DMs have favourite monsters, now.

[Wik]

So, I like 4e. I'm not entirely sold on it, yet - there's a lot in there that kind of bugs me (I'm looking at YOU, treasure packets!). But, the first time I ran a real session, I came across something that really caught me.

The PCs were fighting some human minions, a human bandit, and an orc raider. Each monster was playing completely differently on the table - the raider was engaging from range with his throwing axes while the minions tried to pin things down, and then he closed in (using his free healing surge to really annoy PCs). Meanwhile, the bandit was taking flanking opportunities and shifting every time someone closed with him in melee combat. Because the fighter couldn't get close enough to the bandit to mark him, it meant that the bandit was very, VERY mobile on the battlefield.

After running that fight, and a few others, I realized I liked the human bandit. It wasn't just a "hey, I think this monster's concept is cool" (like 3e bugbears, for me) - it was a "hey, this monster is fun to run in combat".

In earlier editions of the game, I had favourite monsters, of course. But these favourites tended to be based on flavour issues - gnolls were cool because of their feral nature; bugbears were the alpha goblins; and the squealer is my all-time fave just because it jumps down from a tree, grabs you, and doesn't let go while it chews your face off.

But I never had a favourite monster based on rules. I was never "Hey, I absolutely LOVE the Chuul's Improved Grab! BOOYAH!"

So, I have a new favourite monster, and it's a human bandit (about as vanilla as you can get, really). I think it's kind of neat for the GM to be able to run monsters differently (tactically-speaking) on the table.

So, yeah. In 4e, monsters feel different from each other, beyond the flavour. I like it!

 

[Wik]

Oh, and I realize you could say '4e has taken the flavour out of RPGs!'. But that's not my point here. I still love the gnolls and bugbears - they have great flavour. And I'm all about flavour. But, it's nice to have the actual rules of the game make my human bandit different from the orc raider.

In 3e, this is done by adding class levels. But that makes the human rogue have a sneak attack that can be finicky to set up, and he has to make tumble checks to disengage (at half speed). Making the rogue a one-trick pony, quite often. While the orc fighter or barbarian power attacks and just deals a bit of damage each hit, until the group swarms him and takes him down. Neither really seems all that interesting - not to mention the fact that you're adding a class onto a monster... there's only so many times your group can fight a X rogue(x)/Fighter(x) before it gets boring.

In 4e, each monster is fairly unique, and has a unique "Feel" to it's rules. I'm a fan.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I designed several monsters recently, and I really enjoyed playing them and using their mean little abilities on the players, I have to admit. I certainly think this is a good thing, and the players seemed to enjoy it too.

 

[Spinachcat]

Human Bandit + Savage Berserker Template + Cosmetic Change = a new and dangerous bugbear!

I am having a LOT of fun with the 4e monsters and the combo of altering their levels up and down with cosmetic changes and renaming of powers.

My next project is taking a Beholder Eye of Flame and lowering it 5 levels so its an 8th level encounter...and then throwing it at some first level characters. Muhahaha!

 

[Scribble]

Maybe it's just me, but I'm finding the way things are set up make me kind of think like the monster, more then I ever have before...

 

[malraux]

I must admit, even though I'm planning on Dming 4e, I'm reluctant to read the MM. So many of the monsters have such fun surprises in store for players that it seems like a shame to spoiler those.

 

[Scribble]

I must admit, even though I'm planning on Dming 4e, I'm reluctant to read the MM. So many of the monsters have such fun surprises in store for players that it seems like a shame to spoiler those.

Yeah, I can see that... But as the DM for our 4e campaign I can also say it's a ton of fun watching the players first encounter a monster.

 

[Wormwood]

When I ran Oakhurst as a playtest, my players said that for the first time, kobolds really felt like the slippery little bastards they are.

 

[Nightchilde-2]

My group H-A-T-E-S elven archers after last session. I find that a Good Thing, of course. Part of that is the fact that they're a little melee heavy.

Simple ol' elven archers. Who'd a thunk it?

 

[I'm A Banana]

This isn't especially new for me, but it's always fun when you get to root for your monsters a little.