Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Upper_Krust" data-source="post: 4018516" data-attributes="member: 326">Howdy Alzrius matey! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />The difference is that in 4E he only has to look up the monster entry in the Monster Manual, In 3.5 he has to look up the monster entry in the Monster Manual and the Players Handbook (for spell-like abilities AND feats). Then factor in the possibility a monster might be using feats and spells from different sources (Book of Vile Darkness, Epic Level Handbook etc.). Throw in an additional layer of complexity for Dragons in that you have to choose all their feats to begin. Add in the further potential of Integrated Class Features and before you know it you are swamped. The question seems to be do you want:a) All monsters to be unique but have a small list of options.b) All monsters to share myriad similarities but have a wide range of options.From what little we can glean at this point it looks like 4E has FAR more tactical depth than 3.5 ever did, particularly with the martial classes. Yes. When you fight a Pit Fiend (or a Dragon, or whatever) I want that fight to be unique, not the same as when you were fighting ten other encounters where either monsters or NPCs all had access to the same spells or spell-like abilities.That said, I think we are all in agreement its at least one or two options shy of what we would like, but we still don't know what benefits those summoned devils will bring.The term spell-like abilities seems to generalise abilities. Making them universal rather than unique.By my calculations, after the first round (summons) the Pit Fiend has two different choices for each of its actions that round (standard, move and minor). But thinking more about it, there are few monsters have more than that discounting spell-like abilities...and thats going by my own monsters in the Epic Bestiary - where I was already pushing the 4E mantra of trying to give each monster a suite of unique abilities.The problem is that buffing or readied areas are not tactics, they are a strategy. A tactic is making a choice. Asking a fighter if he wants Bulls Strength or not isn't a tactical choice, because the Fighter will always want it.You are always going to buff and ready an area if possible. So if you are buffing and the monsters are also buffing where the hecks the benefit to buffing. Its a totally unnecessary layer of math.Well you could argue that the 3.5 Pit Fiend is already so close to other monsters that its already dull and boring when used in the greater context. At least this way you have an encounter with a Pit Fiend thats going to be unique. Two Pit Fiends may fight the same, but at least a Pit Fiend won't fight the same as numerous other monsters.Also take into account that we are likely to see far more monsters per page in the new Monster Manual (because each entry is uncluttered with the same repeating spell-like abilities and other blandness).In that respect how is 4E any different from 3.5? Except that in 3.5 by 'knowing' who you are fighting you can specifically buff to defeat it thus neutering the threat.In 3.5 too many monsters have the exact same branches though. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue    :p"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" /></blockquote>

Verification