MV: Threats to the Nentir Vale in my hands

[Aegeri]

Now if that doesn't signify a change in design direction, nothing does.

Actually this doesn't indicate any change in design direction: Perytons have ALWAYS been able to do this. It's a core part of their fluff that they obsess over gaining "The perfect shadow" and so mercilessly attack (And kill) downed opponents. I'm 100% certain that whoever designed the Peryton, just like I did when I made mine for my own campaign had their Monsters of Faerun (or whatever) next to them. The 3E Peryton also had a similar named ability that let them tear an opponents heart out and kill them.

So being very "coup de grace" happy is sort of a thing that the Peryton does and I am absolutely delighted to see them have it. They're utterly, reprehensible and evil creatures, the very definition of the monster the DM is told WOULD coup-de grace in the description. Feast is a mechanic that keeps that feeling. In my own games, I gave Perytons a power called Heart Rending Bite, that only targets dying, prone or bloodied creatures. It is a minor action attack (1/turn) and is *specifically* used to kill dying PCs. It meant my PCs become terrified of these monsters very presence - you go down you have a good chance of staying down!

So this isn't so much a design direction as it is keeping with years of lore and other mechanics as to how this monster works. I've said it before and I'll say it again: It's not enough to have pretty fluff about how horrible Perytons are as monsters, their mechanics MUST back that fluff up to mean a thing. This is exactly what feast does.

 

[Erren]

Wow, nothing in epic whatsoever. Minding I totally saw that coming so there is no point complaining about it. Either way the thing that interests me most is I am wondering if there is any published changes to the maths of monsters in the book. The three-headed dragon for example has 120 HP more than it should. When Matt who wrote the monster was quizzed on this he responses simply with "NDA", implying it might not be an error. So are there any updates to monster design guidelines in the book that might explain the maths differences?

What stand out monsters are there?

I'm getting a distinct feeling I'm not going to like this answer from your OP, but I'll ask anyway: What number of monsters are joining the already incredibly crowded heroic tier and how many are in paragon? From your previous description, I get this real impression the book has a heavy heroic tier (sigh) focus.

Sadly Aegeri, you're right. You're not going to be happy. I certainly agree with you that Paragon and Epic are horribly under-represented, but I'm not as personaly upset as this book happens to fall right in the range of my current campaign. If it was a more balanced approach (like MM3), I'd have still bought it (hear that WotC!). Here's the Tier breakdown:
Heroic: 145
Paragon: 39
Epic: Zero.

Within the heroic tier, there's only 10 first and second level creatures combined. The rest are fairly evenly split among the remaining levels.


I'm finding some irregularities with monster HP - I need to make sure I have my formula correct. The attack bonuses and average damage seem to be tracking with MM3.

I haven't really set down to puruse stat blocks yet, so nothing's caught my eye yet. Though if I were running Thunderspire Labryinth, I'd want this book with the updated Mages (there's an exta page of stat blocks that wasn't in the preview) and an updated Blackfang Gnoll series of stat blocks.

 

[Aegeri]

Wow.

Just...

Wow.

I have no idea what to say.

Edit: I am completely speechless. I really didn't expect that whatsoever.

Edit2: So much for the "paragon tier" part of the book....

Edit3: You are serious right? You're not just yanking my chain?

 

[Erren]

Wow.

Just...

Wow.

I have no idea what to say.

Edit: I am completely speechless. I really didn't expect that whatsoever.

Edit2: So much for the "paragon tier" part of the book....

Edit3: You are serious right? You're not just yanking my chain?

Completely serious. Here's the complete breakdown:
Level 1: 4
2: 6
3: 14
4: 14
5: 20
6: 20
7: 18
8: 20
9: 14
10: 15
11: 3
12: 8
13: 4
14: 6
15: 7
16: 3
17: 2
18: 3
19: 2
20: 1


Looking through the HP math, it seems that Lurker Solos retain the old math [(8+Con+Level*8)*4], but Brute Solos are now [(10+Con+Level*10)*4]. There's no Artillery Solos, but I would guess they're the same as Lurkers. All other HP seem normal to me.

One thing I've liked flipping through is that there's a few swarms of lower-level monsters. For example, I always hated that hyenas were so much lower level than the gnolls I wanted to pair with them, but here's a brute level 6 Hyena Pack!

edit: There's only 2 Brute Solos, so low sample size. And they're both dragons, though I doubt that'd matter.

 

[Aegeri]

What is the 20th level monster in the book?

How is Bitterfang the Ancient White dragon? Significantly different from the original MV?

 

[Erren]

What is the 20th level monster in the book?

How is Bitterfang the Ancient White dragon? Significantly different from the original MV?

Bitterstrike is a level 10 solo brute, so basically an adult white dragon. Mechanically, she's nearly indistinguishable from a level-up Young White Dragon from MV, though she gained a triggered attack to damage and push nearby enemies as an effect once per encounter.

The entry for her though is big - it's four pages that includes several stat blocks for vassals, two new pieces of artwork, and a lengthy bit of good fluff.


The level 20 monster is a huge treant (a solo) - supposedly the oldest living creature in the Nentir Vale.

 

[Aegeri]

Wow, I was really hoping that would be an ancient dragon. I can't say I'm enthused with another dragon that is a MV version + couple of extra powers.

Edit: Is the solo treant at least pretty cool?

 

[Colmarr]

So this isn't so much a design direction as it is keeping with years of lore and other mechanics as to how this monster works.

Compare and contrast 4e rust monsters vs 4e perytons.

Both monsters have a history of saying "suck it" to PCs in fairly long-term ways, but when WotC updated rust monsters for 4e they deliberately limited the finality of their signature move.

Contrast that against the peryton. WotC could have used a power that said "the target cannot gain hit points until the end of the encounter". The power would reflect the "if you go down against Perytons, you stay down" nature of the creature without the long-term consequences, but they instead went for "you're dead".

I stand by my comment.

 

[Erren]

Wow, I was really hoping that would be an ancient dragon. I can't say I'm enthused with another dragon that is a MV version + couple of extra powers.

Edit: Is the solo treant at least pretty cool?

I like it. It's part of a 4-page entry on Treants of the Nentir Vale. He's a controller, and I think he fulfills that role well (though he's a melee-based controller, not ranged). He's pretty vulnerable to fire, but gets to swing back if he gets hit by a fire attack, too.

 

[Aegeri]

Compare and contrast 4e rust monsters vs 4e perytons.

Or compare and contrast 4E Perytons with 4E Jackalweres. Where the Jackalwere can knock a PC unconscious (Deceiver) and the Bravo trivially finish off any character with a coup de grace crit. There are a few heroic tier monsters that can easily kill a PC now at low levels. You act like these creatures are new, when they aren't. Heck check out the level 2 lurker that is in the same book as the Peryton.

Both monsters have a history of saying "suck it" to PCs in fairly long-term ways, but when WotC updated rust monsters for 4e they deliberately limited the finality of their signature move.

Rust monsters are actually obscenely brutal to PCs and keep the same flavor. Same with the Perytons. Your point isn't really anywhere near as strong as you think it is.

As for "You're dead", it's not going to be significantly different than writing "Perytons Coup De Grace dead characters", which by fluff is what makes Perytons Perytons. They have ALWAYS been out to kill characters as that is their thing. They just get a power to do it as it fits exactly what kind of monster they are.