Do the monster creation guidelines make sense?

7 posts / 0 new
Last post
The Monster Creation chapter in the Monster Packet lists the general design rules for monsters.

Do these numbers make sense?


A few things I found noteworthy:


  • The baseline armor class increases by 5 points between level 1 and level 20.  This scales with with the expected ehancement bonus from magic items, but does not account for anything else.  If D&DN will have some means of permanently increasing stats above 20, it will throw off these numbers.

  • Monsters have a certain number of expected hit points based on organization and level.  However, there is a calculation for determining the number of hit dice a monster has.  Are a monster's level and hit dice intended to be independent?

  • The guidelines say that increasing AC or attack bonus by 1 point should be compensated by reducing hit points or damage by 10%.  Is this a sensible tradeoff?

  • Monster hit points and damage scale in a linear way, but PC hit points and damage do not.  What kinds of implications will this have for higher level combat?


I'm not sure, I do mean to fiddle with them to try to recreate my first VTT adventure, Goblin Hill Fort but there are well, issues. How do I recreate the skill challenge to get to the fort, just hand wave the party manuvering through the goblin patrols? Its not like I can just take a healing surge from the party if they fail?
Skill Challenges should be easy to replicate IMO. Whatever SKills was used should use his Ability Score equivalent, and some PC can even get bonuses (Explorer has some for exemle).


Monster Building is a virgin terrain for me almost. I created only 2 Monsters so far (Lizard men and Giant Widow Spider) and used similar templater and modified it, rather than building it from scratch. But its something i want to look into.   
 

Yan
Montréal, Canada
@Plaguescarred on twitter

I'm not sure I understand how to do proper DPR calculations as presented in the back of the monster packet, personally.  I prefer the guess and check approach ;)  With that said, I think it's a pretty easily modifiable system - very similar to 4e overall so I'm happy.  I can imagine that if you want a really climactic battle you may need to double a solo monster's HP and reduce damage further so it takes more than 3 rounds though.  I'm happier with that being the exception rather than the rule in any case.
Saling isn't constant.  5/5/4/2/2?  Interesting.

I also think that +1 should be 5%, not 10%?  I've got to do a bit more math to double check, it may be that the relative improvement rate is the right one, and not the absolute, but my first take is that the absolute change is the relevant one.

"Nice assumptions. Completely wrong assumptions, but by jove if being incorrect stopped people from making idiotic statements, we wouldn't have modern internet subculture." Kerrus
Practical gameplay runs by neither RAW or RAI, but rather "A Compromise Between The Gist Of The Rule As I Recall Getting The Impression Of It That One Time I Read It And What Jerry Says He Remembers, Whatever, We'll Look It Up Later If Any Of Us Still Give A Damn." Erachima

OK, I'm going to try to build Krashnikar, the Goblin Warlord this morning. I will post a new thread for him and ask for critiques.
I'm going to go on record with no.

*edit for clarity* at least not when trying to make a custom monster.