New simple way to list creatures in MM

Besides comments maybe yiu can fine tine this better here is a sample
Simple is better but to simple is just to little.
Here is a sample:
Orc:
1. Orc leader. Lvl 3 (whatever class DM want) assign stats according to class stats 17,15,14,10,9,8
Ac 8-14 hit points 20-40. Etc. Damage by weapon or spell
2. Orc lvl 1 stats Str 14,int 8, wis 8 dex 10, con 14, Cha 8.
Ac 14 hit points 8 damage by weapon type.
Picture
Ecology

This allows 1. Less confusion trying to remember whose what in a fight like fourth with 5 different types.
2. More space saved In MM and modules listing creatures
3. Allows DM to decide if he wants to use leader as a warrior wizard cleric rogue etc just assign stats by class choose between recommended ac and hitpoints
Eh. No. Give me defined stats which I can fine tune if needed, don't force me to fine tune everything.

Damage by weapon or spell? Do you mean I have to look up the weapon/spell like in 3.5 with spells? Ew, no, that's not something I want to have back either.

How's this going to help with who is what?

And I've been happy to see classes go out the window for monsters.
Eh. No. Give me defined stats which I can fine tune if needed, don't force me to fine tune everything.

Damage by weapon or spell? Do you mean I have to look up the weapon/spell like in 3.5 with spells? Ew, no, that's not something I want to have back either.

How's this going to help with who is what?

And I've been happy to see classes go out the window for monsters.


There's nothing in this commentary that I don't agree with.

A smaller block would be cool so we could have more monsters that are easier to run, but the OP's idea gives us the first by completely tearing up the second.  I really think 4e got monster presentation right.  We should never have to look anything up in another book.  That just slows combat down, requires more space at the table, and makes it harder to prep for encounters because you have to look up and note all the spells' effects (or at least page numbers) ahead of time.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

I don't mind all the stats but each different one is to much.
2 is enough.
Having all the different ones was great though. As a DM, all i have to do is flip to the orc section and i have 6 different versions that have different abilities. I don't have to look anything up. I don't have to customize something if i don't want to. This was something in 4e that needs to stay.

Why not do both? Wizards will want to sell books anyway so why not have the base monster manual with small stat boxes similar to the original poster and then compendiums with expanded variant options. So they would have a monster manual I and then maybe an Orc compendium with a bunch of variant options for orcs all worked out. One thing I would like is for them to have some type of database that we could access that splits the monsters up by type, terrain, and CR.

I don't mind all the stats but each different one is to much. 2 is enough.



For you.

I'd like to have more than orc, level 1 and orc, level 3. Either those two versions are not enough as they will have only two sets of powers, or they will need too much building if they have more than one set of power I need to choose from, on top of already having to choose AC, stats and weapon(s).

I think the book you want, which, to me, more looks like a monster building book, isn't the book I want, which is a monster manual with pre-made, ready-to-use monsters.
3 pages and 6 different stats is to much.  The goal is to simplify but not to much so. That means simplify the book and pages and for combat   

I also understand that some of you may not be able to think outside the box and need to follow exactly what is written.  Where some DM's can use both written and also outsided the box using written as guidelines.

Back in 79 if we faced orcs it would be 8 orcs ac 6 hp 5 dam 1-6 example with a chief littel extra stats. Im saying as a core stat for lvl 1.  the hp etc can be made up easy as writing down 42hp dam 1-12 for lvl 4 adventure group

WOuld you use their Orc chieften for lvl 1 adventure 216HP? or would you modifie it to fit your group lvl of 1 or 2. its the same process.  Dont tell me that you can use each orc type in a fight and know without looking up what they can do.  so each time you do its wasting play time. thats what they want to reduce.

So, on a map you would have #1-5 and maybe L for leader and not have to list  orc m, orc raider, orc drudge orc bers orc leader orc etc. It becomes messy and drags time out for combat which is what they want to reduce.   Whats the BEst way to do that?  reduce the amount of differnt typs
 
lets say my players were a little more lvl oriented I can on the fly easily say hp 12 dam 1-8  with a leader lets say ac 5 hp 22 dam 1-6 and cast whatever amount of spell i fee fit for the combat.
Or I'll make this fast:  You hear the faint sound of creatures talking.  Champ #1 can recognize the speech as Orcish.   You charge into the room to confront them.   5 Large Black Orcs wearing chain armor turn towards you holding either swords or axes in hand as a 6th Orc moves behind them.  He is wearing robes. 
1-5 AC15 HP 5 Dam 1-6 etc. or if my group is lvl 5 i can say 1-5 AC 18 HP 14 dam 1-8+3 its so easy to just write down ac hp dam.  on a piece of paper.  You have to anyway.
  
So, as they fight I decide that the Orc Leader inthe back casts magic missle or web or whatever I feel like to give the group a good fight.  maybe he casts silence on the group or cast 1 lightning bolt. 

What I am saying is a few things according to 4th MM Orc.
1. the 1hp is a waste.  You want the orcs to be able to go from lvl 1 to whatever lvl you want for game play based on the lvl of your adventure group. If i want them to fight orcs at lvl 1 or lvl 10 it should be a simple format.  
2. reduce the differenty types to what is really different warrior, chief.    so its less iformation for waht they can do that you have to remember or look at each time its their turn.      

      
I for one like the way monsters are currently done. When I want an orc I just open to the orc page and *poof* I have an orc. If I needed to assign stats and figureout how much damage his weapon does, what his saves are, etc. then I would not use that orc. I mean how often has any DM used a template creature? Except for special bosses it takes way to much time to make a template creature, I would rather just pick and play.

So, on a map you would have #1-5 and maybe L for leader and not have to list  orc m, orc raider, orc drudge orc bers orc leader orc

Sounds like the DM is making it harder on himself. Sure you could have a battle with 2 human skeletons, two orc skeletons, a kobold skeleton, a cow skeleton, etc. Or you could have 5 human skeletons. Sure it sounds cool to have a bunch of different types, but really it does nothing more than add a level of paper shuffling that does not benifit game play. (or could could desribe 5 different skeletons but just us a single stat block, best of both worlds)

It would seem you are trying to solve the problem of too many creatures. Instead of 5 types of orc what stop the DM from just using 5 different creatures, 1 orc, 1 kobold, 1 drow, 1 dwarf, 1 devil? The options are there, that does not mean that you have to use them. But when you do want that option it is right there to use.
Im sorry but ADEU is a French word for goodbye, not a combat system. You say, "Encounter Power" and I stop listening to you. [spoiler Have Played/Run] D&D 1st ed D&D 3.5 ed D&D 4th ed Shadowrun Star Wars SAGA Cyberpunk Interlock Unlimited Run.Net [/spoiler] I know my games, don't try to argue about them. [spoiler Alignment Explained] This is a very simple problem and I will outline it below. Their are two types of people Type 1: a lot of people (not all, but a lot) who play see alignment as "I am lawful good thus I must play lawful good" Type 2: a lot of people (not all, but a lot) who play see alignment as "My previous actions have made people and the gods view me as lawful good. The difference is subtle but it is the source of the misunderstanding. Alignment does not dictate how you play your character. All it does is tell you, the player, how the rest of the world views you, and your previous actions. Any future actions will be judged by their own merits. Say you're a baby eating pyromaniac. You are most likely chaotic evil. But one day you decide, "Hey all I really need is love." So you get a wife, have a kid, and get a kitten named Mr. Snook'ems. You become a member of the PTA and help build houses for the homeless. You are no longer chaotic evil. And just because you were once chaotic evil it does not mean that you have to stay chaotic evil. Alignment never dictates what you can do, it only says what you have done. Now that is cleared up here is a simple test. What is the alignment of... A Police officer: The average Citizen: A Vigilante: The answer is simple. The Police officer is lawful good. He uses the laws of the country and city to arrest people and make them pay their debt to society. The Citizen is Neutral good. He wants to live is a place that is Good and follows moral and ethical principle, but he sometimes finds the laws impedes him, and he wonders why we spend so much on poor people. The Vigilante is Chaotic Good. He wants to uphold the morals and ethics of society but finds that the bad guys often slip through the cracks in the law. He takes it upon himself to protect the people from these criminals. That is the basic breakdown of the good alignment axis. What needs to be remembered is that any one of these people can change alignments, easily. The Police officer could be bought off by a local gang, and suddenly he drops to lawful neutral. The average citizen might find that his neighbors dog is annoying, barking at night and keeping him up. So he poisons its food, now he is no longer good, he is stepping towards true neutral. Maybe the citizen really goes crazy also kills the neighbor, hello neutral evil. It is possible that the Vigilante realizes that the cops are actually doing a pretty good job and decides to become an officer himself, leaving his masked crime fighting days behind him. Now he is Lawful good. Your alignment is not carved in stone, it is malleable and will change to reflect your actions.[/spoiler]
Your suggestion 1 Orc. First let's look at each one. 1hp, 1 hp, 46 hp 63hp,then yiu hp into 130 to 215 hp.
1. Next 5th wants to reduce combat time in fights. Let's here your suggestions.
Heres mine
1. 4th had a good system with understandable + to hit d20 + 1/2 lvl + ability mod etc. vrs target ac #. Represents yr lvl in fighting. Damage was fine also but hit points became to much so long combat was a problem. They have mentioned this and wantvto fix it.
2. They want to streamline monsters. So using orcs as example what can yiu take out or change to streamline.
1. 6 different type. Each one with different ability stats hp ac abilities damage etc. 2. Hit points in general.
Did I miss something else to streamline or take out. Let me know.
So. Take away cannon fodder 1hp orcs. Damn a farmer could kill one with a butter knife or a 1 punch fist. Do that's two. Replace that with lvl 1 orcs with same ability stats ac damage saves but give hit points if a first lvl. Next yr berserker, axe tosser, shaman ,leader.
Axe tosser can fit in with lvl 1 orcs they use axe bow etc.
The berserker shaman chieftain can all fit in one catagory as leader. If I want one of them in a lvl 1 adventure should I modifier their stats to be lower how can i use a berserker chieftain shaman in a lvl 1 game based on those stats so either i modify up or down. They are to powerful for lvl 1 module.
So let's say in a game tfe group encounters 1 of each chief shaman berserker raider. Each have different stats saves damage abilities ac hit points etc. I have to flip pages and lOok at each one to see what they can do. I gave to write down hit points with name of each different type of Orc. That means on paper and on play map. This is what they wantvto reduce as well. Combat time.
So how would yiu change it to make it easier to read look up abd play for shorter fights.

1. Reduce amount of Orc types to reduce look up time in what they can do.
2. Reduce hit points to have faster combat.
What can yiu suggest because they don't want it like fourth completely.
Tell me how YOU would streamline combat. That goes from flipping pages to see what type can do what on their turn to finishing fights.
..."window.parent.tinyMCE.get('post_content').onLoad.dispatch();" contenteditable="true" />I also understand that some of you may not be able to think outside the box and need to follow exactly what is written.  Where some DM's can use both written and also outsided the box using written as guidelines.

Back in 79 if we faced orcs it would be 8 orcs ac 6 hp 5 dam 1-6 example with a chief littel extra stats. Im saying as a core stat for lvl 1.  the hp etc can be made up easy as writing down 42hp dam 1-12 for lvl 4 adventure group



Nice job there.

Preface your ideas as insults to those of us who like having lots of premade creatures to choose from.

I see no point to reading this thread anymore.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

There is a nice little self created divide here. Shame there can't be more acceptance instead. I feel that is where the future of the game should be.

All this vitriol, pushing away, retroactive retaliation, and preemptive striking needs to stop.

I keep trying but some won't let things go. Will you?

 

Because you like something, it does not mean it is good. Because you dislike something, it does not mean it is bad. Because it is your opinion, it does not make it everyone's opinion. Because it is your opinion, it does not make it truth. Because it is your opinion, it does not make it the general consensus. Whatever side you want to take, at least remember these things.

You might want to re-read what you're posting. I can't make sense of half of what you're writing.

As far as I can see, your problem isn't however that there are too many orcs printed, but that you're using too many different sorts in the same fight.

If I have five orcs in a fight, I'll normally use 2 types at the most who're at a level more or less matching the party and the intended encounter difficulty.

btw, implying that someone can't think out of the box because he wants ready-made creatures isn't going to make you any friends. At least that's how it came across in post #7, whether you intended it or not.
OP, you want to "streamline" monsters by taking all interesting abilities way from them and reducing them to a sack of hp and an AC number? Thats the only way i can possibly interpret your cryptic posts.
Yeah, no.  If you assume people just can imagine more monsters or whatever, you are seriously o the wrong track.  We want more monsters because somtimes there's no time to make new monsters, or hell, because some days we've spent so long on the story, planned traps, skills and other challenges that we're not going to have time to make up monsters too, no matter how "easy" it is to make them.
"I don't know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everybody." --Bill Cosby (1937- ) Vanador: OK. You ripped a gateway to Hell, killed half the town, and raised the dead as feral zombies. We're going to kill you. But it can go two ways. We want you to run as fast as you possibly can toward the south of the town to draw the Zombies to you, and right before they catch you, I'll put an arrow through your head to end it instantly. If you don't agree to do this, we'll tie you this building and let the Zombies rip you apart slowly. Dimitry: God I love being Neutral. 4th edition is dead, long live 4th edition. Salla: opinionated, but commonly right.
fun quotes
58419928 wrote:
You have to do the work first, and show you can do the work, before someone is going to pay you for it.
69216168 wrote:
If you can't understand how someone yelling at another person would make them fight harder and longer, then you need to look at the forums a bit closer.
quote author=56832398 post=519321747]Considering DnD is a game wouldn't all styles be gamist?[/quote]
I also understand that some of you may not be able to think outside the box and need to follow exactly what is written.  Where some DM's can use both written and also outsided the box using written as guidelines.


This is more than a little offensive.  Not wanting to spend extra time creating every encounter does not mean we are "inside the box."  Maybe you should try opening up the perceptual box you live in and look at other's opinions without your preconceived notions.  I gave you the benefit of the doubt in my first post.  You at least owe the same to the rest of us.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

If I insult anyone I apologize.
All I read is keep it the same which some people truly want but won't happen. They want to change it so you can say keep it same but how about also giving some suggestions on changes. Even slight changes that might peak their interest.
Remember they are looking to change it from current 4th MM so if you don't add your input in changes they might like then don't cry when it's something completely different
- Minions, get rid of them. I find them uninteresting and not very fun.

- More premade monster. The idea of templates works fine if you have the time to prepare, but when I want a random encounter I want a lot of choices that are easy to use.

- Seperate Stat blocks. I found in 3.5 it was nice to have the 12 different types of skeleton in one large stat block but it also made it much harder to use the special abilites which would now be shuffled to a few pages away. So keep the monsters stat block and its abilities right next to eachother instead of giant stat blocks of many varieties.

- Fewer playable monster races. If a race is good enough for a player then it belongs in either the PHB or a Races book, not burried in the monster manuel.

- No index of Types. In the back of the MM they have all of the special abilities that are given to a creature type. I don't want to look those up, put them in the creatures description. I mean who remebers all of the stuff of the undead type? Why do I have to go to the back of the book to find this very important information.


I am perfectly fine with a 600 page monster manuel if it gives me the ability to open the book and see everything I need to know about the creature right there on one or two pages (preferable facing pages) without having to go flipping around the book looking at indexes and glossaries.
Im sorry but ADEU is a French word for goodbye, not a combat system. You say, "Encounter Power" and I stop listening to you. [spoiler Have Played/Run] D&D 1st ed D&D 3.5 ed D&D 4th ed Shadowrun Star Wars SAGA Cyberpunk Interlock Unlimited Run.Net [/spoiler] I know my games, don't try to argue about them. [spoiler Alignment Explained] This is a very simple problem and I will outline it below. Their are two types of people Type 1: a lot of people (not all, but a lot) who play see alignment as "I am lawful good thus I must play lawful good" Type 2: a lot of people (not all, but a lot) who play see alignment as "My previous actions have made people and the gods view me as lawful good. The difference is subtle but it is the source of the misunderstanding. Alignment does not dictate how you play your character. All it does is tell you, the player, how the rest of the world views you, and your previous actions. Any future actions will be judged by their own merits. Say you're a baby eating pyromaniac. You are most likely chaotic evil. But one day you decide, "Hey all I really need is love." So you get a wife, have a kid, and get a kitten named Mr. Snook'ems. You become a member of the PTA and help build houses for the homeless. You are no longer chaotic evil. And just because you were once chaotic evil it does not mean that you have to stay chaotic evil. Alignment never dictates what you can do, it only says what you have done. Now that is cleared up here is a simple test. What is the alignment of... A Police officer: The average Citizen: A Vigilante: The answer is simple. The Police officer is lawful good. He uses the laws of the country and city to arrest people and make them pay their debt to society. The Citizen is Neutral good. He wants to live is a place that is Good and follows moral and ethical principle, but he sometimes finds the laws impedes him, and he wonders why we spend so much on poor people. The Vigilante is Chaotic Good. He wants to uphold the morals and ethics of society but finds that the bad guys often slip through the cracks in the law. He takes it upon himself to protect the people from these criminals. That is the basic breakdown of the good alignment axis. What needs to be remembered is that any one of these people can change alignments, easily. The Police officer could be bought off by a local gang, and suddenly he drops to lawful neutral. The average citizen might find that his neighbors dog is annoying, barking at night and keeping him up. So he poisons its food, now he is no longer good, he is stepping towards true neutral. Maybe the citizen really goes crazy also kills the neighbor, hello neutral evil. It is possible that the Vigilante realizes that the cops are actually doing a pretty good job and decides to become an officer himself, leaving his masked crime fighting days behind him. Now he is Lawful good. Your alignment is not carved in stone, it is malleable and will change to reflect your actions.[/spoiler]
The 4e phenomenon of 7 different orcs was caused by actually printing the same orc 7 different times, altering the defenses and hp to match what was needed by level, and sometimes adding a new ability or two.

In 5e, level bonuses to attack and defense are thankfully gone, so there is no need to have 7 different attack ratings or 7 different ACs. The only things we are left with is hp, damage, and abilities. To take the same example, this means we have 1 orc entry and 5 different abilities from which we can choose any to give this 1 orc. None of these abilities will require cross-referencing info or any math to add, and some may deal more damage than others. You want to make this orc level 10? Multiply its hp by 10.

I've been dealing with MM1 grimlocks, goblins, low-level orcs, and dragons within each color recently, so understand my cynicism. ;)

My point was that the ability variance makes the most difference without level bonuses, and 5e abilities can't rely on grid movement like many 4e ones do. I don't know how much ability score variance they will have within a single monster entry in 5e. 5e's a different beast, so its monster entries may be too.
The statblock needs all of the numbers.  Explaining where those numbers came from is secondary.
It wasn't a problem with all of them.

I think people have different ideas about how different assorted kinds of a monster need be to warrant different stats for it, but we still have things like ghosts, zombies, and skeletons. They may all have the same abilities undead-wise, but what about their former life's form? As long as the templates don't require the math conjugation it did in 3e.
True story:
One of the DMs in my group (who learned most of his rules in 3e) just mentioned that he had less trouble reading the 1e monster blocks at a glance than the 4e monster blocks at times because 4e expressed most of the monster in walls of numbers and game lingo ("+X vs AC: xdy+r, __, shift 1.") while the 1e entry expressed all features in text with minimal game terms (damage, hit points, save) and seldom mentioned modifiers as they were understood to always equal the HD stated in the statblock.

Personally, 1e monster descriptions are oft wordier than 4e's concise ones, but I see his point. I learned from Basic, and played 1-4e, but when I look back to 3e the more complex or high-level monsters have small lists of feat names and sometimes spells to cross-reference pooled at the bottom of their blocks and several different attack bonuses based on whether they are attacking without moving, moving and attacking, grabbing, ... Don't get me started on dragon table/statblocks.

We can also think about what purpose a monster entry may serve.
Apart from the illustrations, 4e uses much of its space for extra statblocks for combat variety and for suggested combat encounter groups, but that's not the only way.

1e had many creatures (like the tween, umblepy, and carbuncle) that focused on party interaction: each had a bizarre motive or general plan of action that could prove ally, pest, or threat at different points depending on how the party reacted, and whether they were exploring, in combat, or trying to communicate to it.

They may also have strange narratives in regard to each other:
Show
Gynosphinxes did more than pose riddles and then try to eat you; they traded in knowledge for payment  in the form of gold, riddles the players may think up, or the location of one of those androsphinxes they were always chasing.

Androsphinxes for there part resented gynosphinxes because they were known to eat people who didn't pay up and because, for all the androsphinx's virtuous ideal, gynosphinxes were more intelligent on the whole.

Criosphinxes were nasty folks always lusting after gynosphinxes, who thought they were disgusting.

Now we have this amusing little triangle.

Some monsters even had adventure hooks in their descriptions, like the 3e gravecrawler/ancestor worm, a creature that had both combat, role-play, and story potential. (For the curious, a review of this creature lurks at the base of this page.)

I'm personally more attracted to using monster space for this kind of thing, but some monsters may be more suited to other treatments.
In 5e, level bonuses to attack and defense are thankfully gone,

I have yet to hear this fact confirmed, I did hear a lot of speculation, but nothing official.
Im sorry but ADEU is a French word for goodbye, not a combat system. You say, "Encounter Power" and I stop listening to you. [spoiler Have Played/Run] D&D 1st ed D&D 3.5 ed D&D 4th ed Shadowrun Star Wars SAGA Cyberpunk Interlock Unlimited Run.Net [/spoiler] I know my games, don't try to argue about them. [spoiler Alignment Explained] This is a very simple problem and I will outline it below. Their are two types of people Type 1: a lot of people (not all, but a lot) who play see alignment as "I am lawful good thus I must play lawful good" Type 2: a lot of people (not all, but a lot) who play see alignment as "My previous actions have made people and the gods view me as lawful good. The difference is subtle but it is the source of the misunderstanding. Alignment does not dictate how you play your character. All it does is tell you, the player, how the rest of the world views you, and your previous actions. Any future actions will be judged by their own merits. Say you're a baby eating pyromaniac. You are most likely chaotic evil. But one day you decide, "Hey all I really need is love." So you get a wife, have a kid, and get a kitten named Mr. Snook'ems. You become a member of the PTA and help build houses for the homeless. You are no longer chaotic evil. And just because you were once chaotic evil it does not mean that you have to stay chaotic evil. Alignment never dictates what you can do, it only says what you have done. Now that is cleared up here is a simple test. What is the alignment of... A Police officer: The average Citizen: A Vigilante: The answer is simple. The Police officer is lawful good. He uses the laws of the country and city to arrest people and make them pay their debt to society. The Citizen is Neutral good. He wants to live is a place that is Good and follows moral and ethical principle, but he sometimes finds the laws impedes him, and he wonders why we spend so much on poor people. The Vigilante is Chaotic Good. He wants to uphold the morals and ethics of society but finds that the bad guys often slip through the cracks in the law. He takes it upon himself to protect the people from these criminals. That is the basic breakdown of the good alignment axis. What needs to be remembered is that any one of these people can change alignments, easily. The Police officer could be bought off by a local gang, and suddenly he drops to lawful neutral. The average citizen might find that his neighbors dog is annoying, barking at night and keeping him up. So he poisons its food, now he is no longer good, he is stepping towards true neutral. Maybe the citizen really goes crazy also kills the neighbor, hello neutral evil. It is possible that the Vigilante realizes that the cops are actually doing a pretty good job and decides to become an officer himself, leaving his masked crime fighting days behind him. Now he is Lawful good. Your alignment is not carved in stone, it is malleable and will change to reflect your actions.[/spoiler]
In 5e, level bonuses to attack and defense are thankfully gone,

I have yet to hear this fact confirmed, I did hear a lot of speculation, but nothing official.

First mention of things moving in that direction from Charting the Course seminar:
Enworld transcript
Monte: Instead of the fighter getting a better and better attack bonus, he instead gets more options to do stuff as he goes up in level, and his attack bonus goes up at a very modest rate. I think it offers a better play experience that the orc/ogre can remain in the campaign, and people can know how the monster would work from a previous experience, but they remain a challenge for longer.
Jeremy: The Monsters are in the design teams hands now and we'll be moving to development in the next few weeks. What I can say about this goal that Monte is talking about is that we're working ot provide the DM with really good world building tools. And it's important to provide information about the orcs place in D&D while making sure that a Monster remains relevant as the characters level up. They're might be an orc shaman, an orc champion or whatever for higher levels, but we also want the basic orc to be relevant at higher levels. We want it to be really easy for the DM to open the Monster Manual and drop an orc or iconic monsters into the game.

Confirmed as being explored in Rule of Three 03/20/2012:
1st question
One of the things we're exploring in the game is what we refer to as a bounded accuracy system. Effectively, we're looking into whether or not we can strip out the assumption of accuracy and defense scaling by level, and let progression rest largely within the scaling damage, hit points, and capabilities of both characters and monsters. When you have this, any monster whose hit points are less than the damage you deal is, effectively, a minion. Thus, we might not need a specific minion rule, because we would simply design monsters with hit points that rest below average damage for certain levels and let that take care of it (in other words, we do want monsters in the game that do what minions do for us). At the same time, since as the player characters gain levels their damage numbers are going up, monsters that previously were not "minions" become "minions" by virtue of player damage outstripping their hit points. Since AC and attack bonuses aren't automatically scaling up, the orc that you fight at 1st level that took three hits to kill may only take 1 hit to kill at 6th level, making it a "minion" for heroes of that level.

Enworld DDN Fact Sheet ~ D&D Article Archive
This will be.... interesting. So far for most editions the main progression of the warrior classes was to increase to hit, increase damage, or increase armor. Since to hit and armor are now, more or less, fixed, that means we will see a lot more focus on battle axes and less focus on daggers, and a lot more focus on increasing damage and HP so that you can stay in the fight longer while dealing more damage per turn. I can see all sorts of problems arising from this...



Im sorry but ADEU is a French word for goodbye, not a combat system. You say, "Encounter Power" and I stop listening to you. [spoiler Have Played/Run] D&D 1st ed D&D 3.5 ed D&D 4th ed Shadowrun Star Wars SAGA Cyberpunk Interlock Unlimited Run.Net [/spoiler] I know my games, don't try to argue about them. [spoiler Alignment Explained] This is a very simple problem and I will outline it below. Their are two types of people Type 1: a lot of people (not all, but a lot) who play see alignment as "I am lawful good thus I must play lawful good" Type 2: a lot of people (not all, but a lot) who play see alignment as "My previous actions have made people and the gods view me as lawful good. The difference is subtle but it is the source of the misunderstanding. Alignment does not dictate how you play your character. All it does is tell you, the player, how the rest of the world views you, and your previous actions. Any future actions will be judged by their own merits. Say you're a baby eating pyromaniac. You are most likely chaotic evil. But one day you decide, "Hey all I really need is love." So you get a wife, have a kid, and get a kitten named Mr. Snook'ems. You become a member of the PTA and help build houses for the homeless. You are no longer chaotic evil. And just because you were once chaotic evil it does not mean that you have to stay chaotic evil. Alignment never dictates what you can do, it only says what you have done. Now that is cleared up here is a simple test. What is the alignment of... A Police officer: The average Citizen: A Vigilante: The answer is simple. The Police officer is lawful good. He uses the laws of the country and city to arrest people and make them pay their debt to society. The Citizen is Neutral good. He wants to live is a place that is Good and follows moral and ethical principle, but he sometimes finds the laws impedes him, and he wonders why we spend so much on poor people. The Vigilante is Chaotic Good. He wants to uphold the morals and ethics of society but finds that the bad guys often slip through the cracks in the law. He takes it upon himself to protect the people from these criminals. That is the basic breakdown of the good alignment axis. What needs to be remembered is that any one of these people can change alignments, easily. The Police officer could be bought off by a local gang, and suddenly he drops to lawful neutral. The average citizen might find that his neighbors dog is annoying, barking at night and keeping him up. So he poisons its food, now he is no longer good, he is stepping towards true neutral. Maybe the citizen really goes crazy also kills the neighbor, hello neutral evil. It is possible that the Vigilante realizes that the cops are actually doing a pretty good job and decides to become an officer himself, leaving his masked crime fighting days behind him. Now he is Lawful good. Your alignment is not carved in stone, it is malleable and will change to reflect your actions.[/spoiler]
In the next monster manual, I'd like to see a line or two describing the monster in words. The stench, the red glowing eyes, the yellowed underbite-tusk... what have you. I prefer my game to be filled with adjectives, not nouns - especially the first time the party meets a critter. Of course any DM can describe any monster for himself, but if flavour-text is absent and all that is present is combat tactics (and a couple of knowledge check results) it's easier for newer DMs to say, "You see a ghoul." instead of describing it with words that summon an horrorific vision more terrifying than the miniature.

 I truly remember encountering my first rust monster back in 1985 and only because the description of the creature was truly bizarre. That my armor and sword began to rust when it's tentacles hit me was terrifying; I didn't know what else could it do. Now it may be near to impossible to reclaim some of the mystery, but I like it when my players don't know off the bat exactly what kind of creature they are facing. To remove the meta-game from the table, so to speak. And for that to happen, a descriptive line or two on the monster's presence, smell, aura would be a great help. 

As to the argument about how many stat blocks of the same creature we need.  I'd like to see fewer stat blocks in the book, with universal rules for adding levels to monsters that make its challenge scalable. I've never liked classes for monsters, just too much work. If there are true variants of that creature, Orc is a good example: as it may be a warrior (grunt), a champion (leader role) or a shaman (magic wielding), to provide them where necessary as they have different abilities, but to not provide them where the variancy is artificial, like for instance, a minotaur that doesn't really benefit from having 3 types.  
The secret we should never let the gamemasters know is that they don't need any rules. -Gary Gygax
meh, no thanks. What I want is the ease of use mechanically of 4E, and the fluff of 2nd edition/pathfinder. 4E has by far the tightest and easiest stat blocks of any edition for your average critter (outside of creatures with no special abilities... which are pretty dull to run anyways)

What I absoloutely dont want to see is the nausea inducing 3E/PF breakdown of how you arrived that the monster that needed a +12 to hit obtained said +12 to hit. Awesome, so he has weapon focus, weapon specialization, drank a potion of accuracy, ate a THAC0 TAC0 and rubbed Bane's lucky merkin before he went out on guard patrol. I care this much about a dude whose life expetency is 3 rounds why?

Oh, and have a bunch of abilities/spells that require me to go to another source to resolve. This is the real bloat of pre-4E stat blocks...
In 5e, level bonuses to attack and defense are thankfully gone,

I have yet to hear this fact confirmed, I did hear a lot of speculation, but nothing official.



Given the rules are only 10% done as of PAX, I think most everything is up in the air at this point. At least I hope so, because their current solution of "massive HP countered by massive damage" isnt particularly appealing...
This will be.... interesting. So far for most editions the main progression of the warrior classes was to increase to hit, increase damage, or increase armor. Since to hit and armor are now, more or less, fixed, that means we will see a lot more focus on battle axes and less focus on daggers, and a lot more focus on increasing damage and HP so that you can stay in the fight longer while dealing more damage per turn. I can see all sorts of problems arising from this...


But it solves all sorts of problems too.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

I was thinking more about this. Armor has not been based on level for a while. Sure you got that stat boost every few levels and if you put it in dex it would improve AC, but that +1 dex did not really improve your defense a noteable amount. (magic items have more effect)

Attack has been based on level for a long time. I wonder how BAB will he handled/replaced. If the wizard and the fighter can both hit the orc with a sword just as easily then the main difference will be damage.

So if the only area of focus left is damage then you could stat seeing fighters throwing huge amounts of damage and to counter this you will see an inflation of HP.
That is assuming that damage is based on level. If damage is still primarially based on weapons and strength then a damage vs hp race won't occur.


I wonder if they are counting saves as defense like they did in 4th edition? If they do that is the only level based defence that I can really think of.


So we are loosing BAB and level bonus to saves. Basically the first 4 columns in the classes stat block.... Does that mean that it is now harder to hit foes with weapons and easier to get past enemy saving throws with spells?
Im sorry but ADEU is a French word for goodbye, not a combat system. You say, "Encounter Power" and I stop listening to you. [spoiler Have Played/Run] D&D 1st ed D&D 3.5 ed D&D 4th ed Shadowrun Star Wars SAGA Cyberpunk Interlock Unlimited Run.Net [/spoiler] I know my games, don't try to argue about them. [spoiler Alignment Explained] This is a very simple problem and I will outline it below. Their are two types of people Type 1: a lot of people (not all, but a lot) who play see alignment as "I am lawful good thus I must play lawful good" Type 2: a lot of people (not all, but a lot) who play see alignment as "My previous actions have made people and the gods view me as lawful good. The difference is subtle but it is the source of the misunderstanding. Alignment does not dictate how you play your character. All it does is tell you, the player, how the rest of the world views you, and your previous actions. Any future actions will be judged by their own merits. Say you're a baby eating pyromaniac. You are most likely chaotic evil. But one day you decide, "Hey all I really need is love." So you get a wife, have a kid, and get a kitten named Mr. Snook'ems. You become a member of the PTA and help build houses for the homeless. You are no longer chaotic evil. And just because you were once chaotic evil it does not mean that you have to stay chaotic evil. Alignment never dictates what you can do, it only says what you have done. Now that is cleared up here is a simple test. What is the alignment of... A Police officer: The average Citizen: A Vigilante: The answer is simple. The Police officer is lawful good. He uses the laws of the country and city to arrest people and make them pay their debt to society. The Citizen is Neutral good. He wants to live is a place that is Good and follows moral and ethical principle, but he sometimes finds the laws impedes him, and he wonders why we spend so much on poor people. The Vigilante is Chaotic Good. He wants to uphold the morals and ethics of society but finds that the bad guys often slip through the cracks in the law. He takes it upon himself to protect the people from these criminals. That is the basic breakdown of the good alignment axis. What needs to be remembered is that any one of these people can change alignments, easily. The Police officer could be bought off by a local gang, and suddenly he drops to lawful neutral. The average citizen might find that his neighbors dog is annoying, barking at night and keeping him up. So he poisons its food, now he is no longer good, he is stepping towards true neutral. Maybe the citizen really goes crazy also kills the neighbor, hello neutral evil. It is possible that the Vigilante realizes that the cops are actually doing a pretty good job and decides to become an officer himself, leaving his masked crime fighting days behind him. Now he is Lawful good. Your alignment is not carved in stone, it is malleable and will change to reflect your actions.[/spoiler]
I was thinking more about this. Armor has not been based on level for a while. Sure you got that stat boost every few levels and if you put it in dex it would improve AC, but that +1 dex did not really improve your defense a noteable amount. (magic items have more effect)


I know you may wish 4E never happened, but AC does scale with level in 4E. Just a nitpick though ;) And in a sense AC does scale with level in 3E, albeit erratically, since wealth is presumably spent on better armor and better buffs. AC is not a strict function of level, but it does have an upward trend.

Attack has been based on level for a long time. I wonder how BAB will he handled/replaced. If the wizard and the fighter can both hit the orc with a sword just as easily then the main difference will be damage.


Which makes total sense if you take a moment. Fighter hits enemy for 20 damage, wizard hits for 5 damage, and all is well. It's not like the wizard needs to miss to be less effective as a Str-based melee combatant. If the difference is a lot smaller (fighter hits for 1d8+5, wizard for 1d8) then you've got a huge problem. But if the fighter is getting some level-based bonus to damage (straight bonus, better maneuvers, multiple attacks, some combination of these) while the wizard is getting a different bonus (bonus spell damage, better spells) then their attacks with swords will be appropriately far apart in damage.

So if the only area of focus left is damage then you could stat seeing fighters throwing huge amounts of damage and to counter this you will see an inflation of HP.
That is assuming that damage is based on level. If damage is still primarially based on weapons and strength then a damage vs hp race won't occur.


A damage and hp race is exactly what we're expecting. As long as the scaling is done right, this will be the cleanest system to date. If it's done wrong, well, we've seen that one a few times. There's nothing intrinsically wrong with higher damage though.

I wonder if they are counting saves as defense like they did in 4th edition? If they do that is the only level based defence that I can really think of.


Abiity scores will be defenses, as far as we know. So far there's no sign that other defenses besides AC are in. If hit numbers are more or less static, defenses can be too. Or to look at it another way, hit points are a defense. If those go up every level, you already live longer.

So we are loosing BAB and level bonus to saves. Basically the first 4 columns in the classes stat block.... Does that mean that it is now harder to hit foes with weapons and easier to get past enemy saving throws with spells?


It seems like you're picturing DDN as 3E with a few changes. That's probably not a safe assumption - we should all throw out what we think we know about the math or the charts or anything like that.

truth/humor
Ed_Warlord, on what it takes to make a thread work: I think for it to be really constructive, everyone would have to be honest with each other, and with themselves.

 

iserith: The game doesn't profess to be "just like our world." What it is just like is the world of Dungeons & Dragons. Any semblance to reality is purely coincidental.

 

Areleth: How does this help the problems we have with Fighters? Do you think that every time I thought I was playing D&D what I was actually doing was slamming my head in a car door and that if you just explain how to play without doing that then I'll finally enjoy the game?

 

TD: That's why they put me on the front of every book. This is the dungeon, and I am the dragon. A word of warning though: I'm totally not a level appropriate encounter.

I may have grasped the wrong end of the stick entirely here, so correct me if I have. 

Damage going up by level means more hp for monsters, does it not? How does this play into the "let's shorten combat" slog? 4e combat for me and my group was some of the slowest and frequently boring "roleplaying experiences" I have ever played. If the hit points stay the same, I expect similar problems with hour long *yawn* battles. 
The secret we should never let the gamemasters know is that they don't need any rules. -Gary Gygax
I may have grasped the wrong end of the stick entirely here, so correct me if I have. 

Damage going up by level means more hp for monsters, does it not? How does this play into the "let's shorten combat" slog? 4e combat for me and my group was some of the slowest and frequently boring "roleplaying experiences" I have ever played. If the hit points stay the same, I expect similar problems with hour long *yawn* battles. 


It takes more than hit points to stretch out combat. Decision paralysis, looking up rules, complex resolution methods, and other factors matter a lot too. But if monster hp and PC damage scale well, that shouldn't add more time. For example, if your fighter hits for 8 damage against a 15 hp goblin at level one and hits for 80 damage against a 150 hp hill giant at level 10, then the scaling won't lead to a bad place. Even if your DM makes you fight the giant at level 4 when you only hit for 32 damage, your're still not necessarily in for a long fight. Other factors (complicated rules) could still slow you down, but that's all. The numbers in my damage scaling example are totally made up and probably wouldn't work at all, by the way - just an example.

truth/humor
Ed_Warlord, on what it takes to make a thread work: I think for it to be really constructive, everyone would have to be honest with each other, and with themselves.

 

iserith: The game doesn't profess to be "just like our world." What it is just like is the world of Dungeons & Dragons. Any semblance to reality is purely coincidental.

 

Areleth: How does this help the problems we have with Fighters? Do you think that every time I thought I was playing D&D what I was actually doing was slamming my head in a car door and that if you just explain how to play without doing that then I'll finally enjoy the game?

 

TD: That's why they put me on the front of every book. This is the dungeon, and I am the dragon. A word of warning though: I'm totally not a level appropriate encounter.

Damage going up by level means more hp for monsters, does it not? How does this play into the "let's shorten combat" slog? 4e combat for me and my group was some of the slowest and frequently boring "roleplaying experiences" I have ever played. If the hit points stay the same, I expect similar problems with hour long *yawn* battles. 

It works like this. It chukifies hit points. So if the Fighter increases damage by 1d6 per level (which is absurd) Then you know that at level 8 a monster needs 8d6 Hp to surivive 1 hit. So if you want the monster to take 3 hits it needs 24d6 HP. This allows the DM to know how many hits a monster can take before it goes down.

So if a party of 4 at level 3 attack a monster and you want the combat to last 3 rounds how many Hit Points does the monster need? The answer is 4*3d6*3. That is 4 hits per round (one for each player), 3d6 per hit, and 3 rounds. The monster needs 36d6 hp.

Now with a constant hit rate you can help lower that monsters' hit points. So if the players have a 50% hit rate you know that instead of 4 hits per round only 2 will hit. So now the monster's HP only needs to be 18d6 to survive for 3 rounds against 4 level 3 adventures.


The idea is that you turn the monsters HP it to chunks. Each hit removes 1 chunk. So if you know the number of hits and how long you want the monster to surivive you can easily know how many chunks of HP it needs. But don't expect to see HP listed in boxes like Shadowrun or Cyberpunk. It sounds like HP chunks will probably be defined as either d6 or d8 Hit dice so they will still have a number. Like how our monster has 18 chunks, which is 63 hitpoints.
Im sorry but ADEU is a French word for goodbye, not a combat system. You say, "Encounter Power" and I stop listening to you. [spoiler Have Played/Run] D&D 1st ed D&D 3.5 ed D&D 4th ed Shadowrun Star Wars SAGA Cyberpunk Interlock Unlimited Run.Net [/spoiler] I know my games, don't try to argue about them. [spoiler Alignment Explained] This is a very simple problem and I will outline it below. Their are two types of people Type 1: a lot of people (not all, but a lot) who play see alignment as "I am lawful good thus I must play lawful good" Type 2: a lot of people (not all, but a lot) who play see alignment as "My previous actions have made people and the gods view me as lawful good. The difference is subtle but it is the source of the misunderstanding. Alignment does not dictate how you play your character. All it does is tell you, the player, how the rest of the world views you, and your previous actions. Any future actions will be judged by their own merits. Say you're a baby eating pyromaniac. You are most likely chaotic evil. But one day you decide, "Hey all I really need is love." So you get a wife, have a kid, and get a kitten named Mr. Snook'ems. You become a member of the PTA and help build houses for the homeless. You are no longer chaotic evil. And just because you were once chaotic evil it does not mean that you have to stay chaotic evil. Alignment never dictates what you can do, it only says what you have done. Now that is cleared up here is a simple test. What is the alignment of... A Police officer: The average Citizen: A Vigilante: The answer is simple. The Police officer is lawful good. He uses the laws of the country and city to arrest people and make them pay their debt to society. The Citizen is Neutral good. He wants to live is a place that is Good and follows moral and ethical principle, but he sometimes finds the laws impedes him, and he wonders why we spend so much on poor people. The Vigilante is Chaotic Good. He wants to uphold the morals and ethics of society but finds that the bad guys often slip through the cracks in the law. He takes it upon himself to protect the people from these criminals. That is the basic breakdown of the good alignment axis. What needs to be remembered is that any one of these people can change alignments, easily. The Police officer could be bought off by a local gang, and suddenly he drops to lawful neutral. The average citizen might find that his neighbors dog is annoying, barking at night and keeping him up. So he poisons its food, now he is no longer good, he is stepping towards true neutral. Maybe the citizen really goes crazy also kills the neighbor, hello neutral evil. It is possible that the Vigilante realizes that the cops are actually doing a pretty good job and decides to become an officer himself, leaving his masked crime fighting days behind him. Now he is Lawful good. Your alignment is not carved in stone, it is malleable and will change to reflect your actions.[/spoiler]
If HP scales that much, 5E may likely just ditch random hit-die in favor of fixed HP.
If HP scales that much, 5E may likely just ditch random hit-die in favor of fixed HP.


I don't think it will.  They've already said that their goal is flatter math so monsters stay relevant for longer.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

Yeah, as I said, the numbers I was using were absurd. They just made math easy. It will probably be like 1d6 per 3 levels or some such thing. Basically I have a feeling it will increase like rogue's sneak attack.
Im sorry but ADEU is a French word for goodbye, not a combat system. You say, "Encounter Power" and I stop listening to you. [spoiler Have Played/Run] D&D 1st ed D&D 3.5 ed D&D 4th ed Shadowrun Star Wars SAGA Cyberpunk Interlock Unlimited Run.Net [/spoiler] I know my games, don't try to argue about them. [spoiler Alignment Explained] This is a very simple problem and I will outline it below. Their are two types of people Type 1: a lot of people (not all, but a lot) who play see alignment as "I am lawful good thus I must play lawful good" Type 2: a lot of people (not all, but a lot) who play see alignment as "My previous actions have made people and the gods view me as lawful good. The difference is subtle but it is the source of the misunderstanding. Alignment does not dictate how you play your character. All it does is tell you, the player, how the rest of the world views you, and your previous actions. Any future actions will be judged by their own merits. Say you're a baby eating pyromaniac. You are most likely chaotic evil. But one day you decide, "Hey all I really need is love." So you get a wife, have a kid, and get a kitten named Mr. Snook'ems. You become a member of the PTA and help build houses for the homeless. You are no longer chaotic evil. And just because you were once chaotic evil it does not mean that you have to stay chaotic evil. Alignment never dictates what you can do, it only says what you have done. Now that is cleared up here is a simple test. What is the alignment of... A Police officer: The average Citizen: A Vigilante: The answer is simple. The Police officer is lawful good. He uses the laws of the country and city to arrest people and make them pay their debt to society. The Citizen is Neutral good. He wants to live is a place that is Good and follows moral and ethical principle, but he sometimes finds the laws impedes him, and he wonders why we spend so much on poor people. The Vigilante is Chaotic Good. He wants to uphold the morals and ethics of society but finds that the bad guys often slip through the cracks in the law. He takes it upon himself to protect the people from these criminals. That is the basic breakdown of the good alignment axis. What needs to be remembered is that any one of these people can change alignments, easily. The Police officer could be bought off by a local gang, and suddenly he drops to lawful neutral. The average citizen might find that his neighbors dog is annoying, barking at night and keeping him up. So he poisons its food, now he is no longer good, he is stepping towards true neutral. Maybe the citizen really goes crazy also kills the neighbor, hello neutral evil. It is possible that the Vigilante realizes that the cops are actually doing a pretty good job and decides to become an officer himself, leaving his masked crime fighting days behind him. Now he is Lawful good. Your alignment is not carved in stone, it is malleable and will change to reflect your actions.[/spoiler]
Yeah, inflating damage with level (and hp to match), would have atrocious consequences, but the reference to fighters' ability to deal more damage as they reached new levels was probably made minding that fighters may complete more actions per round as they level-up.

This needn't mean monster hp inflation; it could mean more monsters attacking, which is what happened in 1e: whole troops of goblins and orcs might be encountered in the Caverns of Tcojcanth wilderness (levels 6-11), IIRC.