The Awful and Dangerous Monster?

[Jack7]

Suppose you could make monsters new and fresh again in 5th Edition?

Suppose you could make them truly dangerous and awful and awe-some (inspiring awe)?

Suppose you could make monsters scary, creepy, vicious, a real threat...

How would you go about it?

What would you do, and why?

 

[foolish_mortals]

I'm not sure but we might be talking about the same thing or something similar in this thread:
http://www.enworld.org/forum/new-ho...have-been-degraded-over-time-need-fixing.html

foolish_mortals

 

[Aldarc]

The protection of the law or diplomatic immunity.

 

[nnms]

I'd make them brutally dangerous. Where if you go for a straight up fight and don't take the time to either bypass them or out think them, the party is very, very likely to be short at least one member by the time the monster is dead.

 

[foolish_mortals]

more like the flumph jumped over the strumpet.

foolish_mortals

 

[Jack7]

I'm not sure but we might be talking about the same thing or something similar in this thread:
Monsters that have been degraded over time that need fixing

foolish_mortals

I think in part, from what I've read in your thread. I'm talking though about redesigning the entire monster paradigm, how they operate and how they are presented.

Personally I don't think you can make monsters scary and unpredictable and dangerous again if 5th Edition approaches monsters as they've been done in the past.

Because then they're just a slightly redesigned known quantity. Not something new, dangerous, and scary.

Asking how others would redesign the whole idea of the monster.

 

[Ahnehnois]

I would extend and redefine the "death window" and make it clear that it's not assumed that one party must be dead at the end of every battle. That's scary on a lot of levels.

I would increase the potential for sudden PC death and lasting wounds and make resurrection harder.

I would include quick templates like PF, or various monster customization options that are simple and usable so the players never feel like they know the monsters' stats.

And I would add good flavor text. The explanations of how to use classic monsters from Heroes of Horror are great. They don't change the mechanics, they're just good ideas.

 

[Jack7]

I like your ideas but could you expand on this one a little? I think I know where you're going, but let's see.

I would extend and redefine the "death window" and make it clear that it's not assumed that one party must be dead at the end of every battle. That's scary on a lot of levels.

 

[Ahnehnois]

I like your ideas but could you expand on this one a little? I think I know where you're going, but let's see.

Well, I want something in the DMG that asks "what happens after the battle is over"? Do the players slit the throats of their fallen enemies? Do they take prisoners? Do their opponents come after them a year later with a veangeance? All of those things are scary in different ways. The issue's always been there, but it's often been handwaved.

 

[Jack7]

Well, I want something in the DMG that asks "what happens after the battle is over"? Do the players slit the throats of their fallen enemies? Do they take prisoners? Do their opponents come after them a year later with a veangeance? All of those things are scary in different ways. The issue's always been there, but it's often been handwaved.

That's not what I thought you meant. But those are good points in their own rights.

I thought that you had meant that with monsters death might not mean what it appears to mean, or that the death of a monster might inflict serious or bizarre dangers upon the killers (the adventurers or the party), such as a curse or a disease or a poison or severe reaction which makes them doubly or triply dangerous to kill. In other words killing a monster does not end their dangerousness.

Well, ladies and gentlemen, I must now to bed. Please carry on as you were.