Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="freyar" data-source="post: 4540815" data-attributes="member: 40227">I've thought about this a lot ever since the 4e monster previews started coming out with monster roles rather than types determining things like HD.Anyway, I think the proposal you quote is a good idea.&nbsp; I would call the &quot;subtype&quot; the monster's &quot;class,&quot; though, more in line with PCs.&nbsp; (Keeping &quot;subtypes&quot; being tied to special traits, as in the incorporeal or fire subtypes makes more sense to me.)&nbsp; In particular, I agree with Features being a function of monster class and Traits being a function of type (plus subtype).&nbsp; I'd envision each monster as having a type and class, with racial HD gained in the appropriate class.In any case, in answer to your question, I do think this would allow you broader flexibility within creature types.&nbsp; I don't think I'd like to use it necessarily to customize individuals of a given monster (&quot;I am pit fiend x, and I have d4 HD because I am an academic!&quot; wouldn't do it for me <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />), but I think it would help a little with design.&nbsp; I'm not sure it makes a huge practical difference because we're still only talking 1-2 hp extra per HD for average rolls, but it would help a little.&nbsp; Mostly I like the idea because it's a little more like how characters work.&nbsp; I'm really a simulationist at heart.On the other hand, I'm not sure it's worth the effort, since you'd have to rewrite basically every single monster almost from scratch.&nbsp; I certainly wouldn't do it on my own.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="freyar, post: 4540815, member: 40227"] I've thought about this a lot ever since the 4e monster previews started coming out with monster roles rather than types determining things like HD. Anyway, I think the proposal you quote is a good idea. I would call the "subtype" the monster's "class," though, more in line with PCs. (Keeping "subtypes" being tied to special traits, as in the incorporeal or fire subtypes makes more sense to me.) In particular, I agree with Features being a function of monster class and Traits being a function of type (plus subtype). I'd envision each monster as having a type and class, with racial HD gained in the appropriate class. In any case, in answer to your question, I do think this would allow you broader flexibility within creature types. I don't think I'd like to use it necessarily to customize individuals of a given monster ("I am pit fiend x, and I have d4 HD because I am an academic!" wouldn't do it for me ;)), but I think it would help a little with design. I'm not sure it makes a huge practical difference because we're still only talking 1-2 hp extra per HD for average rolls, but it would help a little. Mostly I like the idea because it's a little more like how characters work. I'm really a simulationist at heart. On the other hand, I'm not sure it's worth the effort, since you'd have to rewrite basically every single monster almost from scratch. I certainly wouldn't do it on my own. [/QUOTE]

Verification