D&D General The Monsters Know What They're Doing ... Are Unsure on 5e24

[Maxperson]

One player is plenty. Solitaire is still a game.

All games are games, even if no one is playing them. I don't say, "I have a lot of box thingies with pieces, boards, and rules on my shelf." I say, "I have a lot of games on my shelf."

 

[Paul Farquhar]

So the only thing that is not "ridiculous" is a tortle?

Your suggestion is clearly ridiculous. It’s clearly “my way or the highway” whilst pretending to be reasonable. The way you phrase this clearly shows that what you really mean is you are not allowing tortles because you think they are ridiculous.

I was attempting to have a conversation. That's how conversations work, I come up with an idea, it you don't like it you come up with a counter-proposal.

In this situation you have presented the problem. It’s the player’s turn to suggest a solution. Then you would suggest any modifications, and so on, or declare that there can be no mutually acceptable compromise and go your separate ways.

 

[Epic Meepo]

For the record I have nothing against Tortles. They were just shorthand / figurehead / variable for "player concept that the DM doesn't want in their campaign".

I like tortles and would definitely allow them in any "typical" fantasy campaign setting I was running.

"Tortle" in this thread is my shorthand for "why on Earth does the player stubbornly insist on being a half cat-person, half vampire ninja in my 1920's Call of Cthulhu campaign"?

In fairness, "half-cat person, half-vampire ninja" is just an exaggerated version of Carmilla from the 1872 Gothic novella of the same name. (Vampire? Check. Turns into a cat? Check. Explicity uses martial arts? Check.) So at least the player is proposing a character inspired by the horror genre as it existed during Lovecraft's lifetime.

 

[AlViking]

He went from saying he had no idea if he could make products that people want with the 2024 rules to getting enough positive feedback that he is.

It's odd to focus on a sentence or two while ignoring the entire theme of both posts.

He talks about the Ravnica, Wildemount and Flee, Mortals books. Another option is encounter design. I see no reference to the 2024 revision except "Let’s just say that the munchkins are very happy that the 2024 revision of 5E is catering to their tastes, would like it to do so even more...".

As I said, it's fine that he doesn't like the 2024 books and will continue to write things based on other books. I just dislike being lumped in with munchkins because I don't have the same issue he has.

 

[AlViking]

Your suggestion is clearly ridiculous. It’s clearly “my way or the highway” whilst pretending to be reasonable.

In this situation you have presented the problem. It’s the player’s turn to suggest a solution. Then you would suggest any modifications, or declare that there can be no mutually acceptable compromise and go your separate ways.

Then what is your counter-proposal? There are only two aspects of being a tortle that matter. The attitude and outlook on life, the cultural differences is one. The mechanical benefits is another. I attempted to address both. If you don't like the image I generated, what imagery would be acceptable?

Seems like you can't answer that because you have no real counter, no real compromise. It's tortle or nothing.

 

[bedir than]

He talks about the Ravnica, Wildemount and Flee, Mortals books. Another option is encounter design. I see no reference to the 2024 revision except "Let’s just say that the munchkins are very happy that the 2024 revision of 5E is catering to their tastes, would like it to do so even more...".

As I said, it's fine that he doesn't like the 2024 books and will continue to write things based on other books. I just dislike being lumped in with munchkins because I don't have the same issue he has.

From the first blog entry where people insisted he wasn't going to cover anything in the update

But first, the good news: The Monsters Know What They’re Doing: Revised Edition for 2025, an update to The Monsters Know What They’re Doing: Combat Tactics for Dungeon Masters, is fully written and being edited at this very moment. The original publication date was to be July 21, 2026—in time for Gen Con!—but as a result of some entirely avoidable delays [cough], the pub date is now set at Oct. 6. I’m lobbying as hard as I can to get the pub date reset to July 21, or at least early enough that advance copies will be available for purchase at Gen Con.

As is typical for Keith's products he has a backlog.

But also, there's not a lot out yet from WotC with new monsters.

 

[AlViking]

From the first blog entry where people insisted he wasn't going to cover anything in the update


As is typical for Keith's products he has a backlog.

But also, there's not a lot out yet from WotC with new monsters.

All I said was that there was nothing I saw different from his first blog post other than calling people munchkins. I don't know what the issue is but I don't see a reason to discuss it further either.

 

[Maxperson]

That said, the 'Noble' background doesn't really require you to be literally a noble, right? So we can say you are the closest thing halflings have to 'nobility', even if they don't really do that sort of thing, strictly speaking. Your family is important, respected, possibly even wealthy, etc. You just won't have a castle, nor a title of nobility, even though that's what the flavor text says." Or something more or less along those lines.

In 5e it does. It literally says you carry a noble title, and your family owns lands, collects taxes, etc. That noble title and accompanying influence is why the 5e feature works. Wealthy merchants don't have it. Famous performers don't have it. Real nobility has it.

5.5e removes the background feature(a step backwards in my opinion), but keeps that you are a minor aristocrat who grew up in a castle.

And notice, here, that you gave the player....well, functionally everything they wanted, yes? They got the Noble background mechanics, and they got the actual backstory of "my family is well-known and influential". The only thing they didn't get was something that was genuinely irrelevant to them, namely, the actual castle and title of nobility. So...where's the riding roughshod? Where's the total breakdown of setting consistency? Where's the loudest-jerk-in-the-room-always-wins? You'd said that if you just let players have what they want you'd be destroying the campaign. Why didn't that happen here?

You're better off making a custom Halfling VIP(or whatever fits best) background than trying to cludge noble onto something that noble doesn't fit onto.

 

[Zardnaar]

Your suggestion is clearly ridiculous. It’s clearly “my way or the highway” whilst pretending to be reasonable. The way you phrase this clearly shows that what you really mean is you are not allowing tortles because you think they are ridiculous.

In this situation you have presented the problem. It’s the player’s turn to suggest a solution. Then you would suggest any modifications, and so on, or declare that there can be no mutually acceptable compromise and go your separate ways.

DMs free to exclude anything for whatever reason. Thinking a rae is stupid eg a Tortle is fair enough.

Avoiding Ninja Turtle jokes for starters (ours was a Monk).

Its not really a problem unless the DMs changing rules on the fly. Eg decides to van Tortles after saying its fine.

Anything with a special movement (fly, swim, climb) or magical ability could be a problem in more grounded games. Anything that can ignore environmental effects could also be a problem in a survival game for example.

So mechanically a race foukd get banned for that, DM finds then silly is another reason (plasmoid, autognomes and warforged might hit that),

Restrictions can make things more interesting. Eg humans, warforged, autognones, gear forged only could make sense.

Some things you shouldn't expect to play everywhere. Spelljamner and Eberron things would be up there for that.


First thing I ask any potential DM us the rhene/what do you allow. Second question is what do you prefer or want to see (if anything).

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Then what is your counter-proposal?

I’ve already suggested several. I am a natural turtle changed my magic, I am from another plane of existence, I was a spelljammer until my ship crashed, I have no memory an no one knows what I am, now I am on a quest to discover the truth, I am a human part-transformed into a turtle by magic, I am a lizard man with a skin condition, I’m a dragonturtle Dragonborn etc.

There are only two aspects of being a tortle that matter.

Is there? Says who? Oh yes, you.

The attitude and outlook on life, the cultural differences is one. The mechanical benefits is another. I attempted to address both. If you don't like the image I generated, what imagery would be acceptable?

Seems like you can't answer that because you have no real counter, no real compromise. It's tortle or nothing.

No, I can’t answer because I don’t actually want to play a tortle (or anything else in your game judging by your attitude). But it’s easy for anyone to see that your suggestion is not serious, and is simply intended to humiliate the player.