Question Re: Your 4e Adventure Design

[Dungeoneer]

I don't know what percentage of my monsters I build from scratch, but it was a lot early on. Monster creation in 4e is really a joy, turning DMs into Dr. Frankensteins as they patch together hideous abominations. That said, I've dialed it back some recently because I found that I tended to get carried away with myself and build monsters that were overly complex. Less is more I've found.

I try when possible to at least use an existing monster for a 'seed'. From there I'll add powers from other monsters or make up my own wholesale. But I like to think that if I start with a real monster I won't go too far off track.

 

[Mengu]

As easy as it is to create monsters, Looking at stat blocks, I use maybe 10% straight out of the book, probably 60% scratch built or heavily modified, and the rest have minor modifications. But I have to admit if I look at numbers (instead of stat blocks), that 10% straight out of the book may be significantly higher because I have probably used lots of kobold skirmishers, gnoll marauders and huntmasters, and ogre savages. But then again those numbers maybe balanced by the plethora of minions I've had to scratch build.

My opinion on encounter design is that every encounter has its own needs. And monsters straight out of the book alone, usually just don't cut it.

 

[BobTheNob]

I dont homebrew a hell of a lot, mostly solo's (almost never use the books solo's....always too weak). For normal creature almost never, and only ever because there wasnt a creature that fit what I wanted.

Why? I have a very specific reason for doing this. Players need a yardstick for advancement. A sort of line in the sand that sais "you know how you leveled up and got that new weapon...well, feel the effects now". If you keep throwing new and improved monsters at them all the time, this effect can be diluted (or what I like to call the "Oblivion Effect").

I like using the monsters from the books because they are iconic, recognisable and, through re-using them occasionally, players get a feel for the growth of their characters.

 

[LostSoul]

I only use monsters from the books. I do this because I want to challenge the players; I want them to select the level of risk & reward; thus I want them to metagame and be able to say, "Gnolls are usually level 5, with their leaders in the 7-9 range; we could use some level 5 treasure and XP, so let's head over there."

Only using monsters from the books allows players to make more meaningful decisions (of the kind that game game is about).

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

I homebrew a lot.

I run Dark Sun, so I find I have to. The DSCC is pretty small as monster books go; it's missing a lot of monsters I liked from 2e. The PCs are 3rd-level, and there are no templars in the DSCC at that level, so naturally they have to be home-brewed. (Can't have Dark Sun without templars!) The lowest templar I've written up is 5th-level, so they're a little "meaty" but that's okay; their minions (usually not in the metagame sense of the word) tend to be 3rd-level. I also run templars a little closer to their 2e counterparts (eg being capable in melee, and more like clerics than warlocks).

Same with the dray, only worse. Not only were the levels too high, but DSCC just says to homebrew dray templar yourselves using the Psionic Adept monster theme. So I did! I have regular templars (4th-level), kalin riders (7th-level, so naturally I had to write up kalin too, who are also 7th-level), and defilers of 7th-level, which is still a bit nasty to be throwing at the PCs right now, but then they're not near Giustenal. (Well, actually, they're going near the Silt Sea next session...) And I did up 1st-generation dray as being much more similar to dragonborn than the 2e versions - they're usually 3rd-level, rather than the paragon monstrosities in the DSCC.

I've also blatantly stolen 3.x NPCs from Enemies and Allies and reworked them into 4e because... why not? Some of them were a chore to create, but they ended up looking like lots of fun. Alas, the only low-level NPCs I "stole" (as a group, that is) aren't the kinds of opponents the PCs are likely to face (a druid circle and very angry gnomes - the PCs hate defilers and there are no gnomes - or riding dogs - on Athas).

 

[the Jester]

Interestingly, I have found that I do as many new versions of existing monsters (e.g. "Ooh, I'll gargoyle, but let's make it a gargoyle mason!") as I do entirely new monsters when I homebrew.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I do whatever. I did start out using mostly stock monsters. Nowadays I think it is mostly mods or homebrew ones. I've found I didn't really like a lot of the way things seemed broken down by default with standard monsters always being nameless ciphers and practically every NPC seemed to be elite. Sure, elite NPCs are good, but these days I make all mooks minions pretty much and mostly stick to standard monsters for things that at least have a name or are 'formidable'. That way elite status can be used only for major figures. It means when you go much past high heroic you really have to brew a lot of your own stuff as the MMs don't really seem to mostly work that way.

It seems like there's a divide too between city type adventures where most stuff is custom and unique and dungeon/wilderness areas where there are more types of stock monsters to go with. For instance one large 'dungeon' was centered on demons, mostly stock monsters, and another with fey creatures, which were a mix. The latest is creating an uprising in a town and rescuing an ally from prison. Everything is custom there, even the minions, though a few creatures are minor mods and I will happily throw in a stock monster now and then (a kyton and a misfortune devil worked well).