Idea - Monsters, HDs, Encounters and Characters [Archive] - Wizards Community

Idea - Monsters, HDs, Encounters and Characters [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
DM-Scott
02-10-08, 11:53 PM Ok, here's an odd idea I've been playing around with for a while, and I wanted to ask what others thought of the idea.

Wouldn't it be fairly simple to create a monstrous progression similar to the way monsters work in the monster manuals, and actually make their abilities scale based on HD in a more class-level like method? Ok, you may be thinking "Huh? :confused: " right now, so I'll try to explain more clearly.

In the monster manual, it gives some information on the various types of creatures, from dragons and outsiders to oozes and giants; and gives advice for building them, such as suggesting that aberrations should usually have some sort of magic / psionic abilities because they generally poor at combat and so forth.

Now, generally we have your typical monsters who fill certain roles, such as beefy monster, sneaky monster, trick monster, and magic monster. Similar to the roles in your typical adventuring party, to be honest. Then you have sucker-punch monsters and puzzle monsters (those who have A) Powers far too potent for their HD, and B) Monsters who aren't killable in the usual ways). We're going to steer clear of sucker-punchers and puzzle monsters for now.

Now let's say that there are set guidelines for monstrous progression. Currently we already have 1 feat every 3 HD, and 1 ability increase every 4 HD. Now let's go a step further and give them some monster powers.

Let's say it looks something like this.

Humanoid HD BAB Fort Ref Will Special
1d8 +0 +0 +0 +2* Power
2d8 +1 +0 +0 +3 Power
3d8 +2 +1 +1 +3 _

Now let's say that powers were a selection of typical abilities possessed by creatures such as a higher than typical AC, or special attacks such as swallow whole, improved grab, or qualities such as regeneration. I'd say the closest thing we have to this currently would be the Astral Constructs (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/monsters/astralConstruct.htm) from the Expanded Psionics Handbook. Astral Constructs are generic "creatures" which can be customized on the fly (the designers were brilliant with these guys).

To expand on this thought, you'd essentially have a base guideline for how strong a creature should be based on HD, and would be very easy to gauge effectiveness in an encounter, as well as making it simpler to run non-standard characters (since it would be easier to gauge their power by HD). So using a very, very raw concept version of this system, we might see the lizardfolk looking something like this...

2D8 (Humanoid HD)
BAB +1, Fort +0, Ref +3, Will +0
Powers: Tough Hide (+3 Natural AC), Strong (+2 Strength)

Basic Attributes (For PCs)
+2 Constitution, -2 Intelligence
+2 Natural Armor
Hold Breath (Ex)
Natural Attacks (Bite 1d4, 2 Claws 1d4)
Favored Class: Druid

Now, this wouldn't be necessarily mean that you could advance in lizardfolk HD to get spell-like abilities or anything as a character. Instead the system is intended to gauge how strong something should be based on A) It's HD and B) Maybe it's size, but this would probably be based on HD as well, since there's already a minimum HD limit based on size.

Most special qualities would scale with the HD, similar to how anything with a saving throw DC already scales with creature HD in the core rules (such as breath weapons, poisons, and so forth being 10 + 1/2 HD + ability mod).

Also, creatures could have an Advancement section in their entry (just like the standard MM) to show the range of their abilities; so if there was a way that made natural AC scale with HD, there would still be a cap on just how tough lizardfolk (for example) can get before having to take class levels.

Does any of this seem to make any sense, or seem like it would be worth figuring out a balanced, mechanical way to do it? It's primarily for creature and encounter design, but has the added benefit of being more user friendly than level adjustments for characters (since the monster progression ALA savage species would be much more fluid and such - even if it means higher racial HD than we currently have on some creatures), and keeping creatures in line with each other.

Any thoughts?
Tequila_Sunrise
02-13-08, 02:39 AM Dude, I'm with you 100%. I've actually spent a lot of time to create monster progressions, though based on CR rather than HD: http://lucasbuchanan.com/Standardized%20Monster%20Progressions. I've found it very difficult to balance monsters against each other, as the MM seems to be designed to obsfucate any CR guidelines which may have guided monster creation. In fact, I really need to reevaluate the Animal page at some point.

I didn't include LAs for any of them except goblinoids, but honestly that's because LA is the only aspect of 3e that I really feel unsure of.

TS
LordVladamir
02-14-08, 11:24 AM Savage Species has already taken many of the monsters from the MM and broken them down into classes in order to allow monsters to be played in lower-level games. They had some of the levels where the moster gained abilities but not a HD to account for the LA of the creature. When creating a monster there can and will never be a truly accurate system because of how varied the abilities are. A good rule of thumb is to compare a the monster to another monster of the same HD and CR and compare it to an NPC of the given level of the CR to see how it compares.
Eldritch_Lord
02-18-08, 09:46 PM Savage Species has already taken many of the monsters from the MM and broken them down into classes in order to allow monsters to be played in lower-level games. They had some of the levels where the moster gained abilities but not a HD to account for the LA of the creature. When creating a monster there can and will never be a truly accurate system because of how varied the abilities are. A good rule of thumb is to compare a the monster to another monster of the same HD and CR and compare it to an NPC of the given level of the CR to see how it compares.

However, those are balanced for players, with LA and long-term ability use taken into account. A progression solely for monsters would need to be quite different.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
DM-Scott 02-10-08, 11:53 PM	Ok, here's an odd idea I've been playing around with for a while, and I wanted to ask what others thought of the idea. Wouldn't it be fairly simple to create a monstrous progression similar to the way monsters work in the monster manuals, and actually make their abilities scale based on HD in a more class-level like method? Ok, you may be thinking "Huh? :confused: " right now, so I'll try to explain more clearly. In the monster manual, it gives some information on the various types of creatures, from dragons and outsiders to oozes and giants; and gives advice for building them, such as suggesting that aberrations should usually have some sort of magic / psionic abilities because they generally poor at combat and so forth. Now, generally we have your typical monsters who fill certain roles, such as beefy monster, sneaky monster, trick monster, and magic monster. Similar to the roles in your typical adventuring party, to be honest. Then you have sucker-punch monsters and puzzle monsters (those who have A) Powers far too potent for their HD, and B) Monsters who aren't killable in the usual ways). We're going to steer clear of sucker-punchers and puzzle monsters for now. Now let's say that there are set guidelines for monstrous progression. Currently we already have 1 feat every 3 HD, and 1 ability increase every 4 HD. Now let's go a step further and give them some monster powers. Let's say it looks something like this. Humanoid HD BAB Fort Ref Will Special 1d8 +0 +0 +0 +2* Power 2d8 +1 +0 +0 +3 Power 3d8 +2 +1 +1 +3 _ Now let's say that powers were a selection of typical abilities possessed by creatures such as a higher than typical AC, or special attacks such as swallow whole, improved grab, or qualities such as regeneration. I'd say the closest thing we have to this currently would be the Astral Constructs (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/monsters/astralConstruct.htm) from the Expanded Psionics Handbook. Astral Constructs are generic "creatures" which can be customized on the fly (the designers were brilliant with these guys). To expand on this thought, you'd essentially have a base guideline for how strong a creature should be based on HD, and would be very easy to gauge effectiveness in an encounter, as well as making it simpler to run non-standard characters (since it would be easier to gauge their power by HD). So using a very, very raw concept version of this system, we might see the lizardfolk looking something like this... 2D8 (Humanoid HD) BAB +1, Fort +0, Ref +3, Will +0 Powers: Tough Hide (+3 Natural AC), Strong (+2 Strength) Basic Attributes (For PCs) +2 Constitution, -2 Intelligence +2 Natural Armor Hold Breath (Ex) Natural Attacks (Bite 1d4, 2 Claws 1d4) Favored Class: Druid Now, this wouldn't be necessarily mean that you could advance in lizardfolk HD to get spell-like abilities or anything as a character. Instead the system is intended to gauge how strong something should be based on A) It's HD and B) Maybe it's size, but this would probably be based on HD as well, since there's already a minimum HD limit based on size. Most special qualities would scale with the HD, similar to how anything with a saving throw DC already scales with creature HD in the core rules (such as breath weapons, poisons, and so forth being 10 + 1/2 HD + ability mod). Also, creatures could have an Advancement section in their entry (just like the standard MM) to show the range of their abilities; so if there was a way that made natural AC scale with HD, there would still be a cap on just how tough lizardfolk (for example) can get before having to take class levels. Does any of this seem to make any sense, or seem like it would be worth figuring out a balanced, mechanical way to do it? It's primarily for creature and encounter design, but has the added benefit of being more user friendly than level adjustments for characters (since the monster progression ALA savage species would be much more fluid and such - even if it means higher racial HD than we currently have on some creatures), and keeping creatures in line with each other. Any thoughts?
Tequila_Sunrise 02-13-08, 02:39 AM	Dude, I'm with you 100%. I've actually spent a lot of time to create monster progressions, though based on CR rather than HD: http://lucasbuchanan.com/Standardized%20Monster%20Progressions. I've found it very difficult to balance monsters against each other, as the MM seems to be designed to obsfucate any CR guidelines which may have guided monster creation. In fact, I really need to reevaluate the Animal page at some point. I didn't include LAs for any of them except goblinoids, but honestly that's because LA is the only aspect of 3e that I really feel unsure of. TS
LordVladamir 02-14-08, 11:24 AM	Savage Species has already taken many of the monsters from the MM and broken them down into classes in order to allow monsters to be played in lower-level games. They had some of the levels where the moster gained abilities but not a HD to account for the LA of the creature. When creating a monster there can and will never be a truly accurate system because of how varied the abilities are. A good rule of thumb is to compare a the monster to another monster of the same HD and CR and compare it to an NPC of the given level of the CR to see how it compares.
Eldritch_Lord 02-18-08, 09:46 PM	Savage Species has already taken many of the monsters from the MM and broken them down into classes in order to allow monsters to be played in lower-level games. They had some of the levels where the moster gained abilities but not a HD to account for the LA of the creature. When creating a monster there can and will never be a truly accurate system because of how varied the abilities are. A good rule of thumb is to compare a the monster to another monster of the same HD and CR and compare it to an NPC of the given level of the CR to see how it compares. However, those are balanced for players, with LA and long-term ability use taken into account. A progression solely for monsters would need to be quite different.