Monster Design in D&D Next

Philousk · Jun 12, 2012

TerraDave said:
Philousk said:

... if the hook horror impaled a high level character that would be stark naked?...

Click to expand...

Oh, I thought about that. (though maybe I shouldn't have).

Imagine what you will.

I could have taken a less shameless example also as a companion animal a high level character with no belt or other equipment to justify the hook is stuck in it and the problem would have remained the same.

JamesonCourage said:
To me, this is clearly not meshing well. I want the mechanics to define the fiction for me, and when they contradict each other, it bugs me. As it stands, the Large creature impales a Medium or Small creature, holding it in place unless it makes a Strength check. Hit points represent your ability to not get hit, and you don't necessarily take a physical wound until half hit points. You recover from all your wounds overnight (so the impaling cannot be bad) unless you're below 1 hit point, in which case it takes 2d6 hours (I think) plus overnight rest (so, the impaling still can't be that bad; I could grudgingly justify a flesh wound that's mostly just painful, but on "weak" or small characters, not as easily).

If the PCs aren't supposed to take grievous injuries (aside from death?), make sure that the mechanics reflect that. Don't "impale" a halfling on the claw of a Large creature mechanically if other mechanics contradict that interpretation..

I think the ability to impalement should occur only on a critical hit and that when the HP of the target are reduced by half at least, otherwise it would remain normal piercing damage. A zero HP or against an unconscious or immobile, it is not necessary to make a critical hit, because that would be automatic as was the rule initially.

Gilladian · Jun 12, 2012

Morrus said:
I'm playing in the playtest rather than running it, so I haven't looked at the DM stuff. Does it tell you when to level up?

Second level at 2,000 and 3rd level at 6,000 xp on the character sheets... as far as I know that's all they've said. If that means that each level is 2,000 xp more than the level before (ie 2000 for 2st +4,000 more = 6,000 for 3rd) then 4th level would be 12,000 and 5th level would be at 20,000. That would mean that one of these creatures, as a solo fight, is about 1/40th of the advancement needed to reach 5th level.

So fighting 40+ creatures of 5th level value would put a character up from 1st to 5th level. I suppose that's really not so bad; I may have misjudged the value of the XP.

This presumes my guess about how to calculate XP level gaps is right, and that my math is not wacky!

Argyle King · Jun 12, 2012

It's cool that I'm seeing the process Mearls went through.

However, in response to: "So, hopefully that gives you some insight into how we are building monsters"

No, not really. I mean, I have an idea of how you are making decisions pertaining to the monsters by averaging out how they are presented across various editions, but I still have little to no idea how you're actually building the monster as it relates to how the game works.

Lanefan · Jun 12, 2012

I like Hook Horrors. They first appeared in "Quest for the Heartstone" where the party has to take them on in numbers...fun times!

That said, I don't like what I see in that example of a monster write-up:

- still using 3e stat bonuses (Str 18 = +4, Int 6 = -2, etc.); so much for flatter math
- this thing can really give out the pain (potentially 1d10 + 2d6 + 8 vs. two different characters per round - ouch!), which tells me 5e characters are either likely to have lots of h.p. or are going to die against monsters like this; again looks bad for the flat math (likely) or the no-death types (unlikely)
- presentation (which admittedly is a work in progress) looks even drier than 4e, and I didn't think that was possible
- presentation again: that write-up is WAY too long! 20 lines not including wrap-arounds, to say what could be said in about 4 lines (again ignoring wrap-arounds) - each stat, for example, does not need its own line!
- combat design is still obviously highly turn-based, as per the example on hiding from it; going strictly by that wording a character can start its turn hidden behind an object, move into view to do something, then move behind an obstruction and remain hidden if it ends its turn there - watch the fox???
- some obvious details are missing:
** surprise (for and against);
** hit dice or fight level or BAB or anything that indicates how good it is at fighting if using anything other than its hooks (e.g. if it decides to drop a rock on someone before leaping down, what's the attack modifier?);
** morale or any other indication of whether it will ever do anything other than fight to the death if-when met by adventurers
** can it see by means other than echolocation, does it have eyes that function when there is light?
** can it voluntarily drop impaled opponents once it's had its free bite, in order to get the full impale-bite routine for each hook next round? Or does it have to hang on to impaled opponents until they wriggle free?

Lan-"shake it up baby, now (shake it up baby) - twist and bite (twist and bite)"-efan

GX.Sigma · Jun 12, 2012

Have you read the playtest rules yet? Many of your questions and concerns are explained in the playtest document and WotC articles about it. I'll try to address them as best I can.

Lanefan said:
- still using 3e stat bonuses (Str 18 = +4, Int 6 = -2, etc.); so much for flatter math

PC ability scores are capped at 20 (+5) and there's no level-based attack bonus progression, so the math is quite flat indeed.

- this thing can really give out the pain (potentially 1d10 + 2d6 + 8 vs. two different characters per round - ouch!), which tells me 5e characters are either likely to have lots of h.p. or are going to die against monsters like this; again looks bad for the flat math (likely) or the no-death types (unlikely)

Since to-hit and target numbers don't scale, the primary numerical progression is hit points and damage. This means that (e.g.) a high level fighter vs. 40 orcs can be a fair fight.

- presentation (which admittedly is a work in progress) looks even drier than 4e, and I didn't think that was possible
- presentation again: that write-up is WAY too long! 20 lines not including wrap-arounds, to say what could be said in about 4 lines (again ignoring wrap-arounds) - each stat, for example, does not need its own line!

I think it's a given that there will be a "stat block" that hasn't been designed yet.

- combat design is still obviously highly turn-based, as per the example on hiding from it; going strictly by that wording a character can start its turn hidden behind an object, move into view to do something, then move behind an obstruction and remain hidden if it ends its turn there - watch the fox???

Maybe it's, if you end your turn behind a solid object, you're automatically hidden from the monster. But yeah, I agree with you, this is weird and should be clearer.

** surprise (for and against);

Not really a thing, given the way initiative in 5e works.

** hit dice or fight level or BAB or anything that indicates how good it is at fighting if using anything other than its hooks (e.g. if it decides to drop a rock on someone before leaping down, what's the attack modifier?);

All attack rolls are based solely on ability score modifiers (often with class bonuses). So if it wanted to throw a rock, it would make an attack with its Strength modifier as the attack bonus.

** morale or any other indication of whether it will ever do anything other than fight to the death if-when met by adventurers

I totally agree that something like this is needed, but maybe they feel it's best to put that stuff in the description, or just haven't figured out how or if they want to do morale rules.

** can it see by means other than echolocation, does it have eyes that function when there is light?

I think all monsters have normal senses unless it says otherwise, but I agree this could be clearer.

** can it voluntarily drop impaled opponents once it's had its free bite, in order to get the full impale-bite routine for each hook next round? Or does it have to hang on to impaled opponents until they wriggle free?

Valid point.

Blackwarder · Jun 12, 2012

Hussar said:
You are concerned that the xp value of the creatures are too high. But, if you use GP=XP, then the total xp for any given encounter is likely pretty close. Sure, you get less xp for a given critter, but the treasure gained from any given encounter will generally balance it out.

So, is there any real difference? If you get 1000 xp does it matter that it's all "defeat" xp or "defeat+GP" xp?

Of course there is a difference, how many orcs have you encountered carrying 100+ gp on them?

Warder

Hussar · Jun 12, 2012

Blackwarder said:
Of course there is a difference, how many orcs have you encountered carrying 100+ gp on them?

Warder

Well, it depends on what you count as 100+ gp. Weapon and armor is likely worth about 30-40 gp each, a potion of healing is a few hundred Xp (IIRC, it's been a LONG time since I looked up the xp value of magic items in AD&D), and a chest with a hundred gp and a silver cup worth 150 gp. Not terribly off 1000 gp.

Would they have 1000 gp in coins? Probably not. But, overall, having close to 1000 gp worth of stuff isn't that hard to rack up. And, while those 10 orcs might not have it, the chief and his couple of guards in the next room might make up for it.

IOW, it balances out fairly quickly. I mean, I've got the Moldvay Basic rules in front of me right now and:

MOldvay Basic P B56 - the Sample Dungeon Room 4 said:
The DM selects 4 hobgoblins to occupy this room with 2 prisoners and some treasure... The number of silver pieces is reduced to 1/6 the rolled number (down to 500 sp) and the minimum 1 piece of jewelry is uses... worth 1100 gp

So, we have 4 hobgobs with treasure worth 1150 gp. So, it's not too out of line.

Blackwarder · Jun 12, 2012

Hussar said:
Well, it depends on what you count as 100+ gp. Weapon and armor is likely worth about 30-40 gp each, a potion of healing is a few hundred Xp (IIRC, it's been a LONG time since I looked up the xp value of magic items in AD&D), and a chest with a hundred gp and a silver cup worth 150 gp. Not terribly off 1000 gp.

Would they have 1000 gp in coins? Probably not. But, overall, having close to 1000 gp worth of stuff isn't that hard to rack up. And, while those 10 orcs might not have it, the chief and his couple of guards in the next room might make up for it.

IOW, it balances out fairly quickly. I mean, I've got the Moldvay Basic rules in front of me right now and:

So, we have 4 hobgobs with treasure worth 1150 gp. So, it's not too out of line.

I have no problem with this because the PC can choose to just try and steal the gold and not fight anyone which is a perfectly valid tactic.

I just don't want monsters killing to become the goal because I don't want the game to be distilled to being all about the combat, I want there to be several methods for giving xp that the DM and group could pick from.

Basically I don't want xp values to be the corner stone on wich we design an advanture/encounter.

Warder

Blackwarder · Jun 12, 2012

Btw, I went and made a quick advancement table from what we know from the playtest, now if the advancement table will be somthing like this that I completely agree that the monsters xp levels isn't too high, but I have a hard time believing that this will be the advancement table in D&DNEXT.

Playtest Advancment Table

Level XP
1 0
2 2000
3 6000
4 14000
5 30000
6 62000
7 126000
8 254000
9 510000
10 1022000

Warder

pemerton · Jun 12, 2012

Doug McCrae said:
The hook horror is a really boring monster.

Agreed. I don't think I've ever used it, and I've had a Fiend Folio since the mid-80s.

[MENTION=10021]kamikaze[/MENTION]Midget's version is better, but at the moment I haven't seen any rules that would make it very easy to run that sort of "Alien" stealth/horror sequence in D&Dnext.