Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DwarvenDog" data-source="post: 4414092" data-attributes="member: 40792">I wanted to briefly step in, to the defense of monster creation across the editions.  There's a lot to like, and a few things to dislike, about both methods of getting this job done.  Each game system rewards (or punishes) certain types of monster-builders differently.3rd edition monster design is like object-oriented programming, where you create a monster "object" that is roughly defined by its type and subtype, and draws upon re-usable but standardized attack forms, feat progressions, and templates. 4th edition monster design is like balancing a budget.  You have a set value at the end, and you get to tweak its component values (ability scores, hit points, attack options) up or down within a certain range, as long as your end balance remains relatively stable.Both are perfectly well-suited for people who like to fiddle with the numbers.  3E's method is better suited for those who have a vast library of options, because it allows you to build the exact monster you can imagine. Because the numbers in the system are all interwoven, the monster you come up with will have abilities and power that make "sense" from a simulationist point of view. By "sense" I mean relative to other types of creatures you can build with the system. The downside is that the end result may not be playable at the level you're trying to target. Advancement rules somewhat make up for this, but they were never developed beyond the bare-bones approach we got in the core rulebook. 4E's method is better suited for those who have a distinct challenge level in mind and want to create an appropriately balanced creature. This is also a better option for those who are pressed for time, because the end result will be directly usable at the level you're designing for. The downside of this is that the monster you create may not quite "fit" into the world outside the encounter you've designed.  If the numbers were transparent, the creature wouldn't make logical sense RELATIVE to other stuff in the world. The onus is on the DM to narrate the creature's relative capabilities and only use the numbers for balanced combat resolution.Pathfinder has not yet changed monster design from 3E's method in any meaningful way.  They have updated how CR is determined for NPC's and provided a prototype "budget-like" way of developing encounters.  But nothing on the concept-to-monster process yet.</blockquote>

Verification