Solos: Using AP for the BIG ESCAPE

[Jack99]

Plus, it's not like the two action points are going to be the difference in the BBEG winning or losing--if he uses them for offense, he'll lose by just a little bit less, ordinarily. But they can very easily make the difference between losing and living to fight another day, especially if the PCs have mostly used their APs.

Oh, and also, to respond to a question earlier that I don't recall seeing an answer to: solo monsters can, in fact, use both of their action points in one encounter. In general, no 4E monsters have limited-use powers that they might try to 'save for later', because in general there is no later for a monster--if it fights PCs, it's expected to die in that encounter. The 2nd AP for a solo is useless if it can't use the second one until after it's dead.

I thought you typically used a solo of 2-3 lvs higher than the party to ensure a climatic fight of sorts.



The idea is that if he goes nova in the 1st 2 rounds, he should be able to do enough damage to potentially take down at least 1 PC. After all, a PC is every bit as effective regardless of whether he is at full life or at 1hp, you ideally want to push him towards to ultimate status effect (death) ASAP. This way, with fewer PCs to face, this means fewer actions (which in turn translates to fewer attacks/damage/debuffs etc).

After all, I don't see what is wrong with the PCs killing the solo, then have him manage to cheat death somehow via DM fiat. They still get full xp for overcoming him regardless of which path I choose, so I see no reason to not let my players earn that.

While burst damage is indeed king, to use a WoW-ism, using it in round 1 is usually not the best solution for the solo. He should wait to be 100% to be able to get the healer(s). When they are gone, he can much better deal with the rest of the group. Killing people in round 1 will only result is them very likely being brought back quickly.

 

[Asmor]

I've found that if you want a solo to successfully escape, it's best to have them run either as soon as their bloodied, or even the round before you expect them to become bloodied.

Between players blowing their dailies and getting opportunity attacks for it leaving, the second half of the hit points don't go nearly as far as the first half did...

 

[Glyfair]

They are if you are using them as intended.

Certainly not 100% true. Look through the D&D Compendium at the Solo monsters. Quite a few of them have abilities that only work when they have allies in the battle.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I confess to a bit of rigid thinking based on the premise of the thread. My BBEGs are not typically lower level than the party.

Note the example with the Solo = PL +1 and an Elite. You can have a higher level BBEG and still combine him with multiple monsters. It will be a hard encounter, but usually, BBEG encounters are supposed to be hard.

 

[CharlesRyan]

A lot of good points here. But remember that we're talking about a BBEG who should A) provide a climactic fight when you DO finally reach a showdown with him (which may be when you're several levels higher than you are at the initial encounter) and B) make for a pretty tough fight even when he flees the scene halfway through.

In other words, it's entirely appropriate for the BBEG to be a really tough encounter--a solo of higher level than the heroes, along with some henchmen. Given that he's only around for half the fight the first time around, that remains fair for that encounter. And in the showdown encounter, he'll still be a challenge to the heroes without having to be arbitrarily leveled up.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

Note the example with the Solo = PL +1 and an Elite. You can have a higher level BBEG and still combine him with multiple monsters. It will be a hard encounter, but usually, BBEG encounters are supposed to be hard.

Note the repeated warnings that Solo monsters are intended to be used alone, and that using them with allies will (a) make the encounter a lot harder and (b) change the feel of the Solo.

Swapping out a Solo for 5 monsters of the same level is not an apples-to-apples trade.

 

[Stalker0]

Note the repeated warnings that Solo monsters are intended to be used alone, and that using them with allies will (a) make the encounter a lot harder and (b) change the feel of the Solo.

Swapping out a Solo for 5 monsters of the same level is not an apples-to-apples trade.

Great discussion guys, but can we take it elsewhere? This is becoming a threadjack.

 

[Ourph]

Swapping out a Solo for 5 monsters of the same level is not an apples-to-apples trade.

They are worth the same amount of XP. When you spend your XP budget for creating an encounter, they cost exactly the same. I would say the rules don't support your assertion at all. If they did, a Solo used in an encounter with allies would have a different XP value than a Solo used alone.

 

[Asmor]

They are worth the same amount of XP. When you spend your XP budget for creating an encounter, they cost exactly the same. I would say the rules don't support your assertion at all. If they did, a Solo used in an encounter with allies would have a different XP value than a Solo used alone.

4th edition has this dirty little secret... The XP values are, for the most part, arbitrary and not but a very gross gauge of difficulty. They're based exclusively on the monster's level and status, but for example two level 5 soldiers can be on vastly different power levels even if they stay within the "expected" realm of numbers.

Don't get me wrong, I agree with the base argument here that solos are not exclusively best used alone, nor are they intended to be exclusively used alone.

 

[CharlesRyan]

4th edition has this dirty little secret... The XP values are, for the most part, arbitrary and not but a very gross gauge of difficulty.

I agree, except that I don't think this is dirty, little, or secret.

The factors that determine how much a threat an opponent represents are so varied and difficult to nail down (and chief among them are non-game-design issues like party composition and character builds, as well as how the opponent is played/used by the GM) that any system of codifying threat level will necessarily be crude.

This is true of 3E's CR/EL system, and it's just as true of 4E's XP assignments.

Of course, any system is better than nothing--I frankly don't even remember how I built encounters before 3E. (Except for games like CoC, where it doesn't really matter.)

But the results will always be variable--and that's fine; even within a given level of challenge, a some unpredictability of outcome is desirable.