Something Awful leak.

[Incenjucar]

I've used it before but just making monsters into big scaly wizards is boring to me and my players, so I avoid it. It was boring in past editions, too. But it's already there for people who like that kind of thing.

If 5E is going to make spellcasting interesting for monsters, they should stay clear of the classes.

 

[Piratecat]

The only monster I really, really want to have spellcasting is the lich. Other than that I'm pretty flexible.

...and just like that, I'm totally off topic.

 

[Kzach]

The only monster I really, really want to have spellcasting is the lich. Other than that I'm pretty flexible.

And beholders, of course. And rakshasa. And vampires. And living spells. And sphinxs. And lammasu's. And arcanoloths. And couatls. And...

 

[Incenjucar]

Most of those monsters have no reason to cast spells as a species.

 

[Tovec]

And beholders, of course. And rakshasa. And vampires. And living spells. And sphinxs. And lammasu's. And arcanoloths. And couatls. And...

You are confusing spellcasting with supernatural abilities.

Spellcasting to me is levels in wizard, sorcerer or even cleric.

Supernatural abilities would apply to those creatures you listed, as well as most fey, but not necessarily dragon.

 

[KarinsDad]

Most of those monsters have no reason to cast spells as a species.

I think that is a major weakness of 4E. You have this campaign world where the physical laws are such that humanoid PCs take advantage of spells and prayers and such via the arcane and divine and psionic and primal power sources, but a vast majority of the humanoid monsters (some of which can be PCs) are using "the monster power source". What the heck is that? Often no rhyme or reason to their abilities, just a hodge podge of whatever the designer thought was cool.

The 4E model of Monster Knowledge Checks where the PC knows a ton of stuff about a monster NOT as a species, but because the monsters has Educational Cues floating above his head was implemented precisely because monsters have lost a lot of their rhyme and reason. Monsters have all kinds of powers and abilities, but they are so disparate that the game designers had to create an artificial MKC system so that players could keep up with it.

And, some of those abilities could and should be spells. What's the difference? Why should a Goblin Hexer's hexes be different than the Human Hexer's hexes and that different from Warlock Curses? And why do half of all Goblins have Goblins Tactics, but the other half doesn't? To me, something like Goblins Tactics should be something that all Goblins have and something that players should expect Goblins to have, not something that some do and some don't and oh by the way, roll a Monster Knowledge Check for this particular Goblin to figure it out.

I think that 5E Monster Knowledge Checks should give Racial knowledge, not individual named monster knowledge, including any spells or specialized powers unless a vast majority of that race is able to cast that spell (e.g. Darkness for Drows).

Most monsters should have obvious abilities. For example, many creatures with tentacles might be able to reach. Giants with large clubs should be able to knock smaller foes around like bowling pins. But, a lot of these abilities should be racial abilities. Individual abilities should be unknown to PCs. An example of an individual ability is a spell.

 

[Tallifer]

Most monsters should have obvious abilities. For example, many creatures with tentacles might be able to reach. Giants with large clubs should be able to knock smaller foes around like bowling pins. But, a lot of these abilities should be racial abilities. Individual abilities should be unknown to PCs. An example of an individual ability is a spell.

In the Fourth Edition, monster do indeed have obvious abilities. Kobolds are shifty and hard to pin down. Giant crocodiles grab you in their jaws. Ghosts pass through walls and take half damage from attacks. Rats swarm you. Hippogriffs fly. Not sure why you would think otherwise.

On the other hand specific spell-like abilities are as wondrous and mysterious as those of any class's spells. BUT if the monsters' attacks are just the same as those from the characters' spell lists, then the mystery and surprise is lessened (and the logistics increased).

 

[Piratecat]

And beholders, of course. And rakshasa. And vampires. And living spells. And sphinxs. And lammasu's. And arcanoloths. And couatls. And...

Tovec nailed it. Vampires don't cast a charm person spell, they stare into the maiden's eyes with a supernatural ability. Sirens didn't cast a "come hither" spell when luring sailors to their doom. I'm talking actual, honest to gosh class ability to cast.

 

[KarinsDad]

In the Fourth Edition, monster do indeed have obvious abilities. Kobolds are shifty and hard to pin down. Giant crocodiles grab you in their jaws. Ghosts pass through walls and take half damage from attacks. Rats swarm you. Hippogriffs fly. Not sure why you would think otherwise.

Which 4E Giants can hit you and knock you back and which cannot? Some Hill Giants can do it, some cannot. Hill Giant Grunts can do it for pete's sake, but many other hill giants cannot. Hill Giant Grunts can do it, but many other bigger and more powerful giants like Frost and Storm Giants cannot.

I don't see the rhyme or reason for this. I think any giant (i.e. Hill Giant or taller, not just Ogres, specialized Ogres might have these abilities) using a really large weapon should knock foes all over the place. JMO. I think the same should be true for certain types of massively powerful Demons, and Devils, and Dragons. On the other hand, there should be some more subtle Demons and Devils and slim snake-like Dragons that don't use massive weapons that don't have this ability. But, Giants are massive by definition. They should almost all do this type of thing. I want Giants that are like the Cave Troll in the LotR movie. Not brutes that just swing for damage. The overhead shot knocks a PC prone. The normal shot knocks a PC back. A heavy duty shot knocks a PC back and prone.

I think the 5E game would be better served if the monster races were created first such that all monsters of each particular race have specific racial abilities. Then, create specific monsters of each race that enhance those abilities and add in new abilities.

4E's method of "maybe the designer remembered that Hobgoblins have this ability, maybe the designer forgot" is lacking in flavor and consistency.

On the other hand specific spell-like abilities are as wondrous and mysterious as those of any class's spells. BUT if the monsters' attacks are just the same as those from the characters' spell lists, then the mystery and surprise is lessened (and the logistics increased).

I don't think that monster attacks should always be the same as PC spells. I just think that sometimes they should be. I think the game is not served well if most abilities of most monsters are mostly specific to this monster. I think some abilities should be obvious and some should be recognizable (and even unrecognizable) spells.

I think that there is plenty of room in the game space for monsters that cast spells. Not just liches, but pixes and dragons and demons and devils and most humanoid monsters who have their own deities and their own prayers/spells and because they are humanoid, they have the same access to Arcane, Primal, Divine, and Psionic abilities.

I don't see why the physics of the campaign world should be segregated between PCs and NPCs. I do see a reason to make NPCs simpler and easier to run, but that doesn't require that NPCs cannot cast spells.

 

[Dragonblade]

Being away all weekend and reading that 5e "leak" fills me with absolute horror. I hope the released playtest looks nothing like the rubbish I read in that link.

I pray this is an elaborate troll.