D&D 4E The New Monster Math, Explained and Expanded

[Tequila Sunrise]

My PCs are going to be in real trouble though, as these "swarms" are actually army units, led by competent nobles! (The kind that give them extra attacks, although swarms don't exactly kick butt in the offense department.)

I pity your players.

Can you post what you tested?

Sure!

Generic Swarm
Level 3 Brute
Initiative +2
HP 45; Bloodied 22
AC 17, NADs 15

Swarm Aura 1
An enemy that ends its turn in the aura takes 5 damage.

Swarm
A swarm can occupy the same space as another creature, and an enemy can enter a swarm’s space, which is difficult terrain. A swarm cannot be pulled, pushed, or slid by melee or ranged attacks. A swarm can squeeze through any opening large enough for even one of its constituent creatures.

Standard Action Attack At-Will
Attack: Melee 1; +8 vs. AC
Hit: 1d8 + 6 damage.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Isn't that actually weak for a swarm brute? Or do swarms normally do low damage?

This does 10.5 damage a hit, average for a 3rd-level monster, but a brute should be doing +25% more. Also, the AC is high.

 

[keterys]

Isn't that actually weak for a swarm brute? Or do swarms normally do low damage?

Swarms tend to factor in their aura damage, too, so yeah brute swarms don't seem to deal brute damage on their powers until you add in the aura.

Which makes sense since they're also the ones most in danger of having that bucket of hit points problem (most hp, potentially doubled against melee/ranged) - gotta be careful about going crazy with brute swarms.

Like if you look at the L6 Hyena Pack, Brute Swarm - its MBA does 1d10+7 (12.5) which is lower than a normal MBA, but its aura end damage is 5, which brings it to 17.5 - exactly the damage you'd expect from a brute MBA. It also has vuln 10, so if it takes, say, 6 hits to take off its 85 hp, if 2 of those are from close/area (15 base + 10 extra = 25 each, or 50 damage), 4 from M/R (20 base / 2 = 10 each).

So, there's still a fair chunk of variance there... and, yes, parties should make sure they pick up _some_ ability to area/close for situations like this. Also, for against darkness/invisible/blinding enemies, whose -5 attack will also effectively halve your damage

 

[keterys]

Anecdotally, party of 5 I was in yesterday had 3 people who could reliably burst and 2 who couldn't. So against that group, the swarms would go down faster.

Group I'm running for tonight has 6 people... 1 has only melee/ranged (thief), 3 have encounter close (druid, paladin, avenger), 2 are filled to the brim with bursts (warlock/swordmage, mage or monk). So, same situation, would die swiftly.

 

[Tequila Sunrise]

Isn't that actually weak for a swarm brute? Or do swarms normally do low damage?

This does 10.5 damage a hit, average for a 3rd-level monster, but a brute should be doing +25% more. Also, the AC is high.

The average damage was a total flub on my part; it should have been 1d10 + 8.

The average AC and HP are intentional though; because it's a roughly even trade, and because average is better for play testing than highs and lows.

 

[keterys]

Eh, if you're looking for average, you should use a skirmisher instead of a brute. The brute gets extra damage and extra hit points, in trade for a minor defense hit. If you're skipping the last, it's just... extra.

 

[Tequila Sunrise]

Eh, if you're looking for average, you should use a skirmisher instead of a brute. The brute gets extra damage and extra hit points, in trade for a minor defense hit. If you're skipping the last, it's just... extra.

Well with the hit point reduction -- 8/level rather than 10/level -- the only extra is the higher damage. And all roles have something extra; skirmishers have extra mobility, and so on.

I could play test a skirmisher swarm, but the only thing that would change is that they wouldn't provoke OAs for entering PC squares.

 

[keterys]

Since they took the attack penalty off the brute, he's pretty much king of the roost in terms of monsters.

 

[Tequila Sunrise]

Since they took the attack penalty off the brute, he's pretty much king of the roost in terms of monsters.

You may be right, but either way ya slice it, I didn't play test any real role. Essentially I play tested a proto-swarm, that didn't have the extras of any role.

 

[keterys]

Yep, pretty generic indeed. It's interesting the party did so badly. Maybe cause they were low enough level that they didn't have much in the way of encounter powers? Dunno. All I know is swarms aren't considered all that scary at tables I've been at.

Not since they started designing them better, anyways.