D&D 4E New gamemaster to 4e

[AbdulAlhazred]

I think what [MENTION=996]Tony Vargas[/MENTION] is trying to say is that running an encounter of 3 level 2 monsters vs 3 level 2 PCs is what is considered an 'easy' encounter, unlike 5e CR where a single CR2 monster is supposed to take on a level 2 party. The DMG claims you can have up to 'level + 4' encounters (very hard), though experience has shown that this is not actually the upper limit. At low levels you DO probably want to keep it in the level -1 to level +3 range, at higher levels things can get more flexible (and of course this is just considering monsters alone and some fairly neutral terrain and no other major considerations).

I would say that 'MM3 grade' monsters are, on average, tougher than 'MM1/2 grade' monsters, while being more interesting to run and fight. Not to say that MM1 and MM2 (and other early books) lack good monsters, there's plenty of fun to be had. They just tend to be underpowered in damage output, sometimes have unfortunate designs vis-a-vis what conditions they dish out (IE stunned with a duration of 'save', not fun).

 

[Tony Vargas]

MM1&2 are also inconsistent, especially if you don't have the updates, there are plenty of fine monsters, a few that are wimpy or flavorless blocks of tofu, and a few that are over-deadly for their CR or broken...

 

[tuxedoraptor]

That was probably what I was doing wrong, I typically kept it to three monsters per encounter. I am still going to use MM1 for a few monsters and I do have errata for the books. Tony, if you want, I can PM you a link to forgotten heroes, scythe and shroud. Mostly because my group is about to fight a deathlock wight and that never got reprinted into a MM3 statblock. With a couple of MV skeletons. Unless the deathlock wight is one of those brokenly overpowered monsters.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

That was probably what I was doing wrong, I typically kept it to three monsters per encounter. I am still going to use MM1 for a few monsters and I do have errata for the books. Tony, if you want, I can PM you a link to forgotten heroes, scythe and shroud. Mostly because my group is about to fight a deathlock wight and that never got reprinted into a MM3 statblock. With a couple of MV skeletons. Unless the deathlock wight is one of those brokenly overpowered monsters.

Well, when you make an encounter, you obviously have a choice, you can stick with say 3 monsters, but jack their level up by a 1-3 levels above the party (or even use fewer monsters, which is a good use for elites sometimes). You can also go for MORE monsters of the same level (and of course minions let you do this in spades if you want). You could of course even use lower level monsters, though it doesn't work too well very often.

As for the Deathlock Wight. IIRC it can suck healing surges, which makes it a real resource sucker! That's fine, its a good monster, but it could leave the party quite drained! You'll find with undead they're a bit situational, if the party has a good cleric and can dish out some Radiant attacks they'll be a lot less scary than if the party doesn't. Still, this is a solid monster.

 

[tuxedoraptor]

we don't have a cleric, we have a deathwarden. At level two, theres not much a deathwarden can do against them other than hit them with cold, psychic and fire. Our fighter provoked an interesting debate/arguement with the rogue. He took battlerager vigor, then his first feat proficency was platemail. The rogue pointed out that he gets bonus damage from wearing lighter armor, as well as an axe or hammer. The fighter replied "My character is going to be the toughest sonofabitch in the room, +1 attack won't do much if I am dead, your job is killing them, my job is being a big shiny target for them to aim at"

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

we don't have a cleric, we have a deathwarden. At level two, theres not much a deathwarden can do against them other than hit them with cold, psychic and fire. Our fighter provoked an interesting debate/arguement with the rogue. He took battlerager vigor, then his first feat proficency was platemail. The rogue pointed out that he gets bonus damage from wearing lighter armor, as well as an axe or hammer. The fighter replied "My character is going to be the toughest sonofabitch in the room, +1 attack won't do much if I am dead, your job is killing them, my job is being a big shiny target for them to aim at"

BRV attains survivability via THP, which are at least partly acquired by hitting things. If he's playing the original un-errated MP1 BRV then he should REALLY REALLY use chain armor IIRC. Once the errata hit, I'm not sure, its not as potent a build anymore, you just can't stack up THP quite as fast, so it may actually be that using heavier armor is more effective. However, in that case you're better off being a standard FWT build I would think... I mean, really, a nice axe dwarf, crank up the CON, or maybe go the hammer route, way tougher than nails.

Of course if you want THE toughest thing, then you can't even touch a Warden. Stupid levels of soaking damage. I remember a fight at level 12 IIRC where the party warden basically made himself the target of EVERY ATTACK made by the bad guys in a stiff fight. He still didn't go down, burned a LOT of resources, but never hit 0 hit points. It was impressive.

 

[tuxedoraptor]

Well, the warden is a fantastic class and we like it, but the player didn't feel it fit his character concept. The errata'ed battlerager vigor gives you temporary hitpoints when you hit with an attack equal to your constitution modifier, plus any from the attack itself. You gain these extra points if you use an invigorating attack and miss. The only few changes we made were the rogue becoming human, and the deathwarden becoming a deva. Rogue is now an artful dodger. Will look at the warden and see if it would be a better choice for the group. This final change was mostly because we had no party face. Now we have a party face who is also violently psychotic with a raiper.

 

[Garthanos]

Now we have a party face who is also violently psychotic with a raiper.

Typical nobleman eh /snark

 

[Garthanos]

Well, the warden is a fantastic class and we like it, but the player didn't feel it fit his character concept.

I had green knight defender bodyguard for preistesses druids in 1e days and no class to really do it with ...

 

[Tony Vargas]

I had green knight defender bodyguard for preistesses druids in 1e days and no class to really do it with ...

5e has the Oath of Ancients Paladin for that. Just say'n.

The rogue pointed out that he gets bonus damage from wearing lighter armor, as well as an axe or hammer. The fighter replied "My character is going to be the toughest sonofabitch in the room, +1 attack won't do much if I am dead, your job is killing them, my job is being a big shiny target for them to aim at"

The were both right. But, the idea of the battlerager is that it gets temp hps and gets hit more often than other fighters. FWIW.

Mostly because my group is about to fight a deathlock wight and that never got reprinted into a MM3 statblock. With a couple of MV skeletons. Unless the deathlock wight is one of those brokenly overpowered monsters.

The Deathlock Wight was updated in 7/2011, well after the MM3 standard, so those stats, which also appeared in Dungeon 191, should be 'ok' - it does suck healing surges with it's basic attack, which can be brutal for across-the-day attrition.

It should probably count as a 'leader' (not that that means much) because of Reanimate.