4e titans were their own thing, tying into the 4e primordial and elemental chaos cosmology and are different from other edition titans.No Titans in 5e?
Slight correction, there are 2 varieties of Titans in 1e. First the handsome, strong, magically powerful, somewhat Grecian. But they are not really Ancient Greek style mythological titans, and...4e titans were their own thing, tying into the 4e primordial and elemental chaos cosmology and are different from other edition titans.
Most D&D titans are CG greek style titans who are smart and handsome and strong and magically powerful and not really connected to the giants.
4e Titans are elemental creations of the Primordials and are basically bigger tougher versions of the also elemental giant types. So there is a fire titan class of monster which is a bigger (size huge) stronger (higher level monster) fire giant but very similar thematically and cosmologically to the size large fire giants. I forget if the 4e titans made the lesser giants of their type or if they are all originally elemental craftings of primordials directly.
Glad I am not the only one. See my post (#90) D&D 5E - Why are 5E Giants Huge size?... I am having serious deja vu, wasn't there a thread about this a few weeks ago?
Why Kobolds and Goblins in B2, and not Balors and Titans?Yeah it is the version supported in 1e RAW. Look it up man. B2, which you’ve cited, encourages using role playing to set the goblins and kobolds against each other.
Which gives the weird result that third party stuff like Kobold Press that sticks to the DMG numbers often feels 'off' and overpowered compared to the official monsters.
Yes, I agree but that’s not the expectation and if you don’t, bad wrong fun no good GM.
I think @Flamestrike explained it best here from a game guidelines perspective, but it is something you need to experience too. Solo monsters simple to don't provide the same challenge, regardless of what the encounter guidelines say, as multiple monster with the same challenge rating. The big issue - focus fire from the PCs. Now, let's loom at some math from the DMG:
2 CR 9 monsters = a 15,000 XP challenge (w/ 1.5 encounter multiplier for 2 foes). This is the same XP as a CR 16 monster.
So what do the monster guidelines say about these two monsters:
CR 9: 205 HP & 62 DPR each for 410 HP and 124 DPR total
CR 16: 310 HP and 104 DPR total
They are not equal and then you also have the focus fire issue. I ham not saying it is a huge difference, but it is a difference. I hope that helps.
Not that I ever 'build' my encounters, but I do often check the threat level after the fight.
The big issue I was forgetting was the reduction in the # of attacks. That being said, my experience over the last 6 years with 5e tells me they are not the same. The multiple monsters are more difficult 9/10 times in the combats I have run. Maybe because focus fire drops a solo so quick the fact multiple monster DPR drop is less of a factor than one would think? If you don't protect them, solos can easily drop in round 1 or shortly into round 2 depending on initiative.Well you have to factor in that the CR 16 monster has a 2 better AC and Attack Bonus (on average). That means you are hitting them 10% less and they are hitting you 10% more than their CR 9 counterparts. Added to that DPR for multiple creatures is diminished as they get picked off.
Focus fire can be an issue, but at high level that problem is (supposedly) countered by Legendary Actions. You could even make Legendary Actions = Proficiency Bonus - 4. ie. they kick in for CR 13 monsters.![]()
I only did that because some else (I thought it was you, but maybe not) did so up thread.There is no point comparing CR 9 hp & dmg to CR 16 due to other factors (as noted above).
I don't understand this, can you clarify? What does MM stats compared to DMG stats have to do with encounter difficulty?What you can do is compare a monster's stats to its advised average stats as per the DMG.