Exactly. You've explained the high Fort defenses in terms of the guideline in the DMG. However, I don't see any justification for said guideline. Why is doing it that way a good idea?
Any decent wizard encounter 1's?
- Thread starter kerbarian
- Start date
Exactly. You've explained the high Fort defenses in terms of the guideline in the DMG. However, I don't see any justification for said guideline. Why is doing it that way a good idea?
For the same reason it is a good idea for PCs.
Fast monsters should have high Reflex, not low and not average. Ditto for the rest.
Otherwise, you basically end up with either the Monster Builder:
AC: 25
Fort: 24
Reflex: 23
Will: 22
or if you build your own monsters and follow the DMG charts without the ability score quideline:
AC: 25
Fort: 23
Reflex: 23
Will: 23
Player: "Oh. It's another same level Brute. I hit it on a 9. I use my xyz power."
zzzzzzz
instead of:
Player: "What the heck is this thing? I use my xyz power. I hope it has a low Reflex."
The game does not benefit from monster defense sameness.
Your alternative is fine. It requires some slight extra work on the part of the DM, but not a great deal. Personally, there are so many monsters in the plethora of books that I have that I don't build my own anyway. It's too time consuming when I can do a quick search on the Compendium and find something I like quickly.
UngeheuerLich
Legend
From the MMI am not sure you read the DMG. It doesn't state which average they are discussing.
Uh huh. Where exactly does one find "the average constitution of a monster of a certain role"?
You made this up, right?
What might the average be? The DMG does not state.
It could be:
Str 42 | Con 36, average = 39, +1
Dex 26 | Int 3, average = 14.5, +5
Wis 18 | Cha 7, average = 12.5, +2
resulting in:
AC: Level 30 + 12 + 2 = 44 (MM 43)
Fort: Level 30 + 12 + Str (42-39) +1 = 43 (MM 49)
Reflex: Level 30 + 12 + Dex (26-14.5) +5 + 2 = 49 (MM 38)
Will: Level 30 + 12 + Wis (18-12.5) +2 + 2 = 46 (MM 32)
But this doesn't make any sense. It does the opposite of the intent.
The only thing that makes sense is either:
1) Take the sum of all of the ability scores for the monster, divide by 6 to get the average ability score.
or
2) Take the highest of each defense pair, sum them, divide by 3 to get the average ability score used to calculate a defense.
#2 makes more sense because it determines the current defense on the average defenses for that particular monster, but it looks like they used #1 in some cases in the MM.
3. Determine Ability Scores. It’s helpful to think
of ability scores in pairs, each pair corresponding to
one of the three defenses (Fortitude, Reflex, and Will).
Ability scores also help determine the monster’s attack
bonuses, ability and skill checks, and Armor Class.
On average, the highest ability score of a pair is
equal to 13 + one-half the monster’s level. For example,
the target score for an 8th-level monster is 17 (13
+ 4). However, set the ability that governs the monster’s
primary attacks to be 3 higher, or 16 + one-half
the monster’s level. An 8th-level monster that relies on
melee attacks should have a Strength of 20.
6. Calculate Other Defenses. A monster’s level
determines its defenses. A given defense based on an
average ability score is equal to 12 + the monster’s level.
For every 2 points the ability score varies from the average,
adjust the defense by +1 (if higher) or –1 (if lower).
Tarrasque stats:
Str 42 (+31) Dex 26 (+23) Wis 18 (+19)
Con 36 (+28) Int 3 (+11) Cha 7 (+13)
So lets count:
average:
13+1/2 Level = 28
So strength is 14 points higher (instead of just 3)
Dexterity is 2 points lower
Wisdom is 10 points lower
So with guidelines for monsters, the tarrasques defenses should have been 42 before modification:
after modification we have:
Fortitude: excactly 49
Reflex: 41
Will: 37
Seems that the person who made up the tarrasques stat just botched terribly...
edit: made a quick research with the character builder and it seems that they made it a bit easier:
if the highest ability is below average: -1 to defenses
if highest ability is above average: +1 to defenses
and then you can apply aditional penalties or bonuses (-6,-3,0,+3,+6)
your fort :-1, ref -2, will -3 derives from attack stat strength or constitution (which seems to be the brute´s attack stat) +3 higher stat and wisdom or charisma rather low
if you make all tarrasque stats equal you get exactly 42 in all defenses.
So no, i didn´t make it up, i am just able to read.
Last edited:
Destil
Explorer
This is pretty much exactily what I do. Heck, sometime I don't even stick that close; two weeks ago the party fought a giant snake who's AC was equal to it's other defense: AC was the 'weakness', the others were a little higher than normal. Extra bastardy since it had a grab at-will and that made the escape DCs hard
Personally I think the AC of most monsters are ok.
What I don't find ok are some rediculessly low WILL defenses and rediculessly high FORT defenses.
I think I would rather use the following guideline:
AC = level +14
Fort = level +12
Ref = level +12
Will = level +12
Lowest ability score pair modifies the relevant defense with up to -3
Highest abilty score pair modifies the relevant defense with up to +3
Soldier: Modifies AC up to +2
Brute: Modifies AC up to -2
The sum of the modifications shouldn't be more than +/- 2
What I don't find ok are some rediculessly low WILL defenses and rediculessly high FORT defenses.
I think I would rather use the following guideline:
AC = level +14
Fort = level +12
Ref = level +12
Will = level +12
Lowest ability score pair modifies the relevant defense with up to -3
Highest abilty score pair modifies the relevant defense with up to +3
Soldier: Modifies AC up to +2
Brute: Modifies AC up to -2
The sum of the modifications shouldn't be more than +/- 2
Thanks, I stand corrected.
However, it is from the DMG and not the MM.
And, the average Strength of the Tarrasque is 31 (best score 3 higher than average), not 28. So we get:
AC: 42
Fortitude: 47
Reflex: 41
Will: 37
and since it is a solo, we add 2 to 3 of these:
AC: 44
Fortitude: 47
Reflex: 43
Will: 39
So it seems that the DMG guidelines are fine. One just has to recognize when a monster's defenses seem to be way out of wack. Probably just look at the best and worst pair of stats and see if the best and worst NAD have the same delta.
UngeheuerLich
Legend
Thanks, I stand corrected.
However, it is from the DMG and not the MM.
And, the average Strength of the Tarrasque is 31 (best score 3 higher than average), not 28. So we get:
AC: 42
Fortitude: 47
Reflex: 41
Will: 37
Yes, from the DMG, not the MM
I also thought at first, that the average strength was 31, but then it would actually be counterproductive. So i assumed, the average is still 28 for any monster, but the defense correlating with the attack stat is 1 or 2 points higher than the other stats.
Of course you could argument the other way: because the attack stat is usually much higher than the other stats, you should subtract 1 or 2 points to not have the corresponding stat be way out of line...
But i guess a standard monster with average stats should have one defense that is a little bit higher than the other two.
A standard dextrous monster of level 1 has defenses:
It has 16 dexterity and 13 in the other attributes
Fort 13, Ref 15, Will 13
which seems not out of line. Note, that Fort, reflex and will are 2 points higher than player attributes with those stats.
In your assumption, defenses would be all 13, but a dextrous monster would most surely have 18 dexterity so sats would be Fort 13, Ref 14, Will 13... i will look up a random level 1 monster now^^
Ok, the kobold skirmisher is relatve close to those guidelines and my interpretation gives slightly better results...
Last edited:
If Winged Horde is broken what do you consider the Invoker's at wills? Busted to all hell? Winged Horde is very much in line with Divine Bolts or Grasping Shards, weaker in fact. I'd gladly trade the "only enemy" of Winged Horde for the slow effect on Grasping Shards. Grasping Shards is complete own on melee creatures who are at range.
Similar Threads
