Bonuses for being Elite/Solo

[Pale Jackal]

4e really is a MMOG ripoff...

Are we gonna start referring to them as mobs? Do they have an aggro radius also?

Because adding class levels and templates to creatures is so much better than having standardized rules to make them [albeit generically] tougher?

 

[Plane Sailing]

4e really is a MMOG ripoff...

Are we gonna start referring to them as mobs? Do they have an aggro radius also?

This looks like deliberate trolling which has nothing to do with this thread - don't post again in this thread and if I see trolling behaviour again you will be suspended.

 

[Jhaelen]

So there may well be stuff about upgrading monsters to elites, but I doubt that you'll see much in the way of 'upgrading' monsters to solo status...

I think they already mentioned that the DMG will include certain templates (death knight, lich, vampire lord, etc.) that will upgrade a normal creature to an Elite.

So, even if there is no generic way to do it, there'll be several specific ways to achieve the same thing.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I think a common mistake we all make is to expect symmetry. I think it's a specific design goal (and not just in fluff) to avoid unnecessary symmetry. Just because SOME solos and elites have those specific bonuses, does not mean ALL of them need to.

The skeletal tomb guardian is scary enough, thanks!

Fitz

 

[Revinor]

I think a common mistake we all make is to expect symmetry. I think it's a specific design goal (and not just in fluff) to avoid unnecessary symmetry.

I have read this 'avoid unnecessary symmetry' as a bit different statement. It means "We are too time/space constrained to provide all the combinations for everything from the very start, but as soon as we run out of fresh ideas for splatbooks we will revisit old topics and fill out blanks in symmetry, as it is a lot easier and it worked for previous editions".

Anyway, I thought that symmetry they are trying to avoid means more 'provide djinii for each element', 'have mephit for each element', 'got a plane for each alignment'. It is something very different from 'consistency'. Every elite has 2xhp, every solo has 5xhp, everything in universe has +1 to all values per 2 levels. It is consistent, not symmetric.

I think it is perfectly possible that elites/solos will have multiple guaranteed modifications, to stay consistent in what this descriptor means. Which ones - we will have to wait till core books.

 

[Stalker0]

Anyway, I thought that symmetry they are trying to avoid means more 'provide djinii for each element', 'have mephit for each element', 'got a plane for each alignment'. It is something very different from 'consistency'. Every elite has 2xhp, every solo has 5xhp, everything in universe has +1 to all values per 2 levels. It is consistent, not symmetric.

I agree. Basically, the designers have realized that in order for a single monster to stand up to a party of 5 people...without being so overwhelmingly strong that it simply kills them all, then there are a few consistent things it needs to have.

1) Toughness. The creature has to stand to the full brunt of a party's round of attacks and still keep on kicking (ie x2 or x5 hp)
2) Resistance to lingering effects. As DDXP showed, even the mighty dragon can fall prey to a single sleep spell. Single monsters can not be as vulnerable to lingering effects, else the combat is over before it begins (ie bonus to saving throws, higher defenses)
3) Way to act multiple times in a round. Actions are power, and a 5 player team has plenty of them. A monster needs way to stay offensive throughout the initiative count, or do enough damage on its own initiative to keep the party defensive (ie action points, immediate actions, area effect abilities).

 

[Mal Malenkirk]

While an Elite Gnoll skirmisher is conceivable (He's the best of his tribe), A solo Gnoll skirmisher wouldn't make much sense...

Simply doubling the gnoll skirmishers HP along with increasing his defenses and bonuses seems enough to making him elite. But no amount of bonuses would make him similar to the Black Dragon we've seen. He'd need a whole new set of abilities and then we'd have the silliness of having a solo monster out of a race of hyena-like pack minded monsters.

Solo obviously needs to be designed from the ground up with the ability to threaten a whole party at once and is only thematically meaningful for a handful of monsters.

Dragons, Kraken, Hydra, Manticore... Those are Solo monsters.

Most likely there is no Elite version of these monsters.

Bottom line, Normal to Elite conversion : Of course. Elite to Solo conversion : Hopefully not.

 

[Jhaelen]

Solo obviously needs to be designed from the ground up with the ability to threaten a whole party at once and is only thematically meaningful for a handful of monsters.[...]
Bottom line, Normal to Elite conversion : Of course. Elite to Solo conversion : Hopefully not.

Well, I think it mainly boils down to this:
Solo monsters need more actions per round to be able to deal successfully with a pc group.

Earthdawn had the right idea: The horrrors which are supposed to be a challenge for a party of 5-8 (and yes, they succeed in being a challenge!) have several melee and spellcasting actions per round. I could imagine something similar for D&D 4E. But I agree:
It's unlikely there will be a generic, formulaic method to 'upgrade' a monster to a solo monster.