War Trolls aren't Giants !?!?

[Grover Cleaveland]

My big problem was that a player spent all his loot on these arrows. He should have been informed they would be useless. .

It's the DM's perogative to trick the players by introducing unexpected stats. It discourages meta-gaming. Players shouldn't always know what a monster's weaknesses are.

For example, maybe a troll is a half-fiend and therefore resistant to fire. The ranger knows trolls, but he doesn't necessarily know half-fiends, and might be caught off guard. This situation is the exact same thing. The ranger should know a lot about giants, but he shouldn't necessarily know that a related subspecies isn't affected by a certain magic item if he's never encountered them before. The player might, but the character doesn't know what creature types are. For all he knows, there might be lots of previously unknown giant breeds out there that you can shoot anti-giant arrows at. And there are - this just wasn't one of them.

If he had gone to a sage or a something, done some actual research on the matter, sure, but a DM isn't required to simply hand information to players for free. At best, he should get a knowledge check, but that's ultimately the DM's call, especially if the player doesn't think to ask.

Stop whining! It's a minor setback. The player was outsmarted fair and square. The campaign goes on, and there will be new opportunities for precious, precious loot. Chalk it up to a valuable lesson hard-earned.

 

[ThirdWizard]

But that's how most business' operate, not keeping an eye on the current things as much as planning for the future.

That is so far removed from my experiences.

 

[Azul]

Az,

See though, that's the difference between a 1st level giant with a level in sorcerer and the same level of sorcerer with say a goblin.

Agreed, but it's also a matter of getting creative with oddball class mixes. For example, that level of sorcerer could include knowing charm person (and thus having an unusual "friend" protecting him) or casting a few rays of enfeeblement on the party tanks (which will make the fight tougher) or casting reduce person on friendly goblins and skirmishing from crawlspace sized tunnels that even the party halfling finds rather tight.

When you add only a level or two of a spellcasting class to a monster, you really have to look for spells that can leverage the monster's abilities nicely or allow the monster to use some unexpected, unorthodox tactics. The usual favourite spells for the class (e.g. stuff like magic missile for sorcerers) are often poor choices.

I suppose the need to leverage any class levels holds true for any class. Things like front-loaded abilities, group buffs and powerful class abilities (e.g. rage, sneak attack) can add some nifty spice to a monster. Also, a monster with a level in a core class is normally assigned the "elite array", is it not? That would also enhance the critter.

Mixing in some oddballs keeps a party on their toes and helps reduce the "oh, it's just a goblin" mindset that can all-to-easily set in. Even at 9th level, my players have a healthy respect for any humanoid foes, especially if they show any signs of competence or unusual abilities.

 

[Nightfall]

That is so far removed from my experiences.

Uhm think I cross posted. Doh.

*looks again*

Oh wait there it is!


Third,

I think it depends on the people in charge. Look at Ken Lay. He obviously thought ahead. Just not for anyone else.

Az,

But I think perhaps your PCs might be the exception, not necessarily the rule.

 

[Azul]

Az,

This may be so but I think mostly WotC is looking ahead rather than in the present. But that's how most business' operate, not keeping an eye on the current things as much as planning for the future.

Even so you raise excellent points and ones I certainly agree with. But then I'm an old codger too. *well at age 28 going on 29 not THAT old but still!*

Yer a young'un... (says the guy in his early 30s).

As for the future, hey, if anyone is likely to still be buying gaming stuff in 10 years, it's us old-timers who never gave it up even after becoming "responsible" adults. Lots of teens or young adults game in high school or college/university and stop gaming after leaving that environment. Guys like us who still game long after we "should have outgrown it"... we're lifers. We're the loonies who introduce our kids to gaming and breed a whole new generation of hardcore gamers. You won't find a more surefire long-term customer than the hardcore adult players because for us it's become a lifelong hobby.

Yep, there are fewer of us but we're the one's who'll be sitting in old folks homes decades from now still rolling our polyhedral dice and bitching about how 10th edition screwed everything up. My bunch of players all genuinely expect to be gaming extensively after their retirements in 20-30 years.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

It's the DM's perogative to trick the players by introducing unexpected stats. It discourages meta-gaming. Players shouldn't always know what a monster's weaknesses are.

For example, maybe a troll is a half-fiend and therefore resistant to fire. The ranger knows trolls, but he doesn't necessarily know half-fiends, and might be caught off guard. This situation is the exact same thing. The ranger should know a lot about giants, but he shouldn't necessarily know that a related subspecies isn't affected by a certain magic item if he's never encountered them before. The player might, but the character doesn't know what creature types are. For all he knows, there might be lots of previously unknown giant breeds out there that you can shoot anti-giant arrows at. And there are - this just wasn't one of them.

If he had gone to a sage or a something, done some actual research on the matter, sure, but a DM isn't required to simply hand information to players for free. At best, he should get a knowledge check, but that's ultimately the DM's call, especially if the player doesn't think to ask.

Stop whining! It's a minor setback. The player was outsmarted fair and square. The campaign goes on, and there will be new opportunities for precious, precious loot. Chalk it up to a valuable lesson hard-earned.

Oh, bull puckey!

A troll is a giant.

A war troll is a troll.

Therefor a war troll is a giant. Same species, different breed. And yes, if it is not a giant (?!) then a ranger should get at least a chance of realizing it. Perhaps not a certain knowledge, but a chance.

The valuable lesson learned is that sometimes the DM needs to be hit with a clue club.

There is also a reason that I do not own all of the WotC monster books...

The Auld Grump

 

[Nightfall]

Grumpy,

I own them but I think I use other monster books WAY more. War Troll probably not going to see as much use as say...A footman of Wrath in Book of Fiends.

 

[Azul]

Az,

But I think perhaps your PCs might be the exception, not necessarily the rule.

Only because I have made it a habit to regularly terrorize them with so-called wussy monsters and they are well aware that I regularly add significant class levels and templates onto monsters to keep them challenging.

They've learned that a seasoned orc warrior is usually something like a 5th level warrior, maybe even with some barbarian levels, and that he packs some serious hitting power. Since orc society is so brutal and darwinistic, such tough orcs aren't rare. They expect hobgoblins to fight with military precision and they expect kobolds to fight using ambushes, traps and lots and lots of poison.

Yeah, I'm probably the exception, but the way I see it is I'm just treating the other humanoid races the same way the "good guy" humanoids are treated. I level the playing field. If anything, I give the baddies a bit of an edge on levels since they tend to have more dangerous lifestyles. I also consider 1st level to be "green" not "average joe" and I hand out NPC class levels generously. Rookies and trainees are first level in my games. Inferior troops are 2nd level (sometimes war1/com1). Regular troops are 2nd or 3rd. Veteran troops are usually 4th+. Leaders, bodyguards and elite troops often have core class levels in addition to NPC class levels.

My players have faced orc frenzied berzerkers, clerics, half-troll orc barbarians, and a fiendish large-sized mutant orc variety I call the Chosen of Erythnul (or Black Orcs for short). I'm sure that even in the 10th+ level range, I'll find ways to keep them thinking of orcs, goblinoids and the like are serious adversaries.

 

[Nightfall]

Az,

Good for you. Me I'd do the same...but probably replace Orcs with Ratmen. But that's my SL roots shining through.

 

[Azul]

Az,

Good for you. Me I'd do the same...but probably replace Orcs with Ratmen. But that's my SL roots shining through.

Ratmen are cool. The carnival is pretty funky too. Charduni (the LE dwarves) have some flavour to them. I'm not a big fan of some of the other SL races though.

I love the siege undead though. Great concept.

Anyway, this is off-topic.

As for war trolls, meh, I'd just leave them as monstrous humanoids but tack on the "giant traits" special quality, much like some critters have ooze-like or plant-like traits despite not being those critter types. So the war troll is mechanically a monstrous humanoid. It's a dumb design decision but I'm not likely to bother reworking it from scratch. I'll just declare that in my games it also counts as a giant... so it's probably a weird mutant version of trolls but it's still a troll. I'm certainly going to treat it as one, including making it vulnerable to the anti-troll abilities and weaponry (like giantbane weapons).