WhatGravitas
Explorer
I hope so, I *need* this comic! Badly.Mustrum_Ridcully said:
Cheers, LT.
DMG Excerpt: Customizing Monsters
- Thread starter Shroomy
- Start date
Cheers, LT.
Spatula said:
Wait, one of us isn't understanding the other. The threshold, as I understand it, exists to stop you from putting a +5 weapon in the hands of a 2nd level kobold and making him really badass. You can put the weapon in his hands, but he won't get any good out of it.
Obviously at higher levels, both characters and monsters are assumed to have some access to magic gear, so the threshold increases, allowing higher level monsters to fully take advantage of powerful weapons.
What I said above was a response to someone who said that you *subtract* the threshold, which would mean that a 2nd level kobold could get +5/+5 from a +5 sword while a pit fiend or what have you would get nothing out of it, which clearly makes no sense.
I think they just messed up their example, probably left it in from before they inserted the threshhold idea and were instead just warning DMs that giving low level monsters powerful magic items could result in balance problems.
Oh I see the subtract text now. I think that's a typo pure and simple. Clearly a "threshold" implies a cap. Doing it as subtracting the +bonus makes no sense either from a balance stand point or from a design standpoint.
Sort of worrysome that they have chosen to release text that appears to have not gone through final editing. I had assumed these were PDFs of what actually went to the printer, but maybe we're a generation back. Hope so, anyway.
Sort of worrysome that they have chosen to release text that appears to have not gone through final editing. I had assumed these were PDFs of what actually went to the printer, but maybe we're a generation back. Hope so, anyway.
cferejohn said:
That was me... My actual post was inquiring as to why ogre savages only get +1 bonus from a +2 magic club, since they have threshold +1, but are then quoted as getting +3 from +3 greatswords with a threshold +1. It seemed contradictory.
I then observed, in an edit, that the article states threshold is subtracted from the enhancement bonus. Instead of giving the ogres the +1 I had expected, it would result in the ogres getting a +2. Yet the article states they'd get the full +3.
This article seemed so straightforward at first!
Last edited:
It states in the article that the magic threshold is an abstract number that symbolizes the creatures access to magic weapons, powers and so on. That means that, for example, the pit fiend already has a mace that is almost as powerful as +5, getting only a +1 in the upgrade. The kobold, otoh, only has a rusty spear as a regular weapon. For the kobold, it would be a huge upgrade and it would get +5.cferejohn said:
By the way, the article states up front that is an abstract rule. I don't think anything will be gained by spending 3 pages of the thread making literal interpretations and cornercases out of this...
med stud said:
Huh. You know I think you are right. From the excerpt:
Honestly I think I like my way better, and yeah, the whole "subtract the value that has a plus in front of it" thing is really bizzare. If this is what they were intending "theshold" seems like a strange choice of words. I guess its a threshold in the sense that it is the *minimum* plus that applies to them.
In either case, the example is bricked.
Personally I like the ideas of magic items that characters (and I suppose monsters) "grow" into, unlocking more powers as they go up in level. I know they started adding "some* items that worked like that in 3.5, but I thought they might make it standard, since it would fit in well with the whole "only 11th+ level characters can use rings" thing.
Umm, this is not a corner case, someone (evidently me) was confused about how the rule fundamentally worked. Is the threshold the max plus a creature of that level can take advantage of OR is it the minimum plus that the weapon/armor must have for a creature to take advantage of it (on the assumption that if it is lower than this then what they already had was better anyway). It seems from closer inspection that the latter is the case, but the text and (especially) the table are pretty damned confusing.
Last edited:
cferejohn, you're right about "threshold" probably being the wrong word to use. The threshold listed in the chart is the number of magic "plusses" already built into the monster. The same as its AC - 10 - max (Dex or Int mod) is its built-in armor bonus. Whatever items you give the creature have to surpass the built-in bonuses in order to have an effect, and even then only the difference applies. So a 6th-10th level monster gains nothing from wielding a +1 weapon, because its own attacks are already considered to be just as effective as one. Give the same monster a +2 weapon, and it only gets +1 to hit & damage from it.
med stud said:
It was an article on customizing monsters. Therefore, it's reasonable to discuss customization rules on monsters since, well, that's what the article was about. What I'm trying to figure out is why a monster with a +1 threshold gets +1 from a +2 mace (that makes sense) but +3 from a +3 greatsword with the same +1 threshold (that makes no sense).
Unless there's some mechanic to greatswords that grants a +1 to hit and a +1 to damage? A 2-handed bonus, perhaps?
Magic threshold is a monster only solution for a monster only problem.
The good: Giving a war devil a +5 trident that the PCs can win from him.
The bad: The war devil gets +5 to damage and attack rolls, messing up his balanced math.
Solution: Lower the bonus he gets so he can have an appropriate level item without messing up the math.
The good: Giving a war devil a +5 trident that the PCs can win from him.
The bad: The war devil gets +5 to damage and attack rolls, messing up his balanced math.
Solution: Lower the bonus he gets so he can have an appropriate level item without messing up the math.
Merlin the Tuna
First Post
That is easily the best lich artwork I've ever seen. Bravo.
