Monster Design--from a designer's standpoint

[Mentat55]

I think I'd make most dinosaurs in the level 6-12 range , maybe elite for large herbivores, solo for large predators, regular for pack predators (e.g., velociraptor). The big dinos would probably be brutes, so they would have a lot of hit points (befitting their size), but with low Int and Dex, their Reflex defense would only be around 10 + 1/2 level (+3 to +6) = 13 to 16. The velociraptors (or Utahraptor, or deinonychus, or what you will) would probably be skirmishers, or maybe lurkers in some cases.

I guess what I am trying to say in that 1st paragraph is that we have to reevaluate how we build monsters. Consider that a T-Rex, while it has 18 HD in 3.5E, is only a CR 8 monster. HD in 3.5E was relatively uncoupled from CR - obviously more HD usually meant more CR, but we have 20 HD zombies that are CR 6, while 20 HD balors are CR 20. Special abilities, creature type and the associated saves and BAB, ability scores, AC, etc., really made CR in 3.x. But they were not integrated with HD, and so you got wonky results. Now, all of those values -- AC, defenses, attack bonus, hit points -- are tied to monster level and role.

So the 18 HD T-Rex in 3.5E suddenly becomes a level 8 solo brute in 4E. It has tons of hit points, but its attack bonus is not ridiculous for its CR (+20 and swallow whole against lvl 8 PCs, c'mon) and its defenses are appropriate for fighting level 8 PCs (rather than the current high Fort and Ref vs. CR 8). There are probably weird and wonky situations in this system as well, but from the looks of it, because level and role dictate so many things, it is easier to arrive at the solution you want.

 

[Storminator]

So what's a CR 4 critter doing with 16 hit dice?

Not much! Adventure Spoiler...

[sblock]In the adventure it's running from some Axebeaks (called Terrorbirds...) and you're supposed to save it... our Druid did Hold Monster on it so the Axebeaks would eat it in peace and let the party go... [/sblock]

 

[Steely Dan]

Have we seen anything to indicate a level-based damage bonus for characters?

Yep, the paladin smites mentions extra damage just by virtue of being a higher level.

I have somehow misplaced them, but I'm sure one of the lovely members of these boards will oblige.

 

[fafhrd]

In binding smite you can see an example of how the effect of a smite goes up with level, while the numbers in their base form seem similar when not taking into account the accuracy and damage boosts that merely gaining levels (and having better weapons) affords. It just gets … well, better. Heck, it's epic, after all, so it has to be good, and you don't have to have 4th Edition books in front of you to realize line of effect denial is good. When you're fighting balor, ancient blue dragons, and sorrowsworn, it had better be good -- those critters don't fool around!

article

 

[Lizard]

Not much! Adventure Spoiler...

[sblock]In the adventure it's running from some Axebeaks (called Terrorbirds...) and you're supposed to save it... our Druid did Hold Monster on it so the Axebeaks would eat it in peace and let the party go... [/sblock]

That's, uh, some druid...

I'm guessing his holy symbol is a fish with legs.

IAE, I was working on the assumption that even though 'hit dice' are gone in 4e for monsters, hit *points* are some function of Level*Number, and if it has 16HD in 3x, it would be 16th level in 4 to have roughly the same hit *points*. I forgot about the multipliers for elite/solo monsters which can ramp them up.

 

[Cadfan]

So what's a CR 4 critter doing with 16 hit dice?

Having a lot of hit points but no serious ability to attack. At least, that's what it SHOULD be doing, except that you have to monkey with everything to accommodate for its automatic base attack bonus. Logically, it should be strong, and it should be tough (its a big dinosaur), but its also slow and doesn't possess any meaningful weapons. Unfortunately you're stuck with a huge BAB and a high strength score. Even if you give it unarmed damage adjusted by size, you're still looking at a powerful creature. We could rework the entire monster to have 4 hit dice and a gigantic constitution, but that creates problems for our ADULT diplodicus, who we want to have a good trample attack.

Or, we could just, you know, assign it some stats based on a chart of standards and our personal feelings on how to adjust stuff. Yay!

 

[Nebulous]

Or, we could just, you know, assign it some stats based on a chart of standards and our personal feelings on how to adjust stuff. Yay!

Bah, that could never work.

 

[Storminator]

That's, uh, some druid...

I'm guessing his holy symbol is a fish with legs.

Something like that!

PS

 

[Steely Dan]

article

Ta very much.

 

[Wolfwood2]

Sure it does, when the PCs finally figure out what it's up to and attack it.

Seriously, giving it mechanics serves a purpose. How good a liar is it? If it's with the PCs and they're hit by a fireball, does it die? How fast can it travel -- will it slow down the PCs on a long march, or not? Can it help carry the treasure? Etc. There's plenty of reasons for statting out such creatures. Maybe they need a different 'template' than monsters, or should be handled differently, but treating them as purely statless incarnations of DM fiat isn't the way to go, esp. in games like D&D.

You're right that your "patron imp" won't be possible in 4E as it first comes out. That's because it belongs to a specific category of "helper creature" that the 4E design team freely admits they're still working on. We're talking about things like wizard familiars, druid animal companions, and paladin mounts.

The design purpose of these creatures is to help out a character in some fashion, not function as characters in their own right. Yet at the same time there has to be an answer to the question of, "What if somebody attacks one? What if they try to do something on their own?" In 3E they were given their own stat blocks like any other creature and either they were too weak to bring anywhere near the battlefield (making them a liability) or strong enough to stand on their own (meaning that a player was in effect running two characters).

Apparently there are some ideas being considered for an effective way to do this, but the development team won't have it figured out by the first PHB. That's why you won't see wizard familiars, paladin mounts, or ranger animal companions as options in the first PHB. However, helper creatures will be in the game eventually. And when they are, it should provide a clear design structure for how ti implement your patron imp.