Design & Dev: Monsters (DRAGONS!)

[MerricB]

On the one hand, I agree.

On the other, if any creature in the game should be allowed some level of complexity, it's the dragon.

Yes, definitely.

If only for the reason that you normally only encounter 1 dragon.

One great problem I have with certain D&D designs (and I'm going to point squarely as some of the high-level Paizo AP adventures) is that the statblocks become way, way too long and complicated. I can handle a creature that has three or four options each turn. Once that list reaches 10 or more - and has stuff (like spells) that isn't spelt out in the statblock - things get very, very difficult.

Especially if you've then got four different examples of that attacking you. One of my key problems with high level monsters + levels. (Oh, wrong thread!)

I love the monster design in MMV.

Cheers!

 

[A'koss]

Hmmm... Dragons with over 1,000 HP. I still hope the CR for the mightiest ones don't exceed ~24. I don't want generic dragons being able to compete 1-on-1 with Demon Lords and the like...

 

[MerricB]

I wonder how the Wizzy heals from the Clerics crit...

That's something that we sort of saw in Bo9S, and is greatly needed in 4e.

The problem with the cleric is this: they can heal someone and stop them from dying, or they could do something fun (cast a spell, attack, etc.) I experienced this as a high-level cleric of Pelor - all my actions past the first round were spent keeping the barbarian alive.

It's far more interesting if I don't have to devote actions to this. If I get to attack, and a secondary ability I have triggers when I hit, thus healing someone... cool. I've fulfilled both my functions.

Cheers!

 

[cthulhu_duck]

Yikes!

I'm still not loving the nose spike on the chromatics.

 

[JoeGKushner]

Well that article goes a long way towards making me feel optimistic about 4e

Not me.

I'm looking forward to 4e but that whole encounter just makes me go, "Hmmm... the continual disatisfaction that the design staff has with dragons, ranging form adding age categories in earlier editions via Forgotten Realms to making them powerful spellcasters with unique abilities in higher editions, has just taken a huge shot of crack cocaine to the new levels of silly."

 

[MerricB]

Actually, I think you'll find that Dragons have just lost most of their spellcasting and vulnerabilities. Nice.

Cheers!

 

[Glyfair]

From a PC perspective, it seems the fighter can do about 500 points of damage with a "solid blow."

 

[Reaper Steve]

I'm still not loving the nose spike on the chromatics.

It's amazing now that nose spike can take otherwise fantastic dragon art (both this and the WAR full color shown over the weekend) and totally ruin it.

In case WotC' reading here: please lose the nose spikes! I'm willing to make a sizeable bet that a poll would shown that spike as extremely unpopular.

 

[JoeGKushner]

Actually, I think you'll find that Dragons have just lost most of their spellcasting and vulnerabilities. Nice.

Cheers!

Mixed emotions if that's true as in several books, especially those by the old WoTC, dragons = magic. Nixing their spellcasting abilities and vulnerabilities in exchange for more raw power can make them easier to run but also changes their whole dynamic at the same time. (As was the case between 2nd and 3rd.)

 

[Reaper Steve]

From a PC perspective, it seems the fighter can do about 500 points of damage with a "solid blow."

Nothing says that's the first round of combat.
(Not saying that you couldn't be right...)