Starter Set - Amazoned it, won't come for two weeks.
Basic - Won't be updated for a while.
Play test- Out of date for the latest version.
Dragonspear, Red wizards, sword coast, Thay etc... Are these 5e compatible or are they more of a playtest compatible product.
I don't know about the other bits that have been out for a while. I suppose the monsters from the playtest will do in a pinch (just increase HP and some AC). Right now the only ones I'm using are the ones in the starter box. It's a decent sample, but I really want my Gelatinous cube, oozes, and carrion crawler ;)
Quote from: CRKrueger;764035Dragonspear, Red wizards, sword coast, Thay etc... Are these 5e compatible or are they more of a playtest compatible product.
All playtest.
Basically your options are Hobgoblin, Ogre, Ochre Jelly, Nothic and Young Green Dragon.
Which kinda sucks right now.
Honestly, with a ruleset this straightforward, making my own looks like it will be a doddle.
Quote from: jadrax;764042All playtest.
Basically your options are Hobgoblin, Ogre, Ochre Jelly, Nothic and Young Green Dragon.
Which kinda sucks right now.
There are a lot more than that in the starter set. Bugbears, skeletons, zombies, stirges, etc.
But it is pretty easy to look at what's there, and figure out what the stats would be for a monster you want to just wing it with.
Quote from: Sacrosanct;764050There are a lot more than that in the starter set. Bugbears, skeletons, zombies, stirges, etc.
But it is pretty easy to look at what's there, and figure out what the stats would be for a monster you want to just wing it with.
"wing it?"
This is 2014, sir. Any game that causes a person to think/plan/create/do anything on their own is broken crippleware whose designers should all kill themselves.
.. this is my biggest complaint about it right now. Without monsters (and are there even rules on xp gain? I briefly looked, but didn't see any) it seems it's not a "full game".
I mean, if that's my biggest complaint, that's not bad. I don't know that it's fully what I'd want (the "2nd favorite D&D" line seems reasonably accurate), but I haven't found anything particularly bothersome.
Quote from: Sacrosanct;764050There are a lot more than that in the starter set. Bugbears, skeletons, zombies, stirges, etc.
yeah, but he won't have the starter set for a fortnight.
Quote from: robiswrong;764061.. this is my biggest complaint about it right now. Without monsters (and are there even rules on xp gain? I briefly looked, but didn't see any) it seems it's not a "full game".
Basic isn't
meant to be a full game yet - not until the PHB comes out and the DMG and MM extracts get added to it.
Quote from: Warthur;764071Basic isn't meant to be a full game yet - not until the PHB comes out and the DMG and MM extracts get added to it.
I got a very strong impression that it *was* intended to be a full game. THe name of it (I mean, "Basic D&D" was a full game, right?) the comparisons to Moldvay, the idea that the 3 "big books" would be optional...
Even if they didn't say it *directly*, it was pretty strongly implied.
Quote from: robiswrong;764078I got a very strong impression that it *was* intended to be a full game. THe name of it (I mean, "Basic D&D" was a full game, right?) the comparisons to Moldvay, the idea that the 3 "big books" would be optional...
Even if they didn't say it *directly*, it was pretty strongly implied.
It will be a full game. Just not quite yet. They've announced that the MM and DMG stuff will be added to basic when they come out. This initial version was primarily for chargen.
Quote from: Sacrosanct;764081It will be a full game. Just not quite yet. They've announced that the MM and DMG stuff will be added to basic when they come out. This initial version was primarily for chargen.
Glad to hear that.
I guess I'll have to wait to play it.
Quote from: robiswrong;764082Glad to hear that.
I guess I'll have to wait to play it.
Yeah, it's a total bummer that it isn't all at once. But it's meant to partner with the starter set, so I can sort of see why (and you'd have those starter set monsters). But still, it will be nice when it's complete.
Quote from: robiswrong;764078I got a very strong impression that it *was* intended to be a full game. THe name of it (I mean, "Basic D&D" was a full game, right?) the comparisons to Moldvay, the idea that the 3 "big books" would be optional...
Even if they didn't say it *directly*, it was pretty strongly implied.
Man, did you even read the full sentence I wrote? It
will be a full game but
it isn't meant to be a full game yet. This has been made clear repeatedly ever since Basic was first announced.
Wouldn't 1E/2E monsters be mostly compatible?
Quote from: Bill;764360Wouldn't 1E/2E monsters be mostly compatible?
TBH, monsters from any edition would probably work o.k. with a little fudging if dropped in. I suppose it is just down to how much work you want to do bearing in mind the official ones will be arriving soon.
Has anyone had a look?
How would 4E Essentials drop in?,
AD&D 2E? (pretty easy from comments elsewhere),
BECMI D&D,
Random OSR clones (Teratic Tome, Arrows of Indra etc).
Quote from: BarefootGaijin;764799Has anyone had a look?
How would 4E Essentials drop in?,
AD&D 2E? (pretty easy from comments elsewhere),
BECMI D&D,
Random OSR clones (Teratic Tome, Arrows of Indra etc).
That's what I was wondering. The high level of compatibility with prior versions of d&d should help, but which version supplies monsters that would need the least tweaking to use?
Playing around with a new toy. My math and terminology might be a little off.
MAGGOT MAN
Small aberration, Neutral evil.
AC 12 (Natural armor- coat of thick slime and feces)
HP 3 (1d6)
Speed 30
STR 8 (-1)
DEX 10 (+0)
CON 10 (+0)
INT 3 (-4)
WIS 5 (-3)
CHA 3 (-4)
SKILLS: None
SENSES: Darkvision, Passive Perception 8
Languages: Broken & Limited Abyssal
ACTIONS:
Tooth & Nail: Melee Attack, +0, 5' reach, one target, 1d6 damage
These horrors look like a cross between an emaciated child and a giant maggot. They are created when flies lay their eggs on the rotting corpse of a dead god. Their barely-sentient minds are malleable and susceptible to domination by evil wizards, mind flayers, and anti-clerics, and they often fight for such villains in drooling, moaning swarms. They can be found wherever unburied gods rot unmourned or madmen scheme.
Quote from: Bill;764360Wouldn't 1E/2E monsters be mostly compatible?
Overall. No. Not without some work or the playtest packet as a guideline. In which case you might as well use the playtest beastiary.
Some creatures have more HD and HP, hobgoblins for example are now worth 4x their AD&D exp. most are doing more damage.
Kobolds in the playtest did more damagae if they had friends near. Goblins too I believe.
Quote from: Omega;764931Goblins too I believe.
I am hearing that the Goblins in the starter now basically get Cunning Action instead.
Do HD mean about what they always did?
What's the AC for Buck Nekkid? For Tin Can Al w. shield?
Damage roll for a spear or such?
With benchmarks and a mk 1 eyeball, I would hope I could write up whatever, especially with TSR-D&D monsters for a start.
Quote from: jadrax;764934I am hearing that the Goblins in the starter now basically get Cunning Action instead.
Pretty much, although I liked the old Bushwacker trait.
Quote from: Phillip;765285Do HD mean about what they always did?
What's the AC for Buck Nekkid? For Tin Can Al w. shield?
Damage roll for a spear or such?
With benchmarks and a mk 1 eyeball, I would hope I could write up whatever, especially with TSR-D&D monsters for a start.
HD means something completely different now. It no longer is used to represent quasi-monster level, but is tied to your character class and how much healing you can do during short rests. For example, a level 2 fighter has 2d10 HD, and in old school terms, can heal himself 2d10 points of damage once per day (he can split it up between combats to 1d10 each). You can only do this healing when you have an hour to rest.
AC nekkid is 10, AC with plate and shield is 20. Shields give a +2 bonus. Spears do 1d6 dmg, 1d8 if you use it with both hands
Quote from: Phillip;765285Do HD mean about what they always did?
Pretty much yes, although you may want to double them if the thing you are stating up is large or bigger.
QuoteWhat's the AC for Buck Nekkid? For Tin Can Al w. shield?
Nekkid = 10+Dex Bonus; Plate and Shield = 20 (regardless of dex)
QuoteDamage roll for a spear or such?
1d6 + str bonus, or 1d8 + str bonus if used two handed. Again you may want to double them if the thing you are stating up is large or bigger.
QuoteWith benchmarks and a mk 1 eyeball, I would hope I could write up whatever, especially with TSR-D&D monsters for a start.
I would think its pretty easy tbh, the maths range is so tight that tbh its not going to break anything if you just eyeball it.
SNOX
Slow as a heavily burdened man.
Big and strong as an ox.
Carapace shell like plate-reinforced mail.
Two horns/round, like daggers, or a spit (60' effective range).
Spit = save vs. snot or no attack and half move until a round spent getting un-gooed.
If both horns hit, bite for a third helping of damage.
Crit on bite = starts to swallow victim (3-5 rounds for medium), no attack meanwhile.
So.... 5e really needs more monsters.
My G+ is alight with complaints about Basic being incomplete without them. I'm tempted to try and work on a crosswalk.
Would anyone be interested in collaboration?
Quote from: mcbobbo;765647So.... 5e really needs more monsters.
My G+ is alight with complaints about Basic being incomplete without them. I'm tempted to try and work on a crosswalk.
Would anyone be interested in collaboration?
At the moment Basic IS incomplete. This shouldn't be a surprise. The announcement for the release schedule said as much.
In August when the PHB comes out, the DM material for basic should be available. Until then the starter set has a fair number of monsters and others can be made using those and prior edition knowledge as an outline.
On some level they're not actually complaining about 5e, so that will never stop.
But for those who are doing more than just bitching... I can see a need.
I'm thinking of trying to handle it via Rosetta stone / crosswalk.
Quote from: mcbobbo;765647So.... 5e really needs more monsters.
If you grok it enough, maybe a good start would be conversion guidelines from 3e or TSR D&D - since SRD and OSR resources are freely available.
Creating 5e monsters:
Can we safely assume that monsters get a proficiency bonus based on their number of hit-dice (basically as a fighter), to which is added their Strength bonus?
Quote from: Turanil;765976Creating 5e monsters:
Can we safely assume that monsters get a proficiency bonus based on their number of hit-dice (basically as a fighter), to which is added their Strength bonus?
No.
Looking at the Ogre and the Dragon, I am thinking the Proficiency is based upon the Challenge rating as if it were level, rather than its Hit Dice.
Quote from: jadrax;765980No.
Looking at the Ogre and the Dragon, I am thinking the Proficiency is based upon the Challenge rating as if it were level, rather than its Hit Dice.
That, and monsters don't have hit dice.
Quote from: jadrax;765980No.
Looking at the Ogre and the Dragon, I am thinking the Proficiency is based upon the Challenge rating as if it were level, rather than its Hit Dice.
Makes sense given CR is level as used in the playtest.
Quote from: Sacrosanct;765983That, and monsters don't have hit dice.
What makes you say that?
An ogre is listed as has having 7d10 for hit points. That is 7 hit dice where I come from. And guess what? If the party wounds it then runs away for a rest then the ogre is sure as shit gonna spend them to heal.
This is probably either a stupid question, or has been asked and answered already, or both, so pardon me.
Wasn't the point of 5th ed. to make a system that ALL versions of DnD can play? And that being the case, shouldn't any monster from any system be fully compatible or at least easily converted?
Quote from: Exploderwizard;766080What makes you say that?
An ogre is listed as has having 7d10 for hit points. That is 7 hit dice where I come from. And guess what? If the party wounds it then runs away for a rest then the ogre is sure as shit gonna spend them to heal.
They're not called hit dice. Hit dice are for characters to determine out of combat healing capability. The term "hit dice" doesn't appear anywhere for the monsters. Not in the stat block, nor in the glossary. It's just hit points.
Quote from: everloss;766082This is probably either a stupid question, or has been asked and answered already, or both, so pardon me.
Wasn't the point of 5th ed. to make a system that ALL versions of DnD can play? And that being the case, shouldn't any monster from any system be fully compatible or at least easily converted?
Not quite. It wasn't claimed that you could play any version with it. It was claimed that you can play any version's
style with it. Meaning, you could have one guy playing a basic character without feats or any of that stuff next to a player who is playing their PC with all the bells and whistles, and both would be viable in the game.
Can't speak for 4e, but conversion from the other systems seems pretty easy.
Quote from: everloss;766082Wasn't the point of 5th ed. to make a system that ALL versions of DnD can play? And that being the case, shouldn't any monster from any system be fully compatible or at least easily converted?
If it is the case, I suppose that having a guideline that helps determine a Base Attack Bonus based on the creature's number of hit-dice, would be needed.
By the way, how is computed a creature's "CR"?
Quote from: Sacrosanct;766087They're not called hit dice. Hit dice are for characters to determine out of combat healing capability. The term "hit dice" doesn't appear anywhere for the monsters. Not in the stat block, nor in the glossary. It's just hit points.
Semantics.
Rule 1: Always give a monster an even break.
No HD healing for monsters/ No HD healing for PCs
Its the only fair solution. :)
Quote from: everloss;766082This is probably either a stupid question, or has been asked and answered already, or both, so pardon me.
Wasn't the point of 5th ed. to make a system that ALL versions of DnD can play? And that being the case, shouldn't any monster from any system be fully compatible or at least easily converted?
No, it was meant to support all the different play STYLES that developed over the previous editions. The BASIC PDF represents the classic editions by having classes with fixed progressions starting with the traditional four.
The PHB will have the 5e default mode plus some optional rules (like feats). The DMG is tentatively slated to have all the advice and options to make 5e into a tactics heavy game (like 4e), a heavily characters customized game (like 3e) or anything in between including stripping it down.
The only thing that looks to be constant between what 5e variation you choose is bounded accuracy. Basically high level character to more damage more often while the increase to their to hit bonus and AC are flatten considerably.
With that being said I think classic edition creatures can be used 'as is' except you will need to multiply their hit points by some factor. Their AC appears to be within the bounds of 5e monsters that have been presented so far and within the late playtest. You might need to double or triple their damage dice as well for high HD monsters.
Quote from: Turanil;766092If it is the case, I suppose that having a guideline that helps determine a Base Attack Bonus based on the creature's number of hit-dice, would be needed.
By the way, how is computed a creature's "CR"?
I suspect that you pick the monsters CR first and then compute everything else from that, but we will not know for sure 'till the MM hits probably.
Quote from: Sacrosanct;766087They're not called hit dice. Hit dice are for characters to determine out of combat healing capability. The term "hit dice" doesn't appear anywhere for the monsters. Not in the stat block, nor in the glossary. It's just hit points.
Cant see it catching on tbh, using the term Hit Dice to refer to the number of dice you roll to determine a creatures Hit Points is too engrained in D&D jargon.
Quote from: estar;766102With that being said I think classic edition creatures can be used 'as is' except you will need to multiply their hit points by some factor. Their AC appears to be within the bounds of 5e monsters that have been presented so far and within the late playtest. You might need to double or triple their damage dice as well for high HD monsters.
This should be possible to compute if I can get off my lazy butt and do the 5e data entry. Plan would be...
1) Establish the data sets.
A) Key-in 5e
B) download srd data for anything OGL
2) Compare based on same-name creatures
3) Test by applying ratios in reverse
4) Eliminate/note outliers
Should be doable
Quote from: Turanil;766092If it is the case, I suppose that having a guideline that helps determine a Base Attack Bonus based on the creature's number of hit-dice, would be needed.
By the way, how is computed a creature's "CR"?
We haven't seen yet. That will probably be in the MM or DMG.
I would not expect 3/4e "encounter build" mavens suddenly to be satisfied with less than By the Book 5e. Quick and dirty benchmarks should suffice, though, for us "old school" cats used to borrowing material eclectically.
In a short while, this shouldn't be much of a problem; but for the moment, I think it's fairly easy to just make up one's own.