Calling an edition's combat boring, trivial and over too fast (without a qualifier) isn't edition warring...
There isn't an anti-5e edition war that I've noticed. There are criticisms of the new edition (as always) and many of them are questionable or unfounded (ditto) - and deserving of a spirited defense - or resolvable (and warranting some discussion of how to fix them - which, in spite of thecasualoblivion's stated aim, is, I think, fair game on some of the topics we're visiting). Few of those criticisms sink to the level of the edition war, and, even then, they aren't picked up and repeated ad nauseum.
And, like I told thecasualoblivion - if you find it trivial and boring, it can't very well be over /too fast/, now can it?
(Actually, 'trivial' isn't even that unfair. Some 'easy' combats are to be expected in a 6-8 encounter day, they still consume (some) resources, so add up to something less trivial, though.)
but my post in response to this for some reason could be construed as edition warring??
It could have been pulled right off the front lines c2009.
I'm referring to the number of monsters. On average, a 4E encounter will feature more monsters than a 5E encounter.
Sure. Supports the 'faster combat' goal. Fewer monsters, less overhead for the DM, shorter DM/monster turns, manageable attrition vs the PCs, Bounded Accuracy favors the numerically superior side, PC victory likely.
I found the guidelines for attack bonuses, average damage per attack, and defenses to be perfectly workable in 4E. They were simple and effective. There are guidelines that exist in 5E, but I find them harder to use. Maybe they'll become easier once I understand them better,
Most likely. I used the builder or just eyeballed it in 4e. I wing it in 5e.
but I don't go for a lot of fudging or "winging it". I want to make a monster out of numbers and stick to what I make, and only fudge when I absolutely need to.
It's just one way to cope. One I like, but it's not for everyone. If you do get a handle on the 5e 'monster math' sharing the experience would be cool.
Oh, I would guess the system is working as intended in that regard. I just don't like how it seems to be very swingy in that regard.
It does add potential drama. A large group of enemies can be a credible threat, even though you have a limited resource that can trivially annihilate them.
As for "behind the scenes", I mean actually building monsters and using the system outlined in the DMG for monster creation.
OK, so 'away from the table' preparation.
I really like to homebrew and create my own monsters, and I really liked 4E's system for doing it. I'm trying to get used to 5E's, but I'm not too fond of the approach used so far. I got 4E's to work for me, and maybe I'll get 5E's to also work, and I just haven't managed it yet. I am hopeful that I'll get there...
OK, sounds fair. You can always post here with specific questions or ideas. Make for some constructive threads.
Like I said, they do take the late-era 4E approach to solos of "giving monsters more actions per round, outside their turn". I don't think the implementation is quite enough to get me what I want, but it's workable, and a good starting point. Still, the problem with legendary actions is they aren't particularly dynamic, and the ones written in the book can be kind of hit-or-miss. Lair actions are more what I'm looking for, because I like how they are themed as the creature turning the environment against the PCs, and a legendary creature in its lair can be a credible threat, and I could work with that. I'm just not quite sure it's appropriate for the level range of PCs I currently have though, because legendary creatures with lair actions tend to be >= CR 10 (notable exception is the Unicorn, but I don't think that's quite what I'm going for either).
I think it's perfectly appropriate to have 'Legendary' monsters at low level, just like it was fine to have low-level 'solos.' Maybe the name is misleading that way, but it's also evocative.
You could take Lair Actions out of the Lair, too, in some cases, I'm sure. Make them Environment Actions, maybe?
