Have the Damage Expressions from Page 42 Been Updated?

[Jack99]

Does the DM book in the DM Kit have the new Monster Math in it?

Not if IIRC.

 

[The Little Raven]

Does the DM book in the DM Kit have the new Monster Math in it?

Nope, but the errata does. The DM's book gives you tools for creating adventures and encounters, but not for creating monsters or traps or anything else.

I sent you an email with a monster creation summary I put together back in mid-2010.

 

[Quickleaf]

I came back to this thread cause I'm in the process of updating my cheat sheet, and I'm a bit stuck on whether or not to update the damage expressions of page 42.

It's clear the update to the DMG is not actually "up to date"; just looking at the Difficulty tables in the update document (p. 37) reveals that.

Notes on new damage expression format, since this confused me at first:

Low damage expression: Multi-attack powers, Artillery
Medium damage expression: Most standard attacks.
High damage: Brute AWs.
Limited: Encounters/recharge powers.

Yeah Mike Shea's approach is a bit different from the errata.

Single-shot traps are probably best treated as minions.

Yeah but that puts their damage way low. In my games I'd prefer a falling iron portcullis being quite dangerous at 3d10+5 rather than dealing a paltry 8 damage. Maybe for some groups that makes sense though?

 

[D'karr]

Yeah but that puts their damage way low. In my games I'd prefer a falling iron portcullis being quite dangerous at 3d10+5 rather than dealing a paltry 8 damage. Maybe for some groups that makes sense though?

I think this is all relative to the encounter, and the thematics of the encounter should weigh heavily on what approach you use.

When you are building the encounter you can use the XP budget and the Encounter Level to determine how "deadly" that trap should be. But balance it all with the theme of the encounter. If that trap would "feel" better as a minion use it as such, if it "feels" better as a brute then use it as such.

This is where a lot of the "art" part of the DMing craft should come into play.

 

[the Jester]

Yeah but that puts their damage way low. In my games I'd prefer a falling iron portcullis being quite dangerous at 3d10+5 rather than dealing a paltry 8 damage. Maybe for some groups that makes sense though?

Sorry, I was unclear. What I meant was, if a trap deals damage only once, I would consider it a minion for xp purposes (assuming it dealt damage in line with a high damage attack for its level).

The portcullis is a bad example because, since it can split the party, act as a barrier, etc, I'd treat it as a full "obstacle" type trap. A pit is the perfect example- you fall in once and then you know it's there. So say a pit trap that does 3d10+5 (20' deep + spikes?), I'd eyeball that at about a level 6 minion trap.

 

[Saracenus]

Yep. Updated damage expressions are in the DM Kit book and the Priemium DM screen.

Sent from my HTC EVO using Tapatalk

 

[Quickleaf]

Sorry, I was unclear. What I meant was, if a trap deals damage only once, I would consider it a minion for xp purposes (assuming it dealt damage in line with a high damage attack for its level).

Ah, now I gotcha. I blame 4espeak.

The portcullis is a bad example because, since it can split the party, act as a barrier, etc, I'd treat it as a full "obstacle" type trap. A pit is the perfect example- you fall in once and then you know it's there. So say a pit trap that does 3d10+5 (20' deep + spikes?), I'd eyeball that at about a level 6 minion trap.

Heh. See I would consider the pit trap to NOT be a minion because someone could get pushed back into it during the fight and there is no clear countermeasure. The portcullis, OTOH, would have to be wound up and dropped a second time to feature as a trap again in the same combat. That's my thinking.

Of course if we're talking out of combat, then most traps probably should be valued as minions in terms of XP.