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 LIVE! 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
MM3 Damage Expression Table
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="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 5237555" data-attributes="member: 82106"><p>I'm not so sure about this, nor about the +5 for soldiers vs NADs being an error. One thing that has always struck me as odd is the way that previous monster designs never took advantage of the concept of drama. If you have a monster that has an exciting special power that it only gets to use once in a while or under some circumstance that is hard to achieve or unusual why shouldn't it have a greater chance of hitting? You WANT the Shadow Stalker's special attack to land, at least a decent amount of the time, because that's what makes them scary. Nothing IMHO is more disappointing to a DM then to finally grab the enemy and manage to hold onto him and then pfffft you roll low and the nasty brain sucker sucks wind. Obviously its dramatic if these powers miss too, but by making them exceptionally accurate you shift the thrill to avoiding the bad situation where the monster can unleash them in the first place and when it does happen the players get to squirm a bit.</p><p></p><p>I think soldiers get an accuracy boost on NAD attacks for a somewhat similar reason. Most of these attacks are secondary types of powers that are supposed to help the monster pin down its enemies in some fashion. Making them extra accurate allows the monster to be especially sticky and really do its job.</p><p></p><p>Personally I think the flattening out of differences in monster NADs etc is somewhat of a shame. I think having some roles of monster with OVERALL tougher defenses wasn't great, but I also think, especially at lower levels where players really have to think about which powers to use to get an edge, that having one particularly low NAD and one particularly high one are more interesting. And I really don't think 1-2 points is distinctive enough. I think it should be 3-5 points. That's a lot, but you know the weak willed goblins (or whatever) REALLY should be distinctively weak in that area. As it is, and especially with the newer monsters, they almost might as well just have 1 defense number that never varies by level and a +2 if you use an implement attack. I know its inviting getting a lot of monsters easily wiped out by giving them a significant weakness, but It also seems a lot more flavorful to me.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="AbdulAlhazred, post: 5237555, member: 82106"] I'm not so sure about this, nor about the +5 for soldiers vs NADs being an error. One thing that has always struck me as odd is the way that previous monster designs never took advantage of the concept of drama. If you have a monster that has an exciting special power that it only gets to use once in a while or under some circumstance that is hard to achieve or unusual why shouldn't it have a greater chance of hitting? You WANT the Shadow Stalker's special attack to land, at least a decent amount of the time, because that's what makes them scary. Nothing IMHO is more disappointing to a DM then to finally grab the enemy and manage to hold onto him and then pfffft you roll low and the nasty brain sucker sucks wind. Obviously its dramatic if these powers miss too, but by making them exceptionally accurate you shift the thrill to avoiding the bad situation where the monster can unleash them in the first place and when it does happen the players get to squirm a bit. I think soldiers get an accuracy boost on NAD attacks for a somewhat similar reason. Most of these attacks are secondary types of powers that are supposed to help the monster pin down its enemies in some fashion. Making them extra accurate allows the monster to be especially sticky and really do its job. Personally I think the flattening out of differences in monster NADs etc is somewhat of a shame. I think having some roles of monster with OVERALL tougher defenses wasn't great, but I also think, especially at lower levels where players really have to think about which powers to use to get an edge, that having one particularly low NAD and one particularly high one are more interesting. And I really don't think 1-2 points is distinctive enough. I think it should be 3-5 points. That's a lot, but you know the weak willed goblins (or whatever) REALLY should be distinctively weak in that area. As it is, and especially with the newer monsters, they almost might as well just have 1 defense number that never varies by level and a +2 if you use an implement attack. I know its inviting getting a lot of monsters easily wiped out by giving them a significant weakness, but It also seems a lot more flavorful to me. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
MM3 Damage Expression Table
Top