The Devil's in the Details: Slavicsek reveals the Pit Fiend in all its glory

[Just Another User]

The ability doesn't seem silly to me. You just use it on your wounded. Like FrankDM said.

Crazy villains offing their minions happen all the time. I wouldn't expect it to happen much in a serious campaign, but fiends are almost literally stereotypes of evil.

Then add that you can use it only on Bloodied devil and I'm sold, But as I told what really bother me is the slide.


actually I have an idea, make it an automatic action, I don't know what is the 4e term but in practice, once for round, even outside the PF turn,when an allied devil get bloodied the pit fiend can use its special ability to make it blow up, or else on his turn can use it on an already bloodied devil to make it blow up. I don't know you, but I'd have liked this version much more than the actual one..

 

[LEHaskell]

So, I'm assuming that a "slide" is movement that does not provoke opportunity attacks, which would make sense, since you don't want your bomb to be killed before it gets a chance to explode.

I have to say, exploding allies and the auras makes large groupings of PCs very dangerous.

I suspect that "slide" is a key word for straight-line movement where you physically occupy each intermediate square -- that is, unlike teleport, your movement can be blocked by terrain or creatures. In this instance, it's like telekinesis. I'm not sure about the provoking, though I can't see why it WOULDN'T provoke -- though with the "ally bomb", I'm not sure it would make any difference whether he arrived at the target dead or alive. ;-)

 

[Just Another User]

I agree that the fluff is somewhat inadequate here, but the crunch seems fun enough to keep me interested.

But for how long? because I think this power could be fun the first or second time you use it, but already at the fourth -fifth time (and I don't mean the fifth combat) I'd start to get bored by it, either as a player or a GM. Generally I have the same impression with all the at will/per encounter powers we have heard of, I'm the only one that think that a 1st level wizard, with just 3 things/powers to use, will get boring to use pretty quickly (and I'm afraid that to compensate they will make levelling even faster so you get more toys/powers to play with before you get bored) , magic missile at will will be still cool when you've cast your 20th magic missile for the day? My guess is that for the preparation of 5e there will be many complains that "playing a wizard at low level is boring because there is not enough things to do". At least something will remain the same between editions

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Keep in mind that monsters are not built (i.e. calculated) like PCs are. Heck, we don't even know if there is a true algorithm or just a chart that "feels" right to the devs.

I don´t have a problem if stats are made up. Indeed I feel its better if they are. But if stats are made up, you can easily make up stats for his hide and his armor. He has a tough hide deflecting magic and weapons alike granting +6 defense and a breast plate (+6 AC)

making up a monster like this: A brute in full plate, Hp 5, AC 11 makes no sense at all.

its not necessary, but for some monsters it could be convenient.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Then add that you can use it only on Bloodied devil and I'm sold,

Yeah, I agree with you on that

But as I told what really bother me is the slide.

I figured it was telekinetically picking the minion up and dragging it (or blasting it through the air with magic). It would provoke AoOs.

Doesn't the pit fiend have the option to teleport allies intead? This suggests to me the slide is physical.

actually I have an idea, make it an automatic action, I don't know what is the 4e term but in practice, once for round, even outside the PF turn,when an allied devil get bloodied the pit fiend can use its special ability to make it blow up, or else on his turn can use it on an already bloodied devil to make it blow up. I don't know you, but I'd have liked this version much more than the actual one..

Same here.

 

[AllisterH]

So why can't you do that for combat? It seems a bit silly that they're putting in a system for resolving social encounters and yet apparently not considering that monsters might participate in those social encounters.

Wouldn't social encounters be run via the skill system? It looks like a pit fiend from just being a level 26 creature PLUS its natural stats is going to be one hell of a social encounter to overcome.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Generally I have the same impression with all the at will/per encounter powers we have heard of, I'm the only one that think that a 1st level wizard, with just 3 things/powers to use, will get boring to use pretty quickly (and I'm afraid that to compensate they will make levelling even faster so you get more toys/powers to play with before you get bored)

I really hope rituals make up for this, and I even hope there are possibilities to ready different combat spells for the day as at will, per encounter and per day slots.

---> learn as many spells as you can afford, ready a certain amount of spells per day. This would be my ideal wizard.

 

[Fifth Element]

If it really is cool, after I've finished reading/hearing about it I'll probably think something along the lines of, "hmmm... that seems pretty cool.", and if I don't think it's cool the developers assuring me that it is many many times is not going to change my mind.

Hold on, it's okay for you to call something cool, but it's not okay for the designers/developers to do the same?

If they think something's cool (which, as you point out, is quite likely since they wouldn't use it if they didn't), why shouldn't they call it cool?

Are you implying that they are only calling things cool in order to convince people it's true? Maybe it's just the best word to describe how they feel about the thing.

 

[Wolfspider]

Oh, good. Literary snobbery. I love that ever so much more than grognardian edition-snobbery. Sheesh.

I don't see this as literary snobbery, mainly because I don't consider game books to be literature? Do you?

I also don't see anything wrong with wanting rule books to be written well. Would you prefer if they were written poorly?

Of course, what's well-written and what's not is a whole other can of wyrms....

 

[Rallek]

Hold on, it's okay for you to call something cool, but it's not okay for the designers/developers to do the same?

If they think something's cool (which, as you point out, is quite likely since they wouldn't use it if they didn't), why shouldn't they call it cool?

Are you implying that they are only calling things cool in order to convince people it's true? Maybe it's just the best word to describe how they feel about the thing.

I'm not implying it, I'm outright saying it; If the designers feel the need to tell me how "cool" the mechanic/fluff/monster is, rather than just telling me about it and letting its coolness become apparent than yes, I feel it is less "the best word to describe it" and more "propaganda".

That aside, if they occasionally said something along the lines of, "oh, this bit about the new flummox here is exceptionally cool" I might be inclined to give it an extra look, but when everything is cool, multiple times, it begins to grate.


So to recap;
Designers saying one particular thing amongst many being presented is "cool" = acceptable AND potentially useful.
Designers saying everything is "cool" = assumed and therefore redundant.
Designers saying everything is "cool" multiple times = just plain weak


All in my opinion, of course.