Some bits about Monsters from the WotC boards

[Remathilis]

But that's a good thing! Higher level games should/could look like League of Extra-Ordinary Gentlemen.

Yeah, but that was highly dependent on you losing or dumping your PC. If I wanted to play a minotaur, I'd like to from level 1, not play an elf for 9 levels, then switch...

 

[Shroomy]

In general, I see a lot of clamoring for the ability to play monster-races as PCs, but I bet if you asked a random sampling of gamers who wanted to play monster PCs, they each respond with a different type of monster. How do you satisfy that kind of demand? The 3x solution was LA (and ECL), a single number tacked onto a monster stat block that ultimately led to a broken system. I think the 4e solution of separating the PC-racial write-up from the monster right up is a good idea; just hit the heavy hitters in the PHB and MM (mostly humanoids, fey, and outsiders) and you'll probably hit 90% of what people are actually demanding.

 

[psionotic]

I'll be very happy when that enormous, ponderous golem has a reflex save of less than +15 just because it has so many HD. Personally, HD = (all combat abilities) is great for PCs (including villian NPCs), but terrible for monsters.

If I want to advance a creature, I'll either bump one or more of its existing qualities (HP, Attack Bonus, etc) or give it class levels.

 

[Shroomy]

My main pet peeve regarding monster advancement is that values like SR and DR did not scale with HD in most cases.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Y'know, this has been a complaint about the NPC classes too.

"20th level commoners having +10 saves!" is weird to wrap your head around.

I wonder if NPC's will follow the more-monster-like design of "Give them what they need."

 

[Frostmarrow]

Yeah, but that was highly dependent on you losing or dumping your PC. If I wanted to play a minotaur, I'd like to from level 1, not play an elf for 9 levels, then switch...

Hm, you are right. That's pretty dull. You could of course have the elf die and then switch but that's a question of timing...

Serioulsy: You could start playing a minotaur despite being better than everybody else. Or you could have a cheesy chrysalis system where you grow big (or wings) at level nine. Or you could be under curse of low performance that is lifted at level nine.

I don't know. None of these seem better than to wait until you have grown into the minotaur. EL with all it shortcomings is looking pretty good right now. Any more ideas?

A pre-teen minotaur perhaps? That works with the conditions you have to play a kid and that the monster in question doesn't have real long life spans.

 

[Kobold Avenger]

I actually liked Savage Species as a book, and got pretty good at figuring out monster levels by extrapolating it from the LA and HD. But no one really liked that book because they already had big problems with the Level Adjustment.

 

[Mouseferatu]

A pre-teen minotaur perhaps? That works with the conditions you have to play a kid and that the monster in question doesn't have real long life spans.

So, a mini-taur, then?

 

[marune]

Y'know, this has been a complaint about the NPC classes too.

"20th level commoners having +10 saves!" is weird to wrap your head around.

I wonder if NPC's will follow the more-monster-like design of "Give them what they need."

Probably, and that's a good idea !

NPC classes can be a good idea to create villains (like a cultist class) but is a ridiculous way to "simulate" the mundane folks.

4E seem to be cleaning D&D of his simulation bits, and that's GOOD !

 

[Glyfair]

AS I read this, it means that gnomes, and maybe goblins, will be usable as PCs because in the MM they will be described both as a monster and as a race.

The gno more gnome problem is over then!

Indeed, if you read the entire exchange by following the links, you'll see that is how this whole discussion evolved. Gnomes are important, very important, in Eberron and losing them from the start will prevent anyone from moving to 4E until the problem is dealt with.

Y'know, one of the reasons I wouldn't run D&D before 3E was because monsters followed one set of rules, characters followed another, and there was precious little overlap. I don't like the sound of this -- we're sliding backwards, here!

Yes, we know that monsters follow one set of rules and characters the other. We don't know that there will be "precious little overlap."