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

[Dausuul]

If that's all the options it has in a fight, my argument stands doesn't it?

No, it doesn't. Not even a little bit.

The President of the United States is just an ordinary human being. He doesn't have a raft of SLAs, and he doesn't have great heaping gobs of hit points. But that doesn't stop him from commanding a military that can annihilate whole cities in the blink of an eye. That same military could easily topple him from power if it chose to, but it doesn't.

If we were talking about demons, who acknowledge nothing but raw power, you might have a point. Devils are an organized race, much more akin to humans in that regard. A great ruler among devils might be relatively weak in a one-on-one fight.

 

[Celtavian]

re

What tactical diversity do you think the new pit fiend lack that the old pit fiend had? When I read your post I had a look at the 3.5 SRD and the pit fiend entry and I didn't see a lot of tactical diversity there.

Are you being serious? I'm talking about all the spell-like abilities that it could use to tactically support its troops. I don't know about you, but I was a strong user of illusion spells for fights. I liked having the options.

Now the Pit Fiend seems like a watered down, pure melee fight with some flashy explosions. Where are the manipulation powers that a strong devil like a Pit Fiend would have?

I was hoping they would incorporate power uses that didn't consist of setting up flank bonuses in melee and casting flashy explosion effects. Even their skills are completely lacking. Am I missing something?

 

[Celtavian]

re

Given the number of underlings the Pit Fiend can summon, plus the default assumption that there will between 2 (Elite + Normal) and 6 (Minion) monsters accomanying the Pit Fiend in a standard level 26 encounter (or even more, if the GM makes up the relevant number of XP to constitute a 26th level encounter by using monsters of below 26th level), I think you are underestimating the tactical options.

It's just that the tactics are no longer "look at stat block, try to find optimal SLA". Rather, the tactics are "look at battleground on which there is a Pit Fiend in command of a dozen or so allies, and optimise the hurt to the PCs".

Didn't you run Pit Fiends with support in 3.5? I did. They were leader devils in my campaigns with supporting troops. Given their special abilities, their tactical options were far superior to 4th edition. A single Pit Fiend could give a party quite a bit of trouble with the 3.5 upgrades. Not really seeing this Pit Fiend is going to be more interesting to the old one.

 

[ruleslawyer]

The devils lost way too much if that's a real stat block for them. The Pit Fiend is pathetic in it's options, seriously. With those simple combat only abilities how the heck could they rule devils?

(FIFY.)

IMO, the rulership elements are, as others noted, an out-of-game construct. If the pit fiend has a +30 racial bonus to Persuasion checks involving other devils, that's probably a good enough reason for them to assert command... but it doesn't need to go in the combat stat block. More to the point, it is much, much easier to add than take away. If I feel like assigning the pit fiend a decent range of abilities, I'd prefer to do it without having the base stat block already a bloated mess to start with.

Plus, this stat block actually does seem to promote a much more dynamic combat than "most powerful SLA, rinse, repeat."

 

[Celtavian]

re

No, it doesn't. Not even a little bit.

The President of the United States is just an ordinary human being. He doesn't have a raft of SLAs, and he doesn't have great heaping gobs of hit points. But that doesn't stop him from commanding a military that can annihilate whole cities in the blink of an eye. That same military could easily topple him from power if it chose to, but it doesn't.

If we were talking about demons, who acknowledge nothing but raw power, you might have a point. Devils are an organized race, much more akin to humans in that regard. A great ruler among devils might be relatively weak in a one-on-one fight.

Doesn't even make sense. Comparing a powerful leader devil to a human President? If that is what it has come to, you make my argument concerning the innaneness of this Pit Fiend for me.

 

[Celtavian]

re

(FIFY.)

IMO, the rulership elements are, as others noted, an out-of-game construct. If the pit fiend has a +30 racial bonus to Persuasion checks involving other devils, that's probably a good enough reason for them to assert command... but it doesn't need to go in the combat stat block. More to the point, it is much, much easier to add than take away. If I feel like assigning the pit fiend a decent range of abilities, I'd prefer to do it without having the base stat block already a bloated mess to start with.

Plus, this stat block actually does seem to promote a much more dynamic combat than "most powerful SLA, rinse, repeat."

Are you saying that manipulation powers such as the ability to hold PCs, cast illusions, and the like didn't work into your game as they did into mine? I like combat options.

I don't see swing most powerful melee attack, slide flankers into position, and blow up a few devils, rinse and repeat, as dynamic combat. I'm not sure why you do.

 

[Imban]

Doesn't even make sense. Comparing a powerful leader devil to a human President? If that is what it has come to, you make my argument concerning the innaneness of this Pit Fiend for me.

Well, the devil does have the advantages of his own personal on-call army and a huge raft of hit points...

Seriously, though, how do you think power structures come into place? D&D's never been Exalted, so it's not like the Pit Fiend is lacking the appropriate Bureaucracy Charms or anything - instead it's just an amazingly charismatic and amazingly powerful feudal lord of evil. And you know, we had a lot of powerful feudal leaders in our own world without superhuman Charisma and imperviousness to many assassination attempts. The comparison to the real world is perfectly apt.

It's different when you talk about demons - I don't think there should be a single printed demon prince, for instance, who can't take a Balor in a cage match, because demons explicitly live in a society of angry warlords and destroyers where they can't rely on having a place in a self-sustaining power structure.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

Seriously? Wow, I had no idea that this severe of a change was coming. So the Pit Fiend goes from many options, to a very few. The spellcasters go from hundreds of options, to a very few? And fighters get to kick more butt, which they could have without these kinds of changes, and now it's balanced?

I'm nearly speechless.

Yeah, it's pretty awe-inspiring, isn't it?

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

THe game is called "Dungeons and Dragons", not "Heroes of Might & Magic" or "Magic: The Gathering". This doesn't mean magic is not important, but there is no need for it the "ultimate" solution to everything. It is an important part of D&D, and without it, it would suffer.

But don't confuse "nerfing" spellcasters with removing magic.

"Traditionally", D&D villains and heroes always needed loads of magic. Because their is nothing magic can't do, and nothing to counter magic except other magic. But that doesn't have to be this way. Magic not following the rules of our world doesn't mean it doesn't follow rules at all. In a fantasy world, magic can achieve things "physical" things cannot. But why can't the opposite be also true? Is there even a need for such a clear distinction? If magic can get in the way with mundane things, maybe the other way also works?

I notice that we now have anti-4E commentary decrying how 4E is going to be too full of magic, and commentary decrying how 4E is going to be not full enough of magic.

lol internet.

 

[HeavenShallBurn]

Yeah, it's pretty awe-inspiring, isn't it?

Only at how much the new edition has diverged from anything I'd want to play. And I agree with Celtavian, this Pit Fiend is definitely subpar compared to 3.5e.