PCs and Monsters being different - Classes?

The bad news: it seems that Warlocks may not have the curse powers you want. The write-up for the Races and Classes for the Warlock is probably going to be the one furthest from the actual finished class. In the D&D podcast, there was mention that the Warlock was still undergoing significant changes and that it relied on curses at one time but they changed it after playtesting.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Abstraction said:
The bad news: it seems that Warlocks may not have the curse powers you want. The write-up for the Races and Classes for the Warlock is probably going to be the one furthest from the actual finished class. In the D&D podcast, there was mention that the Warlock was still undergoing significant changes and that it relied on curses at one time but they changed it after playtesting.
They said that it no longer relied on curses to do more damage with the eldrich blast, yes.

This doesn't mean that curses won't hinder, weaken or immobilize foes.
 

Counterspin said:
But we already know that monsters and monster PCs are handled with two different systems.

Yes, but is the one system just a simplification of the other, or an entirely new system? I hope it's the former. I'd love to see how 4e is handling the whole 'LA' thing and PCs as monsters.

Pinotage
 

One of the earliest playtests talked about how easy it was to change monsters into something else... I guess you'll be able to slap an ability/power into any monster statblock and calculate it's CR/Level/XP award according to the level of the ability/power. Maybe swaping powers of similar level will work too. As for numeric values (attacks, saves, hp), the level of the monster will tell it all, so you just tweak it to your liking (hope there are guideline to 'if I lower saves, can I increase attack bonuses without changing level? and where's the limit to this?').

I'm really liking this 'monsters are not PCs'. If I want a monster to level up with the party, then I can rewrite it as a PC - and worry about how many feats he's supposed to have or his Swim modifier - but until then, Level/HP/AC/Saves/Attacks/Powers will do. Sometimes, only Level.
 

Pinotage said:
Yes, but is the one system just a simplification of the other, or an entirely new system? I hope it's the former. I'd love to see how 4e is handling the whole 'LA' thing and PCs as monsters.

Pinotage
Mearls said this:
Querent: Do I wave my hands and say "Suddenly, the Ogre Warrior in front of you can't take a punch as well, and also has for some reason forgotten how to use Awesome Blow, and maybe has gained a barbarian's Rage! Poof!"

Nope. In all the situations you cite, the ogre would be an ogre.

The only case where the ogre might not get a theoretical Awesome Blow ability is if, for some reason, it caused problems in the hand of a PC. However, that is much more likely to be the case for beholders, mind flayers, and other critters with really weird, powerful abilities that would be big problems if used every round throughout an adventure.

I think this discussion points out the flaw in 3e's handling of monsters as PCs. LA works fine for *some* monsters, particularly those like giants, ogres, and minotaurs, who don't have any outlandish abilities. It breaks down for really magical, weird critters.

I think the ogre is a bad example, because he's on the very simple scale for monsters. He's basically a big, dumb fighter, and I imagine that a PC write up for him would be close to, if not precisely, just taking his stat block and playing as a level X character.

However, take the troglodyte as a counter example. Let's say I create a level 1 troglodyte fighter, the equivalent of a level 6 character. He probably has around 30 hit points, not great for a fighter at that level, but not too awful. His attack bonus is 4 points behind the equivalent human fighter. That's not so good, a 20% lower chance to hit on average.

In return, the trog has an AC of about 30 or so if he carries a shield. That's before any buffs. Thanks to the wonders of a +6 natural AC bonus, he is 30% less likely to be hit than the equivalent human fighter.

So, the trog gains +6 AC for -4 on attacks and 12 to 15 hit points.

Is that an even balance? Who knows. It might be. It probably isn't. But the key is, there's no design here. It's just numbers chosen to make a good CR 1 monster clumsily converted into a character.

In the future, we'd rather *design* this stuff to do what it does, so that when you play a trog you have a fun, interesting, reasonably balanced character.

The monster trog works fine as an NPC. He can join the party, follow you as an ally, gain character levels if the DM wants a trog wizard or fighter, and so on. The key is that, to form a fun play experience over session after session, that trog doesn't work. You need a different tool.

Some monsters are much closer to being playable. Others are farther away. We'd rather create mechanics to deal with each situation, rather than try to manufacture a one size fits all solution when it's plain that monsters need wildly different changes from case to case to become usable PCs.
 

Two things are pretty clear from the Monster podcast. I am not exactly sure about the implementation of the second.
1. You can add class levels to a monster if you want and fairly easily.
2. There are standard stat blocks for each role of monster at each level, or at each level range, or some sort of formula to generate these stat blocks. One uses these blocks as a starting point to make determinations about the strength of a monster (e.g. after you've added class levels) or as a starting point for a stand-in monster with no other stats. (I think that the example in the podcast was using a standard stat block and modifying it slightly to get a spider.)
 

Rechan said:
Mearls said this:

Hmmm. I'd read this before but hadn't really thought about it. One thing to point out is that just because a particular monster is a PC, he's suddenly different to your average monster of his kind. Or that's what it sounds like. That's not to say PCs shouldn't be different, but it looks like there are going to be two different systems. I hope it's consistent though.

Pinotage
 

Pinotage said:
Hmmm. I'd read this before but hadn't really thought about it. One thing to point out is that just because a particular monster is a PC, he's suddenly different to your average monster of his kind. Or that's what it sounds like. That's not to say PCs shouldn't be different, but it looks like there are going to be two different systems. I hope it's consistent though.
It'd probably be that 1) the monster PC race will have nice benefits, but 2) some of the nicer powers will be racial feats he has to pick up, or he'll get those powers at higher levels.
 

Rechan said:
It'd probably be that 1) the monster PC race will have nice benefits, but 2) some of the nicer powers will be racial feats he has to pick up, or he'll get those powers at higher levels.
Yeah, the idea would be that say the monster listed in the MM is a beholder and is a level 8 striker. He has a certain number of bonuses to hit, AC, as well as a bunch of eye rays.

It's similar for the reasons for LA now. As a 1st level character those bonuses make you too powerful compared to everyone else in the group. Now, you might just add levels on top of the level 8 it is already considered. However, in some ways (like bonuses to hit, ac or saves) it's possible that a beholder is way too weak for an 8th level character. In some ways (like the eye rays) it might be way too powerful as a level 8 character.

So it's best to create a race write up for a creature instead. One that says "this race gets +X to his stats, and the ability to hover", for example(whichever of his abilities still are appropriate for level 1). Then have feats that slowly let them gain whichever beholder powers they want.

This doesn't need to be done for every creature, like Mike Mearls says. Often taking an Ogre or something without really weird powers could just be played as a character of the level it is and just add class levels on top of it.
 


Remove ads

Top