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

[med stud]

Unless of course the Players are smart enough to have tactics above "charge and swing" and try to formulate plans how to avoid some of the abilities of the Pit Fiend like spreading out, casting silence, timing the dimensional anchors correctly, etc.

4E Pit Fiends only require fire protection and then you can charge and trade blows till someone drops. Yeah, thats really tactical, isn't it?

How did you come to that conclusion? Casting silence isn't worth much now, true. Timing dimensional anchor? Last time I checked it's duration is long enough with a large margin for a combat. Cast it the first round if you feel like it. Spreading out is worth doing now too.

What is much harder now than before is that the pit fiend can react to spreading out; by moving around it's allies it can take the fight to the PCs whatever they want it or not. So it creates a problem for the PCs; if we stick together the pit fiend can use it's fire aura and area effects against them all but if they spread out the pit fiend can take them on one at a time, both personally and by teleporting it's allies.

The old pit fiend has serious fire power but in a point-and-click way to a larger degree compared to the new pit fiend. Also, the teleportation as a move also is much more interesting than flying around (using old school teleportation as a move during a combat is almost never worth it since you essentially use a full round to move). Especially with the fire aura; if the pit fiend teleports 20 ft above a group of opponents it will deal 15 damage to them and it's fear aura will affect them.

Honestly, it seems like you are complaining about the new pit fiend's lack of firepower more than the lack of tactical options.

 

[med stud]

Although I stand corrected, it doesn't sound like a few saving throws followed by a lot of PC death. I forgot, blasphemy doesn't give a saving throw.

I thought blasphemy had a save. So, essentially, the pit fiend could teleport in, bringing an evil house cat. Using blasphemy at will it could let the cat tear it's opponents apart without them being able to defend themselves. A fitting end for heroes .

That's not even on the same map as tactical, it is an "I win"- button.

 

[Derren]

I see you forgot that 3E Pit Fiends can simply dispell the Anchor when they want to.

And why would the party need to spread out when they fight the 4E Pit Fiend? Because of the Irresisteble Command? When the PCs focus on the Pit Fiend then it is doing them a favor when it explodes a undamaged devil as the damage this explosion does is much less then what the devil could do.

And how is moving minions once every few rounds more tactical than in 3E? Considering that most 3E devils can freely teleport the situation got less tactical as the movement is more limited. And its interesting that you complain that 3E teleportation movement is a waste and then choose an example where the standard action isn't used anyway...

 

[FourthBear]

Actually, tactics refers specifically to things such as the placement of troops, so the new Pit Fiend is, by definition far more tactically capable than the old.

I'll also note that our 3.5e Pit Fiend can't just dispel the Dimensional Anchor whenever he feels like it. Assuming he's facing appropriately leveled foes (20th), he's got a less than 50/50 shot at it every time he takes a standard action to dispel it.

 

[med stud]

I see you forgot that 3E Pit Fiends can simply dispell the Anchor when they want to.

So the pit fiend uses a full round to dispel the dimensional anchor without being sure of success? In that case the PCs have essentially stunned the pit fiend. EDIT after reading Dausuuls post: If the pit fiend uses it's round to dispel, just cast the dimensional anchor again. If the wizard and the pit fiend are using up each others' rounds it is just good for the PCs.

And why would the party need to spread out when they fight the 4E Pit Fiend? Because of the Irresisteble Command?

Because of fire aura, fear aura, allies? Melee combatants don't have the option of spreading out in any edition so the spreading out goes for those who can deal damage at range.

When the PCs focus on the Pit Fiend then it is doing them a favor when it explodes a undamaged devil as the damage this explosion does is much less then what the devil could do.

The devil might deal more damage given unlimited time. With an explosion against four opponents the devil deals 8d10+20 damage in total. In many situations much damage now is more valuable than potentially more damage over a long time.

And how is moving minions once every few rounds more tactical than in 3E? Considering that most 3E devils can freely teleport the situation got less tactical as the movement is more limited. And its interesting that you complain that 3E teleportation movement is a waste and then choose an example where the standard action isn't used anyway...

They can not freely teleport. They have to spend a round to teleport. By teleporting they can move to a place and stand there and look stupid. If the teleportation doesn't take a standard action it can teleport and act in the same round. That opens up for dynamic and efficient uses of teleportation within a tactical context.

According to polls an average D&D combat lasts about five rounds. In the story hours I have read high level fights lasts shorter than low level fights. That means that each participant has five times he/she can act. The round economy is a huge part (maybe the largest) of managing a battle*.

For a "boss monster" such as a pit fiend the round management becomes more important since it's opponents often have more rounds to act in together; if a wizard uses one round to cast dimensional anchor and the pit fiend dispels it it means that it hasn't done anything against the cleric, fighter and rogue that now attack it.

Same thing with a tactical teleportation taking a full round. The pit fiend teleports to a square using up it's action for the round. The same round it gets hit by spells, arrows and possibly melee weapons.

* For an example, look at the obscenely powerful 3.0 haste.

 

[Dausuul]

They can not freely teleport. They have to spend a round to teleport. By teleporting they can move to a place and stand there and look stupid. If the teleportation doesn't take a standard action it can teleport and act in the same round. That opens up for dynamic and efficient uses of teleportation within a tactical context.

I can't stress enough how true this is. I've played a top-level 3.5E game (characters in the 18th-20th range), and I am here to tell you that a standard action in such a combat is a resource more precious than gold. To squander it on mere tactical movement is suicidal. Dispelling a single effect, when the enemy caster can just do it again on the next round, is equally idiotic.

Conversely, SLAs like blasphemy and mass hold monster, when usable repeatedly, strip the enemy of so many actions that they're essentially win buttons.

 

[Imban]

I can't stress enough how true this is. I've played a top-level 3.5E game (characters in the 18th-20th range), and I am here to tell you that a standard action in such a combat is a resource more precious than gold. To squander it on mere tactical movement is suicidal. Dispelling a single effect, when the enemy caster can just do it again on the next round, is equally idiotic.

Greater teleport over combat distances is only an acceptable game plan if you're highly screwed unless you teleport, and the 4e move-action version is far better for that. Generally it gets used for overland travel.

Greater dispel magic is, as you said, idiotic if it's something that can just be recast, especially in a party-vs-1 situation. However, sometimes it makes sense - if your opponent has used transcend mortality and will explode hilariously when it's dispelled or has ten high-end buffs on him or divinely persistent buffs that can't be recast until tomorrow or spending your action to dispel something helps out your team somehow.

Conversely, SLAs like blasphemy and mass hold monster, when usable repeatedly, strip the enemy of so many actions that they're essentially win buttons.

While I hate blasphemy as much as the next guy, mass hold monster is just an area "death" effect like wail of the banshee, and at the same caster level. While I won't miss the save-or-die spamming of 3.5e combat, it's not particularly unfair in that context.

 

[Dausuul]

Greater dispel magic is, as you said, idiotic if it's something that can just be recast, especially in a party-vs-1 situation. However, sometimes it makes sense - if your opponent has used transcend mortality and will explode hilariously when it's dispelled or has ten high-end buffs on him or divinely persistent buffs that can't be recast until tomorrow or spending your action to dispel something helps out your team somehow.

Oh, yes, there are certainly times when it's worth it to use greater dispel magic, usually to strip a target of a whole slew of buffs (which is its normal application). It's much less attractive to a monster in a party-versus-1, but even then it can be useful... but not when its only benefit is to allow the monster to teleport next round.

While I hate blasphemy as much as the next guy, mass hold monster is just an area "death" effect like wail of the banshee, and at the same caster level. While I won't miss the save-or-die spamming of 3.5e combat, it's not particularly unfair in that context.

Wail of the banshee, usable at will, would also be a win button. (Of course, it can be countered with the proper defensive magic... which means that the fight, far from being tactical, in fact boils down to who happens to have a spell that the other side is not buffed to resist.)

 

[Henry]

I thought blasphemy had a save. So, essentially, the pit fiend could teleport in, bringing an evil house cat. Using blasphemy at will it could let the cat tear it's opponents apart without them being able to defend themselves. A fitting end for heroes .

But it makes for a great story.... the first time.

 

[med stud]

But it makes for a great story.... the first time.

Haha, true

I didn't think of that way (kind of strange since it was my example, but what the hey )