|
3 months ago ::
Feb 25, 2013 - 3:08PM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Feb 25, 2013
|
I was reading Mike Mearls' latest Legends & Lore column, and started thinking about how high level monsters can be taken down by being swarmed by several weaker foes. In general I like this idea a lot, and for most monsters I believe it makes sense. However, if all high monsters are designed this way (High HP, relatively low AC) I feel we will be missing an iconic monster; that of the rampaging beast. If any monster can be taken down by a sufficcient number of town guards, or peasants with pitch forks, it will make less sense for needing to call in adventurers to kill for instance a huge monster rampaging in a town. Some creatures in mythology are also defined by their resistance to feeble attacks. The impenetrable scales of a monstrous dragon is perhaps the most obvious example. I believe solving this problem is quite easy. Since damage and HP scale with level, giving some high level monsters a moderate amount of damage resistance will make them much harder for weaker enemies, but to a much lesser extent for higher level players. I believe granting damage reduction rather than high armour class also fits the feel of a trully tough monster better. This will also create a class of monsters that you will want to send your heavy damage dealers at, creating more tactical opportunities. I think that we should by all means keep high level monsters without damage reduction, and also have this be true for the majority of foes, but I feel we will be missing something if every huge beast can be killed by goblins and the like. Link to the article in question: wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4ll/2...
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 25, 2013 - 3:18PM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Jun 17, 2003
|
Pretty much what I was thinking. A simple DR 5/magic would solve this problem nicely.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 25, 2013 - 3:22PM
#3
|
- Forum Guide
- Hero Craftsman Gold Medalist
- Master Dungeon Master
Date Joined:
Jun 23, 2005
|
I was reading Mike Mearls' latest Legends & Lore column, and started thinking about how high level monsters can be taken down by being swarmed by several weaker foes. In general I like this idea a lot, and for most monsters I believe it makes sense. However, if all high monsters are designed this way (High HP, relatively low AC) I feel we will be missing an iconic monster; that of the rampaging beast. If any monster can be taken down by a sufficcient number of town guards, or peasants with pitch forks, it will make less sense for needing to call in adventurers to kill for instance a huge monster rampaging in a town.
How many times is this going to come up?
- Mearls article mentions soldiers, not commoners. The commoners are going to run and flee because they are nto trained soldiers.
- Half of those human warriors perish when they swarm onto a hill giant or the Calydonian Boar.
Could the Greeks have sent a phalanx of hoplites in to take out the Calydonian Boar? Absolutely, but scores of men would have perished in the process. Instead, Theseus gathered a whole mess of heroes (between 20 and 30) to go on a boar hunt. And they vanquished the boar without losing a single hero. (A bunch of the heroes killed one another contesting the spoils, but that's another tale.) And that's the reason towns need heroes. A hill giant will kill a dozen soldiers before he is taken down. That's a dozen fathers, sons, daughters, mothers, friends, and companions. Why not pay some strangers to do it... especially if they can do it without dying? But if you want a creature that no common soldier can kill, give it the following trait: Legendary Creature: This creature is immune to attacks and spells cast by characters with less than 20 hp. Ta-da!
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 25, 2013 - 3:35PM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Feb 25, 2013
|
How many times is this going to come up?
Well, pardon if this has come up many times before, but I am very new to Next. I think we might agree more than you might think. As I said, many, if not most of high level monsters should be possible to fell by overwhelming force, like your example of the Caledonian bear. Your suggestion of the legendary creature trait is one solution, true. I do believe damage reduction is more elegant, however, and it has more of the intuitive feel of toughness, compared to only being hurt by characters of 20 hp or above. Your solution seems more appropriate for a creature with a certain destiny or some such, where it can only be killed by a great hero.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 25, 2013 - 3:36PM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Sep 30, 2006
|
I was reading Mike Mearls' latest Legends & Lore column, and started thinking about how high level monsters can be taken down by being swarmed by several weaker foes. In general I like this idea a lot, and for most monsters I believe it makes sense. However, if all high monsters are designed this way (High HP, relatively low AC) I feel we will be missing an iconic monster; that of the rampaging beast. If any monster can be taken down by a sufficcient number of town guards, or peasants with pitch forks, it will make less sense for needing to call in adventurers to kill for instance a huge monster rampaging in a town.
How many times is this going to come up?
- Mearls article mentions soldiers, not commoners. The commoners are going to run and flee because they are nto trained soldiers.
- Half of those human warriors perish when they swarm onto a hill giant or the Calydonian Boar.
Could the Greeks have sent a phalanx of hoplites in to take out the Calydonian Boar? Absolutely, but scores of men would have perished in the process. Instead, Theseus gathered a whole mess of heroes (between 20 and 30) to go on a boar hunt. And they vanquished the boar without losing a single hero. (A bunch of the heroes killed one another contesting the spoils, but that's another tale.)
And that's the reason towns need heroes. A hill giant will kill a dozen soldiers before he is taken down. That's a dozen fathers, sons, daughters, mothers, friends, and companions. Why not pay some strangers to do it... especially if they can do it without dying?
But if you want a creature that no common soldier can kill, give it the following trait:
Legendary Creature: This creature is immune to attacks and spells cast by characters with less than 20 hp.
Ta-da!
that could work, but i think a dr-5 would feel a little less gamey and arbitrary.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 25, 2013 - 3:47PM
#6
|
- Forum Guide
- Hero Craftsman Gold Medalist
- Master Dungeon Master
Date Joined:
Jun 23, 2005
|
Well, pardon if this has come up many times before, but I am very new to Next.
I'm sorry. That was an overreaction because there's a really long discussion abotu this very topic on the official thread discussing this Mearls' article.
I do believe damage reduction is more elegant, however, and it has more of the intuitive feel of toughness, compared to only being hurt by characters of 20 hp or above.
The problem with DR is that it can really penalize small weapon fighters and it's basically just giving a creature more hit points. And it obligates everyone to do an extra step of math every time they hit with an attack. And it favors spellcasters.
Your solution seems more appropriate for a creature with a certain destiny or some such, where it can only be killed by a great hero.
I'm a big fan of not trying to do indirectly what should be done directly because indirect things always feel a little passive aggressive and often have lots of unintended consequences.
You want a creature that commoners can't kill. Just declare that commoners can't kill it.
Truly, the DR thing shouldn't stop a bunch of commoners from killing the Calydonian Boar. They just have to make a really big boar pit, trap it, and then pelt it with heavy stones until they crush it. (The way neolithic man would hunt down mammoths.) DR will not explain why commoners can't kill a creature. It just requires them to get more creative.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 25, 2013 - 3:57PM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Aug 22, 2007
|
I remember playing the Heroes Might and Might games.
Pikeman/footman dealt so much damage but Oh BOY!! if a dragon/angel/devil hits the pikeman stack. You could loose like 50 men in one shot.
That is a lot of of letters to widows, orphans, and mothers.
That is how Next should be.
Orzel, Halfelven son of Zel, Mystic Ranger, Bane to Dragons, Death to Undeath, Killer of Abyssals, King of the Wilds.
Constitution Based Class for Next!
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 25, 2013 - 4:13PM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Feb 25, 2013
|
I'm sorry. That was an overreaction because there's a really long discussion abotu this very topic on the official thread discussing this Mearls' article.
Thats fine. I know how annoying it is having to defend the same point over and over. Has this been discussed so much that it is pointless for me to continue the discussion in this post?
The problem with DR is that it can really penalize small weapon fighters and it's basically just giving a creature more hit points. And it obligates everyone to do an extra step of math every time they hit with an attack. And it favors spellcasters.
What you see as a problem I see as a benefit. As I mentioned earlier, penalizing small weapon fighters would make it necessary to make more tactical decisions in combat concerning who attacks what monster. However, I can see that this might be a bit of a balance problem. To compensate, small weapon users would probably have to have a slight damage bonus at the levels in which creatures with DR appear, against creatures without DR. I agree that this might not be a satisfactory solution to everyone, but it is one i personally prefer.
You want a creature that commoners can't kill. Just declare that commoners can't kill it.
Truly, the DR thing shouldn't stop a bunch of commoners from killing the Calydonian Boar. They just have to make a really big boar pit, trap it, and then pelt it with heavy stones until they crush it. (The way neolithic man would hunt down mammoths.) DR will not explain why commoners can't kill a creature. It just requires them to get more creative.
Again, forcing weaker creatures (and characters) to be creative I see as a benefit, not a hindrance. I think the way you are thinking about the problem, creating the simplest possible rule to achieve a result, is very sensible. However I do prefer the DR mechanic, as I agree with trebor that your solutions seems a bit arbitrary (though perhaps thematically fitting for some monsters). I also do not think that having the DM subtract 5 when noting damage is that much of a slowdown. Avoiding any type of slowdown, no matter how small, should still be something to strive for, as these things tend to add up. However, I think the benefits outweigh the drawbacks in this particular case.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 25, 2013 - 4:17PM
#9
|
- Forum Guide
- Hero Craftsman Gold Medalist
- Master Dungeon Master
Date Joined:
Jun 23, 2005
|
Again, forcing weaker creatures (and characters) to be creative I see as a benefit, not a hindrance.
Well, except the point of the exercise originally was that you wanted to justify the need for adventurers on the gorunds that there were creatures that commmonfolk can't kill. but we just established that DR doesn't mean that commonfolk need adventurers. They just need shovels.
However, I think the benefits outweigh the drawbacks in this particular case.
What benefits? DR doesn't do what you wanted it to do.
It appears you just like DR and want a reason to bring it back into the game, not that you think bounded accuracy renders heroes superfluous and want a mechanic that will justify their existence.
The designers have said they have made resistabnce half-damage, rather than DR specifically because they've found that DR slows the game down. So I really don't see them bringing DR back.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 25, 2013 - 4:28PM
#10
|
Date Joined:
Aug 22, 2007
|
The best DR systems are percentage based but percents slow down the damage too much.
Percentage based DR is better than Bounded accuracy and Scaling damage for displaying the differences between commoners, normal soldiers, heroes, and legendary monsters. But you would definitely need a computer to run the calculations.
Orzel, Halfelven son of Zel, Mystic Ranger, Bane to Dragons, Death to Undeath, Killer of Abyssals, King of the Wilds.
Constitution Based Class for Next!
|
|
|
