DMG Excerpt: Customizing Monsters

[FabioMilitoPagliara]

Ummm, wow. Huge, huge props to FabioMB for somehow noticing and pointing out the obvious answer that all the rest of us (myself included) somehow missed. I'm not being sarcastic here -- we all completely flaked out on that tiny-yet-soooo-cruicial detail that the excerpt is from the DMG and not the MM.

thanks

happy to be usefull to the comunity

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

I like posting as I read a thread this long because it piles my posts all at the end like I'm a jerk talking to myself. Isn't that great?

I've been asking for a function to merge adjacent posts I've made for a couple of years now.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I think the most important thing has not been mentioned: If orc joe has 2 more STR, 4 more CON, 2 more DEX and 2 more WIS than Jack, he is about 1 Level higher. Which means: you now know how fudging with stats makes an encounter more or less difficult.

 

[AZRogue]

AZRogue, there is an alternate explaination:
Original Ogres use a unknown armor. The new armor you gave the (plate mail) grants it an effecive 3 points higher bonus. (The text mentions no magical bonus for the armor)
They use a (Great?)Club as weapon (+1 profieincy bonus), but switch to Greatsword +3 (+2 proficiency bonus, +3 bonus to attacks, -1 for magical item threshold => net effect +3 compared to clubs). The damage is 3 points higher for +3 enhancement, -1 threshold, +1 two-handed.
So, they get +3 to attacks and AC, and +3 to damage from their equipment selection.

That could be so, but I think the explanation is a lot more simple. I think they were addressing the DM's intent giving those +3 greatswords to the ogres. I think they're just saying that if you want to give them a +3 bonus, think about raising the ogre by 3 levels instead so the encounter will be more appropriate for the difficulty (numbers) being used.

 

[Just Another User]

That is of course a solution, and a rather good one, but it requires the DM to know what magical weapons and armor each monster has in the case that the PCs pick it up. It would be easier if that would be written in the statblock.

Besied, IIRC someone mentioned that in 4e there would have been a ritual to drain magic items and use them to create new magic items.If that is true to know if a monster have magic weapons or not, is not exactly irrelevant.

 

[med stud]

Besied, IIRC someone mentioned that in 4e there would have been a ritual to drain magic items and use them to create new magic items.If that is true to know if a monster have magic weapons or not, is not exactly irrelevant.

I think the point is that you can add magic weapons at your leisure. Some level 12 monsters have +2 weapons, some don't. I wouldn't want every specimen of monster X to have a +3 weapon, while there is a point that you would want to add a magic weapon without throwing the math out of whack. What magic weapons do monsters carry? Well, what do you, as the DM, want them to carry?

 

[AllisterH]

I think the point is that you can add magic weapons at your leisure. Some level 12 monsters have +2 weapons, some don't. I wouldn't want every specimen of monster X to have a +3 weapon, while there is a point that you would want to add a magic weapon without throwing the math out of whack. What magic weapons do monsters carry? Well, what do you, as the DM, want them to carry?

Exactly.

I think the default is that no entry in the MM is assumed to have magical items and similarly, any NPC creation rules in the MM work without the DM having to use magical items. They've basically divorced magical items from NPCs UNLESS the DM specifically wants them to have it.

 

[ZetaStriker]

I don't think this has been said yet, but about the Lich template's uses:

Yes, it could be useful for all types of characters, but I believe it can only be granted to casters. It isn't in the requirements, but since a ritual is likely needed to attain the template, this would restrict its possibilities. You my be thinking that I'm pulling this out of my nether regions at this point, but here's what I think backs up this argument: the template only lists HP changes for Controllers and Strikers... i.e., Wizards and Warlocks.

 

[Fallen Seraph]

What about then, Rogues and Rangers who are also Strikers? Those certainly are not arcane-based.

I think it states only Controllers and Strikers because they have lower HP then the other roles, so as such as part of this template they are given a boost. This is probably to show that they have gained more of the physical stamina/physical ability to withstand punishment by being undead. That the other roles already poses.

It also states:

“Lich” is a template you can add to any intelligent creature of 11th level or higher. It best complements an arcane NPC, such as a wizard or warlock, or a monster with arcane powers, such as a beholder or oni. Other highly intelligent creatures might also become liches; for example, mind flayers, who draw on psionic power.

So while it best suites arcane characters it isn't limited to them.

Also while re-reading noticed:

Some liches know a ritual that sustains them beyond destruction by tying their essence to a phylactery. When a lich who has performed this ritual is reduced to 0 hit points, its body and possessions crumble into dust, but it is not destroyed. It reappears (along with its possessions) in 1d10 days within 1 square of its phylactery, unless the phylactery is also found and destroyed.

So perhaps we should keep our eyes open for rituals in the fluff of creatures, not in stat-blocks.

This also then would reinforce stat-blocks are purely the combat-stats.

 

[Shroomy]

I don't think this has been said yet, but about the Lich template's uses:

Yes, it could be useful for all types of characters, but I believe it can only be granted to casters. It isn't in the requirements, but since a ritual is likely needed to attain the template, this would restrict its possibilities. You my be thinking that I'm pulling this out of my nether regions at this point, but here's what I think backs up this argument: the template only lists HP changes for Controllers and Strikers... i.e., Wizards and Warlocks.

The way I read the DMG template information, if a template is applied to a base creature, its role changes to one of the defaults of the template. My reading is based on this part of the text:

"In general, if a template does not alter a certain statistic, that entry does not apppear in the list."

If a template could only be applied to a creature with a certain role, I think that information would have appeared under prequesites.