Discussing 4e Subsystems: Elites, Solos, Minions, and Monster XP

[Plane Sailing]

I don't think defender lock-downs are bad; that is their job anyway, right? Besides, high level solos have such great stats compared to PCs they can take that measly -2 to attacks and still have good odds of hitting, and dodging an OA.

As I've illustrated with my quick tour of solo monsters above, most of the solos (once they reach high level at least) have ways of disengaging from fighters.

The "problem" that I've experienced is twofold really. The first is with fighters OA stopping movement and getting free attacks on marked targets who attempt to shift or damage someone else means that fights with solos suddenly get very static, which makes it a little less interesting.

The second part of the problem is that for the dragon, there is pretty much no option other than to rip the fighter apart as soon as possible in order that it can be free to attack other people again. As a DM I would sometimes like to spread the solo's attacks around a little to help keep the party as a whole alive; I can sorta manage that when there is a paladin marking it, but it is much harder when a fighter is marking it to find any reason to do anything other than take the fighter down as quickly as possible.

Now, that is allowing the fighter to act in a particularly 'defendery manner', sure... however, it can lead to a rather high turnover of fighters!

Cheers

 

[Lacyon]

In my game, when the fighter locks down the solo, he begins to affect its ability to act as multiple characters. Any immediate reaction that targets someone other than the fighter means the fighter gets a whack, or the paladin's mark does damage.

Which ought to reduce the "grindiness" in theory. I mean, the thing has a boatload of HP. Why not spend some of it to hurt the guy what needs hurting?

(I'm starting to think the playtesters/designers may have misjudged how frequently and under what circumstances DMs would have the monsters willing to take that hit).

 

[WhatGravitas]

...but it is much harder when a fighter is marking it to find any reason to do anything other than take the fighter down as quickly as possible.

Well, a solo has 2 APs, you can easily use them to get away from the fighter (via shift) and then whack other people.

Also, a solo has sufficiently high hit points (and usually defences), that you can simply move away - the OA has to connect, after all. If it didn't work, just whack the fighter instead.

Turn these superfluous HP into tactical potential!

Cheers, LT.

 

[Minigiant]

I personally love the minion, standard, elite, solo idea. I just thing the desighners put too much focus on HP.

Elites should be a creaure that a single person can't go toe to toe with but 2 can. It' s pretty much done right.

The party vs Solo should be the same style fight as the PC vs the minions. The problem with the Solo vs the party fight is the solo has too much survivablity. They take too long to kill. The problem with the PC vs the minion fight is the minions have too little survivablity. So use more minions and weaker solos.

I find that minions work better if you choose more weaker ones at higher levels. 4 level X minions is about the same XP as 6 level X-2 minions or 8 level X-4 minions. They'll still get mass murdered but you'll get more survivors and get to use better tactics.

Likewise is solos, use weaker ones and fill the rest of the XP with a few minions. When they AOE the enemies, the solo will look cooler for laughing at the the weak AOE damage and their dead allies. And they'll die faster.

 

[yesnomu]

I gotta say, the monster design in general is perhaps my favorite change of 4e. It's so quick and simple, it's beautiful. Pick a role and level, some cool powers, and you're done. Everything else is just flavor (a weak defense, varying HP, resistances and vulnerabilities).

Solos seem to be too static, as mentioned before. I really only ran one, the Blackfire Dracolich, and even with a 200 HP deduction, my players were kinda bored. (Part of the problem was that I didn't have any interesting terrain, but it was still a ton of HP.) He was able to stun anyone who melee attacked him as an interrupt, which made the frontline people angry. (I possibly threw the "Stunned!" cards at them with too much pleasure.) Eventually, thanks in large part to the Paladin (Divine Challenge really sucks for undead), he went down.

I honestly don't know the solution to the solo problem, without either degenerating into 3.5's problems (BBEG? Two rounds, tops) or giving them boatloads of HP and boring everyone to death. I like that idea of the combat in stages, like a video game boss fight. I might try something like that the next time I run a game, along with the "no initiative" variant.

 

[Rel]

The second part of the problem is that for the dragon, there is pretty much no option other than to rip the fighter apart as soon as possible in order that it can be free to attack other people again. As a DM I would sometimes like to spread the solo's attacks around a little to help keep the party as a whole alive; I can sorta manage that when there is a paladin marking it, but it is much harder when a fighter is marking it to find any reason to do anything other than take the fighter down as quickly as possible.

Now, that is allowing the fighter to act in a particularly 'defendery manner', sure... however, it can lead to a rather high turnover of fighters!

That could be an incentive for the Fighter to disengage when he's nearly out of hit points though. A smart fighter might back off and let somebody else take damage for a round or two until he can get a couple heals or drink potions and then run back into the fight.

 

[Jack99]

That could be an incentive for the Fighter to disengage when he's nearly out of hit points though. A smart fighter might back off and let somebody else take damage for a round or two until he can get a couple heals or drink potions and then run back into the fight.

Problem is, no smart solo would ever let the fighter do this, if he is low on hp. In my world, low on HPs (for the players) tends to attract the use of AP's from the monsters. Which is when the fighter goes *splat*.

 

[Rel]

Problem is, no smart solo would ever let the fighter do this, if he is low on hp. In my world, low on HPs (for the players) tends to attract the use of AP's from the monsters. Which is when the fighter goes *splat*.

I thought we were talking about a situation where the Solo was really wanting to get past the Fighter to get at the squishy Mage. Since that's so difficult then he gnaws on the Fighter as hard as possible until he backs off. That's "mission accomplished" for the Solo who then surges forward and chews up the Mage in very short order. After that he can turn his attention back to the Fighter and erase whatever gains he's made in terms of Hit Points again, this time without coming under fire from the Mage (or whatever other squishy DPS types the Fighter was protecting). If he's tying up the Cleric by forcing him to heal the Fighter during that time, that's just gravy.

I'm not suggesting that this tactic would always be employed or that it isn't sometimes smarter for the smart bad guy to try and finish off the Fighter first. Just that, if he wants a go at the more vulnerable members of the party, he should take those opportunities when they present themselves.

 

[Jack99]

I'm not suggesting that this tactic would always be employed or that it isn't sometimes smarter for the smart bad guy to try and finish off the Fighter first. Just that, if he wants a go at the more vulnerable members of the party, he should take those opportunities when they present themselves.

Yes, we can agree on that. I guess I just think that it too often ends with a solo (or elite, in my campaigns) vs fighter race. Who can get the other down before the hp run out. It's just something I have noticed with elites, and fear that the issue might be even more pronounced with solos. With elites, there is also plenty of other monsters to go around, for the other players. With a solo, not so much.

Cheers