Design & Dev: Monsters (DRAGONS!)

[WhatGravitas]

I think the bab of classes will be altered to fit more into the role. Defenders and strikers will have full BAB (paladins, fighters, rangers, rogues, +30 in the endgame)
Leaders will have 2/3 BAB (clerics, warlords, +20 in the endgame)
Controllers will have 1/3 BAB (wizards and who knows, druids?, will have +10, which will suck royally but then again they won't need it.

Hmm... I think that would be bad design: The difference between the best and worst class is a difference of 20 - the size of the dice used to roll meaning, that something, a wizard would only hit on a 20 (AC 30) would be an auto-hit for a fighter - that increasing gap was the reason, why epic levels use these wacky inherent bonuses, instead of continuing BAB (and because of the insane number of new attacks).

I think a gap topping out at 10 points difference (practically even more, due to different focus of feats and ability scores) is alread fine, so it'll probably look more like: Full BAB (topping out at +30), 5/6 BAB (topping out at +25) and 2/3 BAB (topping out at +20).

Cheers, LT.

 

[Szatany]

QFT.

I once had a 2nd level character take 22 javelin attacks before he could even blink. Twenty-two! Thankfully most missed, & he succeeded on his bluff check to fall to the ground 'dead' with 0 hp.

Aye, I once overdone an encounter , a CR 21 encounter IIRC with monsters dealing about 400 damage from magic missiles each round! After I realized what I've done I made them go away leaving remaining surviving PCs to their sudden terror.

 

[Knight Otu]

Out of curiosity, I tried to assemble a "monster stat block" based on the information in the article and the idea that monsters are monsters, using the later 3.5 stat block as a template.

[sblock]

[b][u]Ancient Red Dragon	Lvl ??	XP ?????[/u]
CE Decathlete (Gargantuan Dragon (Fire))?
Init[/b] +?	[b]Senses[/b] Notice +?
[U][b]Languages[/b] Draconic[/U]
[b]AC[/b] 49	[b]hp[/b] 1,000
[b]Immunities[/b] fire
[b]Vulnerabilities[/b] ?
[U][b]F[/b] +xx, [b]R[/b] +xx, [b]W[/b] +xx[/U]
[B]Space/Reach:[/B] 20 ft/20 ft
[b]Speed[/b] 40 ft (8 squares), fly 200 ft (40 squares)
[b]Free melee[/b] Tail slap +xx (damage plus knockback)
[b]Melee[/b] 2 claws +xx (damage)
[U][b]Ranged[/b] Fireball (fire damage plus cling)[/U]
[b]Special Actions:[/b] Breath weapon (standard?; x ft cone) inferno blast (free; 25 ft
	aura), draconic haste (free?; x/encounter?; gain 1 extra standard action/round)
[b]Immediate Actions:[/b] Breath Weapon (reduced below 500 hp), Tail Slap (against
	character moving into flanking position)
[b]Skills:[/b] ???

[/sblock]
Even if we assume the dragon did not use every ability it has...

 

[Szatany]

Hmm... I think that would be bad design: The difference between the best and worst class is a difference of 20 - the size of the dice used to roll meaning, that something, a wizard would only hit on a 20 (AC 30) would be an auto-hit for a fighter - that increasing gap was the reason, why epic levels use these wacky inherent bonuses, instead of continuing BAB (and because of the insane number of new attacks).

I think a gap topping out at 10 points difference (practically even more, due to different focus of feats and ability scores) is alread fine, so it'll probably look more like: Full BAB (topping out at +30), 5/6 BAB (topping out at +25) and 2/3 BAB (topping out at +20).

Cheers, LT.

Not necessarily bad design, you just have to make bad BAB players aware that its pointless for them to use BAB after about 15th level, and stick to magic instead (of course, all controller classes would have to be magical ones). I can make similar argument that your progression is a bad design because at first 10 levels the different between different progression is slim at best. (and IMO shouldn't be).

 

[Cadfan]

Actually, percentage BAB needs to die, die, die. It probably won't, but it really, really should.

What I mean by this- if a fighter gets BAB at 100%, and a rogue gets BAB at 75%, then eventually, if the levels drag on long enough, the rogue becomes incapable of hitting in combat. At level 1, the rogue has only 1 less BAB than a fighter, so if a fighter hits on a 7, the rogue hits on an 8, ability score differences notwithstanding. At 30 levels, the rogue will have a BAB of about 22. If a fighter needs a 7 to hit a target, the rogue then needs a 15.

What we need to do is just have a BAB delay. Declare that everyone gets BAB at every level, but that a rogue starts from -2. Now the rogue always needs 3 more to hit than the fighter, no matter the level. Start the wizard at -5, and you're set.

The exact differences could be worked out, but that's the basic idea. It would also create complications with multiclassing, but these could also be worked out.

 

[Szatany]

Actually, percentage BAB needs to die, die, die. It probably won't, but it really, really should.

What I mean by this- if a fighter gets BAB at 100%, and a rogue gets BAB at 75%, then eventually, if the levels drag on long enough, the rogue becomes incapable of hitting in combat.

I'm working with an assumption that once you reach level 30, it is the End (i'm even calling it endgame level, just like in WoW ). If the game is open ended like 3e then you're right by all means.

What we need to do is just have a BAB delay. Declare that everyone gets BAB at every level, but that a rogue starts from -2. Now the rogue always needs 3 more to hit than the fighter, no matter the level. Start the wizard at -5, and you're set.

It sounds like a good idea, but it would play hell with multiclassing.

 

[WhatGravitas]

Not necessarily bad design, you just have to make bad BAB players aware that its pointless for them to use BAB after about 15th level, and stick to magic instead (of course, all controller classes would have to be magical ones). I can make similar argument that your progression is a bad design because at first 10 levels the different between different progression is slim at best. (and IMO shouldn't be).

Touché! But my progression has exactly the opposite effect of yours, and I see that that's bad. Especially, since 4E wants to "preserve the sweet spot" as long as possible, however, I think that "sweet spot" also means that the controllers' can also try to hit something... with an at least reasonable chance of success.

Perhaps a new concept, different from fractional BAB?

Cheers, LT.

 

[Cadfan]

Even if the game isn't open ended, you still hit this problem eventually. Look at right now. A 3/4 BAB class is at an automatic -5 by 20th level. No one worries about it because the fighter expects a guaranteed hit with his first attack, a reasonably likely hit with his second, etc, and this just means the 3/4 BAB classes are attacking like fighters on their second iterative attack- which is still good. But in the next edition, it looks like having a near guaranteed hit on attack 1 out of your iterative attacks is going away, as there won't be iterative attacks. So I assume that attack bonuses will be recalibrated to make your first attack have some risk of missing even at high levels for melee characters. Which would mean that taking a -5 penalty in comparison to someone who's only hitting part of the time would be really, really painful. Even worse once you got to level 30 and it was -8.

You could find a fix for multiclassing. The most mathematically precise solution would be to use an averaging system. I'm sure a more elegant one could be worked out.

Averaging system- Each level of low BAB is worth 6. Each level of medium BAB is worth 3. Each level of high BAB is worth 0. Sum them up, divide by total levels, round. That's your penalty below the top BAB.

Awkward, but it shows that a solution is possible.

 

[Jhaelen]

And, I am still wondering how the dragon "burst out in an inferno of flame".

Well, isn't that exactly what the Xorvintaal ability 'Energy Aura' in MM5 does?

 

[Knight Otu]

I don't like that a monster gets to make a special attack just because it reaches half hit points. I don't like that the wizard heals, because the cleric hit the dragon. Both to me are hokey.

I admit that we don't know enough yet to say anything definite, but the healing really seems to me like a divine spell from a divine spellcaster. Since it doesn't say much how it works, we can't be too sure whether it might have worked on a miss or a normal hit, but I feel that it probably would - since a healer role might want to stay back from melee a bit and not concentrate on it, it would be counter-intuitive to have its healing ability be fully linked to its melee capacity. As for the breath attack at half hp, well, I'd think of that much like natural reflexes, personally.

And, I am still wondering how the dragon "burst out in an inferno of flame".

As I mentioned earlier, that may be related to the breath weapon attack (the dragon maybe breathes "downwards," so the flames travel across the ground, causing a burst of flame to surround it). Also, the dragon, being a creature of fire, may have attained some level of control over its breath weapon, allowing it to reshape it in some ways.