Am I the only one who doesn't like the arbitrary "boss monster" tag?

[GMforPowergamers]

And he's probably done more than just his chores - maybe helped put out a few fires, spent some time in a militia, lived through a war or two, tried to fend off burglars, a whole bunch of things that make up a varied life's tapestry in a genre-consistent setting.

).

Wow justifying mechanic with after thought add on fluff.. How 4e of you

 

[Chris_Nightwing]

I haven't got time to take up the current NPC challenge.. but I'd solve it the same way 4E does - use DM fiat. The subtle difference being that I'd create a sage class that never gains BAB, only Will save and skill points, Wizard spells solely from the divination school and d4 HP. I like some mechanical backup!

 

[billd91]

Actually this is one of the common dissonances of games with levels. Power is attached to level, so a high level whatever is always better than a low level anything.
<snip>
I also find it weird in the opposite sense. My fighter is pouring points into blacksmithing. In order to finish a masterwork plate, I need a couple of extra ranks. So I go to the nearest hill, start to kill goblins, and then I'll be able to craft it.

You're right that there is some dissonance (and dissociation) in level-based systems. But it's really a minor issue under most circumstances. You'd really have to set your expectations on a razor's edge for it to be of any significance. The sage may have a fairly decent BAB in order to get the skill levels you want... but he's got a Str of 6, isn't wearing armor, has a Con of 8, and is only armed with his parchment-trimming knife. A party of adventurers can pretty easily work him over.

 

[nightwyrm]

I haven't got time to take up the current NPC challenge.. but I'd solve it the same way 4E does - use DM fiat. The subtle difference being that I'd create a sage class that never gains BAB, only Will save and skill points, Wizard spells solely from the divination school and d4 HP. I like some mechanical backup!

If you can handwave a unique class for a single NPC sage, you can handwave it for any 3e/4e monster/NPC. Alice the Sage who can't fight a cat, she's in a unique "Alice the Sage" class. Bob the Sage who can beat up an ogre and do backflips on tightropes, he's in a unique "Bob the Sage" class. Trogdor the Burninator Ancient Red Dragon who just like to burninate and not able to cast any spells? He's in the "Trogdor the Burninator Ancient Red Dragon" class. All these classes, feats, races etc. etc. are all just abstractions that the DM uses to model the results he wants. The fact that a "class" is created to suit just one particular case doesn't mean it's any more meaningful than a simple handwave.

 

[triqui]

Unless I miss my guess, we are talking about a fantasy trope world - or at least a medieval one - and not a modern one in which Paul Chen would matter. As far as Masamune goes, who's to say? Did he have some training in the use of the sword as well as the forging of them? And how seasoned are we talking about in D&D levels? 3rd level? 7th level? 10th level? How many seasons does it take to be seasoned?

The fantasy trope might work for the town Blacksmith, or maybe the woodcutter, but will fail for the world's best glassblower, or silkweaver, or scribe.

A level 3 fighter is damn seasoned by D&D standards. Really depends on which edition you play, but most seasoned soldier's that came in leadership feat followers and the like are under 3rd level. 3rd is roughly the CR of a ogre. It's also 1 more than a panther. So we are talking about soldiers seasoned enough to defeat a panther, or stand a chance against an ogre. That kind of seasoned.

A 10th level fighter is, in D&D, far beyond "normal mortal" range. He is a legend hero who can defeat Dire Lions and Seven Headed Hydras like Hercules, he can fall from a tower and not dying, he can jump astonishing distances, tame Pegaus, survive Basilisks and Medusas, fights Rakshashas, Devils and Dragons, he can mow through a mob of enemy grunts... That's not a seasoned soldier who has been in a few war campaigns, killed several enemy soldiers, and won a couple battles. It's a mighty heroe.

So the high level glassblower might not be able to defeat the mighty level 10 Beowulf, but he can kill a war veteran soldier that went to conquer holy land in the Crusade and came back as a seasoned warrior.

 

[slobo777]

The fantasy trope might work for the town Blacksmith, or maybe the woodcutter, but will fail for the world's best glassblower, or silkweaver, or scribe.

A level 3 fighter is damn seasoned by D&D standards. Really depends on which edition you play, but most seasoned soldier's that came in leadership feat followers and the like are under 3rd level. 3rd is roughly the CR of a ogre. It's also 1 more than a panther. So we are talking about soldiers seasoned enough to defeat a panther, or stand a chance against an ogre. That kind of seasoned.

A 10th level fighter is, in D&D, far beyond "normal mortal" range. He is a legend hero who can defeat Dire Lions and Seven Headed Hydras like Hercules, he can fall from a tower and not dying, he can jump astonishing distances, tame Pegaus, survive Basilisks and Medusas, fights Rakshashas, Devils and Dragons, he can mow through a mob of enemy grunts... That's not a seasoned soldier who has been in a few war campaigns, killed several enemy soldiers, and won a couple battles. It's a mighty heroe.

So the high level glassblower might not be able to defeat the mighty level 10 Beowulf, but he can kill a war veteran soldier that went to conquer holy land in the Crusade and came back as a seasoned warrior.

The NPC/monster rules in 3E were created in order to build combatants with varying abilities to fight. So that's what they tend to do, even if you bend them to other purposes.

Most NPC artisans and socialites aren't equipped for battle anyway, so all the high level ones get is a some extra hit points that might let them last long enough to run away.

 

[triqui]

I haven't got time to take up the current NPC challenge.. but I'd solve it the same way 4E does - use DM fiat. The subtle difference being that I'd create a sage class that never gains BAB, only Will save and skill points, Wizard spells solely from the divination school and d4 HP. I like some mechanical backup!

If you are going to use the Sage class more than once, this might be a good move. But if you are going to need some obscure special need NPC (let's say... a glassblower?) why would you go through all this process, and needing that much prep time, just to make a class you'll use once, and only once, in a very specific setting, in your whole career? Why not just handweave it enterelly? "This is Bob the glassblower, he has +15 in glassblowing. He sucks at fighting, so he is +0 att, +1d3-1 dmg, and 5hp, with AC 10, in the case it ever needs a combat stat.

 

[ForeverSlayer]

Are you saying that B/X does have magic resistance?

EDIT:


In B/X, Dragons have breath weapons (which they use a random % of the time), flight, three attacks (claw/claw/bite) and a % chance of speaking, which in turn triggers a % chance of spells.

Of the items on your list, they lack guaranteed spells, blindsight, wing and tail attacks, spell-like abilities (except for the Gold Dragon, which can shapechange), DR and Spell Resistance. I don't think they have immunities either. Their physical attacks - especially their claws - are very weak. It is only their flight and their AoE that gives them "solo" capabilities. They are highly vulnerable to action denial (typically from MUs using Charm or Hold Monster).

In 1st ed AD&D, dragons are very similar to B/X except that they get very modest elemental damage resistance (but also, from memory, vulnerabilities: a Red Dragon, for example, is -1 per die of damage from fire but +1 per die of damage from cold), a more generous process for calculating saving throws (as if HD = hp/4), and (I think) blindsight. There are no guaranteed spells (except for gold dragons, I think), no wing or tail attacks, no DR, no magic resistance and no immunities. The only spell like abilities are dragon fear, which has a HD cap on its effectivness, and the ability of silver, bronze and gold dragons to change shape. Claw damage is still pitifully low. As in B/X, it is primarily their flight and AoE that gives them "solo" capabilities, though they are less vulnerable to action denial, because of their better saving throws than other monsters of the same HD.

2nd ed AD&D introduces tail attacks, wing buffets, etc, and ups the claw and bit damage. It also introduces magic resistance for dragons. I think damage reduction comes in only in 3E.

Dragons did have Magic Resistance: Standard in 1st edition.

2nd edition did not introduce Magic Resistance.

If you have access to the 1st Edition Monster Manual you will find on page 33, example Red Dragon, that it has Magic Resistance: Standard.

You do realize that things such as Blindsight, feats etc were in reference to 3rd edition because we were on the topic of previous editions.

Also 1st edition dragons had sight, hearing, and smell so keen that they could detect hidden and invisible creatures, they can cause PC's to panic, they can use their breath weapon 3/day.

I know what 1st edition and 2nd edition dragons have. They were still a match for a party even back then.

 

[triqui]

I know what 1st edition and 2nd edition dragons have. There were still a match for a party even back then.

Of course they were. Dragons, as Beholders, Chimeras, and other monsters, have always been solo monsters. They just didn't have the term invented. Just like "Runequest" was "simulationist" even before "simulationism" term was invented.

The point of normalizing the terminology is to make it easier to know what we are talking about, rationalize about it, discuss it, and build rules for it.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I know what 1st edition and 2nd edition dragons have. They were still a match for a party even back then.

So they were solo monsters?