[WotC_Logan] Why is Tiamat Huge?

[ferratus]

Really though, does Orcus need to be Gargantuan? He is a ram headed demon with power over the undead. What part of that theme really speaks to gargantuan?

People are talking about how easy it is to reduce the size category. There are only a few monsters in the MM who are of size G or greater, so why not errata to smaller, and make fighting a gargantuan creature an different experience?

 

[I'm A Banana]

Did you make this term up for this thread, or did I miss it elsewhere in the world until now?

I like the term very much as you have applied it to the situation of Tiamat and her mini. Lets just hope only the term catches on, but not the philosophy behind it

I made it up. I think it's pretty useful for describing design that comes from minis rather than the game.

Overstate much?

You have said you don't even use minis. So the mini itself is irrelevant to you. So your "wheelchair" is what, having to change one word in her stat block?

It's hyperbolic, but you'll notice by the end of that post, I've put it in context. They chose to wus out on Tiamat for a motive that I think is pretty dumb. And, as I have posted, I have no real problem with getting to more "manageable" monster sizes in principle. In this instance, it was misapplied.

Plus, I was rebutting the "you can fix it!" defense for the 800,000th time since primordial cavemen complained about bad cave art. A bit of hyperbole helps to keep me interested for that old ride, and maybe conveys the point with a bit more force.

 

[Quantarum]

Another tempest in a teapot. Allowing your imagination to be weighed down by the shackles of aesthetic expectation is lame.
After seeing the picture of Tiamat by WAR one of players concluded a miniature for it would be the size of a recliner and wouldn't fit on our gaming table. I responded I would need a full mini, just a couple of 4x4 cardboard squares with FOOT written on them and that picture.

-Q.

 

[justanobody]

Wait...so (in part) the stats for a God, in game, were determined by WotCs capacity to sell a miniature of said God?
WAT?

No. Because Tiamat is long since out of print from DDM 1.0 and War of the Dragon Queen is VERY hard to find in unopened boxes anymore, so it relies on a non-existent product that you cannot even buy except for off the collectors market.

WotC doesn't even make a Tiamat mini any more to even relate to anything in 4th edition.

So if you want one you will be buying it from eBay or something like that for about $50 in the after-market.

So the rules matching the mini don't even help gamers that have no access to the mini, or even WotC make money as they no longer product said mini.

ergo...Plastic Logic (TM to KM)

WizKids - Mage Knight

Hell, I thought all true fans of the old Tiamat were using that bad boy for it.

I only ever got the Great Fire Dragon (Red), Venemous Shadow Dragon (Black), and I think Polar Ice Dragon (Blue).

Never did get the Radiant Light Dragon (White), and they didn't make a green that I recall, or I WAS going to make my own Tiamat!

What is with these people not making big green dragons?!?!?!

 

[Serendipity]

No. Because Tiamat is long since out of print from DDM 1.0 and War of the Dragon Queen is VERY hard to find in unopened boxes anymore, so it relies on a non-existent product that you cannot even buy except for off the collectors market.

*nods* I have since (in another thread I think) been corrected. Though....if it's that rare I don't quite "get" the point of "fixing" the stats to match the mini.

 

[justanobody]

*nods* I have since (in another thread I think) been corrected. Though....if it's that rare I don't quite "get" the point of "fixing" the stats to match the mini.

I was a day late to the party, and since I typed it all up figured I would just leave it there.

That is what myself and KM also do not get why they made a mini the reason for the rule, because the mini is no longer available unless you already were lucky to have one.

Guess it means Tiamat was designed for rich people that were able to afford 4 cases of WotDQ to be able to get a Tiamat in the first place, because the old toy version is bigger than the DDM version....and cheaper to get as well.

 

[Fifth Element]

It's hyperbolic, but you'll notice by the end of that post, I've put it in context. They chose to wus out on Tiamat for a motive that I think is pretty dumb.

Hmm? We're talking about an existing mini here, released before this decision was made. It's not like they've said "all monsters from here on will be designed based on their minis". They said that in Tiamat's case, the "main" reason the decision was made was to correspond to the size of the existing mini.

A bit of hyperbole helps to keep me interested for that old ride, and maybe conveys the point with a bit more force.

...or perhaps makes people dismiss your point because you're blowing it way out of proportion?

 

[I'm A Banana]

Hmm? We're talking about an existing mini here, released before this decision was made. It's not like they've said "all monsters from here on will be designed based on their minis". They said that in Tiamat's case, the "main" reason the decision was made was to correspond to the size of the existing mini.

Right. That's dumb. It's plastic logic. It's shoehorning my game into minis skirmish. That's not cool, man. Whatever designer made that call gets a Gold Star taken away, or gets a check next to their name on the whiteboard (two checks and you go to the principal's office!), or gets kicked in the shins by a kobold, or has to make out with the garbage troll, or whatever. It's something that I will deride, because it's worse for my games.

Praise where praise is due and criticism where criticism is due.

...or perhaps makes people dismiss your point because you're blowing it way out of proportion?

Pfft. This is the Internet. I haven't compared anything to Hitler, and I haven't cleverly substituted the $ sign for an S. I even gave a rational account of how it will actually directly affect me in practice (as a 4e DM). I am practically a picture of restraint and educated opinion, here.

And now, a cat macro.

 

[Fifth Element]

Pfft. This is the Internet. I haven't compared anything to Hitler, and I haven't cleverly substituted the $ sign for an S. I even gave a rational account of how it will actually directly affect me in practice (as a 4e DM).

Eh, I didn't find that account too convincing. Bearing in mind you have to balance your own preferences against the preferences of all other players.

I am practically a picture of restraint and educated opinion, here.

That's a given.

 

[Klaus]

Problem:

There WAS going to be a Orcus Gargantuan figure. It was on display at D&D XP

They produced the Orcus in the MM assuming this thing was going to be made and on sale in summer '08, just in time for 4e. But, they ended up "delaying" it for the Dracolich (also a gargantuan creature in MM 4e) and then delayed them both indefinitely.

As KM would say, they were designed and put in the MM at that size with a certain level of "plastic logic" involved. I think the costs involved in that product overshadowed its potential value (As I said with Tiamat, how many times are you really going to fight Orcus?) so they were canned.

I think if they had it to do again, both monsters would be Huge and fit in a Huge Pack, or whatever the DDM 3.0 version will be. They were designed with a certain logic that is no longer applicable. Tiamat managed to avoid this fate by being designed when the knowledge that the Icons line is pretty much dead.

in other words, Orcus's size is a holdover from a different Plastic Logic mindset.

The problem with that line is the price point. If you don't push it as a mini, but as a D&D action figure or whatever, you can sell it in more places.

Imagine a boxed set with a Gargantuan Tiamat and little action figures of Hank, Sheila, Presto, Eric, Bobby and Diana! Not unlike the recent Transformers Scene Packs that have human minis packed alongside the (actually transforming) robots:

Guess who makes those: Hasbro.