Comments on Noonan's thoughts on Monsters

[Morrus]

This may sound a bit snarky, and for that I apologize, but I think these comments by Mr. Noonan are quite telling. They tell me that Mr. Noonan and I are quite different DMs. Not only that, but it makes me question how well he know how to run a game.

Frankly, I am shocked that a DM has trouble keeping monsters alive long enough to pull off the “cool tricks” that are built into the creature. I think if you are having trouble doing this you are: a) playing the monsters incorrectly; b) underestimating the power of the PCs; or c) overestimating the power of the monster. It’s quite possible to be doing all three, which could explain Mr. Noonan’s problems.

I have all of these problems. Perhaps you're a superior DM to me (heck, you probably are). I'm very pleased, therefore, that 4E is being written with me in mind as well as you.

4th Edition isn't a game for "expert gamers". People will be coming to it blind, just like any other game. They'll still need to tell you what a "level" is, or a "hit point", even if any [already] competent DM knows this.

The game ain't just for you. It's for me, too!

 

[AffableVagrant]

for SERIOUS??

Frankly, I am shocked that a DM has trouble keeping monsters alive long enough to pull off the “cool tricks” that are built into the creature. I think if you are having trouble doing this you are: a) playing the monsters incorrectly; b) underestimating the power of the PCs; or c) overestimating the power of the monster. It’s quite possible to be doing all three, which could explain Mr. Noonan’s problems. If you know your players, their characters, and have fully read the monster description, then you should almost always be able to use a creature’s special abilities.

Even if Noonan doesn't know how to run a game (and I seriously doubt that) he has touched upon a problem that MANY MANY DMs have had. If so many DMs think this fix is a great idea then maybe they are all incompetent, but even so, that's totally irrelevent. What IS relevent is that Noonan has touched upon a common complaint and is working to fix it. The customer is always right.

Nobody I have talked to feels that running mixed groups of monsters has ever been a problem. Until I saw the comments on the front page here, I never knew that anyone had a problem with that.

I'm seriously shocked that you've never heard anyone complain about this. It's the #1 "what a drag" part of DMing I hear MOST often (besides players massacring random NPCs)

If you like that much paperwork, maybe you should go to lawschool. That's not meant with any disrespect, I'm sincerely recommending that. Not all of us can stomach that kind of bookeeping and homework.

 

[DaveMage]

I've never had a problem running mixed monsters against a party (or keeping them alive long enough).

I *have* had prep time issues, though.

I think 4E will do a much better job at streamlining the game.

The question remains, though, what features/options that we enjoy will we have to give up for that efficiency?

I don't suppose we'll truly know the answer until May.

 

[Drammattex]

I am an awesome DM.

When I run an encounter using:
a level 10 druid
a greater earth elemental
a prestige class from Complete Warrior that I have forgotten
a small retinue of low level fighters
a mid-level wizard

vs.

6 PCs with prestige classes including the aggravating Apostle of Peace/aescetic from BoED and the Pale Master & his minions...

I am considerably less awesome.

I don't combine creatures/classes like this anymore. Maybe I will again in 4e.

 

[coyote6]

I dunno about anyone else, but, an encounter with say, 2 babau, 3 vrocks and a glabrezu is enough to make my head explode. It takes a huge amount of prep to make that encounter work, and, after it's done, I'm still aways banging my head because I forgot this or that ability.

I've ran similar encounters, and didn't find them terribly difficult at the time, but I do forget abilities once in a while (and probably keep the tactics pretty straightforward). OTOH, add in a couple more types, or maybe a wizard and/or a cleric, and it starts to get hairy.

What made me dizzy was the 13th level PCs (and allies) vs. a half-dragon Ftr11, a Wiz13, a Rog9/Ftr4, a Clr13, a Rgr2/Ftr4/Order of the Bow Initiate 7, a Spellthief 13, and a Bbn6/Ftr4/Outcast Champion 3. I gave most of the NPC allies to the players to run, had the other "bystanders" generally just get out of the battle zone, and still . . .

 

[Philip]

From watching many people run games, it has become obvious to me that some DMs have either not enough spare time or not enough skills (or both) to properly setup and run complicated combat encounters using the 3.5 system.

This is fairly common problem, and gets especially noticable when you get into the higher levels and get DM's with busier lives.

I've seen the same DM's who have these problems run excellent sessions as well. But they usually involve simple encounters (one or maybe two types of monsters, primarily melee grunts). I have seen these DM's totally botch high-level encounters as well.

Rather than reading up on a Glabrezu and utilizing their powers to maximize their effectiveness, they let them charge head on into the party and then melee. Obviously, that is bad use of a Glabrezu to treat it as a melee grunt, but when you have several Vrocks, Hezrou, wizards, golems and other assorted monsters to manage, I can imagine a DM short on prep time would resort to that.

I would welcome any change in rules that would allow potentially good DM's to shine.

Recently I've asked several of my players to participate in a high level adventure where I will try to challenge them with encounters below their EL, using smart tactics and combinations of lower level monsters. It's hard, and takes a lot of prep time, but while a lack of prep time and superior technical DM-ing skills and rules knowledge can turn an EL20 encounter in an EL16 one, so can the reverse turn and EL12 encounter in an EL16 one. Lack of prep an intimate rules knowledge should not create a potential difference of 8 EL's at the higher levels, that's a problem with the system.

 

[Haffrung Helleyes]

complexity

There's an obvious tradeoff between the detail of 3E and the complexity it adds to prep time.

For me whether 3E hits the `sweet spot` or not depends on whether I'm running a prepared adventure, or my own homebrew.

With prepared adventures, I'm good; 90% of the time I have the monster already typed up on a 3x5 card and I just pull out the card and use it. Otherwise, I make a card before the game starts and from then on I have it.

As an aside, why doesn't WoTC sell these?

For my own stuff... well, writing an adventure takes way way longer than it used to. I am not sure whether it's the complexity of the game vs. earlier editions, or the fact that I have less time now, but I tend to go with published adventures these days to avoid this time commitment.

I would like 4E to be faster in prep, but I am not willing to sacrifice the unified system and detail that 3E provides. I worry that 4E will go to far in this regard.

Ken

 

[Thundershield]

I believe Noonan viewed the case from the perspective of a good designer, not from the perspective of a DM with 20 years of experience.

When designing a good system, you want to make it "easy to use, difficult to master." Or at least that's a classic design goal. And what it means is that you want the system to be easy to learn and accessible in use, so even the newbie DM can learn to use it to the extend it's intended (multiple enemies in an encounter, and different monsters) while keeping it interesting for veterans, leaving ends open for implementations of complexity, such as elaborate tactics or highly modified monsters.

It's a very common mistake, when criticizing, that you view something solely from your own point of view instead of from the creator's. Noonan isn't designing this game solely for himself, or solely for you, but for all of the D&D community -and- for future D&D gamers.

 

[Wolfspider]

I can understand the frustrations of DM's who don't have the time or ability to set up complex encounters and such. I hope that D&D 4e helps them enjoy the DMing aspects of the game more.

Like the OP, I have never had any problems running combats involving many varied kinds of critters. Just last weekend it was:

aasimar monk 13
pixie druid 9 with dire hedgehog animal companion
human ranger 7/beloved of Valarian 6 with celestial charger unicorn companion
elf paragon 3/wizard 3/abjurant champion 5/eldritch knight 2
human ranger 9/psion 3

vs.

half-fiend aboleth wizard 10
fiendish frogemeth
6 fiendish advanced slime chuul
12 fiendish advanced skum
6 fiendish advanced aballin
6 human slaves (who existed to frustrate the characters through flanking and by making zombie-like professions of love for their tentacled overlord)

This was a pretty nasty encounter set on the banks of an underground river that had been polluted by a gate to Juiblex's plane. My head didn't explode. The prep for the encounter took maybe 2 hours. I used d20srd.org and digital copies of WotC books in order to copy and paste monster statistics into Word and then modify them by template or whatever. (I only buy digital books these days; my world is too cluttered for anything else.) The most time consuming part of prep was printing off and laminating counters for the game, but I farmed this job off to my girlfriend and her son. Heh. (By the way, Counter Collection Digital v2.0 Gold is one of the best gaming purchases I've ever made.) The encounter took three hours to run and was very exciting to me and my players.

I have a full time career teaching English, and I have a family. I do have a bit of leisure time in the mornings and evenings, where I do most of my work--maybe a half hour a day. I have been playing D&D in some iteration or another for 27 years, but I can't say I have a huge amount of experience with v3.5. I've just gotten into the updated rules within the last couple years after a long time off from running 3.0.

Eh, I guess this post is mostly pointless. The new edition is coming, and there's nothing in this world or any other I can do to stop it. I understand what WotC is trying to do with the game. They're trying to make setup and gameplay as quick and painless as possible in order to compete with a world of leisure activities that includes things that are a lot easier to enjoy (out of the box) than v3.5 of D&D, like movies and video games and lovemaking. Since I don't have the same kinds of problems as some DMs, I don't really see the need for these changes, although I won't begrudge those who do.

I will say that some of the changes don't seem to have this goal in mind and really only exist (in my opinion) to shake things up. For example, while I know that multiple attacks and AOO and grappling can cause headaches, I don't seem to remember a lot of threads here or elsewhere complaining about erinyes, or the boring nature of the elemental planes, or the problem of referring to elves, dwarves, and such as races, or how cool it would be if wizards had to carry around magic balls. (And you thought the Pokemount threads got hot!)

Interestingly, I have just planned an adventure set in the elemental plane of water, with a jaunt to the City of Glass and a marid's palace and involving the ambitions of a kraken, and the place didn't seem at all boring to me....

Game on!

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Not only that, but it makes me question how well he know how to run a game.

Maybe it's not him. Maybe lots of inexperienced DMs have been telling him this and he wants to sell a product to them.

Letting players know that a monster is a threat is a very difficult skill to grasp. Most DMs aren't great DMs on the scale of Piratecat; they're just trying to run a fun game, and anything that makes that job easier is a good thing for them.