Angry Drunk Review - 5e Monster Manual: A Modern Relic

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Fri Dec 05, 2014 9:04 pm

FrankTrollman wrote:Quippers are D&D fresh water piranha that live in temperate and cold climates. Because piranhas are awesome, and most D&D adventures take place in climates where piranhas don't normally exist. So D&D did a D&D thing where it made there be piranhas that exist in fantasy Norway so that Viking Heroes can be threatened by piranha attack. Totally legit, but if you don't explain that, you've just wasted ink.

Man, ice-piranhas that actually swim in snow would be awesome.

Omegonthesane · Post by **Omegonthesane** » Sat Dec 06, 2014 1:05 am

Orion wrote:Literally none of us think or have said that they're changing their art to appeal to conservatives. Look at Red Archon's post -- your opinion here is not controversial. We all agree that the art style was changed to appeal the SJW mob.

(Just a quick check. I'm not up on my internet slang but I assume "sjw mob" is a new word for "women, feminists, and people of good taste?)

It's a derogatory term for the subset of same who - supposedly - take excessive pride in attempting to raise awareness of the specific issues they care about on Tumblr.

I was saying that you really don't have to be actively involved in derping in the Tumblr echo chamber to find gratuitous female nudity distasteful.

DSMatticus · Post by **DSMatticus** » Sat Dec 06, 2014 2:09 am

I think we broke hamstertamer. I'm not sure how I feel about that - is having him ramble about dogfucking and incest more or less offensive than having him tell us 'what women really want'? And now that we've found the buttons to piss him off, where are the ones to shut him the fuck up?

Orion wrote:(Just a quick check. I'm not up on my internet slang but I assume "sjw mob" is a new word for "women, feminists, and people of good taste?)

It's a dog-whistle for anti-egalitarianism. On its face, it's a pejorative label for people who say stupid or terrible things in the name of egalitarian movements. But the people you hear using the term are almost invariably shitstains who are trying to say "sexism and racism are over; stop whining."

Post by **fbmf** » Sat Dec 06, 2014 4:23 am

[The Great Fence Builder Speaks]
Hamster,

You were asked to take this argument to another thread but instead responded with incestual rape and bestiality jokes in poor taste even by the Den's standards.

Get off my lawn.

[/TGFBS]

OgreBattle · Post by **OgreBattle** » Sat Dec 06, 2014 4:31 am

Chris Rock gave an interview recently where (among other things) he mentions he doesn't do shows at colleges anymore because everyone gets offended too easily:

I stopped playing colleges, and the reason is because they’re way too conservative.

In their political views?

Not in their political views — not like they’re voting Republican — but in their social views and their willingness not to offend anybody. Kids raised on a culture of “We’re not going to keep score in the game because we don’t want anybody to lose.” Or just ignoring race to a fault. You can’t say “the black kid over there.” No, it’s “the guy with the red shoes.” You can’t even be offensive on your way to being inoffensive.

As for what an SJW is, I see it as somebody using the same rhetoric as Rush Limbaugh or Sarah Palin, but championing supposedly liberal views instead of conservative. There's a tendency for political extremists of either stripe to demand censorship as response to things they dislike.

Whipstitch · Post by **Whipstitch** » Sat Dec 06, 2014 5:44 am

I'd take it more seriously if it was anyone but Chris Rock. In many ways the dude is a centrist whiny baby.

Orion · Post by **Orion** » Sat Dec 06, 2014 7:25 pm

DSMatticus wrote:It's a dog-whistle for anti-egalitarianism.

I lied. I actually up on my internet slang.

zugschef · Post by **zugschef** » Sun Dec 07, 2014 11:34 am

Whipstitch wrote:I'd take it more seriously if it was anyone but Chris Rock. In many ways the dude is a centrist whiny baby.

He said that the late George Carlin said the same thing...

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Sun Dec 07, 2014 11:39 am

I kind of get the feeling that Chris Rock saw black people other than him being talked about and realized he hasn't been relevant in almost a decade, and, since the black people being talked about were not Obama, Al Sharpton, Nelson Mandela or Jesse Jackson, felt justified in trying to be the center of attention.

Username17 · Post by **Username17** » Sun Dec 07, 2014 11:54 am

It's gotta hurt to be Chris Rock and realize that The Fifth Element came out in 1997, and then realize that you weren't even in The Fifth Element because Hollywood had replaced you with a younger and sexier black comedian seventeen years ago.

-Username17

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Sun Dec 07, 2014 12:16 pm

I literally forgot that Ruby Rhod wasn't played by Chris Rock, because Chris Tucker seriously is the young replacement for Chris Rock.

Lago PARANOIA · Post by **Lago PARANOIA** » Sun Dec 07, 2014 3:45 pm

FrankTrollman wrote:It's gotta hurt to be Chris Rock and realize that The Fifth Element came out in 1997, and then realize that you weren't even in The Fifth Element because Hollywood had replaced you with a younger and sexier black comedian seventeen years ago.

Prak wrote:because Chris Tucker seriously is the young replacement for Chris Rock.

Whipstitch wrote:Oh, it gets worse. People like to tell themselves that everything is OK now because Tucker "fizzled out," but the reality is that he was handily clearing eight figures per Rush Hour sequel. Thus it is unclear how much of the gaps between projects is due to market rejection and how much can be attributed to the simple fact that in the '00s Chris Tucker likely felt that shouldn't get off the couch for less than five million.

I'm a huge fan of Chris Rock; you guys are fucking brutal.

(No, really though, I love these boards.

)

Whipstitch · Post by **Whipstitch** » Sun Dec 07, 2014 5:38 pm

Oh, it gets worse. People like to tell themselves that everything is OK now because Tucker "fizzled out," but the reality is that he was handily clearing eight figures per Rush Hour sequel. Thus it is unclear how much of the gaps between projects is due to market rejection and how much can be attributed to the simple fact that in the '00s Chris Tucker likely felt that shouldn't get off the couch for less than five million.

*To put this in perspective, he wasn't just getting more than Jackie, he was getting more than anyone at the time, at least in terms of base salary.

Krusk · Post by **Krusk** » Sun Dec 14, 2014 6:16 pm

Lets put this thing to rest. Appendix B: Nonplayer Characters

Won't be a lot of rage in this entry, but it does wrap us up.

This is a thing DND has struggled with for a long time, and has generally just not included. A couple of pages with some quick stats to grab for your NPCs. Its 5e so it isn't awesomely done, but the fact that its done is a huge benefit. Especially right in MM1. I'm harsh on 5e, but this is actually a really solid add on.

There are about 10 pages with half an entry per page, and some notes at the front to modify them. This gives us a total of 21 entries to use for things like "You are ambushed on the road, here are bandit stats". This is great for a DM when he is improving, but its also great for a player to get an assessment of how strong they are supposed to be. When someone at the tavern says "Bandits are robbing the crossroads, I can intelligently tell if this is a quest for my PC, something way beyond me, or something way below me. Them all being humans is also nice. Because I can point to this and say "my wizard is 13th level. This says archmages are 12th. I'm supposed to be a big fucking deal, if you throw more kobolds at me fuck you".

The general level of all NPCs is actually shockingly low to me. This being 5e, fuck the players, edition, I assumed every NPC would start at CR 4 for town guards and move up from there. In reality it seems pretty reasonable. The acolyte (beginner cleric) is CR 1/4. 4 of them and your 4 PC party of level 1 clerics has a decent fight. Archmages are CR 12, not 20. Yes, they still get level 9 spells, but only 1. Assassins seem high at CR 8, and realistically should probably be more like 5-6 based off the damage he deals.

Bandits are CR 1/8 and you can legit fight 9-10 of them as a first level party without being out of line. Their bandit captain? he isn't CR 20 like I expected. He is a reasonable CR2. Commoners aren't anything anymore. They are CR 0 with 4 HP and a club at +2 for 2 damage. They also get +0 to all skills. This means that you can probably pick pocket them, browbeat them, or lie to them. Now, giving all merchants, artisans, and servants +0 to all skills seems stupid and it is, but it is still 5e. Your PC with potentially no investment is probably better at crafting than the town smith, and thats sort of why the game falls apart. On the other hand though, the random town smith isn't arbitrarily level 14 and can beat you up. This is a nice change of pace, but it sucks having them all suck at the thing they are supposed to be good at.

My favourite entry? The town guard are CR 1/8. They basically suck. This is why you need adventurers to do stuff. No more 2/3/4e town guard who beat you up and lock you away. You are probably getting away. There is no Town Guard Captain, but the knight comes next and I assume people will just use them as the captains. They aren't terribly sucky, but are still only CR 3.

One entry, the Thug, seems kind of weird to me. Its CR 1/2, and so I think its supposed to be the tough guy bandit or something. The picture has them holding what is either a winged snake or a pseudodragon. I can't tell. Their stats don't mention this, and I'm curious what that's about.

Next up is an index of stat blocks which is alphabetical. Of note, when I bitched about drow being under "Elf: Drow, in the index they are under D for Drow. So I assume someone at wizards disagreed, lost a public fight with mearls about it, and just fixed it on the back end. All assumptions, but based on work shown and interviews/videos with the guy Ill make it.

The index is actually kind of fun. Its got some small doodles in the margins of a bullette chasing some sheep, a troll looking for its head, an elf and pseudodragon about to bang (No idea what else it could be), a dude poking a flumph with a 10ft pole, dude being eaten by a carpet, guy with a map asking a Minotaur for directions, fat dude finding his naked clone in a tree and being into it (again no idea what this is), and an otyugh under a latrine. These are generally pretty funny, and a decent addition to the index to get a chuckle.

And thats the end. The 5e monster manual, a return to the bad old days.

Blicero · Post by **Blicero** » Sun Dec 14, 2014 6:29 pm

Are the NPCs built like PCs, built like PCs but simplified, or just totally made up?

Krusk · Post by **Krusk** » Sun Dec 14, 2014 9:52 pm

It's 5e, so its still a total asspull. That said, you can see that they gave a lot of thought to what a PC at that level should be able to do, and mimicked a lot of their abilities. So its better than 4e where its all just made up, but its still not as good as 3.X where you know exactly what it can do if its a 4th level Wizard.

Best example is the Druid.

Its CR 2, and has the power spell casting. "The druid is a 4th level spell caster. Its spellcasting ability is wisdom. It has the following druid spells prepared. Then it has the exact same slots as an actual 4th level Druid. It gets +4 to hit which is a druid prof bonus + its 2 wisdom mod. What it can't do though, is wildshape and it has no druid circle powers. It also has 5d8 HP, indicating that HP were assigned totally at random by CR instead of anything logical.

So you can see that they kind of sort of looked at PC classes and applying them to NPCs, they didn't actually go that far.

That parts still super shitty.

Username17 · Post by **Username17** » Sun Dec 14, 2014 9:59 pm

5e CRs don't make any sense to me. I seriously can't figure out what the hell they are even for.

-Username17

Lago PARANOIA · Post by **Lago PARANOIA** » Sun Dec 14, 2014 10:10 pm

Krusk wrote:Its CR 2, and has the power spell casting. "The druid is a 4th level spell caster. Its spellcasting ability is wisdom. It has the following druid spells prepared. Then it has the exact same slots as an actual 4th level Druid. It gets +4 to hit which is a druid prof bonus + its 2 wisdom mod. What it can't do though, is wildshape and it has no druid circle powers. It also has 5d8 HP, indicating that HP were assigned totally at random by CR instead of anything logical.

Even though a PC Druid is explicitly CR 4. Dammit, this system sounds stupid and terrible and worse than even 4E D&D's. At least 4E D&D gave us mathematically sensible outputs that adhered strictly to guidelines.

I don't mind a game having special snowflake PC Classes which were more complex and overall better than what the vast majority of NPCs could get. However, that shit needs to be explained and at least work like 3E NPC classes. If the DM throws an 8th level adept at the party we at least know how powerful it is and why it's that powerful. 4E and 5E NPC non-monster antagonists? Who the fuck knows?

Also:

This is a thing DND has struggled with for a long time, and has generally just not included. A couple of pages with some quick stats to grab for your NPCs. Its 5e so it isn't awesomely done, but the fact that its done is a huge benefit. Especially right in MM1. I'm harsh on 5e, but this is actually a really solid add on.

... 3E D&D did this, too. It was even nice enough for you to give you a full level and treasure progression. Granted, it didn't group and sort NPCs by function, but that was honestly the least important part of plopping down a bunch of bandits or cultists.

Krusk · Post by **Krusk** » Sun Dec 14, 2014 10:52 pm

That thing starting on page 113 in the DMG? Where it tells you how to generate your own NPCs?

Thats kind of helpful. It tells you what stats NPCs of various classes should be, so you don't have to build your own "Fighter level 8", except that you do because it doesn't include things like class features, feats, skills, or spells. So you know what their +to hit, AC, and HP are, but thats about it. And thats assuming they don't have any feats or spells to help those numbers.

It also doesn't tell me which of those stats should be used for a town guard. I can probably assume they are fighters, rangers or paladins of some sort but thats about it. I still have to assign level and pick class.

This method is better in the long run if I have time to prep and want an exact specific NPC but don't want to do ALL the work, but I can't just flip to this page and grab some dudes and run with it. I've got to flip between books and pick spells, see what some good feats are and pick them. For a new DM or someone who just wants to say "I don't know what happens next.... I lost my notes..... BANDITS ATTACK!" these things suck.

Krusk · Post by **Krusk** » Sun Dec 14, 2014 11:01 pm

5e CR - from DMG Page 82

When making a 5e encounter the DM has 5 steps.
1 - Determine each PCs XP threshold for easy/med/hard/deadly encounters. (look at chart based on level)
2 - Device what type of encounter you want. Then total all PCs XP thresholds. This gives you your XP budget.
3 - Total all monsters XP with XP value in stat block.
4 - Multiple total XP for multiple monsters. Its not straight forward and you need to look at a chart. (This helps reduce TPKs from bonded accuracy sucking. You don't fight hordes anymore). 1 monster is X1. 2 Monsters is X1.5. 3-6 monsters is X2. 7-10 is X2.5. X15+ is X4.
5 - Compare monsters adjusted XP value to the Party XP thresholds.

It mentions CR in a sidebar like it does house rules. I'll just type word for word what they say its for because.... basically nothing aside from "Rough guess for toughness".

"when putting together an encounter or adventure, especially at lower levels, exercise caution when using monsters whose challenge rating is higher than the party's average level. Such a creature might deal enough damage with a single action to take out an adventurer of a lower level. For example, an ogre has a challenge rating of 2, but it can kill a 1st-level wizard with a single blow.

In addition, some monsters have features that might be difficult or impossible for lower level character to overcome. For example, a rakshasa has a challenge rating of 13 and is immune to spells of 6th level or lower. Spellcasters of 12th level or lower have no spells higher than 6th level, meaning that they won't be able to affect the rakshasa with their magic, putting the adventurers at a serious disadvantage. Such an encounter would be significantly tougher for the party than the monster's challenge rating might suggest."

Basically TLDR - CR means you must be this tall to ride.

Insomniac · Post by **Insomniac** » Sun Dec 14, 2014 11:23 pm

I decided to compare this to a "vintage" 3.5 book, MM V.

At least this book doesn't commit absolute sins like giving trivia question obscurities that will never make games, class levels, ecologies, 800 words on potential encounters, etc.

They got so obscure with it in 3.5 with the authenticity and worthless page bloat and word padding that this guy...

Got almost 4 pages. A yugoloth (trivia question Neutral Evil outsiders) called the corruptor of fate. I just about lost it when I got to this line...

"Male and female corruptors of fate look very similar. Both
have bosomlike rolls of fat on their chests, so most perceive
them as female (DC 20 Spot check to correctly determine a
corruptor’s gender)."

HUBBA HUBBA!

Anybody care to make a check?

Username17 · Post by **Username17** » Mon Dec 15, 2014 5:58 am

Krusk wrote:Basically TLDR - CR means you must be this tall to ride.

I could sort of accept that, but why have fractional CRs at all? 0.125, 0.25, and 1.0 are all equally incapable of being higher than the party's average level; because the minimum character level is 1. Since your budget for building the encounter comes from the XP value and not the CR, and the CR is just a caution sign for fighting the monster in the first place, 1/4 and 1 are not different.

And of course, the explanation makes no real sense in a game where a 13th level Wizard only gets a single 7th level spell in a day. The Rakshasa's personal globe of invulnerability is pretty much indistinguishable to a 12th level party and a 13th level party. Even if it's the only encounter of the day, they are probably going to deal with the Rakshasa 100% with sword swipes and summoned archers and 0% with direct magic spell attacks.

-Username17

Insomniac · Post by **Insomniac** » Mon Dec 15, 2014 3:19 pm

They didn't learn their lesson from 4E about dissociated monsters.

The NPC situation is even worse than in 4E. Now they have officially published material with 7th level casters being CR 3 and other dopey shit
with no rhyme or reason to how they got their ability scores or what sort of wealth they should have.

Krusk is right, its a total Ass-Pull. They had 3 years to work out the math and rationale for 5E but they are still yanking it out of their hineyhole on just about everything.

"Just Ask Your DM!"

ACOS · Post by **ACOS** » Mon Dec 15, 2014 5:02 pm

Okay, so we actually do have a list of monsters by CR ..... in the DMG.

Previn · Post by **Previn** » Mon Dec 15, 2014 5:53 pm

Insomniac wrote: Now they have officially published material with 7th level casters being CR 3 and other dopey shit
with no rhyme or reason to how they got their ability scores or what sort of wealth they should have.

I don't actually find a 7th level wizard to b a CR 3 to be stupid, so long as CR actually is correct about that. A single 7th level dude vs 4+ 3rd level dudes is not remotely as unfeasible as it was in previous editions.

Their entire use of CR in 5 is pretty much foolish, so I think this is just a case where it happens to be a thing.