D&D Podcast: MM2

[Cadfan]

My thoughts on the podcast:

1. Its nice that they're willing to admit that this or that didn't work out quite as well as intended, and that they intend to change it in future releases. I don't personally expect errata to update monsters that aren't actually broken, just less fun than they could be, so I don't get all snippy about that sort of thing and instead I just enjoy knowing the details of the design process.

2. I am a little annoyed at how they seem to have been surprised by minions, particularly high level minions, dying too fast. Minions work GREAT when the area effect attacks available to the party are things like cleave and one character's scorching burst. But they start to suck when the party has access to large amounts of auto damge area of effect attacks, or when several party members possess per encounter or at will area effect attacks. This is not an unobvious thing. It was literally the first worry I had about 4e in literally the first ten minutes after I opened the book for the very first time. I like minion rules, I just think that its a bad idea to have minion rules AND a lot of automatic damage abilities. I don't know what solution they've used, so I'll have to look into it, but this one did bug me. I understand some solos not being quite as cool in practice as you anticipated after thousands of people playtest them, but the fact that auto damage and multiple large area of effects will demolish minions should not be a surprise.

3. I really appreciate that they've put some effort into making sure that classic monsters that are coming back are actually interesting and worthwhile for someone without a nostalgic connection to them. I really, really appreciate this.

 

[mach1.9pants]

Have you tried the PHB1 classes with the powers books? My warlord got way more interesting after I had access to more powers. Generally speaking, I think the powers books are meant to do what you suggest and I feel like they accomplish it.

Unless you are a wizard with not very many controllery at wills!

1. Its nice that they're willing to admit that this or that didn't work out quite as well as intended, and that they intend to change it in future releases. I don't personally expect errata to update monsters that aren't actually broken, just less fun than they could be, so I don't get all snippy about that sort of thing and instead I just enjoy knowing the details of the design process.

Whereas I am annoyed they are not putting out errata for it, or at least an 'optional' fix sheet for those DMs that want it or just a written down formula of how to fix. I think it is slack what they are doing.

 

[OchreJelly]

Whereas I am annoyed they are not putting out errata for it, or at least an 'optional' fix sheet for those DMs that want it or just a written down formula of how to fix. I think it is slack what they are doing.

This is just a guess on my part, but I bet we'll see something like this in DMG2. Like ways to template monsters with formulas like you suggest. I could easily see a -20% hp, + attack damage style formula being written up in template format. They could even invert that by make a +20% hp / - attack damage template to create a "HP bag" style. Heck they could call these "playstyle templates". I certainly would appreciate something like this in a DM toolbox section.

 

[Cadfan]

Whereas I am annoyed they are not putting out errata for it, or at least an 'optional' fix sheet for those DMs that want it or just a written down formula of how to fix. I think it is slack what they are doing.

From the podcast I'm pretty sure it isn't just a simple formula to repair the monster. Its more about making sure that solos have interesting changes in the way they function so as to keep you interested and engaged over a long period of time dealing with only one monster.

If it was just -20% hp +10% damage SHAZAM FUN! Then sure, I'd be annoyed. But I'm pretty sure that's not it.

 

[Rechan]

Have you tried the PHB1 classes with the powers books? My warlord got way more interesting after I had access to more powers. Generally speaking, I think the powers books are meant to do what you suggest and I feel like they accomplish it.

Yes, I own Martial Power. I don't think "Just more powers" do it, at all.

 

[Dire Bare]

Whereas I am annoyed they are not putting out errata for it, or at least an 'optional' fix sheet for those DMs that want it or just a written down formula of how to fix. I think it is slack what they are doing.

Because it's not errata. They just found a better way of doing things, that's all.

Besides, the monster makers amongst the fans need projects like "updating" the MM1 to keep them busy . . .

 

[Pseudopsyche]

From the podcast I'm pretty sure it isn't just a simple formula to repair the monster. Its more about making sure that solos have interesting changes in the way they function so as to keep you interested and engaged over a long period of time dealing with only one monster.

If it was just -20% hp +10% damage SHAZAM FUN! Then sure, I'd be annoyed. But I'm pretty sure that's not it.

Well, I don't know if it would count as official, but the recent article D&D Alumni: Demogorgon suggests applying the following formula (in the context of reconfiguring Orcus for a deathmatch against Demogorgon): "give him 20% fewer hit points, -2 defenses, but also increase his damage output by 50% when bloodied." This only brings Orcus "closer to the newer solo monster design tenets," so of course it's just a rough patch.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Maybe minion suffered from a last minute rule change:

During DDE they read: minions are only killed by a hit.

Also Minions used to have hp for a while (Level = hp)
And monsters used to have higher damage and lower hp in general...

for some reasons they changed that...

 

[Elric]

Well, I don't know if it would count as official, but the recent article D&D Alumni: Demogorgon suggests applying the following formula (in the context of reconfiguring Orcus for a deathmatch against Demogorgon): "give him 20% fewer hit points, -2 defenses, but also increase his damage output by 50% when bloodied." This only brings Orcus "closer to the newer solo monster design tenets," so of course it's just a rough patch.

I've got my take on how to change Orcus, taking into account the MM2's new solo design guidelines, here.

That article's suggestion seems insufficient. On the approximation that Orcus spends half his time bloodied, this amounts to +25% damage, which could compensate for -20% HP (on the further approximation that monster damage dealt per encounter is proportional to fight length, and fight length is proportional to monster HP, this works out to the same average damage per encounter), but not -2 to defenses as well. Much more at the above link.

 

[Plane Sailing]

I've started listening to the podcast, and I'm included in the 'wha?' camp.

I'm disappointed that they freely admit that they got stuff like the hydra wrong in the MM1 but aren't going to do anything to fix it. That's what errata is for, guys. Fix your mistakes.

I'm disappointed that they didn't realise that minions weren't worth the xps until after the release. What kind of playtesting did they do anyway? Nothing worth much from the looks of it when a couple of months of Jonathan Tweet found all kinds of problems (which many DMs on ENworld identified as a problem within the first couple of months of release too).

FWIW I would much rather they had treated 'minion' as a downgrade option that could be applied to standard monsters, much like elite can be applied as an upgrade. That could have been done in a way which solved the issue nicely without padding the MMs out with minion variants. Personally I like taking a standard creature, giving him 1hp and calling him a minion. He thus has an interesting range of options, gets some attacks, fits in different roles but still dies quickly. I never use standard minions.

I'm honestly surprised that they seem to have been taken by surprise by some of the problems with MM1. Adequate playtesting (as well as some thought given to the implications of auto-damaging powers) should have revealed a lot of these issues prior to release.

Colour me disappointed.

Regards,