Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
The D&D Boss Fight
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="TheAngryDM" data-source="post: 5286277" data-attributes="member: 93931"><p>Thanks everyone for discussing my ideas and especially to Matrix for getting the word out.</p><p> </p><p>Just want to make a few points:</p><p> </p><p>Firstly, I know Bloodknuckles does not really push the envelope or show the versatility of the system. That was done on purpose because it was more of an attempt to test and prove the concept. </p><p> </p><p>A couple of people have pointed out that my system is more complex than simply 'fixing' solos or accepting that solos can't really be solo. Yes, it is. But simply improving the action economy and adding some resistance to conditions doesn't address the total "solo problem" with front loaded action and a lack of 'beats' that indicate progress. These things contribute to the grind as much as anything else (I discussed all of these in the first part). </p><p> </p><p>I've also heard more than a few proposals for 'just let them have two initiatives,' 'just give them more actions,' and/or 'just give them the XXXX trait from this solo.' The problem with any blanket solution like that is that it lacks versatility. Some bosses can and will have double initiatives, some will have more actions, threatening reach, interrupts, minor actions, and so on, but the creator of the monster gets to decide what is right and flavorful for that particular monster. One of the greatest strengths of 4E monster design is the versatility that comes of a universal stat block with exception-based powers. Why give that up?</p><p> </p><p>That, ultimately, is why I backed away from the blanket traits I mentioned in Part 2 (e.g.: Boss Monster Resilience). How Bloodknuckles responds to being proned or grabbed is part of his flavor, part of the story of the creature instead of just an immunity or "shake it off" mechanic. </p><p> </p><p>Is it more complicated? Yes. But it actually isn't much more complicated than building a single solo monster and most of the complicated is in the fun of designing tactics and powers to show them off.</p><p> </p><p>And finally, to Exploder, I am not sure where exactly there seems to be any more script to the monster than any other. Instead of being bloodied once, he gets bloodied twice, and he has two powers that trigger when he becomes bloodied. Beyond that, certain tactics are emphasized by certain stages but nothing removes the DMs ability to make decisions and be unpredictable. Every monster in the MM has a script of sorts, a set of tactics that it is designed to use or a best tactic.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="TheAngryDM, post: 5286277, member: 93931"] Thanks everyone for discussing my ideas and especially to Matrix for getting the word out. Just want to make a few points: Firstly, I know Bloodknuckles does not really push the envelope or show the versatility of the system. That was done on purpose because it was more of an attempt to test and prove the concept. A couple of people have pointed out that my system is more complex than simply 'fixing' solos or accepting that solos can't really be solo. Yes, it is. But simply improving the action economy and adding some resistance to conditions doesn't address the total "solo problem" with front loaded action and a lack of 'beats' that indicate progress. These things contribute to the grind as much as anything else (I discussed all of these in the first part). I've also heard more than a few proposals for 'just let them have two initiatives,' 'just give them more actions,' and/or 'just give them the XXXX trait from this solo.' The problem with any blanket solution like that is that it lacks versatility. Some bosses can and will have double initiatives, some will have more actions, threatening reach, interrupts, minor actions, and so on, but the creator of the monster gets to decide what is right and flavorful for that particular monster. One of the greatest strengths of 4E monster design is the versatility that comes of a universal stat block with exception-based powers. Why give that up? That, ultimately, is why I backed away from the blanket traits I mentioned in Part 2 (e.g.: Boss Monster Resilience). How Bloodknuckles responds to being proned or grabbed is part of his flavor, part of the story of the creature instead of just an immunity or "shake it off" mechanic. Is it more complicated? Yes. But it actually isn't much more complicated than building a single solo monster and most of the complicated is in the fun of designing tactics and powers to show them off. And finally, to Exploder, I am not sure where exactly there seems to be any more script to the monster than any other. Instead of being bloodied once, he gets bloodied twice, and he has two powers that trigger when he becomes bloodied. Beyond that, certain tactics are emphasized by certain stages but nothing removes the DMs ability to make decisions and be unpredictable. Every monster in the MM has a script of sorts, a set of tactics that it is designed to use or a best tactic. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
The D&D Boss Fight
Top