D&D 4E Kruthiks, Needlefang Drakes and Foulspawn in 4e MM

[ZombieRoboNinja]

I think that confirms that the balance in the game has changed a lot. A carrion crawler in 3e is what, CR 3? Now it figures to be something that you fight at around 10th level. I'm guessing that pc's are much less powerful at 10th level in 4e than they were in 3e.

Nah, they just swapped a lot of monster levels around.

In general, it sounds like certain monster types, including aberrants as well as demons, devils, etc., are almost entirely paragon or higher tier. In addition, a lot of the monsters that were like CR 3 or lower in D&D (orcs, kobolds, goblins, etc.) seem to be a bit more spread out along the heroic spectrum. This makes a LOT of sense to me, because it adds some sense of progression to the game. Now, when I'm a 4th-level hero and I see a portal to the Nine Hells open, I'm no longer thinking, "Uh oh, here comes a level-appropriate 'evil' puddle of slime to fight." I'm thinking, "OH SWEET ZOMBIE JESUS, RUN!"

 

[kennew142]

Consequences without conscious choice is something I don't like.

Even if you had some old coot say, "Don't go in there, you'll stir up the (dire) hornet's nest" I would think that would be fine. (Or, even better, a cleric of some other god, who is against the Pelorian ritual, then you can introduce politics at home... that's cool.) Or out of game talk: "I'm going to have the gameworld to react to your choices, sometimes in ways that you won't expect and can't predict."

I guess I'm just talking about player buy-in. I guess I jumped the gun in assuming there wouldn't be the right level of buy-in when I read that blurb.

IMC the players always expect some sort of reaction to their activities. I don't see the problem with the example in the article. Players should know that all of their actions have consequences - some good, but some bad.

 

[Kishin]

Consequences without conscious choice is something I don't like.

IMO, that sort of thing is a classic element of fantasy stories (and has plenty of real world examples and analogues). Ignoring the obvious D&D Campaign != Fantasy literature, it makes logical sense to me for something like this to happen.

I can understand your perspective though, largely as a result of having seen something like this go too far: ("Haha, mookish adventurers! You've been unwittingly abetting my schemes for 2/3rds the campaign!")

 

[Gundark]

Why does that last bolded part bug me?

I guess it seems too heavy-handed for my tastes.

Well calling it "their fault" is a bit heavy handed. They didn't force the baddies to come raid the village. However like others have said PC actions should bring consequences.

I think the question here is, "Are the consequences natural?". what I mean is, is it logical that B should happen given A. Having the goblins attack the village after being attacked themselves seem natural. Releasing the BBEG from his magical prison because the PCs inadvertently moved magical McGuffin off of the alter of evil in his prison seems heavy handed.

 

[Fallen Seraph]

I wish there were some low-level aberrations in the MM. Oh well guess I can reskin some monsters to work.

 

[LostSoul]

I think the question here is, "Are the consequences natural?". what I mean is, is it logical that B should happen given A. Having the goblins attack the village after being attacked themselves seem natural.

I think it depends.

PCs go into dungeon, perform ritual, prove bravery. Yay! Everyone is happy.

Goblins start raiding the villages. Important NPCs are killed.

Everyone is not happy. PCs are arrested. Tried for murder.

They fight their way out of prison. Now they are wanted criminals.


That is a natural progression of consequences. It may not be the kind of game that the players want to see. That's why I was talking about buy-in above after I thought about it a little.

Another thing is that the only choice that the players had was to go on that adventure (it's the only thing the DM made, so there's no game without it); saying that it's "their fault" isn't really fair. But, once again, with the right buy-in that's no problem.

 

[Kaodi]

I am rather disappointed by the name, " Kruthik " . It does not really scream traction to me, though the monster may turn out to be cool enough. As for " Needlefang Dragon " , I think it is passable. The vibe I get from it is like, small, viscious, rabid draconic predator.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I am rather disappointed by the name, " Kruthik " . It does not really scream traction to me, though the monster may turn out to be cool enough.

It's a pretty old monster: It first appeared in the Miniatures Handbook. Personally, I prefer Monte's version in the Book of Vile Deeds, but there's no rule that I can't take the fluff from one and the 4E crunch from the other and merge them together.

 

[FadedC]

I think it depends.

PCs go into dungeon, perform ritual, prove bravery. Yay! Everyone is happy.

Goblins start raiding the villages. Important NPCs are killed.

Everyone is not happy. PCs are arrested. Tried for murder.

They fight their way out of prison. Now they are wanted criminals.


That is a natural progression of consequences. It may not be the kind of game that the players want to see. That's why I was talking about buy-in above after I thought about it a little.

Another thing is that the only choice that the players had was to go on that adventure (it's the only thing the DM made, so there's no game without it); saying that it's "their fault" isn't really fair. But, once again, with the right buy-in that's no problem.

Well it depends on what type of adventure you want. The events you describe would be a good setup for an extremely dark campaign where people are petty minded and no good deed goes unpunished. It wouldn't exactly inspire the adventurers to want to go back and help the town though, but it would help set a tone for the world. It's definitely not a game world for everyone though.

On the other hand, a more heroic arc where you accomplish something good but there are some bad consequences to clean up shouldnt bug anyone too much. Perhaps they accomplished a greater good by going down there and reading the ritual. Not everything has to be black and white where an action having negative consequences makes it a bad action overall

 

[the Jester]

You know, I really like the "group rooms together into a big encounter area" thing. I've decided to start doing that myself when designing adventures.

(I'm actually in progress on one now... but not yet to the dungeon part.)