(Psi)SeveredHead
Adventurer
Or maybe use higher level minions?
Good traps to use in tight quarters?
- Thread starter NewJeffCT
- Start date
Kobolds are -mean-. How about an obvious trap, annoying enough that the party rogue is going to want to try to disable it, disconnecting the pressure plate that sets it off (or whatever).
Only...on all the obvious places to stand when disabling the trap are some very -non- obvious traps; maybe something simple but annoying like a pit trap with a lid, which can get the rogue-type out of the way for a while.
Other thoughts:
Abuse the hell out of LoE/terrain mods. Kobold slingers using glue shots behind full cover barricades, or using sliding doors that they only open long enough to fire through. Kobolds dropping firebombs out of the celing. "divide and conquer" traps that are designed (like the pit trap above) not so much to damage the party as divide them up and break up party synergy so the kobolds can try to overwhelm their attackers one at a time.
My opinion is that by keeping the kobold levels low, you are freed to have them be mean and sneaky.
Only...on all the obvious places to stand when disabling the trap are some very -non- obvious traps; maybe something simple but annoying like a pit trap with a lid, which can get the rogue-type out of the way for a while.
Other thoughts:
Abuse the hell out of LoE/terrain mods. Kobold slingers using glue shots behind full cover barricades, or using sliding doors that they only open long enough to fire through. Kobolds dropping firebombs out of the celing. "divide and conquer" traps that are designed (like the pit trap above) not so much to damage the party as divide them up and break up party synergy so the kobolds can try to overwhelm their attackers one at a time.
My opinion is that by keeping the kobold levels low, you are freed to have them be mean and sneaky.
Kobold leaders in the monster builder are still pretty good challenges, and if I level the leaders up, I think I'll be okay in that regards.
I don't think I"ll put in all low level kobolds, but will have a good selection of them. If they're targeting PCs and have combat advantage, they still have a chance to wear them down.
Emberdark Kobold Pillager, level 4 soldier, is a +9 vs AC to hit. Up it to level 5 and give it combat advantage, and it's at +12.
The Wyrmguard Sentinel is a level 7 soldier, and is +14 vs AC to hit, +16 with CA. The Dragonkin Champion is a level 7 Brute, and is +10 vs AC. A modified Three-Tooth (level 10 elite artillery) is similar to one of the kobold leaders.
Dr_Ruminahui
First Post
The problem with that is that they aren't terribly mean when they need a 16 to hit the lowest defences in party - rather they are just annoying. After all, seperating the party doesn't present much of a threat when you can't do anything when after you do.
Hence, levelling them up - doesn't have to be all the way up to level 9, but should be within 4 levels of so of the PCs. And yes, one way of doing so would be to make them minions, but depending on the amount of area of effect they have, that may not present much of a thread either - it certainly wouldn't with my group, where every character has at least one area of effect encounter ability.
But yes, the selection of Kobolds you list NewJeffCT looks fine with the tweeks you recommend. I would actually recommend levelling the lvl. 10 artillery down.
Last edited:
@Dr_Ruminahui In the described scenario, if you're having them make attacks where the attack rolls matters, you're doing it wrong. Play the kobolds like they're PCs faced with a foe who is claimed to be "impossible", pulling out all the tricks in the book.
But yes, using a combination of mean "level doesn't matter" tactics with leveled up foes who can challenge the PCs without as much recourse is generally a better match, as the players get to try to alternate between outthinking crafty kobolds and getting a more normal fight.
For an excellent example of what I'm talking about (if you're a DDI subscriber, anyway) see Tucker's Kobolds
But yes, using a combination of mean "level doesn't matter" tactics with leveled up foes who can challenge the PCs without as much recourse is generally a better match, as the players get to try to alternate between outthinking crafty kobolds and getting a more normal fight.
For an excellent example of what I'm talking about (if you're a DDI subscriber, anyway) see Tucker's Kobolds
Last edited:
Dr_Ruminahui
First Post
I'm well familiar with Tucker's kobolds, I just don't think it works with in 4e without throwing the math out the window - because, by its design, almost every attack requires a to hit roll, something that was much less the case in previous editions.
Basically, to be a threat, the kobolds have to be able to hit. So either you make them a level where they can, give them huge bonuses, or make them auto hit. And neither of the last two make much sense - why should they have abilities over and above the PCs (bonuses/autohitting that the PCs couldn't get even using the same tactics) just because they are weak - its inherently contradictory.
Not to mention the issue of defences - if they are 8 levels below the PCs, even if they have superior cover and concealment, the PCs are still hitting them on 3s. Again, why should they get better bonuses than the PCs would from the same terrain for being weaker?
IMHO, Tucker's kobolds could work in previous editions because the math was much "flatter", damage without hit rolls were the norm for certain manners of attacks and the tight quarters required that either spell casters forgo their most powerful spells (fireball, lightning bolt) or risk damaging themselves. None of the same presumptions apply to the same extent in 4e.
In other words, Tucker's kobolds worked because they exploited the existing rules and expectation. In 4e, the rules and expectations that allowed this to work simply don't exist or are much weaker. As such, IMHO, they don't win because they are "mean and sneaky" but because the DM is using his fiat to allow them to break the rules. And sure, that's something the DM can do, but to me it seems forced.
As such, my suggestions are directed at remedying the math problem within the rules themselves... that is, of course, not the only option.
Incidentally, to build in the "players hurting themselves" issue, you may want to design hazardous terrain that reflects area effects back at their caster - for example, terrain that if a blast/burst were to expand X squares past the edge of the terrain, it expands the blast X squares in the opposite direction. Just make sure to give the PCs a way of telling when/where that might occur, even if the first time catches them by surprise.
Basically, to be a threat, the kobolds have to be able to hit. So either you make them a level where they can, give them huge bonuses, or make them auto hit. And neither of the last two make much sense - why should they have abilities over and above the PCs (bonuses/autohitting that the PCs couldn't get even using the same tactics) just because they are weak - its inherently contradictory.
Not to mention the issue of defences - if they are 8 levels below the PCs, even if they have superior cover and concealment, the PCs are still hitting them on 3s. Again, why should they get better bonuses than the PCs would from the same terrain for being weaker?
IMHO, Tucker's kobolds could work in previous editions because the math was much "flatter", damage without hit rolls were the norm for certain manners of attacks and the tight quarters required that either spell casters forgo their most powerful spells (fireball, lightning bolt) or risk damaging themselves. None of the same presumptions apply to the same extent in 4e.
In other words, Tucker's kobolds worked because they exploited the existing rules and expectation. In 4e, the rules and expectations that allowed this to work simply don't exist or are much weaker. As such, IMHO, they don't win because they are "mean and sneaky" but because the DM is using his fiat to allow them to break the rules. And sure, that's something the DM can do, but to me it seems forced.
As such, my suggestions are directed at remedying the math problem within the rules themselves... that is, of course, not the only option.
Incidentally, to build in the "players hurting themselves" issue, you may want to design hazardous terrain that reflects area effects back at their caster - for example, terrain that if a blast/burst were to expand X squares past the edge of the terrain, it expands the blast X squares in the opposite direction. Just make sure to give the PCs a way of telling when/where that might occur, even if the first time catches them by surprise.
[MENTION=81104]Dr_Ruminahui[/MENTION]: Some good points. Although 4e still does have abuses you can exploit, really (without breaking the rules, which is for obvious reasons verboten. The kobolds get a kind GM; they don't get a cheating GM).
The most obvious, of course, is line of effect. With abuse of the LoE rules, the PCs area either auto-hitting them or never hitting them.
The second and primary idea, naturally, is to include traps at the PCs level even if the kobolds are far below it. If they can lure PCs into traps that will give them a challenge, they don't have to be able to hit. This is one way that "crafty kobolds" can do damage without being able to make hit rolls.
Now, regarding being able to make hit rolls themselves...it's kinda neat if they don't have to (beyond a few "bosses"), but while I think that levelling them up to -4 from the PCs is excessive, a -6 is fairer -- it's only technically a -3 penalty, so it's pretty easily erased with combat advantage and teamwork. Actually, even -8 is basically a -4 (or maybe -5) bonus -- so on attack, kobolds attacking with combat advantage and in teams (for the +2 bonus of "aid attack"; teams of no fewer than 3 are best here; one to work the reveal/hide mechanism (such that the kobolds are only attackable during their turn); one to aid attack, one to fire) can easily get a +4 bonus to counteract that.
I love the reflected terrain idea. I'd make it a shimmery substance; when hit with area attacks that extend beyond the "wall", it reflects them instead in a mirror image. After the first or second incident, the players would get that the shimmer was a telltale, but predicting what would happen would still be tricky. (Also, I'd expect the player to make a try of getting some "reflect" for themselves).
The biggest grounding of Tucker's Kobolds that are defeated by the existing game, BTW, is the assumption that PCs aren't that great at mobility. The "flaming debris" trick the kobolds used just wouldn't work well in a modern game because PCs can fly, jump large objects in a single bound, teleport, etc. So today's kobolds need to be a lot more sophisticated in terms of messing with mobility and visiblity (don't forget visiblity; do you know how many of PCs tricks are completely hosed when they can't see or can't see what they want to? I'd not realized how many of my Avenger's tricks were tied into sight until she got blinded at 16th level, more or less taking her out of the fight until she could save!).
The most obvious, of course, is line of effect. With abuse of the LoE rules, the PCs area either auto-hitting them or never hitting them.
The second and primary idea, naturally, is to include traps at the PCs level even if the kobolds are far below it. If they can lure PCs into traps that will give them a challenge, they don't have to be able to hit. This is one way that "crafty kobolds" can do damage without being able to make hit rolls.
Now, regarding being able to make hit rolls themselves...it's kinda neat if they don't have to (beyond a few "bosses"), but while I think that levelling them up to -4 from the PCs is excessive, a -6 is fairer -- it's only technically a -3 penalty, so it's pretty easily erased with combat advantage and teamwork. Actually, even -8 is basically a -4 (or maybe -5) bonus -- so on attack, kobolds attacking with combat advantage and in teams (for the +2 bonus of "aid attack"; teams of no fewer than 3 are best here; one to work the reveal/hide mechanism (such that the kobolds are only attackable during their turn); one to aid attack, one to fire) can easily get a +4 bonus to counteract that.
I love the reflected terrain idea. I'd make it a shimmery substance; when hit with area attacks that extend beyond the "wall", it reflects them instead in a mirror image. After the first or second incident, the players would get that the shimmer was a telltale, but predicting what would happen would still be tricky. (Also, I'd expect the player to make a try of getting some "reflect" for themselves).
The biggest grounding of Tucker's Kobolds that are defeated by the existing game, BTW, is the assumption that PCs aren't that great at mobility. The "flaming debris" trick the kobolds used just wouldn't work well in a modern game because PCs can fly, jump large objects in a single bound, teleport, etc. So today's kobolds need to be a lot more sophisticated in terms of messing with mobility and visiblity (don't forget visiblity; do you know how many of PCs tricks are completely hosed when they can't see or can't see what they want to? I'd not realized how many of my Avenger's tricks were tied into sight until she got blinded at 16th level, more or less taking her out of the fight until she could save!).
Dr_Ruminahui
First Post
I think you have PC math confused with creature math - creatures get an inherent +1 hit/defences with each and every level. PCs essentially get the same though half of it is from enhancement bonuses, feats and stat increases.
So, yes, a level 1 kobold would essentially have a -8 to hit a level 9 PC, which is why I think that a 4 level gap is about the maximum you can get and still have them pose any kind of threat. Sure, they can lead the PCs into traps and pitfalls, but given that they can't actually hurt the PCs, why should the PCs bother following them - essentially, the encounter is essentially just traps with the kobolds being largely irrelevant.
And given the 4e assumption that by default all attacks need to roll to hit.
I do agree with your other points, though - its just with the kobolds almost never hit and almost auto hit in return, I think that its difficult to make the kobolds dicks rather than DM being one.
So, yes, a level 1 kobold would essentially have a -8 to hit a level 9 PC, which is why I think that a 4 level gap is about the maximum you can get and still have them pose any kind of threat. Sure, they can lead the PCs into traps and pitfalls, but given that they can't actually hurt the PCs, why should the PCs bother following them - essentially, the encounter is essentially just traps with the kobolds being largely irrelevant.
And given the 4e assumption that by default all attacks need to roll to hit.
I do agree with your other points, though - its just with the kobolds almost never hit and almost auto hit in return, I think that its difficult to make the kobolds dicks rather than DM being one.
Similar Threads
