Sanity Checking some Monster Damages

[Elric]

Nice work. Storm Gorgons are a specific example of the general phenomenon that creatures with Auras would often be (much) too strong if their Auras stacked. This is a problem, because it means that a single creature with an Aura is stronger than it should be, even if an encounter with five of them wouldn't be noticeably harder than it should be (because of the lack of stacking).

The Storm Gorgon's aura affects allies as well, which makes it hard to avoid using a bunch of creatures with non-stacking auras in the same encounter (since its natural allies, the Storm Giants/Titans, have auras as well).

Another example: the Bloodfire Harpy (L9 soldier) has: Burning Song (Fire) aura 20; enemies within the aura at the start of their turns take 5 fire damage (deafened creatures are immune). Aura 20 means it should hit every pc every round of combat after the first and many on the first as well. If it lives 3 rounds against a party of 5, that's 75 damage already, not counting its attack actions. It's spread out damage, but still too much.

Today's rules update for the Monster Manual is relevant to this thread:

Aura
Page 280: Replace the third paragraph of the aura section with the following text. This change removes the rule that prevents stacking in damage auras, ensuring that monsters are achieving correct damage output.

This would be a reasonable change if monsters with auras weren't consistently too strong relative to other monsters already (at least when facing PCs without appropriate resistance). Five Bloodfire Harpies, under this update, for example, are way too much for a level 9 party, particularly if they simply stay in the air >10 squares away when few PCs can attack them effectively.

 

[keterys]

Yep, I immediately responded to that errata point by asking Greg if he could nerf the Bloodfire Harpy down to an aura 2 or something at the same time

It's quite worrisome for me, the new change. On another hand, it makes it much easier for me to measure creature damage since that damage _will_ land.

And if previously creatures with auras were considered weaker than they are, because 'Oh, there are 3 of them, so the aura is only 1/3 or 1/2 as effective', good to see that idea dispelled.

 

[Elric]

Yep, I immediately responded to that errata point by asking Greg if he could nerf the Bloodfire Harpy down to an aura 2 or something at the same time

It's quite worrisome for me, the new change.

Storm Gorgon needs toning down too, and so on. It's striking how little errata there's been to reduce monster power levels (and though there was some errata to increase monster damage in the MM, there's been relatively little of that too). At least they hit the Needlefang Drake Swarm.

Other monsters that should be toned down: Ghoul Gatherer (E2), Wyrmwarped Atrocity (Draconomicon), Skeletal Tomb Guardian (MM).

 

[Markn]

I asked this in the May update thread and haven't got an answer yet.

Are they saying that aura (& zone for that matter) damage now stacks but that penalties (to defenses/to hits or othewise) don't stack.

Can someone confirm if this is correct?

Thanks.

 

[Lancelot]

I asked this in the May update thread and haven't got an answer yet.

Are they saying that aura (& zone for that matter) damage now stacks but that penalties (to defenses/to hits or othewise) don't stack.

Can someone confirm if this is correct?

Thanks.

Correct. Damage auras stack. Penalty auras don't stack.

 

[Jhaelen]

Storm Gorgon needs toning down too, and so on.

Well, the gorgon's aura will also affect its allies (a fact that WotC's adventure module tend to overlook in their encounter design), so there is a balancing factor when using a mix of monsters (that don't happen to be immune to the damage).