Excerpt: Swarms

[Celebrim]

You may not have noticed, but the rats are a skirmisher, while the drakes are a soldier. That makes their implementation quite different. The drakes are meant to be front and center, the primary threat, while the rats are meant to come in and attack while you're dealing with something else.

The problem is that the Needlefang Drake Swarm is not only a better Soldier than the rats, but a better Skirmisher too.

As I understand it, 'Soldier' is the 'Defender' role class for monsters. It's meant to have high defences to have powers which are 'sticky'. I can certainly see the high defences in the NFDS, and you can think of its knockdown power as being 'sticky'.

As I understand it, Skirmishers are one of the 'Striker' roles for monsters. They are meant to have highly damaging attacks (often ranged attacks) and very good battlefield mobility, but not be able to take a punch as well as a 'Soldier'.

So compared to a NFDS, we'd expect the positives of a level 2 skirmisher swarm to be things like:

a) Greater mobility, but it doesn't.
b) Higher damage (shudder!), but it doesn't.
c) Greater ability to act at range, but it doesn't.
d) Better or at least comparable dodge defence, but it doesn't.
e) Better ability to assist thier allies, but they don't. In fact, the internal synergy of the needlefang drake swarms knocking down the foes for each other is huge.

Moreover, we've been given no reason to think that 'Soldiers' are supposed to be tougher fights than 'Lurkers', 'Skirmishers', 'Brutes', 'Artillery', or 'Leaders'. They are supposed to be different, just as the PC classes are supposed to be different, but

So what we have here is two monsters, both of which are supposed to be level 2, but one of which (no surprise, the fantastic one) is given every advantage and the other isn't.

If Needlefang Drake's were a card, they'd be blue.

 

[Byronic]

If Needlefang Drake's were a card, they'd be blue.

I'm going to note that drakes are usually blue.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Slackers are probably gone for the weekend...

What? Now they really have the time for thoroughly analyzing the wis of the fandom (or vice versa)? Slackers, indeed!

Actually, now that I think about it, I am thinking it is an evil plot by the equally evil mearls.

He changed the stats in the article, knowing that the interweb nerds would rage all weekend long, trying to figure out wth happened, while he chuckles all the way to church (err evil temple).

Actually, I see that as a possibility. A remote one, but come on, the whole beginning of the article was totally over the top (and hilariously funny!).

 

[MindWanderer]

Hmm... I dunno about that. The thing about the swarms we're seeing here is that if you have a fair bit of area-attack firepower, they're toast, but if you don't, you're ant food. That vulnerability 5 to area attacks will add up very fast if you're facing multiple swarms... if you have area attacks to use, that is. And if you can keep them off the wizard long enough for him to fry them up nicely.... Without Skamos, though, they're totally hosed.

Which is exactly the kind of thing they're trying to avoid in 4e. You should never be dependent on a single type of character. It might be extremely helpful, but not necessary. This is a big leap forward from weapon immunity that most 3e swarms had (bat swarms at CR 2 are just evil), but it's still poor design.

But it takes half damage from most attacks. Its "effective" hit points are therefore much higher than the raw number would indicate.

And the article says: "Swarms are hard to hurt. Hacking at a pile of bugs with a sword is inefficient, but it's also scary to face a monster that's hard to hurt. The swarm marches on in a relentless wave. We liked that feel, and we could easily set the swarm's hit points to balance the effect." The swarm's hit points clearly weren't balanced to compensate. I can only assume there's an error somewhere.

 

[Agamon]

But whose cheek?

I dunno. Mike's not telling where he's sticking his tongue these days...

 

[Korgoth]

On Needlefang Drake Swarms:

So, I was thinking (shocking, I know) that perhaps they're not quite as outrageous as they first looked... depending on how you read the Swarm Attack aura:

Swarm Attack aura 1; the needlefang drake swarm makes a basic attack as a free action against each enemy that begins its turn in the aura.

I was taking that to mean that, like an ongoing damage condition, at the start of a character's turn, if he is within 1 square of the swarm, the swarm gets its free attack. And since he will probably start prone, a heck of an attack it will be.

However, there is another plausible reading of the power, hinging on how you take "its" (it depends on what your definition of its is, apparently):

Swarm Attack aura 1; the needlefang drake swarm makes a basic attack as a free action against each enemy that begins the needlefang drake swarm's turn in the aura.

That is actually much more reasonable because the Proned character will have had a turn to stand up, spend a healing surge or whatever else... even get the heck out of dodge (or dodge the heck out of get, as the case may be). And even if you stand and fight, the free attacks the swarms get will not be the double damage ones against Prone characters, and they will not get that bump from Combat Advantage.

 

[Rechan]

I was taking that to mean that, like an ongoing damage condition, at the start of a character's turn, if he is within 1 square of the swarm, the swarm gets its free attack. And since he will probably start prone, a heck of an attack it will be.

Why would he be probably prone? The Swarm can only make 1 prone attack a round (two if it wastes a move to make a minor).

 

[Boarstorm]

I don't think pronouns work that way. I'm not a master of grammar, but it would be a real stretch to apply that "its" to the subject of the sentence instead of the subject (object?) of that clause.

Besides which, it would make the aura on swarms all but useless.

 

[ForbidenMaster]

On Needlefang Drake Swarms:

So, I was thinking (shocking, I know) that perhaps they're not quite as outrageous as they first looked... depending on how you read the Swarm Attack aura:



I was taking that to mean that, like an ongoing damage condition, at the start of a character's turn, if he is within 1 square of the swarm, the swarm gets its free attack. And since he will probably start prone, a heck of an attack it will be.

However, there is another plausible reading of the power, hinging on how you take "its" (it depends on what your definition of its is, apparently):



That is actually much more reasonable because the Proned character will have had a turn to stand up, spend a healing surge or whatever else... even get the heck out of dodge (or dodge the heck out of get, as the case may be). And even if you stand and fight, the free attacks the swarms get will not be the double damage ones against Prone characters, and they will not get that bump from Combat Advantage.

The latter is only true if either A) Wizards messed up, or B) the rules of English dont apply.

 

[Spatula]

Why would he be probably prone? The Swarm can only make 1 prone attack a round (two if it wastes a move to make a minor).

The swarm can make up to 3 such attacks, and would probably continue to make them until it successfully drags someone down. Then it attacks with the damage bonus (if it has any actions left), and its companions play pile-on. The way that multiple needlefang swarms complement each other is rather frightening. It's a neat image, but the damage done is a bit out of line for its level...