Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="FormerlyHemlock" data-source="post: 7007754" data-attributes="member: 6787650">Need it be established that something is "a problem" before it is changed?I can't prove that it's a problem, but my preference certainly is for mighty enemies to be actually mighty. My preferred route is not to mess too much with their base stats/attacks/etc. (although I would at least give the Balor a third attack, because only two attacks just doesn't feel awesome enough) but to give them enough spells and magical abilities to be cunning, both tactically and strategically. For dragons, I give almost all of them above Wyrmling status between 1 and 19 levels in Dragon Sorcerer, which is enough to make them extremely mobile and formidable. For Pit Fiends and Balors, I'd basically just give them back all the abilities from 2nd edition. Balors will get at-will Symbol and Teleport Without Error and a handful of other spells; Pit Fiends will likewise get at-will Animate Dead and Suggestion and Advanced Illusion (Major Image in 5E) and Teleport Without Error plus nigh-unstoppable regeneration (IIRC, only holy water stops it, although that might be my house rule--I do remember that Lemures regenerate that way but I can't remember for sure if Pit Fiends officially do too).What you're seeing here is that I prefer a game where a CR 20 monster is a serious strategic threat capable of proactively shaping the game world in complicated ways: dominating a region, animating undead in all of the graveyards, infiltrating courts and blackmailing nobles into submission or outright kidnapping/replacing them.5E comes on Easy difficulty by default; I find Nightmare more interesting, but that doesn't necessarily mean that it's a problem that the game defaults to Easy. AFAIK that design decision is deliberate, and it makes sense--it's more fun for players to know that they're wildly outperforming baseline expectations than to feel like they're just barely keeping their heads above water. If the Balor's stats were identical to today but it were rated as CR 5 instead of CR 19, nothing would change in the game world, but at the metagame level, players who can't beat one would feel awful about themselves for losing instead of justified.Edit: BTW, Strahd is scary strong if you play him intelligently and ruthlessly (which is totally in character for him too). He's got an insanely high Stealth skill, high mobility including the ability to move through walls in his lair, minions to summon, and regeneration. I don't know where the number "a hundred adventurers" came from, and if I were him I wouldn't try to take on all hundred at once, but it's easy to imagine him succeeding in killing off groups of four to six professional killers ("adventurers") between levels 6-11, many, many times over the years. Perhaps some of them got away (Shadow Monks especially) to tell the tale, but it would have been Strahd who was victorious, and not the professional killers.Edit2: one reason I like a world with a high difficulty curve is to explain why PCs of levels 6-11 even exist. In a low-lethality world in line with DMG recommendations where eventual advancement to level 20 is assumed, it doesn't even make sense that everyone wouldn't be level 20, since gains accrue so rapidly and reliably. I like a world where rapid advancement has a high chance of killing you off just as quickly, say 90%. Something like this (<a href="https://maxwilson.github.io/Beast/AbstractDungeoneering/" target="_blank">https://maxwilson.github.io/Beast/AbstractDungeoneering/</a>) is fairly close to my preferred style for a world. In a world like that, many, many NPCs will never get past 6th level, and maybe not even past 1st. Either they die or they retire so that they won't die.</blockquote>

Verification