Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Quickleaf" data-source="post: 9297077" data-attributes="member: 20323">Absolutely. This plays out in different ways tactically (in the midst of combat), than it does strategically (thinking about the approach to a dangerous situation before combat).I know the strategic approach is less in vogue with modern D&amp;D, but one of the cool things about carrion crawlers, ghouls, mind flayers and such in older editions (not necessarily a rules thing, more a play style) was that they encouraged out-of-the-box thinking. This did require player foreknowledge about the unique nature of the threat posed...which may not be something the designers want in the game as much. But the good part was that this led to players talking about:&quot;Ghouls? Crap, let's try to avoid fighting them in melee. We don't want to get paralyzed and dogpiled! Wasn't there a pit trap we passed in that hallway? Rogue, why don't you lure them this way, while the rest of us post up behind the pit trap with our arrows and spells at the ready?&quot;I don't know how much of that gets lost when we start lessening the impact of conditions like stunned or paralyzed. It's probably a shades of grey situation. But I can recall my old group (with plenty experienced players) facing carrion crawlers in 5e, and they waded into combat and didn't give a second thought to getting paralyzed... I was able to magnify the threat by making the crawlers aquatic &amp; having them drag a paralyzed PC into the water to drown them... but that was me making it dangerous in spite of the paralyzation tweaks*, not because of them.* I'm referring to the duration of the paralyzation across editions, not house rules, for anyone wondering (i know you know Stalker). In AD&amp;D, the paralyzation lasted 2d6 x 10 minutes, compared to 5e where it lasts until &quot;save ends&quot; (less than a minute).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Quickleaf, post: 9297077, member: 20323"] Absolutely. This plays out in different ways tactically (in the midst of combat), than it does strategically (thinking about the approach to a dangerous situation before combat). I know the strategic approach is less in vogue with modern D&D, but one of the cool things about carrion crawlers, ghouls, mind flayers and such in older editions (not necessarily a rules thing, more a play style) was that they encouraged out-of-the-box thinking. This did require player foreknowledge about the unique nature of the threat posed...which may not be something the designers want in the game as much. But the good part was that this led to players talking about: "Ghouls? Crap, let's try to avoid fighting them in melee. We don't want to get paralyzed and dogpiled! Wasn't there a pit trap we passed in that hallway? Rogue, why don't you lure them this way, while the rest of us post up behind the pit trap with our arrows and spells at the ready?" I don't know how much of that gets lost when we start lessening the impact of conditions like stunned or paralyzed. It's probably a shades of grey situation. But I can recall my old group (with plenty experienced players) facing carrion crawlers in 5e, and they waded into combat and didn't give a second thought to getting paralyzed... I was able to magnify the threat by making the crawlers aquatic & having them drag a paralyzed PC into the water to drown them... but that was me making it dangerous [I]in spite of [/I]the paralyzation tweaks*, not because of them. * I'm referring to the duration of the paralyzation across editions, not house rules, for anyone wondering (i know you know Stalker). In AD&D, the paralyzation lasted 2d6 x 10 [I]minutes[/I], compared to 5e where it lasts until "save ends" (less than a minute). [/QUOTE]

Verification