because every monster did it. I also contend legendary monsters do a better job as solo creatures than the 4e "solos" did. And 5e mythic monsters even more so and even more evocative. However, there are certain things I like a lot about 4e monsters: [LIST=1] [*]Roles (brute, soldier, etc) where interesting, gave you a starting point, and initially had mechanical impact (this became less and less as monster design was revised throughout the edition [*]Tiers (minion, standard, elite, & solo): This design allowed a lot of flexibility and really appreciated it. I tried to impliment this in 5e, but it really isn't need with BA, you just use a higher CR monster or the ne mythic monster rules. [/LIST] I used to agree with you, but I have since change my mind somewhat. My preference is a combination. When I design a 5e monster, i give it all of the traits, spells, and actions spelled out in its stat block to justify the CR. I then add spell casting (per typical 5e design) as needed to round out the monster and give stuff for those who want to do a deeper dive. I like this because I don't have to detail all the spells out in the statblock, but I know they are there if I need them. Official 5e monsters are moving this way too (including at least on spell spelled out in the stat block). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Revised 6E prediction thread
Top