D&D 5E Should Explicit Monster Roles Return?

Should Explicit Monster Roles Return?

  • Yes

    Votes: 58 58.6%
  • No

    Votes: 41 41.4%

Tonguez

A suffusion of yellow
But that conclusion isn't an objective one, is it? I think there are arguments to be made for other roles.
I'd say it's pretty clearly a Controller - you put on the battlefield a "passive damage aura (fire)" and an "active grapple +shove" effect to move opponents into the fire aura.

As to soldier personally I'd drop that role and change it to Defender

Role bits alignment because Roles are action focused whereas alignment tells me nothing about behaviour
 

log in or register to remove this ad

CreamCloud0

One day, I hope to actually play DnD.
Role bits alignment because Roles are action focused whereas alignment tells me nothing about behaviour
Alignment does inform about its behaviour just slightly more on the noncombat side of things, and requiring a modicum of extrapolation, a good creature is more likely to protect or heal a downed ally whereas an evil creature might try to make a break for it abandoning their ally to save their own skin. A chaotic character might prioritise freeing prisoners but lawful prioritises taking in the criminal first.
 

Undrave

Legend
Neat to see the 60%/40% split. I'd still like to know how the 'No' camp describes Monster Roles and how they think they work, because it often feels like they imagine them way more restrictive than they actually are?
 

Cadence

Legend
Supporter
Neat to see the 60%/40% split. I'd still like to know how the 'No' camp describes Monster Roles and how they think they work, because it often feels like they imagine them way more restrictive than they actually are?

This thread made me change my vote to yes (just did it).

I think it is probably nothing but helpful if we're adding them to things already in the MM, and maybe filling out some things that are missing. My vote might still be a no if it were a new edition starting from scratch - because I would worry that role might have too strong of an influence on design.
 
Last edited:

Neat to see the 60%/40% split. I'd still like to know how the 'No' camp describes Monster Roles and how they think they work, because it often feels like they imagine them way more restrictive than they actually are?

As a person in the "no" camp, but not representative of the "no" camp, I can tell you that the answer is: I don't.

To me, all of this discussion just sounds like more jargon. In fact, the lables and jargon just seem to generate more arguments and debate that, frankly, outweigh any potential value to me at the table.

I'll even go a step further and posit that the reason this poll skews positive is because the people that do value this type of discussion are the only ones who even click on a thread with "Monster Roles" in the title. The people who vote "no" mostly don't make it this far.
 

dave2008

Legend
Neat to see the 60%/40% split. I'd still like to know how the 'No' camp describes Monster Roles and how they think they work, because it often feels like they imagine them way more restrictive than they actually are?
There are also likely people like me who voted no because our desire is between a yes and a no. For me it is a question of implementation and having an option of no / any role (unaligned if you will).

I personally didn't find roles very useful in 4e. I looked at a monster and see what it can do and decide how to use it. Its role didn't make a difference for me generally. But I can see how it might be helpful for some.
 


Undrave

Legend
As a person in the "no" camp, but not representative of the "no" camp, I can tell you that the answer is: I don't.

To me, all of this discussion just sounds like more jargon. In fact, the lables and jargon just seem to generate more arguments and debate that, frankly, outweigh any potential value to me at the table.
It's just a way to quickly communicate 'This monster is good at this thing in battle', it's not that deep of a concept.

Brute: Brutes excel at high damage in close quarters while having a lot of HP themselves. They have low defenses to compensate and are simply meant to be used to get in the parties face. Brutes love cover and broken lines of sight so that they are not harassed by ranged attacks. A good example of a Brute would have to be an Ogre.

Soldier: Soldiers have high defenses with average HP, and attacks. They serve as the tanks for fellow monsters, absorbing blows, and discouraging attacks against their weaker comrades. Soldiers love narrow funnel points, that channel all of the enemies towards them one by one. A good example of a Soldier would have to be an Iron Golem.

Artillery: Artillery have high damage range spells, but very low HP and defenses. These guys stay on the backline and rain fireballs on the party. Artillery loves the high ground and having cover to duck in and out of while they rain attacks from afar. A good example of Artillery would have to be a Mind Flayer.

Skirmishers: Skirmishers have average stats but above average mobility. They try to weave in and out of combat, and try to aim for the squishies at the back of the party. Skirmishers love open-ended battlefields with lots of cover. This gives them the opportunity to dive into the back line of the party. A good example of a Skirmisher would have to be a Bullete.

Lurker: Lurkers have below average health and defenses, but have an ability that makes them difficult to target. They wait, hiding in the shadows until they can ambush some poor PC. Lurkers love having places to hide to ambush the party from. A good example of a Lurker would have to be a Cloaker.

Controllers: Controllers are the monsters who try to force the PCs into disadvantageous situations. They will move the PC's around, have the party make saving throws, and put the party in a rough spot. Controllers love terrain that has negative aspects to it, such as acid pools so that they can force the party to move towards the dangerous terrain. A good example of a controller would have to be a Beholder.

Leaders: Leaders are special monsters who give bonuses to the entire group just for simply being there. This trait makes them much more of a target but makes your group a far greater threat. Leaders love terrain that allows them to see the whole battlefield while keeping them safe from any immediate attacks. A good example of a leader would have to be a Hobgoblin Warlord.
 

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top