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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 6119677" data-attributes="member: 82106">I'm not 100% sure I understand what you're saying. At least in my opinion you just assign stock numbers and a small number of powers and traits to a monster. There's no need for monsters to have feats, backgrounds, etc. All they need are the final numbers. Its not really relevant that the Orc Slayer does Nd12+M damage because of this and that feat plus an ability score bonus, etc. Its fine that it does "adequate damage to be a level 5 threat". Its fine that its axe blow power can daze opponents, we don't need to know that comes from using an MBA plus the benefits of the Axe Murderer feat. Now, its fine if the game details what sorts of stock numbers and variations in those numbers are going to project various conclusions (IE the orc has hide armor on, we can conclude AC is not particularly high amongst orcs), and we can be pretty sure the orc's FORT is probably higher on the scale than for a typical monster perhaps, but that its REFLEX is average and its WILL is a bit on the low side. The rules may well note that this is the typical expected pattern for lower intelligence humanoid monsters, though some of course may be quicker and less sturdy, etc. I have to say, I think 4e failed to really discuss this and tie it into the game in as convincing a fashion as it might have. Monsters work well, but I think 30 levels of scaling every number by +1/level tended to blur things a lot. 20 levels of half-level scaling probably will work better and allow a tighter coupling, which IMHO even reduces the case for using class-like mechanics or other PC mechanics even further.</blockquote>

Verification