Converting Greyhawk monsters

Sell me on the low Str. What's your reasoning?

The original monster only does 1 damage per bite, same as with a standard mouther. While I'm happy to increase that somewhat, I don't want to raise it with a +8 Strength bonus.

Giving it Str 17 like a Black Pudding (which is also Huge) and, say, a 1d3+3 damage bites seems more appropriate.

Alternatively, I thought about having its bites use secondary weapon damage bonuses (e.g. it has Str 22-23 for a +6 Strength bonus, but still has 1d3+3 damage bites).
 

log in or register to remove this ad

On the other hand, the original is only Large, while we're bumping to Huge. And increasing HD above the usual mouther's range. That said, I don't feel too strongly about this, so I'd be ok with Str 19, Con 30 if that makes everyone happy.
 

On the other hand, the original is only Large, while we're bumping to Huge. And increasing HD above the usual mouther's range. That said, I don't feel too strongly about this, so I'd be ok with Str 19, Con 30 if that makes everyone happy.

Well, it'll make me happy. :D
 



Should we work on the spawned things now, or just put in a little ability to spawn them?

Some sort of "Spawn Gibberslug" ability would seem to be in order.

I'm still thinking I'd like the bite with secondary damage 1/2 Str (e.g. 1d3+2), but I guess 1d4+4 is reasonable for what's supposed to be a nasty monster.

Speaking of nastiness, we need to increase the Blood Drain damage from the 1d4 of a standard Mouther. I'm thinking in the region of 1d12 or 2d6 Con - as I said, it ought to be NASTY.
 

Some sort of "Spawn Gibberslug" ability would seem to be in order.

Seems so.

I'm still thinking I'd like the bite with secondary damage 1/2 Str (e.g. 1d3+2), but I guess 1d4+4 is reasonable for what's supposed to be a nasty monster.

Haven't we appeased you enough with our concessions?!? :p

Speaking of nastiness, we need to increase the Blood Drain damage from the 1d4 of a standard Mouther. I'm thinking in the region of 1d12 or 2d6 Con - as I said, it ought to be NASTY.

I'm always a fan of the ol' d12.
 

Seems so.

Haven't we appeased you enough with our concessions?!? :p

The wrath of Cleon is satisfied. For the moment... :devil:

I'm always a fan of the ol' d12.

So, we're going for 1d3+4 bites and 1d12 Blood Drain.

Would you mind if the Greater Mouther also did hit points damage to its grappled/engulfed foe? The original AD&D Mouther was able to bite grappled foes multiple times (12, to be precise, with a +4 to hit).

A good 3E would be a Rake Extraordinary special attack. Indeed, we could just use Rake and swap "claw" for "bite".
 

The wrath of Cleon is satisfied. For the moment... :devil:

Whew!


So, we're going for 1d3+4 bites and 1d12 Blood Drain.

Would you mind if the Greater Mouther also did hit points damage to its grappled/engulfed foe? The original AD&D Mouther was able to bite grappled foes multiple times (12, to be precise, with a +4 to hit).

A good 3E would be a Rake Extraordinary special attack. Indeed, we could just use Rake and swap "claw" for "bite".

Yeah, in fact I think we may have done that with one of our numerous "gnaw" abilities. ;)
 

Whew!

Yeah, in fact I think we may have done that with one of our numerous "gnaw" abilities. ;)

Checked the Rake special ability and whle it says rakes usually use two claw attacks, they can involve any natural attack. Thus, there's no reason we can't use a biting Rake for them.

SRD said:
A creature with this special attack gains extra natural attacks when it grapples its foe ... a monster with the rake ability usually gains two additional claw attacks that it can use only against a grappled foe.

This ought to do the job:

Rake (Ex): If a greater gibbering mouther grapples an opponent, it gains an additional six bite attacks (+14 melee, 1d3+4 damage) that it can only use against a grappled foe.
 

Remove ads

Top