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

[helium3]

It's cheesy because:
a)If you play a fire giant cleric, you won't be built that way. At all. Ditto any other monster race.

Except of course for that whole section in the back of the MM about how to give monsters spell like abilities and special abilities and then how to estimate their CR.

It's really pretty simply. What's the monster's base CR? What CR would it have if I gave it the correct number of levels of cleric? Now, how much of the "oomph" of that extra CR comes from the extra hit dice and how much comes from the spells? Hmm. It's gonna have to be somewhere in between the two numbers and an easy answer would just be "the average."

 

[Kid Charlemagne]

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)?

I think we know that all PC's have a BAB of 1/2 level, so you have +13, then +11 for strength. That leaves +7 left. It's been implied that BAB's are modified once by a set amount at 1st level; ie, the Soldier class may get a +4 to their BAB. Might this go up again at Paragon and Epic levels? I don't know. It's also possible that "flame-touched mace" means something specific in terms of bonuses - like a 1E Vorpal Blade, perhaps it always is a +3 weapon?

Just throwing out ideas...

 

[Dausuul]

I think we know that all PC's have a BAB of 1/2 level, so you have +13, then +11 for strength. That leaves +7 left. It's been implied that BAB's are modified once by a set amount at 1st level; ie, the Soldier class may get a +4 to their BAB. Might this go up again at Paragon and Epic levels? I don't know. It's also possible that "flame-touched mace" means something specific in terms of bonuses - like a 1E Vorpal Blade, perhaps it always is a +3 weapon?

Just throwing out ideas...

I'm pretty sure it's just +31 to attack, with no underlying formula. Remember, the 4E method of monster generation is to pick the level and give it appropriate attack bonus, damage, AC, and so forth for a monster of that level. The designers are no longer required to "justify" those numbers by way of elaborate formulas as in 3E.

 

[Kid Charlemagne]

I'm pretty sure it's just +31 to attack, with no underlying formula. Remember, the 4E method of monster generation is to pick the level and give it appropriate attack bonus, damage, AC, and so forth for a monster of that level. The designers are no longer required to "justify" those numbers by way of elaborate formulas as in 3E.

Mouseferatu has implied that just because there are guidelines for broad areas doesn't mean that there aren't underlying formulas - however I would be interested to learn more... I think I'll dash over to the other thread and ask..!

 

[Daniel D. Fox]

I'm pretty sure it's just +31 to attack, with no underlying formula. Remember, the 4E method of monster generation is to pick the level and give it appropriate attack bonus, damage, AC, and so forth for a monster of that level. The designers are no longer required to "justify" those numbers by way of elaborate formulas as in 3E.

Ugg. I want formulas to jive both with players and monsters. Although I can see the appeal as a 1st edition purist, I need some sort of logic to apply when creating my own monsters.

 

[Dausuul]

Ugg. I want formulas to jive both with players and monsters. Although I can see the appeal as a 1st edition purist, I need some sort of logic to apply when creating my own monsters.

*shrug* To me, the logic is still there, it's just that it's being applied to the output instead of the inputs. A 26th-level Soldier should have an attack bonus of +31. How you get there is no longer important. (Compare this to 3E, where you could end up with a huge range of different attack values for a CR 26 monster, depending on which elaborate process you followed to get to that CR.)

 

[Daniel D. Fox]

*shrug* To me, the logic is still there, it's just that it's being applied to the output instead of the inputs. A 26th-level Soldier should have an attack bonus of +31. How you get there is no longer important. (Compare this to 3E, where you could end up with a huge range of different attack values for a CR 26 monster, depending on which elaborate process you followed to get to that CR.)

Ahh, now I follow you. So you would apply half level, plus Strength or relevant ability score plsu the bonus given by the monster's role perhaps?

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Fireball is not a Druid spell.

of course that druid has a feat which allows him to throw fireballs... i am sure ther is one anywhere...

I don't know whether this actually fits to the point adressed here - there are types of arbitrariness that players can accept easily, and some they won't.

yes, but I can make up a monster with any classes from any book. If I just want a certain spell, I have to make it stronger than i wanted. Then I can give it magical items from any books and place it in such favourable terrain that the counter is on a difficulty setting I like.

And seriously, the CR of monster Levels + class levels doesn´t fit at all if you mix caster Levels with giant Levels. It even doesn´t work that well if you have a LVL 13 Mind flayer cleric vs 3 average equipped but well prepared LVL 11 chars... It doesn´t survive two rounds of combat..

The only unfair thing I can see is changing a monster during battle... but preparing a little bit that it poses a challenge... thats ok.

And usually you don´t have to do any changes if players don´t use meta game knowledge to equipp and find the best tactics against such monsters. If players find weaknesses of monsters in-game, be sure don´t change them until monsters know that players know them, and then you still need a good explanation...

 

[Dausuul]

Ahh, now I follow you. So you would apply half level, plus Strength or relevant ability score plsu the bonus given by the monster's role perhaps?

No, what I'm getting at is that the goal is to produce +31 for a 26th-level monster. That value is not arbitrary--it's calculated to produce an exciting battle against the typical 26th-level party. But the calculation is much more likely to be something like "monster level plus 5," not "Hit Dice divided by this plus Strength modifier times that plus one-half class level plus special modifier for monsters whose names start with P."

 

[Burr]

As to formulas, here are some best guesses so far. While individual formulas may be controversial, I haven't yet figured out a system that works better for both Pit Fiend and Spined Devil without relying on unprecedented, arbitrary bonuses (although, I'll admit, I'm only vaguely familiar with SWSE).

Note: these equations all assume an Ability Modifier is calculated the same as in 3.5. I'm 99% certain that is the case, since alternate methods cause weird anomalies when applied to one monster or the other. For example, if the Pit Fiend had a +14 Str, then it would be a weird that his melee damage bonus is only 11. It makes far more sense that he has +11 Str.

Anyhow...

Initiative: Cha + 1/2 Level
Pit Fiend: 9 + 13 = 22
Spined Devil: 2 + 3 = 5

Perception: Wis + 1/2 Level + (Trained?)
Pit Fiend: 5 + 13 + (5?) = 23
Spined Devil: 2 + 3 + (0?) = 5

Skills: Ability + 1/2 Level + Trained
Pit Fiend:
.....Bluff: 9 + 13 + 5 = 27
.....Intimidate: 9 + 13 + 5 = 27
.....Religion: 6 + 13 + 5 = 24
Spined Devil:
.....Spot: 2 + 3 + 5 = 10


Melee attack: Str + Dex + 1/2 Level
Pit Fiend: 11 + 7 + 13 = 31
Spined Devil: 4 + 2 + 3 = 9
Melee damage: Str
Pit Fiend: 11 = 11
Spined Devil: 4 = 4
Ranged damage: Dex
Spined Devil 2 = 2
Poison attack: Con + Con + 1/2 Level
Pit Fiend: 8 + 8 + 13 = 29
Fear attack: Con + Cha + 1/2 Level
Pit Fiend: 8 + 9 + 13 = 30

(I tried to figure out the Spined Devil's Spine Rain ranged attack. The problem is, in the old card it's listed as "+9 Dex vs. Ref"; whereas, in the new card it's listed at "+8 vs. DEF (Ref)". The +9 could have been Str + Dex + 1/2 Level, just like a melee attack against AC. But where is that +8 coming from? It could be Dex + Level, or it could be Dex Check + 1/2 Level, or it could even be Str + Str. None of those make much sense if we assume the other attack or save formulas are correct. They seem to be following an Ability + Ability + 1/2 Level method now.)


Fort: 11 + Con + Con + 1/2 Level + Saving Throw
Pit Fiend: 11 + 8 + 8 + 13 + 2 = 42
Spined Devil: 11 + 2 + 2 + 3 + 0 = 18
Ref: 11 + Int + Int + 1/2 Level + Saving Throw
Pit Fiend: 11 + 6 + 6 + 13 + 2 = 38
Spined Devil: 11 + 2 + 2 + 3 + 0 = 18
Will: 11 + Wis + Cha + 1/2 Level + Saving Throw
Pit Fiend: 11 + 5 + 9 + 13 + 2 = 40
Spined Devil = 11 + 2 + 2 + 3 + 0 = 18
AC: 11 + Dex + Dex + 1/2 Level + (Net Armor and Penalties?)
Pit Fiend: 11 + 7 + 7 + 13 + (6?) = 44
Spined Devil: 11 + 2 + 2 + 3 + (2?) = 20

(The 11 balances the aggressor's d20 roll, such that the aggressor wins a tie.)

-ALTERNATIVELY-
Ref: 11 + Dex + Int + 1/2 Level + Saving Throw + (Size Modifier?)
Pit Fiend: 11 + 7 + 6 + 13 + 2 + (-1?) = 38
Spined Devil: 11 + 2 + 2 + 6 + 0 + (0?) = 18
AC: Ref + (Armor?)
Pit Fiend: 38 + (4?) = 44
Spined Devil: 18 + (2?) = 20

(Of course, we don't know what armor bonus, if any, or dex penalties, if any, are given by the Pit Fiend's breastplate or the Spined Devil's spines or whatever. So AC may be impossible to verify before the release date. Reflex should become clearer after the next monster preview.)


HP: [(Con + d10 average) * Level] rounded down to the nearest 5.
Pit Fiend: (8 + 5.5) * 26 = 351 -> 350
Spined Devil: (2 + 5.5) * 6 = 45 -> 45

(This formula is almost certainly wrong. Although the Spined Devil has 45 hp in the updated minis card, it most likely has 47 hp before rounding, given the info from the older card. In any case, the correct formula is difficult to figure out without knowing how hp varies with monster type, role, or rank. We need more monster previews with stats.)