D&D 4E The New Monster Math, Explained and Expanded

[Rechan]

I think that defines lurkers just fine, even if their damage is only spikes rather than consistent high damage. However, I find artillery to be quite weak compared to controllers. Artillery get a +2 bonus to ranged attacks; controllers get a +1 bonus to vs NAD attacks, giving artillery an effectively +1 bonus. That's it though.

But Artillery are supposed to have high damage.

Look at the PDF [MENTION=40398]Tequila Sunrise[/MENTION] put up.

Brute attacks:
AW: High damage
Recharge: Very High

Artillery Single Target attacks:
AW: High
Recharge: Very High

Controller Attacks
AW: Medium
Recharge: High

Artillery AREA attacks:
AW: Medium
Recharge: High

Artillery are Brutes on single target damage, and against multiple ranged targets they're Controllers.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

But Artillery are supposed to have high damage.

Look at TS's PDF. Artillery have High AW damage (ranged single targets), and Very High rechargable single targets. Brutes have High AW and Very High recharge damage. The issue is they do lower damage on multiple targets.

I must have missed that in the document; I only "number checked" the basic assumptions; eg how much damage to nerf if your attack does immobilization.

The point is only really true for WotC standards; IIRC (and maybe I'm wrong on that, then) artillery don't do bonus damage.

 

[Tequila Sunrise]

I updated MarMon and uploaded three dwarves!

The point is to keep the "paperwork" down. A player only needs to keep track of their own character, including (if a warlock) their own curses. The DM needs to keep track of that and other things.

Huh maybe it's just because I'm accustomed to using bottle rings for these things, but I'd think that "cursed until encounter's end" is less paperwork than UENT. *shrug*

As for leaders, there's so many things that leaders (and controllers, for that matter) can do I don't know if it's possible to simplify them.

The leader role is basically my way of justifying NPCs with healing word or whatever. Because giving any ol' monster such a power in addition to their other perks just stinks of DM cheese, IMO. I'm definitely not looking to codify all leader or controller effects!

When I think about striker the traits that come to mind are relatively glass cannon - lots of damage, not too strong defensively. This should describe artillery and lurkers. I don't think a one-to-one translation of PC to NPC roles needs to be done.

I agree as a general rule. Symmetry for symmetry's sake isn't necessary.

If you have the time, give my dwarven rogue doc a glance. If you'd rather classify a rogue npc as a different role, what would it be?

Also boy do I not think monsters need any kind of healing mechanisms. If you absolutely positively need to make a Cleric NPC, then use the cleric class.

You mean the cleric template from the DMG?

...controllers get a +1 bonus to vs NAD attacks, giving artillery an effectively +1 bonus.

The point is only really true for WotC standards; IIRC (and maybe I'm wrong on that, then) artillery don't do bonus damage.

Really? I'll give the errata another check.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

The rogues don't match skirmisher or lurker (which is generally what you'd expect from a rogue).

The dwarven scout does +2d6 damage with combat advantage. That's a lot for a 3rd-level creature; a lurker might do that much extra damage, but not a skirmisher.

It doesn't have any ability to gain combat advantage (something a lurker should have, if it has that trait) and no movement powers that would be handy when it comes to flanking, etc (indeed, it has speed 5).

In short, it doesn't seem to have a role, which makes deciding limited powers and special abilities rather difficult. Which role do you want it to have?

The Dwarven Endurance ability is flavorful, but grindy. They already have Cast Iron Stomach and Stand Your Ground; I would suggest replacing Dwarven Endurance with another power. However, it does to some degree push the dwarven scout toward the lurker role (they tend to have good defenses, it's just that these aren't linked to being "sneaky" or underhanded).

The Bravo Baron is a solo, and has all of his attacks combined. (I think this is an issue with the Marvelous Monsters PDF, actually; solos generally get three attacks of some kind. Not that having one triple-powered attack is always a bad thing, though, as there's many different ways to design a solo.) It can throw individual shuriken that dish out 2d10+13 damage, which doesn't match the flavor of a shuriken. To do that kind of damage, it should probably be a poisoned shuriken. (Low damage, high ongoing damage.) And maybe three weaker attacks, each of which could benefit from +2d6 combat advantage instead.

In addition, new solos generally have something to avoid being "locked down" by daze/stun/dominate powers. For instance, dragons have Action Recovery, most MM3 solos have Epic Resilience (not that helpful, because most of them are epic...).

EDIT: Or were these companions?

In which case the only thing the first one is missing is an encounter attack or utility power. I would suggest Tumble! If it's a companion though, it's damage is too high.

 

[Tequila Sunrise]

The rogues don't match skirmisher or lurker (which is generally what you'd expect from a rogue).

That's why I decided to try the striker role for monsters. The artsy rogue would make a decent skirmisher, but the cool rogues don't really fit any of the monster roles. (No, I'm not biased at all. )

Striker aside though, I could probably tweak brute stats to make it work for rogue npcs.

The dwarven scout does +2d6 damage with combat advantage. That's a lot for a 3rd-level creature; a lurker might do that much extra damage, but not a skirmisher.

Whoops, my bad. I edited that damage value in MarMon, but forgot to edit the dwarf doc.

It doesn't have any ability to gain combat advantage (something a lurker should have, if it has that trait) and no movement powers that would be handy when it comes to flanking, etc (indeed, it has speed 5).

What would you suggest?

In short, it doesn't seem to have a role, which makes deciding limited powers and special abilities rather difficult. Which role do you want it to have?

Note that I gave all my dwarves a damage boost instead of recharge powers. Call it an 'essential' npc, if you like.

The Dwarven Endurance ability is flavorful, but grindy. They already have Cast Iron Stomach and Stand Your Ground; I would suggest replacing Dwarven Endurance with another power.

Any ideas?

Of all the races I almost expect dwarves to be grindy, but I'm open to suggestions.

The Bravo Baron is a solo, and has all of his attacks combined. (I think this is an issue with the Marvelous Monsters PDF, actually; solos generally get three attacks of some kind. Not that having one triple-powered attack is always a bad thing, though, as there's many different ways to design a solo.) It can throw individual shuriken that dish out 2d10+13 damage, which doesn't match the flavor of a shuriken. To do that kind of damage, it should probably be a poisoned shuriken. (Low damage, high ongoing damage.) And maybe three weaker attacks, each of which could benefit from +2d6 combat advantage instead.

I guess it's a preference of mine; it's easier to write and run monsters with one or two potent powers than a handful of weaker ones. For the sake of having a few samples of monster design and having stock npcs, I'm keeping things simple.

...Although I do have more complex monsters, which I'd love to share.

In addition, new solos generally have something to avoid being "locked down" by daze/stun/dominate powers. For instance, dragons have Action Recovery, most MM3 solos have Epic Resilience (not that helpful, because most of them are epic...).

Again, my bad. I just forgot to paste the standard elite/solo extra saves.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

That's why I decided to try the striker role for monsters. The artsy rogue would make a decent skirmisher, but the cool rogues don't really fit any of the monster roles. (No, I'm not biased at all. )

Alright.

I guess I'm saying they seem a little "boring". They just have combat advantage going for them. They'll ambush with their Stealth skill, but then every round, they will (slowly) try to flank enemies to get combat advantage. That's all they do. IMO, they need something to be more interesting.

What would you suggest?

One thing you could try is making Tactical Strike a trait, like this:

Tactical Strike (martial): The rogue has combat advantage against any enemy that is adjacent to at least one of the rogue's allies.

As I like doing, it's a simpler version of a PC power. (The E-thief has the same ability as an at-will move action, which also prevents the rogue from provoking opportunity attacks if it moves from a square adjacent to an ally.)

The dwarves now work better as a team. They don't need to try to tumble around and flank, it's just that any PC facing two of them will be in a world of pain. The defenders and controllers will have to work extra hard to guard vulnerable PCs and split up the attackers.

(I believe this trait would also make shuriken nasty. If a rogue is next to a PC, a rogue 10 squares away can still hit that PC with their shuriken, gaining +2 to hit and +2d6 damage.)

Striker aside though, I could probably tweak brute stats to make it work for rogue npcs.

The funny thing is, that would work, but IMO that's not flavorful. (Brutes work well with Slayers, who don't have to work as hard for extra damage, but don't get the benefits of combat advantage whenever they feel like.)

 

[Tequila Sunrise]

Tactical Strike (martial): The rogue has combat advantage against any enemy that is adjacent to at least one of the rogue's allies.

I like it! ENworld has suddenly decided to not upload my dwarf doc, and I'm too lazy to post those stat blocks. But I added Tactical Strike (scaling it up and down for upper and lower caste dwarves), and tweaked the dagger attacks. (2 more to-hit, low damage.)

So thanks again for the help.

 

[Grandpa]

I also built a spreadsheet because I'm fickle about formatting. It presents information as a simplified stat block that you can print. To aid improvisation, it lists all four damage categories for your monster with notes and example powers from the PDF that adjust dynamically based on your caste and role.

[Update 2/29] Made everything prettier, fixed a problem with damage categories, added attribute and skill bonuses, and also speed, monster attributes, and action points.
[Update 3/15] Changed the starting monster to "standard" caste, labeled which cells to edit, and added side notes about whether editable cells are drop downs or can be edited however you like.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

I have tried to list all interesting powers I've seen, but there's three Monster Manuals, two Monster Vaults and DSCC (and others). *Sigh*

One day I'll write up the whole thing, though. It's very handy for monster design.

 

[Rechan]

I also built a spreadsheet because I'm fickle about formatting. It presents information as a simplified stat block that you can print. To aid improvisation, it lists all four damage categories for your monster with notes and example powers from the PDF that adjust dynamically based on your caste and role.

[Update 2/29] Made everything prettier, fixed a problem with damage categories, added attribute and skill bonuses, and also speed, monster attributes, and action points.

1) That is awesome and pretty.

2) The HP is way, way off. A 1st level artillery has 84 HP? Maybe it's for solos or something, but certainly doesn't specify.