Adding Flavor to 3e- Your Methods, Solutions, Philosophies

[Belen]

Here is a brand new monster I created for my campaign. It's based loosely on No-Face from Spirited Away.

=================
Devouring spirits are the undead slaves of a fiend of corruption. They live to eat, and are quite willing to devour any physical object they can cram down their gullets. They extort huge tolls from those they encounter, of which half is eaten and half contributed to the fiend’s hoard. No matter how much they eat, their hunger can never be satiated; that is the nature of their curse.

If a devouring spirit is reduced to 0 hit points, it transforms back to the creature it originally was (but remains dead). If a restoration, greater restoration or break enchantment is cast on a devouring spirit and it fails its save, the magic enslaving the creature is broken, and it is restored to its original state.



Devouring Spirit: CR 12; Large Undead (spirit); HD 16d12 (130 hp); Init +5; Spd 40 ft, climb 30 ft; AC 25 (touch 14, flat-footed 20); BAB +8; Grap +22; Atk +17 melee (2d6+15, bite); S/R 10 ft/10 ft; SA Improved grab, swallow whole, pounce, burst of speed; SQ DR 10/Britannian steel, SR 21, fast healing 5, turn resistance +4, resistances, undead traits; AL CE; SV Fort +5, Ref +10, Will +10; Str 30, Dex 20, Con —, Int 9, Wis 11, Cha 20.

Skills and Feats: Climb +25, Jump +25, Listen +21, Spot +21, Cleave, Improved Natural Attack (bite), Weapon Focus (bite), Power Attack.

SA — Improved Grab (Ex): To use this ability, the devouring spirit must hit a creature at least one size smaller than itself with its bite attack. It can then attempt to start a grapple as a free action without provoking an attack of opportunity. If it succeeds, it establishes a hold and can attempt to swallow the opponent the next round.

SA — Swallow Whole (Ex): A devouring spirit can try to swallow a grabbed opponent by making a successful grapple check. Once inside the devouring spirit, the opponent takes one negative level per round unless a DC 23 Fort save is made. A new save is required each round inside the stomach. The Fort save DC to avoid negative levels becoming permanent level loss is similarly 23.

A swallowed creature can attempt to cut its way out by using a light slashing or piercing weapon to deal 25 points of damage to the devouring spirit’s stomach (AC 17). Once the creature exits, the spirit’s regenerative ability closes the hole; another swallowed opponent must cut its own way out.

SA — Pounce (Ex): A devouring spirit can make a full attack at the end of a charge.

SA — Burst of Speed (Su): A devouring spirit can haste itself for up to five rounds per day. Activating and deactivating this ability is a free action, and the use need not be consecutive rounds.

SQ — Resistances (Ex): Cold resistance 10, electricity resistance 10.


This thing was created entirely within the rules of the game. As far as I know, it breaks none of the guidelines for monster creation regarding skill points, feats, attack and save bonuses, etc; and yet, trying to reverse-engineer its abilities based on one encounter is going to be pretty hard. The position that the rules limit flavour is a furphy, an excuse used by DMs who either can't be bothered or don't want to learn the rules.

Good movie...cool monster.

However, I have to disagree with you somewhat. While I have worked for a d20 company and created monsters for them, it is neither easily nor quickly done. For those people that have time issues, then it is unrealistic to ask them to become game designers. Nipping here, and tucking there is what, I think, most GMs do.

The more time that a GM delves through books looking for PrCs, feats, and items to outfit encounters, the less time a GM has to prep the story, create locales, or create non-encounter NPCs.

While I find it benefical to do with named villians and the like, it becomes far too time-consuming to do on a regular basis.

I can see a few GMs having the time and ability to create new monsters, NPCs etc and have a kick-tail story and world create, but they would be a minority when compared to rest.

I would not accuse them of not being bothered or not wanting to learn the rules. I would say that they know the rules, but have limited time durning the the week to create everything needed and still have a life.

 

[doghead]

I decide what I want to do, then check the rules to see how they suggest that it would happen. I see the rules as guidlines to help me maintain consistancy, rather than parameters that dictate what I can and can't do. However, I am very aware of remaining fair - if I wouldn't appreciate it being done to me as a player, it probably won't be appreciated by my players.

There is a degree of trust involved. If you have the trust of your players, then they are, in my experiece unlikely to take up arms over small fudges for the sake of the story. If there are not, then they should probably should be playing a game like M:tG (which I also play).

In particular, withregards to flavor, I prefer using the ordinary in unexpected ways to a constant stream of new monsters and magic items. It makes that homebrewed monster or item so much more memorable.

I also think that a solid setting, character motivations and personal goals and convictions give a game so much more potential to be rewarding and interesting.

 

[hong]

I can see a few GMs having the time and ability to create new monsters, NPCs etc and have a kick-tail story and world create, but they would be a minority when compared to rest.

Then stop crying if the players know what you're using.

I would not accuse them of not being bothered or not wanting to learn the rules. I would say that they know the rules, but have limited time durning the the week to create everything needed and still have a life.

You just need to improve your time management skills.

 

[Greatwyrm]

I have to agree with Henry on the value of "set-piece" battles. Give players interesting places to fight in and they'll do interesting stuff. Give them stuff to jump from, swing on, trip over, etc.

That aside, when I started working on the campaign that I plan to run here in a few months, I wanted the same thing you did - more flavor. After I got some ideas from the players about what type of a game they wanted to see (city adventures, wilderness exploration, some plane hopping - odd combo, eh?), I didn't pick up any rule books while I built the world.

Not to say the rules aren't important. I just found that writing the background first, without limiting myself to what was in the rules, I was able to put together something really cool. Once I had the big ideas worked out, I found that it wasn't hard to put together something that fit my vision, using farily standard rules.

I guess what I'm trying to say is, you gotta know what you're hungry for before you start digging through your recipies.

 

[Henry]

Try something like the Quintessential Psion... Or Arcane Strife. Or Bastion's Spells & Magic. BoEM III.

Ah, Arcane Strife. The day my players watched an Archmage rip out a dragon's skeleton through its mouth, was the day my players found a mage they decided they were NEVER going to tangle with.

 

[Amal Shukup]

In my campaign, most of the 'flavor' is simply non-mechanical. Setting specific stuff mostly, but one can easily change descripitive text of purely mechanical things (spells, monsters, etc.) to give a sense of the unknown.

No law says a Bugbear can't belong to a weird tribe where warriors shave their bodies all over, cover their skin with ritual tattooing and decorative scarring, and daub themselves liberally with yellow mud before heading into battle...

"What the heck are THOSE!?! Man, the DM musta got a new monster book!"

Hee hee.

But arbitrarily changing the rules breaks the covenant with the players somewhat, and I try not to do it. Sure the NPC Paladin has some unusually cool abilities - but if they care to investigate, they'll find that he belongs to an order dedicated to eradicating undead and has levels in the Hunter of the Dead Prestige Class... If they want to dedicate the next several levels to qualifying for membership in that order, who am I to deny them?

The end result of playing straight is that the players trust me: they know there's a valid reason the Elder Fire Elemental is unusually tough. They don't need to know how, neccesarily (advanced to 48 HD), but they know I'm not just making it up to screw them.

So baddies are legit. This does NOT make them predictable or boring. Besides just playing around with flavor/descriptive text, there is an abundance of perfectly balanced Advancement Rules, Class Levels, Templates, Magical Effects and so forth which can be combined to make unique, unpredictable and potentially terrifying foes.

Periodically I'll even 'deconstruct' an unusual opponent for my players over beer after the game.

I find that a demonstrated policy of honesty makes my players much more willing to get involved in the game - something they don't understand is a potential mystery to unlock, NOT cause to start yelling 'Foul!' at the DM. They also don't assume "oh, he's just playing fast and loose with the rules again - it's not worth worrying about".

It is almost certainly 'worth worrying about'...

A'Mal

 

[I'm A Banana]

Adding Flavor to 3e: Your methods

I find sprinkling a little oregano on the core books works just as well as deep frying them, though you don't get the same crunch.

(Holy crap, I just realized how many food terms we use in reference to gaming...)

The moment that you introduce something that make players go "how'd he do that?" is the moment that you remind them that the 3 core books aren't the answer to life, the universe, and everything

They are not the Unchangable Words of the Gods, after all....

(Holy crap, I think it's just me, but I just realized the boards are on a brit lit kick today....)

 

[diaglo]

How do you handle adding flavor to encounters etc?
How do you manage the differing types of gamers?
What are your philosophies?

i play it the way i would OD&D. it is the only way i can stomach it.

there are things about the 2000ed and 3.11ed for workgroups which make me retch. but i keep it all inside while i'm gaming. i come to message boards to vent.

 

[Desdichado]

I'm glad I don't have players like that. But I agree with Psion -- there's so much stuff in print that there's no way a player can know it all anymore. My solution for players who are deconstructing adversaries? Use adversaries with abilities they're not familiar with. For me, it's not too hard.

 

[Ferox4]

Come back rolleyes smiley, all is forgiven.

LOL