D&D 5E Tome of Undeath

[loverdrive]

Smart people in marketing always say that one should start to promote their work as soon as the production starts, sooo...

Here's some stuff from my take on Monster Manual.

The basic idea is to make monsters a bit more varied, with roles akin to those in Strike! D&D 4E and Fate Adversary toolkit, so one could run a "full skeleton" or "full zombie" or whatever encounter without having carbon-copied monsters that behave the same.

I'm gonna focus on undead, because I have a huge boner for skelies and zombies and liches.

 

[loverdrive]

So, you could see the little "Filler" and "Threat" badges on the screenshot above, so I'm gonna elaborate. There are five different monster roles, derived from Fate Adversary Toolkit (damn I love that book):

Basically, 4E minions. Simple to run, simple to kill -- exist solely to make PCs look awesome. Die in one hit, failed save, taking auto damage, but survive when they pass saves against effects that deal half damage on success.

They hit consistently hard and are hard to kill. They, well, pose threat -- you can't just leave'em to their own devices or you'll be screwed.

They hit hard, but mostly only once or twice. Skeleton Archer, for example, may take a called shot when they take time to prepare, dealing huge damage, but otherwise they aren't that scary. Good ol' glass canons.

They help other monsters. That's their job -- buffin'em, healin'em and occasionally debuffin PCs.

Everyone's favourite. They dish it out and they take it. And they have multiple phases. And a list of storyhooks and inspiration prompts.



Also I finalized the monster list for this supplement:

Skeletons

• Decrepit (filler)
• Bruiser (threat)
• Sentinel (threat)
• Archer (hitter)
• Champion (threat/support)
• Bonelord (boss)

Zombies

• Rotting husk (filler)
• Plaguecarrier (threat)
• Template for other zombie creatures -- ogres, beholders, dragons, whatever (also threat, it's not like zombies can be anyone but that)

Apparitions

• Wraith (hitter)
• Specter (hitter)
• Unturned (threat/hitter)
• Headless (threat/hitter)
• Spirit of Conquest (boss)

Liches

• Good ol' wizard lich (boss)
• Deathknight (boss)
• Mummy (boss)
• The First Sword-Saint (you guessed it right, boss)

I have no boner for vampires, so I guess I'll leave them out for now (there's always a chance for Tome II), but, damn, that thing is gonna be huge. The stats are already ready and tested, but amount of artwork I'm gonna need to produce is daunting, at best. Good luck to me, I guess.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

Love it. I'll be following it with attention. Does the project has a name?

 

[loverdrive]

Love it. I'll be following it with attention. Does the project has a name?

This particular one is gonna be called Tome of Undeath, but the project of redoing MM at large doesn't have one and probably wouldn't. I'm bad at naming.

 

[NotAYakk]

I have soured on minion mechanics, and started playing with squad mechanics. Collective HP with multiple creatures to ease tracking, damage caps to represent dropping one, etc.

The idea that a 50/2 damage fireball doesn't kill a mook seems off, basically.

 

[jayoungr]

What's the vulnerability (5) or (10) part represent?

 

[loverdrive]

What's the vulnerability (5) or (10) part represent?

I've decided to bring back 4E resistances and vulnerabilities as just flat subtraction or addition to damage (if several damage types apply, only the lowest resistance or highest vulnerability is used). There are several reasons, all of which will be outlined in a preface for supplement, but basically it boils down to:
A) It's easier to balance, so giving a boss vulnerability to a common damage type isn't going to make him a piece of cake
B) It's easier to use as there's no need to track each individual damage type
C) More variety, as monsters with resistances are best taken down by a single powerful attack, while monsters with vulnerabilities invite more weaker attacks.

 

[loverdrive]

Having a lazy day with next to no real progress, but here's the cover.

 

[NotAYakk]

Consider using half-vulnerability: weakness; +50% damage instead of x2.

x2 runs into the problem of being too big. 50% is big enough to track without dominating, and is pretty fast math.

A treant being weak to fire makes fire a smart tactical choice.

A treant being vulnerable to fire makes it a trivial fight if you have fire vs not having fire.

And similar, skeletons who are weak against crushing gives a neat benefit to the mace/hammer users.

...

5e doesn't try to control "big attack" vs "multiple small attacks" as an important balance difference. (most, but not all, damage boosts are "per turn")

Making it matter seems risky.

Magic Missile, for example, makes force vulnerability crazy dangerous.

It also impacts melee/caster balance. Melee characters are more likely to rely on multiple taps, while a caster is more likely to have a big attack; the caster often also has some multiple tap options.

By making having that choice -- single vs multiple -- important, you weaken weapon users. The "consequence" of an attack roll landing is bounded in 5e, which also effectively bounds damage (rogues and paladins are the exception to that rule) per tap, while the "consequence" of a save failing is unbounded (up to and including "lose the fight").

That means that a failed save can be $lots$ of damage, while an attack that hits shouldn't be. (again, smite breaks this, and is why there is so much smite-based charop, and there would be a lot of sneak attack charop if it wasn't so expensive to get).

And while this introduces a mechanical and tactical difference between vulnerability 5 and vulnerability 15, that tactical difference is larger than the narrative difference between them. "Fire seems to burn it easily" is a narrative element; that "easily" being bigger or smaller is a smaller one.

---

Nice cover.

 

[embee]

This particular one is gonna be called Tome of Undeath, but the project of redoing MM at large doesn't have one and probably wouldn't. I'm bad at naming.

If you're going to stick with a black cover, perhaps "Le Livre Noir Du Mort-Vivant."

Not every faux book title needs to be Greek or Latin.