Rules Question - Give your opinion

[phoffman]

As a general rule don't make monsters "immune" to party tactics and abilities. It has consequences that are often difficult to judge.

What is the Monster's Role in the story?

If your going to make an enemy resistant or immune to something the players often do, for it to feel proper you have to foreshadow that event. Also when you do this you have to ask yourself, is it effecting just one player? If so make sure there is something special that is part of this fight that that character can do instead. (manning a non-portable repeating ballista, ect.)

It is ok to surprise the players with a monster's abilities, (i.e. has an ability that causes aoe, when it is hit by radiant, lighting, or fire) But if you do surprise your players you have to calculate that into the difficulty of the combat.

 

[Pentius]

Another thing to consider is that these characters are level 23. They're in Epic Tier, let them pull off larger than life stunts if they want. If the Naga leans down to see the 'puny dwarf' and he smashes it in the nose, cracking the floor tiles with its face, well, that sounds Epic to me.

 

[Marshall]

The way I look at it is that the DM has the right to house-rule, but with the right comes a responsibility to follow a fair degree of due-diligence in terms of the impact that a change would have.

Oooh, my spidey-sense is tingling.

 

[FireLance]

On the other hand, if it bothers you that much but you don't want to short-change your players, give the player an alternate advantage that you can live with instead, such as extra damage. The balance won't be perfect, but it should be close.

 

[AeroDm]

I agree with a lot of what has been said above. The power was balanced with the idea that the effect would trigger when successful. The monster was described to be *cool.* That cool-osity shouldn't interfere with the balance the power sought to achieve. So just because it is more cinematic for a foe to be a massive snake with ten stabilizing legs, unless that description went into the actual stats it should just be flavor.

If it makes you feel better, rename prone to "off balance" or "stilted" or something similar and say it represents not being poised to effectively strike.

 

[BobTheNob]

Oooh, my spidey-sense is tingling.

I have no idea whether that response was good or bad

Another thing to consider is, contrary to a prior post, is creatures having specific immunities, especially solo fights.

Solo fights, especially at epic, tend to have be defined by control. When every player can daze/slide/knock prone (e.t.c. e.t.c.) and they are 5 v 1 vs the solo, it tends to become trivial because the solo gets pounded with control capability after control capability.

If you were to build into a solo monster something along the lines of...

"Stability : Whenever this creature is hit with an affect that would knock it prone, roll a d20. On a 14 or greater, it is not knocked prone"
(p.s. this is just the prone example, you can extend it to other things like Dazes and stun...or even crits!)

It doesnt set a system wide blanket rule which would nerf you characters that like to knock things prone, but allows that the solo has protection against particular control effects, stopping the encounter from being an utter steam roll.

I wouldnt do it often, but once in a while its nice to take players out of their comfort zone

 

[S'mon]

If the answer is "No," you are singling out the warlord unfairly because you haven't done the work to figure out how to justify the effect.

I'm coming to think that it's time to make the players do some damn justifying as to why their powers should work in an apparently ridiculous situation like this. And not just the martial PCs - I'm getting pretty sick of thinking up reasons why Visions of Avarice should work on Int 3 lizards, on ettercaps, on undead, on golems - while the player just sits there, rolls dice and declares effects, never makes the slightest attempt at any explanation of what's supposed to be actually happening.

 

[Obryn]

I'm getting pretty sick of thinking up reasons why Visions of Avarice should work on Int 3 lizards

mmm... tasty grubs!

on ettercaps

mmm... tasty giant butterflies!

on undead

mmm... braaaaaiiiinnnnsssss

on golems

mmm... other adventurers...



-O

 

[Mengu]

I can see both sides of the argument.

I'm a DM who likes to stick with the rules as is for the most part. So if the gelatinous cube is knocked prone, I just imagine it's cut to pieces and disoriented (easier to hit due to combat advantage), and needs to gather itself up before it can fight effectively (stand up as a move action).

But if I was playing under a DM, and the DM said, no man, sorry you can't knock Tiamat over with your tiefling's tail swipe, I'd be perfectly fine. Player entitlement has gone overboard in 4e. Back in the day, when the DM said no, it was a no. All this "yes" talk is favorable in some circuits, but taking away the DM's power to say "no" is hindering some of the entertainment value in a roleplaying game. Defeating challenges is a big part of my fun in D&D. And if the DM says yes to everything I try, I don't know if I would feel challenged to think outside the box and come up with creative solutions.

I want to see the occasional monster that can't be knocked prone, that can't be dazed, that can't be stunned, that can't be hurt by implement attacks, that can't be hurt by weapon attacks, etc. Not saying these should be common place, but if my wizard was reduced to "aid another" actions during an encounter because of a few monsters that were immune to implement attacks, I'd be fine with that. I'd run around trigger people's second winds, and maybe ask for some standard action history check to give people tactical advice, or even run by a creature to provoke an opportunity attack to get the defender to swing at him again.

Anyway, I'll come down from my imaginary soap box, and back to reality where I run things by the book, but the idea of a game where the DM does a bit more heavy handed ruling is not an unattractive idea to me.

 

[Zaukrie]

I agree with aerodm, just rename it to off balance, or unsteady, or wobbled, or whatever works in your mind. Or, they are nearly gods themselves, so ya, maybe in a fantasy world where someone is level 23, they can knock something that big prone....