chaotix42
First Post
Really? You've never participated in a battle with a solo monster that was fun, or read a solo monster that seemed compelling?
What Have We Done About Solos?
- Thread starter ender_wiggin
- Start date
Really? You've never participated in a battle with a solo monster that was fun, or read a solo monster that seemed compelling?
James McMurray
First Post
Not when they're alone. At least not when the fight is finally over. The first few rounds are usually fun, but after that it gets repetitive.
I've been running Touch of Madness lately, which has no solos in it. Instead they put a bunch of elites in the adventure, with lower level mooks to back them up. Those fights have all been fun. The few times I used solitary solos in the epic campaign I ran was on the opposite end of the spectrum.
I've read several that seemed compelling, but they don't work that way in combat. Too many hit points plus too few powers leads to a fight filled with a lot of the same old same old, at least the ones I've seen. YMMV
I've been running Touch of Madness lately, which has no solos in it. Instead they put a bunch of elites in the adventure, with lower level mooks to back them up. Those fights have all been fun. The few times I used solitary solos in the epic campaign I ran was on the opposite end of the spectrum.
I've read several that seemed compelling, but they don't work that way in combat. Too many hit points plus too few powers leads to a fight filled with a lot of the same old same old, at least the ones I've seen. YMMV
I feel like one of the roots of the problem is that solos have roles attached to them. If they truly are supposed to be like fighting 5 monsters of the same level, should they not have powers that mimic the 5 roles those monsters would fill?
In a way, dragons do this, or attempt this, but at the same time, each one is given a role as well. It makes sense that the black dragon *leans* towards lurker, but it also has a blast effect. Granted, that blast effect grants a -4 penalty to AC, further highlighting the lurker in him. But I think it is important that all solos also have means to deal with all roles that a standard 5 person party is made of.
Right now, I'm ready to put in a solo monster around level 10 for a party that has yet to face one. Thought about the Adult black dragon, but the negative reviews here make me think that he'd be a cakewalk. I have only played against one dragon, and indeed, we put him to sleep and cut him down in 4 rounds. It was a Young White Dragon at Level 3. What should I do?
In a way, dragons do this, or attempt this, but at the same time, each one is given a role as well. It makes sense that the black dragon *leans* towards lurker, but it also has a blast effect. Granted, that blast effect grants a -4 penalty to AC, further highlighting the lurker in him. But I think it is important that all solos also have means to deal with all roles that a standard 5 person party is made of.
Right now, I'm ready to put in a solo monster around level 10 for a party that has yet to face one. Thought about the Adult black dragon, but the negative reviews here make me think that he'd be a cakewalk. I have only played against one dragon, and indeed, we put him to sleep and cut him down in 4 rounds. It was a Young White Dragon at Level 3. What should I do?
Aenghus
Explorer
Solos in 4e, though flawed, are still better than 3e monsters who had even less actions compared to the party - solitary 3e monsters either were significantly higher level than the party, had lots of magic, or died really quickly.
4e solos need other stuff to make the encounter interesting - some combination of other monsters, interactive scenery, traps, a transforming battlefield. A solo white dragon should crash through ice walls, or erupt out of a snow drift. A solo dire bear should smash his way through trees sending them flying.
These ideas do take more creativity and brainpower to come up with, but it can be very rewarding when it works out.
4e solos need other stuff to make the encounter interesting - some combination of other monsters, interactive scenery, traps, a transforming battlefield. A solo white dragon should crash through ice walls, or erupt out of a snow drift. A solo dire bear should smash his way through trees sending them flying.
These ideas do take more creativity and brainpower to come up with, but it can be very rewarding when it works out.
DracoSuave
First Post
I think one of the fallacies made regarding how to treat solos is that they assume that 'by the book' a solo is a one-on-party fight, without features, when by the book a solo is not intended to be by itself, but, like -all- encounters, supposed to be jazzed up with terrain features, traps and hazards, and yes, other monsters. By the book, that's how encounters are supposed to be.
One of the DMG's encounter templates is called "Dragon's Den", and specifically calls out having a fight against a single solo monster. I agree that terrain and traps should be part of the equation (terrain should come into play in every encounter), but the concept of the solo monster (if not its current rules implementation) is that it can be the only monster in the encounter.
CapnZapp
Legend
I think the biggest share of the blame must go to Wizards, who chose to name these monsters Solos.
It would have been much better if they had chosen a name that did not implicate being encountered alone.
Of course, it would have been better still if they had designed 4E to properly support the option of having encounters with few strong foes (and not solving any problem by the old "throw more monsters at them" advice)...
It would have been much better if they had chosen a name that did not implicate being encountered alone.
Of course, it would have been better still if they had designed 4E to properly support the option of having encounters with few strong foes (and not solving any problem by the old "throw more monsters at them" advice)...
Nebulous
Legend
But a party fighting a single terrifying monster is a staple of fantasy since the concept of fantasy was first invented. I think that WotC wanted this to happen, but solos didn't get enough playtesting. I plan to run my first homebrew solo monster soon and i'll post how it goes. Basically, it is going to cover the roles of a lurker, skirmisher and controller, with lowered HP and an interactive terrain where PCs can be pulled off a bridge into a river. I'm also prepared to wing its HP and powers if the encounter seems to be leaning too much one way or another.
I'm just curious though: has WotC said anything about the way solos work, or is their gradual tweaking of them their admission of "yeah, we don't like them either"
CapnZapp
Legend
I think the best quick-fix is to give MM1 Solos two turns each round.
More attacks mean higher damage output. Two turns mean Solos become much less susceptible to stunlocking.
This option increases the uniqueness of any Solo (also flagging the Solo's status!) without requiring any book-keeping (like any suggestion to change the damage of their attacks would do).
Just make sure not to throw high-level Solos against unprepared adventure parties though...
More attacks mean higher damage output. Two turns mean Solos become much less susceptible to stunlocking.
This option increases the uniqueness of any Solo (also flagging the Solo's status!) without requiring any book-keeping (like any suggestion to change the damage of their attacks would do).
Just make sure not to throw high-level Solos against unprepared adventure parties though...
Nebulous
Legend
Just make sure not to throw high-level Solos against unprepared adventure parties though...
Well, that's precisely what i'm doing, and the party at 5th level is not optimized for stunlocking, so i have to be careful. Scary, dangerous, but defeatable.
Similar Threads
