4th Edition Red Wizards

Ydars

Explorer
This is a strange thread...............

Some people seem to worry that monster stats in 4E will be arbitary! I suspect they will be since this is a game and in a game, everything is arbitary (i.e. there will almost certainly be some underlying math or system for creating monsters in 4E but the purpose of creating monsters is merely to challenge the party in a game. Therefore the system is deliberately and arbitarily set up solely to create a workable game).

3.5E monster generation was totally arbitary; it just followed the same rules as for PCs. Why this is a good thing has always evaded me because it meant you had to slavishly follow these rules in longwinded fashion just because WoTC never let us DMs in on the underlying math. 3.5E monsters creation was HORRIBLE and complete nonsense. I loved many of the monsters but I don't think I ever created any of my own because it was such a nightmare. WHY would monsters choose to follow careers as if they were humans? It makes NO SENSE. NPC/Monster creation was such a complete chore in 3.3E that it made the game much less fun for the DM.

My great hope for 4E is that is removes this horrible burden from the DM and makes monster generation mechanics explicit and simple. That way, we DMs can prepare a few surprises for players who know how to get around everything you throw at them because they are DMs themselves. This very fact has always lessened the game for me when I play rather than DM.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Lurks-no-More

First Post
Charwoman Gene said:
Unless certain posters use common sense and courtesy to stop destructively poisoning this board out of spite that their chosen rules wankery isn't supported.
Unnecessary, since ignore lists exist and are quick, easy and satisfying to use.

I have to say that "Thay = evil Tibet" sounds very nice. I was never all that fond of the school-specific structure of the Red Wizards, both because it felt meta-gamey in a bad way to me (like the "nine gods for nine alignments" pantheon every DM ever has built at some point), and because I always felt that wizard specialization in 3.* was a lousy choice.
 

Ydars said:
This is a strange thread...............

Some people seem to worry that monster stats in 4E will be arbitary! I suspect they will be since this is a game and in a game, everything is arbitary (i.e. there will almost certainly be some underlying math or system for creating monsters in 4E but the purpose of creating monsters is merely to challenge the party in a game. Therefore the system is deliberately and arbitarily set up solely to create a workable game).

3.5E monster generation was totally arbitary; it just followed the same rules as for PCs.
I think I'll will have a post or thread up in a while that discusses my groups last experiences with the great 3E system of monster creation and statting, and how it wrecked our Age of Worms campaign.
 


Charwoman Gene

Adventurer
Lurks-no-More said:
Unnecessary, since ignore lists exist and are quick, easy and satisfying to use.

No, they aren't. The threads still get posted, others reply to the crap. It's just sad how much people want to beat a dead horse.
 

vagabundo

Adventurer
Charwoman Gene said:
No, they aren't. The threads still get posted, others reply to the crap. It's just sad how much people want to beat a dead horse.

It gets a little tiring when there is a drive-by-treadcrapping.

They could have the decency to slug it out and take their beating.
 

Ashardalon

First Post
There does seem to be some rhyme and reason to the statting of NPCs and monsters in 4E. Some people managed reverse-engineer hit point formulas and XP formulas. They do seem to create minimums, however, rather than fixed values. And let's not forget the half-level bonus, on which the New Math(tm) seems to rely very strongly.

The recently published malebranche actually is right on target regarding the hit points predicted by this system (255 for a 22nd level Brute with Con 25). Its XP is a bit above what seems to be considered normal, perhaps due to its Leader-ness. The succubus seems to be off-target for a 9th level Controller with Con 10 - the formula I have predicts 70 hp rather than the 90 she has. On the other hand, the formula does predict 90 hp for Soldiers and Skirmishers with those stats, so maybe I simply have copied a wrong Controller formula.
 

Remove ads

Top