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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="shadowoflameth" data-source="post: 4845780" data-attributes="member: 62336">I am a bit puzzled having just picked up the 4E mmII. I had heard about the changes to hit points from (5x) to (4x) even though the DMG says a new solo should have (5x) the usual number if it is 11th level or higher. I understand that this was a suggestion, as is the damage table for monster powers in the DMG, but here's the pickle. The MM monsters are all or nearly all following the 'suggestions' in the DMG by roll instead of figures for defences, to hit and damage based on ability score and level. These however, do not follow either one. Demogorgon or Dagon can't do better than a 3d8+8 with a basic attack? Their strength scores alone would lead to a higher damage bonus than that. Why if the DMG is going to suggest such design hand waving based on level or roll do these creatures disigns not follow the publishers own suggestions? For a high level creature like Demogorgon who a party is going to encounter once at the end of a high level campaign the difference between 3d8+8 which is actiually less than the suggested damage for a creature of lower level per the DMG, not only have hundreds fewer hit points than another controller of a lower level but arbitrary damage less than the norm? Was this poor proof reading, or was there errata that I missed (and that should have been included with the book)? perhaps damage tables and the like have been extended beyond 30th level, and I missed it. If that is the reason though, why give a monster a 32 str. If even Demogorgon or Dagon can have it and still not do more than +8 damage with a basic attack, why bother. Other creatures in the book have similar design differences, but I chose a high level example or two  as an extreme case.</blockquote>

Verification