I see this happening if one Giant moves and Slaps a PC, then, others could move upto the PC and Raise Club.Ok, that may be fine for an elite or solo. It's way, way too powerful for a standard monster, however: an encounter with level+3 standard monsters equal in number to PC's should be surviveable. Here, however, the giants will simply pin down all PC's most of the time and reliably use the smash. The only thing PC's can then do is crawl (but that'll be almost impossible when slowed+dazed: a crawl would move just 1 square, and of course it gives up the standard action).
That way, a single PC could get Smashed more than once for the "price" of a single Slap, which kind of improves a lot the DPR of the monsters.
This can also happen when these Giants fight along monsters that Immobilize.
But that seems a reasonable synergy.
Did you see the DPR calculation before?As is, the slap is too powerful for a standard monster, particularly in conjunction with the very lethal smash because many giants can do this to the entire party. Basically, vs. standard monsters, PC's just don't have a choice but to stand ground. You just can't escape from all of em.
If no more than one Giant engage a PC, then these Giants are no more threatening than any other Brute of it's level.
Leaving it's Powers intact?Make him elite, and it's OK, though still very nasty.
That's a good one. It even contrains the PCs to only avoid one Giant per round.Putting the action into the hand's of the PC's is fun and is a reminder of the special OA rules. That's one reason why I prefer the action approach.
I don't think the difference will actually matter very often. The real threat is his big smash anyhow, letting PC's spend a minor action to prance around the enemy won't change that. If you feel this is too easy, then I'd make it a free action 1/round to avoid one OA - that leaves the initiative in the PC's hands (fun) but is more limited.
I think that ruling is better. Although it's something not very elegant from a design POV. A monster granting a PC a Power or Ability is kind of klunky.
As I mentioned before: you wait until the Giant comes to you, then, inyour turn, you hit him and move away.How do you imagine melee characters will fight this giant?
That's why I don't want to grant the Giant normal OAs.Most melee characters simply don't have the option to do hit+run tactics;
Yes. In this case I want to discourage the second part: ending adjacent.they need to either start or end adjacent to the giant.
Well, in this case they CAN know.Such characters shouldn't be useless in combat. Readied actions are reactions; you can't (normally) ready knowing which way a monster will strike.
But now that I think of it, that's not clean enough.
Yes, you're right.Maybe that should be a focus first anyhow: how should the battle turn out, eventually? Then you can design the monster around that. As a matter of preference, I think it's better not to rely on readied actions anyhow, they slow down combat and initiative tracking when overused.
But note that I'm not relying on CA for this monster to be defeated.
It's merely an option for some characters.
I like what you propose here.So: what kind of tactics should a bog-standard fighter or paladin use against this monster? That storyboard should guide monster-design.
As I mentioned before, the idea is twofold:
- You don't want to be adjacent to this guy when it's turn comes up
- Tension: there should be a moment when everyone knows who's going to take a huge hit, and with proper Powers, they could make him escape this. As a reward, the Giant looses it's turn (looses his Standard in this case)