Adding Templates to Solos?

[drquestion]

I would also say -- just add the powers of the template and ignore the increased defenses, hit points, action points, save bonuses, and so on. This generally gives the creature more *choices* but not more *power*, given the whole action economy. It will have just as many hit points, the same defenses, and so on, but it will have alternate options.

My worry with just adding the powers would be that getting a daily and an encounter (possibly more than one, depending on level) from a class template seems like it would be at least a slight upgrade in power, assuming the monster uses these instead of whatever it normally has as an at-will.

Andur's method sounds promising, though. I'll think about doing that.

Thanks to all who've responded with ideas!

 

[hamishspence]

What about mine?

Mine was intended to use the rules as directly as possible, and simply capitalize of the fact that it simply says: "Add a template to a monster to make an elite monster"

I figured that keeping to the level of the party makes for less mathematical fiddling: same level, same skills. Only difference is it has about 20% more HP and is about 20% harder to hit (elite monsters get +2 to saves and some defenses) So, it should award 20% more XP, or, Counts as 6, not Counts as 5.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

The interesting stuff are usually the powers, so I'd go with everyone else suggestion and try to add the powers. This will increase the power of the monster, assuming it gets Encounter, Recharge or Daily abilities. Maybe it would be enough pretending this was an additional regular monster of its level.

Then, and this is not snarky, how do I create a Draconic Wizard, or a vampire beholder, or other such things?

I think the RAW doesn't provide any solutions for this, because they wanted the monsters to be distinct for what they are. If you add wizardly powers to a Dragon, he suddenly stops feeling like a dragon, and more like a funny wizard. Likewise with a Vampire Beholder.

Vampires, Wizards, Dragons and Beholders are each distinct monster types. Each alone should feel unusual. If you _really_ want to create a monster that mixes these aspects, why not create it as its own monster?
Using the monster creation guidelines is hardly more difficult then adding templates, but you will probably get better (more playable) results this way.

In 3E, adding templates to everything was done quite often, but it was also often overdone - especially with all those Half-Templates. It was an easy (and maybe the only) way to create a distinguishing monster.

There is no big difference between an Ogre, a Hill Giant and a Stone Giant, but if you make it a Vampire Ogre and a Half-Fiend Hill Giant, and a Half-Dragon Stone Giant, things begin to look interesting.

 

[Protagonist]

I agree with the crossbow-wieldin' Archchancellor. But if you enjoy messing with archetypes and trademark abilities it should be easy to end up with a balanced monster. It is ineed probably best to create a new monster if you want an existing solo monster +x. If you use the guidelines and base it on the old solo monster and you should be set.
I have toyed with the idea of simply reversing the "how to make an elite/solo out of a normal monster" guidelines in the monster creation chapter and applying them to an elite/solo. After revoking elite/solo status from a monster one should be able to apply any template and end up with a elite/solo again. I haven't tested this yet, so I don't know whether the numbers really work that way, but after reading the chapter it seems like it should be at least as good as creating a "cloned monster" from scratch.
Selectively applying only some features of a template to an existing monster will probably do as well, so it looks like we have three solid ways of creating "templated elites" that will probably be as balanced as most of the MM stuff. (This means of course that some monsters of a given level will still be stronger than others, but if it weren't like that we would end up with 6 monsters in the MM and 200 pages of reflavouring ideas for generic monster ability 1- 12)

 

[small pumpkin man]

Then, and this is not snarky, how do I create a Draconic Wizard, or a vampire beholder, or other such things?

I suppose I could start by first making an Elite Dragon (or whatever) using the monster creation guidelines, and then applying the template.

I would also say -- just add the powers of the template and ignore the increased defenses, hit points, action points, save bonuses, and so on. This generally gives the creature more *choices* but not more *power*, given the whole action economy. It will have just as many hit points, the same defenses, and so on, but it will have alternate options.

Considering most of the reports/complaints of Solo fights seem to involve them degenerating somewhat into tediousness near the end, I would possibly recomend adding the powers and lowering the hp, but that might be off-topic.

 

[hamishspence]

Dragon Wizard

Main reason was to resurrect the feel of some of the old games, where dragons had a % chance of being able to cast wizard spells.

Also, for modifying old campaigns. A Vampire Silver Dragon, or a Dracolich Wizard, used in Age of Worms to represent Lashonna and Dragotha. However a lot of monsters would need howbrewing.

Maybe allow epic destinies: Larva Mage + Demigod = Kyuss?

 

[Lizard]

I think the RAW doesn't provide any solutions for this, because they wanted the monsters to be distinct for what they are. If you add wizardly powers to a Dragon, he suddenly stops feeling like a dragon, and more like a funny wizard. Likewise with a Vampire Beholder.

I really strongly disagree. Vampirism, like lyncanthropy, is something that happens to you. Two people (or beings) affected by vampirism don't suddenly become the same thing; they become who they were, plus vampire stuff. Being a wizard is something you train to do, and since dragons could cast spells going all the way back to the 1e MM, I don't see why they can't in 4e.

My influences are Vance, Lovecraft, Moorcock, but especially late 70s gaming like Arduin. 3e's templating is, IMO, the best thing about it, and combining the kind of creativity it allows with 4e's lack of hair-pulling math should allow the best of both worlds. I am hoping WOTC or a 3PP comes out with 'non eliting' templates, though, really, one can just design a 'templated' monster from scratch easily enough, now.

 

[hamishspence]

Spellcasting

Thing was, before 3rd ed (maybe before 2nd ed, not sure if it was Basic only) it was a % chance. Some had spells, some didn't.

In 3rd ed, all had spells.

In 3.5 (late) an option to replace spells and spell resistance with powers was provided in MMV: the Xorvintaal template.

So I like the idea of keeping the option.

It says Elite+elite = solo, but doesn't specify what you do with action points.

But all solos have 2 action points.

So that makes it reasonable for an Elite Solo to have 3 action points.

The only thing not clear is how much XP an Elite solo would have (I chose 6X, because I see the elite template as counting as 1 more monster, unless it is used to turn an elite monster into a solo monster.)

It seemed a good way to avoid too-high XP awards.