Orcs preview

Charwoman Gene said:

I have a non-stack resolution problem with it. (I'm just supporting the alternate view with RP. YMMV) Tide of iron is one continuous motion in my head. It is pushing forward with your shield while attacking the enemy. Bull rush with weapon damage. You shift AS you attack, staying adjacent to the enemy, so whenever the timing of the kill, the orc gets that last swing. The orc isn't dead until they get that swing, think of it like adrenaline, making these guys super annoying minions to clean up. Allowing a fight level 1 at-will power to wipe out half the coolness of the Eye of Gruumsh is sucking the flavor out of the orc. Again, YMMV.

Click to expand...

I know you said YMMV (twice) but I just thought I'd mention that in my mind this is what marks the fighter out as a skilled combatant. The fighter has Tide of Iron. The Rogue is so fast he can shift away before the final blow lands (he has some powers that allow shifts after a blow). This is what makes the classes exceptional. The cleric, warlord, etc. have to risk a retaliation yet the specially trained professionals have a counter.

The downside for the fighter is by shifting the orc away he runs the risk of the orc not taking enough damage to die and ALSO being outside the fighters threat range. So do you Tide and risk the orc running away and hitting the mage or do you use a more damaging attack and risk the retaliation.

THAT makes an interesting tactical choice, rather than merely disabling how Tide of Iron works.

[I'd say the rules should be interpreted as immediate reactions taking place after the action that triggers them. Tide of Iron is one action for both the attack and shift. So I'd rule the orc gets a death flail at where the fighter would have been if he hadn't Tided. The orc is cool for getting a death attack. The Fighter is even cooler for having out maneuvered the enemy. Please replace cool with Rouse(tm) acceptable wording]

BeauNiddle said:

I know you said YMMV (twice)

Click to expand...

It's a mystical utterance and ward against flames. YMMV

I think you are misreading Tide of Iron. Actually no, I am. I thought your shift was mandatory. Bleah, I don't like the power as much.

My interpretation of the Tide of Iron vs Death Strike is simple: Death Strike is not listed as an Immediate Interrupt. Thus, it can't 'interrupt' Tide of Iron. A skilled shield-fighter thus can deal with it simply.

This is from what I've garnered from just reading spoilers and so on. If the books say otherwise through some means, cool! Just how I read things at the moment.

As a complete and total non sequitur, there are a large number of small things I dislike about the layout of the Orc pages (presumably, I'll like the MM as a whole about as much). In the spirit of the Web site redesign undertaken earlier by a fan and professional Web designer, here's my take on the Orc pages of the Fourth Edition Monster Manual.

Marius Delphus said:

As a complete and total non sequitur, there are a large number of small things I dislike about the layout of the Orc pages (presumably, I'll like the MM as a whole about as much). In the spirit of the Web site redesign undertaken earlier by a fan and professional Web designer, here's my take on the Orc pages of the Fourth Edition Monster Manual.

Click to expand...

It's a nice design, but I like the original better for these reasons:

1. I like the stuff like "knowledge check results" at the end. (Though I would prefer the standard orc party info at the begining as in your design.)

I prefer the stat stuff up front ready to go, so when I need a quick encounter, I can just turn to the Orc (or whatever monster) page and be good to go... Instead of turign to the orc section and then paging through to the stats. (Not a big deal, but if it saves me a couple of moments overasll...)

2. I like the way they did the Tactics stuff..

The way you did it kind of gets lost in the stat block for me. I have to skim down through the stat block to find the tactics. The WOTC design kind of pops out for me. If I want stat block I see the stat block.. if I want to quickly refference the tactics... there they are.

The fact that I might not even use the tactics in the first place also means putting them as a part of the block makes it look crowded.

Finally, I think the way the tactics are in there sort of breaks up the different stat blocks nicely.

Yours has a better "cohesiveness" feeling to it, and looks slightly more organized, but it seems to take a moment longer for my eyes/brain to pull out a different stat block.

The way the WOTC one has it set up makes my eyes just kind of bounce from one block to the next. Automatic eye movement makes it easier for my brain to switch to the different stat blocks.

Thank you for your quick and thoughtful comments!

Scribble said:

It's a nice design, but I like the original better for these reasons:

1. I like the stuff like "knowledge check results" at the end. (Though I would prefer the standard orc party info at the begining as in your design.)...

Click to expand...

I disagree with doing this for the following reason: I want the DM to have all the "fluff" in one place.

2. I like the way they did the Tactics stuff..
...
The way the WOTC one has it set up makes my eyes just kind of bounce from one block to the next. Automatic eye movement makes it easier for my brain to switch to the different stat blocks.

Click to expand...

This, you've persuaded me about.

Turns out, though, that I needed little time (or impetus) to modify the PDF to address both your points.

EDIT: As I'm an inveterate tinkerer, I had to give it one more go. I think Version 3's my personal favorite.

I think the biggest problem with Marius' design is that it is three pages, so fitting it with the monsters before/after it is going to be harder than if it was two or four pages since WotC has specifically said that they're doing their best that a new monster type starts at the top of a page and there will be as little page flipping required as possible.

Thanks for having a look and commenting.

Did you see the original WOTC version? It's also three pages. If I understand correctly, the WOTC version consists of final pages directly from the Monster Manual. The goal of my exercise was simply to see if I could get the same material in the same number of pages in a way that appealed more to me.

Hrm, that's odd... I was certain I counted the original version being four pages when I looked at it the first time.

One other thing that popped up about the editied version is that the beginning fluff text splits oddly. While the coloured for Encounter Groups gives some cue, my eyes don't flow naturally to the adjacent column when reading the intro text. There would need to be a dividing line or something similar, but that would seem extraneous for such a small block of text.

Would it be possible for you to do a similar version of the gnolls spread from way back in DDXP for comparison purposes?

Dalamar said:

There would need to be a dividing line or something similar, but that would seem extraneous for such a small block of text.

Click to expand...

I thought of four ways to handle this (see attached JPEG). #3 is my personal favorite.

Would it be possible for you to do a similar version of the gnolls spread from way back in DDXP for comparison purposes?

Click to expand...

All I can find is low-res photos of these, which I can't even read. If you know where I can find high-quality images, then sure, I could take a crack at it.