|
5 years ago ::
Sep 29, 2008 - 4:27AM
#11
|
Date Joined:
Sep 12, 2008
|
Not at you, but at the general literalist snarkiness of these forums, to which I occasionally contribute. In any rational gaming society, (if such a thing exists) there would be no need to clarify that proposing cutting monster hit points in half excluded 1 hp minions.
Heh, sometimes it's just someone trying to be funny and failing.
Besides, if you cut 1 hp in half, then round normally, they still wind up with one hp. 
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Sep 29, 2008 - 4:28AM
#12
|
Date Joined:
Aug 11, 2006
|
> and that monsters have way more hitpoints than the PCs. So that seems like
> a problem.
Are you possibly making one of the more common mistakes? PCs add their Con *score* to their base hit point value, not their Con *modifier*. A lot of people skim over that and add the modifier because that's how it was done in 3E.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Sep 29, 2008 - 4:30AM
#13
|
Date Joined:
Sep 12, 2008
|
> and that monsters have way more hitpoints than the PCs. So that seems like
> a problem.
Are you possibly making one of the more common mistakes? PCs add their Con *score* to their base hit point value, not their Con *modifier*. A lot of people skim over that and add the modifier because that's how it was done in 3E.
Gah, good catch ND. I didn't even think of that.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Sep 29, 2008 - 4:32AM
#14
|
Date Joined:
Aug 11, 2006
|
> and that monsters have way more hitpoints than the PCs. So that seems like
> a problem.
Are you possibly making one of the more common mistakes? PCs add their Con *score* to their base hit point value, not their Con *modifier*. A lot of people skim over that and add the modifier because that's how it was done in 3E.
I don't know who this is directed at, but we do not play using the 3rd Edition method. We are following the rules.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Sep 29, 2008 - 4:36AM
#15
|
Date Joined:
Sep 12, 2008
|
I don't know who this is directed at, but we do not play using the 3rd Edition method. We are following the rules.
I think it was directed at Oorlof.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Sep 29, 2008 - 5:43AM
#16
|
Date Joined:
Oct 19, 2006
|
PC's have superior in-combat HP recovery skills when compared with most monsters. The higher HP totals on the monsters helps to make up for that.
t~
While this is absolutely true, I think it is also part of the problem. Because PC's can heal quicker, monsters have more hit points. Because monsters have more hit points, combat is slowing down as it scales up in level.
I've been running a Dungeon Adventure level 12 for several sessions now and we are getting in 1-2 encounters in (only). The combats just go on and on and on.
I've voiced concerns over the scaling of this game and I still have my doubts.
I haven't made any adjustments to HP's...but it is an idea to consider.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Sep 29, 2008 - 6:06AM
#17
|
|
|
Heh, sometimes it's just someone trying to be funny and failing.
Besides, if you cut 1 hp in half, then round normally, they still wind up with one hp.
In 4e you always round down not up, even when the number is 1.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Sep 29, 2008 - 6:31AM
#18
|
Date Joined:
Jun 18, 2003
|
@the OP: I must say, your Party looks to be about the lowest damage-output Party I could imagine...your best Striker (the Ranger) decided to be small?? That practically halves the usefulness of Twin Strike (which I'm praying the Halfling took  ), as a Medium creature can use a Greatbow, which does d12 base damage. This type of damage output speeds things up immensely. Your Rogue isn't a Brutal Rogue (who are also more damaging than Tricksters), but that's not SO bad, except for the fact that he can't flank with your Fighter for CA! The guy's an ELADRIN FIGHTER. I also pray he's multiclassing...? Please? *Cringe* This means he's probably not the most heavy-weight guy out there. Even your Cleric seems more like a Laser Cleric, as there isn't a single person on your Team who has a natural +2 Racial Bonus to Strength! The Human COULD, but I suspect it went into Charisma. Lastly, your Tiefling Wizard (who I'm going to assume is like me and is just using Fire Spells with Hellfire Blood) seems like he could put out the best damage on your Team! It definitely feels as if your Parry's damage output is the reason your battles take so long. Your Party's best bet is probably to use Tactics, Ambushes, or anything else they can to gain advantages over their enemies outside of basic Combat Powers. My Party in one of my games, for instance, consists of only four players: a Dwarven Fighter with an Executioner's Axe, a Sword-and-Board Human Fighter, a Tiefling Star Pact Warlock, and myself, a Dragonborn Bardlord with a Fullblade. Our DM is very hard, running us against Encounters much higher than our levels (Kobold Camps, Dire Wolves, etc.), but we have enough Powerhouses that we can usually end these battles in at least an hour, if not faster. I would suggest that, if your Party isn't the Powerhouse type, they revert to being Sneaky. A lot.
Resident Logic Cannon
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Sep 29, 2008 - 6:36AM
#19
|
Date Joined:
May 26, 2008
|
I've fudged monster health in the past two battles my party has had. Composed of a Dwarf Fighter, Eladrin Warlock, Dragonborn Warlord, Elf Rogue, and Eladrin Wizard (soon to be an Genasi Swordmage . . . what a tactical nightmare, 4 melee-based PCs), my party takes AGES to fight enemies. We've got our power cards, they flank & abuse sneak attack and whatnot like crazy, and I make my monster attacks quickly, but battles really drag once the first few enemies go down and it's obvious the PCs won't lose.
Normally I don't mind, but we don't have a huge amount of time to play (five hours every two weeks), and when I start to see every player's eyes glaze as "I use my at-will . . ." for the fourth time in a row, suddenly the mobs are bloodied and they go down faster.
I find the best battles include a whack of minions, and one or two standard monsters. I've had a few battles that lack minions and they just drag on and on and on. Minions are exciting, can still threaten the party, and more importantly, they go down in groups with an at-will or Dragonbreath. When the Wizard changes to a Swordmage . . . I guess I'll just include less minions, because then it'll just be the same length, but with more mini moving.
While I love the PCs out-of-combat restoration, so that they feel like they can die in combat but they can fight several battles, monsters all feel like tanks. Even the weaker artillery mobs have enough ways to avoid attacks or just keep surviving. While I love the tactics of it, it eventually bores the hell out of everybody.
So for now I've been fudging health values lower once the battle is basically decided, but I've been considering an NPC wide drop (with a few exceptions, of course) of 33% or so.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Sep 29, 2008 - 6:56AM
#20
|
|
|
one thing that is notable, and you (I) don't really think about. Is encounter difficulty from DMG 104. Those fights where the players know they are going to win should only happen 3 times per level, where slightly harder encounters should happen another 3 times, and one battle that really taxes the group should happen once. then one encounter that is just a cakewalk (make them feel strong, its fun too).
With encounter difficulty variance is used, it should make a lot of encounter time actually in the air opposed to players knowing they're going to win.
|
|
|
