Zombies! New Dungeoncraft article up

[Green Knight]

It is an oft-repeated but hard-learned lesson:

The pun is mightier than the word.

If only there were some way to reach through the computer screen so I could throttle you...

 

[JoeGKushner]

I don't understand why you don't like this and you and I are usually on the same page with what we like, and I'm curious. Are you bothered by the fact that they are no longer templated? If so, why do different breeds of zombie need different stats? Don't get me wrong, I love templates, but for something like zombies who cares? If you want to switch them up, fine. Juggle around their hit points and stats.

I just don't understand why you think this is weak. Now if we took all of the dragons and wrote one entry and said add your own fluff, then we'd have issues. They're just zombies man! I just don't see any advantages for statting out individual zombie guys.

BTW, greatest zombie song EVER: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjMiDZIY1bM

To me, it just smacks of... bad game design.

A hill giant is NOT the same as a halfling zombie.

A dead warrior in full plate armor is not the same as some farmer in doe skin.

A titan zombie is not the same as a wyvern zombie.

If the zombie is thus 'simplified', why not the skeleton? We've already seen that they're going to be combing certain monsters and if the design is soley on 'simplicity' and 'types', then why do they need more than a few of each?

 

[Stone Dog]

So dilemma 2: If you're a couple XP short of levelling, can you smash their unholy hunger, glaring heads in to level up? Y'know, turning: Saving XP for that rainy day.

You can probably attack them just like before, I just think the "Turned undead flee from you by the best and fastest means available to them" aspect isn't there anymore. Playing zombie pong was always wierd, zombie pong being generic for anytime we turned undead every ten rounds or so fighting a big bad dead guy.

Turn the minions and battle the big guy for a while. Minions come back. Turn again rinse and repeat. It happened once in a while and made for some strange moments.

 

[JVisgaitis]

It is an oft-repeated but hard-learned lesson:

The pun is mightier than the word.

As long as you don't unleash this "awesomeness" into Avadnu, I'll let it slid. What is it with writers and bad puns? I deal with the same thing from Alex. Much more of this asshattery and I'll stab the both of you. Seriously.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

Ugh, ugh, ugh.

The actual changes to how zombies operate in play look cool. I'd be glad to have them prove more threatening, for example.

But changing them from template + examples to JUST examples by size? Awful, awful, awful. Not quite "Sony dropping ALL backwards compatibility from new PS3s" awful. Certainly not "Blizzard never making Warcraft Adventures" awful.

But "Terrible game design choice that pretty much ensures I'll stick with a SWSE-based rulesset that lets me upgrade existing d20 material for superior play" awful? Yeah, like all the monster stuff, it's pretty much that.

 

[Khuxan]

To me, it just smacks of... bad game design.

1) A hill giant is NOT the same as a halfling zombie.

2) A dead warrior in full plate armor is not the same as some farmer in doe skin.

3) A titan zombie is not the same as a wyvern zombie.

4) If the zombie is thus 'simplified', why not the skeleton? We've already seen that they're going to be combing certain monsters and if the design is soley on 'simplicity' and 'types', then why do they need more than a few of each?

1) A hill giant would be a Large zombie. A halfling would be a Small zombie. Do you think it's good game design to have a difference between halfling zombies and gnome zombies?

2) Each monster can have equipment added to it. Zombies are no different.

3) Maybe only humanoids can become zombies. Maybe they'll include options for zombies with wings, four legs, teeth, poison, etc.

4) I sure hope they simplify skeletons too. There's a world of difference between deciding a human zombie and a half-elf zombie are practically the same, and deciding a barbed devil and an astral deva are practically the same because they're the same type. Monsters will have abilities diversifying them, but they'll also be streamlined to make them easier to create and run - and the easier monsters are to create, the more we'll have, not less.

 

[mhacdebhandia]

Conversely, the notion of a whole book of Shadowfell or Feywild monsters that are almost identical to prime material plane monsters, but not quite makes me weep. I'd rather have a template that says "generic Feywild creatures add quality X and subtract quality Y from prime material creatures."

Perhaps it's wishful thinking, but I hope there is no such thing as, say, a Feywild-native wolf or a Shadowfell-native tiger.

I would much rather see a situation where there are similar creatures but not virtually-identical creatures. So, say you have a Wild Hunt that runs around the Feywild in the dark of night; I hope that the Huntsman's dogs aren't "Feywild dogs" but death dogs (Fiend Folio) or something similar.

I was never really satisfied with the implication that, thanks to the fiendish and celestial templates, there were all sorts of "normal" animals running around the Upper and Lower Planes.

 

[Stone Dog]

To me, it just smacks of... bad game design.

I don't understand your reasoning here. I figure that, what the things are wearing aside, all zombies of the same basic size are basically the same. Previous skills and abilities are GONE. A tenth level fighter stripped of gear turned zombie and a 1st level commoner zombie in rags turned zombie should be the same threat. All the fighter's previous training and skill are wiped away. The shambling brute is now a zombie. Terrible and implacable in its need to kill, but without talent or skill. Grab, bite and eat are the limits of its tactical ability.

Zombie trolls don't regenerate, zombie wyverns don't fly or sting and zombie hill giants don't chuck boulders. Anything that isn't walking to food, grabbing food and putting food into its mouth is forgotten, rotted away, made impractical or otherwise not important mechanically.

Skeletons may be different. There is a tradition of skeleton warriors having skill and wielding weapons. Generally being nimble little bastards that don't present much target area, but are happy to stab you. I don't know, I'll have to look at what they do with skeletons and how they define them to decide.

I hope ghouls are templates though, but then I like lovecraft ghouls that are smart enough to keep their tricks after changing into something less human, but no less dangerous.

Basically I figure if you take two humans of the same stats, but wildly different levels and turn them into something, if the levels don't/shouldn't matter then it isn't a template. I don't think that the previous life of a thing should matter to a zombie. If you turn into one, then you are an implacable foe of all humanoid life with an unending hunger for flesh that is basically indistinguishable from the next one save for cosmetic differences. Bigger ones have slightly more hitpoints than thin ones. Whoop de doo.

 

[JVisgaitis]

To me, it just smacks of... bad game design.

I guess we're at opposite ends on this one. Keep in mind, they did say medium zombies. I'd be shocked if that didn't have different stats for various sizes. And while a titan zombie is physically different from a wyvern zombie, they're all doing the same thing. Eatin' brains.

I don't think it's bad design, it depends on the philosophy. I'm sure your aware that I'm all for individual customization of monsters with the xxyth and the carcaetan in Denizens of Avadnu, but to me zombies are just a generic horde monster and they all do the same thing.

I just don't see a lot gained by bothering with templates for them. If you want that sort of customization, give the warrior in plate an AC bonus. We're talking about mindless undead here.

If the zombie is thus 'simplified', why not the skeleton? We've already seen that they're going to be combing certain monsters and if the design is solely on 'simplicity' and 'types', then why do they need more than a few of each?

Personally, I think skeletons fall in the same category and I would do the same thing. Really, I'd be surprised if skeletons weren't a single statline at different sizes. I can see what you're saying, but I don't think its all about simplicity and types. From their blogs it seems as if they are adamant about making each monster fight differently.

I get the feeling they are approaching monster design like we did in Denizens of Avadnu. Everything has a purpose and its own unique abilities. With that in mind, a unified statline like your mentioning won't work. If you want to clean up some of the garbage on a mindless undead critter, that philosophy works fine like in this case.

 

[Rechan]

Idle curiosity.

If zombies are the shambling, flesh-hungry horde, then what becomes of ghouls?

Zombies in 3e were just 'Ho hum, oh look, something I am ordered to kill..." while Ghouls were the undead driven by hunger.

So, is the ghoul just a faster, smarter zombie that can play freeze tag? I hope not.