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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="MeMeMeMe" data-source="post: 4300367" data-attributes="member: 68069">Time consuming? You listed an example above that fcan't have taken you much more than a minute. With a spreadsheet and the formulas, you could do it in about two clicks.As Mustrum Ridcully said, that's a perfectly valid way to go, but there might not be a similar creature.They are intended to be used. They are extremely useful.But they are not the endpoint: they give you a starting point, then you decide: "Do I want this creature to be more agile than normal? Okay, I'll up it's REF by a point or tow, and maybe reduce its FORT to compensate: it's agile but not as hardy."Once you have this starting point, and have made some modifications, you then need to look at similar monsters to ensure you haven't gone overboard, or to get ideas for powers.So it's not as simple as "oh, this is an CR 10 Magic beast, plug that in, and all my statistics are determined." But even if it was, in D&D3, that's still not the endpoint. You then have to decide what powers it has - and there's no good guideline on that. Look at the difference between demons and devils, and orcs and goblins. Level aside, how do you decide how many powers the creature has? How do you decide3 what the base statistics of a creature are? So 3e is also incomplete.In 4e, you have a few more choices to make, but they don't take long. 4e starts from the (correct) assumption: a 3e-style "plug in level and monster type, get combat ratings from a table, add class level or monster level increases" approach is flawed, because some combinations are more powerful or weaker than others. So, the monster designer is forced to take those things into account rather than relying on a simple set of tables.(PS: I saw the YouYouYouYou quote and chuckled.)</blockquote>

Verification