• Zagorath@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    I think that’s largely a consequence of the 5e design in general. It doesn’t leave a lot of room, natively, for exciting challenges from its monsters. You’ve got to go to third parties, like Colville’s “action-oriented monsters”, or other systems like PF2, to get that.

    • TheGreatDarkness@ttrpg.networkOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      Fun fact, MCDM’s Flee Mortals! book has its own stand-in for Tarrasque - Goxomoc. Fool’s Gold: Into the Bellowing Wilds also has Dire Tarrasque

      • Zagorath@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        I’m a little sad that that book took so long to arrive that I had gone from never even considering moving to another system (other than for some fun temporary one-shots & small campaigns to add variety) to basically not being able to imagine myself choosing to go back to D&D at all, between the time I paid for it and when it finally arrived 5 months ago. Because I really did love the idea of it when it was being Kickstarted.

        • Shyfer@ttrpg.network
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Same. The monsters are amazing, and would be a big boost to 5e, but I haven’t been playing it as much lately.

    • edgemaster72@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      The main thing missing compared to the 3.x version that would hinder the flying archer strategy is its regeneration and needing to use Wish or Miracle to keep it dead. Trolls and Vampires have conditional regeneration, Zombies have Undead Fortitude that gives them a chance not to die when reduced to 0 HP, the concepts were there they just chose not to implement them.