Monsters of Legend and the First Monster Manual

[AbdulAlhazred]

What makes it difficult in 4e?

Tucker's Kobolds weren't bad-assed because they had any kind of ordinary numerical way to take on higher level PCs. Heck, one 5th level AD&D figher can dispatch 10 kobolds in 2 rounds with ease, and they'll be lucky to hit him at all with their 20 THAC0 vs his AC1.

It was using tactics of various kinds, and extreme cunning that was what made them nasty. There's not any reason in the world that wouldn't work in 4e either. At least the kobolds can probably survive a hit from a 4e PC of high heroic levels, even if they probably can't really be missed. OTOH deadly traps and setting up tricky situations can easily be deadly vs any PC.

If you can dig up a copy of the Kobold Death Maze you'll find an example of one way to make a group of deadly kobolds that any party up to at least 8th level will be hard pressed to survive (especially if you modernize the numbers a bit).

 

[avin]

I want to be able to add class levels (3E) or change a monster level like in 4E, being able to told the story I want.

If the players find a kobold in Gehenna he won't be level 1.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

I don't want specific Monsters of Legend statted. Let each gamer determine on their own how their vision of legendary monsters or characters should be reflected.

I may think Gandalf was a 5th-level wizard, but the game shouldn't publish an "authorized" version to force you to agree.

 

[Aramax]

4th Edition really committed to having multiple versions of each monster. However, I think we can ask whether the particular approach to multiple monsters was adequate. For the most part, 4E monsters of a kind were all around the same level and operated on similar paradigms.

What I was wondering might be valuable for the next version of the Monster Manual is including the Monster of Legend version of many classic mythical creatures alongside the standard D&D versions. Or in other words: " This is the Medusa that Perseus fought, " or " This is the Pegasus captured by Bellerophon. " I can well imagine this would at least be a good additional supplement, but I want to know what peope think of making this dichotomy Core.

Like all the other good ideas Im seeing here,if en world was making these books theyd all be 1000 pages

 

[Alzrius]

If I'm fighting a monster at 5th level, and it's a tough encounter, then when I fight that same kind of monster again at 10th level, being able to dispatch it handily is a nice method of showing how far my character has come...rather than finding that it's a variant that's conveniently of equivalent challenge, thus making 10th level feel like 5th level.

From the D&D XP Seminar: Charting the Course: An Edition for all Editions:

Monte: Instead of the fighter getting a better and better attack bonus, he instead gets more options to do stuff as he goes up in level, and his attack bonus goes up at a very modest rate. I think it offers a better play experience that the orc/ogre can remain in the campaign, and people can know how the monster would work from a previous experience, but they remain a challenge for longer.

Jeremy: The Monsters are in the design teams hands now and we'll be moving to development in the next few weeks. What I can say about this goal that Monte is talking about is that we're working ot provide the DM with really good world building tools. And it's important to provide information about the orcs place in D&D while making sure that a Monster remains relevant as the characters level up. They're might be an orc shaman, an orc champion or whatever for higher levels, but we also want the basic orc to be relevant at higher levels. We want it to be really easy for the DM to open the Monster Manual and drop an orc or iconic monsters into the game.

Well @#$%.