|
5 years ago ::
Jun 03, 2008 - 11:32PM
#411
|
Date Joined:
Aug 22, 2007
|
If your town has Borders anyways. Or if the Barnes and Noble people would actually start to stock game books. I pretty much live in Hickville USA, so no luck there.
We have Borders but no Barnes and Nobles and it only stocks WotC stuff. I expect to see DnD 4e there by July. Amazon don't fail me know.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Jun 04, 2008 - 8:40AM
#412
|
Date Joined:
Mar 13, 2007
|
Amazon is usually pretty reliable, they delivered my Fudge 10th anniversary edition book exactly when they said they would. Not a bad book either, its one of the best game systems I have ever seen.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Jun 04, 2008 - 10:58AM
#413
|
Date Joined:
Mar 16, 2004
|
Nice way to twist words and read into things what you want rather than what is said.
Well that's not very nice and is merely an ad hominem - i.e. it attacks me personally without actually addressing what I've said. I would like you to quote where I have twisted your words and in what way, please. I don't believe it.
XP should be the only determining factor. Monsters do not need levels. Is there a level 1 Pit Fiend? The use of levels is inproper use of the term. An intuative system would have the term mean the same thing throughout the game. Level for monsters means when the PCs should expect to meet them. This means the term is NOT used the same throughout the game.
Again, I have bolded the parts which are simply you saying you don't want to use the new system the designers have introduced. Whilst you are entitled to dislike it on aesthetic grounds, that doesn't hold any weight with the rest of us. The latter part of your quote is a non sequiter - you "this means..." but there's no explanation as to why you think this and it's certainly not a train of logic the rest of us can follow. You will have to explain yourself.
Remove all the levels form the MM and tell me you cannot design proper encounters without them. I bet you anything you could. You could make the exact same functioning system without levels for the monsters or encounter equation, it just wouldn't be as easily read by humans in this new artsy look they want for it. You would just have charts telling you XP ranges for monsters, and use this range for determining which monsters you can use for encounters.
The bolded part above, is bolded purely for amusement purposes. I find your selection of pejoratives both entertaining and revealing. As to the substance of your remark, you are advocating a system that has two simple to read axes - level and XP with one that would have to read: At Party Level W, a standard encounter should have XP budget of X with the individual monsters having an XP value between Y and Z. Two things are wrong with this. The first is that rather than saying Level as a convenient shorthand, you are specifying "between value Y and Z" the whole time. You gain nothing except verbiage - lots more space and tables. The second problem is that you make it difficult to use minions or other party level appropriate but numerically dependent creatures as these have a reduced XP relative to what their actual appropriateness is. It therefore doesn't meet the same functionality as provided by the two axes XP and Level that you've just replaced. It is therefore an inferior system both in terms of being concise and in terms of usefulness.
And as to this:
And yet we must still rely on the article, as that is the information presented to everyone, and taking someone elses random word is meaningless. Nobody knows if you have illegal PDF copies of the books, or the real things to reference to, because nobody else can yet see this information. You cannot prove it.[/quote]
Well if your argument has been reduced to "you might be lying about being right" then your argument is looking pretty weak and those people who haven't seen for themselves yet will shortly do so.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Jun 04, 2008 - 11:30AM
#414
|
Date Joined:
Aug 11, 2006
|
I acknowledged that several pages ago.
I also noted that inexperienced DMs could be expected to overlook that, and that it still does not address the issue of lower level creatures with the same xp but different levels.
Would you like to address both of those?
Step-by-Step Encounters
1. C hoose an encounter level. E
2. Determine your XP budget.
3. Spend your XP budget.
Considerations
Levels of Individual Threats: Choose threats
within two or three levels of the characters’ level.
Threats in an easy encounter can be as many as
four levels below the party’s level.
Threats in a hard encounter can be as many as
three to five levels above the party’s level.
Yes the bold part is important because it addresses your exact question. The the level of each individual threat in an encounter should be within 4 levels lower to 5 levels higher. So yes if i spend 2000 xp solely on lvl one kobold minions for a level 10 party it will pass the XP math but I am ignoring the advice in the DMG saying 'don't do that' the math breaks down. The kobolds would need a 20 to hit and always get hit. The encounter would suck if I threw this at a party.
And the same is true for using a higher level minion. Its defenses and to hit are too high. It would always hit and the PCs would always miss except on the nat 20 which kills the minion. Yes I could describe as the misses as nicks and small wounds but the players would get confused on how the thing never seems to get bloodied and then suddenly keel over. The encounter would suck.
Can this thread die now?
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Jun 04, 2008 - 11:42AM
#415
|
Date Joined:
Mar 16, 2001
|
I think it's wonderful they can get so much enjoyment out of the concept without having to even play. My cousin hasn't played DnD in 20years, But he has a lot of the 3e books and Knows the lore inside and out, he's not to good on the mechanics though.(In no way am I assuming Samwise and Hellmute do not really play, just stating people can enjoy Dungeons and Dragons with out playing.)
Yeah, I do not play.
I just run, write background, and edit 3E adventures.
I guess I do get way too much enjoyment out of analyzing, understanding, and using the mechanics of 3E.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Jun 04, 2008 - 11:58AM
#416
|
Date Joined:
Mar 16, 2001
|
Yes the bold part is important because it addresses your exact question. The the level of each individual threat in an encounter should be within 4 levels lower to 5 levels higher. So yes if i spend 2000 xp solely on lvl one kobold minions for a level 10 party it will pass the XP math but I am ignoring the advice in the DMG saying 'don't do that' the math breaks down. The kobolds would need a 20 to hit and always get hit. The encounter would suck if I threw this at a party.
Yes, the bold part is important.
Until I get the 4E books I cannot talk about a level 10 party, but what about a level 5 party?
The following creatures have identical xp values:
Level 1 standard and level 9 minion 100 xp each
Level 1 elite and level 5 standard 200 xp each
Level 1 solo and level 6 elite and level 10 standard 500 xp each
All of those are within the acceptable level range for an encounter of that level.
Are each of those widely disparate monsters of a particular xp value equal to the other monsters of that xp value?
The minions are the most extreme example of a lack of equivalence.
Do the others compare well?
If they do, how is, for example, a level 1 solo suitable for use up to 5th level, while a level 6 elite is suitable for use up 10th level, and a level 10 standard is suitable for use up to 14th level?
Obviously something significant is not equal about them, although they are all worth the same amount of xp no matter what level you fight them at.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Jun 04, 2008 - 12:53PM
#417
|
Date Joined:
Aug 11, 2006
|
Yes, the bold part is important.
Until I get the 4E books I cannot talk about a level 10 party, but what about a level 5 party?
The following creatures have identical xp values:
Level 1 standard and level 9 minion 100 xp each
Level 1 elite and level 5 standard 200 xp each
Level 1 solo and level 6 elite and level 10 standard 500 xp each
All of those are within the acceptable level range for an encounter of that level.
Are each of those widely disparate monsters of a particular xp value equal to the other monsters of that xp value?
The minions are the most extreme example of a lack of equivalence.
Do the others compare well?
If they do, how is, for example, a level 1 solo suitable for use up to 5th level, while a level 6 elite is suitable for use up 10th level, and a level 10 standard is suitable for use up to 14th level?
Obviously something significant is not equal about them, although they are all worth the same amount of xp no matter what level you fight them at.
I would say that the lvl 9 minions would not work very well because they are more than 5 levels higher than the party level. But using two level 5 standards should work well because it is within the 5 levels. I would however be more hesitate to use a 6th elite as a level one solo simply because elites usually lack the interrupts and multiple actions that solos usually have. Also these encounters would most likely be considered hard encounters instead of standard encounters than what the xp budget would suggest because the monsters have higher AC and to hit than normal.
So doable? Definitely. Would I want to do so on a regular basis? Maybe not. It will take actual play experience to determine exactly how these guidelines will work out in play.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Jun 04, 2008 - 1:14PM
#418
|
Date Joined:
Aug 27, 2007
|
Yes, the bold part is important.
Until I get the 4E books I cannot talk about a level 10 party, but what about a level 5 party?
The following creatures have identical xp values:
Level 1 standard and level 9 minion 100 xp each
Level 1 elite and level 5 standard 200 xp each
Level 1 solo and level 6 elite and level 10 standard 500 xp each
All of those are within the acceptable level range for an encounter of that level.
Are each of those widely disparate monsters of a particular xp value equal to the other monsters of that xp value?
yes and no. you are forgetting the slot system for determining the number of monsters in the encounter.
1 standard monster slot for each PC
1 elite slot= 2 standard monster slots
1 solo slot = 5 standard monster slots
4 minion slots = 1 standard monster slot
So all standard monsters for a level are roughly on par mechanically with each other. an elite monster of the same level will have # actions, HP, and surivablity equivalent to 2 standard monsters of that level. a solo of the same level will have that of 5.
Minions are really only meant to mechanically exist near their level, and are worth 1/4 of a regular monster in terms of expect damage output/ encounter, number of hits they can survive and avoid at their level, etc.
The minions are the most extreme example of a lack of equivalence.
Do the others compare well?
If they do, how is, for example, a level 1 solo suitable for use up to 5th level, while a level 6 elite is suitable for use up 10th level, and a level 10 standard is suitable for use up to 14th level?
Obviously something significant is not equal about them, although they are all worth the same amount of xp no matter what level you fight them at.
A monster may only be used within a certain number range in levels or it becomes mechanical inappropriate for that encounter. The tolerances of the system allow for that to be within +/- about 4 levels from the level of the PCs.
This is the problem with the 10th level minion at level one concept. Its the equivalent of saynig you should be able to put a single tire from a tracker-trailer by itself on a go-cart because its the same total volume and weight is that of 4 go-cart tires, then saying the system is flawed because it doesnt work. Its not the system, your trying to join parts that are physically incompatible, not because they are flawed, but the design specification only work if the tires are within certain peramiters and you have the quantity required. That semi-tire is far to big, and its designed to work with other tires, not by itself. Its no suprise to anyone that it wont work when you look at it, and insisting its because all cars are designed poorly is ridiculous.
Those physical properties are like the underlying mathmatics of the game's ruleset. If you ignore the design specifications, you can it expect it to not work as intended. The designers have told you it wont. Minions are designed to work within a range based on the desired encounter level - this is shown by the level of the monster. They are designed to work in groups in conjunction of either other minions of the same level or other monstes. Using them alone is not what they are designed for.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Jun 04, 2008 - 3:12PM
#419
|
Date Joined:
May 16, 2008
|
yes and no. you are forgetting the slot system for determining the number of monsters in the encounter.
What slot system? The encounter budget is built by assuming 1 standard monster for each PC and then add them all to get the budget. In fact, several of the excerpts give sample encounters (they all seem to assume the 5-person party). The undead level 4 encounter and human level 4 encounter both have more monsters than what the slot system you mentioned would allow.
but what about a level 5 party?
The following creatures have identical xp values:
Level 1 standard and level 9 minion 100 xp each
Level 1 elite and level 5 standard 200 xp each
Level 1 solo and level 6 elite and level 10 standard 500 xp each
Should a level 5 party be able to face a level 10 standard monster and its 5 9th level minions? Or 10 level 1 standard monsters? Seems like those scenarios should be allowed under what has been leaked to us. How it works in practice is the question at this point.
Are each of those widely disparate monsters of a particular xp value equal to the other monsters of that xp value?
No. It's not hard to see that is not how this system works. Ignore the minions for a moment.
Level indicates the basic amount of power of a monster - AC and the three ability defenses, hit bonus, and damage bonus. They have indicated that monsters scale up and down by adding another 1 point to all of the attack and defense bonuses, and 1 point to damage every other level. Extrapolating on that, I found that sure enough if you add up those 6 values standard monsters of the same class (Soldiers, Artillery, etc.) and level have about the same total power. If they go up a level then the power jumps by about 5 or 6 (5.5).
So obviously power scales linearly with monster level. Hellmute asserted earlier that monsters do not need levels, but new DMs certainly do need something to make sure they have a good encounter. Levels let them know just how powerful a monster is compared to the equivalent PC level. HP is also based off of this level value and the monster's class, so a brute and a controller may be the same level, but the brute will take more hits. HP is mostly a measure of time that a monster should last in combat, and that's why elites and solos have more. They PCs will focus more attacks on an individual monster.
Anyway, back to the XP disparity. Just look at the XP table we have and see that XP increases in a non-linear fashion. Therefore, it is tied to something other than level, or at least not just to level. XP is a value made up to make the '1 PC defeats 10 monsters of the PCs level and the PC moves to the next level' concept work. But they also wanted to be able to use larger groups of monsters than in 3E but still allow for boss fights and for the selection of monsters several levels above the PCs. Thus, the XP budget is a way to balance the monsters' power, tiers (standard, elite, etc.), and quantity.
It is a fairly complex interaction behind a fairly simple-looking facade. For instance, if they increased the XP needed to level so it was more linear then the DM could not afford as many monsters of a higher level even though the power difference is not that great. But taking it to far then has drawbacks where, as you've pointed out, a level 10 standard and level 1 solo have the same XP 'purchase cost' but are not really equal in power. It's because those two monsters are intended for entirely different purposes, and are thus weighted accordingly. The purpose of a standard monster is to be part of a group of monsters that support each other rather than solo as it has less HP. It will end up being either too easy to deplete its HP or too hard to hit and nothing in between. So they set up the XP amounts so you can have more challenging monsters, but also in sufficient quantity. But this indicates (to me anyway) they also have to limit how far up and down in levels the DM could go to keep the power to quantity ratio from being unbalanced.
Thus, XP is not linked directly to level of monsters, especially for minions (who need to be in groups). These things can all be derived from what has been released in notes and excerpts. If there is anything unclear or uncertain I can elaborate. (Like I don't type too much in a post already. :D)
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Jun 04, 2008 - 3:42PM
#420
|
Date Joined:
Aug 27, 2007
|
What slot system? The encounter budget is built by assuming 1 standard monster for each PC and then add them all to get the budget. In fact, several of the excerpts give sample encounters (they all seem to assume the 5-person party). The undead level 4 encounter and human level 4 encounter both have more monsters than what the slot system you mentioned would allow.
the one that says a balanced encounter is made up of one normal monster per PC. That is what im refering to as a "slot" elites are worth 2 of these, solos 5.
|
|
|
