Am I the only one who doesn't like the arbitrary "boss monster" tag?

[GMforPowergamers]

Your point? Any of this can be done and quite easily. What's the assumption you're not including here... that each of the encounters be "level appropriate" in some way? Is that what you think the "hard part" is? Why would we try to balance these encounters around some kind of combat model other than allowing the NPCs to be the threats they naturally represent?

Ha

Ok you think I am trying to trick you, I am not.

Just try to make all three as if your next session need them..


Edit: the 'trick' is not mine, but the rules that need to be thrown out to make 2 of the characters work, and one of those 2 even possible

 

[billd91]

Ha

Ok you think I am trying to trick you, I am not.

Just try to make all three as if your next session need them..


Edit: the 'trick' is not mine, but the rules that need to be thrown out to make 2 of the characters work, and one of those 2 even possible

What rules need to be thrown out? I'm not seeing any. I suppose the fact that your basic spells pretty much always include some combat spells as well as divination might be tripping up the example on a technicality? But if the sage simply never preps any, problem solved.

 

[slobster]

Your point? Any of this can be done and quite easily. What's the assumption you're not including here... that each of the encounters be "level appropriate" in some way? Is that what you think the "hard part" is? Why would we try to balance these encounters around some kind of combat model other than allowing the NPCs to be the threats they naturally represent?

I'm about to quibble here. I apologize.

For two of them I agree, 3.x handles it just fine. But the blacksmith example is one that always tested my suspension of disbelief. In 3.x, max skill ranks are based on level. So to make a blacksmith of truly legendary ability, you'll need to level him up. You're probably using the expert class for this.

A 10th level expert fits the bill. Let's ignore any advantages he might get out of superior equipment and circumstantial modifiers. His bonus will be 13(skill points)+3(ability mod)+3(skill focus)=+19. Not bad. Hits DC 29 on an average roll, which is pretty legendary. He also hits DC 20 on a natural 1, which is the DC for masterwork equipment.

The problem is that he's only supposed to be a blacksmith. He's not a warrior. But because we raised him to 10th level (the only way to get his skill bonus high enough), his hp, attack bonuses, and saves are going to be beastly. especially using some of the masterwork equipment that he can easily make. With a con mod of just +1 (I think a blacksmith of such skill should have at least an above average constitution) his hp is 45 (10d6+10). His attack bonus with a mace is +7/+2, without a str mod (he probably has an ok one).

He can take on low level characters pretty handily, which may not be what I was looking for. Maybe I just wanted him to be a craftsman with no real combat ability. The disconnect is even more obvious when we choose a profession that isn't necessarily physical, like a legendary silk weaver. Why is the best silk weaver in the land able to make iterative attacks?

You ask "Why would we try to balance these encounters around some kind of combat model other than allowing the NPCs to be the threats they naturally represent?" In this case 3.x is modeling our silk weaver as something other than they threat I think they should naturally represent, but I don't have any choice because of the way the skill system works.

But hey, any system will have brainfarts like this. Like I said, this post is a quibble. It just happens to be something that bothered me quite a bit back when I was GMing 3.x as a young lad. These days I'd just stat up a level 3 expert real quick and give him a +10 "awesome at silk and stuff" bonus to his craft check and call it a day.

 

[triqui]

I am actually planing a 1 e game with the new books.

I just think jumping on Always is a bit of a false fight... 25 out of 45 years is pretty close to always, and is multi generations of fans is "always was this way"

25 out of 45 years is pretty close to 20 out of 45 years

 

[Neonchameleon]

Your point? Any of this can be done and quite easily.

OK. Let's start with the knowledgeable sage. He needs at least a dozen ranks in various knowledge skills, but is no more than a third level wizard. Let's try Wizard 3/Expert 6 - hardly the BAB of someone who's never won a fight in his life.

The best blacksmith in the land is probably a Commoner. And can kick a third level fighter's arse.

Skilled characters create unwanted consequences due to the inflexible nature of 3.X NPC creation. You get tougher and better at fighting by ... staying in the library and reading books?

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Kobold 10th level sorcerer we Give him a +2 con so 10d4+20 hp61
Blacksmith level 12 with a 14 str 12 con and 16int has 12d8+12 hp70
Sage (non combatant) Adept level 10 8 str and 8 con 10d6-10 hp 31

Heck that sage has a better attack then most 6th level wizards..

 

[billd91]

I'm about to quibble here. I apologize.

For two of them I agree, 3.x handles it just fine. But the blacksmith example is one that always tested my suspension of disbelief. In 3.x, max skill ranks are based on level. So to make a blacksmith of truly legendary ability, you'll need to level him up. Your probably using the expert class for this.

A 10th level expert fits the bill. Let's ignore any advantages he might get out of superior equipment and circumstantial modifiers. His bonus will be 13(skill points)+3(ability mod)+3(skill focus)=+19. Not bad. Hits DC 29 on an average roll, which is pretty legendary. He also hits DC 20 on a natural 1, which is the DC for masterwork equipment.

The problem is that he's only supposed to be a blacksmith. He's not a warrior. But because we raised him to 10th level (the only way to get his skill bonus high enough), his hp, attack bonuses, and saves are going to be beastly. especially using some of the masterwork equipment that he can easily make. With a con mod of just +1 (I think a blacksmith of such skill should have at least an above average constitution) his hp is 45 (10d6+10). His attack bonus with a mace is +7/+2, without a str mod (he probably has an ok one).

He can take on low level characters pretty handily, which may not be what I was looking for. Maybe I just wanted him to be a craftsman with no real combat ability. The disconnect is even more obvious when we choose a profession that isn't necessarily physical, like a legendary silk weaver. Why is the best silk weaver in the land able to make iterative attacks?

You ask "Why would we try to balance these encounters around some kind of combat model other than allowing the NPCs to be the threats they naturally represent?" In this case 3.x is modeling our silk weaver as something other than they threat I think they should naturally represent, but I don't have any choice because of the way the skill system works.

Why is this a problem? Keep in mind that this is a rougher and more dangerous world that most of us have experience with. These aren't computer programmers or office workers who can live exceptionally sedentary lives. These are people who probably have to engage in a lot more physical labor just to get their normal maintenance chores done. And that applies even to the silk weaver. Why shouldn't he be non-helpless?

That said, even with a +7/+2, he may not be comparing particularly well to a 1st level fighter who probably has weapon focus and a lot of strength compared to the weaver with a 10 (or lower if we assume it took him to middle age or old to rack up those levels).

And that, of course, assumes he wants to fight. He can still have some combat abilities that he never uses, surrendering all the time, like a learned sage who has never won a fight in his life despite having the potential to do better if that was the kind of man he wanted to be.

 

[slobo777]

I guess I'm a math guy or something.. I agree that anything involving spells or spell-like abilities is hard work (in any system really, because there is no logic to the power level of certain effects).. but I was fine with all the little bonuses. In contrast, I found it difficult, personally, to explain 4E numbers after the fact.

One particular example stands out in my mind: I had made a 4E enemy from scratch, an animated statue of an archer. Now, in my fresh-to-4E mind, there were still no guidelines as to whether I could give it immunity to mind-affecting spells, or damage resistance because it was made of bronze. It got more confusing when I couldn't relate its basic attack to its weapon and abilities. Yes, it worked in play, but it felt too abstracted to me.

That's all I can ever say in this argument really - that I think more in terms of processes than abstracts, and I always will.

Yes, I'm more "ideas first, detail later". Most personality rating schemes (e.g. Myers Briggs) recognise detail-first bottom-up thinking vs ideas first top-down thinking as personal preference and part of who we are. It's common to do both well enough, but usually there's a strong preference.

Really it is unlikely all people sat around a game table are going to have the same personality type in this regard, so game, adventure and monster design should be approachable using both mindsets where possible. Otherwise the number of DMs who will take to the system is needlessly reduced.

Somethimg like 3E's build units for monsters could provide that, if they were simplified in places and complemented with some 4E-style "target numbers by level and role". Then DMs can build monsters up from parts, or just go straight to balanced numbers, or even some mix of both . . . I believe something was mentioned about this in a D&D Next article, so that's hopeful for the future

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Why is this a problem? Keep in mind that this is a rougher and more dangerous world that most of us have experience with. These aren't computer programmers or office workers who can live exceptionally sedentary lives. These are people who probably have to engage in a lot more physical labor just to get their normal maintenance chores done. And that applies even to the silk weaver. Why shouldn't he be non-helpless?

That said, even with a +7/+2, he may not be comparing particularly well to a 1st level fighter who probably has weapon focus and a lot of strength compared to the weaver with a 10 (or lower if we assume it took him to middle age or old to rack up those levels).

And that, of course, assumes he wants to fight. He can still have some combat abilities that he never uses, surrendering all the time, like a learned sage who has never won a fight in his life despite having the potential to do better if that was the kind of man he wanted to be.

This is why I made npc my way instead of the rules...

My blacksmith would be this hd3d6+6 hp 17 +23 blacksmith and +6 with a war hammer

My sage would have 1/2 hd and 3 hp and +18 all know skills and cast legend lore as a 15th level wizard

 

[billd91]

OK. Let's start with the knowledgeable sage. He needs at least a dozen ranks in various knowledge skills, but is no more than a third level wizard. Let's try Wizard 3/Expert 6 - hardly the BAB of someone who's never won a fight in his life.

Or he's an adept. Possibly a wizard 1/expert 8, maybe wizard 2/expert 7, cleric 1/wizard 1/expert 7 - there's a lot of variations that can be explored assuming you even need to get to a dozen ranks (lower may be sufficient). But having a BAB that doesn't completely suck doesn't mean he's ever won a fight.

The best blacksmith in the land is probably a Commoner. And can kick a third level fighter's arse.

For blacksmith, I'd go with expert. And yes, a highly skilled blacksmith probably should kick a 3rd level fighters ass up and down the street.

Skilled characters create unwanted consequences due to the inflexible nature of 3.X NPC creation. You get tougher and better at fighting by ... staying in the library and reading books?

See my other post. They're not modern librarians. Life in a pseudo-medieval fantasy setting would still be pretty vigorous. To reach the level he has reached to gain his skills, he's probably seen, experienced, and survived a lot. Probably has a number of coping mechanism under his belt as well as the savvy to prolong or at least cling to his own life.

The effect of adding things like BAB, save bonuses, hit points - all pretty minor in the grand scheme of things, even if the peaceful encounter goes bad and breaks down into a fight. A learned sage, probably pretty old, never very high physical stats, not going to put up much of a fight for a party of 4 6th level characters no matter what his BAB is.