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

[Upper_Krust]

Howdy FireLance!

There is still an element of tactics involved: using Irresistable Command as an immediate action means that the pit fiend won't have a spare (or additional) minor action to use Point of Terror on its turn. So, whenever a minion dies, the decision will be between blowing it up now, or lowering an(other) opponent's defences on its turn.

You are still removing the tactical ability to choose when its going to be used. Also you are giving PCs the ability to know when such an attack will take place. Going that far you may as well make it explode on death like a Balor.

 

[FireLance]

You are still removing the tactical ability to choose when its going to be used. Also you are giving PCs the ability to know when such an attack will take place. Going that far you may as well make it explode on death like a Balor.

Well, I don't see why it can't have both options: either exploding an ally on its turn as a minor action, or doing so as a reaction to its dropping below 0 hp.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Well, I don't see why it can't have both options: either exploding an ally on its turn as a minor action, or doing so as a reaction to its dropping below 0 hp.

Simply because you can't have your cake and eat it.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi all!

Does anyone actually understand the mechanics of its Attack Roll of +31 yet?

Is it some sort of 1/2 Level + 1/4 level (rounded up*) + strength bonus

*To represent the inferred magical items bonuses PCs will have at that stage? Hence the reason its not added to the mace (so the tail gets the mechanical benefit too)?

 

[Plane Sailing]

I notice that it has an initiative check of +22.

This seems to suggest that Initiative might be a skill check like it is in SWSE.

 

[Dausuul]

Maybe the newbies won't. The experienced players will blink in unison and tell you you're playing it wrong.

You don't really think that experienced gamers don't read the DMG and MM, do you?

Any player in my games who expects to know a monster's stats chapter and verse, just on account of having read the MM, is in for a rude awakening. I find it takes a lot of the fun out of a fight when you can be totally certain what you're going to be up against, and the most exciting battles are those where the monster pulls out some totally unexpected ability and slams the PCs with it.

Ideally, the ability should "feel" natural to the monster. For example, a mind flayer might be able to create illusions, or a balor could cast wall of fire as a swift action. A mind flayer that threw fireballs, or a balor that sucked out your brain, wouldn't work as well.

One shouldn't do this with every fight, of course. Generally these "special features" belong on boss monsters rather than grunts. But there's no reason why one should be required to go through the 3E process of justifying each mod.

 

[Peter LaCara]

Does it? As far as I've heard, you're encouraged to use the simple stat blocks as written because its so much easier.

Plus, most experienced players I've gamed with are wildly uncomfortable with GMs making stuff up on the spot. Arbitrarium tends to aimed like a gun, right at their characters...

just like Peter is talking about. GMs that give them the finger and declare 'Because I said so' tend not to make for a fun and enjoyable game.

I dunno, man. My players have all had a lot of fun so far. But then again, I've been completely up front about the fact that I wing stuff and play fast and loose with the rules sometimes.

Lemme put it this way: When I run World of Darkness stuff, I don't build every NPC using the character creation rules and tracking each xp meticulously. I think, "Oh, this guy's a cop. He should have Firearms 3. This guy's a lightning spirit, so he should have some sort of bolt attack." Why on earth shouldn't I be able to do the same thing for D&D?

And for the record, I have never once had to invoke the Viking Hat rule, because my players are all reasonable human beings. It's just there in case someone ever did complain. Haven't had to use it yet.

 

[Professor Phobos]

Maybe the newbies won't. The experienced players will blink in unison and tell you you're playing it wrong.

You don't really think that experienced gamers don't read the DMG and MM, do you?

If a player tells me that, they can walk away from my table and never return. Monsters are mine to make and break.

Of course, every experienced player I have not only expects me to wing things, but appreciates it. Especially since I say "yes" to them, with few exceptions.

 

[helium3]

Fireball is not a Druid spell.

Fine. Then it was a celestial dire bear that had fireball as a spell like ability. There's absolutely no reason it can't happen if the DM wants it to.

On the other hand, if it's too weird and unexpected and the DM puts no thought into why a celestial dire bear has fireball as a SLA, than yeah it causes problems for the players in terms of their ability to suspend disbelief.

 

[Kid Charlemagne]

I notice that it has an initiative check of +22.

This seems to suggest that Initiative might be a skill check like it is in SWSE.

I believe that was confirmed some time ago - at least I remember reading it. It might even have been in the 4E videos playing at Gencon.