L&L 5/21 - Hit Points, Our Old Friend

[pemerton]

It's more than that. if you take a look at the monster math, a 1st level monster has 15 AC. Based on what? The armour it's wearing? The dexterity bonus it has? A half level bonus to defenses? What if I have one soldier with a dex of 10 in chain and another in plate & shield? They both have 17.

A bit of an aside, but lately, I've been thinking that the relationship between AC and level ought to be reversed. A monster shouldn't have AC 15 because it's level 1. Rather, it should be level 1 because it has AC 15.

That's sort-of what I was trying to get at above in talking about delevelling a goblin by taking off its plate armour.

The times that bored me to tears was when I played and it was either a module or a set of tactical encounters loosely connected with other game modes that was only really designed to justify the next tactical encounter. But that can happen in any RPG.

I think it's plausible that 4e is especially prone to it.

Despite 4E's strengths, something about it as a product isn't working for WotC. So I think it's probably a fair bet that things that are iconic 4E elements might have a higher chance of not being around than staying. So my guess is that they'll start with the exploration focus and add more 4E style combat rules and refresh mechanics as modules than go the other way around.

I think this is right.

 

[Balesir]

A bit of an aside, but lately, I've been thinking that the relationship between AC and level ought to be reversed. A monster shouldn't have AC 15 because it's level 1. Rather, it should be level 1 because it has AC 15.

I'm picking on AC because it should be the most commonly attacked defence, and (IMO) probably the most important factor that determines the PCs' ability to overcome the monster is how easily they are able to hit it (let's set aside the ability to damage it for now). Factors like hit points influence how long the PCs will take to defeat it, and factors like the monster's attacks (type, bonus, damage) affect how long the PCs can take before the monster kills them, but (again IMO) the best single number on which to base an assessment of encounter difficulty is how easily the PCs are able to hit the monster.

What this means is, if you dress up a level 1 goblin that normally has AC 15 in plate mail and shield so that its AC is now 20, you've turned it into a level 6 monster. It might have the same hit points, attack bonus and damage (and this should be accounted for by adjusting the "standard" experience award for defeating a level 6 monster downwards) but calling it a level 6 monster makes the answer to questions like, "Why do my level 1 PCs have difficulty defeating level 1 goblins in plate mail?" pretty darn obvious.

Maybe I'm just wired differently in the brain to others, but it seems to me that this and the 4e "monster design matrix" are just different sides of the same coin. The only difference is that, when I'm designing monsters (or, more usually, modifying them) for an adventure the 4e way around is slightly more useful. Could I generate the monster descriptions, assess a rough AC, hp, Dmg and so on from that and then convert that to a level? Sure; but then I could end up futzing around designing several creatures until I got one of the level I'm looking for to fit the adventure and party level. Alternatively, I can set an AC based on the level of monster I want and then ask myself "what armour does that mean it has?"

The basics are sound, as long as "monster level" is there to give an accurate idea of how dangerous this monster is, though. The answer to "what happens if this (level 1) goblin gets maille armour and a greatsword?" is "it becomes a level 3 goblin".

 

[Blackwarder]

A bit of an aside, but lately, I've been thinking that the relationship between AC and level ought to be reversed. A monster shouldn't have AC 15 because it's level 1. Rather, it should be level 1 because it has AC 15.

I'm picking on AC because it should be the most commonly attacked defence, and (IMO) probably the most important factor that determines the PCs' ability to overcome the monster is how easily they are able to hit it (let's set aside the ability to damage it for now). Factors like hit points influence how long the PCs will take to defeat it, and factors like the monster's attacks (type, bonus, damage) affect how long the PCs can take before the monster kills them, but (again IMO) the best single number on which to base an assessment of encounter difficulty is how easily the PCs are able to hit the monster.

What this means is, if you dress up a level 1 goblin that normally has AC 15 in plate mail and shield so that its AC is now 20, you've turned it into a level 6 monster. It might have the same hit points, attack bonus and damage (and this should be accounted for by adjusting the "standard" experience award for defeating a level 6 monster downwards) but calling it a level 6 monster makes the answer to questions like, "Why do my level 1 PCs have difficulty defeating level 1 goblins in plate mail?" pretty darn obvious.

Woot? A goblin is a goblin, regardless if he is wearing plate armor or stark naked, it doesn't make him a level 6 monster (what ever the hell that means) it's just make him tougher and harder to hit.

Warder

 

[Viking Bastard]

Woot? A goblin is a goblin, regardless if he is wearing plate armor or stark naked, it doesn't make him a level 6 monster (what ever the hell that means) it's just make him tougher and harder to hit.

Warder

You answered your own question: He's a 6th level monster because he's tougher and harder to hit.

 

[Blackwarder]

You answered your own question: He's a 6th level monster because he's tougher and harder to hit.

I'm not trying to be offensive but I'm sorry but that's a load of crap, if the wizard in my group cast sleep on that goblin and than the player strip it of its armor and slash his throat is it still a 6 level monster? And what about a goblin shaman? Do we have to make sure that it's AC is 20 to make sure he is a high enough monster? Fact is that monster design does not start and ends with AC, I'll go further and say that I completely dislike 4e way of monster design where monsters where forced into a small encounter nish while not changing the actual challenge of the encounter (and I used to love it in the first year until I realized that the game doesn't change over the sessions).

I had a lot of games where my players encountered goblin/Orc/giant tribes where there were several variant of said monster so there could be normal goblins, bodyguards with one more hd, +1 to hit, with better saves and maybe wearing better armor, shamans with more hd and spells and better saves, etc...
So they were higher level monsters because they were more lethal and capable than their lesser cousins, not because they had better armor.

Warder

 

[Viking Bastard]

I'm not trying to be offensive but I'm sorry but that's a load of crap...

As has been thoroughly discussed in this thread, no that's not a load of crap. I get where you're coming from and it's a legitimate criticism of the 4e system and it's assumptions.

But that's still what a level 6 goblin means in 4e terms.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Maybe I'm just wired differently in the brain to others, but it seems to me that this and the 4e "monster design matrix" are just different sides of the same coin. The only difference is that, when I'm designing monsters (or, more usually, modifying them) for an adventure the 4e way around is slightly more useful. Could I generate the monster descriptions, assess a rough AC, hp, Dmg and so on from that and then convert that to a level? Sure; but then I could end up futzing around designing several creatures until I got one of the level I'm looking for to fit the adventure and party level. Alternatively, I can set an AC based on the level of monster I want and then ask myself "what armour does that mean it has?"

The basics are sound, as long as "monster level" is there to give an accurate idea of how dangerous this monster is, though. The answer to "what happens if this (level 1) goblin gets maille armour and a greatsword?" is "it becomes a level 3 goblin".

Yeah, this is how I build monsters in 4e.

But I go a step further:

I also look up, what Weapons and which PC class could resemble my NPC.

So I say: I want a level 3 lurker:

An assassin, executioner.
17 AC: dex 18 + Leather armor + 1/2 level MAke it 20 dex and don´t have him wear armor and a secondary weapon instead. (he can later be encountered with armor and is a bit more beefier than)
Attack bonus of 8: longsword + dex bonus. Check!
Damage: 1d8+1d8+5. maybe a bit too high. 2 daggers instead. Reasonable. (Longsword for the times when he wears the leather armor)
Lurkerness:
assassins strike +2d10
death attack (unconscious attack against PCs)
sneak attack 1/encounter? why not.
and a rechargeable hide in shadows ability. And the ability to hide with partial cover.

5 mins, moster done. This is what works great in 4e. If you take the time to make up some reasonable dressing. However HP and such is rather inflexible.
You can play around with brute and soldier and artillery... but it makes the system rather inflexible.

If you would reverse the process, you would have:

Assassin PC class level 3.
longsword and leather and 2 weapons. Great AC and high damage. And abilities to attack from surprise! HP are not that high.

-> Makes him a Lurker. Challenge level 4, if he can play to his advantage. Otherwise only 3. If the players catch him off guard they still get full xp.

So maybe a PC class in general is about one CR higher than a normal monster in 4e. Defining challenge rating right in 5e, (measuring in PC class level, a monster with a PC class minus some fiddly bits) is CR equal to PC level, and in a 1 on 1 fight the PC, because of those fiddly bits like Theme feats or magic items will let the PC win most of the time, but usually only barely.

 

[pemerton]

Maybe I'm just wired differently in the brain to others, but it seems to me that this and the 4e "monster design matrix" are just different sides of the same coin. T

<snip>

The basics are sound, as long as "monster level" is there to give an accurate idea of how dangerous this monster is, though. The answer to "what happens if this (level 1) goblin gets maille armour and a greatsword?" is "it becomes a level 3 goblin".

Yes. I thought this is what I was saying a page or so upthread.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Back on topic:

Would you object an orison spell or the application of the heal skill, that is called "quick recovery" that reduces the time needed to recover from hp loss by spending hit dice to 1min instead of 10?

I know, if you reduce it to 1 combat round or instantly you are more or less back to healing surges. But if the application takes a complete combat round for the cleric it would still not be in the "expected twice every combat" section.

Such spells would make for a fin 4e module, and as long as this is not called healing and does not allow you to get from wounded to not wounded, I could see it not offending too many people.

 

[Lord Mhoram]

How many hit dice are recovered during an extended rest? The text suggests that several extended rests are required to recover all hit dice; that suggests a low number, perhaps just one (1).

Nice overview.

As to this question I really feel that one will be a dial. Wahoo games will have a higher refresh rate, and gritty will be lower. Or a discussion of where best to set it for different types of play - want to avoid magic healing at all in your game? Set this to X amount.