Why are certain monsters at certain tiers?

Dykstrav

Adventurer
I'm designing an adventure for my group that just hit 4th level. I'd like to use a vampire as the main antagonist (making it around a level 6 solo or so). Alas, the DMG's vampire lord template requires the creature in question to be 11th level.

I reviewed the vampire lord's abilities and none of them seem particularly game-breaking for heroic tier (although blood drain is nasty, I don't think it's much worse than some other monster attacks, like a fire beetle's breath weapon). So what's the deal? Why does a vampire lord need to be paragon tier?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

For the same reason Drow are paragon tier. Just wizards idea of the power level of the monster. Ignore them at will and make a level 6 solo vampire.
 


Mechanically, none, I guess, other than an effort to differentiate the tiers thematically. PC's heading into Paragon tier should know it, not just from their Path and other changes, but because the tenor of the foes they're facing changes as well. Still nothing stopping you hacking it together for your own campaign.
 

So what's the deal? Why does a vampire lord need to be paragon tier?

I'm pretty much in agreement with most of the others, here. There's no reason in the writeup you couldn't make the vampire lord 6th level, using the rules from the DMG and the pre-existing monster from the monster manual. If I had my DMG and MM handy, I'd do it in a couple of minutes for the fun of it here - did it all the time for the games I ran last year.
 

Yeah, I kinda already knew the answer before I even asked. I already started statting out the vampire when I noticed that it's supposed to be 11th level. I was curious as to if there was actually some sort of game balance reason or it was just an arbitrary choice on the part of a game designer somewhere.

Since there doesn't seem to be anything from stopping me from doing it, "Sister Angela" will be lurking in the crypts below the Monastery of the Eternal Sea a few sessions from now.
 

There's nothing truly preventing you from writing up a 2nd level solo red dragon, and ascribing the 1st level heroes' victory to Luke Skywalker-level luck and moxy.
 

Since there doesn't seem to be anything from stopping me from doing it, "Sister Angela" will be lurking in the crypts below the Monastery of the Eternal Sea a few sessions from now.

Cool. :) I dropped an elite level 6 basilisk in a rewrite for the Slavelords modules in one of my 4e games for a gameday, just by dropping the levels, hp's, attack bonuses, etc. as per the rules in the DMG - worked like a charm, and unnerved the players just a bit, too. :)
 

By the way, I wouldn't make the vampire a solo. Make him an elite and give him allies -- bodyguards, or spectral hounds, or swarms of shadow bats, or something. There are too many annoying things PCs can do against solos for them to really work without a lot of tweaking.
 

I wouldn't call it a game balance thing. I would say it looks more like a pacing thing, in order to keep variety going through all 30 levels by having you fight different things at different ranges. You know, like fighting kobolds and goblins at 1st level, graduating to orcs and hobgoblins and gnolls, then to ogres, and so on. With 30 levels and three tiers to account for, I think they simply decided that starting some monsters considerably higher would help pace the average campaign. "Hey, we're tough enough to take on medusae now!"

Even if you're planning to take a game to 30, you probably can figure out your pacing on your own well enough that you don't have to partition critters out the way they did. If you're not planning to go all the way to 30, there's definitely no reason to stint yourself on your favorite critters.

(I personally used vampiric "husks" as low as 2nd or 3rd level and culminated with a fight against a 5th-level vampiric giant spider. I know the itch.)
 

Remove ads

Top