Kobold Inconsistancy

[Celebrim]

Putting monster special abilities into gear (and kobold gear at that, kobolds are neither clever nor wealthy) amounts to giving it to players.

Yes. I took one look at that and mentally tossed the monster manual in the trash. It wasn't even just that they were giving abilities over to the players, it was that they were implying that kobolds could create these items - who are as you say neither especially intelligent or wealthy. And if kobolds, why not players?

Moveover, look at the one that immobilizes the target. Shouldn't it mention something about strength or size class? Playing by the rules, this is the tanglefoot bag problem all over again, only perhaps worse. It's not that I can't easily come up with some sort of fiat adjustment on the spot, its that the professional game designer paid to make my life easier has passed that responcibility over to me. If that's the case, I'm sure as heck not paying for his product. I can invent my own content, thank you very much.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

I think you all are missing the really important part of exception based monster designer here. You have kobold slingers and kobold archers and you can't switch their weapons. So, if you want kobold crossbowmen, they get to sell you another monster manual.

 

[Celebrim]

I think you all are missing the really important part of exception based monster designer here. You have kobold slingers and kobold archers and you can't switch their weapons. So, if you want kobold crossbowmen, they get to sell you another monster manual.

Also, another batch of minatures. Because we'd never want to be one of those geeks that uses clothespins or erasers to represent kobold crossbowme...err... whatever.

 

[bganon]

I am more worried by the Kobold ACs. Just *try* and reverse engineer them, please. That and the sling pots. Putting monster special abilities into gear (and kobold gear at that, kobolds are neither clever nor wealthy) amounts to giving it to players.

(I'm only half-serious here)

Minions: AC 15, Ref 13, hide armor, light shield
They're getting +3 from Dex, +1 AC from armor (it's poorly made or they're just not proficient with it), and +1 AC from the shield. They don't get any size or class bonus to defenses because they're pitiful minions. They don't get a Ref bonus from the shield because they're not trained with it.

Skirmisher: AC 15, Ref 14, hide armor, light shield
Same as minions, but they get +1 size/racial bonus to defenses (but not AC, because it sucks to be a kobold).

Slinger: AC 13, Ref 14, leather armor
Same as skirmisher, but they have no shield and the leather armor gives no bonus other than a warm happy feeling.

Dragon Shield: AC 18, Ref 13, scale armor, heavy shield
They have a class bonus of +2 to Fort. Their equipment is so heavy they have -1 Ref cutting into their +5 from Dex, level, and size. But the armor and shield together still give +4, and they get to use their size/racial bonus for AC (but lose it from Will) because of their training.

Archer: AC 16, Ref 15, ??? (I haven't seen if they have armor listed)
These guys are so fearful they lose the +1 size/racial bonus to all defenses, but otherwise they're normal. +1 AC from whatever armor they're wearing.

Wyrmpriest: AC 17, Ref 15, hide armor
They have +1 class bonus to Reflex, but no size/racial bonuses (leaders stand tall and proud!). They get +2 AC from the hide armor because as leaders, they get the good stuff.

It all makes perfect sense!

As for the pots, the players need a sling to use them, and the only one that seems remotely powerful is the glue pot. I'd be willing to rule that the glue goes bad in hours (and that you can't use a power with a pot shot, but this may already be a rule), but otherwise the players are free to use them as they will!

 

[FadedC]

Yes. I took one look at that and mentally tossed the monster manual in the trash. It wasn't even just that they were giving abilities over to the players, it was that they were implying that kobolds could create these items - who are as you say neither especially intelligent or wealthy. And if kobolds, why not players?

Moveover, look at the one that immobilizes the target. Shouldn't it mention something about strength or size class? Playing by the rules, this is the tanglefoot bag problem all over again, only perhaps worse. It's not that I can't easily come up with some sort of fiat adjustment on the spot, its that the professional game designer paid to make my life easier has passed that responcibility over to me. If that's the case, I'm sure as heck not paying for his product. I can invent my own content, thank you very much.

There have always been creatures in D&D with access to poisons/ammunition the players are not able to get. I suppose it's quite possible the players might capture some kobold ammo much like they can capture some of the overpowered drow sleep poison in 3e. Weither they can figure out how to properly use it without immobilizing themselves is another matter though.

 

[Kraydak]

There have always been creatures in D&D with access to poisons/ammunition the players are not able to get. I suppose it's quite possible the players might capture some kobold ammo much like they can capture some of the overpowered drow sleep poison in 3e. Weither they can figure out how to properly use it without immobilizing themselves is another matter though.

That was fun, I went to pick up a 3.5e DMG and it opened to page 297 (Table 8-3, poisons). Didn't even have to crack the index. BTW, drow poison: 75 gp/dose. 5% chance to self poison on application, DC 15 reflex save on a natural 1 with a poisoned weapon.

 

[Celebrim]

There have always been creatures in D&D with access to poisons/ammunition the players are not able to get.

I am really really really getting tired of this response.

NPC's able to make and use things that PC's are not allowed to make and use have been a consistant source of complaint and irritation since 1E. Did you really find this to be a positive attribute of past editions? There is no since defending the new edition by pointing out it is repeating or expanding upon the mistakes of the past.

That there have always been creatures in D&D with access to poisons/ammunition the players are not able to get is not an argument for the new edition, but an argument against it. This is especially true because we are taking a big step backward toward the bad old days when PC's could never be as uber as NPC's because the DM supposedly needs a crutch to help keep the PC's down. I predicted this would be true as soon as they announced 'PC's and NPC's no longer work by the same rules', but everybody was too busy cheering about how great it would be as if we hadn't do this whole thing before. No, we've barely gotten any info but we are already seeing the first signs of it with things like special kobold ammunition and proponents offering rationalizations like, "Whether they can figure out how to properly use it without immobilizing themselves is another matter though."

I would like to say I'm amazed by the number of 4E proponents who feel compelled in the past couple of days to defend the warts on the older editions of D&D now that it indeed appears that 4E isn't going to magically remove quite all the warts afterall. It seems like every post were I complain of some flaw is met with, "Well, that was a problem in earlier editions too." or else, "Well, you can always house rule the problem away."

Of course I could, but if that is already true, why spend the $$$'s to change edition?

PS: And let's not forget the chorus of defenders of 4E who counter with, "The mechanics don't matter. The story is what is important. You can roleplay with any system." Again, that may all be true, but its not an argument in favor of converting to a different edition.

 

[FadedC]

Hmm....I must be half an edition behind, they nerfed the DC on drow poison from 3.0 and put it in the DMG. Of course it makes absolutely no sense that drow poison would be the cheapest poison in the book when it's for all practical purposes save or die, but yet costs less then the DC 11 poison that does d2 dex damage. So it would probably have been better it they HADN"T put it in.

 

[IceFractal]

The armor isn't a problem ... yet. Right now, most of the kobold armor is worse than normal armor, which is easily explainable, and PCs are unlikely to take it for that reason.

But someday soon, I predict we'll see something like an "Bugbear Juggernaught", who wears super-tough spiked armor which grants him Resist Weapons and does damage to people attacking him. And then either the PCs fight a Bugbear and all have super-armor, or the really lame excuses that piss off players start.


The kobold glue pots are much worse though. They're actually a useful thing to have, and it doesn't matter whether they go bad quickly, because the PCs can make them. Why can they make them? Because:
* Kobolds are not intelligent or wealthy.
* Kobolds don't have any special bodily fluids like poison spit.
* Kobolds don't have any magical glue-creating powers.
* Kobolds aren't brave. If you captured a kobold and made him tell you the recipe, he would.
* Kobolds aren't so rare that they're shrouded in mystery.

So yeah, either you let anybody with basic alchemy skills make these pots at a fairly low cost, or you start coming up with the lamest, weakest, most-player-aggravating excuses we've heard for several editions.


Now yes, sometimes monsters have things PCs don't. But those things should be exclusive to monsters for a reason. If, say, you're got a group of snakemen with poisonous venom who distill that venom into a toxic gas, then that's a reasonable exclusive item. If there's a group of fire cultists who use an open portal to the elemental chaos combined with their lifetime study of fire to craft weapons of solidified flame, that's reasonable too.

It should be noted even then that if PCs go to extreme steps to produce these items (capturing a whole group of snakement, for instance, or opening their own planar rift and having a fire-specialist Wizard), then it should be possible.


But don't pull crap like - "Yes, he's a human warrior and so are you. No, he's not better at shield use than you. But you can't have his non-magical shield that lets him negate ranged attacks, it's for monsters only!" - That has never been a good feature in D&D.

 

[FadedC]

I am really really really getting tired of this response.

NPC's able to make and use things that PC's are not allowed to make and use have been a consistant source of complaint and irritation since 1E. Did you really find this to be a positive attribute of past editions? There is no since defending the new edition by pointing out it is repeating or expanding upon the mistakes of the past.

That there have always been creatures in D&D with access to poisons/ammunition the players are not able to get is not an argument for the new edition, but an argument against it. This is especially true because we are taking a big step backward toward the bad old days when PC's could never be as uber as NPC's because the DM supposedly needs a crutch to help keep the PC's down. I predicted this would be true as soon as they announced 'PC's and NPC's no longer work by the same rules', but everybody was too busy cheering about how great it would be as if we hadn't do this whole thing before. No, we've barely gotten any info but we are already seeing the first signs of it with things like special kobold ammunition and proponents offering rationalizations like, "Whether they can figure out how to properly use it without immobilizing themselves is another matter though."

I would like to say I'm amazed by the number of 4E proponents who feel compelled in the past couple of days to defend the warts on the older editions of D&D now that it indeed appears that 4E isn't going to magically remove quite all the warts afterall. It seems like every post were I complain of some flaw is met with, "Well, that was a problem in earlier editions too." or else, "Well, you can always house rule the problem away."

Of course I could, but if that is already true, why spend the $$$'s to change edition?

PS: And let's not forget the chorus of defenders of 4E who counter with, "The mechanics don't matter. The story is what is important. You can roleplay with any system." Again, that may all be true, but its not an argument in favor of converting to a different edition.

So we agree that this type of thing is not new and is a fairly traditional part of past D&D games. And I agree with you that something that's the same as it always was is not a reason to switch systems (much like the existance of hit points, levels and classes are not a reason). But by the same logic it's also not a reason to refuse to switch systems either, unless your arguing that the entire system is the same (which it clearly isn't). In the end your decision to go (or your in case not go) to the new system will be based on how much you like the new stuff, some of which I can understand not being for everyone.