Please tell me how I am reading this wrong.

[dmccoy1693]

I'm not being cynical; I know I am reading this wrong. Please tell me how.Link.

Unfortunately, between point A and point B is a whole lot of math and deconstruction that requires consideration of not only the respective stat blocks, but also all of the peripheral “Gotcha” rules.
<snip>
As we come to the end of 3rd edition, the sheer number of Gotchas out there is daunting. The math and science are so finite that often repairing stat blocks becomes not a case of creating a flawless, pristine creature, but rather, a creature with a minimal amount of mistakes.

Is he saying that their mistake with 3rd ed was to publish to many books? So is the best fix to publish less?

 

[Pale]

No, I think that he's saying the mistake was in publishing too many rules that are exceptions to the normal rules of stat-block design. Thus, the streamlining of Monster stat blocks = good thing overall because in 3E there were too many exceptions to the rules.

 

[Lorthanoth]

Ah, I didn't read it as that at all. I think he means that in a stat block there are too many ways in which numbers can become confused as one creates a monster. That and poor proof-reading.

Nothing to do with books. He means 'end of 3rd edition' just as a poetic way of looking back over the way in which monsters and NPCs are made, and trying to avoid simialr mistakes in the new edition.

 

[AdmundfortGeographer]

The others said what I was going to.

 

[wedgeski]

No-one in Wizards R&D is going to point at the publishing schedule and say, "Mistake! Fix!" They all know they're a slave to the business as well as to the problem of creating as good a game as possible. The fix is not to publish less, because the business might not be sustainable if you do that; the fix is to re-engineer the game so that more options does not necessarily mean more complexity.

 

[Irda Ranger]

Yeah, you're reading that wrong. The two key quotes are:

“Gotcha” rules are usually modifiers (often related to size class and the like) that are almost invariably forgotten or miscalculated. As we come to the end of 3rd edition, the sheer number of Gotchas out there is daunting.

And that’s why 4E represents a change in creature-making philosophy.

The problem with 3e wasn't that there were too many books, but that there were too many templates, prestige classes, spells, etc. which could modify creatures away from their original stat block. Stacking on one top of the other on top of the other was a bit like building a LEGO panorama with hundreds of parts - some people (for whom building the panorama is a hobby in itself) found it to be a fun intellectual challenge. For all the GM's though for whom stacking all those templates just a necessary stepping stone to play, they were a barrier to fun. So, new philosophy.

Here's my guess as to part of this new system:

There is one advancement chart for brutes, one for artillery, one for arcane monsters (like drow priests and mind flayers), one for dragons, etc. etc. There is one advancement chart for each category of monsters.

Each monster entry is the single list of modifiers for that creature which modifies the chart.

So, you have an Orc brute. His modifiers are Darkvision and Light Senstivity. Other than that, you pick the HD / Monster Level you want, and read straight off the chart.

I haven't figured out yet if templates will still exist, or if there's a new monster entry for (as an example), a Fire Orc brute. Templates were an excellent way (in theory) of modifiying any creature in the book you choose; but they were found to be burdensome in practice. Time will tell if anything like them survives into 4e.

 

[Scribble]

Yeah, you're reading that wrong. The two key quotes are:


The problem with 3e wasn't that there were too many books, but that there were too many templates, prestige classes, spells, etc. which could modify creatures away from their original stat block. Stacking on one top of the other on top of the other was a bit like building a LEGO panorama with hundreds of parts - some people (for whom building the panorama is a hobby in itself) found it to be a fun intellectual challenge. For all the GM's though for whom stacking all those templates just a necessary stepping stone to play, they were a barrier to fun. So, new philosophy.

Here's my guess as to part of this new system:

There is one advancement chart for brutes, one for artillery, one for arcane monsters (like drow priests and mind flayers), one for dragons, etc. etc. There is one advancement chart for each category of monsters.

Each monster entry is the single list of modifiers for that creature which modifies the chart.

So, you have an Orc brute. His modifiers are Darkvision and Light Senstivity. Other than that, you pick the HD / Monster Level you want, and read straight off the chart.

I haven't figured out yet if templates will still exist, or if there's a new monster entry for (as an example), a Fire Orc brute. Templates were an excellent way (in theory) of modifiying any creature in the book you choose; but they were found to be burdensome in practice. Time will tell if anything like them survives into 4e.

My guess is you'll also have a list of "maneuvers" that you can swap in and out for the creature.

I can't decide if they'll come from the class or the race... probably both though now that I think about it.

 

[dmccoy1693]

Here's my guess as to part of this new system:

There is one advancement chart for brutes, one for artillery, one for arcane monsters (like drow priests and mind flayers), one for dragons, etc. etc. There is one advancement chart for each category of monsters.

Each monster entry is the single list of modifiers for that creature which modifies the chart.

So, you have an Orc brute. His modifiers are Darkvision and Light Senstivity. Other than that, you pick the HD / Monster Level you want, and read straight off the chart.

I haven't figured out yet if templates will still exist, or if there's a new monster entry for (as an example), a Fire Orc brute. Templates were an excellent way (in theory) of modifiying any creature in the book you choose; but they were found to be burdensome in practice. Time will tell if anything like them survives into 4e.

From everything I've read, I made a similar guess, but here's the thing: WotC is going to release more and more advancement charts as players learn them and are no longer wowed by the old ones anymore. There are bound to be rules for mixing charts (if not at first, there will be eventually). Some monsters will have their own charts simply because they are so different then anything else (i.e. beholder). And by the time that 5E (or 4.5, take your pick) is ready to launch, there will be such a glut of charts and such that it'll be a "barrier to fun." So I am back to square 1: Is it because they release to much?

At the start of the new edition, its going to be very easy because there are less options. But give the edition 3-5 years worth of material to be released and considering that many books release more and more options, you end up with the same situation as right now.

 

[Xyl]

Take a look at the errata for the monster manuals some time. There are tons of minor fixes where an attack bonus, or damage roll, or skill bonus, or saving throw, or grapple check, or special ability save DC, or any of a hundred other things was off by 1 or 2 because someone forgot that 5 ranks in Tumble gives a +2 bonus to Jump and nobody caught it before the book went out the door. It's easy to have a minor mistake slip through, especially when you're taking an existing monster and adding class levels. That's what he means by "Gotcha" rules: all the rules that cause changing one thing about a monster to make several other things change.

The problem has existed since day 1, and hasn't really gotten worse with the number of books published. It's a consequence of having all of a monster's numbers be derived from a few basic things (size, type, hit dice, abilities, and skill ranks), with each of those basic things influencing several places in the final statblock. Their solution for 4e appears to be that all the numbers in a monster's statblock are simply set at whatever the designer wants, and don't depend on each other like they do now.

 

[Charwoman Gene]

From everything I've read, I made a similar guess, but here's the thing: WotC is going to release more and more advancement charts as players learn them and are no longer wowed by the old ones anymore.

Yes, just like the GLUT of creature types, which are the closest these "roles" have in D&D 3.5.