It certainly might be nice if framework rules were provided for approximately how much a creature would weigh depending on its size (e.g. small creatures weigh between 30 and 100 pounds, medium creatures weigh between 100 and 400 pounds, etc.). This would take up very little space and at least provide reinforcement that, yes, creatures do have a certain weight and that weight is a significant factor as to whether a creature can be lifted, carried, or dragged, just as is the case with objects.
It certainly might be nice if framework rules were provided for approximately how much a creature would weigh depending on its size (e.g. small creatures weigh between 30 and 100 pounds, medium creatures weigh between 100 and 400 pounds, etc.). This would take up very little space and at least provide reinforcement that, yes, creatures do have a certain weight and that weight is a significant factor as to whether a creature can be lifted, carried, or dragged, just as is the case with objects.
I was thinking of a similar concept: a weight range for size categories, adjusted by the creature's strength or constitution (as stronger creatures tend to be heavier). Or vice versa. Weight=[str]*[x lbs]*[size modifier].
I wrote a long reply that went into design history, but decided to move it to the 'hot takes' thread, to keep this one more on topic. In short, it's hard to write simple rules that cover most situations well. The grapple rules can be read in different ways, depending on how you look at them. We need context. They need to write them more clearly, and let us know their intent for which rules are being replaced by the new ones.
I applaud simple rules. I think simpler is almost always better. The only downside of simple is there can be lots of unforeseen consequences and edge cases. So it takes a lot of playtesting to find them. I guess that's why we're here.
So, I don't think we need monster weights. It will be so rarely used that it is mostly a waste of space, and when it is used, it will almost always nullify the thing you we're attempting anyways. If the Lifting and Carrying rules still apply to grappling, then almost no one will have a high enough Strength to drag ANY large creatures. So why bother making anyone look it up? If these rules don't apply here, and it is covered by the Slowed condition, then we get very unrealistic situations.
I think the best compromise for both simplicity and 'realism' is:
You can drag or carry a creature that is Tiny, or two sizes smaller than you. You can drag or carry a creature the same size as you, but suffer the Slowed condition. You cannot drag or carry a creature larger than you.
That's all that is needed to cover 99% of situations. If you still want the chance for creatures that are unnaturally strong for their size to be able to drag something larger than them, that can be covered with specific rules and abilities. For example, the Grappler feat, or Belt of Giant Strength could say 'you can drag a creature one size larger than you when you grapple them, but suffer the Slowed condition.'
I agree. Adding such "extra" rules into specific feats or items that the player gets to add to their sheet puts the onus onto the player to activate that rule.
It might also reduce the potential for other players to "suggest" how the newer players should handle their turn. ie "You should grapple that monster and drag it to the pit."
The main reason that they have done it the way they have is likely so that they do not have to worry about coming up with weights for creatures, but the same problem does exist with respect to objects, such as figuring what a boulder weighs.
If they started listing what things weigh, they'd need to rewrite the rules for encumbrance, because they result in large creatures being unable to lift or move things they really should be able to lift (there's a reason for the complex weight tables in 3e). In practice, 5e monsters seem to be using a subset of the size categories from 3e, which means:
Tiny: Up to 2' in size, up to 8 lb (Diminutive and Fine do not exist in 5e)
They should re-write those rules anyway, IMO. Long overdue.
It would probably have to be extremely nonlinear for the strength 20-30 range, because they've compressed such a vast range of creatures into such a narrow range of values (an ogre weighs 'close to a thousand pounds', a tarrasque weighs 'hundreds of tons'. There's only 11 points of strength difference between them).
Completed. A lot of it feels odd to grade as with the small picture we have we don't know if it works. So balance oriented things for example I can't really say much on. I can say the lore bard doesn't feel like it represents lore much, so mark that as dissatisfied, I can say jump as an action is just bad design etc. But is heavy weapons master good? No idea, as maybe weapon damage will scale by level once we see those rules, maybe -5+10 is now just a standard combat option. it is on par with the other level 4 options for the most part.
Completed. A lot of it feels odd to grade as with the small picture we have we don't know if it works. So balance oriented things for example I can't really say much on. I can say the lore bard doesn't feel like it represents lore much, so mark that as dissatisfied, I can say jump as an action is just bad design etc. But is heavy weapons master good? No idea, as maybe weapon damage will scale by level once we see those rules, maybe -5+10 is now just a standard combat option. it is on par with the other level 4 options for the most part.
One of the issues with this UA is so many feats are for the Warrior Group. With the focus on Expert Classes it doesn't make sense. They said the next release will have some changes to weapons so it would should be added with that. It is hard to play test in segments. Also some playtest takes longer to try. I mean how many playtests are people doing to decide?
Completed. A lot of it feels odd to grade as with the small picture we have we don't know if it works. So balance oriented things for example I can't really say much on. I can say the lore bard doesn't feel like it represents lore much, so mark that as dissatisfied, I can say jump as an action is just bad design etc. But is heavy weapons master good? No idea, as maybe weapon damage will scale by level once we see those rules, maybe -5+10 is now just a standard combat option. it is on par with the other level 4 options for the most part.
One of the issues with this UA is so many feats are for the Warrior Group. With the focus on Expert Classes it doesn't make sense. They said the next release will have some changes to weapons so it would should be added with that. It is hard to play test in segments. Also some playtest takes longer to try. I mean how many playtests are people doing to decide?
Yeah as an example play test 1 I rated grappling positively but it only came up twice in our game, the more we play tested it the worse it got. They asked about the condition here, but not the mechanic on how to achieve it. Are we already done with that now?
Completed. A lot of it feels odd to grade as with the small picture we have we don't know if it works. So balance oriented things for example I can't really say much on. I can say the lore bard doesn't feel like it represents lore much, so mark that as dissatisfied, I can say jump as an action is just bad design etc. But is heavy weapons master good? No idea, as maybe weapon damage will scale by level once we see those rules, maybe -5+10 is now just a standard combat option. it is on par with the other level 4 options for the most part.
One of the issues with this UA is so many feats are for the Warrior Group. With the focus on Expert Classes it doesn't make sense. They said the next release will have some changes to weapons so it would should be added with that. It is hard to play test in segments. Also some playtest takes longer to try. I mean how many playtests are people doing to decide?
Yeah as an example play test 1 I rated grappling positively but it only came up twice in our game, the more we play tested it the worse it got. They asked about the condition here, but not the mechanic on how to achieve it. Are we already done with that now?
Unarmed Strikes are rules presented in this UA and can be rated as well as commented on. That is only place that seems to talk about Grappling, Shoving and Knocking Prone really. I also used the final comments section to say something about it as well.
Completed. A lot of it feels odd to grade as with the small picture we have we don't know if it works. So balance oriented things for example I can't really say much on. I can say the lore bard doesn't feel like it represents lore much, so mark that as dissatisfied, I can say jump as an action is just bad design etc. But is heavy weapons master good? No idea, as maybe weapon damage will scale by level once we see those rules, maybe -5+10 is now just a standard combat option. it is on par with the other level 4 options for the most part.
One of the issues with this UA is so many feats are for the Warrior Group. With the focus on Expert Classes it doesn't make sense. They said the next release will have some changes to weapons so it would should be added with that. It is hard to play test in segments. Also some playtest takes longer to try. I mean how many playtests are people doing to decide?
Yeah as an example play test 1 I rated grappling positively but it only came up twice in our game, the more we play tested it the worse it got. They asked about the condition here, but not the mechanic on how to achieve it. Are we already done with that now?
Unarmed Strikes are rules presented in this UA and can be rated as well as commented on. That is only place that seems to talk about Grappling, Shoving and Knocking Prone really. I also used the final comments section to say something about it as well.
Not sure how much they will read, but that is a good point. I missed talking about it with unarmed strike.
Completed. A lot of it feels odd to grade as with the small picture we have we don't know if it works. So balance oriented things for example I can't really say much on. I can say the lore bard doesn't feel like it represents lore much, so mark that as dissatisfied, I can say jump as an action is just bad design etc. But is heavy weapons master good? No idea, as maybe weapon damage will scale by level once we see those rules, maybe -5+10 is now just a standard combat option. it is on par with the other level 4 options for the most part.
One of the issues with this UA is so many feats are for the Warrior Group. With the focus on Expert Classes it doesn't make sense. They said the next release will have some changes to weapons so it would should be added with that. It is hard to play test in segments. Also some playtest takes longer to try. I mean how many playtests are people doing to decide?
Yeah as an example play test 1 I rated grappling positively but it only came up twice in our game, the more we play tested it the worse it got. They asked about the condition here, but not the mechanic on how to achieve it. Are we already done with that now?
Unarmed Strikes are rules presented in this UA and can be rated as well as commented on. That is only place that seems to talk about Grappling, Shoving and Knocking Prone really. I also used the final comments section to say something about it as well.
Not sure how much they will read, but that is a good point. I missed talking about it with unarmed strike.
Considering that most of the Unarmed Strike Rules are really just the Grappling, Shoving, Knock Prone rules, you can just mark it as Dissatisfied and that would likely carry the most weight
It certainly might be nice if framework rules were provided for approximately how much a creature would weigh depending on its size (e.g. small creatures weigh between 30 and 100 pounds, medium creatures weigh between 100 and 400 pounds, etc.). This would take up very little space and at least provide reinforcement that, yes, creatures do have a certain weight and that weight is a significant factor as to whether a creature can be lifted, carried, or dragged, just as is the case with objects.
I was thinking of a similar concept: a weight range for size categories, adjusted by the creature's strength or constitution (as stronger creatures tend to be heavier). Or vice versa. Weight=[str]*[x lbs]*[size modifier].
I wrote a long reply that went into design history, but decided to move it to the 'hot takes' thread, to keep this one more on topic. In short, it's hard to write simple rules that cover most situations well. The grapple rules can be read in different ways, depending on how you look at them. We need context. They need to write them more clearly, and let us know their intent for which rules are being replaced by the new ones.
I applaud simple rules. I think simpler is almost always better. The only downside of simple is there can be lots of unforeseen consequences and edge cases. So it takes a lot of playtesting to find them. I guess that's why we're here.
So, I don't think we need monster weights. It will be so rarely used that it is mostly a waste of space, and when it is used, it will almost always nullify the thing you we're attempting anyways. If the Lifting and Carrying rules still apply to grappling, then almost no one will have a high enough Strength to drag ANY large creatures. So why bother making anyone look it up? If these rules don't apply here, and it is covered by the Slowed condition, then we get very unrealistic situations.
I think the best compromise for both simplicity and 'realism' is:
You can drag or carry a creature that is Tiny, or two sizes smaller than you. You can drag or carry a creature the same size as you, but suffer the Slowed condition. You cannot drag or carry a creature larger than you.
That's all that is needed to cover 99% of situations. If you still want the chance for creatures that are unnaturally strong for their size to be able to drag something larger than them, that can be covered with specific rules and abilities. For example, the Grappler feat, or Belt of Giant Strength could say 'you can drag a creature one size larger than you when you grapple them, but suffer the Slowed condition.'
I agree. Adding such "extra" rules into specific feats or items that the player gets to add to their sheet puts the onus onto the player to activate that rule.
It might also reduce the potential for other players to "suggest" how the newer players should handle their turn. ie "You should grapple that monster and drag it to the pit."
~not a "lazy dungeon master"
If they started listing what things weigh, they'd need to rewrite the rules for encumbrance, because they result in large creatures being unable to lift or move things they really should be able to lift (there's a reason for the complex weight tables in 3e). In practice, 5e monsters seem to be using a subset of the size categories from 3e, which means:
It would probably have to be extremely nonlinear for the strength 20-30 range, because they've compressed such a vast range of creatures into such a narrow range of values (an ogre weighs 'close to a thousand pounds', a tarrasque weighs 'hundreds of tons'. There's only 11 points of strength difference between them).
Survey for the Expert Classes UA is up. Be sure to respond with what you liked or didnt like
Three-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
I'm bowing out for this one, I have nothing constructive to add.
Completed. A lot of it feels odd to grade as with the small picture we have we don't know if it works. So balance oriented things for example I can't really say much on. I can say the lore bard doesn't feel like it represents lore much, so mark that as dissatisfied, I can say jump as an action is just bad design etc. But is heavy weapons master good? No idea, as maybe weapon damage will scale by level once we see those rules, maybe -5+10 is now just a standard combat option. it is on par with the other level 4 options for the most part.
One of the issues with this UA is so many feats are for the Warrior Group. With the focus on Expert Classes it doesn't make sense. They said the next release will have some changes to weapons so it would should be added with that.
It is hard to play test in segments. Also some playtest takes longer to try. I mean how many playtests are people doing to decide?
Yeah as an example play test 1 I rated grappling positively but it only came up twice in our game, the more we play tested it the worse it got. They asked about the condition here, but not the mechanic on how to achieve it. Are we already done with that now?
Unarmed Strikes are rules presented in this UA and can be rated as well as commented on. That is only place that seems to talk about Grappling, Shoving and Knocking Prone really. I also used the final comments section to say something about it as well.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
Not sure how much they will read, but that is a good point. I missed talking about it with unarmed strike.
Considering that most of the Unarmed Strike Rules are really just the Grappling, Shoving, Knock Prone rules, you can just mark it as Dissatisfied and that would likely carry the most weight
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
Did anyone else notice that the Expert Classes UA is now been “Updated?” What changed?
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Just adding the Survey
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
That’s it? Okay then. I only have just had time to look at it today, so I wasn’t sure. Thanks!!
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
That’s C doesn’t stand for C- Tier it stands for concentration