Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
Thing I thought 4e did better: Monsters
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Sacrosanct" data-source="post: 6983677" data-attributes="member: 15700"><p>It wasn't meant to be. It was meant to be an observation of what's actually happening. We've had TONS of arguments over the years (most recently a thread here from a week or so ago that I'm aware of) where people either outright say, or heavily infer, that unless an ability is in the statblock, then that monster can't do anything else. People have described their gameplay more akin to a boardgame, where all the flavor text and lore about the monster is ignored (as well as attributes unless it involves a save somewhere) because of statements like "monster X is boring because they don't do anything but attack." INT and WIS scores are there for more than just saves. They tell you the intellectual capacity of said monster, which tells you how they would react in the game world. All that flavor text is just as important. In the example earlier in this thread, the kobold flavor text tells you that they are experts at trap making. So when ehren says that kobolds using deadly traps is just the DM out to get the players, that's actively against what the book actually says.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>AEDU discussions. I find your claim that you don't know where it's coming from to be a bit unbelievable, to be honest, because I know you're a very active and long time poster, so I know you've seen them. The whole basis of AEDU is built around "you'll have X encounters per day, where you'll spend Y amount of resources on each one", which has resulted in a de facto expectation from players that they call beat every encounter because they know and/or expect how many resources will be spent. I can't go pull up the quotes, but we have had people literally say that if the encounter isn't built for the PCs to win, then that's bad DMing and "out to get the PCs" because the rules say how each encounter should be balanced.</p><p></p><p>And my point to that which you quoted, was no wonder why someone thinks it will result in a TPK if the players always expect to win due to metagaming if the DM actually plays the monsters like Tucker's Kobolds. Players don't have that same sense of risk if they assume there is no real risk of their PCs dying because of that metagaming balance knowledge. Its why we have people like ehren saying that if a group of kobolds set traps that result in PCs dying or suffering, it's bad DMing rather than how the game actually should work (role playing the monsters to their ability).</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Who has made that accusation? No one has called another person a bad roleplayer. I've only inferred that if you do play reckless like that and run into a situation like Tucker's Kobolds, don't blame the DM for playing them as they would normally act and don't blame the game, because it's you who made the choice to act recklessly. Nothing in that statement implies you're a bad role player. the only way you could be a bad role player is if you didn't role play at all in a role playing game because it defeats the purpose. </p><p></p><p>You like to quote Gygax, then I'm sure you're also aware in the DMG of him saying that if PCs die because of their own poor choices, then too bad for them.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This. So much this.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Sacrosanct, post: 6983677, member: 15700"] It wasn't meant to be. It was meant to be an observation of what's actually happening. We've had TONS of arguments over the years (most recently a thread here from a week or so ago that I'm aware of) where people either outright say, or heavily infer, that unless an ability is in the statblock, then that monster can't do anything else. People have described their gameplay more akin to a boardgame, where all the flavor text and lore about the monster is ignored (as well as attributes unless it involves a save somewhere) because of statements like "monster X is boring because they don't do anything but attack." INT and WIS scores are there for more than just saves. They tell you the intellectual capacity of said monster, which tells you how they would react in the game world. All that flavor text is just as important. In the example earlier in this thread, the kobold flavor text tells you that they are experts at trap making. So when ehren says that kobolds using deadly traps is just the DM out to get the players, that's actively against what the book actually says. AEDU discussions. I find your claim that you don't know where it's coming from to be a bit unbelievable, to be honest, because I know you're a very active and long time poster, so I know you've seen them. The whole basis of AEDU is built around "you'll have X encounters per day, where you'll spend Y amount of resources on each one", which has resulted in a de facto expectation from players that they call beat every encounter because they know and/or expect how many resources will be spent. I can't go pull up the quotes, but we have had people literally say that if the encounter isn't built for the PCs to win, then that's bad DMing and "out to get the PCs" because the rules say how each encounter should be balanced. And my point to that which you quoted, was no wonder why someone thinks it will result in a TPK if the players always expect to win due to metagaming if the DM actually plays the monsters like Tucker's Kobolds. Players don't have that same sense of risk if they assume there is no real risk of their PCs dying because of that metagaming balance knowledge. Its why we have people like ehren saying that if a group of kobolds set traps that result in PCs dying or suffering, it's bad DMing rather than how the game actually should work (role playing the monsters to their ability). Who has made that accusation? No one has called another person a bad roleplayer. I've only inferred that if you do play reckless like that and run into a situation like Tucker's Kobolds, don't blame the DM for playing them as they would normally act and don't blame the game, because it's you who made the choice to act recklessly. Nothing in that statement implies you're a bad role player. the only way you could be a bad role player is if you didn't role play at all in a role playing game because it defeats the purpose. You like to quote Gygax, then I'm sure you're also aware in the DMG of him saying that if PCs die because of their own poor choices, then too bad for them. This. So much this. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
Thing I thought 4e did better: Monsters
Top