Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Korgoth" data-source="post: 3714514" data-attributes="member: 49613">I don't know how accurate this is, but from Lescault's interview with Mearls (an embedded YouTube on the page for the Sunday GenCon coverage via WOTC) he suggested that a lot of monsters have a variety of powers that don't really have a lot to do with one another.&nbsp; So I think the notion is, at least if I have this correct, is that some monsters will have their various powers rebuilt according to the 'theme' of the monster.&nbsp; I get the impression that some monsters will retain an expansive suite of powers, while other ones will be re-envisioned along more tightly (metagame) thematic lines.&nbsp; I also get the impression that this is intended to make it easier for the DM to plan and build effective encounters without having to wonder whether the monster will do its melee thing, its charm thing or its create wall of fire thing.Hopefully the &quot;mastermind&quot; or &quot;boss&quot; monsters will retain their &quot;Swiss Army monster&quot; configuration.&nbsp; I think that some monsters will be split into several separate stat blocks: you'll probably see some stuff like &quot;Orc Bruiser&quot;, &quot;Orc Runner&quot;, &quot;Orc Shaman&quot;, &quot;Orc Bodyguard&quot;, &quot;Orc Chief&quot;, etc.&nbsp; So that instead of needing to add class levels to the basic Orc to make up those roles, you just plunk down a ready-made Orc caster, some Orc thugs, etc.That last change is something that really sounds good to me.&nbsp; I don't like the notion of adding class levels willy-nilly to monsters, so that you never know if a Kobold will be a 1st level Kobold warrior or a 17th level Kobold warrior.&nbsp; I accept that some Kobolds will be extra tough, but even the toughest shouldn't be a dragonslayer.&nbsp; Kobolds are supposed to be scrawny, tricky little gits... not 150 hp champions.&nbsp; It's just against type.&nbsp; Plus, it saves having to stat out all the &quot;Middle Management&quot; and &quot;Boss&quot; Kobolds, or whatever.I don't know for sure that it will be like that, but for some reason it seems likely.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Korgoth, post: 3714514, member: 49613"] I don't know how accurate this is, but from Lescault's interview with Mearls (an embedded YouTube on the page for the Sunday GenCon coverage via WOTC) he suggested that a lot of monsters have a variety of powers that don't really have a lot to do with one another. So I think the notion is, at least if I have this correct, is that some monsters will have their various powers rebuilt according to the 'theme' of the monster. I get the impression that some monsters will retain an expansive suite of powers, while other ones will be re-envisioned along more tightly (metagame) thematic lines. I also get the impression that this is intended to make it easier for the DM to plan and build effective encounters without having to wonder whether the monster will do its melee thing, its charm thing or its create wall of fire thing. Hopefully the "mastermind" or "boss" monsters will retain their "Swiss Army monster" configuration. I think that some monsters will be split into several separate stat blocks: you'll probably see some stuff like "Orc Bruiser", "Orc Runner", "Orc Shaman", "Orc Bodyguard", "Orc Chief", etc. So that instead of needing to add class levels to the basic Orc to make up those roles, you just plunk down a ready-made Orc caster, some Orc thugs, etc. That last change is something that really sounds good to me. I don't like the notion of adding class levels willy-nilly to monsters, so that you never know if a Kobold will be a 1st level Kobold warrior or a 17th level Kobold warrior. I accept that some Kobolds will be extra tough, but even the toughest shouldn't be a dragonslayer. Kobolds are supposed to be scrawny, tricky little gits... not 150 hp champions. It's just against type. Plus, it saves having to stat out all the "Middle Management" and "Boss" Kobolds, or whatever. I don't know for sure that it will be like that, but for some reason it seems likely. [/QUOTE]

Verification