If the devils are how monsters will be....I am so happy

[TerraDave]

When I saw the the spined devil for the first time I thought: good.

When I saw the pit fiend the first time I thought: perfect.

Why?

*Straight forward descriptive text with just enough flavour.

*Vastly simplified presentation that eliminates cross referencing and makes it much easier to really use the creature, and greatly eases prepping for it.

*Numbers that are not explosively large, indicating that designers have kept a handle on this part of the game.

*Potent powers that I will actually use and will realy be noticed at the table

*Clear guidance on role, level, xp...that is helpful, not constraining, and easier to use then the CR system.

Yes there are things we don't know (action points, "recharge", does a fire*weapon do both fire and weapon damage). And a lot of nitpicking (...the fiend actually does a good amount of damage if you add it all up...). But right now I am really looking forward to more monsters.

 

[EricNoah]

I was concerned, mostly because the stat block layout was just so confusing. Maybe it would help if they put lines between the different sections, or used colors (I always highlight AC in red in my notes, for example), or something.

But ... I gotta say ... for a high level monster, this thing looks very much like it could be managable from the DMs side of the screen. Certainly more manageable than an equivalent from 3E.

I don't really have a useful comment about how monsters do or don't need to be able to live in their settings and function in their story-roles and how that should or shouldn't be reflected in their stats. I often handwave that stuff regardless.

 

[Jack99]

I can only say that you have just expressed exactly what I think. Down with needless info that I change most of the time anyway, to suit my campaign-worlds.

The only thing that would be great, is a long list of different rituals available to monsters, to use as I see fit, and to inspire me. But I am fairly confident that it will be in the MM, or perhaps the DMG. Either way, I will be a happy camper.. err gamer.

Cheers

 

[Irda Ranger]

*Vastly simplified presentation that eliminates cross referencing and makes it much easier to really use the creature, and greatly eases prepping for it.

Anything that can cut down on incessant page-flipping is a god-send.

 

[Imban]

I think one of my biggest problems with the pit fiend is that it doesn't actually have options. Or rather, it has 7 actions it can possibly take, but two of them are obsoleted totally by a third, one of them is always used on the first round as (effectively) a free action and is encounter recharge, and of the remaining four it gets to use no less than two and as many as three every single round.

I suppose that's the downside of multiple actions, but it still nags at me as annoying.

 

[Doug McCrae]

When I saw the pit fiend the first time I thought: perfect.

Agreed.

Clearer presentation, simpler rules, simpler but more flavourful powers that don't require the DM to also have a PHB open, a specific role, the right amount of flavour text. What's not to love?

And if you want 20 page ecology articles, that stuff is already out there. It doesn't need to be reprinted. What we desperately needed were better rules.

 

[Counterspin]

Imban : The first two aren't entirely obsoleted by the third, because you can only use the third during the monster's turn. The other two are options of AoO or OA, or whatever they're called now.

 

[Imban]

Imban : The first two aren't entirely obsoleted by the third, because you can only use the third during the monster's turn. The other two are options of AoO or OA, or whatever they're called now.

Hmm, true. That's still not an option in the sense of what they do during their turn, which is what I said feels rather... limited, but it does make there be a choice between the first two during an opportunity attack.

An abundance of moves one can make during a combat round only really creates options when the answer is not "Well, ALL of them!".

(Of course, we're assuming it can't Opportunity Attack with Pit Fiend Frenzy. Possibly a reasonable assumption, possibly not.)

 

[TerraDave]

Its worth noting that this follows pretty much exactly the description of devils in Worlds and Monsters:

"a devil might use poison...devils emphasize teamwork and combination attacks...command legions of lesser minions...devils are more fragile (then demons) but landing a telling blow is difficult at best"

If you want to just beat something down, use a demon, not a devil.

 

[Celebrim]

I think one of my biggest problems with the pit fiend is that it doesn't actually have options. Or rather, it has 7 actions it can possibly take, but two of them are obsoleted totally by a third, one of them is always used on the first round as (effectively) a free action and is encounter recharge, and of the remaining four it gets to use no less than two and as many as three every single round.

I suppose that's the downside of multiple actions, but it still nags at me as annoying.

Agreed.

And, I was kinda annoyed by how much room the new stat block took to do the equivalent of 'claw/claw/bite'.

This is probably largely my background, but the new stat block reads like a system requirements document. It looks like something you'd send a developer who needed to know how to code monster behavior and powers. It doesn't look like a PnP stat block. Notice how most of the powers are written in jargon to a degree which exceeds even the normally high jargon quotient you'd expect in a stat block: 'aura 5', 'close burst 2', 'Ranged...', etc.

One thing I noted is that the pit fiend has lost some pretty significant abilities: create undead, invisibility, dispel magic, mass hold monster, persistant image, meteor swarm, power word (stun), and regeneration. Some of those abilities are irrelevant to combat and maybe some are problimatic, and I do understand the argument 'Well, off stage, the pit fiend can do anything the DM wants it to do', but I do think something is lost conceptually if the monster loses abilities like 'create undead', 'invisibility', 'greater dispel magic', and 'persistant image'. Basically, this stat block tells me that the Pit Fiend is there to be killed by PC's so that they can take his stuff. Which, if I'm a computer programmer is basically all I need to know. Afterall, anything that isn't combat is going to be run as a cut scene using narrator fiat anyway.

Anyway, it sounds like combat is going to be fun (assuming I'd ever play 4e), and I do like that they improved the ratio of hitpoints to damage to make combats last longer, but otherwise I feel like something is missing.

(Incidently, I'm getting really tired of hearing how great it is to be running 4-5 massive combats a session with multiple opponents, as if somehow this is a new thing. Did people really never do that in 3E? I used to host an open table night at a local game store, and often get 4-7 combats into 3-4 hours of play - plus time for character creation, exposition, and allocating experience points. And that was with 'non-expert' players.)