Something Awful leak.

[KarinsDad]

Meh, this is true, but it is kind of a nit. I think the thing with helpless is that it isn't really a condition you apply BY ITSELF. I know there are a couple of ways you can end up helpless without any other condition, but it is not really intended to be the only condition on you.

Dude. Joke. See smiley face.

You always take jokes so seriously.

 

[Janaxstrus]

Funny thing though, about the "master blacksmith". Change that to a Sage and try the same thing. For some reason, being extremely knowledgeable about the breeding patterns of vampiric wombats suddenly means that I'm capable of standing toe to toe with a 5th level fighter and winning.

This is my primary problem with TheAlexandrian's "examples" of how the 3e system works. He has a tendency to pick and choose his examples and ignore all the other stuff that doesn't work.

So...you agree a 1st level blacksmith can create the stuff a small town would need as well as exceptional weapons and that "high level" isn't required?

Ok then.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

A level 5 expert (blacksmith) can make any kind of weapon needed.
+8 skill ranks
+1 Intelligence bonus
+3 Skill Focus
+2 masterwork tools
+2 from an assistant or apprentice helping them

+16 to his check If he takes 10, that is a 26 check, vs 20 to make masterwork items.

The Alexandrian Blog Archive D&D: Calibrating Your Expectations

Right, so now all I have to do is screw around with calculating all the different feats and blah blah blah as if the monster was a PC. No thank you! In 4e I can simply say "this monster is a blacksmith" and MAYBE I give them some attribute scores that would go along with doing 'blacksmith things' (say a good STR and CON perhaps). I can then simply state what they can and can't do and under what conditions. This will all be based on the needs I have within the story, not dictated by some rules framework that is intended to set the limits on what PCs can do and make them accept various trade-offs.

Remember too, PCs are adventurers. The character gen system is designed to produce adventurers, not blacksmiths and shopkeepers. Given that I'm not interested in complex rules for those sorts of characters it is much more economical and sensible for the system to just let me set up these NPCs so they work for my purposes. I have no need for rules telling me how they level up etc.

 

[billd91]

Funny thing though, about the "master blacksmith". Change that to a Sage and try the same thing. For some reason, being extremely knowledgeable about the breeding patterns of vampiric wombats suddenly means that I'm capable of standing toe to toe with a 5th level fighter and winning.

This is my primary problem with TheAlexandrian's "examples" of how the 3e system works. He has a tendency to pick and choose his examples and ignore all the other stuff that doesn't work.

How do you figure that? Examples, please.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Dude. Joke. See smiley face.

You always take jokes so seriously.

lol, maybe. More often I just forget to add my own smiley or something. Helpless IS weird though. I'm not sure why they didn't just attach something like 'stunned' to it, but I guess they figured it might be more useful as-is.

Anyway, I agree with your analysis of durations, pretty much. I do think it is easier to handle the ones that end on the affected target's turn though. It is kind of one of those things where neither option is really perfect.

 

[tlantl]

It's not about making them "plane touched, vampiric, and advanced-" at least for me.

For me it's about supporting the unexpected. Throwing a troll at pcs the first time? Fun... OMG it's not dying!!! Throwing them at the PCs the 3rd time? Get the fire swords out...

Making monsters quick to generate for me lets me throw together monsters that keep on scaring the players because they never know what to expect. THAT to me is the fun of D&D.

Sounds good but there's also the fact that there are hundreds of monsters in those books. I never have to use another troll again for years, especially since were likely to see maybe ten different monsters a session and most of us only see one session a week. I can't see that there's a need to beef up a monster if you can use a different one for your next dungeon.

Most of the people I play with like to have the monsters become familiar, therefore easier to beat the next time they run into one.

I like to build the dungeons and set up adventures. I draw my own maps and write my own campaign rules. I find building 3e monsters tends to be a problem. I spend so much time building them that I have to skimp on other stuff to get things ready on time.

But the biggest issue have is that I get attached to some of the intricate enemies I put so much time into building. I don't play 4e so I have no clue about that game's system for monster preparation.

I never thought of character creation as building until 3e came our way.

 

[KarinsDad]

It's not about making them "plane touched, vampiric, and advanced-" at least for me.

For me it's about supporting the unexpected. Throwing a troll at pcs the first time? Fun... OMG it's not dying!!! Throwing them at the PCs the 3rd time? Get the fire swords out...

Making monsters quick to generate for me lets me throw together monsters that keep on scaring the players because they never know what to expect. THAT to me is the fun of D&D.

I have to admit that I can understand your desire, but I think that what you want is mostly supported already, regardless of monster generation system. There are 4857 different monsters in the 4E Compendium which means that with approximately 35 main monster levels (plus a handful higher) and about 4 levels of monsters are worth throwing at the PCs at any given level, there are about 555 different monsters that I can throw at PCs in any given encounter.

I'm sorry, but for non-special monsters, I don't need to generate a single troll that fire doesn't work as well against. I have 555 different monsters I can throw at PCs at each level of which 530 they will never see (and the number is typically 700 to 1000 for levels 1 to 15, and dropping off to 400 to 500 at higher levels because not as much material is available for high Paragon and Epic). I don't need to quickly generate a special troll and if I do, I just take a pencil, cross out what I don't like, and add in what I do.

For special monsters, I agree with you. But for me, a special monster is a re-occurring villain. One that will show up over and over again. If I'm taking out the time to generate a special monster, I don't want it dead in 30 minutes. And yes, I want it to be somewhat quick, easy, and painless to create. But, this is relative. It can take a bit of time because it's something that I want to fine tune anyway. I want to take my time and design it, I don't just want to slap it together.

But for non-special monsters, I really don't care. As long as I can grab some powers in the vein of what I want, have a template for level for attacks, defenses, and hit points, I'm good. The monster doesn't have to be really well designed because it's going to be dead 15 to 30 minutes after I introduce it.

But, I typically do not create monsters. As long as I have a good search tool to search for a monster similar to what I want, it's all good. In 3E, a lot of monsters are not online, so I would have more of a desire to create my own. It really takes too long to search through monster manuals for monsters.


This is why PC rules and monsters rules should be similar for attacks, defenses, hit points (although monsters can have more), ability scores, etc., but their generation rules can be totally different due to their utility and duration in the game system. Monster creation has to be fast and easy because monsters die so quickly. But, the fastest monster creation is just grabbing something someone else already created.

 

[GreyICE]

Well I'm guessing a lot of that junk is going to be scrapped. Having 6 different NADs, all used for defenses against Save or Die attacks seems like exactly the sort of thing a playtest reveals is a bad idea. Would not be surprised to see the 4E mechanic return.

If they're truly avoiding using exact language in order to use 'plain language' then they're going to run into huge problems rather quickly. Minor action stacking is already an issue, that version of minor actions strikes me as sounding exactly like free actions. And I assure you, if free action attacks/effects can be stacked, free action attacks/effects WILL be stacked. Getting 3 or 4 free actions a turn to do effects like healing, attacking, buffing, etc. would be NUTS.

Standard/move/minor was awesome.

TLDR of the entire thing is that Monte Cook has plowed ahead with throwing out everything 4E did for the game, and instead of DND next, this will be DND retro edition.

Looks like it's time for 4E fans to get our heads together and hack 4E into shape.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Funny thing though, about the "master blacksmith". Change that to a Sage and try the same thing. For some reason, being extremely knowledgeable about the breeding patterns of vampiric wombats suddenly means that I'm capable of standing toe to toe with a 5th level fighter and winning.

This is my primary problem with TheAlexandrian's "examples" of how the 3e system works. He has a tendency to pick and choose his examples and ignore all the other stuff that doesn't work.

As shown, the sage most probably has no dexterity, no strength and no constitution, most probably because of his age, which leaves him with +0 to hit, 1hp per level and AC of less then ten.

(As shown in the example with einstein)

I didn´t know about the alexandrian, but he came to the same conclusions as I, when I began thinking about skillpoints, and if 2 skillpoints per level for fighters are enough.

My experts are usually level 2. Which even allows for 5 ranks in a related skill, to gain a synergy bonus.
It is very easy to get up to a bonus of +10 or more. Which equals to a skill check result above 30 when taking 20. Which means that with enough time, you can do anyting. And you can reliably do hard tasks. (take 10)

3.5 skills were brilliant. The only problem was that somehow they were presented, as if increasing a skill by 1 per level was default. It was not.

Cross class skill ranks rather fitted the expectations. 2+1/2 per level. If you remember that, every class has more than enough points to distribute.

Maybe a simple rule: you may only max 1-2 skills, would have made the system more usable.

 

[Scribble]

This is why PC rules and monsters rules should be similar for attacks, defenses, hit points (although monsters can have more), ability scores, etc., but their generation rules can be totally different due to their utility and duration in the game system. Monster creation has to be fast and easy because monsters die so quickly. But, the fastest monster creation is just grabbing something someone else already created.

All I'm talking about is the generation rules, not the basic rules like attack and defense damage and stuff.