Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Revising the DMG monster damage progression table
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Jhaelen" data-source="post: 5211945" data-attributes="member: 46713"><p>Yep, sure!</p><p>However, I don't think it's really _that_ tricky. Or rather: I don't think it the system is so fragile that it wouldn't survive a bit of experimenting. The rule updates to swarms and auras have shown that even the game's developers aren't always sure about what's the right amount of damage for non-standard attacks. </p><p></p><p>Basically, they seem to have preferred the time-honored tradition of playtesting monsters instead of trying to come up with accurate but tricky mathematical methods.</p><p></p><p>The DMG guidelines are _very_ vague: use the low damage expression for area-attacks and attacks that are accompanied by one of the nastier status effects and the standard damage expression for everything else.</p><p>Use the limited damage expressions for everything that is expected to be used once or twice in an encounter (i.e. encounter powers, including those that recharge when bloodied and powers that recharge on a 6 or on a 5 and 6).</p><p></p><p>There are several common methods to vary standard damage expressions. Here's some ideas how to deal with them, if you want more precision:</p><p></p><p>- monsters have several attacks using different damage expressions</p><p>This is the easiest case, since those variations are often just done for variety's sake. They typically just seem to be different, e.g. one attack is doing '3d8+5 + push 1' and one is doing '3d6+8 + slow (save ends)'. I.e. average damage is identical and the status effects are comparable.</p><p></p><p>- on its turn the monster can use its basic attack(s) twice using a single standard action.</p><p>This is a case when the damage for the basic attack should be half the damage expression you'd use following the table.</p><p></p><p>- the monster has an additional attack it can use as an at-will minor (immediate) action</p><p>The average damage for this attack should be simply substracted from the value derived from the table. Depending on a monster's role this is usually either low or standard damage.</p><p></p><p>- part of the damage is translated into ongoing damage</p><p>Ignoring any bonuses to saving throws or effects granting extra saves, ongoing damage is equal to about 1.8 times the ongoing damage value (55% of the time, damage is taken just once, 55*45% it's taken twice, 55*45*45% it's taken three times, etc.).</p><p>The ongoing damage value used is tied to a monster's level (typically 5 or 10 per tier).</p><p></p><p>- part of the damage is translated into a damaging aura</p><p>Since aura damage is automatic damage, it should rate higher than damage requiring a successful attack roll. The factor depends on the average to-hit chance of a monster, so it slightly decreases with a monster's level, since accuracy goes up.</p><p>E.g. assuming an average to-hit chance in the heroic tier of 65%, I'd use a factor of about 1.5 (100/65) in the heroic tier, 1.4 (100/70) in the paragon tier, and 1.3 (100/75) in the epic tier.</p><p>The size of the aura is also important, since it could potentially affect several party members at once. If only adjacent targets are affected, I'd use a factor of about 1.5, up to range 3 a factor of 2, up to range 5 a factor of 2.5 or 3, etc. up to a factor of 5.</p><p>Similar to ongoing damage, the Monster Manuals typically use about 5 to 10 damage per tier.</p><p></p><p>- part of the damage is translated into status effects</p><p>That's definitely the most tricky one. Apart from dividing them into nasty and not-so-nasty, I don't have any idea how to equate them with a fixed amount of damage. So, I'd just use the DMG guideline of using either standard or limited damage expressions.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Imho, if you're using that kind of calculations you're already putting a lot more thought into this than the monster designers ever did. </p><p>It's probably easier and not significantly less accurate if you simply pick two (or more) example monsters of the same role and level and compare them with each other.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Jhaelen, post: 5211945, member: 46713"] Yep, sure! However, I don't think it's really _that_ tricky. Or rather: I don't think it the system is so fragile that it wouldn't survive a bit of experimenting. The rule updates to swarms and auras have shown that even the game's developers aren't always sure about what's the right amount of damage for non-standard attacks. Basically, they seem to have preferred the time-honored tradition of playtesting monsters instead of trying to come up with accurate but tricky mathematical methods. The DMG guidelines are _very_ vague: use the low damage expression for area-attacks and attacks that are accompanied by one of the nastier status effects and the standard damage expression for everything else. Use the limited damage expressions for everything that is expected to be used once or twice in an encounter (i.e. encounter powers, including those that recharge when bloodied and powers that recharge on a 6 or on a 5 and 6). There are several common methods to vary standard damage expressions. Here's some ideas how to deal with them, if you want more precision: - monsters have several attacks using different damage expressions This is the easiest case, since those variations are often just done for variety's sake. They typically just seem to be different, e.g. one attack is doing '3d8+5 + push 1' and one is doing '3d6+8 + slow (save ends)'. I.e. average damage is identical and the status effects are comparable. - on its turn the monster can use its basic attack(s) twice using a single standard action. This is a case when the damage for the basic attack should be half the damage expression you'd use following the table. - the monster has an additional attack it can use as an at-will minor (immediate) action The average damage for this attack should be simply substracted from the value derived from the table. Depending on a monster's role this is usually either low or standard damage. - part of the damage is translated into ongoing damage Ignoring any bonuses to saving throws or effects granting extra saves, ongoing damage is equal to about 1.8 times the ongoing damage value (55% of the time, damage is taken just once, 55*45% it's taken twice, 55*45*45% it's taken three times, etc.). The ongoing damage value used is tied to a monster's level (typically 5 or 10 per tier). - part of the damage is translated into a damaging aura Since aura damage is automatic damage, it should rate higher than damage requiring a successful attack roll. The factor depends on the average to-hit chance of a monster, so it slightly decreases with a monster's level, since accuracy goes up. E.g. assuming an average to-hit chance in the heroic tier of 65%, I'd use a factor of about 1.5 (100/65) in the heroic tier, 1.4 (100/70) in the paragon tier, and 1.3 (100/75) in the epic tier. The size of the aura is also important, since it could potentially affect several party members at once. If only adjacent targets are affected, I'd use a factor of about 1.5, up to range 3 a factor of 2, up to range 5 a factor of 2.5 or 3, etc. up to a factor of 5. Similar to ongoing damage, the Monster Manuals typically use about 5 to 10 damage per tier. - part of the damage is translated into status effects That's definitely the most tricky one. Apart from dividing them into nasty and not-so-nasty, I don't have any idea how to equate them with a fixed amount of damage. So, I'd just use the DMG guideline of using either standard or limited damage expressions. Imho, if you're using that kind of calculations you're already putting a lot more thought into this than the monster designers ever did. It's probably easier and not significantly less accurate if you simply pick two (or more) example monsters of the same role and level and compare them with each other. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Revising the DMG monster damage progression table
Top