Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Staffan" data-source="post: 4498128" data-attributes="member: 907">I vote against that. That's the 3e solution all over again, with the MM having base monsters that you can add templates and/or classes to.The main problem with your idea is that it takes a lot of setup time. If I want to have a fight with an orc raiding party consisting of three melee guys (basic orcs), two axethrowers, and a boss, I would have to write up the leader and axethrowers myself. With the 4e MM, I just plonk in two Orc Berserkers, three Orc Raiders, and an Orc Eye of Gruumsh.A second problem is that it doesn't take unexpected synergies into account, which a more holistic monster design system might. I'll give you an example of a monster that broke the system in 3.5e.I started with a mind flayer (XPH version, which acts as a 9th level psion instead of just having a few spell-like abilities) and added one level of monk. This single monk level gave me a humongous AC increase (because mind flayers have very high Wis), Improved Grapple (+4 to Grapple checks, which is nice because the Mind Flayer's grapple check sucks for something that's supposed to be its signature attack), and one extra HD. The extra HD took it up to 9, which meant I got another feat. I spent this on Expanded Knowledge: Grip of Iron (a psionic power that gives a bonus on Grapple checks for a couple of rounds).For a single point of increase in CR, I got something like +5 to AC, +2 to all saves, and +12 to grapple checks (as well as some hp, and some other incidentals like &quot;elite&quot; stats). This is an extreme example, but it shows how a system where you build monsters out of building blocks can break down.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Staffan, post: 4498128, member: 907"] I vote against that. That's the 3e solution all over again, with the MM having base monsters that you can add templates and/or classes to. The main problem with your idea is that it takes a lot of setup time. If I want to have a fight with an orc raiding party consisting of three melee guys (basic orcs), two axethrowers, and a boss, I would have to write up the leader and axethrowers myself. With the 4e MM, I just plonk in two Orc Berserkers, three Orc Raiders, and an Orc Eye of Gruumsh. A second problem is that it doesn't take unexpected synergies into account, which a more holistic monster design system might. I'll give you an example of a monster that broke the system in 3.5e. I started with a mind flayer (XPH version, which acts as a 9th level psion instead of just having a few spell-like abilities) and added one level of monk. This single monk level gave me a humongous AC increase (because mind flayers have very high Wis), Improved Grapple (+4 to Grapple checks, which is nice because the Mind Flayer's grapple check sucks for something that's supposed to be its signature attack), and one extra HD. The extra HD took it up to 9, which meant I got another feat. I spent this on Expanded Knowledge: Grip of Iron (a psionic power that gives a bonus on Grapple checks for a couple of rounds). For a single point of increase in CR, I got something like +5 to AC, +2 to all saves, and +12 to grapple checks (as well as some hp, and some other incidentals like "elite" stats). This is an extreme example, but it shows how a system where you build monsters out of building blocks can break down. [/QUOTE]

Verification