Monsters are more than their stats

[Iron Sky]

This is a DnD forum, shouldn't it be hew-more?

 

[AllisterH]

Does this mean that any PC with bluff and diplomacy 15+ can seduce the king (or anybody else) and make him do whater he/she want?

If the PC can shapechange into pretty much any humanoid AND has the time (I'm imagining the Succubus took at least 5 years worming her way into the court and for her, that's not a big deal) AND has the skills (do you think that a Succubus is going to be BAD in the sack?), then yeah, I fully support any PC seducing the King.

In fact, this is why I like the Succubus since even if tey do capture her and the PCs say they want to use her (that has all types of connotations....) it is quite easy to point out that it took her 5 years to get where she was.

 

[Imp]

(I'm imagining the Succubus took at least 5 years worming her way into the court and for her, that's not a big deal)

Five years? That's crap for a mortal! Come on, a hellspawned archetype of evil seduction ought to be able to get wherever she wants in ordinary circumstances within a month. That's how you know something is Wrong. That's the whole point of using supernatural monsters, they – in this role, succubus, nymph, sirine, whatever – do their shtick much much better than their mortal counterparts. Otherwise it's like saying giants regularly lose bar fights, pegasi lose races to mules, and dragons have to be careful or they'll get kicked out of their caves by bears.

Five years is how long an ordinary devil might take to worm its way into a court.

 

[Torchlyte]

Not a problem, just shift a few skill points around or change a feat to 'Skill Focus' and...oh, wait.

Oh noes! We don't have skill points and feats for monsters! However will we give them +4 to Diplomacy checks?!

 

[DandD]

My idea is even more horrendous... Let's just make them trained in class X. Oh noes!
That means +5 to a skill. What will the poor 3.X-enthusiasts do against that simplicistic approach that eliminates the cumbersome skill points-system?

 

[Hussar]

QFT. Apparantly opinions on this differ, but I don't find ignoring things to be nearly as big of a chore as making them up from scratch.

The irony of this statement just makes me giggle.

That just because before 4e succubus had magical ways for ethereal travel and teleport. To capture one was very difficult, except maybe at high levels when you could do everything she can, only better . In 4e all you need to keep a succubi prisoner is a net and some strong rope, I strongly doubt you can do rituals while tied up, so she can't escape. Oh, yes and a blindfold to avoid domination. And you have a good reason to do it because she can do things you can't do and you want to learn how or that she does them for you.

If I've got a succubus tied up and blindfolded.... err hang on, I'll be in my bunk.

 

[Steely Dan]

4e is not merely "make stuff up" which, yes, you always could have done. Instead, 4e tells you what stuff you should make up and what stuff you shouldn't touch.

And how to make it up/implement.

 

[AllisterH]

Five years? That's crap for a mortal! Come on, a hellspawned archetype of evil seduction ought to be able to get wherever she wants in ordinary circumstances within a month. That's how you know something is Wrong. That's the whole point of using supernatural monsters, they – in this role, succubus, nymph, sirine, whatever – do their shtick much much better than their mortal counterparts. Otherwise it's like saying giants regularly lose bar fights, pegasi lose races to mules, and dragons have to be careful or they'll get kicked out of their caves by bears.

Five years is how long an ordinary devil might take to worm its way into a court.

Ordinary circumstances != Royal court of a major kingdom.

Sure, I doubt it would take a succubus even a week to seduce the mayor of Noswhereville but say the Emperor of a major kingdom (say along the lines of England or Rome at their height of glory)?

No, I don't think a succubus should take less than a couple of years if she wants to be subtle (your method lacks any subtlety whatsoever). She's going to be whispering in the king's ear AND the major courtiers so that any idea that she has, they'll think that they came up with it themselves. More importantly, others around them won't notice the difference.

(If in one month, the King is acting ENTIRELY different than before, that kind of screams, "he's been bewitched" but a slow gradual shift in policy won't get noticed by most people and that's how I see a succubus using subtle influences).

Frankly, if you want a sledgehammer, then ANY creature with charm should be able to do it.

 

[Lizard]

Oh noes! We don't have skill points and feats for monsters! However will we give them +4 to Diplomacy checks?!

The magic of handwavium?

I find it interesting that people were afraid to say, "Whatever, she's got +5 Bluff" in 3e, but feel that 4e grants them some new and special power they never had before...

3e let you make changes at-will, as any DM does, but also provided a formal mechanism if you wanted it. The low granularity boolean skills of 4e means it's hard to make a given succubus (or anything else) just a *little* bit different within the rules; if you use the RAW, you can say, "Well, she knows Bluff, but loses Diplomacy" (or whatever). Or you can just, as always, handwave it and add trained skills, but then why bother with rules/guidelines for how many skills should be trained a for a given creature?

 

[Lizard]

My idea is even more horrendous... Let's just make them trained in class X. Oh noes!
That means +5 to a skill. What will the poor 3.X-enthusiasts do against that simplicistic approach that eliminates the cumbersome skill points-system?

Point out that it uses a sledgehammer to do the job of a scalpel?

4e is clay? Riiiight. If it were, I'd be camped outside my FLGS waiting for it. High granularity games with lots of things to adjust, fiddle with, tinker, and set are my favorite style; 4e ain't that, as its ardent defenders will happily tell you.