D&D 4E [4e] Monster Design - a flying monster built to fight on the wing.

[catastrophic]

Previous thread:
　
http://www.enworld.org/forum/4e-fan...onster-design-great-beast-unbeatable-foe.html

Death From Above
Flying creatures don't tend to fit well into normal combat. The flying rules are an add-on to the system and while creatures flying close to ground level can be modeled in a fight, those with more powerful flying speeds don't tend to engage in the fight without a lot of work from the GM.

The Skystone Gargoyle is an attempted solution to this. TSG uses a special move action to build up Soar Points which give it a power-up on it's attacks. TSG can soar in the sky over the battlefield, building up momentum, then drop into a power dive that ends in a wing-buffet or snatching grab. TSG's damage is not that high, but it gains a bonus to attack from soaring- the tactical challenge for players is to harass it enough while it's airborne, to stop it from building up too many soar points.

The DM meanwhile has to build up points and use them on key attacks, without exposing TSG to too much punishment. This is why the monster has the role of a lurker instead of a controller- it's a matter of timing. The MBA minor power the monster has can be very effective, BUT it comes at the cost of the move actions that offer it's real tactical advantage. If TSG commits to a melee battle at ground level, it can quickly find itself overwhelmed.

The monster is made up at 6th level, and it is designed to be used at that level. As pcs gain their own flying powers, their relationship with flying monsters tends to change, but the premise of TSG is that the pcs are mostly stuck on the ground. The actual attacks can be boosted relativly easily, and the miss-defence can scale- although as zones become more common, the TSG may have trouble staying effective. Feedback and alternatives are welcome, as always, this is a perpetual work in progress.
　

 

[the Jester]

A couple of things:

1. Your description of stonewing swoop goes back and forth between being a close burst and a close blast.

2. Giving up to a +6 bonus to attacks on pretty much every standard action attack (always at least +1 unless he's locked down movement-wise) is far too good, imho, especially with nothing offsetting it.

3. The minor action attack serves well to help boost this guy's damage to "two monsters" elite level, and it seems about right given that he won't often use it more than once per round (because he wants his soar points, natch).

4. I think the whole soar points mechanic adds a bit of bookkeeping, which is never good in 4e. It's only a tiny bit, though, so it's not too bad. But there might be a better way to implement the same concept, reduce the bookkeeping component and make it better balanced (I keep thinking about that +6 to hit everyone in a close burst or blast).

5. I think you should either rename stonewing shield to sound more like a dodge or else change its effect to a resist x damage if the intent is that he blocks the attack with his wings or some such. (Otherwise it just seems like his wings are invulnerable.) Also, this ability can pretty much shut down a ranged attack reliant pc, like some wizards or rangers. You might want to reduce its frequency of use from At Will to a recharge 4 5 6 (about every other round) or maybe "Recharges when stonewing clutch or stonewing swoop hits" or something.

 

[catastrophic]

Thanks for your feedback. The swoop is indeed a blast, apologies for the error, I'll fix it tomorrow if I remember to.

The soar/defense combo is at the heart of the monster's lurker mechanic, but it can be overcome. I was attempting to create a lurker with a strong mechanic, while also not resorting to stealth/invisibility like many lurkers.

The soar bonus is powerful, but it's based on a d6 roll, which makes it swingy in a way comparable to power recharge rolls. Players might feel frustrated by suffering an auto-miss, but a smart player will time their attacks with their allies, or even hold their action until the monster's turn.

To me, this kind of timing is what sets lurkers apart from other monster types like skirmishers. An invisible, hidden lurker won't reveal itself until it attacks, and finding it before then takes some work. Likewise, this foe soars above the battlefield, and your best bet is to time your attacks to take it down, rather than treating it like a conventional threat.

Of all the 4e monster roles, I feel lurkers, and to a lesser extent soldiers, live and die by a solid core role mechanic. Weaker designs for these roles will just use stealth or high defenses + mark, but stronger ones will actually have an articulated 'lurk' or 'punishent' mechanic that is distinctive, characterful, and puts fights into a diferent context.

 

[Quickleaf]

[MENTION=81381]catastrophic[/MENTION]
I like the way you designed this guy, and totally agree with you about the need for unique mechanics for lurkers and soldiers in particular, actually controllers too.

A couple things I would tweak:

Get rid of soar points to make it easier on the DM and balance the monster's attack rolls.

Soaring Assault - give it +2 attack and defense vs opportunity attacks while airborne and allow it to make airborne charges

Stonewing Dive & Stonewing Swoop & Stonewing Shield - make these recharge powers; it can recharge one of these (it chooses which) when it uses Stonewing Soar

Stonewing Shield - make this a +4 defense bonus; if the attack still hits this power is not expended; if the attack misses the gargoyle can move it's speed

Really these suggestions are just to tighten up already solid design. Bravo!

 

[rob12]

Great minds think alike ... You're terrific ...
warhammer gold