Two stat block things that bug me

[Man-thing]

I understand that. I meant more of the deadend feats that seem to be liberal scattered through higher HD monsters.

It just seems strange to harmonize the rules but...not quite.

 

[shilsen]

Wait.... We're arguing whether porpoises should have Weapon Finesse?

Well, some people are arguing. Some people are watching and grinning

 

[Daermon]

Oh yeah. It is definately amusing.

 

[Cavalorn]

Oh yeah. It is definately amusing.

Taken in the abstract, it certainly looks like hairsplitting. However, the intent is a laudable one. Designers and proofreaders want to get things right, because however minor an error may be, it's something a consumer has a right to complain about. Look at the recent review of a Mongoose product in which the errors in monster design were pointed out. Nobody wants to see that happen to their work.

The process of designing a monster isn't so much simulating its birth at 1 HD and advancing it - it's creating it according to a linear progression and then plonking it into the world fully formed. The construction from the ground up takes place on the DM's divine workbench, not with the dolphin's growth from dolphin baby into troubled adolescent dolphin.

Man-thing is quite right when he says that he could create a 33 HD Outsider with nothing but epic feats (and the pre-req regular feats). He's also right when he says that dead-end feats seem to have been taken as if the creature was advancing like a character, not just to qualify for later feats.

So, should dolphins have weapon finesse? Technically, no. Is it a big deal? Not in itself, but the implications are interesting. Frankly, I think the problem here is with the pre-req for the feat. A BAB of +1 doesn't make a great deal of sense to me. Maybe 'BAB +1 or Medium size or smaller' would make more sense.

 

[Hypersmurf]

So, should dolphins have weapon finesse? Technically, no.

Certainly, they should. There's nothing preventing it.

Porpoises are not advanced from 1HD animals with one feat to 2HD animals with one feat. They simply are 2HD animals with one feat... therefore their 2HD statistics are used to determine whether or not they satisfy prerequisites.

Which, for Weapon Finesse, they do.

So there's no reason "Technically, no" applies.

-Hyp.

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

Note that, mechanically speaking, a Multiweapon Fighting feat might help you out a bit more ...

Except that this sort of assumes that ALL creatures must be designed for maximum lethality index. I note the smiley in your response and hesitate to hijack the thread but this has become a peeve of mine. There are those who would simply look at your response and say "Well of course that's correct. Duh." But it's that kind of thinking that creates the perception that D&D has become too video-gamish. Not everything has to be min/maxed.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

But it's that kind of thinking that creates the perception that D&D has become too video-gamish. Not everything has to be min/maxed.

Well, I won't yell at you for holding the "too videogamish" opinion - you're allowed to hold as many opinions as you want, even if they're wrong.

That being said, take a look at the creature he was designing. It's a six-armed hellbeast, with special training in six different weapons. Presumably, it would want to work like the marilith, able to cut foes apart with multiple weapons at the same time. How do you represent the ability to do so skillfully? With the multiweapon fighting feat.

Is it more powerful? Certainly; a -10 penalty on every attack you make is a pretty ridiculous penalty to accept if you can, with a flick of the wrist, make your monster *competent* at what it's supposed to do.

There's a difference between "min / maxxing" and "making sense." A 33HD Outsider - as in, "bigger than a Balor" - that is functionally incompetent doesn't make sense. MWF makes sense for such a creature.

 

[Gez]

Heh! The only thing the porpoise is useful for is when casting Embrace the Wild. Hmmm, Blindsight!

Pinotage

What about all these "intensive porpoises" who get a lot of perks? The number of time I've read "for all intensive porpoises"...

 

[the Jester]

To reiterate the point I made above that nobody has addressed:

Clearly not all creatures are 'born' with 1 HD, even those that are born and grow.

A hatchling black dragon starts out, fresh from the egg, with 4 HD. A baby giant, I would argue, does not start out at 1 HD. And a 1st level paladin can have Quick-Draw as his 1st-level feat (requires BAB +1) even though, clearly, he was not born with a BAB +1.

 

[glass]

When I look at monster classes it seems to me that all monsters are born at 1 HD but become valuable as monsters at a later HD and the MM shows a typical adult.

Which is why I don't like the monster classes, because they imply every creature out there starts at 1HD and advances from there, which they blatently don't.


glass.