Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Imaro" data-source="post: 3864969" data-attributes="member: 48965">This post seems to be saying that either run whatever the designers decide are "solo" monsters as "solo" monsters...or houserule them so that they are simpler to run in groups.  I thought one of the design golas for 4e was that monsters would be usable over a greater number of levels and in greater quantities than 3e.  How is this possible with monster's designated as "solo" and given complicated abilities?  It places, as you suggest above, certain inherent limitations on encounter types...just like 3e only in a different way.My impression was that 4e was trying to streamline or simplify encounters w/ monsters by basically taking away superfluous abilities but if you increase the complexity of how the fewer abilities work, is there really a net gain?  This seems to replace the "oh I forgot about the watchamacllit monster's watchamacllit ability" and replaces it with..."Dope, I forgot to track the watchmacllit monster's escalating ability for those last two rounds."</blockquote>