New Posts For Thread: Rolling for Monster Damage?http://community.wizards.com/dndnext/go/thread/view/75882/29594297/Rolling_for_Monster_DamageIn 4e, minions don't roll for their damage. They just do a number. That's convenient when there's a bunch of puny dudes. The variability comes not in what they roll, but in how many of them hit you.In Next, monster damage is expressed as things likeBack when the monsters had bad accuracy.... I used the flat damage and faked rolling damage when I rolled the d20 for the first hit and every other hit afterward.But they rarely hit.http://community.wizards.com/dndnext/go/thread/view/75882/29594297/Rolling_for_Monster_Damage?post_id=527355927#527355927Back when the monsters had bad accuracy.... I used the flat damage and faked rolling damage when I rolled the d20 for the first hit and every other hit afterward.But they rarely hit.Wed, 19 Dec 2012 18:34:29 -0600Yes, 13th Age uses static damage for monsters. It was changed during playtest because of monsters damage being too swingy (and it was: everyone in the game hits hard and crits are x2).So I had a go at this in our 4E campaign too and I actually likedhttp://community.wizards.com/dndnext/go/thread/view/75882/29594297/Rolling_for_Monster_Damage?post_id=527355907#527355907Yes, 13th Age uses static damage for monsters. It was changed during playtest because of monsters damage being too swingy (and it was: everyone in the game hits hard and crits are x2).So I had a go at this in our 4E campaign too and I actually likedWed, 19 Dec 2012 18:33:44 -0600I used the flat numbers when I was running a session and we really needed to wrap up. It worked pretty well; the fights didn't last long enough for the players to really notice that I wasn't rolling, let alone start predicting monster damage in metaghttp://community.wizards.com/dndnext/go/thread/view/75882/29594297/Rolling_for_Monster_Damage?post_id=527355759#527355759I used the flat numbers when I was running a session and we really needed to wrap up. It worked pretty well; the fights didn't last long enough for the players to really notice that I wasn't rolling, let alone start predicting monster damage in metagWed, 19 Dec 2012 18:26:25 -0600As bounded accuracy is designed to make running larger encounters of lower-level enemies feasible from a math perspective, I find the option for static damage to encourage this possibility further--When I have to deal with a dozen plus weak creatureshttp://community.wizards.com/dndnext/go/thread/view/75882/29594297/Rolling_for_Monster_Damage?post_id=527355641#527355641As bounded accuracy is designed to make running larger encounters of lower-level enemies feasible from a math perspective, I find the option for static damage to encourage this possibility further--When I have to deal with a dozen plus weak creaturesWed, 19 Dec 2012 18:19:39 -0600I have used both damage roll and used static damage for monsters. Static damage is faster, more stable and predictable, while damage roll takes slightly longer to resolve (especially with multiple monsters) and his random thus more swingy and unpredihttp://community.wizards.com/dndnext/go/thread/view/75882/29594297/Rolling_for_Monster_Damage?post_id=527355059#527355059I have used both damage roll and used static damage for monsters. Static damage is faster, more stable and predictable, while damage roll takes slightly longer to resolve (especially with multiple monsters) and his random thus more swingy and unprediWed, 19 Dec 2012 17:51:11 -0600