DMG Excerpt: Customizing Monsters

[Lizard]

As well they should. If it is not used in combat it makes more sense for things to be "mechanically" described and adjusted elsewhere.

And I like the idea of rituals just fine. I just think an awful lot of stuff is seemingly being dumped into the ritual bucket. 4e, in general, is asking a small number of mechanics to do an awful lot of things. (Saving throws, for example...poison? Being on fire? Hit by an aging ray? One roll to rule them all...)

 

[D'karr]

And I like the idea of rituals just fine. I just think an awful lot of stuff is seemingly being dumped into the ritual bucket. 4e, in general, is asking a small number of mechanics to do an awful lot of things. (Saving throws, for example...poison? Being on fire? Hit by an aging ray? One roll to rule them all...)

That had already started this "trend" in 3.x. The d20 systems idea was to have a small number of mechanics to handle most situations.

I don't see anything inherently wrong with that approach.

 

[Sojorn]

I know this is an "unofficial" monster creation, but I thought 4E was aiming at simplified stat blocks! That thing is huge!

No offense to you of course, Delgar.

It's also a level 26 solo.

Seeing as all the relevant data about it is in the block (no looking up random feats) I'm amazed it's not even bigger

Gah! Silly monster data! Gotta staple the war devil and legion devil data to it too!

 

[Derren]

You don't have to worry about that discussion, because the Armour Class-system of D&D is ass-dumb anyway. It assumes that you actually try to hit the non-protected places, not trying to hit through the armour of the enemy. So, really, if you're fighting a monster with thick hide, you're not trying to pierce its skin, but hitting on vulnerable joints, or its eyes, the neck, anywhere where you approximately know that its not that well protected.
Unless playing with optional rules, armour doesn't give Damage Reduction, which would really be the logical way. But because of the AC-system, it doesn't (or wouldn't) matter if the monster with +8 Natural Hide Armour wears a chainmail. You wouldn't try to hit it in its stomach section anyway, but its head, or its foot, or something similarly inane.
That's how AC really works. The fact that D&D 3rd edition allowed the stackability of natural and worn armour while stating that fighting with the AC-system means you try to hit the non-protected area was just contradictionary crap... Natural AC and worn AC shouldn't have been able to stack at all by their definition, but the designers for 3rd edition didn't think that really through.

Of course that assumes that the both the natural armor and the manufactured armor protect the same parts which is exactly how it would not work. The manufactured armor covers those parts which are not covered by natural armor.
Try to slide a dagger under a scale when it is also covered by mail. Head is not covered by natural armor? Thats what a helmet is for.

From a simulationist point of view, D&D - any edition - is a terrible game to begin with. You've chosen a game that has always done a lousy job of simulating anything other than itself, and then you complain that the newest edition isn't sufficiently simulationist for you.

This is why I have a hard time thinking of you as anything other than a troll.

Ah the familiar "3E was not perfect, so 4E can suck as much as it wants" approach. Guess what, 3E was obviously simulationist enough for me and a couple of other people and 4E isn't.

hmmh... mgical items beeing less usefull in higher level monsters...

like gantlets of oger power and boots of elvenkind in ADnD,

actually, its a fine solution to hve its bonus decrease smoothly... compare it to the help of microsoft office... it helps when you begin using a program, when you get more experienced, you only use it now and then and usually it doesn´t help a lot. And finally, when you are experienced enough, it doesn´t offer anything...

Except that magical weapons don't tend to summon small paper clips which tell you where to strike but improve the quality of the weapon like making them sharper and I fail to see how a experienced fighter suddenly stops benefiting from having a better weapon.

 

[StarFyre]

oh well...

ANything players don't like just means more house rules for them, and less house rules for the people who like the changes.

Overall, nothing has changed from older editions.

Sanjay

 

[D'karr]

ANything players don't like just means more house rules for them, and less house rules for the people who like the changes.

Overall, nothing has changed from older editions.

Sanjay

Well said.

 

[AllisterH]

And I like the idea of rituals just fine. I just think an awful lot of stuff is seemingly being dumped into the ritual bucket. 4e, in general, is asking a small number of mechanics to do an awful lot of things. (Saving throws, for example...poison? Being on fire? Hit by an aging ray? One roll to rule them all...)

I thought the consensus was that the 4E saving throw was the 3E version of "X lasts for 1d4 rounds".

 

[Argyuile]

In addition to the rules on vampire spawning time frames I'm going to need some Orc rules. I need to know.

How fast they breed, if 5 Orcs walk into my campaign world how long till there are 50 Orcs?

How fast they eat. If one of my PC's is captured by Orcs how long do they have to rescue him before they eat him. If they capture 2 is one sufficient for all the Orcs or will they eat both? Does it depend on the number of Orcs, if so how many people per Orc do they need to eat, whats the ratio? Will they eat one in preference to another and if so how do they choose?

Will they torture the PC to death and if so how fast? Will they just leave him in a cage for a while or will they start torturing him immediately?

Will they try to breed with the PC's? If so whats the gestation period on half Orc offspring?



The point is as many people have already said, It takes exactly as long as it needs to for the story for these things to happen.

Close Impregnate PC (Out of Combat, usable 1 once every 10 minutes for males, at will for females.l)
Close burst 1; +3 vs. Charisma; 1d4 + 1 damage, and the target is stunned (save ends). Aftereffect: The target is impregnated or becomes impregnated with a Half Orc offspring that will be born in 6 months.

 

[Ingolf]

Ah the familiar "3E was not perfect, so 4E can suck as much as it wants" approach. Guess what, 3E was obviously simulationist enough for me and a couple of other people and 4E isn't.

That is certainly not my argument and you well know it. 3.5 sucks from a simulationist perspective, and so complaining that 4e does too is a lousy argument.

But fine - let's say I grant that 3.5 is "simulationist enough" for you and 4e isn't. If you say so, I'll believe you - I think you have a poor idea of what constitutes a "good enough" simulation, but that's your business. Your original complaint about "unlogical" rules is still invalid. The rule you complain about is perfectly logical within the framework of 4e, you just don't like the rule because you don't like the conceits on which 4e is built. You're well aware that "simulationism" is not really a design goal for 4e, but you still feel compelled to point out every time 4e fails to be simulationist enough for you. You're trolling and it's tiresome.

 

[webrunner]

One thing I think that needs to be mentioned here is that the "Give a monster a magic item" issues being brought up seem to be assuming something: that every base monster is completely naked and bare-handed with no attack skills whatsoever, and therefore anything you add should "make it more powerful", and anything that doesn't only doesn't for balance reasons.

The "threshold" is meant to specify the weapon (be them natural, mundane, or magical) that the monster already has. Think of that unarmed Orc as having a +5 Orc Fist of Punching. The threshold rule is therefore just saying that you can't replace their +5 Orc Fist of Punching with a +4 Sword of Sharpitude since it's worse.

A lot of the monsters already have weapons, too, explicitly: The Water Archon in Worlds of Monsters has a spiked chain. If you want to give it a magical spiked chain, it has to be already be better than the spiked chain it has.

It's the same thing with the natural armor rules: It isn't always natural armor. Sometimes that monster is already wearing a chain shirt. Sometimes it's already wearing full plate. That natural armor bonus refers to both of these, and putting on a new set of armor is going to replace that (either by actually replacing the armor, or bypassing it in the case of hide/scales)