|
The MM does define Challenge Rating as: "A monster 's challenge rating tells you how great a threat the monster is. An appropriately equipped and well-rested party of four adventurers should be able to defeat a monster that has a challenge rating equal to its level without suffering any deaths. For example, a party of four 3rd-level characters should find a monster with a challenge rating of 3 to be a worthy challenge, but not a deadly one." Meanwhile, the actual encounter building rules say that a single CR 3 monster is not a Medium but a Hard encounter for such a group, which does have a chance of killing PCs. Of course, this is the same book that claims that giving a monster a Charming gaze attack, making it invisible, ethereal, teleport at will, and/or giving it life drain has no impact on its Challenge Rating whatsoever. When it comes to monsters it's really unbelievable how hard they dropped the ball. As for Intellect Devourers, they are described as roaming hunters. You absolutely can encounter one or a small pack of them when you're not also facing their illithid overlords at the same time. According to CR you might face them as soon as level 2 or 3, at which point you're really not equipped to handle them yet. I'm not even talking about the Wish thing, just the permanent Int-drain itself is ludicrous at those levels. WotC simply hosed up, end of story. (And if someone wants to tell me the Int drain is not permanent, I would like to point out that the Intellect Devourer actually received errata which did not update the duration of the Int drain.)
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 11:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 11:06 |
|
|
koreban posted:You're free to get mad that they assumed common sense, but your idea of Challenge Rating = Creature Power wasn't right and that's what I was trying to point out. quote:Challenge rating is only a guidepost that indicates at what level that monster becomes an appropriate challenge.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 11:59
|
|
|
Spiteski posted:And if he says no, talk to him after game/during a break, describe exactly the issue you're having and ask if he doesn't mind you changing investigation to perception, as that is the theme you were going for. If we need to tweak our character we are allowed to change one thing when we level up. I'm just wondering about the published adventure itself. Does it just not use investigation? If so I have no issues changing to perception (or some other skill) instead.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 15:32
|
|
|
For the most part, specific checks aren't usually explicitly defined or assigned. The problem you're having is similar to the difference between survival and nature checks: it exists but the nuance may be overlooked or discarded at your table. So the solution really is a dm chat. Iirc, investigation is for active feats of discernment or discovery, perception is for passive or general feats of awareness.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 15:46
|
|
|
CaPensiPraxis posted:For the most part, specific checks aren't usually explicitly defined or assigned. The problem you're having is similar to the difference between survival and nature checks: it exists but the nuance may be overlooked or discarded at your table. So the solution really is a dm chat. Iirc, investigation is for active feats of discernment or discovery, perception is for passive or general feats of awareness. So like, if you walk into a room, it would a Perception check to notice the carvings on the wall. Once you pass that check you can tell basically what the carvings are, and if want to examine them for hidden messages or whatever, it would be Investigation. I think.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 15:51
|
|
|
I've always considered it that perception is for seeing whether something is or is not there, either passively or actively. Active perception that one rolls for is like squinting to see into the mist. You're just looking at a thing, you're just looking harder with the perception roll. On the other hand, investigation looking for something. It's actively going through files on the desk, trying the books on the bookshelf for a hidden lever, looking for the signs of a trap, or trying to figure out how it works. Perception is "can I see a thing?" and investigation is "can I find a thing?" or "can I figure out a thing?"
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 15:59
|
|
|
In practice I've found that perception is normally passive. If the player is asking to do something it's normally investigation. Asking "are they squinting" sounds like a good way to judge if they're using perception.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 16:23
|
|
|
Perception: you notice his boots are very muddy Investigation: you realize the mud on his boots is bright red, like the clay soil on the south side of town where the murder occurred.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 16:27
|
|
|
They could have easily included a paragraph for each monster describing how to use it in an encounter. If not, they could have used any number of tags to indicate use-case scenarios to players - even a [dangerous] tag to indicate maybe a monster is more difficult or has a weird power that makes it more deadly than its other stats might indicate. The idea that players will get uppity if a DM uses a monster outside of the intended use-case is already ridiculous. That is already encouraged by 5e's nature as the 'do what you want' edition. Just a little paragraph or a few words or a single tag that basically communicates 'hey! these little guys are CR2 but can be pretty nasty for characters without access to specific spells' is helpful. I don't hate 5e; but if you want to make an edition that's all about reigniting the role of the DM, than have some loving words on training new DMs.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 18:03
|
|
|
what they should do is if they give a monster an ability, they should have a description of what that ability does so the DM can consider how the monster will attack the party and if it's a suitable foe
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 18:31
|
|
|
Mendrian posted:I don't hate 5e; but if you want to make an edition that's all about reigniting the role of the DM, than have some loving words on training new DMs. As someone who learned to DM with 5e, this exactly.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 18:33
|
|
|
mormonpartyboat posted:what they should do is if they give a monster an ability, they should have a description of what that ability does so the DM can consider how the monster will attack the party and if it's a suitable foe Sort of like the ability descriptors in the monster's stat block? I also learned to play and DM starting in 5th edition. Hell, I started DMing out of the free PHB pdf file. I was months in before I picked up the books. 5th edition does feel like a very free space for designing and developing your own adventures. I haven't had a lot of complaints about it, especially in light of comparisons to 4th ed, pathfinder, Age of Rebellion and Dark Heresy/Only War, which are the other systems I've looked at or had some experience with. The biggest issue may just be the CR[number] stat. Some people just want to shortcut to that to know that from a list of all CR2 creatures, I can randomize a selection of them and they'll all be roughly equally difficult. The issue I see with that is that in the design philosophy of 5th ed, you can clearly see that a pile of thugs, kobolds, hobgoblins, whatever <CR1 creatures is meant to still be deadly in numbers. Abilities like pack tactics and multi attack along with starting +3 to attack rolls means that while you may only get hit 15-20% of the time at mid-high levels, volume of attacks can and will whittle you down. That's why there's an encounter multiplier. Honestly, a group of level 2 adventurers can deal with a 21 HP creature like an intellect devourer, probably before even getting to melee range. It's almost a moot point. It's like 2 rounds of combat with a shortbow and an Eldritch Blast damage and it's dead. If your fighter has a couple javelins and the cleric uses sacred flame, it's basically one round and it dies. The thing that gets people is the intel hit and brain eating abilities. They're really nasty. Seeing that at level 2 is squarely in "being a dick DM" territory, but like I showed in the example, it only takes a couple of those and a mind foster or two to go from a dirty, but not insurmountable level 2 encounter to a hard-deadly level 15-20 encounter. It's not World of Warcraft. The kobold you slapped around at level 1 is still somewhat of a threat at level 15, especially if he's got a few friends with him. You can't think of scalability in MMO terms because they didn't design it to work that way.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 18:55
|
|
|
So the Intellect Devourer is fine because the party can just kill it from range while it stands in the open but the Kobold is dangerous?
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 19:15
|
|
|
mormonpartyboat posted:what they should do is if they give a monster an ability, they should have a description of what that ability does so the DM can consider how the monster will attack the party and if it's a suitable foe
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 19:19
|
|
|
koreban posted:I don't think it's feasible in the way that the monster manual is organized (alphabetically) to put a sidebar or descriptor that explains precisely how WotC envisioned each and every one of the monsters to be used. I would argue that it's not only feasible, but that is, in fact, exactly what books are for.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 19:21
|
|
|
It wouldn't be viable space-wise to do that for a print book, but then again, I don't know why they print the books anymore. Searchable PDFs are extremely my poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 19:40
|
|
|
koreban posted:I don't think it's feasible in the way that the monster manual is organized (alphabetically) to put a sidebar or descriptor that explains precisely how WotC envisioned each and every one of the monsters to be used. Since your entire thing started from an off-hand mention in a post of mine (yes, it was lazy to pick the first example that came to me at 2am), might as well:  It's from the 4e Monster Manual (the first one), and the entire list is 4 pages long. Sure, it's not perfect, but it's got some effort and thought put into it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 19:45
|
|
|
koreban posted:The biggest issue may just be the CR[number] stat. Some people just want to shortcut to that to know that from a list of all CR2 creatures, I can randomize a selection of them and they'll all be roughly equally difficult.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 19:49
|
|
|
koreban posted:Sort of like the ability descriptors in the monster's stat block? 
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 20:01
|
|
|
The game has a stat called Strength. If I look at a group of creatures with the same Strength, I know that those creatures are equally strong. The game has a stat called Speed. If I look at a group of creatures with the same Speed, I know that those creatures are equally fast. The game has a stat called Challenge. If I look at a group of creatures with the same Challenge, I know that those creatures are not, and are not intended to be, equally challenging. Why is this so hard to figure out? Use your common sense.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 22:43
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:The game has a stat called Strength. If I look at a group of creatures with the same Strength, I know that those creatures are equally strong. At least some one in this thread gets it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 22:45
|
|
|
The game has a stat called Level. All player characters of the same Level are equally powerful.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 23:44
|
|
|
Vengarr posted:The game has a stat called Level. All player characters of the same Level are equally powerful. There IS a precedent!
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 23:45
|
|
|
Just tried that website that generates a character for you and I just got one I think I might actually play: Unstable Dragonborn Paladin from a dysfunctional marriage that grew up in a graveyard It's weird, but it's not TOO weird....
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 23:52
|
|
|
Thumbtacks posted:Just tried that website that generates a character for you and I just got one I think I might actually play: That's a pretty cool story. Either dragon blood being the cause of the disfunction, or hoping the kid would help and, well, not working out. Kelemvor is a god, perfect fit.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 23:58
|
|
|
Can someone who believes that CR isn't a measure of how challenging a creature is, and that level isn't a measure of a PCs ability to overcome that challenge, please explain to me what they think those numbers do mean and why there's a set of rules for encounter difficulty that use them as inputs for its formulae.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 00:02
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:Can someone who believes that CR isn't a measure of how challenging a creature is, and that level isn't a measure of a PCs ability to overcome that challenge, please explain to me what they think those numbers do mean and why there's a set of rules for encounter difficulty that use them as inputs for its formulae. Who needs a formula. No body cares about a formula.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 00:10
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:Can someone who believes that CR isn't a measure of how challenging a creature is, and that level isn't a measure of a PCs ability to overcome that challenge, please explain to me what they think those numbers do mean and why there's a set of rules for encounter difficulty that use them as inputs for its formulae. CR is intended as those things, but in practice it is not. Thus after due consideration of my resorces, I use the CR as "what level charcters should be seeing this thing" and then change all the numbers. Again, this is not intended, and the result is a fairly major failing of the system.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 00:14
|
|
|
Serperoth posted:That's a pretty cool story. Either dragon blood being the cause of the disfunction, or hoping the kid would help and, well, not working out. Kelemvor is a god, perfect fit. Yeah that's what I'm thinking, too. Growing up in a graveyard means he's super comfortable with death, and I feel like a paladin that comfortable with death could be really interesting. I'm not super familiar with Kelemvor, he's the god of death or something, right? I think the "unstable" and "dysfunctional marriage" thing could work hand in hand, although I'm not super sure. Any ideas? Maybe a Cleric would work better, hm... Thumbtacks fucked around with this message at 01:05 on Jan 19, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 01:01
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:The game has a stat called Strength. If I look at a group of creatures with the same Strength, I know that those creatures are equally strong. You do know that size influences attributes of strength when it comes to lifting, pulling, carrying capacity, etc. Right? I totally understand what you're saying, but it's a gross oversimplification, the same way I'm trying to say that looking at *only* the CR of a monster as an ultimate gauge of difficulty and abilities of a monster is a gross oversimplifation. quote:The game has a stat called Speed. If I look at a group of creatures with the same Speed, I know that those creatures are equally fast. But initiative, which is very specifically related to the speed at which you enter a combat round is based off of a totally different and unconnected stat. quote:The game has a stat called Challenge. If I look at a group of creatures with the same Challenge, I know that those creatures are not, and are not intended to be, equally challenging. Again, not entirely. Like most things in complicated systems, the nuance makes all the difference. Yes, it's a CR2 monster, but it's a CR2 lair minion for higher level adventurers. Yes, they did a poo poo job at pointing out that explicitly on each and every entry where that could/should be the case. quote:Why is this so hard to figure out? Use your common sense. That works both ways.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 01:13
|
|
|
Thumbtacks posted:Yeah that's what I'm thinking, too. Growing up in a graveyard means he's super comfortable with death, and I feel like a paladin that comfortable with death could be really interesting. I'm not super familiar with Kelemvor, he's the god of death or something, right? Yeah, he's the god of death in a Lawful Neutral "death is a part of life" kind of way, hates undead. Less "torment the sinners who dieded" and more as a limbo kind of place, in the interim until they are passed to their gods, etc. Gives me kind of a psychopomp/Acheron vibe as well, in addition to the obvious Pluto one (from Greek Mythology), now that I'm googling him. High-ranking clerics of his are called Doomguides, which seems like a fun bit, with how evil it sounds. Yeah, between the dysfunctional family, him being a dragonborn (and like I said, possibly the cause of the disfunction if you want), and being a paladin of the god of death, it's not a huge stretch for some instability. Could be as easy as the "Whoa dude you're looking dead today" and him flipping out, to more personal issues (short temper, taking jokes at him more seriously than that, rather than anything paladin-specific). VV: Oh yeah that could be another unstable thing. "What do you mean you want to LOOT them?" "You're just going to LEAVE THEM IN THE DUNGEON?", or just aimed at the bad guys "YOU JUST LEFT THE GUY WHOSE BLOOD YOU DRAINED FOR HELLEVIL RITUAL TO ROT?" Serperoth fucked around with this message at 01:28 on Jan 19, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 01:14
|
|
|
Serperoth posted:Yeah, he's the god of death in a Lawful Neutral "death is a part of life" kind of way, hates undead. Less "torment the sinners who dieded" and more as a limbo kind of place, in the interim until they are passed to their gods, etc. Gives me kind of a psychopomp/Acheron vibe as well, in addition to the obvious Pluto one (from Greek Mythology), now that I'm googling him. High-ranking clerics of his are called Doomguides, which seems like a fun bit, with how evil it sounds. Yeah that sounds like about what I expected. I imagine a paladin of kelemvor would pay a lot of attention to the sickly and dying, trying to make sure they're passing on as peacefully as possible. Maybe when we start looting corpses and poo poo he'd leave a coin or two on the body to pay for a proper burial, or as a token of respect. The more I think about it the more I'm starting to like this character idea. I'm thinking he'd probably be kind of generally weary. Probably not in a depressed way, more of just like a "*sigh* alright let's go" kind of way.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 01:22
|
|
|
Vengarr posted:It wouldn't be viable space-wise to do that for a print book  There's all these words in these books, they're just, the books are full of words, and I'm curious what people think these words are supposed to say if "the intended use of this monster within the game" isn't on the list?
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 01:31
|
|
|
LFK posted:Just because this is making me go all Well, you see, sometimes if you have too many words on one topic, you don't have room for other words on another topic. Labeling monsters as minions and having broad classifications makes sense though. I was picturing more along the lines of a paragraph or two per monster saying poo poo like "See how this monster has abilities all revolving around ranged attacks? They're intended to be ranged attackers"
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 01:56
|
|
|
koreban posted:Yes, it's a CR2 monster, but it's a CR2 lair minion for higher level adventurers. Yes, they did a poo poo job at pointing out that explicitly on each and every entry where that could/should be the case. Nothing in the monster manual supports this statement. "Mind flayers breed intellect devourers to serve as roaming hunters of the Underdark..." "An intellect devourer typically uses its puppet host to lure others into the domain of the mind flayers..." What do you think CR represents and what do you think it's supposed to be used for? Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 03:02 on Jan 19, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 02:54
|
|
|
It's almost like the rules are... bad? 5e is still a good excuse to drink beers and roll dice on weeknights.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 03:03
|
|
|
Arivia posted:It's a Zak S product. Run way the gently caress away from Gamer Manchild's poo poo. For bonus points, Maze is designed for OSR systems, not 5e. Yeah the DM will be adapting it to 5e, I get the feeling it's more about puzzles and plot than rote monster stats. What do you mean by gamer manchild, can you elaborate?
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 03:15
|
|
|
I am curious, does the DMG or Monster Manual provide guidance on how to control monsters in combat? "Big brutes pay attention to what's in front of them," "Creatures with pack tactics should group up," "Just do what makes narrative sense," anything?
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 03:30
|
|
|
Elendil004 posted:Yeah the DM will be adapting it to 5e, I get the feeling it's more about puzzles and plot than rote monster stats. What do you mean by gamer manchild, can you elaborate? Zak S is an OSR grognard who picks fights across the internet and considers this forum to be one of his greatest enemies. He also internet stalks and harasses people, including several people here in Trad Games. He's just complete and total trash. Oh, and his claim to fame is that he was in social circles with porn actresses and recorded them playing D&D. A lot of nerds love this, because they think with their dicks.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 03:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 11:06 |
|
|
Serperoth posted:Oh yeah that could be another unstable thing. "What do you mean you want to LOOT them?" "You're just going to LEAVE THEM IN THE DUNGEON?", or just aimed at the bad guys "YOU JUST LEFT THE GUY WHOSE BLOOD YOU DRAINED FOR HELLEVIL RITUAL TO ROT?" I like this a lot, actually. I was debating between Paladin and Cleric but the more I think about it I think Paladin is the right way to go. I might be super off base with this, but Clerics generally follow an Order in service of (a) God, right? Paladins seem more like divine lightning rods, like they're (theoretically) like an extension of a God's power on the mortal plane. I'm firmly convinced the best way to play a Paladin is as a crazy near-fanatic, it's way more fun. And this will really just let me play off that more. Alright so he's super not cool with any kind of defiling bodies and that sets him off REAL quickly.... Nice. Still not sure how I'll weave the "dysfunctional marriage" part in here but I'll figure out a good use for it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 03:42
|
|