(Win pdf books!) Week 1 complete. Click in first post for link to the week 2 thread.

[RangerWickett]

Not as many posts today, unfortunately. For folks who are coming in late, you might want to know that I'm actually sending out Pick-N-Mix freebies to everyone who participates (though each participant only gets one). So post. You'll get something, regardless.

Obviously Alzrius deserves something, since he got an actual discussion going, but since The Fantastic Science isn't out yet, I'm going to have to offer to send you a comp copy when it comes out. Remind me, okay?

While all the proposed topics were cool, I think the one most likely to spur more discussion would be Demiurge1138's general "Monsters" topic. We'll try more specific ones as time goes on.

Give me a minute, and I'll send out the complimentary copies. In the meanwhile:

The next topic is Monsters. Post not just about what monsters you use, but how you alter them, what you feel the role of monsters is, and what sorts of things in your game have involved monsters. Don't forget to post what pdf you'd like.

 

[mythusmage]

On Monsters

Ryan asked for posts on monsters, so I'm posting on monsters.

I like dinosaurs. I also like presenting people with differences. So I combined an old D&D monster with dinosaurs and came up with my version of basilisks.

In my scheme of things basilisks are advanced dromaeosaurid dinosaurs belonging to the basiliskid family. It is divided into two sub families, the basiliskinae with 3 genera, and the similiskinae with 1 genus.

The basiliskinae look like velociraptors over all, though they do vary in size from the lion basilisk (150 pounds) down to the wren basilisk (4 oz). The similiskinae (one species) looks like a squirrel monkey, and has been mistaken for one. All basilisks have the ability to paralyse at a glance. This is a magical talent and is entirely voluntary. Some species, such as the canary basilisk and the sparrow basilisk have been domesticated and made into pets.

Under the law those paralyzed by a basilisk are charged with harrassing a wild animal and face fines up to $150 dollars. In extreme cases the victim may be charged with cruelty to animals and fined as much as $10,000 and spend 5 years in prison. There are those who are addicted to being paralyzed by basilisks.

The exact type of paralyzation depends on the species. Some species inflict muscular paralyzation, others neural. In some cases the paralyzation is localized, in others generalized. Then there is the degree of paralyzation. In the case of the lion basilisk the paralyzation is mild and merely slows the victim down to half speed or so. The raven basilisk on the other hand inflicts a neural paralyzation that renders the victim totally immobile and can cause death by cardiac arrest unless lifted quickly. Since the raven basilisk hunts birds for the most part the drastic effects are thought to make catching prey easier.

And that is how I, in part, changed a standard D&D monster. How I handle monsters will follow in a later posting, once I've had an opportunity to compose it.

 

[Steverooo]

Rust Monsters and...?

The AD&D Rust Monster has always seemed silly, to me. I can understand its uses (to scare the Fighters), but the Giant Rust Monster in one of the Greyhawk novels just made things even worse...

So I asked Gary Gygax, one time, if you had all these rust monsters eating all the metals and ores in the world, then why was there any left, at all? He poo-poohed the idea, saying that one battleship could feed all of them for a hundred years, but this is obviously not the case... They can eat a handful of spikes, or a sword, shield, or suit of armor in a single round, and not be filled! If they can eat 60 pounds of fullplate in six seconds, a battleship won't last ALL of them a century! So how is there any metal left?

Somewhere, deep below the surface of the earth, there must also be a race of metal- uh -spitters, who eat rock, and spit up metal, to replace it. Thus, metals exist because they are constantly depositing new veins of it.

And what do they eat? Why, Rust Monsters (and their offal), or course! Giant, Elemental entities that carve their way through the world, depositing high-grade ores within the living earth! As they age, they delve deeper, and the materials they deposit change. The younger, smaller versions make tiny tunnels, and deposit copper. The sub-adults tin, iron, manganese, etc. The adults move deeper still, and deposit higher-grade iron and the mysterious "Cold Iron", moving on to silver. The elders deposit gold, mithral, and eventually adamantine.

Hence, the Rust Monsters have an eternal supply of metals to eat, and the Dwarves have eternal veins of ore to mine. The Metal-spitters eat rock, and occassionally get to munch on a Rust Monster who ventures too deep, in search of their ores... It solves the "problem", and creates a new miner which can tunnel through solid rock (and has a motivation to do so!), connecting all of those Underdark realms!

Need your Balrog bound in a vein of Mithril? Call in an Elder Metal-spitter!

 

[Steverooo]

Vampires and...?

Many creations, for me, begin out of irritation... When something irritates me sufficiently, I "fix" it, usually investing quite a bit of work. Metal-spitters are one example, as is this one.

It has always bothered me that the D&D Vampire (and almost all undead) are linked to the "Negative Material Plane", and suck energy levels, instead of blood. In one of his ancient Dragon expositions, Gygax condemned the Conan The Barbarian movie because it was unlike the books, yet when asked why the AD&D Vampire didn't resemble the legends more closely, replied that "This is the AD&D Vampire!" Hmph! That never worked, for me.

While I have thought of "fixing" the Vampire, on many occasions, I have never bothered. No one else seems to care, and it just hasn't bothered me, enough. It's a minor irritation, and too little to invest the time and work required to come up with a version that better fits the legends that I want to represent in the game...

What has irritated me enough, however, is: Why, when there are so many powerful undead in the world, that can create spawn, is there nothing on the side of Good to counter-balance this? If there are the Undead, why not the No-Longer-Alive?

This was brought to a head when a PC "became a Vampire", but refused to be one... Instead of submitting, he climbed out on the roof, and waited for the sun to rise! He prayed, and refused to move, even though he knew that the sunrise would kill him. He'd died fighting Vampires, and NO WAY was he becoming one! He'd rather EXPLODE!

Now whatcha gonna do, with a guy like that? I say you reward committment!

So I insta-created the Eripmav, one of the Dual-Lived. Infused with Holy, Supernal power, just like the Undead are infused with Unholy, Infernal. Instead of negative energy, they are based upon positive. Instead of draining levels, they Cure Wounds (5 HP) and Restore. Having to come up with it on the spur of the moment, I was vague, but told the PC that, despite what legend said, the Sunrise didn't kill him... it changed him, instead. He got a brief message from some higher power, saying "Well done", or somesuch, and to continue the fight...

As play progressed, and I had a chance, I worked up some stats, basing them off the Vampire template. I didn't give him an Alternate Form ability, nor Charm, but did give him immunity to Charm, and later revealed that his Cure 5 HPs and Restore abilities only worked on Vampire-wounds and level-drains (it was later expanded to work against attacks from ANY Undead, but not sword-wounds, etc).

So basically, I made him the "Good Anti-Vampire", whose powers undid all of theirs, and who was immune to all of their attacks. I even gave him a limited "Spawn" power, in that he could convert other willing Vampire-would-be-Spawns, instead of allowing them to be Undead.

Now, the forces of Good are beginning to balance the Evil, as the Dual-Lived face off against the Undead, and heroes who fall in battle have another choice, instead of rising to join the enemy!

The player of the Eripmav PC (who would have been an ashed Spawn) was pleased with his "new" character, even though he had to spend a few levels fighting to "earn off" the Template LA (in the meantime, he kept his class levels, as his not knowing his abilities made them impossible to use, until I told him about them, as he gained XP). All told, I was happy with it, and the players seemed to be, as well.

(And if either of these sparks any interest, I guess Tourneys, Faires, & Taverns sounds good.)

 

[Pinotage]

Evolutionary Monsters and the Great Beyond

We all have our ideas of where monsters come from - some are created by the gods, others evolve and mutate along lines that strengthen their change of survival. Natural selection can often play a key part in developing a creature to become what it is today. And with the whole process of change you can have a lot of fun. Monsters as written don't have to be static - a creative DM can often look forward as well as back for a slightly different creature with completely different abilities.

Take a simple example. The chuul could easily be thought of as a more evolved from of a crab. A normal crab goes through several stages of natural selection, growing stronger and tougher to eventually end up as a chuul. One could even imagine that certain crabs evolved symbiotic relationships with anemones, for instance, eventually incorporating the paralytic tentacles into the creature's body to form the Chuul. If you expand along these lines, you can come up with combination creatures that may look like chuuls but are more like crabs, or even those that have underdeveloped tentacles and look like crabs.

The same is true if you run in the opposite direction - what would be the ultimate natural feature that a chuul could evolve into to make it more effective at what it does? How does the chuul hunt for its food, and how could it change to make it stronger. Taking a look at the ecology of a chuul and attempting to understand its way of life may make for some interesting ideas as to what is beyond the chuul. Simple examples include bonuses to Hide, such as a camouflage ability, or increase paralytic ability. One could even go further as to suggest that mindflayers originated from the chuul as the epitome of its evolution.

There is a lot of material to explore in taking evolutionary paths for monsters both back and forth. Interesting creatures can be created with different abilities but perhaps with the appearance of a particular subspecies. Next time your party faces a chuul, will it have limited psionic abilities like a mindflayer? Thinking in terms of evolutionary ecology provides ample surprises for players and the chance for DMs to develop fantastic ecologies for creatures in a campaign. Trying to link creatures together in an evolutionary sense can often open up interesting ideas and new critters, as well as sensible ecologies

Edit: As another example on the chuul, one could imagine that the ankheg evolved from a chuul, attempting to develop a spitting paralysis rather than relying on close-up tentacles in a grapple.

Selection: E.N.Critters: Berk's Wasteland

 

[sjmiller]

A couple of years ago I was asked to take over the role of DM for a group of friends. I was not part of the group under the old DM, but let us just say there were issues with his gaming style. The group have been playing for a long time, with years of 1st and 2nd Ed AD&D under their belts. Deciding to give myself a bit of an advantage, I decided to go with the new edition of D&D (3e at the time).

I wanted to avoid some of the classic tropes of D&D, so I tried to use ideas and monsters that they would find refreshing and different, or at the very least, entertaining and fun. So, dwarves became the evil monotheistic bad guys; litorians and faen from Arcana Unearthed were added; and a swampy/marshy area was their starting base of operations. I wanted something else, so I started brainstorming.

After lots of trial and error, I came up with a great name: Children of Gruumsh. Thenthe ideas started flowing. They are devout followers of the god, living in the swamps and forrests near a corrupted and fallen elven citadel. Picture a centaur, but instead of half man and half horse they are half orc and half boar. I came up with stats (thanks to Savage Species) and prepared the first encounter.

The party was preparing an ambush on some lizardmen who had been menacing the party for some time. The noise and the smell of blood attracted the attention of a Child of Gruumsh who was leading a couple of boars near the area. The boars came through first, which startled the party. When the Child of Gruumsh came through the trees the players (not just their characters) stopped and asked, "what the heck is that thing!?"

After a long, hard battle, the Child of Gruumsh (referred to by the party as a "Borc") was defeated. This was towards the end of the day, so we called it a night at that point. After the game ended several players came up and told me that the "borc" was totally unexpected and a lot of fun. They looked forward to playing the next session. The "borc" encounter has been a highlight of the campaign, and is something that is mentioned periodically well over a year after it occured.

So why am I telling this story? Simply to say that adding variety, changing things up, can make even the most jaded of old school players sit up and take notice. Variety makes the game exciting, and coming up with your own monsters is one way of making the game a fun challange for all involved.

Thanks for listening. As for a product selection, I've been thinking about getting "Tournaments, Fairs & Taverns" but finances have been tight. That would be my choice if selected.

 

[FickleGM]

The Making of a Monster

I would like to discuss what it takes to make a monster. To me, the term monster is very evocative. Pictures spring to mind of Godzilla, King Kong, Frankenstein, Gremlins, etc. These pictures bring with them certain feelings like awe, terror, despair, etc.

Now, take the term monster and apply it to a roleplaying game, like D&D. What you sometimes end up with is an adventurer's "To Do" list. This isn't inspiring at all, and can sometimes be downright deflating. I understand that some groups are fine with handling monsters in this way, I have had many fun games that gave monsters this treatment. Unfortunately, there are times that I am shooting for a bit more and find it difficult when my players and I are desensitized to the "monster effect".

So, in order to try to restore the monster to its rightful place, I am following a few steps to determine if a creature is actually a monster:

1) Is it scary? This one is easy, as monsters are normally named such due to their capacity to cause fear. Once a creature loses its ability to cause fear, it ceases to be a monster. Of course, not all scary creatures are monsters, so we must continure...

2) Can it hurt me? A monster must have the ability to hurt you. This can be physically, psychologically or spiritually. If a monster cannot hurt you, it will become less scary and will cease to be a monster.

3) Is it incomprehensible? I could have stopped at #2, but then I would not have a true monster. Sure, something that is scary and can hurt me could be called a monster, but is it really? The bully on the playground is scary and can hurt me (the kids may even say he is a monster), but is he a monster in the truest sense of the term? I believe that the mystery surrounding the monster is what gives it the ability to haunt your nightmares. I want to envision the creature and know that it isn't physically possible (when we uncover its secrets or find a way to create it or destroy it is when it loses what makes it a monster).

So, upon answering yes to each of the previous questions, I feel comfortable in granting the title of monster. Now, all I have to do is present it as a monster. This is often very difficult in a roleplaying game, as players have "seen it all", read the manual or are more powerful than the monster. What to do?

First, I have to decide what my goal is. I have already decided that I want to introduce a monster, but what is the end goal? I think that there are two appropriate goals that I can shoot for when using monsters in a roleplaying game:

1) Initial Shock - this is where the monster is a monster to begin with, but will eventually be just another opponent to overcome.

2) True Monster - this is where it is my goal that the monster is there to scare the characters and that it is not meant to be a fair opponent.

Second, I need to breathe life into the monster. For this step, I will only give as much detail as my goal necessitates.

If my goal is Initial Shock, then I may give some background on why the monsters are where they are and are doing what they are doing. When the shock wears off and the party has to deal with the monsters, they may need this information (or may need the information in order to deal with the monsters).

If my goal is for a True Monster, then I don't want to have much information for the party. In this case, the monster is incomprehensible and horrifying. I will only vaguely detail what the creature is, where it may have come from, how is may have gotten where it is and what it may be after. The important thing to remember here is that you are not setting the True Monster up to be an opponent for the party, but rather an obstacle to circumvent. If the players think that you are using fiat or are throwing unbalanced encounters their way, they may disapprove.

Finally, I am ready to present the monster to the party. The presentation is done in increments, from least detail to most detail. This will change from session to session and is often difficult to do correctly. Rumors, screams in the night, shadows on the wall, brief glimses, etc. can all be used for the initial set up. Subsequently, descriptions of the monster using imagery that the players will understand should be used, but using names from the manual should be avoided (as has been pointed out in countless articles on running monsters). Finally, the point of unveiling, as the party realizes that they are fighting goblin-like creatures (goal #1) or are up against something that isn't in the book and perhaps is best avoided (goal #2).

When all is said and done, the party should have had either a more interesting goblin encounter than they are used to or have had a adventure to find out how to defeat/banish/imprison an "unbeatable" and "unknowable" monster.

Now, all I have to do is get better at doing this (yes, I have been accused of misleading the party when being too descriptive with puny goblins and of killing the party when I made an about face on a hack-n-slash party without letting them know - if your monster is going to be unbeatable by traditional methods, it may be prudent to give the players some sort of clue).

Choice: Elements of Magic - Mythic Earth

 

[Whisper72]

On Monsters and changing them.


One of the problem veteran players pose to DM's is that they have a 'seen it, been there, done that' attitude towards many monsters. Besides being a drag in and of itself on the energy level / excitement of the group itself, it also poses a problem in terms of challenges.

If the PC's know exactly what the strengths and weaknesses of a monster (for example, a Troll) are, then the challenge is quickly gone from the encounter.

There are three main ways to go about this:

- 'Intelligize' the monsters. Make up some in-game reason why, maybe the Troll is simply smarter, maybe it has allies or a boss that help it. In any case, the Troll will make good use of terrain. Maybe it fights in water, so when fire or acid is used, it simply dips down, comes back up. Think also of the infamous 'Tucker's Kobolds'
- 'Accessorize' the monsters. The troll in question may have a ring of fire resistance, or at least a potion.
- 'Transmogrify' the monsters. Make them look different, or make small, but significant tweaks to their special characteristics. Hey, its a magical world, and Darwinian evolution may have created many changes on the norm... The trolls may be special, and be immune to fire in and of themselves, but their regeneration is less quick. Their rubbery skin deflects attacks by blunt weapons, and the best way to defeat them is to use sharp weapons.

Especially the last method is a very nice one. The trick here is one mainly in the way you describe the monster. Sometimes DM's fall in the trap of saying outright: "You spot a group of Trolls", simply because the DM knows that the PC's have met such creatures before, and therefore will know what they are. To begin, say things like, "You see what _looks_ like a group of trolls", and maybe they are quite different creatures. Furthermore, you may go a bit further and 'tease' the players by saying: "You see what looks like a bunch of trolls, but their skins are red in stead of green. Something seems strange about them." The most fun can be had by not even changin anything in the monster at all, but simply stirr the players. Their minds will suddenly go into overdrive. 'Red Trolls? What are they, do they have unexpected powers?' And in the end, this is what you want. The players themselves should be involved with the game, enthralled and intrigued...

Just some thoughts...

 

[Kahuna Burger]

Why are fiends split mechanicly and culturally on the law/chaos axis but all the celestials get along. Well, one obvious answer is that good gets along better than evil. But one could just as easily argue that law forms working coalitions better than chaos. And on a philisophical level, if both axis are objective fabric of the universe sort of forces, why not split them that way?

I've considered for some time splitting out celestials into strong lawful and chaotic factions, or even going a step further and just having 4 kinds of extra plannar beings, LG LE CE and CG, neutrality of any kind being a halmark of the material plane. Such a change would require some mechanical reworking of the celestials and fiends as well as a bit of cosmology juggling.

If the law/chaos axis is just as important, special abilities and DR reduction should be based on that as well as good/evil. So the Balor gets its DR overcome by Law as well as Good, And gets Chaos Hammer and Word of Chaos spell like abilities to go with its Blasphemy and Unholy Aura. The celestials would require a lot of work, esp as some of them are (any) good. (not even neutral good. You can have a chaotic Astral Deva, who is still "impeccably honorable in all their dealings and often prove the most trustworthy and diplomatic of all the celestials" and never lies. Dumb dumb dumb.)

Speaking of DR, why oh why does a creature who has dedicated itself against fighting good - who pretty much is the fight agaisnt good, have a supernatural ability to withstand damage that DOESN'T WORK on his primary enemy? I mean I'm good with the holy damage doing more to evil types, but thematicly, whats the point of DR for extra planars? Its like if demons got Magic circle against Evil as a spell like ability. "A fight agaisnt good! Lets activate my ability that protects me from evil outsiders!" Why not say that the DR is a function of being made of the substance of a non-material plane and only a substance alligned with their plane can get past it. So the Balor has DR evil or chaos. Combined with the switch to ballanced allignment based DR and spell-like abilities, it means that in physical combat an Extra Planer is most vulnerable to and more likely to damage those only one step away (who are also likely to be the subject of shifting alliances) but in terms of spell like abilities has that relationship with the fully opposing plane.

(Is that arsenal book on whips you mentioned a while back en publishing?)

 

[Enkhidu]

Every so often, I page through the MM, or take a look at the dozens of other sources of monsters out there, and am struck by the singular notion that I never - ever - have to worry about monster mechanics again. But, much like Whisper72, I find myself wanting to make cosmetic changes to monsters simply to throw the players for a loop. In addition, I simply love monster themes. As a result, I find myself drawn to templates, and like nothing more than to throw a particular template all over the place during adventure design.


An example: I was in the process of gutting a particular module and filling it with a cabal of Far-Realms worshipping elves that was in the habit of taking prisoners (the hook). Except that I didn't want the party to have to be saddled with all these prisoners, as that would likely lead to a loose end that I'm certain they would want to tie up. As a result, I decided that I would have the elves be capturing these prisoners for... spare parts.

Suddenly, all the existing monsters in the adventure disappeared from my write up, only to be replaced by mechanically identical heaps of that-which-should-not-be: giant spiders became knots of human arms and legs with sausage-like-tooth-tipped tentacles; ogres became towering heaps of muscle and flesh; and humanoid servants were replaced by thick, sexless bodies with mismatched limbs and no heads, magically "worn" by the elves themselves as walking monitors and footsoldiers.

The best part was that, mechanically, I didn't change them much. That which were ogres still relied on powerful strikes, spiders could still poison with their tentacles, etc. And the players didn't know what they were. They tried turning the bipeds the first time they saw them, and when that didn't work, they assumed that they were some strange form of golem. It wasn't until they found the workrooms in which they were created that they figured it out.

I actually got compliments on that after all was done. It's something I look at rather fondly.