[MONSTERS] Monster Advancement - Implied Simulationism

[Wulf Ratbane]

If you want to build a new system for expressing new creatures (or even new ways of expressing humans and elves) then I'm there.
But if you want to take the tools I already have and squeeze that into into a "correct" average answer on an oversized table, then I have no interest.

I think there are conflicting desires between ease, options, and speed.

I would like a "correct average answer" on an oversized table, with respect to the parts of monster creation that are a drag: the Spine statblock. I'm happy with this being an average because, for the most part, the Spine is invisible to the players from their side of the DM screen. There's no real interesting way to describe the difference between a monster with AC20 vs. AC22, BAB+8 vs. BAB+10 (pretty much anything inside +/-4).

In a metagame sense, perhaps, these things are apparent to the players, but not really to the PCs.

All the same, I'd like the numbers to "fit."

But once all the numbers are in place, I want quick, easy options for customizing the "flashy" parts of the monster that are visible to the PCs (as opposed to visible to the players).

 

[GlassJaw]

I think I agree with your preference. However, it may be because we already have bugbears as a "goblin boss" option.

Hmm, I don't think so. I'm ok with a Huge troll but not a Medium goblin. It's completely arbitrary but "in my world" (or brain), goblins are always small.

That's not to say the tools should prevent you from creating a Medium goblin, however.

Does this mean humans can have 1 or more racial HD?

I'm still not sure. If we have defined Hit Dice as "meat", I don't think so, although I can still see having a system that allows you to do so.

But honestly, I don't think I really care. What I really want is a system that gives you the stats and modifiers for creatures and NPCs at a specific CR. End of story. If I need some human heavy strikers, casters, or roguish types for a scenario at CR X, I don't care if they have racial Hit Dice, class levels, templates, whatever - I just want to know the stats are appropriate.

I'm more a fan of having all the pieces than having big blocks already locked in. The modular solo and elite templates are very cool. But the idea of a bunch of pre-fabed giants for every CR drops my interest in a heartbeat. For one thing, by the time you have produced a table with every CR for every creature type you ahve gone through an over-blown exercise in data grinding and 90% of it will never even be potentially of use to me. What I mean there is, I may or may not ever decide I need a custom CR12 giant, but I am certain I won't need a custom CR11 and a CR12 custom giant and a CR13 custom giant and ...

Wulf has the building blocks to create tables at every CR for every creature type. We are still discussing how to implement that. I do think the information is useful, although I agree that some kind of hybrid system may be the best implementation.

And even with that, when I do decide I want a CR12 custom giant, it is going to be just that, custom. I don't want to take a stock chassis off the shelf and plug a few items into slots.

I like the way creatures are presented in the 4E MM. The base creature is listed plus some variations at different CRs. That said, it is essentially the "stock chassis" with some different abilities plugged in.

If you want to build a new system for expressing new creatures (or even new ways of expressing humans and elves) then I'm there.

I definitely want a new system that for expressing all 1-HD races. 1st-level warrior stat blocks aren't that useful.

But if you want to take the tools I already have and squeeze that into into a "correct" average answer on an oversized table, then I have no interest.

This might be where we disagree. I do think a table average values is very useful - as a guideline. If nothing else, it will put you in the ballpark quickly when scaling a creature.

Because at the end of the day, if you pick a stat line from a scalable giant CR table, add Large, give the creature regeneration and rend, and describe it as green with a big nose, to the players it's a troll, even if its "spine" stats are exactly the same as an ogre or a hill giant.

(Ninja'ed by Wulf!!)

 

[BryonD]

I once read a book on physics that described the term "obvious" as anything that a competent physicist could determine through basic calculations, given enough time. "Genius" is figuring out some new insight.

I already have numerous monster books with the guidelines for creatures laid out in tables. Regurgitating the outputs of those tables across a range of inputs is obvious, with a time scale on the order of seconds.

It may be a significant level of effort to grind through it for every iteration. But when I need a 14 HD (or CR7 as the case may be) aberration, I can figure out what I need faster than I can find a separate book on the shelf and flip to the correct table.

There may be a huge demand for this product that I am missing. But just speaking for myself, what you are describing is trivial.

 

[BryonD]

I think there are conflicting desires between ease, options, and speed.

I would challenge a claim that people who need the "ease" and "speed" this provides would truly implement the "options".

Better to just make a monster book with a bunch of off-the-shelf creative variations and let people use the ones they like.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

I once read a book on physics that described the term "obvious" as anything that a competent physicist could determine through basic calculations, given enough time. "Genius" is figuring out some new insight.

I already have numerous monster books with the guidelines for creatures laid out in tables. Regurgitating the outputs of those tables across a range of inputs is obvious, with a time scale on the order of seconds.

I think we both know you are not typical and your order of seconds certainly stretches into minutes for most folks (myself included).

In fact you are so atypical I really struggle to come up with anything that you, BryonD, will find more useful than what you can do yourself, unfettered from any "helpful" system.

I will say that your point is taken in this way, however:

I would much rather have a PDF with a couple of drop down selection menus (type, size, HD) to make the necessary "obvious" calculations, than a bunch of tables.

 

[BryonD]

(ignoring doubtful statements regarding myself...)

My point isn't that I don't use helpful systems. My point is that I already have the helpful systems.

If a system says that, as a guideline, Z should equal X times Y, (the Monster Manual) publishing a multiplication table (your product) is not value added.

But, if this is a product you want to publish, then I'm not going to argue. I'm just disappointed because you've done such evolutionary stuff in the past.

 

[ValhallaGH]

Why do I need a table for each creature type? So many of them are so very similar, and that would be a lot of extra pages that aren't filled with cool abilities, inspiring flavor text, or kick ass examples.
Dragons? Sure, dragons can have their own table.
Undead? Yeah, I can see giving them their own table due to their special HD / Stat rules.
Oozes, Plants, Constructs? Eh, I could go either way on these. They could probably fit into some generic Role tables, but whatever.
Humanoids, Monstrous Humanoids, Animals, Giants, Magical Beasts, Aberations, etc? Why the heck do I need more than six tables for all of these (Brute, Caster, Gish, Guardian, Skirmisher / Sneak, anything I forgot)? I say generate generic "How I want to use this critter" tables to give me the spine, which is dull if simple, I'll attach any traits, fluff, and special abilities.


And for the record, I dislike monster design since it usually takes me two minutes just to find the necessary formulas, let alone the time needed to crunch through them. This is why I steal so much from modules for monster stats. Anything with spells that I have to select usually just ignores it's spell casting ability, because I hate digging through spell lists to find something that fits and that I am willing to use.

 

[booboo]

Why do I need a table for each creature type? So many of them are so very similar, and that would be a lot of extra pages that aren't filled with cool abilities, inspiring flavor text, or kick ass examples.
Dragons? Sure, dragons can have their own table.
Undead? Yeah, I can see giving them their own table due to their special HD / Stat rules.
Oozes, Plants, Constructs? Eh, I could go either way on these. They could probably fit into some generic Role tables, but whatever.
Humanoids, Monstrous Humanoids, Animals, Giants, Magical Beasts, Aberations, etc? Why the heck do I need more than six tables for all of these (Brute, Caster, Gish, Guardian, Skirmisher / Sneak, anything I forgot)? I say generate generic "How I want to use this critter" tables to give me the spine, which is dull if simple, I'll attach any traits, fluff, and special abilities.

you are thinking much more in line with what i want frome the book.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

If a system says that, as a guideline, Z should equal X times Y, (the Monster Manual) publishing a multiplication table (your product) is not value added.

Multiplication table? That's a harsh, if accurate, description. Hmm.

But, if this is a product you want to publish, then I'm not going to argue. I'm just disappointed because you've done such evolutionary stuff in the past.

I'm still not hearing what you want, I suppose.

Why do I need a table for each creature type? So many of them are so very similar.

I say generate generic "How I want to use this critter" tables to give me the spine, which is dull if simple, I'll attach any traits, fluff, and special abilities.

Does this comport with what I said above:

All the same, I'd like the numbers to "fit." But once all the numbers are in place, I want quick, easy options for customizing the "flashy" parts of the monster that are visible to the PCs (as opposed to visible to the players).

And finally:

Why the heck do I need more than six tables for all of these (Brute, Caster, Gish, Guardian, Skirmisher / Sneak, anything I forgot)?

There's a few ways I can move here based on what folks want.

Option 1: by Creature Type.
Find the Type of creature you want (Giant, Ooze, etc.), find the Size you want, find the CR or HD of the creature you want. All the numbers are done for you, then you just pick whatever special effects you want to bolt onto that Spine. We'll provide guidelines for how many special features you could/should add to stick within a given CR.

Option 2: by Creature Role.
The creature's Spine is defined by its role-- Brute, Tank, Soldier, Skirmisher, Leader, etc. As above, find the Size, CR or HD, and read across to get the numbers.

If this is the path you prefer, then you can help out by defining the roles you want to see and the Spine (HD type, BAB, Saves) that you expect to see in each role.

As a caution, as shown on p.16-17 of Trailblazer, it is really pretty hard for a change in Spine

Option 3: The Ur-Monster.
Generate ONE fixed, middle-of-the-road Spine that's good for pretty much anything-- d8 HD, 3/4 BAB, two good saves. This is more of a 1e philosophy, where monsters had their own HD, their own attack table, etc. All creatures have pretty much the same numbers-- it's the special features that matter.

Option 4: Tables for Everything.
Ehh, I have a spreadsheet, and it's just a multiplication table after all. I can provide as many variants as you want.

Option 5: Give me the guidelines, I'll do my own Math.

Option 6: Slide Rule
Give me a table that lets me advance HD (or Size) and see how that affects the numbers I already have in the statblock. In other words, instead of reading across to find a fixed number for BAB (+12), I read across to a cell that shows me the change (+3) from where I started.

Option 7: Give me everything.
This seems to be the simplest answer. Make the method transparent so you can do it yourself, but provide tables so you don't have to.

I may discover, once I am finished with the tables, that the numbers end up so close together (again, see p.17 of Trailblazer) that a "Close Enough, One Size Fits All" is the best way to go.

For players who are absolute sticklers for every last skill rank, every possible point balanced out, you simply might not have any good options, and you have to live with the status quo. I think these players are misguided, and I will do what I can to convince them to loosen up a bit, but you're going to get out (in precision) what you put in (in effort). If you can live with less precision, you can get by with much less effort.

 

[BryonD]

I'm still not hearing what you want, I suppose.

I didn't ask for anything.
Glassjaw asked for feedback on advancing trolls and I provided my thoughts, plus I jumped to some false conclusions about where this line of question was headed.
If you want a really generic answer, I want you applying your design mojo to things I don't already have.

The thought process did lead me to be intrigued by the idea of racial HD for humanoids and such. I'd already extrapolated my thoughts to such things as 20th level Elves (quintessential elves, if you will) standing shoulder to should with 20th level elf wizards and being led by Conan the Human8/Barbarian12.
Kinda an ultimate synergy of really old school D&D and Monte Cooke racial classes and a heaping of new.

But I hadn't thought along those lines until this thread got those wheels turning.

I do now wonder what difference the original question makes. If you are going to make a table for huge giants then a row on that table MUST exist for huge 12 HD giants. And thus the huge 12 HD troll will be implicit no matter what simulation is or is not implied by WotC's guidelines. It is a moot question.