Conditions and the Solo Monster

[GM Dave]

One of the things that comes up in 4e and to a lesser extent in other editions is the effect of certain effects or conditions on a single target or Solo monster.

A hold monster spell that gets through on a group of monsters only stops a single monster from attacking. The same spell on a single monster encounter is much more effective.

Editions prior to 4e tried to reduce some of the problem by requiring higher level spells or only allowing certain spells to work on certain types of opponents. There were also only a few types of classes that usually carried the ability to apply noticeable conditions on the monster. This kept the effects a limited resource where in 4e most characters had ways to slide, daze, knock prone, blind, and other effects at even first level.

The Sly Flourish column was talking on this and he mentioned the idea of having 'Solo' monsters that can manifest into several pieces to help with the 'action' economy and to avoid conditions from having too much effect.

So, what do you suggest should be the solution to helping a Beholder or a Dragon in 5e?

 

[UngeheuerLich]

magic resistance... partial resists.
Splitting up the solo looks too complex for the base...

On the other hand, some monsters always split up into head/body...
So maybe no single solution but different possibilities to achieve the same goal.

Current 4e is not so bad... ADnD dragon also managed to hold its own...

 

[harlokin]

Give it one attack per Character, and have each action denial power only remove one attack.

 

[Zaukrie]

I don't have an answer, but it is a problem, imo. While I love conditions, their execution can leave a cool solo encounter boring.

 

[GM Dave]

I like the idea of large size solos and larger to have multiple body areas.

An effect that dazes could then be listed as dazing one area on the Solo. This could stop a number of eyes on a Beholder or the wings or tail on a dragon. This would still leave the rest of the Solo Monster functional and a threat.

Players could then work together to pin down quadrants of the monster. The players can still gain advantage but they need to stack their advantages over sections of the monster.

I also think that it would be good to have some free action / aura effects and give solos the ability to use more triggers per turn. The Solo Dragon might be able to breath fire with a standard action as this is a big type of attack that should be damaging while Wing buffets, claw swipes, and tail slaps should be triggered based upon the actions of the players.

Solo Monsters might also be given in some cases an assist in the form of 'a lair'. Most Solo monsters are smart or strong enough to manipulate their environment over time. If the Solo monster is encountered in its lair than it is reasonable to consider there are some things that have been set up (traps, hazardous environment, trigger-able events) instead of a bare room.

Five characters facing one Minotaur stacks fate in the hands of the players but what if part way though the battle the Minotaur has walls of a maze come out of the ground separating players into ones and twos. Players will need to work fast to group up again before the Minotaur catches them alone.

A dragon might have a pile of treasure set to topple with the proper thump of a tail causing a wave to knock players down.

A storm giant might raise a cloud of mist that suddenly shuts off the accuracy of long distance range fighters or summons a lightning storm that starts striking targets around the giant every round.

 

[the Jester]

My answer varies with each solo monster, depending on its theme and flavor and how I want it to run in combat. See the Monster Vault, DS monster book, etc for examples of how to avoid total action denial.

 

[Quickleaf]

My answer varies with each solo monster, depending on its theme and flavor and how I want it to run in combat. See the Monster Vault, DS monster book, etc for examples of how to avoid total action denial.

Yeah that's the perfect answer. Would XP ya if I could XP ya.

More systemically, I think 5e could reduce the conditions list, rework stun, and limit the number of PCs throwing around conditions. In my friend's Mystara game I play a knight - one of the best stances inflicts "slowed" on enemies, but I didn't take it because I wanted fewer conditions to track (both for myself and the DM). So my knight inflicts zero conditions. Well, besides D-E-A-D.

 

[Number48]

It's frustrating for the DM when big baddie is shut down by one spell. I had this happen to the way-over-your-level Fire Giant to a Grease spell. Grease!

It's frustrating to the player when spell after spell of theirs simply has no effect.

You can't simply declare there are no Solo monsters. That's an every-edition staple. Is there a way for partial effects that doesn't seem contrived? I agree it's a problem that 5E will have to address, and I have absolutely no idea how it can be handled gracefully.

Side-note, though. There simply cannot be then number of conditions in 5E that there are now in 3E or 4E. I would like to see most conditions simply add to a sliding scale of penalties/bonuses kinda like stackable Combat Advantage, but like bonuses you can't keep stacking the same thing. So hitting that ghoul with slow, daze and flanking it might total up to -3 AC and -3 to hit. Two more people flank it? No increase in its penalties.

 

[Traken]

In my ideal game, the effectiveness of a condition-inducing-effect would scale with the skill of the person doing it and the beastiness of the person being affected.

• A level 1 Wizard casting Sleep on a kobold puts him to sleep for a short time.
• A level 20 Wizard casting Sleep on a kobold puts him in a coma for weeks.
• A level 1 Wizard casting Sleep on a Dragon makes him a bit drowsy (something like -1 to everything).
• A level 20 Wizard casting Sleep on a Dragon puts him to sleep for a short time.

It's time to get away from the all-or-nothing mentality! That said, I can only imagine the pain of trying to codify a system like this.

 

[GM Dave]

It's frustrating for the DM when big baddie is shut down by one spell. I had this happen to the way-over-your-level Fire Giant to a Grease spell. Grease!

It's frustrating to the player when spell after spell of theirs simply has no effect.

You can't simply declare there are no Solo monsters. That's an every-edition staple. Is there a way for partial effects that doesn't seem contrived? I agree it's a problem that 5E will have to address, and I have absolutely no idea how it can be handled gracefully.

Side-note, though. There simply cannot be then number of conditions in 5E that there are now in 3E or 4E. I would like to see most conditions simply add to a sliding scale of penalties/bonuses kinda like stackable Combat Advantage, but like bonuses you can't keep stacking the same thing. So hitting that ghoul with slow, daze and flanking it might total up to -3 AC and -3 to hit. Two more people flank it? No increase in its penalties.

I like your point that you should not be able to keep layering minus on the poor monster until it has a total of -10 made up of four or five -2 and -3 effects.

I also think that it would be good if hit points on large monsters was not treated as one pile but divided up into several piles that need to be targeted and 'defeated'.

The idea is not 'new' in that it has been used with Hydra heads and Beholder Eyes in the past.

I think it would be good in a mechanical sense for creatures that are size large or larger to have multiple 'sections'. This would again avoid the all or nothing beat up on the single monster as players would need to decide things like is it better to bash on the dragon's wings or tail first.

Implementation would be like a typical BBEG in video games in that you don't get to go for the 'core' of the monster until the periphery targets are defeated. The dragon's head is only a target after the wings, tail, and body are 'defeated' and the creature is down to biting and breathing for battle.

Defeats of the major areas would drop the monster in some of the options and capabilities that it could employ.