Higher Damage in Monster Manual 3

[the Jester]

So there has been a lot of speculation about whether the monsters in MM3 do significantly higher damage.

The answer appears to be yes.

I got the book today and the increase, at least at a glance, seems to be very marked. I'm collating data to double check and will post the damage of the monsters' base attacks once I get them all gathered up.

But the difference appears to be very, very significant; I wonder if we'll see new monster damage guidelines in (the eventual) DMG3?

 

[Dice4Hire]

I will be interested to see that. I am already starting to trend away from MM1 monstees towards more MM2 monsters because I feel MM1 monsters do too little damage on the whole.

 

[the Jester]

I will be interested to see that. I am already starting to trend away from MM1 monstees towards more MM2 monsters because I feel MM1 monsters do too little damage on the whole.

Yeah, I'm about halfway through copying over basic attack damage. It's a little deceptive, since I'm not tracking ANYTHING but the basic damage- no special condition-based stuff, no "with combat advantage," no ongoing damage (unless that's all the attack inflicts)- and it's still a huge upgrade.

I'll post numbers in a couple of hours (is my guess).

 

[fba827]

according to this blog...
http://gregbilsland.wordpress.com/2010/06/08/more-on-monsters/

greg bilsland (a designer who was part of mm3) talks about how the damage is upped and how he will look in to seeing if dmgp42 might eventually get updated accordingly.

he also mentions that heroic teir monsters are probably fine as is in mm1 but the paragon and later monsters might possibly need a nudge up if they aren't doing enough in your particular campaign...

and stuff like that..

(I only glanced at the interview, apologies in advance if my comments above are not 100% accurate)

 

[the Jester]

...oh, and by the way, if anyone had been worried about a lurker shortage... worry no more.

 

[Rechan]

...oh, and by the way, if anyone had been worried about a lurker shortage... worry no more.

I felt a dearth of lurkers, and had the impression that there would be an uptake of lurkers.

Although given that I've never ran or may never get the chance to run a paragon tier game, I have to wonder how useful the book will be.

 

[the Jester]

Jesus, this is a 9-page-long column.

Okay, I'm going to start at the top. Keep in mind that I ignored everything but the basic damage from basic attacks only. Also, note that many- perhaps even most- of the MM3 monsters have more than one basic attack (often a melee and ranged option).

Anyway, here are the top levels (30+) to start with...

30/brute- 4d10+20
30/soldier- 3d8+15
32/controller- 2d10+9
34/soldier- 4d8+24
35/lurker- 4d4+13
35/brute- 4d10+12

Compare to the chart on DMG 184... granted that these are pretty well off the chart- but compare our 30th level damage to that in the book: 3d8+10 as a medium normal damage expression, 4d8+10 as a high normal... this is definitely a step up!

Now here are levels 26-29:

26th Level:

26/artillery:
2d6+7 (x2)

26/controllers:
3d8+12
3d10+10

26/soldiers:
3d8+21
3d8+11
1d8+11 (x2)

26/brute:
4d10+15

26/minions:
skirmishers- 17
artillery- 12

27th Level:

27/skirmishers:
4d8+17
4d6+12
3d10+19

27/soldiers:
2d8+11
2d10+4

27/artillery:
2d6+8

27/controller:
2d6+10 (x2)
3d8+22
3d6+10
2d10+15

27/lurkers:
3d6+9
2d10+9

27/minions:
soldiers- 12, 14, 17

28th Level:

28/skirmisher:
3d12+17

28/brutes:
6d8+18

28/controllers:
3d8+8
4d6+12

28/lurkers:
2d8+9

28/soldiers:
3d8+13
3d8+18

28/artillery:
2d10+4
2d8+4
2d6+4
ongoing 20 fire
ongoing 25 fire

28/minions:
brute- 8
soldier- 18

29th Level:

29/soldier:
4d10+15
4d10+19
1d6+10

29/controllers:
4d6+14
4d6+10
4d8+19

29/minions:
lurker- 15
controller- 15

Whew, that is a lot of data, and there's tons more- but it's late, and I actually want to READ some of my MM3, so I'll post more tomorrow.

 

[Rechan]

In the Critical Hits interview, Greg also said that brutes accuracy was increased. I'm curious how much so. I typically give brutes an extra +2 (simply because I want them to hit).

 

[Mesh Hong]

In the Critical Hits interview, Greg also said that brutes accuracy was increased. I'm curious how much so. I typically give brutes an extra +2 (simply because I want them to hit).

I typically make brutes 2 levels higher for the same reason.

 

[Jhaelen]

I'll be interested to see how the new 'official' damage guidelines will compare to the damage progression tables I've created for myself.

I originally intended to post them in the house-rules forum at some point. What I did was to start with the assumption that the Level 1 damage expressions were fine and represented the intended percentual damage when compared to a PC's hit points. I further assumed that brutes were intended to provide the same threat as skirmishers.

Using those basic assumptions you can recalculate the damage values for the whole table leading to damage expressions at Level 30 that are more than twice the original values.

The only thing I don't understand: Why didn't they notice immediately that the damage exressions at higher levels are way too low? Apparently, zero playtesting was done at the paragon/epic tier.