Hobgoblin Slavemaster - Lvl. 3 Elite Controller

[Trooper Maximus]

Yeah, since you posted I've been doing some more thinking - I probably would allow them to cut it, if it is currently grabbing another character. If the Slavemaster and the victim are not adjascent, it would be pretty easy - the whip would be taunt, and I would just give it a AC and HP using the chart in the DMG - I was thinking AC 10 and 10 HP.

In the more likely situation that the Slavemaster and the victim are adjascent, I would require two rolls, the first vs. the Slavemaster's reflex, the second versus the AC of the whip. If you make the first, you then get to try to damage the whip - it you don't, you instead hit the victim being grabbed (as the Slavemaster pulls the victim into the way).

Sounds good I defenetly wouldn't want to try and cut the whip if one of my buddies was wound all the way up in it. If it's taught then I wouldn't hesitate.

That said, with my gaming group, the situation is unlikely to occur - if our many years of D&Ding together, I can only remember us trying to disarm an opponent once (a 3.5 Death Knight who needed his greatsword to dish out the big damage and who we were loosing to, badly).

Huh! Interesting.

I would also have him have one back-up whip - seems like a reasonable thing to have for a slaver, so if need be he can catch one slave and still take out the other to whip the rest with.

Good idea.

Glad you like the concept.

If I can get a gaming group together I'm totaly bogarding your Hobgoblin Slavemaster!

One thing I was thinking of was replacing the battle axe with a longsword - longsword actually seems more useful to a slaver, as you have hit the slaves with the flat, as well as threaten/make small cuts with the tip - all useful for intimidation purposes. Plus, its handy from a metagaming aspect, as the axe and whip have the same to hit, though having different proficiency bonuses. Finally, I was concerned that I had a controller that was basically handing out skirmisher damage - he seemed a bit too good for a 3rd level elite - and reducing the D10 to a D8 would help a little in toning him down.

Any thoughts?

I like axe better. But I've always thought longswords are too vanilla. If you want to reduce the damage but keep the axe make it a poor quality axe. That's seems like a good explination as to why it would deal out less damage and makes the Slavemaster a bit of a slob/slovenly with his equipment.

 

[Mesh Hong]

One thing I was thinking of was replacing the battle axe with a longsword - longsword actually seems more useful to a slaver, as you have hit the slaves with the flat, as well as threaten/make small cuts with the tip - all useful for intimidation purposes. Plus, its handy from a metagaming aspect, as the axe and whip have the same to hit, though having different proficiency bonuses. Finally, I was concerned that I had a controller that was basically handing out skirmisher damage - he seemed a bit too good for a 3rd level elite - and reducing the D10 to a D8 would help a little in toning him down.

Monsters don't actually use the proficiency rules for weapons, their "to hit" numbers are derived from level and type (in this case level 3 controller). So it wouldn't alter his attack number at all no matter what weapons you give him.

The same is pretty much true in the damage department, monsters have a low, medium and high damage range which means that you can assign the amount of damage you want what ever the attack, technically. I know you won't like this concept because of all the issues you have stated with wanting to keep d4's for the whip.

Dropping the axe damage from 1d10+4 to 1d8+4 wouldn't make that much difference. But personally I would keep it at 1d10+4. He didn't get to be a slave master by going soft, and the threat of that axe is partly what keep those worthless scum in line.

 

[Dr_Ruminahui]

Trooper Maximus:
Yeah, it is interesting the differences in how parties play, isn't it?

And feel free to use him - good luck in collecting players!


Mesh Hong:
I do realise that by the DMG, a monster is simply a collection of stats put together - so the damage expression and to hit need have no actual connection with the weapon the monster is being described as having.

That said, in the MM at the lower heroic teir, if the monster is described as having a weapon, it will usually deal damage appropriate to that weapon (well, except for minions, with their fixed damage). At this point in my campaign, I feel that is appropriate. Come paragon, I expect I will have dumped any such mentallity, but for now it fits both the "feel" of 3rd level and of my campaign.

For the weapon proficiency bonus, I don't care so much about that - though I do have a certain satisfaction when the results synergise so as to produce something that makes sense within the broader rules (as I was talking about before with being glad the sword and whip had the same proficiency bonus). That said, if I wanted to give a monster from the MM a specific weapon, I WOULD alter his to hit if his profile reflects using a certain weapon and the new one has a different proficiency than the first.



Both:
As for a longsword lacking flavour, I simply see it as a "generic medium sized fantasy sword". In this case, it would likely be described as one of those jagged sword blades like dragonborn tend to have in WoC's art. On the other hand, I view a battle axe as simply a generic large one handed axe, again to be described as needed. So, at least for me, a longsword is no more vanilla than the axe.

That said, I think part of our differences in preferring a sword over an axe or vice versa have to do with differences in what "plot role" he fills. I'm thinking that perhaps you see him as kind of a unique warboss, tyranizing other hobgoblins and only in power through the power of fear.

In my campaign, however, he's an actual slavemaster in that he is the one that bosses around the goblin's slaves - except for the other slave minders, he doesn't boss around other goblinoids at all. In such a case, I was thinking a battle axe is actually less intimidating than a sword. One one has nothing to loose (as does a slave), threatening their life isn't the most productive form of intimidation, yet is about all you can do with a battle axe. With a sword, on the other hand, you can show the slave that they do have something to loose - threaten to blind one eye, cut their face, heated to burn them with, humiliate them by cutting their hair... lots more possibilities. Additionally, I see it working better with the whip - when he hauls his victim towards him, he gets the extra attack because he pulls them onto his sword.

So, if I were playin the former, I think the axe would be perfect. - the latter, I think the sword works better. That said, if I were to use him in the former way, I would likely bump him to level 4 so that he is higher level (as well as being elite) than the rest of his followers.