Doing the Monster Math for the original MM

Aegeri

First Post
I think since the errata there has been a lot of confusion in various threads, particularly about what has been done and needs to be done with various monsters to "update" them to the current maths. This should serve as a summary of what you need to do to take your beloved monster manual 1 creatures and update them to the current maths.

Changes that affect all creatures from the first Monster Manual

1) Damage expressions are now different. See the latest errata document here. As a quicker rule of thumb, you can double the static damage of MM1 creatures or triple the static damage if they are brutes. MM3 made creatures hit far harder and also, in some cases more or less often.

Noting that in general, you don't need to change MM1 or MM2 or whatever creatures damage in heroic. They are relatively fine as they are and won't be too bad. The changes to damage expressions really kick in paragon tier (level 11) and above. You can leave most MM creatures in heroic tier alone for the most part damage wise.

2) Brutes gain +2 to attack. This was probably because their damage wasn't great and they never hit either, a pretty terrible combination. Noting that at low levels, I don't think the +2 bonus to attack is critical. Keeping brutes at +3 vs. AC at low levels is something I would even recommend, especially with how hard they hit.

3) Soliders lose -2 to attack. Probably to make them more in line with other monsters.

4) Controllers are now +3 vs. NADs (Non-AC defenses, that is they are less accurate against Fortitude, Reflex and Will) instead of +4. This isn't consistently applied though as few controllers still have +4 vs. NADs, but in general it's now +3.

5) Artillery have +5 vs. AC and +3 vs. NADs, but their ranged and area powers you can decide to give them an additional +1 or +2 to accuracy.

6) Power Design:

Most MM3 creatures have far better power design than those in MM1. Sadly this isn't something that can have hard and fast rules to easily turn a flailing, incompetent MM1 brute into a tactically interesting and fun creature. In general, most MM3 creatures tend to have a trait of some sort, a melee basic attack and then some kind of triggered action as a general minimum. Minions in the original MM need the most help (see upgraded minion damage in DMG2). I recommend adding the odd power to some MM creatures, but don't go particularly crazy.

Personally when designing monsters now I try to avoid large amounts of immunities and resistances as well. Instead I prefer traits that trigger off different keywords, either penalizing the monster like the Fire Elemental being frozen in place by cold spells (can't use flickering flames, minor action shift) or enhancing it somehow (like making the creature move + make an attack). This isn't something you should do for every monster, but it's something to think about instead of giving a resistance.

Changes that Affect Elites specifically

1) Elites no longer gain bonuses to their defenses. I think it was their two highest (AC and one other) that got the bonus. So reduce their AC and one other defense (their highest usually) by 2.

2) Elites definitely need a solid double attack most of the time, some MM elites don't reliably attack twice a round so you need to address that.

Changes that Affect Solos specifically

1) The most notable change is that solos lose 20% of their total HP value after paragon. This is because their HP total ((level*8)+con) after paragon originally was multiplied by 5 to give them their final HP. This formulae changed to just being multiplied by 4, so effectively it results in 20% less HP.

2) Solos need to do around 50% more damage when they are bloodied. Usually either from a triggered action attack when bloodied, extra attacks, extra damage, an aura being activated or any number of other relevant things.

Note that with MM3 damage expressions being roughly ~40% more combined with this, that's a whopping 90% expected damage increase when bloodied over the original MM creatures. This indicates just how far behind in terms of the total maths these monsters actually are!

3) Like elites, solos take a -2 penalty on three of their defenses (instead of two for elites). So their AC and two highest NADs should be decreased by 2 (as they no longer get this defensive benefit).

In Summary

Hopefully this is useful for anyone who wants a relatively "all in one place" look at what the errata and MM3 has generally done with creatures. Upgrading solos especially from the original MM is a total pain, because they are very far behind in "design" in powers, HP, defenses and many other aspects, which is a shame. In general with only a few simple adjustments, many MM creatures can be perfectly fine and will play pretty well - if you're willing to just put in a bit of time to upgrade them.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad


It's worth noting for sources after Monster Manual 2, you only need to worry about the first part of the above. This is because MM2 implements all the changes to solos and elites, while the MM3 maths didn't change elites or solos further (except damage, but that universally applies to all monsters).
 

I bow before you good sir. I was hoping WotC would do a quick conversion sheet or update the monsters in the compendium after the rule change but they have done neither. On behalf of those of us who don't have the time to figure out the conversions I thank you.
:)

*bowing deeply*
 

2) Solos need to do around 50% more damage when they are bloodied. Usually either from a triggered action attack when bloodied, extra attacks, extra damage, an aura being activated or any number of other relevant things.

Note that with MM3 damage expressions being roughly ~40% more combined with this, that's a whopping 90% expected damage increase when bloodied over the original MM creatures. This indicates just how far behind in terms of the total maths these monsters actually are!

If a monster has 10 damage, +40% is 14, +50% is 21, which is +110% not +90% (10 * 1.4 * 1.5). Note that it's the same going 10-15-21, so order is irrelevant.

It's only +90% if the +40 and +50 both apply to the original 10 damage and then the results are added afterwards (10 + (.4 of 10) + (.5 of 10))

If a solo is expected to be 50% stronger while bloodied then it is unbloodied, not then it would be unbloodied if it were MM1, then we're talking the greater 110 difference.
 

Generally some good advice and notes of the rough trend in design change, but it'd likely be a disservice to just apply things in a vacuum without consideration to all the monster manual creatures.

I think since the errata there has been a lot of confusion in various threads, particularly about what has been done and needs to be done with various monsters to "update" them to the current maths. This should serve as a summary of what you need to do to take your beloved monster manual 1 creatures and update them to the current maths.

Eh, it's really not that simple... some creatures already do enough damage (ex: Beholder Eye of Flame) or did too much (ex: Needlefang Drake Swarm).

2) Brutes gain +2 to attack.
Except when they already had a higher bonus - like Angels of Vengeance who are at Lvl +6 vs AC.

3) Soliders lose -2 to attack.
Except when they were already low, like Dragonborn Soldiers who are Lvl +5 vs AC and Lvl + 1 vs Reflex.

(Etc for Controllers and Artillery)

2) Elites definitely need a solid double attack most of the time, some MM elites don't reliably attack twice a round so you need to address that.
Eh, or a big close attack, or some minor action attacks, or a good aura, or...

2) Solos need to do around 50% more damage when they are bloodied.
Or 50% more damage before they're bloodied, or by spawning minions, or...

Frankly the problem is generally more that solos need ways to deal with action denial and rampant penalties/bonuses. It doesn't matter how big a damage a solo does if it never gets to take a standard action at all.

There's also still a serious question of resistances up in the air. Creatures like a Storm Titan or Gorgon actually can do serious damage without any modification, but if you have lots of resistance to their damage, then all bets are off.
 


As far as I can tell, another way to scale MM1 monster damage is to add 1 damage per every two monster levels.

Average at-will damage used to be about 8 + 1/2 level. Now it's 8 + level.

I spot checked monsters of various levels in MM3 and this seems to work pretty universally.
 

As far as I can tell, another way to scale MM1 monster damage is to add 1 damage per every two monster levels.

Average at-will damage used to be about 8 + 1/2 level. Now it's 8 + level.

I spot checked monsters of various levels in MM3 and this seems to work pretty universally.
Ah! It's the old +1/2 Level damage hack. I remember this one. :)

It was usually paired with an HP deduction, but I think the MM3 math lends itself better to challenging at-level encounters, so that deduction is a lot more optional now.

-O
 

Generally some good advice and notes of the rough trend in design change, but it'd likely be a disservice to just apply things in a vacuum without consideration to all the monster manual creatures.

I am aware, but if you readjust an old monster those are the set "standard" maths and what you go for as a baseline. Monster attacks and even defenses have always varied in every MM - this guide is meant to give anyone a quick starting point as to what they should do when updating a creature.

Eh, it's really not that simple... some creatures already do enough damage (ex: Beholder Eye of Flame) or did too much (ex: Needlefang Drake Swarm).
You don't need to adjust heroic tier monsters anyway and there are always broken monsters.

For example in MM3 have you looked at the Jackalweres? A level 4 creature that can knock a PC unconscious paired with a level 3 brute that deals 26+2d4 damage on a critical hit (Coup de grace in this case).

I mean, what do you think is worse there? Needlefang drakes and the Beholder Eye of Flame are pure chumps compared to those level 3 and 4 monsters!

Except when they already had a higher bonus - like Angels of Vengeance who are at Lvl +6 vs AC.
Many monsters vary from the established maths and have done since the original MM. I pointed out in the OP that while controllers get +3 vs. NADs, several MM3 creatures still have +4 or even +5.

Eh, or a big close attack, or some minor action attacks, or a good aura, or...
A close attack is a good example, but minor action attacks are a terrible terrible trap and it is not a good idea to give elites action economy with minor action attacks. An elite should, no matter if it is dazed or similar be able to make two consistent attacks per round. An elite being turned into a regular monster because it can't attack enough on its standard action isn't very well off - minor actions are nice at first but are ultimately traps.

Note that is my personal opinion and is based on my experience. Dazed cripples elites that rely on move/minor actions to function - as such IMO an elite should still attack twice with its standard action.

Or 50% more damage before they're bloodied, or by spawning minions, or...
This is the MM2 guideline for creatures, that they should be doing roughly 50% more damage after they are bloodied. Usually this means they gain an additional attack. Spawning minions is just not very useful against a party with a decent controller, unless said minions do an especially nasty effect on death like explode giving it HP, attack bonuses or something similar.

Frankly the problem is generally more that solos need ways to deal with action denial and rampant penalties/bonuses. It doesn't matter how big a damage a solo does if it never gets to take a standard action at all.
This is true, but it's irrelevant to what guidelines that Wizards have set out with monsters since the monster manual 1 came out: Which is what this thread summarizes.

There's also still a serious question of resistances up in the air. Creatures like a Storm Titan or Gorgon actually can do serious damage without any modification, but if you have lots of resistance to their damage, then all bets are off.
This is something that encounter design should take care of. Unfortunately resistances are too easy to get in 4E, which is why we have this problem but it's not uncommon for creatures to deal with this in various ways. Again, this goes into the waffly "point 6" in the OP (I'll concede that is waffly any day of the week). MM3 includes much better power design and ways around PCs that often negate their attacks.
 
Last edited:

Remove ads

Top