War Trolls aren't Giants !?!?
- Thread starter Xombie Master
- Start date
Pielorinho
Iron Fist of Pelor
See, this is the point where a good DM will consider a retcon.Xombie Master said:
"Hold on," he should say, "I just noticed these things are Monstrous Humanoids."
"What?!" The ranger says. "My character has lived in this world for thirty years, and knows a lot about giants. These things are common. Did I know that they were Monstrous Humanoids, or at least that they're not giants?"
"Um, make a Knowledge: Nature check. DC 10, since these things are common, and you can add your favored enemy bonus onto the check. Anyone else in the party can make the same check."
"Got a 13 on it. So I knew that they were monstrous humanoids, way back when? Can I just switch those giant-bane arrows to monstrous-humanoid-bane arrows?"
"Sure, go ahead: that's what you would've bought if I'd been paying attention anyway. Sorry about that!"
And the game goes forward.
Note that the DM can also try to incorporate the screwup into the game: perhaps normally war-trolls in his campaign ARE just regular trolls with fighter levels, but these were a whole new creature who'd been trained to act like trolls, for some who-knows-why reason that leads the PCs down a new path. However, you have to be a very adroit DM to pull this off, and even if you are, you still risk irritating the players. Better IMO to do a simple retcon like the one above.
Daniel
This is definitely an issue we're aware of. Just last week, we talked about a creature that had giant in its name, but its type was fey. We changed the name in development to prevent exactly this sort of confusion. It's confusing for players and DMs, and that's not something we want.
I'd wager that if the war troll came across the team today, we'd either change the type or give it a different name.
WRT class levels and monsters, there's been some debate on how likely it is that DMs use this tool. It's really not clear.
I think the issue is that class levels don't neatly create a 1:1 CR progression. A frost giant with a level of barbarian gets a lot for that +1 CR. A frost giant with a level of sorcerer? Not so much.
EDIT: As an aside, my favorite moment in my DMing career was watching as the players surrounded a frost giant. They were totally convinced they had the thing dead, right up until it was the frost giant's turn and I said the magic words, "The frost giant rages."
I'd wager that if the war troll came across the team today, we'd either change the type or give it a different name.
WRT class levels and monsters, there's been some debate on how likely it is that DMs use this tool. It's really not clear.
I think the issue is that class levels don't neatly create a 1:1 CR progression. A frost giant with a level of barbarian gets a lot for that +1 CR. A frost giant with a level of sorcerer? Not so much.
EDIT: As an aside, my favorite moment in my DMing career was watching as the players surrounded a frost giant. They were totally convinced they had the thing dead, right up until it was the frost giant's turn and I said the magic words, "The frost giant rages."
ThirdWizard
First Post
This is the first I'd heard of people possibly not using class levels/templates on monsters. I thought that was the big thing, hot stuff added to 3E that was so cool about monsters.
But, I still can't have too many monster books. I never can have too many monsters to choose from.
But, I still can't have too many monster books. I never can have too many monsters to choose from.
Vraille Darkfang
First Post
(Looks up War Troll in MM III).
Hmmmm. My, my. Yep.
They've allowed themselves to be trapped by the BASIC rules, without even, ONCE, thinking about the MODERATE rules (not even ADVANCED rules). They wanted a fighter type troll, but one with better BAB than a Giant Type creature would have. So they said "Well it's IMPOSSIBLE to have a Giant with a good Base Attack Bonus, so what monster types have Good Base Attack Bonuses?"
See, no thought beyond the bare basics of the Monster Creation System. It's called SPECIAL ABILITIES people. Instead of this idiotic 'it's a troll, but its not a troll,' you could have done this:
Warbred (Ex): A war Troll is bred for war and conflict. War Trolls recieve a Fighter's Base Attack bonus for their Racial Hit Dice, and further their Racial Hit Dice count as Fighter Levels for the purposes of Feat Prerequisites. (You can even go beyond this & give it Fighter-type bonus feats).
Now: Change Multiattack to Weapon Specialization. Also, eye that Level Adjustment.
There. A WAR Troll, not a Monstrous Humanoid that has NO REAL RESEMBELANCE to a troll.
I mean, this might not be Monster Design 101. But its Monster Design 102.
The War Troll Designer, Playtesters, and MMIII Editor couldn't think 'outside the box' on this one. Of course the box is clear. And previous D&D & D20 monster designers have riddled it with so many holes it looks like someone cast Invisibility on a hunk of Swiss Chese. But, they couldn't find their way out.
The power of the D20 system is its FLEXABILITY. Once you allow the rules to to confine you, you've lost the power within the system.
Hmmmm. My, my. Yep.
They've allowed themselves to be trapped by the BASIC rules, without even, ONCE, thinking about the MODERATE rules (not even ADVANCED rules). They wanted a fighter type troll, but one with better BAB than a Giant Type creature would have. So they said "Well it's IMPOSSIBLE to have a Giant with a good Base Attack Bonus, so what monster types have Good Base Attack Bonuses?"
See, no thought beyond the bare basics of the Monster Creation System. It's called SPECIAL ABILITIES people. Instead of this idiotic 'it's a troll, but its not a troll,' you could have done this:
Warbred (Ex): A war Troll is bred for war and conflict. War Trolls recieve a Fighter's Base Attack bonus for their Racial Hit Dice, and further their Racial Hit Dice count as Fighter Levels for the purposes of Feat Prerequisites. (You can even go beyond this & give it Fighter-type bonus feats).
Now: Change Multiattack to Weapon Specialization. Also, eye that Level Adjustment.
There. A WAR Troll, not a Monstrous Humanoid that has NO REAL RESEMBELANCE to a troll.
I mean, this might not be Monster Design 101. But its Monster Design 102.
The War Troll Designer, Playtesters, and MMIII Editor couldn't think 'outside the box' on this one. Of course the box is clear. And previous D&D & D20 monster designers have riddled it with so many holes it looks like someone cast Invisibility on a hunk of Swiss Chese. But, they couldn't find their way out.
The power of the D20 system is its FLEXABILITY. Once you allow the rules to to confine you, you've lost the power within the system.
Xombie Master
First Post
I'm all for a variety of monster books, on the basis that my DM doesn't "create" his monsters much. The more books, the more variety he's prone to use. Me personally, I prefer to create 80% of my monsters from scratch anyways. When I say create I mean fully create of course, description, abilities, everything from the ground up. Keeps my veteran players guessing.
Saeviomagy
Adventurer
Crothian said:
I'd have to support this theory, given the amount of "D&D is so much work to run" posts. Half of them are complaining that numbers need to be added together in order to run the game. Lets face it folks, if you can't add numbers together, then maybe you're not cut out for DMing.
Xombie Master
First Post
Or most roleplaying for that matter, including D&D.
Similar Threads
