What makes a monster terrifying?

[Umbran]

That's what feets are for. laughs in jump-kick

Casts grease. laughs in watching monk fall on his head-butt-head

 

[Wiseblood]

I can’t say, but I’ll know it when I see it.

FWIW: I’m pretty sure it isn’t the monster regaining 1/5 of the damage it took in the first round of combat.

 

[BookBarbarian]

Using your only brain-case as a melee weapon seems... like a lifestyle choice you are apt to regret.

I will not stand by and have a pillar of Dwarven culture insulted like this. If our forefather Dwarvey McHeadbutt hadn't headbutted the trolls out of the first cave we would all have fallen into the sky.

Next you'll say that drinking ale and spirits excessively also hurts the precious 'brain" thing whatever it is.

 

[generic]

I will not stand by and have a pillar of Dwarven culture insulted like this. If our forefather Dwarvey McHeadbutt hadn't headbutted the trolls out of the first cave we would all have fallen into the sky.

Next you'll say that drinking ale and spirits excessively also hurts the precious 'brain" thing whatever it is.

Never let Elf talk get to yer head, boy!

Keep yer beard braided, and march on, head down and ready to butt.

 

[Coroc]

So a recent thread had a discussion about monstrous disappointments-

D&D 5E - Monstrous Disappointments.

What monsters have you tried to use that didn’t or can’t give you what you want as they are written? For me the first one that springs to mind is werewolf. They just don’t instill he kind of fear or revulsion I would like.

www.enworld.org

Which ended up in a conversation about monsters that are terrifying, and, for that matter, whether or not monsters in 5e are (or can be) terrifying. I've been a little preoccupied with things recently, but I wanted to return to the topic, because I think that there are some interesting issues that can be teased out of the conversation, provided that we first identify what it means for a monster qua monster to be terrifying.

So I would start by making this assertion: 5e monsters are not, as a rule, terrifying. Scary. They are not, in and of themselves, objects to be feared. But in order to understand why I think that, a few things need to be understood first.

1. Tucker's Kobolds.

So, from way back in Dragon 127 (and the concept long predates this, but it's a useful term for purposes of discussion), we have the idea of Tucker's Kobolds. If you've never heard the term before, allow me to quote a certain scene from Game of Thrones and say, SHAME SHAME SHAME! Look it up. But the basic concept is that any monster (in this case, kobolds) if played intelligently, strategically, and maximizing terrain and so on (aka, TACTICS FTW!) can be, for lack of a better word, terrifying. And, for the most part, I think that you can still design an encounter and use monsters intelligently and use tactics to truly strain the players. You can still have "Tucker's Kobolds."

2. Be unfair.

So players will do things like, say, focus fire and if a particular target will get up again if not dealt with, will make sure it stays down. ....Monsters can do that too. Heck, wouldn't a zombie just start feasting on a fallen foe (aka auto-crit) once it has fallen? And yet, many DMs rarely do this, using the typical D&D "inverse ninja" strategy when it comes to fighting. "First, attack the meatshields, and when the meatshield goes down, move on to the next moving target while the meatshield gets healed ...." The whole "whack-a-mole" problem arises because monsters allow it to. Again, monsters are more scary when they are more likely to truly kill you, or to target the weak PCs first when possible. Combine this with (1), and combats become much, much more difficult and, perhaps, scary.

3. Narration.

Monsters, and their abilities, can be terrifying if narrated correctly. I have used the telepathic powers of the nothic, for example, in LMOP to create a sense of terror and dread in players; this, too, can be scary.

4. Newness.

So a common example used to say 5e monsters are scary is that monsters can scare new players, and everyone else is jaded. There is some support for this! From Dragon Magazine #10 (October, 1978):

One of the problems with D&D is that the players always know too much. This is news? “You obtain surprise over three Clickclicks.”
“Clickclicks? Oh, yeah, they’re in Supplement Three. Hand it to me. And where’s Greyhawk? It had a note about them.”
A pause. “We shout out ‘November’.”
“That’s right, the Clickclicks fall over dead.”

In other words, whether it's yet another troll metagame discussion, or just a newbie encountering zombie for the first time in any edition, there is never a time like your first when it comes to D&D.


So, all those four factors aside, why do I think that monsters in 5e aren't scary?


The issue with 5e's monsters are inherent to 5e's style.

So I've now DM'd a lot of people that have started out as complete newbies to D&D and have progressed to veterans. And the one thing I have consistently noticed is that, relatively quickly, they have grokked the salient driving force in 5e. Whatever small bells and whistles a monster might have, it is, in the end, a bag of hit points. Whatever resistances it might have, whatever abilities it might possess, in the end all you need to do is just cause more damage. Every monster is a nail, and DPR is the hammer. Once that salient point sinks in, the monster qua monster is no longer scary, or even that interesting. The tactics or combat might be, but never the monster itself. Perhaps there might be a save or suck here, or a nifty effect there, but it's all going to be somewhat familiar.

Now, contrast that with older editions (here, OD&D, B/X, and 1e) where monster abilities were much more a la carte. You would have abilities as disparate as:
Save or die.
Level loss.
Permanent loss of hp.
Permanent loss of ability score.
Percentile magic resistance.
Strong effects outside of save-or-die (like petrification that really mattered). And system shock,.
Permanent aging.

...and then you'd have all the weird little effects that are too numerous to mention ...


Now, there are many valid reasons for getting rid of most of these; in fact, I would say that the transformation of the game to one where there is significant effort inherent in the character creation process and it's more "heroic fantasy" pretty much demands removing or altering some of these effects (for example, save or die to save or suck).

However, these same changes are what removes the terror from the monsters themselves. Undead are a useful example of that; a wight or wraith was terrifying in old editions, just because of what they were.


I would end by saying I don't necessarily think that there is a better or worse approach to it, but the approach is different and removes much of the inherent fear of particular monsters.

Anyway, those are my thoughts- throwing it out there for other comments.

When you want to DM a true Ravenloft campaign better get involved with the topic of this thread.
Read 1st or 2nd ed Ravenloft campaign setting handbooks if you can get access to that, it also will make your vanilla campaigns better.

So here are some of the tricks i use to make mobs which are bag of hitpoints or minor nuisances in other campaigns or standard MM a real threat:

• Do not identify the monster to fast, does the player know it is just an orc?
• 5e zombies are truly terrifying if the PC do not have access to radiant damage e.g. so
• re introduce weapon invulnerabilities: At least the killing blow for the werewolf has to be done with some blessed silverweapon or he
• returns. Maybe mobs got access to resurrection also?
• Use hit and run techniques.
• Use mobs which are real heavy hitters with multiple attacks, but immune to several magics. e.g. a wolfwere i set loose on my ravenloft party had bad AC but it had three attacks a shitload of HP and i think 3d8+9 or so each hit and +7 to hit. Those are great opponents even for single mob vs. party, they can easily down one PC in one or two rounds. Barlgura demon like in RAW PHB for a level 4-5 party is another good example, take it as is or reskin or
• use numbers for a change, endless streams of low level critters can bring the party to the edge also.
• Every mob becomes very dangerous if one or more of the party is suffering from exhaustion levels, or if it is clear that no soon rest is in sight, so every resource spent is expensive, so timing which is the next trick:
• Put in a schedule, e.g the werewolf hits at uncommon opportunities, when the party expects it the least, and it always succeeds in e.g. tearing the commodities for the party down, first the shopowner then the innkeeper then the local priest etc. , so do not hesitate to
• kill of NPCs like flies in most gruesome ways to communicate the danger.

So that's enough for now, hope that helps.

 

[Lanefan]

I should have added Dominating/controlling a PC can be pretty terrifying. For some reason the party's barbarian attacking the rest of the group is much scarier than just some run of the mill monster.

The only TPK I've ever DMed in my life came from just this: the party's heavy fighter was the first in the room and was immediately dominated. He then methodically chopped down the rest of the party as they arrived, and once they were all dead the fighter became a mindless slave until himself dying a while later.

 

[Lanefan]

Stop me if you’ve heard this one before:

“The monster attacks... Ragnar, because he did the most damage to it last round.”

It’s a very, very common “tactic” used by DMs, usually to avoid seeming like they’re unfairly targeting anyone. And it never fails to kill the tension in an encounter. It becomes immediately clear that the monsters are going to behave in what ever way will seem the most fair to the players, instead of making tactically prudent decisions. Simply playing the monsters like they want to win goes a long way to making them scary.

Depends on the monster.

A dumb brute (e.g. a typical ogre, or most wild animals) will in fact most likely attack either whoever hurts it first or whoever hurts it the most, because that's who it's mad at.

Completely mindless foes e.g. zombies also don't attack intelligently; here it's completely random who they go after if faced with multiple targets at once.

This is what makes intelligent foes more of a threat; in that they can and do (usually) realize their best course of action in a given situation and act on it.

 

[Lanefan]

Neither Healing Word, Cure Light Wounds, Healing Spirit, Mass Healing Word or Heal have a material component

All of which can (and IMO should!) be changed by a simple stroke of the DM's pen......

 

[ad_hoc]

Movement can be scary.

A group of orcs are scary because they can Dash as a bonus action.

The Fighter runs up to the orcs but they don't care. They all run past him (suffering a single attack in response) and attack the poor wizard 5 times.

 

[Tony Vargas]

and attack the poor wizard

Y'know, if you're attacking an old man in a robe, and he's poor, he's more likely a monk who's taken a vow of poverty than a wizard. So be careful.