Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Complete Disagreement With Mike on Monsters (see post #205)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Mustrum_Ridcully" data-source="post: 3768502" data-attributes="member: 710"><p>That's a good point. Since this is the case, I will assume that the designers also found a way to circumvent this. </p><p>If the actions of the creature are not always on the same (its own) initiative count, the PCs have time to act between.</p><p>The Dragon Encounter example might give some ideas here: The Dragon did several things in reaction to others (breathing fire because its hit point were reduced below a certain threshold). I am not sure when it did its tail sweep attack, but it seemed limited so that it couldn't be used on just any PC, which means that while it had many actions, it couldn't spend them all on the same creature.</p><p></p><p>A Beholder for example might be able to take 10 actions, one for each ray. But during any given round, it can fire only 1 or 2 at a specific PC. </p><p></p><p></p><p>Because they are usually encountered solitary. Beholders, Dragons, Ettins, they are all some kind of "boss" monsters (to use the video game term). You don't really expect to fight multiple of them (well, maybe in the case of the Ettin). So, currently you typically use them against a party with a average level 2 to 4 points below their CR. </p><p></p><p>The game assumes that each doubling of the number of creatures increase the EL by +2 (IIRC). This implies he reserve is also true - if you increase a monsters CR by 2, it becomes twice as powerful. But this is only "roughly" true. There are many cases in which it doesn't work that way. If a monster doesn't happen to have a few weak spots, it works fine, i guess. But if it has a single weak Saving Throw or Armor Class, or not enough hit points, the fact that a party has 4 times as much actions as the NPC will shine through a lot more, because this gives them 4 opportunities to exploit its weak spot. The problem here is that the weak aspects usually do not scale that well with CR. (Weak Saves increase slower than the typical spell level advancement, meaning that the chance to resist a spell of equal level decreases with level/CR)</p><p></p><p></p><p>If you increase a Beholders HD to remove the disparity of Offense and Defense, you still increase its Offense, because its attacks hit even easier. Suddenly, even its Bite might become dangerous. And it's weak saves stay weak.</p><p>And, if monsters should be the same as PCs, why isn't its HD equal to its CR?</p><p></p><p>The Dragons are actually already designed as the functional equivalent of 4-5 PCs. They are stronger than their CR indicates. They manage to be this equivalent by their massive amount of meelee attacks at high attack bonuses and a powerful breath weapon. They also have high hitpoints, good saves and Spell Resistance.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mustrum_Ridcully, post: 3768502, member: 710"] That's a good point. Since this is the case, I will assume that the designers also found a way to circumvent this. If the actions of the creature are not always on the same (its own) initiative count, the PCs have time to act between. The Dragon Encounter example might give some ideas here: The Dragon did several things in reaction to others (breathing fire because its hit point were reduced below a certain threshold). I am not sure when it did its tail sweep attack, but it seemed limited so that it couldn't be used on just any PC, which means that while it had many actions, it couldn't spend them all on the same creature. A Beholder for example might be able to take 10 actions, one for each ray. But during any given round, it can fire only 1 or 2 at a specific PC. Because they are usually encountered solitary. Beholders, Dragons, Ettins, they are all some kind of "boss" monsters (to use the video game term). You don't really expect to fight multiple of them (well, maybe in the case of the Ettin). So, currently you typically use them against a party with a average level 2 to 4 points below their CR. The game assumes that each doubling of the number of creatures increase the EL by +2 (IIRC). This implies he reserve is also true - if you increase a monsters CR by 2, it becomes twice as powerful. But this is only "roughly" true. There are many cases in which it doesn't work that way. If a monster doesn't happen to have a few weak spots, it works fine, i guess. But if it has a single weak Saving Throw or Armor Class, or not enough hit points, the fact that a party has 4 times as much actions as the NPC will shine through a lot more, because this gives them 4 opportunities to exploit its weak spot. The problem here is that the weak aspects usually do not scale that well with CR. (Weak Saves increase slower than the typical spell level advancement, meaning that the chance to resist a spell of equal level decreases with level/CR) If you increase a Beholders HD to remove the disparity of Offense and Defense, you still increase its Offense, because its attacks hit even easier. Suddenly, even its Bite might become dangerous. And it's weak saves stay weak. And, if monsters should be the same as PCs, why isn't its HD equal to its CR? The Dragons are actually already designed as the functional equivalent of 4-5 PCs. They are stronger than their CR indicates. They manage to be this equivalent by their massive amount of meelee attacks at high attack bonuses and a powerful breath weapon. They also have high hitpoints, good saves and Spell Resistance. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Complete Disagreement With Mike on Monsters (see post #205)
Top