Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="quishadi" data-source="post: 5228819" data-attributes="member: 79158">Before I start - MM3 is awesome.  The monsters are interesting, and the fluff is welcome.  I really like the overall higher damage, more accurate brutes, and the welcome sight of some old monsters retooled from previous editions --- really good stuff.  That said, I don't like everything.  All in all though, I like <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />.To the four who posted before me: Wow ... pretty harsh.  Truth is, none of the elemental "counter examples" on the WotC thread are from previous MM versions.  One is from The Plane Below, and has the fire subtype, but no fluff, damage or mechanics relating to fire ... oh and it's both immune to lightning AND has resist 20 lightning ... but that's probably right also, because ya know the WotC editors never let typos slip through.  Two are from dungeon magazine adventures (do they even edit those anymore?) and are minions and another is from an LFR module and is supposed to be an elite version of a Fire Bat (the base version is in MM and DOES have fire resistance).  I know of no one that runs RUNES in the RUINS where the Elite Fire Bat does not have the Fire Bats normal resistance to fire --- it is assumed that it's an unintended omission.  If you want, I can show you many other hinky monster stat block errors in LFR mods - including a swarm of spiders decked out in armor and carrying spears!  The only one that I think might legitimately have no fire resistance if from The Plane Below and has both the fire and water subtypes --- I know of no other creature with both.Truth is, prior to MM3 there isn't credible evidence that an elemental with subtype fire (and not also water) wouldn't normally have some fire resistance or even immunity.Please, do not misunderstand me, I'm definitely not against the damaging feedback that some of the new monsters can dish out.  In fact, I really like it.  Regardless of what some of my fellow debaters from the WotC threads will tell you, I've never said otherwise.  I only object to the lack of resistance/immunity.  Given the existing rules in D&D 4e, it requires too much of a leap for me.  Go ahead and tell me to "get over it" or "it's a fantasy game" or whatever.  The truth is though, that some people (the game designers; some of you) are trying to tell me what is fun and what isn't and what I should be able to tolerate in terms buying into this setting so that I can immerse myself and just have a good time.  For me, a fire elemental without fire resistance is just too much --- both in terms of my suspension of disbelief and also in terms of my trust in the consistency of the rules.As a side note - I have already heard the arguments for allowing such monsters to live in punishing environments and ignore damage from associated hazards --- while at the same time being damaged by the same effects that just happen to be generated by PCs.  I have yet to hear one argument that does not amount to fluff over rules.  Nothing in the rules currently supports multiple fire damage types - there is only one, and lack of resistance means damage gets through.  If such rules were to be clearly defined so that they could be consistently applied (and not just something a mod writer needs to interpret and hand wave his/her way through), I'd welcome it, and it would go a long way toward letting me suspend disbelief.  As it stands, the three monsters that I am aware of (Fire Elemental, Volcanic Dragon and Blizzard Dragon) do not come with written resistances, and therefore require fudged resistance in order to live side-by-side with some of the common hazards for their respective preferred environments.  In effect, this amounts to "immunity to fire (or cold) generated by most non-PC sources" and while it might help to move combats along, it does nothing for the internal consistency of the game.I know that Greg from WotC has already weighed in, and there are no plans to change these monsters, so I know that what I've written on WotCs forums and here will make no difference.  I'm only trying to explain my point of view and perhaps that of the others who keep getting beat up over our misgivings.</blockquote>

Verification