Game Day mini = Spined Devil

[Zaukrie]

See, I feel that taking away monster options makes all encounters with said monster the same. Giving them options means that the PCs won't always know what to expect. Making monsters 1 trick ponies sounds kind of boring to me.

 

[Scribble]

See, I feel that taking away monster options makes all encounters with said monster the same. Giving them options means that the PCs won't always know what to expect. Making monsters 1 trick ponies sounds kind of boring to me.

The problem is, they already were one trick ponies... But the trick tended to be hidden inside a bunch of stuff that didn't really do much.

 

[blargney the second]

I think the Ogre Mage issue was more of a problem with the Role Mearls chose. He designed it more as a bruiser. I suspect that if he chose a Leader role or a Social role for it, we'd end up with a much different beastie.

That's a great point. Leader or Controller would probably fit its traditional role better than bruiser.

 

[Wormwood]

See, I feel that taking away monster options makes all encounters with said monster the same. Giving them options means that the PCs won't always know what to expect. Making monsters 1 trick ponies sounds kind of boring to me.

I hope that 4e is stripping extraneous information from Monster stat blocks WHILE providing greater options for building interesting/unusual encounters (unexpected effects, variable landscapes, social and intellectual encounters, etc).

This way, encounters would not have to rely solely a monster's 'bag of tricks' in order to be memorable.

 

[Reaper Steve]

Adso...
If you are still around (and at liberty to say), can you say if the 4E Spined Devil will have something that reflects the Spine Shield DDM side of the new stat card.

If not, can you explain the reasoning behind the creature having abilities in one rule set but not the other?
Thanks!

 

[BryonD]

We want to give you the freedom to create a good game without having to fix or sidestep the rules. We want to give new DMs the freedom to create good games without them having to figure out they have to sidestep bad rules.

And again, that sounds very good.
But hearing you say "this is our goal", is one thing. Seeing you say "this is what we are doing" is another. The treatment sounds possibly worse than the disease. (Note that 3X still rocks, so it isn't much of a "disease")

 

[Plane Sailing]

I've just noticed that the Spined Devil seems to be a rename of the Spinagon from Fiendish Codex II

 

[Klaus]

I've just noticed that the Spined Devil seems to be a rename of the Spinagon from Fiendish Codex II

... back to its original, pre-baatezu name. (spined devil, horned devil, bone devil, ice devil, barbed devil, bearded devil, etc, etc)

 

[vagabundo]

Is this thread suggesting that the MM will have separate entries for combat and story/monster design?

Is this based on scoops?

I would love to see this, each monsters entry had the combat stats and fluff/mechanics provide hooks, customisations, etc...

 

[tomtill]

So why list Skirmisher in the creature type area if it has no statistical effect?

To me, the roles are there to focus combat decisions (

Given various comments by the developers emphasizing easy of creation and play, and the lack of a need to fill up stat blocks with feats and whatnot, this makes sense to me.

Level 6 skirmisher seems likely to define the BAB (in 3e this would be +4 for a skirmisher type class, like rogue, and is consistent with the SWSE classes and monsters).

The Str mod is listed right on the card as +7. Adding the BAB + Str mod gives the melee attack. Very simple.

However, all level 6 skirmishers, fulfilling the same role, need to be roughly equivalent, with different abilities and exceptions based flavor added to distinguish encounters. Remember the goal is to be able to readily mix and match level 6 skirmishers on the fly, as illustrated in the last podcast. I'm guessing that primary/secondary attacks, like iterative attacks, are minimized, to prevent having to track too many different bonuses in a single round. If true, then to distinguish level 6 skirmishers with a single attack from those with multiple attacks it would make sense to impose a -2 penalty for each attack in the case of a monster with 2 attacks. In this case then, the melee attack drops from 4+7=+11 to +9. Note that this is completely unlike SWSE, but then again, they weren't focused on making mix and match role based monster parties when they wrote that.

Likewise, the ranged attack in this case is the Level 6 skirmisher BAB + Dex mod, listed on the card as +5, for a total of +9. However, the fact that Dex is explicitly mentioned suggests that there might be ranged attacks based on other abilities. For example, perhaps the appropriate ability modifier is used to determine the effectiveness of other attacks, since static saves represent a target. For example, an arcane spell or ability might be cast as a ranged attack, Int vs. appropriate Defense. This might be why the modifiers (presumable old bonuses + half level) are listed directly on the card. In addition to untrained skill bonuses, they are there for quick calculation of other attack bonuses in case the monster is given class levels on the fly. If this were really true though, I'd expect the BAB to be explicitly listed.

As far as damage is concerned, the melee and thrown ranged damage bonuses are not at all what I expected. Totally unlike 3e rules or SWSE. I really expected half the level would be added as damage, in keeping with SWSE and the stated goal of avoiding the christmas-tree effect necessary to make a 3e high level character viable. Instead we get what looks like the raw Str bonus for melee, and half that for the thrown range attack. Maybe this is role based (keep those skirmishers moving)? Maybe alternate means to increase damage at higher levels (power sources, maneuvers)? More data needed!