• Welcome to this new upgrade of the site. We are now on a totally different software platform. Many things will be different, and bugs are expected. Certain areas (like downloads and reviews) will take longer to import. As always, please use the Meta Forum for site queries or bug reports. Note that we (the mods and admins) are also learning the new software.
  • The RSS feed for the news page has changed. Use this link. The old one displays the forums, not the news.

5e Hardcore: Monster Manual

dave2008

Adventurer
I have added the Fire Giants by [MENTION=6801060]Demetrios1453[/MENTION] to the Giants section. These are from his great thread Homebrew Giant Elites , go there to check out his original work and some great flavor text regarding most of these giants. These giants differ a little from his originals, primarily I decided to make the giant chiefs (thane, jarl, etc.) elites per the OP. Thank you [MENTION=6801060]Demetrios1453[/MENTION] for your contribution!

In addition to adding the fire giants I have update the the Hill Giant Chief and Frost Giant Jarl slightly.
 

dave2008

Adventurer
I have added the Cloud Giants by [MENTION=6801060]Demetrios1453[/MENTION] to the Giants section. These are from his great thread Homebrew Giant Elites , go there to check out his original work and some great flavor text regarding these giants. These giants differ a little from his originals, primarily I decided to make the giant Oman and Oathguard elites per the OP. Thank you Demetrios1453 for your contribution!
 

dave2008

Adventurer
I have added the Storm Giants Omen Reader by [MENTION=6801060]Demetrios1453[/MENTION] to the Giants section. It is from his great thread Homebrew Giant Elites , go there to check out his original work and some great flavor text regarding giants. Thank you Demetrios1453 for your contribution!

I have also added the Storm Giant Paramount and update the Hill Giant Chief, Stone Giant Thane, Frost Giant Jarl, Fire Giant Duke, and Cloud Giant Oman to reflect the AD&D concepts proposed in the OP better. Primarily I gave them a method to mitigate stun-locks and ranged attacks to some extent. These should have been there originally, but I was going to fast.
 

Nebulous

Explorer
Good idea. But why make it soooo long?
Most monsters are fine. Only solo ones are a bit lacking if they are the only encounter of the day.
Again here are the things I am doing and it works out quite fine. Try it.
Single encounter big bad guys
Add 1 feat/ASI per 4 CR (save the first four)
Add 1 legendary action per PC above 4.
Multiply HP by 1 +0.25 per PC above 4.
Add 1.5 AC (round up) per PC above 4.

Here is a modified lich my players defeated at 17th level in a previous campaing.

AC: 17 (natural armor + dex) Now 23 (+1.5 AC x 2 for players number, Staff of power and +1 ring. It could go up to 25 for one attack because of the shield guardian and I am not counting shield. Since shield was an at will power, it became and AC 28 and 30 for one attack)
HP: 135 (18d8 + 54) Now 238 for a 1.5 multiplyer for number of players and tough feat (+36hp).
Spd: 30' (unchanged)
Stats: Unchanged (decided to use feats instead...)
Added: Warcaster, Elemental Adept Fire (that one was a surprise for my players), Tough.
Mage feature added: Shield and Mirror image at will (I counted that one as a feat)
Spell list was changed to reflect the added mage feature and feats.
Cantrip: Removed prestigiditation and added Fire Bolt. Rose number of cantrip to four and added Green Flame blade
Level 1: Removed shield and added disguise self (Lich used it to appear human as she did in her life.)
Level 2: Removed Mirror image and added Misty step instead.

Legendary action Rose to 5 (again 6 players)

Lich was also using Staff Of Power And a Shield Guardian.
I'd love to see a book of stuff like this, just amped up enemies with all the work already done, I don't have to think about it. I'd buy something like that.
 

dave2008

Adventurer
Will these Ancients be identical to your Epic Ancients?
No. They are very similar but the tenants of the AD&D monsters are different than the tenants of the epic monster updates. That being said the 2nd drafts of the epic monsters will probably look more like the AD&D monsters.

All that being said, the Ancient Red is only superficial different between the two threads (HP, DPR, unstoppable, etc.)
 

Matrix Sorcica

Explorer
Ok.
Looking at the ancient, shouldn't the tail attack be able to hit more than one creature? This thing is huge! Plus, it doesn't really have that many physical counterattacks due to legendary actions, tail costing two.
So maybe let tail affect more, or reduce cost to 1?

Oh, and the red dragon colossal mini's space is 40' x 40', just saying :cool:
 

dave2008

Adventurer
Well, after making the red dragons I decided to push the boundaries a little and I made the CR 30, elite Primoridal Tarrsque. It is in the Monstrosities section. I will get back to more mundane monsters after catching up a bit on my Epic Monster Updates thread.
 

dave2008

Adventurer
Ok.
Looking at the ancient, shouldn't the tail attack be able to hit more than one creature? This thing is huge! Plus, it doesn't really have that many physical counterattacks due to legendary actions, tail costing two.
So maybe let tail affect more, or reduce cost to 1?
Then intent is that it is smacking one creature. I could do all of that, but that would push up its CR and I wanted to keep the CR the same. I have thought about adding a tail sweep attack that hits more creatures and make it cost 3 actions or just make it a standard action. I will think about it.

Oh, and the red dragon colossal mini's space is 40' x 40', just saying :cool:
Good point, but I have to leave some space for the Great Wyrm Red Dragon!
 

dave2008

Adventurer
Ok.
Looking at the ancient, shouldn't the tail attack be able to hit more than one creature? This thing is huge! Plus, it doesn't really have that many physical counterattacks due to legendary actions, tail costing two.
So maybe let tail affect more, or reduce cost to 1?
OK, I have updated the Ancient, Elder, and Adult dragons to include a tail sweep attack. Let me know what you think.
 

Matrix Sorcica

Explorer
The standard action tail attack is still only one target, making it a waste of action. If you make it identical to the legendary action, it's better, plus you don't have two variants of the same attack.
 

dave2008

Adventurer
The standard action tail attack is still only one target, making it a waste of action. If you make it identical to the legendary action, it's better, plus you don't have two variants of the same attack.
1st - I like the ideas of 2 tail attacks: one a smash and one a sweep. That seems reasonable.

2nd -I had the tail attack because I didn't like the idea that a dragon couldn't use its tail if it didn't get legendary actions. That is a hold-over from before I re-wrote Legendary Actions. I should probably change that now.

3rd - I think I will probably make the sweep a standard action and the tail smash and sweep legendary actions, or maybe just the smash as a legendary action.

Thank you for the input - it is very helpful to think these things through with someone else.
 

dave2008

Adventurer
My pleasure. I was actually concerned that I was annoying you by questioning your design decisions over and over again.
I have uploaded the revised red dragons with the tail sweep as a standard action and the tail attack as a legendary action. I also added a legendary action fire aura to the ancient red. Let me know what you think.
 

dave2008

Adventurer
I realized I overwrote the Balor file when I made the Vargouille Swarm. So I took the opportunity to revise the balor a bit and reformat it. I will probably do this for the other demons too.
 

Advertisement

Top