Vampire Bestiary

Upper_Krust · Feb 24, 2010

Rhuarc said:
Hey UK mate!

Howdy Rhuarc dude!

Just wanted to give you my opinion about your preview vampire

Thanks for the feedback.

Difficult to gauge a feel of the book from one monster, especially one so relatively weak. But I'll try and keep the previews coming every week, raising the stakes (no pun intended) along with the tier.

Really nice flavor, that's for sure. Even if I'm not a big fan of the described rotting naked woman, I like the overall idea of a degenerated vampire which can only be seen by those near death.

Its not bad, some of the sentence structure needs a bit of work, which I'll attend to when I get up to editing that creature.

But IMHO I think the damage output is too high for a level 3 monster. It just so happens that one of my groups just hit level 3, and I'm pretty certain the Pey would rip them apart.

I have to say you may have a point, I changed the original idea of the monster because I couldn't find an easy way to implement the mechanics.

I think I'll take another crack at it when I edit that entry.

The original plan was that the Pey would have a high defense (with invisibility) but deal low damage until a target is bloodied, whereupon it would have a low defense (or rather, no invisibility) but deal high damage.

The problem is that Combat Advantage is much more likely when the thing is invisible. Which sort of unbalances the monster meaning its got a good defense and offense simultaneously.

1d10+3 damage for an At-Will is fine, two attacks for an elite is fine also. But having CA with an additional 2d6 damage against all PCs until they are bloodied is abit over the top. And that's in addition to total concealment from the Invisibility.

I may change the base damage to 1d6 + 3 which becomes 2d6 + 3 against a bloodied target and remove the Bad Romance additional damage.

Also, the increased damage against dominated targets is too much as well. First the character got probably already hit with a 2d10+3+2d6 attack from the Cold Embrace. That's a whopping 17 damage on average with a 3rd level character having only between 34 and 40 hit points (35 damage on a crit!).

Thereafter the target becomes (assuming an average dice roll on the attack) dominated in the same round. A pretty harsh condition on this level, by the way. There aren't many (save ends) powers in the lower heroic tier, and most of them aren't the serious type, meaning slowed, immobilized, ongoing damage or maybe dazed.

I may make it that the target (of the domination) automatically 'snaps out of it' if taking any further damage (or maybe gets an additional save). But I really think the domination works in context with this monster.

Then the Pey could spend its AP to make an additional attack against the target, maybe even with another 2d6 extra damage if the character wasn't bloodied by the first attack. All of this spells out "potential character kill in one round" for me...which is not really fitting for the power level.

Not to mention that the Pey isn't attacking alone...

Those bone wights are a tad tricky too. :angel:

All in all, I guess I would reduce the damage from the CA to 1d6, have the Kiss of Bewitchment to be either another Standard Action or a recharge power and would change the Invisibility to end while a target is grabbed or something like that.

I'll perhaps reduce the damage of the Cold Embrace and make it a standard at-will.

On paragon or even epic levels, the combination of the powers is great. The PCs have more than enough abilities to grant saves, pierce Invisibility and heal the damage back up. But for level 3 it is a bit much.

Sort of trying to contrast its power with that of the Ankheg (L3 Elite Lurker in MM2) and I don't think there is much in it, although the Pey has more focus on attacking a solitary target which I suppose is the worry here (quick character kill).

Anyway, just my two cents. Maybe you find them helpful. Keep up the good work

Much appreciated. Even if I tweak the monster in the book I'll still leave the website version as it is, then people will have a choice.

I see the point with regards the power, that said it only wants to bloody one character then make that its "companion-lover". Rather than flat out try and kill them. So I am wondering if I can tweak the combat tactics slightly (would the pey want to kill its lover? I don't think so) I may not have to change as much as I initially thought.

Rhuarc · Feb 25, 2010

Pssthpok said:
At level 3, a well-rounded party could handle one of these things... by well-rounded, I mean a party with at least one leader, a striker and a defender. She just doesn't have the HP to last against a rogue flanking with a fighter supported by a cleric with sacred flame and/or astral seal.

Well, true if the whole party (or at least the three you've mentioned) focus on the Pey. But if we take UK's recommendation of the encounter group, the Pey is just one of several monsters in the fight, even though it is the strongest. And being a lurker with constant Invisibility, at least at the start, I don't think the group wants to run around, trying to catch the vampire if three or four other, visible, monsters are attacking as well.

Rhuarc · Feb 25, 2010

Upper_Krust said:
I see the point with regards the power, that said it only wants to bloody one character then make that its "companion-lover". Rather than flat out try and kill them. So I am wondering if I can tweak the combat tactics slightly (would the pey want to kill its lover? I don't think so) I may not have to change as much as I initially thought.

Of course, the roleplaying/story-reason not to kill the dominated character would lower the "killing potential".
But that's the thing, do you rather build monsters which are balanced combat-wise in whatever DM hands they'll end up, or do you prefer to have monsters with some very strong power combinations which will be lessened by the roleplaying approach.

I tend definitely to the latter one as well, just wanted to give my objective opinion of the Pey. If you play the monsters in this way, there is no need to change the domination power. Just the damage output and maybe the invisibility

Upper_Krust · Feb 25, 2010

Rhuarc said:
Of course, the roleplaying/story-reason not to kill the dominated character would lower the "killing potential".
But that's the thing, do you rather build monsters which are balanced combat-wise in whatever DM hands they'll end up, or do you prefer to have monsters with some very strong power combinations which will be lessened by the roleplaying approach.

I tend definitely to the latter one as well, just wanted to give my objective opinion of the Pey. If you play the monsters in this way, there is no need to change the domination power. Just the damage output and maybe the invisibility

The weird thing is that, by the book, the Pey is balanced as is. In fact, one of 4Es strengths is that it is actually quite difficult to unbalance it.

That said, I think the designer has a responsibility to create not only challenging monsters, but fun monsters and I don't think a one round kill on a character is necessarily that fun*.

*At least not in the Heroic Tier...but you guys darn well better expect nastiness when you reach the epic tier...and when you hit legendary tier its going to be like the beach scene at the start of Saving Private Ryan. I just love reading threads where people go on about the epic monsters being no challenge to epic characters. BWAH-HA-HA-HA! :devil:

The Vampire Bestiary, it doesn't just raise the stakes, it gives monsters more bite. :lol:

Unlike the core rulebooks, I generally don't pull any punches. This may be the one exception just because its such a low level.

Rhuarc · Feb 26, 2010

Upper_Krust said:
Unlike the core rulebooks, I generally don't pull any punches. This may be the one exception just because its such a low level.

Yeah, and that reason was my only concern. Bring on the TPK-machines on epic and legendary!

Khisanth the Ancient · Mar 1, 2010

The Vampire Bestiary FAQ says that one of the creatures in the book is a 4e version of a creature from the website... I wonder which one? Many can be ruled out for IP reasons, others are revisions of WOTC monsters, pretty much just leaving Talos & the Crown Naga (unless it's the Kilotonchiere but that seems unlikely) - neither of which has an obvious link to vampires.

And I'm really looking forward to the Twin Wight!

Upper_Krust · Mar 1, 2010

Hey guys!

Rhuarc said:
Yeah, and that reason was my only concern. Bring on the TPK-machines on epic and legendary!

The Bisomus is quite tough, but when we hit the Epic Tier next weekend expect fireworks.

Khisanth the Ancient said:
The Vampire Bestiary FAQ says that one of the creatures in the book is a 4e version of a creature from the website... I wonder which one? Many can be ruled out for IP reasons, others are revisions of WOTC monsters, pretty much just leaving Talos & the Crown Naga (unless it's the Kilotonchiere but that seems unlikely) - neither of which has an obvious link to vampires.

And I'm really looking forward to the Twin Wight!

Art today, stats tomorrow. Trying to spread things out and paint the illusion that I have more updates than I actually have. I thought the four-armed wight was a nice touch for a servant of Kali.

By the way if anyone has anymore questions about the book that are not covered in the FAQ either post them here or email me agooddesigner@hotmail.com.

Khisanth the Ancient · Mar 3, 2010

Twin Wight is an awesomely creepy monster.

Just to clarify, the "when first reduced to 0 hit points" stipulation means that if a Bisomus goes down to 0 hit points, splits apart, then rejoins, when its reduced to 0 hp the second time it dies rather than splits?

Teleport away from an attack, and 2 healing surge loss ... nasty.

Rhuarc · Mar 3, 2010

Hey UK!

Nice monster again, well done

Just two little clarifications for the powers to read correctly:

One-Two Punch (standard, at-will) - Necrotic
The Bisomus makes a Punch attack. If this attack hits, the Bisomus can make a second punch attack against the same target. If the second attack also hits the target is knocked prone.

Trial Separation (immediate interupt, when target of a melee or ranged attack, recharge 4 5 6 ) - Necrotic, Teleportation
The Bisomus evades the attack and teleports up to 6 squares where it can make the following melee attack: +15 vs. Fortitude; 2d6 + 6 necrotic damage and the target loses 2 healing surges.

Hope you don't mind

Upper_Krust · Mar 3, 2010

Hiya mate!

Khisanth the Ancient said:
Twin Wight is an awesomely creepy monster.

Glad you like it. Its not bad. There are always things with any monster that maybe you'd like to change in retrospect but sometimes you just have to say enough is enough and move on to the next monster.

Just to clarify, the "when first reduced to 0 hit points" stipulation means that if a Bisomus goes down to 0 hit points, splits apart, then rejoins, when its reduced to 0 hp the second time it dies rather than splits?

Correct.

Teleport away from an attack, and 2 healing surge loss ... nasty.

I was originally planning to have a healing surge loss with each punch but I thought that was simply far too cruel even for me.

The idea behind the teleport thing was inspired by the Half-Undead guy from the Chronicles of Riddick movie, who sort of shadow-shifts/teleports and can either move to this new location or comeback to its original place.