Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
July Rules Update DMG: Errata needed?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Jhaelen" data-source="post: 5243527" data-attributes="member: 46713"><p>Howdy Upper_Krust!</p><p></p><p>Well, when I started looking into this <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/4e-fan-creations-house-rules/278028-revising-dungeon-masters-guide-monster-damage-progression-table.html#post5226497" target="_blank">(here)</a>, I had a similar idea: I tried to keep the minimum damage close to half the average damage. I also tried to make sure that the minimum damage steadily increased from level to level. However, it's at odds with my preference for limiting the number of dice rolled (see below).</p><p>Looking over the MM3 monsters, I notice that the really high damage expressions are rarely used as is. Instead part of the damage is substituted with ongoing damage or status effects.</p><p></p><p>Also, when the July Update was released, I didn't have the impression that the official damage expressions were picked to ensure anything of the kind. The preference seemed to be to have a 'clean' progression of dice expressions. I rather liked that damage expressions change every five levels (at least starting in the paragon tier), so I kept that part.</p><p></p><p>As previously mentioned I'm not a big fan of using 'buckets of dice'. That's the main reason I limited myself to dice expressions with up to four dice. It's one thing I was a bit disappointed about in 4e: I remember that the designers promised I wouldn't have to roll lots of dice. Yet, powers use up to 9 dice, and there are still weapons using two dice as base damage and don't get me started on the 'brutal' keyword... It may not be quite as bad as empowered disintegration spells in 3e, but it's worse than I prefer.</p><p></p><p>Anyway, I don't think there's a right or wrong about using different dice expressions. It's really a matter of personal preferences and the goals you have in mind. See KarinsDad's comments or Asmor's table.</p><p></p><p>If I had tried to create a table for levels 1 to 75 (or is that a typo?), I'd probably have wanted to use more dice expressions. I would still have tried to keep the number of dice as low as possible. </p><p>One further reason is what happens when you list dice expressions ordered by average damage: The higher up you go the more odd changes from one type of die to another you get (e.g. like 4d8 ends up between 3d10 and 3d12). And if you set yourself an upper limit of the number of dice you want to roll, you'll eventually end up with only large dice and huge gaps between the average damage values.</p><p></p><p>Still, I like seeing different damage expression tables, so bring them on <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p><p></p><p>Yup, that's what Jack99 inquired about further up in this thread. I certainly cannot say if that was the intention or not. Without having playtested anything, I feel that 150% is sufficient and 'recharge 5,6' not that different from 'recharge if bloodied' to warrant another column.</p><p></p><p>I may well change my mind on this, though <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite2" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" /> </p><p>Especially, since my analysis prior to the July Update (based on the hp/level progression for pcs) indicated that average damage should be even higher all around.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Jhaelen, post: 5243527, member: 46713"] Howdy Upper_Krust! Well, when I started looking into this [url=http://www.enworld.org/forum/4e-fan-creations-house-rules/278028-revising-dungeon-masters-guide-monster-damage-progression-table.html#post5226497](here)[/url], I had a similar idea: I tried to keep the minimum damage close to half the average damage. I also tried to make sure that the minimum damage steadily increased from level to level. However, it's at odds with my preference for limiting the number of dice rolled (see below). Looking over the MM3 monsters, I notice that the really high damage expressions are rarely used as is. Instead part of the damage is substituted with ongoing damage or status effects. Also, when the July Update was released, I didn't have the impression that the official damage expressions were picked to ensure anything of the kind. The preference seemed to be to have a 'clean' progression of dice expressions. I rather liked that damage expressions change every five levels (at least starting in the paragon tier), so I kept that part. As previously mentioned I'm not a big fan of using 'buckets of dice'. That's the main reason I limited myself to dice expressions with up to four dice. It's one thing I was a bit disappointed about in 4e: I remember that the designers promised I wouldn't have to roll lots of dice. Yet, powers use up to 9 dice, and there are still weapons using two dice as base damage and don't get me started on the 'brutal' keyword... It may not be quite as bad as empowered disintegration spells in 3e, but it's worse than I prefer. Anyway, I don't think there's a right or wrong about using different dice expressions. It's really a matter of personal preferences and the goals you have in mind. See KarinsDad's comments or Asmor's table. If I had tried to create a table for levels 1 to 75 (or is that a typo?), I'd probably have wanted to use more dice expressions. I would still have tried to keep the number of dice as low as possible. One further reason is what happens when you list dice expressions ordered by average damage: The higher up you go the more odd changes from one type of die to another you get (e.g. like 4d8 ends up between 3d10 and 3d12). And if you set yourself an upper limit of the number of dice you want to roll, you'll eventually end up with only large dice and huge gaps between the average damage values. Still, I like seeing different damage expression tables, so bring them on :) Yup, that's what Jack99 inquired about further up in this thread. I certainly cannot say if that was the intention or not. Without having playtested anything, I feel that 150% is sufficient and 'recharge 5,6' not that different from 'recharge if bloodied' to warrant another column. I may well change my mind on this, though ;) Especially, since my analysis prior to the July Update (based on the hp/level progression for pcs) indicated that average damage should be even higher all around. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
July Rules Update DMG: Errata needed?
Top