Solo Monsters and the Risk of Boredom

[keterys]

Personally I don't much like throwing higher level solos against a group - I'd rather do a solo closer to the group's level and throw in additional dangers (monsters, hazards, traps, 'phased' events, etc) that would up the threat of the encounter but make the monster itself less of a pure beat it up.

 

[Plane Sailing]

What joy that is left in 4E comes from whats left over from before he joined. Changing all the classes into the same class with the same play, removing choice in skills, healing surges, all the garbage that has happened with 4E has done a good job killing the enjoyment of previous editions.

The nuts and bolts, like the completely broken skill challenges? The undefined basic mechanics like stealth and the definition of attack? Give me a break. 4E is a train wreck.

Me too, which is why we've tossed our 4E books on the shelf and are using other game systems.

If this is actually the case, I recommend that you don't visit the 4e rules forum again, as it is unlikely to be enjoyable for you or anyone else.

Thanks

 

[AllisterH]

What baffles me is the fact that he is basically saying: "yes, solo monsters can be boring unless you do some work to make them less boring".

I agree wholeheartedly that a DM's job is to make every fight compelling, but I find quite strange that a couple of weeks after the release of a system that was sold as "fast and fun", one of the designers is saying that some work seems indeed necessary to avoid boredomslugfests against monsters who should represent the epytome of said system.

Obviously this is just my opinion and I can be utterly wrong.
I hope this discussion can continue without degenerating into a flame-war.

Nah, you're english is fine.

The thing is, I don't think 4E actually recommends Solos by themselves. Look at your MM for example.

Do any of the Solo monsters listed actually, well, fight Solo in an encounter?

For example, the earliest Solo you can get is the White Dragon and it is a level 3 Solo. Yet, the suggested encounter for it is a level 4 Encounter. Take the hydras as well. Each of them are solos, yet you're not actually suggested to fight them solo (in fact, each is suggested in an encounter where the encounter level is HIGHER than the hydra itself)

Even ORCUS, arguably the iconic Solo BBEG, is not suggested to fight by itself.

So, if the system doesn't suggest Solo encounters and in fact suggests other combatants in it, I don't think the system can truly be faulted.

 

[functionciccio]

keterys,
maybe solos are not supposed to be the epitome of the system, but I think dragons should be.

I understand what you, Cadfan and others are saying, but a fight vs. a dragon should be "fun" right out of the box. Yes, you can work to make it *more* fun, but if said work is required to avoid boredom, then something is not right.

Admittedly, no Dragon in the MM encounters is presented alone... so maybe my vision is wrong.

EDIT: ninjaed by AllisterH about Solos not being solos.

 

[keterys]

Well, to put things in perspective... I plan on having dragon fights with things like buildings the dragon can knock over, stalactites it can drop on people, melting the floor out from under people, setting flaming patches of ground or animating its breath, diving through a ceiling/wall/floor to give it a breather, calling in reinforcements, etc.

I want them to be bigger deals, I guess I mean.

 

[Kordeth]

Well, to put things in perspective... I plan on having dragon fights with things like buildings the dragon can knock over, stalactites it can drop on people, melting the floor out from under people, setting flaming patches of ground or animating its breath, diving through a ceiling/wall/floor to give it a breather, calling in reinforcements, etc.

I want them to be bigger deals, I guess I mean.

This. ANY fight that takes place in a featureless room is pretty boring.

 

[Switchback]

-dp-

 

[Switchback]

Well, to put things in perspective... I plan on having dragon fights with things like buildings the dragon can knock over, stalactites it can drop on people, melting the floor out from under people, setting flaming patches of ground or animating its breath, diving through a ceiling/wall/floor to give it a breather, calling in reinforcements, etc.

I want them to be bigger deals, I guess I mean.

I think this is one of those subjects that you really have to prepare for ahead of time in 4e, even more so than previous miniature based editions. Simply because of the increased importance in tactics and positioning, for me as a player at least, it can be difficult to think creatively or outside the box sometimes.

Some DM's might have same tendencies to just let the rules and grid stand on their own once a encounter is devised. Whereas, I think the things you describe doing in a dragon fight for instance would just come naturally or on instinct in a earlier time where 'the board' wasn't such a vital piece of D&D.

It's just natural if you are only imagining a fight with a dragon in a cave to for instance, make that leap that this round he is going swipe the ceiling with his claw and bring stalactites crashing down. And the players would simply nod as if that makes sense.

But now, if you don't have the tiles for that, and forget to point it out to the players at the start of the battle how the terrain looks, they might be left asking where all the stalactities (or whatever set piece) suddenly came from. None of these ancillary things can just be assumed as easily unless the DM specifically points them out and also has probably devised some rules on how their mechanics will work during the encounter in question.

 

[FadedC]

keterys,
maybe solos are not supposed to be the epitome of the system, but I think dragons should be.

I understand what you, Cadfan and others are saying, but a fight vs. a dragon should be "fun" right out of the box. Yes, you can work to make it *more* fun, but if said work is required to avoid boredom, then something is not right.

Admittedly, no Dragon in the MM encounters is presented alone... so maybe my vision is wrong.

I agree dragons SHOULD be fun right off the back, but in practice it's just hard to make a single monster fun end exciting versus a whole party. I'm not sure that any edition of d&d has ever really gotten dragons perfect. Dragons in edition 1-3 were generally just way too easily killed, sometimes dying in a single round. 4e may have erred on the other side of the coin. I'm inclined to say that a 10 round 4e dragon battle is still more exciting then a 1 round 3e dragon battle, but perhaps I will change my mind in time.

 

[Stalker0]

The math balance of a solo is a tricky thing.

On the one hand you make a creature that has 5 times the normal hitpoints of a single monster AND has higher defenses. Those two multiply together, creating a monster that can take far more punishment than a group of 5 monsters.

On the other hand, its more vulnerable to attacks that make you lose actions and it tends to have lower offense than 5 monsters (not a Lot less, but still less).

That naturally creates a scenario where both the party and the solo are going into a war of attrition, so I can understand why it would need a little spice to keep it interesting.

One thing I will say is if you want to speed up a solo fight, drop its defenses by 1 or 2, and you will see a noticeable difference in how fast a party takes it down.