D&D 4E 4e Monster List - Dwarven Nosepicker & Elven Butt Scratcher

[Fifth Element]

I beg to differ here -- I fail to see how this is any different from statting monsters in 3E, because every time you want to create an "exceptional" monster (e.g. a Hobgoblin Shieldbasher) or a "new" monster "variant", you need to work out its "unique" abilities.

It's very different, because you already have a selection of "exceptional" monsters. If they give you 6 varieties of hobgoblins, that's a lot of variety to work with, all without having to take the time to add class levels or what have you to a base creature.

I think Wormwood has it right here. This setup should allow DMs to create their own unique creatures if they have the time and inclination, but not force them to do so. Options, not restrictions.

 

[The Little Raven]

I've heard many pro-4E posters claiming that characters and monsters were "one-trick" ponies in 3E, but in the light of what I've seen of 4E monsters I wonder if they still think that way. I mean, every monster has one or two possible "attack powers" and tactics available and that's it -- those Kobold Warslingers (?) had only some weird ammunition and no melee attacks (IIRC) at all.

The 4e Kobold Slinger has a melee attack (dagger) and a ranged attack (sling), which is the amount of total combat options a 3e kobold has... if he gets to use them, since he only has 4 hp. In addition, he has special ammo and a racial special ability. That gives that one kobold variant more to do than the 3e kobold. Sure, if you want to put work into a 3e kobold, he becomes more than just a slight speedbump, but the same applies to monsters in 4e.

So 1 out of the 5 kobolds in the 4e kobold entry have more to do than the entirety of the single 3e kobold.

That's progress.

 

[BryonD]

I'll be interested to see how this does over time.

When you have 10 different set goblins and 10 different set orcs and you find that 7 of the orcs are just orc versions of 7 of the goblins, and you are on your 10th encounter, the shiny could start to wear off real quick.

I'm glad some people are seeing what they need.

I'll take build to fit over a stamp machine any day.

 

[Mephistopheles]

I don't mind it. It is a time saver for certain. If you don't like the names just change them and take advantage of having the monsters statted for you. No different to nabbing monsters or NPCs from Dungeon or a module that were close enough to what you were after and slapping a different name on them, is it?

It probably explains why the 4E Draconomicon is being split into multiple books as I imagine they could apply the same approach to dragons.

 

[Wormwood]

No different to nabbing monsters or NPCs from Dungeon or a module that were close enough to what you were after and slapping a different name on them, is it?

I knew I wasn't the only one!

 

[BryonD]

The 4e Kobold Slinger has a melee attack (dagger) and a ranged attack (sling), which is the amount of total combat options a 3e kobold has... if he gets to use them, since he only has 4 hp. In addition, he has special ammo and a racial special ability. That gives that one kobold variant more to do than the 3e kobold. Sure, if you want to put work into a 3e kobold, he becomes more than just a slight speedbump, but the same applies to monsters in 4e.

So 1 out of the 5 kobolds in the 4e kobold entry have more to do than the entirety of the single 3e kobold.

That's progress.

Actually, that is a deeply flawed comparison and if that was all you were capable of getting out of 3E then it is no wonder you had issues.

 

[BryonD]

Sorry, I'm a lazy DM -- I like the 6+6 option more than the 1,1,:12 option, too.
I really liked the Astral Construct spells powers as a player, but as a DM I'd rather cheat completely than use them as written. I just have too much else on my plate to care.

And 4e is designed with this assumption bolted right on to it. So for you, it should be as good as it will get.

 

[Fallen Seraph]

It probably explains why the 4E Draconomicon is being split into multiple books as I imagine they could apply the same approach to dragons.

I am actually really hoping for such, since I really want to have a nice and balanced encounter with a family of say... White Dragons, where they work as a single-team to try and take down my PCs. So each of them has a different role, and methods of using their power in combat.

 

[The Little Raven]

Actually, that is a deeply flawed comparison and if that was all you were capable of getting out of 3E then it is no wonder you had issues.

No, it's perfectly accurate. I open up the MM for 4e and 3e, and 4e both gives me more variations on the same monster, but each of those variations has more combat options built into them than the 3e kobold entry.

Sure, I could take the time to tinker with the kobold to turn him into a kobold shaman, or a kobold sorcerer, but that takes time and tinkering on my part to do so, which can be done in 4e as well as 3e (so there's no advantage to 3e whatsoever in that case).

So, yeah, 4e gives me way more diversity out-of-the-box than 3e did.

 

[hong]

I prefer a big box of generic lego; some people prefer the custom kits with lots of specialized pieces.

Is this the game to play, or the book to read, we're talking about again?