D&D 5E (2014) What Monsters got nerfed from early D&D/AD&D to now/5e

[Mycroft]

I also find it odd that dragon weapon attack (bite, claw, tail) damage does not scale past Large size.

 

[Arilyn]

I remember in 3e we came across a crypt full of mummies. Mummies in 3e are kind of nasty. An aura of fear that causes paralysis. Mummy rot. Everyone was really worried, and then we realized we had a paladin. Paladins in 3e are immune to fear, and immune to disease, including supernatural and magical diseases. In 3e, mummies are just tough zombies to a paladin.

A crypt full of mummies? You had one nasty GM!

 

[Nebulous]

Ugh. This thread reminds me of why I add Monster feats to my baddies, and how nice it is to have third party books like Tome of Beasts where the monsters have a noticeable upgrade in lethality.

 

[dave2008]

I also find it odd that dragon weapon attack (bite, claw, tail) damage does not scale past Large size.

Agreed, that is why I redid them: dragons

EDIT: PS, I have other versions that are closer to the standard monster design, but still scaling damage based on size.

 

[CapnZapp]

Just reducing CR doesn't make a monster "nerfed".

To be called "nerfed" a monster should be worth less than its CR.

If you think the Will 'o the wisps are weak, just combine them with a Banshee... [emoji6]

Something that does earn the epithet "tragically nerfed" is most MM demons. The Nalfeshnee and the Marilith come to mind.

 

[Mycroft]

Agreed, that is why a redid them: dragons

Nice, I have come to a similar place with 5th Ed monsters.

"...I like the way you think, gonna keep my eye on you..." *as said by Sam Kinison-RIP*

 

[Doug McCrae]

A general trend in 5E monster design (probably applies to 3E and 4E as well) is the reduction of asymmetric monsters. Monsters with immunities, or special attacks or special requirements existed to provide an alternative approach. Some monsters can't be assaulted directly and need to be handled a different way. These 'puzzle' monsters exist to force players to look at other tactics.

I like combat to be tense, exciting and allow all the players to meaningfully contribute.

Binary, all-or-nothing powers make this less likely. That's been my experience, not just across multiple editions of D&D, but in other rpgs as well. A common situation in D&D is a monster that is very hard to defeat but becomes uninteresting if the PCs have access to a particular spell or item such as Protection from Evil or magic weapons.

Take a monster that is immune to non-magic weapons. If all the martial PCs have magic weapons, which is often the case in mid to high level play, then the immunity is irrelevant. If some martial PCs lack such weapons then they don't get to contribute.

Here's a few examples from actual play:
1) In a 3e game we were preparing to attack a nest of vampire spawn. We would have been very vulnerable to their Domination power but we cast Protection From Evil on every party member rendering us immune. This turned an impossible or very hard encounter into a relatively easy and imo not very interesting one.
2) Again in 3e, the party were surprised by an umber hulk. Its confusion ability caused, not merely a TPK, but a boring TPK with most of the players unable to control their own characters. If the PCs had cast Protection from Evil otoh as in the example above the encounter would have been trivial.
3) In an 8th level 2e game a multiclass magic-user/cleric was the only PC in the party who could fight a ghost, using defensive spells to make himself immune to its attacks. The other players had nothing to do while he solo-ed it.
4) In a 5e game we fought a dragon construct in its lair. It had no relevant immunities and was defeated by having its hit points reduced to zero. The fight was a very close run thing, and extremely memorable, involving many interesting tactical choices. It wasn't determined by a single spell or ability and every PC made a significant contribution. Even the bard.

 

[Zardnaar]

Most undead, beholders, anything with a petrification attack, anything requiring +2 weapons or better to hit.

In 5E hit it harder works all the time and you can get magic damage from level 1, or 50gp.

 

[Mycroft]

Yeah, more things straight out immune or resistant.

Damage Resistance towards magic weapons is a joke: Once you have a magic weapon, don't worry about it, you got everything...

 

[Yardiff]

Just reducing CR doesn't make a monster "nerfed".

To be called "nerfed" a monster should be worth less than its CR.

If you think the Will 'o the wisps are weak, just combine them with a Banshee... [emoji6]

Something that does earn the epithet "tragically nerfed" is most MM demons. The Nalfeshnee and the Marilith come to mind.

To me, if a monster was a challenge to group of 9th+ characters in one edition and then ends up a challenge to a group of only 2nd-ish level characters, it fits the nerfed category.