Is there an RPG like 5th edition but with better monsters/challenges?

>>54615688
Any older edition. Even the travesty of 3e is more likely to be a challenge than 5e.

D&D 4e.

>>54615688
There's always better options than D&D. Just depends on what you mean by "better"?

Like, when you say the monsters are too arbitrary, do you mean you wish that they were built like characters?

>>54615688

Tomb of beasts by kobold press is better

>>54615688
Depends on what it's the 5th edition of

>>54615711
I mean when I look through the MM i notice that all the monsters are basically some amount of HP, some +x to hit, they can do ydz + w damage on hit, maybe multiattack. There's hardly anything to differentiate them except sometimes they get some almost useless gimick like some skill check they can do or some language known.

>>54616306
There's a lot of monsters that aren't like that, such as Shadows, Oni, Dragons, Beholders, Doppelgangers, Mimics, Mind Flayers, and a hundred other monsters.

>>54616306
I've never really had the problem you're facing. Do you have a specific example?

>>54616306
>The monsters aren't different enough unless they are in which case they're just a gimmick.

>>54616306
There's a lot of boring blocks in there, like ogres and shit. Giants are a big offender.

And there's also interesting blocks, like aboleths and vampires and shit. Volo's Guide to Monsters also has some interesting creatures, I'm sure you can find a PDF.

Make your own you tremendous lazy slob.

>>54616306
That's the point. You bring those monsters life through description. But there's nothing stopping you from take a special rule from one monster, sticking it on another, and reskinning it to fit the monster. Or you could use the basic framework that you yourself pointed out to make your own monsters if you were so inclined. Your only limitation is your own apparent lack of imagination.

5e is not the best rpg by far, and there are plenty of reasons to dislike it. But yours is a reflection of your own deficiencies.

File: 1482541509281.jpg (11KB, 225x224px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 225x224px

>>54616306
>all monsters have HP
>Also attacks
>That deal damage

>>54615688
THIS IS WHAT BOUNDED ACCURACY IS ALL ABOUT, YOU FUCKING IDIOT.

>>54616425
I remember cooking up an encounter and I realized the Gnolls and Orcs were basically the same, then I started going through the rest of the low CR enemies and found that they were similar.

I think you could replace most of the monsters with [Generic Monster] and just tweak the stats a little, maybe an optional spelllike ability for the boss.

>>54616510
I'll check it out.

>>54616535
That's what I ended up doing, I made a ton of variant Nothiks with wildly different stats and attacks.

>>54616546
Why buy a fairly expensive book then just for some subpar artwork.

>>54615688
>with better monsters/challenges
What the hell are you looking for?

I have the distinct feeling that you're not going to find it anywhere.

>>54616894
Monsters that have strategic abilities.

>>54617046
Almost all abilities can be used strategically.
Like how kobolds are actually capable of being a threat.

Are you talking about something like how different wargame units have differing abstracted abilities, factoring in how battles are fought and won?

>>54617046
>Monsters that have strategic abilities.
So all of them depending on how your DM plays them?

Go read what Kobolds do in Volo's guide to monsters, a DM who just throws monsters at you with no strategy and has them fight to the death is a shit DM

>>54615705
This.
Fixes all the complaints you've brought up so far.

File: hobgoblin - hacklopedia.jpg (3MB, 3936x1288px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3936x1288px

>>54615688
Maybe the stats aren't a problem and you just need longer and more colorful descriptions of the monsters, their behavior and so forth? Hackmaster is a rules-heavy abomination of a system that revels in the pointless, fiddly details that were AD&D's worst part (and throws in as many more of them as it can come up with), but it's Hacklopedia of Beasts actually has some pretty cool descriptions (if you can tolerate some edginess). Pic is the hobgoblin entry from that manual (though, granted, the humanoid descriptions tend to be significantly longer than those of other beasts). Maybe you could just use the fluff from shit like that to make your monsters more interesting, while still playing 5e.

Alternately, you could make monsters more fantastical by giving many of them new mystical powers and such. There's the whole "trolls turn to stone in sunlight" thing, and the old elven invisibility thing (which could maybe be a super-stealth power that allows them to turn invisible while they stand perfectly still, to anybody who wasn't already looking at them), and so forth. There's plenty of weird powers like petrification, mummy rot, energy drain, paralyzing touch, nauseating stench, etc. that you could distribute more widely, or use as the basis for new, slightly different powers.

>>54616674
Bounced accuracy is about boring samey adversaries?

>>54615688
There's a forgotten realms bestiary on DMG that's all reviewed, which I've been considering buying.

Alternately , you could use 4e monster manuals with 5e numbers.