Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
Hosted Forums
Creature Catalog Forums
General Monster Talk
5E: Converting Monsters from White Dwarf Magazine for Fifth Edition
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Cleon" data-source="post: 8462750" data-attributes="member: 57383"><p>The more I'm thinking about it, the more the Pine Kindred feels like we should bump them up a CR.</p><p></p><p>A wight is CR 3, after all, and giving a creature who's going to be roughly as good a fighter as a bugbear resistance to weapon damage plus low-level spellcasting is more like a CR 2 maybe?</p><p></p><p>Bugbears are CR 1, but a Pine Kindred is tougher. Unless their opponent has a magic weapon, the Kindred effectively has twice as many hit points against warrior-type opponents since it takes half damage.</p><p></p><p>Speaking of being toughness, I'm wondering why you've given them an <strong>Undead Fortitude</strong> special trait.</p><p></p><p>The original monster didn't have a "stepping back from death's door" type ability.</p><p></p><p>I'm guessing it's a carry-over from the original version being based on the <a href="https://www.5esrd.com/database/creature/zombie-common/" target="_blank"><strong>Zombie</strong></a> rather than a <a href="https://www.5esrd.com/database/creature/ghoul/" target="_blank"><strong>Ghoul</strong></a> or <a href="https://www.5esrd.com/gamemastering/monsters-foes/monsters-by-type/undead/wight/" target="_blank"><strong>Wight</strong></a>.</p><p></p><p>Shouldn't the Undead Fortitude be removed since, well, it's not a Zombie?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Well a cantrip does relatively piddly damage, especially for a 1st-level spellcaster like a standard Pine Kindred. They should do more damage with their weapons.</p><p></p><p>For example, <em>produce flame</em> does 1d8, but it could easily do more than that with its sword.</p><p></p><p>Which reminds me, the original article says "the creature's favourite weapons are jagged sabres and throwing darts" so I'm wondering where the dart attack is?</p><p></p><p>In 1E AD&D darts are quite an effective weapon since, despite only doing 1d3 damage, they have a Rate Of Fire of 3. So that's three 1d3s, or 6 damage on average compared to 1d8 for a longsword.</p><p></p><p>I'm thinking that the Pine Kindred could have Multiattack with darts and <em>maybe</em> its sword.</p><p></p><p>Speaking of said sword, "sabre" covers quite a wide range of sword types, from light dueling blades to heavy cavalry choppers. The same applies to historical scimitars. Not all of them were lightweight finesse weapons like 3E/5E scimitar. In 1E AD&D, a scimitar did 1d8 damage against M-sized opponents, it wasn't a 1d6 damage weapon like the 3E/5E scimitar.</p><p></p><p>So how about giving the Pine Kindred a 1d8 damage sword like the Wight? We could just make it a Longsword like the wight, or make up some new weapon called a "Jagged Sabre" with similar stats.</p><p></p><p>I'd also reconsider making it Strength 15 (+2) but just chucking two darts at a time:</p><p></p><p>So something like:</p><p></p><p style="margin-left: 20px"><strong>Multiattack</strong>: The pine kindred makes two longsword attacks or three dart attacks.</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"><strong>Dart</strong>: <em>Ranged Weapon Attack:</em> +4 to hit, range 20/60 ft., one target. <em>Hit:</em> 3 (1d4 + 1) piercing damage.</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"><strong>Longsword</strong>: <em>Melee Weapon Attack:</em> +4 to hit, reach 5 ft., one target. <em>Hit:</em> 5 (1d8 + 1) slashing damage, or 6 (1d10 + 1) slashing damage if used with two hands.</p><p></p><p>Assuming it hits but does not crit with all its attacks, that's an average total damage of 10.5 with darts (3d4+3) and 11 or 13 with longsword (2d8+2 or 2d10+2).</p><p></p><p>Or possibly:</p><p></p><p style="margin-left: 20px"><strong>Strength</strong> 15 (+2)</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"><strong>Multiattack</strong>: The pine kindred makes two sabre attacks or two dart attacks.</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"><strong>Sabre</strong>: <em>Melee Weapon Attack:</em> +4 to hit, reach 5 ft., one target. <em>Hit:</em> 6 (1d8 + 2) slashing damage.</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"><strong>Dart</strong>: <em>Ranged Weapon Attack:</em> +4 to hit, range 20/60 ft., one target. <em>Hit:</em> 4 (1d4 + 2) piercing damage.</p><p></p><p>That's an average total damage of 9 with darts (2d4+4) and 13 with sabre (2d8+4).</p><p></p><p>At the moment I prefer Multiattack with scimitar and darts:</p><p></p><p style="margin-left: 20px"><strong>Multiattack</strong>: The pine kindred makes two sabre attacks or two dart attacks.</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"><strong>Scimitar</strong>: <em>Melee Weapon Attack:</em> +4 to hit, reach 5 ft., one target. <em>Hit:</em> 4 (1d6 + 1) slashing damage.</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"><strong>Dart</strong>: <em>Ranged Weapon Attack:</em> +4 to hit, range 20/60 ft., one target. <em>Hit:</em> 3 (1d4 + 1) piercing damage.</p><p></p><p>That's an average total damage of 7 with darts (2d4+2) and 9 with scimitar (2d6+2).</p><p></p><p>I could easily go for Strength 15 (+2) to make the darts 4 (1d4 + 2) and the scimitar 5 (1d6 + 2) for an average total of 9 & 11.</p><p></p><p>In any case, adding multiattack would further encourage me towards making the base kindred at least CR 2.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Well firstly, you can "keep the players guessing" by having the Pine Kindred mix up its 1st level spell, which it also won't be able to spam like a cantrip so the DM only needs to worry about it once.</p><p></p><p>Rather than worry about them casting <em>poison spray</em> repeatedly or whatever, I'd rather give then a non-offensive cantrip like, say, <em>druidcraft</em> plus a single spell.</p><p></p><p>Upon reflection, I'm thinking they prefer nonlethal spells that'll help them capture victims to transform into more Pine Kindred and just use weapons when they want to kill.</p><p></p><p>More importantly, the presentation is wonky. If my understanding of the 5E monster design philosophy is correct, the Stat Block (the bit above the Description in this case) is supposed to contain everything needed to run the monster "straight off the card" barring spell descriptions and the like. A Spellcasting section should list the spells a creature has ready to cast, and the current version doesn't have that.</p><p></p><p>The Stat Block needn't mention alternative spells. The spells in its <a href="https://www.5esrd.com/gamemastering/monsters-foes/#Spellcasting" target="_blank"><strong>Spellcasting Entry</strong></a> are just an example and it's assumed that the monster might have different ones.</p><p></p><p>So something like:</p><p></p><p style="margin-left: 20px"><strong>Spellcasting</strong> The pine kindred is a 1st-level spellcaster that used Wisdom as its spellcasting ability (spell save DC ##; +# to hit with spell attacks). A pine kindred has the following spells prepared from the druid's spell list.</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"><strong>Cantrips (at will):</strong> <em>druidcraft</em></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"><strong>1st level (1 slot):</strong> <em>entangle</em></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">Some pine kindred know spells from outside the druid's spell list (see <em><strong>Dark Druidic Mysteries</strong></em>).</p><p></p><p>The <em><strong><em>Dark Druidic Mysteries</em></strong></em> text ("<strong><em>DDM</em></strong>") belongs in the Description section. It is not necessary to run the monster "off the card" so doesn't belong in the Stat Block, putting the text about alternative spells there just clutters up the Special Traits section and makes it harder to read at a glance. Basically, the Stat Block contains the monster's mechanics, not flavour text or variations.</p><p></p><p>My idea was the standard Pine Kindred's <strong>Description</strong> paragraphs would also apply to the Thane and Jarl, who'd only require one or two additional description paragraphs on top of that.</p><p></p><p>Since all grades of Pine Kindred have druidic powers, I'm wrapping all the basic spellcasting fluff into together into a Dark Druidic Mysteries paragraph(s) one paragraph.</p><p></p><p>Incidentally, the <strong><em>DDM</em></strong> I posted was only a rough draft, I'm planning to flesh it out when we get to the Description part of this conversion.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Cleon, post: 8462750, member: 57383"] The more I'm thinking about it, the more the Pine Kindred feels like we should bump them up a CR. A wight is CR 3, after all, and giving a creature who's going to be roughly as good a fighter as a bugbear resistance to weapon damage plus low-level spellcasting is more like a CR 2 maybe? Bugbears are CR 1, but a Pine Kindred is tougher. Unless their opponent has a magic weapon, the Kindred effectively has twice as many hit points against warrior-type opponents since it takes half damage. Speaking of being toughness, I'm wondering why you've given them an [B]Undead Fortitude[/B] special trait. The original monster didn't have a "stepping back from death's door" type ability. I'm guessing it's a carry-over from the original version being based on the [URL='https://www.5esrd.com/database/creature/zombie-common/'][B]Zombie[/B][/URL] rather than a [URL='https://www.5esrd.com/database/creature/ghoul/'][B]Ghoul[/B][/URL] or [URL='https://www.5esrd.com/gamemastering/monsters-foes/monsters-by-type/undead/wight/'][B]Wight[/B][/URL]. Shouldn't the Undead Fortitude be removed since, well, it's not a Zombie? Well a cantrip does relatively piddly damage, especially for a 1st-level spellcaster like a standard Pine Kindred. They should do more damage with their weapons. For example, [I]produce flame[/I] does 1d8, but it could easily do more than that with its sword. Which reminds me, the original article says "the creature's favourite weapons are jagged sabres and throwing darts" so I'm wondering where the dart attack is? In 1E AD&D darts are quite an effective weapon since, despite only doing 1d3 damage, they have a Rate Of Fire of 3. So that's three 1d3s, or 6 damage on average compared to 1d8 for a longsword. I'm thinking that the Pine Kindred could have Multiattack with darts and [I]maybe[/I] its sword. Speaking of said sword, "sabre" covers quite a wide range of sword types, from light dueling blades to heavy cavalry choppers. The same applies to historical scimitars. Not all of them were lightweight finesse weapons like 3E/5E scimitar. In 1E AD&D, a scimitar did 1d8 damage against M-sized opponents, it wasn't a 1d6 damage weapon like the 3E/5E scimitar. So how about giving the Pine Kindred a 1d8 damage sword like the Wight? We could just make it a Longsword like the wight, or make up some new weapon called a "Jagged Sabre" with similar stats. I'd also reconsider making it Strength 15 (+2) but just chucking two darts at a time: So something like: [INDENT][B]Multiattack[/B]: The pine kindred makes two longsword attacks or three dart attacks.[/INDENT] [INDENT][/INDENT] [INDENT][B]Dart[/B]: [I]Ranged Weapon Attack:[/I] +4 to hit, range 20/60 ft., one target. [I]Hit:[/I] 3 (1d4 + 1) piercing damage.[/INDENT] [INDENT][/INDENT] [INDENT][B]Longsword[/B]: [I]Melee Weapon Attack:[/I] +4 to hit, reach 5 ft., one target. [I]Hit:[/I] 5 (1d8 + 1) slashing damage, or 6 (1d10 + 1) slashing damage if used with two hands.[/INDENT] Assuming it hits but does not crit with all its attacks, that's an average total damage of 10.5 with darts (3d4+3) and 11 or 13 with longsword (2d8+2 or 2d10+2). Or possibly: [INDENT][B]Strength[/B] 15 (+2)[/INDENT] [INDENT][/INDENT] [INDENT][B]Multiattack[/B]: The pine kindred makes two sabre attacks or two dart attacks.[/INDENT] [INDENT][/INDENT] [INDENT][B]Sabre[/B]: [I]Melee Weapon Attack:[/I] +4 to hit, reach 5 ft., one target. [I]Hit:[/I] 6 (1d8 + 2) slashing damage.[/INDENT] [INDENT][/INDENT] [INDENT][B]Dart[/B]: [I]Ranged Weapon Attack:[/I] +4 to hit, range 20/60 ft., one target. [I]Hit:[/I] 4 (1d4 + 2) piercing damage.[/INDENT] That's an average total damage of 9 with darts (2d4+4) and 13 with sabre (2d8+4). At the moment I prefer Multiattack with scimitar and darts: [INDENT][B]Multiattack[/B]: The pine kindred makes two sabre attacks or two dart attacks.[/INDENT] [INDENT][/INDENT] [INDENT][B]Scimitar[/B]: [I]Melee Weapon Attack:[/I] +4 to hit, reach 5 ft., one target. [I]Hit:[/I] 4 (1d6 + 1) slashing damage.[/INDENT] [INDENT][/INDENT] [INDENT][B]Dart[/B]: [I]Ranged Weapon Attack:[/I] +4 to hit, range 20/60 ft., one target. [I]Hit:[/I] 3 (1d4 + 1) piercing damage.[/INDENT] That's an average total damage of 7 with darts (2d4+2) and 9 with scimitar (2d6+2). I could easily go for Strength 15 (+2) to make the darts 4 (1d4 + 2) and the scimitar 5 (1d6 + 2) for an average total of 9 & 11. In any case, adding multiattack would further encourage me towards making the base kindred at least CR 2. Well firstly, you can "keep the players guessing" by having the Pine Kindred mix up its 1st level spell, which it also won't be able to spam like a cantrip so the DM only needs to worry about it once. Rather than worry about them casting [I]poison spray[/I] repeatedly or whatever, I'd rather give then a non-offensive cantrip like, say, [I]druidcraft[/I] plus a single spell. Upon reflection, I'm thinking they prefer nonlethal spells that'll help them capture victims to transform into more Pine Kindred and just use weapons when they want to kill. More importantly, the presentation is wonky. If my understanding of the 5E monster design philosophy is correct, the Stat Block (the bit above the Description in this case) is supposed to contain everything needed to run the monster "straight off the card" barring spell descriptions and the like. A Spellcasting section should list the spells a creature has ready to cast, and the current version doesn't have that. The Stat Block needn't mention alternative spells. The spells in its [URL='https://www.5esrd.com/gamemastering/monsters-foes/#Spellcasting'][B]Spellcasting Entry[/B][/URL] are just an example and it's assumed that the monster might have different ones. So something like: [INDENT][B]Spellcasting[/B] The pine kindred is a 1st-level spellcaster that used Wisdom as its spellcasting ability (spell save DC ##; +# to hit with spell attacks). A pine kindred has the following spells prepared from the druid's spell list. [B]Cantrips (at will):[/B] [I]druidcraft[/I] [B]1st level (1 slot):[/B] [I]entangle[/I] Some pine kindred know spells from outside the druid's spell list (see [I][B]Dark Druidic Mysteries[/B][/I]).[/INDENT] The [I][B][I]Dark Druidic Mysteries[/I][/B][/I] text ("[B][I]DDM[/I][/B]") belongs in the Description section. It is not necessary to run the monster "off the card" so doesn't belong in the Stat Block, putting the text about alternative spells there just clutters up the Special Traits section and makes it harder to read at a glance. Basically, the Stat Block contains the monster's mechanics, not flavour text or variations. My idea was the standard Pine Kindred's [B]Description[/B] paragraphs would also apply to the Thane and Jarl, who'd only require one or two additional description paragraphs on top of that. Since all grades of Pine Kindred have druidic powers, I'm wrapping all the basic spellcasting fluff into together into a Dark Druidic Mysteries paragraph(s) one paragraph. Incidentally, the [B][I]DDM[/I][/B] I posted was only a rough draft, I'm planning to flesh it out when we get to the Description part of this conversion. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
Hosted Forums
Creature Catalog Forums
General Monster Talk
5E: Converting Monsters from White Dwarf Magazine for Fifth Edition
Top