Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ilgatto" data-source="post: 9798801" data-attributes="member: 86051">Yup, DMG, p. 85 says so, with: "*Treat peasants/levies as up to 1-1, men-at-arms as 1-1 to 1, and all levels as the n+1 hit dice category." But I've always taken that to mean that, say, a 4th-level fighter NPC should be treated as the "4+1 hit dice" category for xp purposes. If that is true, it doesn't really solve the problem of how many hit dice a mountain dwarf lieutenant has. But maybe I'm making a connection here that doesn't really matter in the end.As to the THAC0 of (some) monsters with, say, a fighter class, the tables on p. 74 do suggest that they attack "as fighters".Yeah, I suppose that most DM's do this (as do I). There's even some evidence to support this notion, for DMG, p. 74 has: "Half-elves use the attack matrix as elves do, while non-player character half-orcs use the attack matrix for monsters."I suppose this says something like "half-elves and elves are cool, and half-orcs are monsters."But that is exactly the main problem I'm facing, for it means that hit dice need not necessarily be tied to class abilities, which could have far-reaching consequences for the number of hit dice of other monsters with "class abilities", and therefore their xp values. Still, both the ixitxachitl and the sahuagin, which are the main problem with inconsistent hit dice values, date back to the Blackmoor supplement, which probably explains a lot.Well, the +x has consequences for saving throws, which may be a "special defense" thing. Also, I've been toying with the notion that THAC0 may have been a factor in determining xp, but that's me.The Constitution bonus adding to hit dice is an interesting notion, but that doesn't explain why some monsters have huge pluses added to their hit dice. I've never really understood why these pluses exist in the first place, other than the notion that they have their basis in OD&D, where the number of hit dice a creature could have may have been limited to some number.That is probably true. I'm just hoping that I can come to understand whether there is such a thing as "multiple consistencies", each with their origins and "run" in specific periods of the game, and all of which then ended up muddled in the Monster Manual and Appendix E.Could be that he never used them, but he did mention 0-level halflings in the heading of Table I.B. in the DMG (p. 74) for some weird reason, plus as part of the footnote: "Dwarves, elves and gnomes are never lower than 1st level (unlike halflings and humans, which may be of 0 level). Bards fight at their highest level of fighter experience."Which is obviously a seriously annoying footnote because: "Dwarves, elves and gnomes are never lower than 1st level (...)" <img class="smilie smilie--emoji" alt="😕" src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f615.png" title="Confused face    :confused:" data-shortname=":confused:" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" /></blockquote>

Verification