Can you define the role of the Balor?

[The Little Raven]

Is 'make the party crap themselves' a viable answer?

"I am become death, the destroyer of worlds."

 

[pemerton]

This is relevant to my concern about monster roles because I think they will encourage a kind of cheesy cartoon style stereo-typing.

<snip>

I suppose that "role" really has to do with combat tactics? Wouldn't "melee" (as opposed to missle, or sneak attack, or whatever) be better terminology?

I guess I don't get roles. One monster with one possible role seems ridiculous to me. It seems like they're trying to encourage you *not* to think about what your monster is doing.

DM: "he's a brute, so he charges you screaming"
Player: "wait a minute, I shout at him that we were sent here on behalf of his master"
DM: "but then he'd have to stop and talk to you"
Player: "yea"
DM: "uh...he's a brute... so he charges you screaming"

"Roles" for monsters dictate their combat abilities, and therefore contribute importantly to their comat tactics.

Whether or not a GM chooses to run monsters in the way your example sets out presumably is up to the GM, but I don't understand why it would be dictated by a monster's role in the way you suggest. "Fighter" PCs have been called fighters (or fighting men) since the earliest editions of the game, making their role pretty clear, but this hasn't stopped players from sometimes having their fighter PCs engage in conversation with NPCs.

The interesting question to me about monster roles is the extent to which the rules support the re-statting of monsters as their roles change. For example, I imagine that the stat block for a typical brute will not include their social stats, as (given the expected use to which the monster is to be put) that would be unnecessary information. But if the players decide to attempt negotiations, the situation suddenly turns from one of combat challenge to one of social challenge. In such a situation, it will be necessary for the GM to have social challenge information to hand for that brute. I'm wondering how the rules will handle this.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

But the balor doesn't go around commanding and organizing troops. Sure, it's the biggest baddest thing in town and everyone better do what it commands, but it's not a "leader" in the D&D party role sense. .

What does a dragon do?

Boss might not be the same as Leader. A Boss monster, in the more or less gamist (video-gamey!) sense of the world is the final monster, the biggest, baddest and meanest foe you have to fight before clearing the level/dungeon/shadowrun.

Bosses often fight alone, or at least with only weak support. They therefore need a variety of abilities to be effective on their own.
The 3rd edition Dragons and Balors certainly fit these position well - spells, spell-like abilities or breath weapons, meelee capability, massive amounts of hit points, all tied up in one neat, deadly package...

 

[Rechan]

Also, "Minion" is not a role, I expect, but just a designation of power, just like "elite".

Minion: Equal to-hit, lower AC and fewer HP than the average monster of its species. "Minion" probably means for every one regular monster, you can have two minions.
Elite: Equal to-hit, higher AC and more HP than the average monster of its species. One "Elite" probably qualifies as two average monsters (Meaning: if you were going to have four monsters in the fight, you can have two and an elite instead).

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

Hey all!

Some monsters are just tougher to pidgeonhole than others. How would you define the role of the Balor (and by extension, its Level)?

Are they...

"Minions"?...of Orcus for instance
"Brutes"?...certainly they are brutish, but perhaps too intelligent
"Soldiers"?...they wield weapons but are they expected to work in groups (perhaps at 30th-level)
"Elites"?...as demonic elite, they certainly fit this role.
"Leaders"?...certainly they may be Paragon Leaders, but are they Epic Leaders - given Orcus inclusion? Does that suggest two sets of stats (unlikely)?

If we assume Orcus is a Level 30 "Leader", should the Balor be a Level 20 "Leader" or a Level 25 "Elite" or a Level 30 "Soldier", or what?

It seems it could be any of the above.

It is all of the above at any given time and in a given campaign situation. When you have a 1st level (or low-level in any case) PC and you fight an ogre for the first time does it matter whether he's a "leader", a "soldier", a "minion", or whatever? He's the biggest, most dangerous, scariest thing your character has EVER seen in his life - and he knows his life is now a hairs breadth from ending.

Same with a Balor. When you first fight one, chances are it's the biggest, baddest, most hideous creature from the foul depths of the outer planes you've ever faced. What does it matter what LABEL you put on it? The point is HOW YOU USE IT. They can be mere minions in the greater scheme of the rulers of the outer planes. One of them could be the focus of an entire campaign from start to finish. It could be that balors become standard, recurring fare for the PC's to fight - a "routine" combat encounter. They do not have to assume any given position of importance or lack thereof in any campaign.

Just because 4E might "tag" it as a "brute" doesn't mean that it has to conform to some kind of dumb, thug sort of role in the campaign. Near as I can tell all that will mean is that in combat it uses/doesn't use certain means of attack and defense.

 

[Brennin Magalus]

With the pit fiend also in the game, the balor's role is that of the fifth wheel.

 

[Lancelot]

In my campaign, Balors are brutes.

Pit Fiends are bosses. They "hide" behind layer after layer of minions, forming complex schemes to deceive, misdirect, dominate, subvert and corrupt hapless mortals. If they end up in combat with said mortals (and those mortals are powerful enough to survive an outright squishing), they lead with magic and only revert to melee if the spells aren't working. They summon lesser devils to do the dirty work, because they're "above it all". I'd personally like to see that emphasis reflected in 4e - the ability to summon a small army (or a small group of brutal elite soldiers), some insanely-terrifying spells (meteor swarm, dominate monster), and a whole host of corruption and deception capabilities.

Balors are loners. They may have a pack of (cowed and bullied) lesser demons doing their bidding, but at the end of the day... the balor wants to get its claws dirty. It wants to be right in the middle of the fight, tossing charred bodies around like feathers. It doesn't want to share the carnage with lesser demons, and it doesn't want to kill with something as impersonal as a meteor swarm. It wants to cleave heads off, and burn mortals to death on its own immolating hide. Accordingly, I'd love to see its melee capabilities kept or even beefed up (!), and greatly reduce its spell capability.

My players have fought balors before. But even though they've been on the wrong end of telekinesis and implosion and suchlike, it's not the spells that they associate with the balor. They think about the whip and the vorpal sword (and the 100 points of damage explosion). That's what has them bringing a spare pair of trousers to the session.

 

[WyzardWhately]

"I am become death, the destroyer of worlds."

Gah! Watch the red text, I thought you'd modded out on me for a split second.

 

[Nifft]

IMHO, Balor's role is:[sblock]TPK.
With extreme prejudice.[/sblock]

Cheers, -- N

 

[Lackhand]

Don't open Nifft's box. It's scary in there.