D&D 5E Wandering Monsters- playable monsters

[gyor]

http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4wand/20130702

Good article, but it would help to explore the difference between the more exotic core racesand the monsterous races.

I mean aasmir is now more monsterous then a tiefling? How does that make sense?

 

[Sunseeker]

Poll question 2 sums up my position on how they should be presented: You play a "lesser" version of the creature, be it younger, inexperienced, or raised outside it's natural culture/habitat.
I don't like the way question 4 was phrased, but it seems to be asking something similar.

I enjoy monstrous PCs, I really do. Either gaining monstrous levels, or monster races gaining class levels, it's a fun and different approach to the game. But, as much as I love these things, they are by no means a mandatory part of the regular game. They are IMO, entirely accessory and while it's something I'd like to have, there's no rush to get it out asap.

 

[howandwhy99]

They should stop the d20 process of deriving saves and To Hit bonuses from Hit Dice / Hit Points. Hit Dice does not equal level and getting rid of the concept of "character level" would be a positive thing. 4th Edition did a good thing here, though honestly I saw that as a throwback to earlier design concepts.

The first barrier in earlier D&D games for monster races was the Ability Scores of monsters needing to fall into the 3-18 spread. If a group of monsters' very weakest member was still over 18 in a score, than one would need to be weakened in some way to make it playable. Something similar goes for creatures like the Giant Tick, which doesn't quite have high enough mental scores to be a PC race, much less any of the classes. With D&D Next having a capped A.S. at 20, I'm thinking we'll see something similar.

A far bigger impediment though is the loss of adventure elements due to racial abilities. Flight is a major advantage for any gravity challenges. If everyone has flight that is one challenge no longer relevant to play. It would need to be removed from any adventure treating gravity as a balancing mechanism and the XP would need to be lowered. Add a flying PC to a gravity challenged party and one member is solving all these problems for them (not necessarily a bad thing, but still the go to workaround).

Another challenge is the basic world supporting elements of the setting and adventures. Robots still need some kind of energy intake (so eating is still an ongoing challenge), but the specific means of gaining this energy defines the world. At least, the world needs to accommodate such energy intake as much as it does growth and access of food or the race may have an unplayable drawback. (Sort of like Kitt in a post-apoc gas-free world. And then when you add in the lack of roads...)

Yet another difficulty is the opening up of new adventure challenges due to racial abilities, but ones that other races cannot engage in. If your race can at will shrink down to microscopic size to explore the world right at your feet, than they have worlds of adventure the others can only reach with plentiful and frequent amounts of shrinking magic for everyone else. This is the Shadowrun Decker scenario where one player plays a solo game while the rest watch (though in that case the Decker had virtually no abilities when not soloing).

There are major challenges once when "Monster" means anything anyone can imagine with the addition of a few specific traits: INT, WIS, and CHA. I might want to play a sentient planet Jupiter, but I suggest we don't believe D&D failed when it isn't designed to do so.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Yeah, I wonder a bit about how that "lag" interfaces with a concept like bounded accuracy, where the "lag" isn't really a lag as much as it is an overall character weakness.

But, I like the idea of making simple critters races (a gnoll can just have gnoll traits + more fighter levels or something), and making the complex critters classes (so I can be a level 4 pixie/level 2 rogue or somesuch), and truly monstrous PC's should remain an option, but with strong caveats. They should probably be opt-in.

 

[Argyle King]

I didn't like any of the options for question 4.

 

[Sunseeker]

A far bigger impediment though is the loss of adventure elements due to racial abilities. Flight is a major advantage for any gravity challenges. If everyone has flight that is one challenge no longer relevant to play. It would need to be removed from any adventure treating gravity as a balancing mechanism and the XP would need to be lowered. Add a flying PC to a gravity challenged party and one member is solving all these problems for them (not necessarily a bad thing, but still the go to workaround).

I wouldn't say that having wings is a significantly larger game breaker than say, a high skill in use rope. Besides, where doors are closed, others are opened. Perhaps there is a great chasm...with a roaring wind in it (read: very high fly check). We could likewise argue about the wingspan needed to carry a medium creature, and in a narrow 5'x5' corridor, you're not going to be able to spread your wings to get over a pit or other hazard. (although the rules don't explicitly account for wingspan, I find that it is a logical consideration and apply it in my games).

Sure, wings are a great tool that gets around a lot of otherwise mundane issues like scaling a cliff or crossing a canyon or scouting from up high. Besides, Wizards and sorcerers have traditionally gotten the "fly" at the rate of 60, and 1min/level. If we estimate a round at 6 seconds, you can fly roughly 600 feet at 3rd level. Easily trumping any gravity-based challenge.

 

[Tonguez]

Having briefly played a willowisp psion (hard) and a ghoul soulknife (fun, especially with no con score), I can say I like monster pcs. Humanoid monsters ought to be treated exactly like PCs (race +class) with the assumption that all the mm monsters are at least level 3.

Non himanoids are harder, but converting abilities to equivalent feats or feat stacks might work...

 

[Tovec]

I didn't like any of the options for question 4.

I know! None were satisfactory, at all.

I think Pathfinder actually has my favourite solution so far, though I think it needs work. The remaining problems probably have to do with the CR system and backwards comparability.

So, my ideal solution would resemble something like.. level adjustment to enter, then possibly reducing that adjustment (gaining back those lost levels in some way) as you advance further. If you do this, you can let nearly ALL monsters be characters, assuming the adjustment comes in high enough. And that is what I need, I have had a wide range of monster PCs and I would hate to lose that club in my bag of tricks. Most people won't be, but that doesn't mean that I should not be allowed the option.

Beyond that however, I've had excellent experiences with Ogre PCs, TERRIBLE experiences with Pixies (mostly due to one specific player) and I don't consider the stock humanoids (aasimar, orc, etc.) to be any different than regular PCs. I haven't had anyone (yet) who was high enough to be able to be a true dragon, but I have had several express interest and a few come close and I absolutely want them to be playable in the future - my preferred system already does that and the system I am developing does that, I would be amazed if WotC can't figure out a way. My game would absolutely suffer if they limit it to only humanoids and not expand it as far as possible.

Oh, and weak versions of monsters CAN work, but I have not seen it ever work in reality. It always feels very much like a weak form of that creature. Play a weak angel and you feel it as soon as you encounter a real one, any fiend, or really any outsider at all. I don't like having only some of the powers that I feel are iconic to a creature*.

Also, unless I'm crazy, it seems like a partial solution for this 'weak form' of a monster might be to let PCs play the 'Half' version. It isn't enough for my preferences, but it is something and does allow a partial measure without feeling, unjustifiably IMHO, watered down. That is, if you want to play a ogre but it is too strong then play a half-ogre. Want to be draconic, half-dragon. Want to be a celestial but the real ones have too many powers? Half-celestial. It can even work with what Wyatt was saying about large creatures being too powerful, as half-creatures could all (by design) end up all being medium (possibly small). They don't even have to be a template (as it was in 3e) they could just be a stock race. Not half-dragon-half-human; just half-dragon. Period.

Also, does anyone else find it funny that we got an article like this AFTER the shadar-kai? I mean, given the percentages and the conversation we had when the shadar-kai article did come out; I would assume monster PCs are more popular.

*If they are not iconic then why does a "fully formed" version of that creature exist, and why with that exact set of powers?

 

[Orius]

He forgot to mention how the original books said that a DM could allow just about any type of PC, provided it worked its way up from a weaker form, and gained its powers as it leveled.

Having rules for the most basic humanoids is good to me. Way back in 2e, I preferred powering up humanoid opponents by giving them class levels through the Complete Book of Humanoids rather than just sticking an extra few HD on them, because they added more challenge to the PCs. I'm not particularly opposed to a player playing something like a goblin either.

Ogres as a PC aren't a huge deal to me either, while they're very strong and maybe have more hp, that's about all they got. Easier to balance than something which has at will spell abilities. And powerful things like dragons or fiends are too powerful to keep them in line with the rest of the party unless the DM is running a campaign with these things, say something like 2e's Council of Wyrms.

 

[Jester David]

Level Adjustment simply did not work. Did. Not. Work.
However, this is very different from "could not work".

The problem with LA is actually pretty obvious: PCs gain HD and powers by levelling up while monsters added their HD to their powers. A 10th level fighter had 10HD and 10 levels of special powers while a monster of equivalent power would be 10HD plus several levels of LA for an ECL of 10+ despite being equal to the fighter (if not worse). Their effective level could never be the same as a PCs' because they were essentially using NPC class levels (no powers) and adding special powers overtop.
This was very apparently with Savage Species where you never received even close to the same number of bonuses as a PC class.
Let's look at something simple as an example. The ogre. CR 3 creature with 4HD and a LA of 2. So an ECL of 6. Again... CR3 and ECL6. What does it get for that LA +2? A net +4 to stats (+2 higher than other races), and some natural armour. +2 strength is hardly worth of two full levels, have almost the same game effect as a +1 weapon. An ogre really feels like it should have been a level 4 (or even 3) character.

As long as we playtest LA and they spend a little more time seeing how it works at all levels, I don't see it being a problem.