Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Jester David" data-source="post: 6155074" data-attributes="member: 37579">Which does quite effectively remove the scary from those monsters, as the odds of failing three saves are quite low. Especially when the party can marshal its resources granting bonuses (or Advantage). Some monsters should just be scary and avoided. If all monsters are non-threatening beyond normalized damage, there's far less impetus to attempt alternate strategies, creative solutions, or non-combat options. This "scary" might come from an ass-ton of damage or from a debilitating or deadly power. Removing a debilitating power is a little like making dragons no more damaging than other monsters. When fighting a dragon is as threatening as fighting an orc (of the same level) then dragons become samey and no longer special.The medusa is a great example as even non-gamers are likely to know of its effects and deadliness, it has a very distinct silhouette & appearance that can be spotted before in range of its attacks, and its presence is frequently telegraphed by statues by its lair. In a good medusa encounter, one that isn't a cheap Gotcha! fight, the party shouldn't need three extra saves to avoid death because they've been warned numerous times and are choosing "risk". If there is no commensurate risk then the creature falls flat. It wasn't worth the hype. Plus the players have a choice: fight normally or close their eyes. That said, there should be some consideration for when players lack a choice (such as eye closing) or monsters that lack forewarning. Or spells. An attack roll works, where the spell or monster needs to successfully hit first before a saving throw is made. This does remove it from being a single roll to avoid death without turning every negative effect into a series of increasingly bad checks.</blockquote>

Verification