Design & Dev: Monsters (DRAGONS!)

[Li Shenron]

Let's not get too excited... the example doesn't seem too different from a 3ed battle to me.
Monster makes multiple attacks in the same round? Check.
Monster react to some attacks with a counterattack? Check (see AoOs).
Monster can full_attack+breath in the same round? Almost check... if it wasn't for the extra move this would just be a Dragon being 3.0-hasted. But wait a minute... wasn't everyone so happy that haste was nerfed? Ah, but I guess this is now only a dragons-only special ability.

There are significant differences in mechanics, but it's not more "cool" than what already happens in the game. I'm sure that 7 years ago they could have written an example that would sound just as exciting.

Something to note for me is that AoOs (whatever they will be called...) are still very much there, except that more options are given: the dragon is using the breath weapon again as an AoO (here called just immediate action) triggered by the charging fighter, except that the breath weapon affects everyone!

Multiple attacks: why the dragon does 2 claws attacks as a standard action + 1 tail slap as a free action is obscure to me. In 3.x it would have taken a full-round action to do all of them. Doesn't make a huge difference to me, but it does not sound as a simplification either.

And by the way, totally removing multiple attacks for PCs is not that nice... How are you going to fight a small group of mooks quickly? Maybe it's just going to require some special ability to make multiple attacks, but I think it's going to be there.

PS Someone please also explain to me the joke about "this isn't 3rd edition" because I didn't get it... "He blasts the dragon with a ray of freezing cold, but this isn’t 3rd Edition. The dragon takes normal damage, but it’s not enough to slow it down." Where's the joke?

 

[charlesatan]

Then it's just possible that the very concept of the "full attack action" is utterly absent from 4E.

It also simplifies the standard action/move action vs Full Attack action. At least now it's clear: you have 3 actions in a round: a swift action (presumably), a standard action, and a move action. Maybe there's a Saga System in there too wherein you can trade all of that for a Full Round Action.

 

[Li Shenron]

Also... I wouldn't worry too much about the removal of spellcasting to dragons. While I think that a spell-less dragon is not more special than a giant lizard, I am SURE that you CAN add spells to dragons by for example giving it some Wizard levels. NOT having spells by default could be a good thing because it's easier to add them than to take them away (and if you were just ignoring dragon's spells in 3.x, chances are that the battle would be easier than the expected CR).

 

[Baumi]

Multiple attacks: why the dragon does 2 claws attacks as a standard action + 1 tail slap as a free action is obscure to me. In 3.x it would have taken a full-round action to do all of them. Doesn't make a huge difference to me, but it does not sound as a simplification either.

The main advantage is that you no longer have to stand around to be fully effective. So Moving to the enemy is no longer a disadvantage (which restricts you to one attack and let the enemy full attack you on his next round). This should make the Fights more dynamic and easier.

Also you don't have to differ the bonuses/attacks for Full Attack and Standard Attack any more which results in an easier to use stat block.

 

[charlesatan]

Something to note for me is that AoOs (whatever they will be called...) are still very much there, except that more options are given: the dragon is using the breath weapon again as an AoO (here called just immediate action) triggered by the charging fighter, except that the breath weapon affects everyone!

Everyone might have been lined up or something. But immediate actions does make "reacting" more dynamic rather than simple AoO at the cost of performing less actions in a round (i.e. you don't have Combat Reflexes) which is what they're attempting to do.

Multiple attacks: why the dragon does 2 claws attacks as a standard action + 1 tail slap as a free action is obscure to me. In 3.x it would have taken a full-round action to do all of them. Doesn't make a huge difference to me, but it does not sound as a simplification either.

I think he meant that each claw attack was a standard action (why the tail slap is a free action is beyond me). Anyway, standard action terminology is easier to comprehend than Full Round actions (because it'll refer to standard and move actions and ask "what am I giving up?").

And by the way, totally removing multiple attacks for PCs is not that nice... How are you going to fight a small group of mooks quickly? Maybe it's just going to require some special ability to make multiple attacks, but I think it's going to be there.

I think iterative attacks will still be present in some form for PCs but not the norm (see Star Wars Saga system). Removing several group of mooks can be handled by Maneuvers from Book of Nine Swords which lets you do funky stuff such as a Whirlwind Attack (what I didn't like about it in 3.5 is that it came too late even for a pure Ftr) or perhaps an area of effect spell.

PS Someone please also explain to me the joke about "this isn't 3rd edition" because I didn't get it... "He blasts the dragon with a ray of freezing cold, but this isn’t 3rd Edition. The dragon takes normal damage, but it’s not enough to slow it down." Where's the joke?

Red Dragons have fire subtype so they take 50% more damage (in 3.5, in 3.0 double damage on a failed save). Apparently that's ditched in 4th Ed. Your choice whether to take that as a good thing or a bad thing but it does make calculations faster/quicker/easier.

 

[fuindordm]

I
But I'm not sure if this fits very well with the "don't give monsters abilities they won't use" philosophy. Which is a good idea, really; I just hope they don't overdo it. I would hate for the dryad to lose her speak with plants ability just because it won't be useful in the fight against the PCs.

Exactly. Any intelligent monster is a potential ally, and this role is also important. Their out-of-combat abilities should not be neglected.

 

[jeffh]

But at least the dragon is below 500 hit points!

(By the way, I did not take this to mean the fighter did 500 damage in one shot. It seemed pretty obvious we were joining a battle already in progress.)

 

[Draxo]

point 1: i hate the nosespikes.

point 2: Sound slike the dragon if terrifyingly powerful, and i say GOOD

Dragons were not powerful enoguh in 3rd ed.. I see dragons as something that should rightly be terrifyingly powerful and the pinnacle of dangerous in D&D.

 

[Yair]

It also simplifies the standard action/move action vs Full Attack action. At least now it's clear: you have 3 actions in a round: a swift action (presumably), a standard action, and a move action. Maybe there's a Saga System in there too wherein you can trade all of that for a Full Round Action.

[pet peeve]
I HATE that standard actions are called standard actions.
Player: "So, I attack. That's a standard action, right?"
DM: "Well, it's part of it. A standard action is attacking plus moving. And taking a Swift action, too, really."
Player: "So... a Standard Action is making a standard action (attacking), and other actions as well?"
DM: "Yes."
Player: "Then what are they calling those actions your'e doing as your standard actions by themselves? Without the extra stuff?"
DM: "Errrg... they used to call them Partial Actions. Now... they just call them standard actions."
Player: "That's a good way to confuse people they've got there... wait a moment, I can regain my focus as a MOVE action?! I don't move to regain my focus, I stand still! Boy, this game has some sucky terminology..."

I just wish they'd change things to a Main Action and Secondary Action instead of Standard and Move. It's simpler saying "In a round the standard thing you do is take one main, one secondary, one swift, and any number of free actions. A full action takes up both the main and secondary slots." Your "standard action" might be to attack and then move, but it shouldn't be a Standard Action!
[/per peeve]

 

[Aloïsius]

There are many things I don't like :
* HP skyrocket. It should be D&D, not a pinball highscore.
* AC skyrocket. Unless the high AC was due to the dragon using AC boost (spells or magic item) I don't see the point. Unless this dragon is CR 30
* No spells for dragons ? humf... I like the "dragons created magic" background you can find in many setting. I use draconic as the "latin" of most setting. If dragons ar now flying lezards with breath attacks, that's not fun
* vulnerability are lost ? Yeah. Great. A monster without weakness is a fun thing. Seriously, this is bad design. I know not all dragons had this elemental weakness, but I do think the most powerfull monsters (dragons, demons etc...) should have one weakness the PC can exploit if they find it. Unless the fight is only about pure force and cleverness is to be banned.

This is the first article that makes me somewhat skeptical about 4e. Wait and see. Perhaps I will wait a few more years.