Undead, as monsters or as templates?

[cougent]

I voted don't care as long as they work, but I do sort of care.

I want them to be simple to throw together, so monster types are an obvious choice.

If I want a complex vampire, or a master vampire I can do that with a template or by beefing up a monster type, so again just make sure it works, and try to keep it simple.

 

[frankthedm]

A template better represents the STATS of a creature turned undead, but not always the challnege presented by the new creature. Since 4e has a LOT more granularity in determining the challenge of a given critter, a template that changes much of anything risks messing up the system of

Level
Minion - Normal - Elite - Solo
brute - soldier - artillery - controller - lurker - skirmisher​

 

[glass]

A mix is good.

Simple templates (with examples) are decent for "generic" undead -- skeletons, zombies, "spirits," etc.

Specific examples are better for complex undead (or undead with complex D&D rules) -- vampire, lich, etc.

I pretty much think it would be exactly the opposite way around. There is no point in templates for zombies that basically say 'remove everything from the base creature except size'. May as well just have small, medium, large zombies etc.

OTOH, for a vampire, what the creature was before it was turned is much more important.


glass.

 

[drothgery]

Specific undead in MM1. Templates or whatever mechanicsm they're using for custom undead in a later MM or whatever book the Necromancer shows up in.

 

[WayneLigon]

Do we even know if there will still be templates for monsters?

I like templates, and the way undead are done in Unearthed Arcana was pretty darn cool; an undead was either corporeal or incorporeal. The Animate the Dead (Greater) spell allows you to slap that template on a creature, then customize it with two or more special powers such as blood drain, create spawn, etc so you create a unique or personalized creature everytime you cast the spell.

 

[BryonD]

I pretty much think it would be exactly the opposite way around. There is no point in templates for zombies that basically say 'remove everything from the base creature except size'. May as well just have small, medium, large zombies etc.

OTOH, for a vampire, what the creature was before it was turned is much more important.


glass.

I'm with you.

Though I would add that I think they got it right with vampires in 3X. Below a certain point you use a static monster so that a vampire will never be weaker than Z. When a first level commoner becomes a vampire, it becomes a very serious threat to all the other first level commoners. Powerful people become even more powerful and distinct as vampires. (There is plenty of room to debate the vampire specifics. But I'm just talking about the static / template combination approach. )

 

[Aust Diamondew]

I pretty much think it would be exactly the opposite way around. There is no point in templates for zombies that basically say 'remove everything from the base creature except size'. May as well just have small, medium, large zombies etc.

OTOH, for a vampire, what the creature was before it was turned is much more important.


glass.

What about for nonhumanoid skeletons and zombies? The differences are tiny between human and elf but between human and lion, wolf, eagle or T Rex not so much.

 

[am181d]

Here's what I'd recommend: No templates in Core (because I want the MMs devoted to creatures I can use out of the box book), but include some templates in DnD insider or one of the supplementary books. Those are the best places for "tinker tools" to appear.

 

[Commonblade]

Give me a couple of undead examples, but then give me ways to turn anything undead. Thats really the best way for me. I get a lot more milage out of it. Personally, I like most of the monsters that can turn normally allied PCs into creatures that can be fought. Gets me double my money for stating out an NPC.

 

[BryonD]

What about for nonhumanoid skeletons and zombies? The differences are tiny between human and elf but between human and lion, wolf, eagle or T Rex not so much.

T-Rex would be a special case on size alone.

The others, for a simple basic skeleton or zombie, need not be any different than a human as far as mechanics go.

I'd certainly like to also have the option for advanced skeletons that take on some characteristics of a lion or whatever, or can fly like an eagle. But the minimal level of animated lion bones doesn't need to be any more complex than animated human bones.