Zombie Solo

[Delgar]

I was just hoping to get some Feedback on this Zombie Solo


Zombie Abomination 3 Solo Brute
Large undead XP 750
Initiative: +1 Senses: Perception +11;
HP 200; Bloodied 100 See also Bloodied Gore
AC 17; Fortitude 18, Reflex 16, Will 12
Speed 6
Saves: +5
Action points 2
Slam (standard; at will)
Reach 2; +6 vs. AC; 1d8 + 5 damage, and opponent is grabbed
Bite (standard; at will)
Reach 2; +6 vs. AC; 1d4 +5 necrotic damage and ongoing 5 necrotic damage (save ends)
Zombie Fury (standard; at will)
The Zombie makes 2 Bite or Slam attacks
Dwarf Toss (standard; recharge )
Target must be grabbed; The zombie launches the grabbed target at another opponent, grabbed target is now next to ranged target; two attacks. Range 10; +6 vs. AC; 1d8 +5 damage and knocked prone. Miss: grabbed target is prone in closest square next to ranged target
Sweeping Attack (standard; recharge )
Must have an opponent grabbed; Close blast 3 (must include grabbed opponent) +4 vs Reflex; 1d8 + 5 damage and any target hit (except the grabbed opponent) is pushed 3 squares
Necrotic Spray (immediate reaction, when a melee attack hits the zombie)
A necrotic ooze shoots out from the wound: +4 vs Reflex; 1d6 + 3 damage and the target is dazed (save ends)
Bloodied Gore (Immediate reaction, when first bloodied; encounter)
The zombie erupts it’s Necrotic Ooze even if it hasn’t been recharged
Necrotic Ooze (standard, recharge ) * Necrotic
Close blast 5; +4 vs. Reflex; 1d6+3 and the target is dazed (save ends). Miss: Half damage
Alignment: Unaligned Languages: None
Str 20 (+6) Dex 12 (+2) Wis 10 (+1)
Con 16 (+4) Int 1 (-4) Cha 6 (-1)
Description: A large muscular, rotting, humanoid corpse covered in pustules oozing a black ichor.

 

[Mesh Hong]

I was just hoping to get some Feedback on this Zombie Solo


Zombie Abomination 3 Solo Brute
Large undead XP 750
Initiative: +1 Senses: Perception +11;
HP 200; Bloodied 100 See also Bloodied Gore
AC 17; Fortitude 18, Reflex 16, Will 12
Speed 6
Saves: +5
Action points 2
Slam (standard; at will)
Reach 2; +6 vs. AC; 1d8 + 5 damage, and opponent is grabbed
Bite (standard; at will)
Reach 2; +6 vs. AC; 1d4 +5 necrotic damage and ongoing 5 necrotic damage (save ends)
Zombie Fury (standard; at will)
The Zombie makes 2 Bite or Slam attacks
Dwarf Toss (standard; recharge )
Target must be grabbed; The zombie launches the grabbed target at another opponent, grabbed target is now next to ranged target; two attacks. Range 10; +6 vs. AC; 1d8 +5 damage and knocked prone. Miss: grabbed target is prone in closest square next to ranged target
Sweeping Attack (standard; recharge )
Must have an opponent grabbed; Close blast 3 (must include grabbed opponent) +4 vs Reflex; 1d8 + 5 damage and any target hit (except the grabbed opponent) is pushed 3 squares
Necrotic Spray (immediate reaction, when a melee attack hits the zombie)
A necrotic ooze shoots out from the wound: +4 vs Reflex; 1d6 + 3 damage and the target is dazed (save ends)
Bloodied Gore (Immediate reaction, when first bloodied; encounter)
The zombie erupts it’s Necrotic Ooze even if it hasn’t been recharged
Necrotic Ooze (standard, recharge ) * Necrotic
Close blast 5; +4 vs. Reflex; 1d6+3 and the target is dazed (save ends). Miss: Half damage
Alignment: Unaligned Languages: None
Str 20 (+6) Dex 12 (+2) Wis 10 (+1)
Con 16 (+4) Int 1 (-4) Cha 6 (-1)
Description: A large muscular, rotting, humanoid corpse covered in pustules oozing a black ichor.

I get the HPs and defences slightly different, using your base stats.

HPs: 192
AC: 17; Fortitude: 20; Reflex: 14; Will: 15
(these include a +2 to AC;Fort;Will)

Dwarf Toss need a bit of rewording, I have also changed it to at will (really its only doing as much total damage as a double attack)

Dwarf Toss (standard; at will) * grabbed target only
Target must be grabbed; The zombie tries to throw the grabbed target at another opponent; attack +6 vs. Fortitude; on miss grabbed target is not thrown and remains grabbed; on hit grabbed target is thrown up to 10 squares, takes 1d8+5 damage and is prone; if thrown into a square containing another creature make a secondary attack +6 vs. Reflex against that creature; on hit thrown creature ends in secondary targets square and secondary target is pushed 1 square, is knocked prone and takes 1d8+5 damage.

I think this is a bit clearer - its still a very long description though !!


I think Necrotic ooze should be changed to an encounter power, and also changed to a burst attack.

Necrotic Ooze (standard, recharge ) * Necrotic
Burst 5; +4 vs. Reflex; 1d6+3 necrotic damage; on hit target is dazed (save ends); on miss target takes half damage and is not dazed.

They are my initial reactions, I will take another look at it tomorrow.

 

[Delgar]

Thanks for the thoughts.

I wasn't sure how to word the Dwarf Toss (I can picture it in my mind but wasn't sure how to word it). But I like your take on it.

I think if I change Necrotic Ooze to once per encounter I'll up the damage on it.

 

[Mesh Hong]

Thanks for the thoughts.

I think if I change Necrotic Ooze to once per encounter I'll up the damage on it.

I changed Necrotic Ooze from a Close Blast 5 to a Burst 5; thats a pretty big area, especially at level 3.

However I take your point, you could maybe up this to 2d6+3 damage.


Throw in a 4 level 1 minions and a shallow pit or two and this could make a very nasty combat for a level 1 group, add more minions and it could be a great encounter for a level 2 group.

 

[CapnZapp]

@Dwarf toss: I'd add the restriction the target must be at least one size category smaller than the monster.

As a restriction this doesn't amount to much (because all player characters are still eligible) but it has the advantage of making it clear(er) it's not just dwarfs the power works on.

 

[keterys]

I get the HPs and defences slightly different, using your base stats.

HPs: 192
AC: 17; Fortitude: 20; Reflex: 14; Will: 15
(these include a +2 to AC;Fort;Will)

Agree on the HP, but it's not important to alter F/R/W based on ability scores - that's just a guideline for quickly whipping up a monster not one that has to apply to monsters by any stretch - you're actually a lot better off figuring out what's balanced and appropriate, then going from there (whether assigning ability scores after the defenses to match or just making them whatever you want and assuming it has racial bonuses and weaknesses to fit the rest).

Otherwise you end up with stupidness like the Tarrasque's Will.

That said, a higher Will might be a good idea as Lvl+9 on a Solo is really very low.

 

[Mesh Hong]

Agree on the HP, but it's not important to alter F/R/W based on ability scores - that's just a guideline for quickly whipping up a monster not one that has to apply to monsters by any stretch - you're actually a lot better off figuring out what's balanced and appropriate, then going from there (whether assigning ability scores after the defenses to match or just making them whatever you want and assuming it has racial bonuses and weaknesses to fit the rest).

I think this is a prime example of differing approaches to monster design either taking it from stats and maybe tweeking them slightly (or even tweeking the stats themselves) or just going straight to applying the values you want.

Both are equally valid, and as long as you take a consistant approach there wont be any problems. On the whole my guess is you will probably end up with identical or very similar results most of the time.

 

[keterys]

Very similar quite often, perhaps... but it's also why there's a striking imbalance between Fortitude and Will.

The ability scores are a lot less mechanically important than the defenses, so I do suggest concentrating on the one that matters more

 

[Mesh Hong]

Very similar quite often, perhaps... but it's also why there's a striking imbalance between Fortitude and Will.

The ability scores are a lot less mechanically important than the defenses, so I do suggest concentrating on the one that matters more

Generally creatures that are:
strong or robust (STR or CON) will have a high Fortitude defence
nimble or clever (DEX or INT) will have a high Reflex defence
insightful or of forceful personality (WIS or CHA) will have a high Will defence

The defences of a creature are a product of its character or stats. You can add invisible or fluffy racial bonuses afterwards to help balance it if you wish.

I know monsters and PCs use different systems, but these are some of the basic principles of the D&D universe as set out in 4e. Practically everything in the world runs off the core principles of Strength, Constitution, Dexterity, Intelligence, WIsdom and Charisma in one way or other.

It is usually considered good practice to include one weaker defence as a "chink in the armour" and rewards clever and varied PC attack powers and styles. Obviously you should try and present PCs with a varied range of creatures that are weak against differring attack options.

Getting back to point, I do not see the vast difference between:

deciding on the stats of the creature in question then applying the defences, then adding a layer of tweek to either the stats or the defences themselves if they look out of whack.

or

Deciding the defences directly and then either filling out the appropriate stats or leaving them out entirely.

They both end up at the same place, design wise. One just has a very slightly deeper layer of thought applied to it which can help in getting a feel for the creature being design. While the other is quicker and therefore perhaps slightly more efficient time wise.

I am not saying that my way is the only way, in fact I was going out of my way to applaud the sytem for allowing differing approaches that would lead to similar or at least consistantly balanced outcomes.

I know I am probably reading more into your post than you intended and I do note you phrase 'mechanically important', but I still think that it can be useful when creating a rounded and grounded creature to consider its defences (and maybe its bonus damage on attacks) as a product of its stats.

 

[keterys]

Yes - a creature that has lower mental stats, or higher physical stats, should potentially have an accordingly higher Fort and/or lower Will.

That said, people tend to gut assign much higher physical stats (well, of course it can be Strooong) than mental (well, it's no smarter or willful than a normal person), so if you attempt to follow the quick guidelines in the DMG (the ones that specifically 'won’t result in a fully designed and developed monster') and assign it stats that are far from the established baseline, _then_ adjust the defenses to fit, you'll give it inappropriate defenses.

For example, the Tarrasque was given a Str of 42 (11 higher than it should have by base guidelines) and Wis of 18 (10 lower than it should have by base guidelines) and its Fortitude is 49 (~5 higher than base guideline) and Will is 32 (~12 less than base guideline) - also a 17 disparity (basically the whole d20) between two of its defenses... that's pretty much just bad design overall.

So, you're a lot better off going 'It's a zombie so it's tough, but it's pretty slow. It's not very mentally capable but nor is its mind vulnerable' - so Solo Brute 3, Base defenses are ~17 (17x3, 15x1 to be more specific)... so maybe you end up with AC 17, Fort 19, Ref 14, Will 16 or thereabouts. Or tweak slightly around to taste.

Not saying it's the only way - after all, it ended up a whole point different from yours, and a minor difference at that. I'm saying that there's almost no chance of screwing up if you figure out the mechanics first... if you apply the stat modifiers you _can_ end up with a Tarrasque