Monster Design--from a designer's standpoint

[Wiman]

Shouldn't the Flind have Pack Tactics, too, if it is a Gnoll?

Yup, the Flind above has Pack Attack the Gnoll Racial. I agree with Lizard to the point that it's skills could be divided into 2 different varients, and the fluff on the abilities is a little on the "texty" side. As an encounter ability for the flind bar attacks I'm not sold (although I agree completely with the supernational effect thus far) best I could say is if it seems too deadly just change to 5,6 or even 6 recharge....if you know your players are going to kill this guy in a round make them encounter powers which have the advantage of being powered from the onset.

As for the entangle ability I would still like to leave the Flind the ability to disarm as it was it's defining roll back in the day - I like the combat advantage ability and the weapon skill disrupt. For those who don't like the instant disarm make it so if someone fails a couple saves they lose the weapon.

Thanks again guys,

Sorry it's too early in the morning for me to feel into editing the post above....coffee now, type maybe later.

<Edit> changed the spelling of "jest" to just....it is too early.

 

[Grazzt]

Scott and I listened to the comments above and now there is the big solo brute bull and some slightly lower level catoblepii that could sure work in a herd.

Yep. What Clark said. They should work fine in a herd...just be one herd I wouldnt wanna come across actually.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Fitz: care to share those monsters?

Sure.

This yellow dragon has no wings, lives in deserts, and loves to bury himself in sand, and leap out at unweary passer-buys. His breath weapon is actually a shimmering blast of super-heated air (I put "fire" so as not to create a new damage type). If you dig enough after defeating him, you may find his treasure horde (meagre as it would be for this young lesser dragon)

Here you go:

Young Flightless Yellow Dragon Level 3 Solo Lurker
Large natural magical beast (dragon) XP: 650

Initiative +10 Senses Perception +8; darkvision
HP 200 Bloodied 100; see also bloodied breath Action Points 2
AC 20 Fort 17 Ref 18 Will 16 Resist 10 Fire
Speed 7 Burrow 7 Saving Throws +5

Attacks:
Bite (standard; at-will)
Reach 2; +9 vs. AC; 1D6 + 2 damage
Claw (standard; at-will) Reach 2; +7 vs. AC; 1D4 + 2 damage.
Double Attack (standard; at-will) The dragon makes two claw attacks.
Bite, Shake, & Throw (standard, recharge 3 4)
The dragon can make a bite attack, and roll +7 vs Fortitude, 2D6 +2 and slide the
target 4 squares, and leave the target prone.
Tail Slash (immediate reaction, when a melee attack misses the dragon; at-will)
The dragon uses its tail to attack the enemy that missed it; reach 2; +7 vs. AC; 1D6 + 3 damage, and the target is pushed 1 square.
Breath Weapon (standard; recharge 5 6) * Fire
Close blast 5; +6 vs. Reflex; 2D4 + 3 damage, and the target takes ongoing 5 fire damage and takes a -2 penalty to AC (save ends both).
Bloodied Breath (immediate reaction, when first bloodied; encounter) * Acid
The dragon's breath weapon recharges automatically, and the dragon uses it immediately.
Frightful Presence (standard; encounter) * Fear
Close burst 5; targets enemies; +4 vs. Will; the target is stunned until the end of the dragon's next turn. Aftereffect: The target takes a -2 penalty to attack rolls (save ends).
Skills Nature +8 Stealth +12
Alignment Evil Languages Draconic
Str 16 (+4) Con 16 (+4) Dex 18 (+5) Int 14 (+3) Wis 14 (+3) Cha 10 (+1)

 

[Orcus]

The GSL *can't* interact with the OGL.

The best WOTC can do is place the 3x SRD under the GSL so that companies have an easier time converting. They can do this with the proviso that the GSL'ed material only be used for 4e supplements or other limits.

There's no way I can see, legally, for the GSL to 'incorporate' OGL material generically. You can't decree that material released under one license is now considered to be released under another. If you could, I could just write "Lizard's Lovely License" and decree material released under the GSL is now covered under the LLL.

All material currently under the OGL will not be under the GSL unless the current copyright holders choose to release it individually, and given the way the GSL is shaping up, I can't see as they'd have a motive to do so (WOTC might be an exception). This means anything which derives from third party content can't be 'upgraded', except by the copyright holder, and books which have content from mixed sources are pretty much unusable.

I strongly suspect there will be no viral component to the GSL. Necromancer might be able to voluntarily open its stuff -- not sure -- but it won't be automatic, so the utility of the TOH to third parties will be negligable. While it wouldn't surprise me it WOTC gave permission to Necromancer to use old IP, I would be very shocked if they allowed it to be 'open for 4e', so no one else will be using Flinds or Flumphs.

I respectfully disagree with you. I think you are taking too broad a view of the problem. I could easily see a way that the new GSL could allow prior OGC to be used under a new GSL. It wouldnt have to be rereleased. But I dont want to turn this into a "what coudl the new GSL do" thread. That should be its own thread (feel free to start it and I will be happy to jump in with thoughts).

But the bottom line is this: we dont yet know what the GSL will or wont allow us to do.

 

[jimpaladin]

I'm just another "groupie" on this thread I would like to add that those that have defended 3.x(I mean this loosely) monster design; give us a new 3.x monster that you stat'ed up correctly. I would hope the time it takes would at least allow you to see the reason most of us "lesser" DM's(I being one) enjoy the opportunity to do our own monster design. In 3.x I just said to heck with it and went to find that which was as close as possible to what I envisioned in my mind for the encounter. Unhappy DM meant unhappy group Not saying you can't post and have a different viewpoint, just wondering why it is to bring nothing to the table other than-"You could do that in 3.x!"

 

[mearls]

So, I wonder how long until someone starts making up some random monster ability charts.

So many crazy combos possible.

For my own campaign, I've brought back the concept of demon types from 1e, you know, type I demons, type II demons, etc, assigned each type a role and level range, and bolted on Gary's old random demon generator from 1e, with attacks and abilities attached to those random elements.

It works out rather well, IMO.

 

[keterys]

Now that sounds Retro Stupid, indeed. I approve!

 

[Lizard]

For my own campaign, I've brought back the concept of demon types from 1e, you know, type I demons, type II demons, etc, assigned each type a role and level range, and bolted on Gary's old random demon generator from 1e, with attacks and abilities attached to those random elements.

It works out rather well, IMO.

OK, now, that's just too cool.

 

[Mouseferatu]

For my own campaign, I've brought back the concept of demon types from 1e, you know, type I demons, type II demons, etc, assigned each type a role and level range, and bolted on Gary's old random demon generator from 1e, with attacks and abilities attached to those random elements.

It works out rather well, IMO.

And we'll be seeing this on Dragon Online when, Mike?

 

[Admiral Caine]

I respectfully disagree with you. I think you are taking too broad a view of the problem. I could easily see a way that the new GSL could allow prior OGC to be used under a new GSL. It wouldnt have to be rereleased. But I dont want to turn this into a "what coudl the new GSL do" thread. That should be its own thread (feel free to start it and I will be happy to jump in with thoughts).

But the bottom line is this: we dont yet know what the GSL will or wont allow us to do.

Hey Clark,

Since you're calling for a new thread about the GSL, I've been talking about this for awhile in the news section, and have recently started a new one over in this section at the suggestion of a moderator.

Mike Lescault offered to try to get some answers, in the original thread. And Erik Mona put a cameo in the original thread as well.

I invite you to the new one in this area: A link for your ease of travel. If you want to review this older thread I'm referring to, a link to that will be provided at the top of this new thread. (It was just re-started over here for higher visibility).

Jim
Aka Watcher