A level 28 Solo Controller (Leader) she has some nasty, nasty tricks. Curses that cause the cursed player to take the same damage as the player she hit. At wills with big pushes and slides that also push or slide all other cursed players, the ability to shift effects from her to cursed players or burn curses to cure allies of effects. Plus other stuff
I'd not want to be fighting her given she wouldn't be alone when you went up against her.
Her fluff recites:
Although Lalali-Puy is not truly a goddess, surely she
is the nearest example of divinity Athas has to offer.
Her knowledge of rituals is unparalleled, even among
the sorcerer-kings. She is said to be capable of performing
arcane and primal rituals known nowhere
else on Athas.
which I find slightly surprising considering the old "canon". I'm not displeased, but she's certainly on a completely different level from Nibenay - even when considering the fact that the game assumes by now that Solo don't fight alone. She's as wicked as he's underwhelming. She definitely is late epic tier content.
Although, fluff-wise, it seems that she's a lot more human than Nibenay (she's medium and she actually gets the human keyword), so if we're going by Dragon advancement, she's actually behind the Shadow King in that regard.
She's definitely wicked as you say, VisanidethDM, though I disagree about Nibenay being underwhelming. All things considered, Nibenay's stats befit his status in the game as an elite, and seeing it for the first time helped me make up my mind on what city to feature in my 4E DS game.
While I'm not 100% satisfied with her write up, I do like it. But I'd like to know what her allies are suppose to be. I'm picturing highly mobile skirmishers with good damage but low hp. But I can't agree with official solos having allies. I can already see how a good portion of level 24 parties are going to be steamrolled by this encounter. Optimization should never be a requirement in combat and this encounter seriously needs to be tested with unoptimized groups. But, we need to see her "regular" allies before any real tests can be done.
As for the other "stuff", I'm curious to know what "secrets of power" contain and what changes have been done to the history of athas.
[edit] After looking through dragonkings again, I had forgotten the progression of power for the SKs. Oba was still human in many ways, so that makes sense. Nibenay was alwasy a level above the others, so that also makes sense.
I dont' really mind the idea of SKs as Elites, tho; they're generals/leaders/kings/dictators anyways, I don't really picture them as solitary godlike beings. Or well... maybe I do, but maybe that's not the best for the setting.
The point is, having the Oba being SO powerful and Nibenay (which we used to think was the most advanced Dragon aside from Kalak, Borys and Dregoth) being so comparatively weak does shake the cosmology a sensible bit.
Why should Lalali-Puy fear Nibenay in any possible way? Why should she avoid conflict with him? In a direct confrontation, she will crush him.
Even more importantly... exactly how powerful is the Dragon gonna be? Sure, a lot of Lalali-Puy's "oomph" is lost on a single target, but if any other SK is even just close to her power, unless Borys is a lvl 40 solo there will be no mechanical explanation as to why the SKs don't gang up on him. If they stat Borys to be sensibly more powerful than the Oba, he will seriously be in Lolth's region of relative power, and possibly further up.
Anyways, I think WotC should have either stuck to all SKs being Solos (and if they were all on the Oba's league, you would have PLENTY of late epic content), or all of them being Elites. I'm also very curious about Dregoth now. I'm sort of picturing Dregoth being a lvl 30 solo and Borys a lvl 35 one right now.
But I'd like to know what her allies are suppose to be. I'm picturing highly mobile skirmishers with good damage but low hp.
Unlikely to be a very good idea; her damage output is already through the roof. If there ever was an almost selfsufficient solo, it's Lalali-Puy. She can damage the whole party every round, more or less, she does damage when hit on multiple targets and she can control the entire opposite group with at wills. She's like 3 mobs in one.
Y'know, based on this latest info, I'd not be surprised if Nibenay got bumped up a bit in the book too. The original version sort of a "beta" version of Nibenay.
I'm flirting with the idea too; but if he gets statted like this and keeps his level, we will fundamentally have Gods in Dark Sun. Once again, if we can assume the Oba fears Borys, what will the Dragon look like?
Which leads me to one bit of fluff that really surprised me in her presentation:
Although Lalali-Puy is not truly a goddess, surely she
is the nearest example of divinity Athas has to offer.
It does seem like this sentence is mostly referring to her approach and knowledge of magic, but... shouldn't the closest thing to a god on Athas be Borys?
In todays Dark Sun exceprt it talks about the social order of Athas and also includes the stats for Lalali-Puy as an added bonus, as seen in this link www.wizards.com/dnd/files/excerpts/DarkS...
A level 28 Solo Controller (Leader) she has some nasty, nasty tricks. Curses that cause the cursed player to take the same damage as the player she hit. At wills with big pushes and slides that also push or slide all other cursed players, the ability to shift effects from her to cursed players or burn curses to cure allies of effects. Plus other stuff
I'd not want to be fighting her given she wouldn't be alone when you went up against her.
That's my suspicion as well. I always thought the Nibenay that was presentes was a tad weak.
I dont' really mind the idea of SKs as Elites, tho; they're generals/leaders/kings/dictators anyways, I don't really picture them as solitary godlike beings. Or well... maybe I do, but maybe that's not the best for the setting.
I disagree. That's always been part of the dread of the sorcerer kings. That compared to everyone else, they were godlike. They granted powers to worshippers (servants), wielded unequalled magical and psionic power and could do things that no mortal could. They were also immortal beings as far as anyone knew. They couldn't die from old age, thirst or starvation like mortals.
The point is, having the Obabeing SO powerful and Nibenay (which we used to think was the most advanced Dragon aside from Kalak, Borys and Dregoth) being so comparatively weak does shake the cosmology a sensible bit.
In 2e, pre-PP, Nibenay was the most advanced living SK at 23rd level. Tectuktitlay was the second most advanced at 22nd level. The remaining SKs were all 21st level, including Kalak. I'm not sure
about Daskinor or Keitis as they're not listed in the original material. As for the new 4e rewrites, I don't know what wotc is doing.
Why should Lalali-Puy fear Nibenayin any possible way? Why should she avoid conflict with him? In a direct confrontation, she will crush him.
This just isn't true and I don't know why wotc believes it should be. Nibenay and the Oba always had an understanding, like all the SKs did and when they did battle, it was always a stalemate. The Oba was never more powerful the Nibenay. Nibenay was always the threat andI don't think any SK wanted war with the shadowking.
Even more importantly... exactly how powerful is the Dragon gonna be? Sure, a lot of Lalali-Puy's "oomph" is lost on a single target, but if any other SK is even just close to her power, unless Borys is a lvl 40 solo there will be no mechanical explanation as to why the SKs don't gang up on him. If they stat Borys to be sensibly more powerful than the Oba, he will seriously be in Lolth's region of relative power, and possibly further up.
Like I said before, I see the dragon as a level 35 solo. The most challenging opponent anyone can fight in darksun. The only person more powerful than the dragon, is rajaat. Rajaatcould still be more powerful, even if both are 35th level.
Story wise, the SKs need the dragon just like the dragon needs them. The levy must be collected and the dragon doesn't want to do all the work himself. The binding ritual must be cast and no one other than the dragon is powerful enough. Not even all the SKs and sadira were powerful enough, despite their major fubar in the CS.
Mechanically, the dragon is more than one monster. He's a solo "god", he's capable of cloning himself, he's got defensive strongholds that can destroy armies, he's got Ur Draxa. He is ridiculously powerful and has enough resources to defeat basically anyone. His ultimate weakness, is his ego. He knows he's without equal in the tablelands and this opens himself up to defeat. Even then, his ego isn't enough. The heroes needed the help of Rajaat to defeat him. The dragon was consumed by "rajaat's blood", which is some sort of magical device of rajaat. The liquid is still one of the mysteries of the setting.
It would not surprise me at all if Borys was ranked right along side Lolth, Bahamut and the other 35th level super powers.
Anyways, I think WotC should have either stuck to all SKs being Solos (and if they were all on the Oba's league, you would have PLENTY of late epic content), or all of them being Elites. I'm also very curious about Dregoth now. I'm sort of picturing Dregoth being a lvl30 solo and Borys a lvl 35 one right now.
I'v always seen Dregoth around 32nd level, maybe 33rd. Dregoth is ridiculously powerful too. Not only is he a powerful dragon king, but I believe he might be the most powerful undead creature on athas that we know of. He is also a "god" in the setting. Worshipped by his creations, the dray.
It does seem like this sentence is mostly referring to her approach and knowledge of magic, but... shouldn't the closest thing to a god on Athas be Borys?
I don't think they're talking about power. I think they're talking about persona. Borys doesn't care about being seen as a god, while the Oba enjoys it and plays the part. Infact, she once told her people that she had to return to the forest and they willingly sacrificed 1000 volunteers so she could stay. Part of her metamorphosis? Probably. Maybe just to see how her people viewed her? could be.
Borys is seen more as the devil, rather than a god. Unless, of course, you're in ur draxa.
The point is, having the Oba being SO powerful and Nibenay (which we used to think was the most advanced Dragon aside from Kalak, Borys and Dregoth) being so comparatively weak does shake the cosmology a sensible bit.
Actually, "Dragon Kings" stated that Kalak tried to jump 10 levels in an instant. Basically he cast "Defiler Metamorphosis" during games on arena, but before he completed it ans swallowed orbs, he was slain. That means, he was advancing from 20th to 21 st level and tried to jump up to 30th. That makes him the weakest of Sorcerer Kings.
It's certainly somewhat confusing to have some Solos and some Elites.
I dont' really mind the idea of SKs as Elites, tho; they're generals/leaders/kings/dictators anyways, I don't really picture them as solitary godlike beings. Or well... maybe I do, but maybe that's not the best for the setting.
The point is, having the Oba being SO powerful and Nibenay (which we used to think was the most advanced Dragon aside from Kalak, Borys and Dregoth) being so comparatively weak does shake the cosmology a sensible bit.
What? How so? Just because one sorcerer-king is level i and another is level j, means nothing! i and j are a completely situational number, and the world of Athas has never been so one dimensional. Being Solo and Elite is like being a Soldier, Brute or Artillery - it's merely a game design to give a role to each creature. Their level is likewise situation, and has nothing to do with any given storyline.
Being Solo and being Elite does not mean one is more 'powerful' than the other. If the two 'duked it out', one on one, yes, it would appear that the Oba could 'take Nibenay out'. Why would an Elite be fighting a Solo? Why would Nibenay, being the shadow king, with an intelligence of 28, ever be stupid enough to allow that to happen? Why wouldn't Nibenay keep 4 or more, level 29 Shadow Wives around? Why wouldn't he prepare himself, and gather powerful magic items, cast a defensive ritual, or make a pact with powerful allies?
According to 2nd edition, and the Dragon Kings supplement, metamorphasis was based on character level. This does NOT apply here. It's not 2nd edition. Monster level is not equal to character level, but merely a measurement to determine challenge rating (like XP) and is a combination of 'character levels', 'equivalent monster level', temporary powers and magic items/artifacts. Give the Oba a suit of +1 armor and weapons and she becomes level 29... but she doesn't become more 'dragon'-like.
If you don't like an elite Nibenay, just give him a template and voila, he's solo. That's what i'm going to do if he's like that in the Dark Sun books
Beautiful. Alevar's got the right idea...
I dont' really mind the idea of SKs as Elites, tho; they're generals/leaders/kings/dictators anyways, I don't really picture them as solitary godlike beings. Or well... maybe I do, but maybe that's not the best for the setting.
I disagree. That's always been part of the dread of the sorcerer kings. That compared to everyone else, they were godlike. They granted powers to worshippers (servants), wielded unequalled magical and psionic power and could do things that no mortal could. They were also immortal beings as far as anyone knew. They couldn't die from old age, thirst or starvation like mortals.
Keep in mind that by mid-Epic tier (the range around which the players could conceivably tackle an encounter featuring an SK), the same thing can be said of the heroes.
It's just a problem of scale. In 2e, "epic" was practically verboten. Now that it's been codified as part of the system, a lot more possibilities open up for the players. Being less than "beyond max level" might seem, at first, to make them a lot less untouchable, but these powers do not operate in a vacuum - to even qualify for that "fight" the players must endure the entire powerbase of the SK, a very real manifestation of their power beyond statblocks.
It's fluid, and is a representation of the difficulty level you want to impose on the encounter, and how many (and how high level, whether they are minions or not) accompanying support cast you want to include.
Alone on a high bute? Solo. With powerful servants? Elite.
A villain can be an elite when encountered in one circumstance, then later on can be solo when fought against under different circumstances, and back to elite later on again.
It's fluid, and is a representation of the difficulty level you want to impose on the encounter, and how many (and how high level, whether they are minions or not) accompanying support cast you want to include.
Alone on a high bute? Solo. With powerful servants? Elite.
Exactly! You could even have standard versions incase you want to throw the players up against a bunch of Sks.
Keep in mind that by mid-Epic tier (the range around which the players could conceivably tackle an encounter featuring an SK), the same thing can be said of the heroes.
Which has always been the case. But generally, the view is from a non epic perspective. How does the common man view them? The Sks are gods in their own right, capable of destroying nearly any contender single handed and when that's not possible, they unite and obliterate any threat. Even in epic, having it be a fair fight is a silly thought. The SKs have had thousands of years to create contingencies.
- to even qualify for that "fight" the players must endure the entire powerbase of the SK, a very real manifestation of their power beyond statblocks.
Yup, and unless the players are very lucky or the DM is very easy, it's almost a sure bet that the PCs will die long before they are strong enough to challenge a single SK, much less capable of fighting all of them. And IMO, if you're a threat to one, you're a threat to them all. And by attempting to upset the balance of power and the machine that is the city-states, you would bring the dragon into it. All of which are simply devices to keep the ultimate master of athas in prison.
Kalak was the first link in a possible chain reaction. One the other SKs will do everything in their power to stop.
Which is one of the coolest things about the setting. Heroes want to defeat the evil Sks and the dragon, yet they don't know that what they would release is so much worse. Unlike the champions, the warbringer wants complete destruction of all rebirth races, which means the majority of life on athas. Considering this, the lesser of two evils actually are the protectors of the people. Which is exactly why the heroes cannot know this fact. Can't give away one of the greatest plot twists ever created in D&D history.
If Nibenay's stats haven't changed in the final version of the rules, I'm going to swap and reskin the stats for the Oba and the Shadow King. ;)
Nice idea! They swap: I think Nibenay should be the ruler of Gulg - more time to think and read with fewer people around. The Oba always suited the city of Nibenay better with her desire to be a God.
(Sorry folks, no time for gaming with the PhD in process. Also, no one to play with, even if I had time).
If Nibenay's stats haven't changed in the final version of the rules, I'm going to swap and reskin the stats for the Oba and the Shadow King. ;)
Nice idea! They swap: I think Nibenay should be the ruler of Gulg - more time to think and read with fewer people around. The Oba always suited the city of Nibenay better with her desire to be a God.
Not exactly where I was going, but points for creativity. I don't think that the Shadow King would appreciate living in the Sunlight Home. :D
Players always fight as a 'party' (of around 4-6 characters).
Monsters don't always. They can fight by themselves (solo) or in groups. In groups, there are occasionally one individual that is sort of the leader, or an elite that is ~twice as powerful (elite). A standard challenge is 5 PCs vs 5 Monsters of the same level. Thus, 5 level 10 PCs should fight 5 monsters of level 10.
Elites take the spot of 2 monsters. Solos 4 monsters.
Nibenay's level is one higher than the Oba's. So, a typical encounter would be Nibenay + 3 monsters vs 5 level 29 PCs. The Oba + 1 monster vs 5 level 28 players. There are a million ways to mix and match combats. But essentially, Nibenay needs help, the Oba doesn't. Nibenay fights PCs of one higher level than the Oba. Does that makes Nibenay "weaker"... ?
The real point is that the stat blocks of Elites and Solos are constructed differently. Elites attack about twice as hard as standard monsters and have more special attacks, while solos attack many times more often and have many special attacks.
Not exactly where I was going, but points for creativity. I don't think that the Shadow King would appreciate living in the Sunlight Home. :D
Sorry, I was joking... I'm being a little immature right now. It's Friday.
There was just no reason to creatively limit ourselves to them only being elites, or only being solos, when it was far more appropriate--for both story and mechanical reasons--to design each one as best befit our vision of that particular character.
Personally, I plan to have an elite version and a solo version for every SK, including the dragon. That way I can make encounters against them a bit more varied. Like the fights leading up to the final conflict are elite versions grouped with allies, where as the final encounter in a sanctuary will be a solo with lots of traps, hazards and other environmental dangers. There are exceptions, of course. Like a surprise encounter, or the dragon. The dragon could be a solo for one encounter, then an elite the next, then a solo again. The abilities could change, based on the terrain and allies.
I enjoy DS and monster creation enough that ending up with 6 different versions of the same monster wouldn't surprise me.
We didn't feel there was any reason that all the SKs had to be the same, in terms of whether they were elites or solos. Some of them fight differently than others. Some have very different sorts of powers than others. None of them are likely to ever be facing each other directly, since that's what they have armies/soldiers/servants/minions/spies/assassins for. And even back in 2E, there was a wide power gap between some of them.
There was just no reason to creatively limit ourselves to them only being elites, or only being solos, when it was far more appropriate--for both story and mechanical reasons--to design each one as best befit our vision of that particular character.
I approve of the spirit; I've always been under the perception that SKs aren't gods, and thus most of their power comes from their own political and military strength, even before their personal might comes into place.
So I'm totally fine with a Nibenay who is a cunning schemer and holds great military power and the Oba being a much more powerful being with lesser external aids.
However, I wonder if such end wouldn't have been easier to achieve varying the role and level. The difference between a solo and an elite is massive, with the Solo being close to be twice as powerful; when the design takes the direction it took with Nibenay and the Oba, the solo is several times more powerful even.
I'll wait to see the book; however I appreciate that you didn't feel forced to follow the previous "ladder of power" and felt free to mix things up.
Personally, I plan to have an elite version and a solo version for every SK, including the dragon. That way I can make encounters against them a bit more varied. Like the fights leading up to the final conflict are elite versions grouped with allies, where as the final encounter in a sanctuary will be a solo with lots of traps, hazards and other environmental dangers. There are exceptions, of course. Like a surprise encounter, or the dragon. The dragon could be a solo for one encounter, then an elite the next, then a solo again. The abilities could change, based on the terrain and allies.
I enjoy DS and monster creation enough that ending up with 6 different versions of the same monster wouldn't surprise me.
That's an appreciable approach, but the new manual WILL set the new "canon" and it's impossible to argue, right now, that by the book the Oba hold massively superior personal powers than Nibenay.
Fans of the setting will always want to discuss these kind of things, and while "I changed it into my game" approachs will probably be common and fully respectable, at the moment "officially" the Oba is a lot stronger than Nibenay, and it will be like that by default for most games.
We didn't feel there was any reason that all the SKs had to be the same, in terms of whether they were elites or solos. Some of them fight differently than others. Some have very different sorts of powers than others. None of them are likely to ever be facing each other directly, since that's what they have armies/soldiers/servants/minions/spies/assassins for. And even back in 2E, there was a wide power gap between some of them.
There was just no reason to creatively limit ourselves to them only being elites, or only being solos, when it was far more appropriate--for both story and mechanical reasons--to design each one as best befit our vision of that particular character.
I have no problem with this design decision in general, only the specific way it was implemented regarding Nibenay. As you say, there was a wide power gap in 2E, but everyone familiar with 2E will agree that Nibenay was at the strong/Solo end of that gap, not the weak/Elite end. This thread is plain evidence of that.
Further, although an argument can be made for quantifying part of an SK's power as "soft power", you can't ignore the mechanics of the game. All RPGs make statements about a setting or fictional world through the mechanics employed to define an NPC or setting feature. In 2E, Nibenay was the most powerful sorcerer-king in the Tablelands (putting aside Dregoth as an outlier), both in the setting fluff and the 2E mechanics used to describe him. This is not the case in 4E, since Nibenay is mechanically weaker than Lalali-Puy, regardless of how Nibenay's soft power is further defined.
Your response explains why some SK's are treated as Elites rather than Solos, but not why the decision was made to change the mechanical relationship between Nibenay and Lalali-Puy.
Your response explains why some SK's are treated as Elites rather than Solos, but not why the decision was made to change the mechanical relationship between Nibenay and Lalali-Puy.
I can't speak to any of the decisions that went into designing Nibenay, I'm afraid. I didn't work on him. I can only say that I designed the two SKs I was responsible for--one of whom was Lalali-Puy--as I felt was most appropriate for their assigned level.
Your response explains why some SK's are treated as Elites rather than Solos, but not why the decision was made to change the mechanical relationship between Nibenay and Lalali-Puy.
I can't speak to any of the decisions that went into designing Nibenay, I'm afraid. I didn't work on him. I can only say that I designed the two SKs I was responsible for--one of whom was Lalali-Puy--as I felt was most appropriate for their assigned level.
That's fine. I like how Lalali-Puy turned out quite a bit.
I like Nibenay's overall concept, it's just his power level that is bizzarely out of place. Nibenay is the sorcerer-monarch most devoted to the intense studies of magic and the Way. He sequesters himself for long stretches of time to further his power, and has the most comprehensive bureaucratic structure in the Tablelands to allow this. Thus, he is the furthest along in terms of how draconic he is compared to human (as is evidenced by his appearance). This is why having Nibenay be so dramatically less powerful comes as a surprise to many in the community. Nibenay is known and feared far and wide as the most magically proficient SK. Actually, this makes the blurb on Lalali-Puy being the most proficient ritualist also somewhat out of place. Nibenay is the most likely to have spend the time and resources researching ritual magic, due to the very nature of his interaction with his city-state, arcane magic, and the Way.To be honest, the fact that you have indicated that you basically worked on your two SKs independent of consultation with the others is rather flabbergasting. How can you all not have discussed relative power levels of the various SKs, to ensure that there is some sort of cohesion amongst their overall design? This seems...poorly thought out. Yes, I understand that each was designed to be their own thing. Nevertheless, surely you folks realized that the players WILL want to have the SKs in the same place at the same time every now and then, which requires a cohesive relative power level to one another, not simply the ideas of independent designers each doing their own thing compartmentalized from their fellows.
The thing that people are going to need to get used to is that, in 4E, a monster's stats are (at least in part) designed to determine how that monster interacts with the PCs specifically. They aren't meant to be a hard-coded measure of power of monster against monster. If Nibenay's personality/style suggests that he should encounter the PCs with more allies at his side, whereas Lalali-Puy's personality/style suggests that she's likely to have fewer, then for this to work mechanically, he needs to be an elite while she needs to be a solo.
But it's a narrative construct, nothing more. (That's why, as someone pointed out up-thread, you can have the same monster count as an elite in some parts of the campaign, and a solo in other parts, and a normal monster in still other parts.) The answer to "Who would win in a fight between Nibenay and Lalali-Puy" is "Whoever the DM wants to."
I realize that won't satisfy everyone--heck, I still sometimes take a moment to wrap my head around it myself ;)--but there it is.
I never said there was no interaction or design guidelines, or that things were designed in a vacuum. I said I can't speak to any specific thoughts that went into Nibenay. Their overall levels were determined in the outline.
Please tell me your other assigned SK was Hamanu!
Please tell me your other assigned SK was Hamanu!
'fraid not. But here's a hint, as to who my other SK assignment was: I've spoken to him in this thread. ;)
I never said there was no interaction or design guidelines, or that things were designed in a vacuum. I said I can't speak to any specific thoughts that went into Nibenay. Their overall levels were determined in the outline.
The thing that people are going to need to get used to is that, in 4E, a monster's stats are (at least in part) designed to determine how that monster interacts with the PCs specifically. They aren't meant to be a hard-coded measure of power of monster against monster. If Nibenay's personality/style suggests that he should encounter the PCs with more allies at his side, whereas Lalali-Puy's personality/style suggests that she's likely to have fewer, then for this to work mechanically, he needs to be an elite while she needs to be a solo.
But it's a narrative construct, nothing more. (That's why, as someone pointed out up-thread, you can have the same monster count as an elite in some parts of the campaign, and a solo in other parts, and a normal monster in still other parts.) The answer to "Who would win in a fight between Nibenay and Lalali-Puy" is "Whoever the DM wants to."
I realize that won't satisfy everyone--heck, I still sometimes take a moment to wrap my head around it myself ;)--but there it is.
I like the approach to sorcerer king design you developers used in designing the sorcerer kings. The sorcerer kings background and personality and how they would individually interact with the Pcs were top of those things considered. Great job on Lalali- Puy Oba queen. I have yet to see the preview of Nibinay the shadow king. Could someone provide a link to that info, thank you?
you made it too easy.
Yeah, it wasn't really meant to be a challenging, riddle-of-the-Sphinx sort of thing. ;)
I never said there was no interaction or design guidelines, or that things were designed in a vacuum. I said I can't speak to any specific thoughts that went into Nibenay. Their overall levels were determined in the outline.
The thing that people are going to need to get used to is that, in 4E, a monster's stats are (at least in part) designed to determine how that monster interacts with the PCs specifically. They aren't meant to be a hard-coded measure of power of monster against monster. If Nibenay's personality/style suggests that he should encounter the PCs with more allies at his side, whereas Lalali-Puy's personality/style suggests that she's likely to have fewer, then for this to work mechanically, he needs to be an elite while she needs to be a solo.
Ah ah ah, the bolded part is not what I said. I said players would want the SKs in the same place at the same time. That in no way implies they are fighting against one another. No, think the Prism Pentad and Rise and Fall of a Sorcerer-King. Mostly the former. What happened at the end? The "PC"s (the heroes of Free Tyr) faced down multiple SKs at the same time. The above design philosophy works fine when those monsters are fought independently. However, if our group is fighting Lalali-Puy and Nibenay at the same time in the same encounter it breaks suspension of disbelief if it is extremely obvious in that fight that Nibenay, the most advanced SK in the Tablelands, is sorely outclassed by the Oba.
Moreover, Nibenay's personality/style doesn't, IMHO, suggest that he would be encountered with more allies on his side. On the contrary, it is quite the opposite. He is the most likely to fight purely with proxies such as templars, his son, etc, than make an appearance himself. When he makes an appearance himself, however, he is one of, if not the most feared SK out there. Much like Hamanu is the most feared by far when leading his army. As a consumate leader, Hamanu is most dangerous when leading a massive force. He has literally never lost when leading his army, something no other SK can boast. Nibenay strikes from the shadows through proxies because he is so preoccupied with his intense levels of study in the arcane arts and the Way. If you warrant his full attention, beware, because you are fighting against what is likely the most powerful dragon on the planet besides Dregoth and Borys.
THAT is why it is out of place. I understand the concept of monsters as a narrative construct. However, relative power levels should still be maintained just in case you face more than one of these beasts at the same time. Not because they will fight each other, but because they should be appropriately powerful comparatively when facing YOU simultaneously. That is part of the narrative construct as well. If Nibenay is both less effective, and falls much faster than Lalali-Puy in such a heated combat (and these are the two SKs most likely to be faced simultaneously, interestingly enough, because of their extremely close physical proximity to one another and need to protect the same forest region), it will be extraordinarily obvious. Thus, Nibenay's relative place in the world, the whole point of his long period of solitude (research), one of the major reasons for his seclusion (his imposing physical appearance as so advanced a dragon), and his carefully constructed bureaucracy to give him such freedoms, are degraded. This undermines the very narrative that the storytellers are attempting to weave, and in a manner that appears utterly arbitrary.
That said, with how well-constructed the Oba is, I look forward to your take on my bloodthirsty, combat-driven, sacrifice-loving namesake. ;)
Points to Duke and Mouseferatu!
@Tec: In an imaginary showdown between all the SKs, a redesign would be in order, but that's the consumer's job (i.e. you and me). The Creature Catalog offers a different venue for encountering a SK: party vs SK. We can't expect the designers to fill the pages with standard, elite, and solo versions "just in case" a DM might feature a SK vs SK fight, or would like to compare sizes.
I thought my remark on the relativity of monster roles got lost in translation.
Points to Duke and Mouseferatu!
@Tec: In an imaginary showdown between all the SKs, a redesign would be in order, but that's the consumer's job (i.e. you and me). The Creature Catalog offers a different venue for encountering a SK: party vs SK. We can't expect the designers to fill the pages with standard, elite, and solo versions "just in case" a DM might feature a SK vs SK fight, or would like to compare sizes.
Nor did I say that the designers should make a standard, elite and solo version of each SK. I said the SKs should be designed such that their relative mechanical power levels allow for them to be present in the same encounter at the same time while preservering their relative fluff power levels. That is quite different, and should be basic design approach 101. Quite literally all that would have been required it to codify, quite simply, the level, role, and standard/elite/solo status of the SKs. The basic mechanical design of 4E would take over from there, and the relative power level of each would be much more cohesive to open up the number of possible scenarios easily played out.
You, as with Mouseferatu, are completely misstating my position. I said nothing whatsoever about a SK vs SK fight. In fact, I quite specifically pointed that out as NOT being the case. If I face Lalali-Puy and Nibenay with an epic level party right now, because we've, say, interrupted a meeting between the two monarchs as they negotiate for control over the Crescent Forest region, Lalali-Puy will be dramatically more powerful than Nibenay in that fight. Ridiculously so. This is a simple, basic scenario that these two SKs, specifically, could easily be caught in.
Had the design team simply laid out the simple codification of SKs, such that, say, each is the following level, role, and are all solos (or elites, or whatever), the power level between Lalali-Puy and Nibenay in the above scenario would be much more believable within the framework of the knowledge of the world of Athas itself. As of now, according to what Mouseferatu stated, it looks like only level and role were laid out. That seems to be a pretty significant and unnecessary oversight that specifically locks out many potential scenarios from being played out in a believable manner (from the perspective of the PCs, not just the players) without sizable alterations from DMs. Yet this was astonishingly easily avoidable with a basic codification of relative power levels of the SKs.
Just look at the gods and godlike beings presented thus far. There is a much more cohesive level of relative power levels with regards to those beings.
Yes, monsters as narrative devices is great and all. But they must simultaneously fulfill the role of such devices on an individual basis as well as a group basis so that in a living, breathing campaign such beings can be present at the same time within a narrative framework with their relative levels of power to one another preserved for the sake of immersion.
As I stated, this was incredibly easily avoidable.
That's an appreciable approach, but the new manual WILL set the new "canon" and it's impossible to argue, right now, that by the book the Oba hold massively superior personal powers than Nibenay.
Nibenay is designed to fight with allies, which could make him very powerful, depending on who those allies are. While the Oba is designed as a contradiction. She is designed to fight with allies, yet fills the solo boss role. So I'm not sure what wotc's goal is with the SKs. I simply can't tell by these write ups. As for the new canon, if it doesn't make sense to someone, it won't be used. It will be replaced by homebrew, which is very common. It's probably more common than someone sticking strickly to canon. Who knows, we never will. New fans with little to no experience with the old material won't notice a difference. Older DS fans who do notice a difference either won't care or will change it to better fit their vision. No problems either way.
Fans of the setting will always want to discuss these kind of things, and while "I changed it into my game" approachs will probably be common and fully respectable, at the moment "officially" the Oba is a lot stronger than Nibenay, and it will be like that by default for most games.
Obviously the official material is what it is, I'm not sure what pointing out the obvious does for the discussion, but I'll go with it. You're correct, officially the Oba kicks freaking ass and while Nibenay is an awesome support character, The Oba seems to have the advantage. As for what it will be like in most games, Yes, whatever is in the books will always (100%) be the default in every single game of darksun that uses those books, as it's the information in those books. Whether or not people use the default stats "as is" is another matter.
The real questions are, Why is a solo built to use allies? How does this encounter work with the standard XP budget? What level encounter is this going to end up being? Is it even possible for a level 24 party to defeat the Oba and her allies? Will it be required to be optimized to win this encounter? How many allies is the Oba suppose to have? A single "special" ally, or a group of standard allies? Obviously the allies are not suppose to be minions, by the way the powers function, so that leads to either, standards, a single elite or something completely new.
If solos are being redesigned like this, to function differently then I wouldn't be surprised to see redesigned elites, standards and minions and maybe even a new position. This also leads to wondering how to replicate these designs for homebrewed material. Can we achieve the same results with the Dmg 1 & 2 or are we going to be getting something new for monster design, or maybe more rules updates?
These are honest, curious questions that cannot be answered by fans and will probably never be answer until after 4eDS releases, if then. But when stuff changes, people ask the questions. "Why?"
Nibenay was the top dog. I don't know what wotc is thinking or what their goal is since they cannot share it, so we are left to speculate. I do not hate the new write ups in the least, but I am curious as to why they were done like this and if anyone ever presented the designers with the question going into the design stage. I'm sure they knew ahead of time, as I'm betting at least some of the design crew are/were DS fans.
...differences of opinion?
And btw, all of those godlike beings (primordials, gods) you speak of that can be compared with one another, well they happen to be godlike beings: all are supremely powerful mythological entities, so they're all little self-sufficient worlds of their own, one-man armies unto themselves, thus all are solos, and when putting them next to each other you're left with comparing levels. What possible epic level encounters would warrant downgrading a god to elite...difficult to fathom ("Sunday Massacre in Heaven?" Next Week on the Hero Channel). But SKs are...just immortal dudes.
* Some will be solos, other elites, or even standards. If your encounter is both with the Oba and Shadow-King, either Nibenay is accompanied by a lot of firepower, or needs to be redesigned as a solo, or the Oba as an elite. As written they are not meant to both be fought together, and PCs should not get this impression the Oba can wipe the floor with Nibenay. He is but one level lower. There might even be a situation when she would be elite 28 and he solo 27.
Fans of the setting will always want to discuss these kind of things, and while "I changed it into my game" approachs will probably be common and fully respectable, at the moment "officially" the Oba is a lot stronger than Nibenay [emphasis mine], and it will be like that by default for most games.
I do not understand this. A monster is not inherently solo or elite or standard or minion, he's one of those things at a time for the purpose of an encounter. In the best of worlds all MM1-MM3 monsters would be in quadruplet, but instead they gave us guidelines in the DMGs on upgrading and downgrading monster roles. I repeat, not upgrading or downgrading the monster, but his role. It's what Mouseferatu acknowledged/pointed out earlier.
As of now, according to what Mouseferatu stated, it looks like only level and role were laid out. That seems to be a pretty significant and unnecessary oversight that specifically locks out many potential scenarios from being played out in a believable manner (from the perspective of the PCs, not just the players) without sizable alterations from DMs. Yet this was astonishingly easily avoidable with a basic codification of relative power levels of the SKs.
Now you're misinterpreting what I said. It's true that some of those details weren't carved in stone in the outline, but everything--everything--was discussed in advance and approved by the lead designers at WotC, and by the development team.
The fact that some SKs are elites and some are solos isn't an accident. It's not something that "sipped by." It's not something that "could have been easily avoided," because we weren't trying to avoid it.
It's something that was decided was a less important design goal than making each individual SK best fit the individual position/purpose/personaly that the designers thought they should fit. Nothing more, nothing less.
You dislike that choice, and that's absolutely your prerogative. But it was a choice, not a careless accident.
The real questions are, Why is a solo built to use allies? How does this encounter work with the standard XP budget? What level encounter is this going to end up being?
Lots of "solos" are designed to use allies. Frankly, the term "solo" was probably a mistake. They're tough, but they don't have to be used alone.
By the encounter budget, it probably means that any encounter with L-P and her allies will probably be around 30th-level--but that's still a fight that a party of, say, 26th or 27th level can handle, if they're prepared and they plan well. And it means that DMs can use her alone, for a 28th-level encounter, if they decide they want to.
Any mechanic in a rulebook--a monster, a magic item, a power, a feat, whatever--is viewed by multiple sets of eyes after it's created. The lead designer sees it, the editors see it, and the development team sees it. Sure, mistakes still slip through; people are people. But it means that the basic concepts--including what role/level a particular NPC fills--have to be approved at multiple stages.
The decision to allow some SKs to be elites and some to be solos was not made by any one person, and it wasn't an accident. It was decided that they could be designed better that way than if they were all locked into one or the other. Again, not everyone has to agree with that decision, but there were good, solid reasons for making it.
Hey, thanks for the reply, mouseferatu! That actually helps me a lot. I'v never really seen a solo used with allies as a player and when I did it as a DM, I always considered it homebrew. But that's the idea I had, that it would be a higher level encounter using a lower level solo.
And don't mind me when it comes to the language I use. I can't seem to get that I'm not accusing anyone by the way I post and the words I use, my tone never comes off right in posts. I like the write ups, even though I didn't fully understand (and still don't to a degree) but now that you offered that reply, the Oba makes a lot more sense to me. I'm sure that when I see Nibenay's allies, that he will make sense in his design - difficulty level.
Again, thanks a ton! Can't wait til next month!
Nevertheless, surely it occurred to your team that folks would want to have encounters where PCs face multiple SKs at the same time, and what kind of dramatic disparity in relative power level would occur if they weren't designed using the same general guidelines. The deities have been presented with that sort of design philosophy, and if I want an opponent to face Lolth and Tiamat at the same time, I can, and their relative power levels are much more in parity with one another. I don't need to jury-rig the monsters so they fall within line with the fluff relative to the mechanics.
Thus, it seems a completely unnecessary approach to the design philosophy that has, perhaps unforeseen (?) repercussions. I get what you are saying. Well and truly. And I do indeed disagree with the decision to make some of the SKs elites, some solos, and, dog forbid, some standad (dunno, noone official has stated that, only speculations by others). I think it is a poor design decision that specifically makes it more difficult for DMs to design encounters with multiple SKs present and expect it as a whole to make sense.
The reason it is a poor design decision is, IMHO, precisely the reason I presented. If you don't give them power levels on par with one another in an appropriate manner, you actually DISCOURAGE their use as narrative devices in precisely the manner I presented. You have a cohesive mechanical structure. Putting the monsters in to said mechanical structure with the aforementioned design philosophy ENCOURAGES the narrative.
Another example to illustrate the point: In one encounter, a group of PCs faces down the Oba, and has a rough challenge. A couple of encounters down the road, futher along in the narrative as the PCs adventure in the Ivory Triangle region, while the characters are at the same level, they face the Shadow King, a character the DM has constantly reinforced as being the most intimidatingly powerful, magically and psionically adept SK in the entire Tablelands (reinforced b y the fluff), who they've thus far only faced through proxies. The Shadow King ends up being a cakewalk by comparison, unless you bottleneck the DM into putting a bunch of other monsters in the encounter, which doesn't even fit with a being like Gallard IMHO. The group will wonder what the hell happened. THIS was the mighty Nibenay? THIS was the Shadow King? Really? What a pushover.
Do you see how this disrupts the potential narrative? Moreover, do you see how it does so in a manner that doesn't even mesh with the rest of the system and how it is structured as a generally carefully balanced mechanical framework? Why take this approach with what amount to the most godlike beings on Athas, when you do not take this approach with the other gods or godlike beings (powerful unique demons and devils, etc) within the system?
I do appreciate your responses, and they are insightful. Yes, I may disagree due to the potential conflict and complications with the narratives I may wish to weave. Nevertheless, it is appreciated. And, again, I think the Oba turned out spectacularly flavorful and fun an NPC, and quite look forward to Tectuktitlay. Even if I end up having to change him.
The real questions are, Why is a solo built to use allies?
Because if you don't use allies with a solo in 4th edition, the solo will get the crap smacked out of him/her/it in a handful of rounds by any party with an inkling of tactical thinking, no matter how many sweet powers he/she/it has.
This is one of the first lessons any DM learns when designing one's own encounters.
Is it possible that a few people will want multiple SKs in the same fight? Sure, and more power to you. But you're in the vast minority. Most people simply aren't going to use them that way.
So if the choice is between designing them to fit a rare scenario, or designing them to better fit how we see them as characters and how we anticipate them being used more often, the choice is going to be the latter every time.
I understand you don't care for it, I really do. I understand why. I'm not saying that you're doing it wrong or anything. ;) But ultimately, we had a choice to make, and we went with the option that we felt would present the best versions of the SKs for how we anticipated they'd be used. (Or at least, I assume that's what everyone else was thinking. I know it's what I was, and obviously development agreed enough not to dramatically change things.)
Lots of things might happen, but aren't likely. It's impossible to design for all of them.
Is it possible that a few people will want multiple SKs in the same fight? Sure, and more power to you. But you're in the vast minority. Most people simply aren't going to use them that way.
So if the choice is between designing them to fit a rare scenario, or designing them to better fit how we see them as characters and how we anticipate them being used more often, the choice is going to be the latter every time.
I understand you don't care for it, I really do. I understand why. I'm not saying that you're doing it wrong or anything. ;) But ultimately, we had a choice to make, and we went with the option that we felt would present the best versions of the SKs for how we anticipated they'd be used. (Or at least, I assume that's what everyone else was thinking. I know it's what I was, and obviously development agreed enough not to dramatically change things.)
I simply find it inconsistent with the rest of the 4E design philosophy as presented thus far. Why isn't this same approach taken to gods, to named devils, to named demons, to primordials, et al? What makes the SKs, the defacto "gods" of Dark Sun, different? If anything in the entirety of Athas are solos, it is Rajaat and the Champions (which includes Dregoth, the Dragon, and the SKs). Elites are a dramatic step down from solos. Quite noticably so.
I notice that you didn't respond to my second example. You can certainly try to assert that the vast majority won't want multiple SKs in one fight (I don't know that to be the case, so I'm afraid I cannot make such a sweeping statement either way). However, what about fighting multiple SKs within the same level as one another, or even within a level or two of one another? That is hardly likely to be uncommon. In this, scenario, too, Nibenay will be a complete and utter pushover compared to the Oba, or, quite likely, another SK who is a level 27, possibly even level 26 solo. Surely you don't ascribe to the belief that solos are actually meant to be fought alone most of the time? That...in actual play...doesn't work out very well at all. For the solo.
2) There are named demons and devils that are elites.
3) Even if two SKs are fought in the same level, if they're fought as presented--with the assumed number of reinforcements--the fights will be appropriate. What matters is the difficulty--and the challenge, and the fun--of the entire encounter. Nibenay won't seem to be a pushover because, if the DM does his job right in building the encounter, the entire encounter will still be harder than the entire encounter was with L-P.
Yes, if you have the PCs face Nibenay on his own, he'll be a pushover. But he's never meant to be used that way. (And no, I don't believe solos should be fought alone. I said that in so many words upthread. But they certainly should be fought with fewer and weaker allies than an elite.)
Really not sure what else I can say on the topic, honestly. I've explained the reasoning (or at least my understanding of the reasoning) behind the decisions that were made. Apparently, I'm not going to convince you it was the right way to go, and as I've said before, that's fine. But you're also not going to convince me it was a mistake. I like the fact that some of the SKs are solos and some are elites. (Which shouldn't be a surprise, since I introduced one of the first--if not the first--non-solo named devils in 4E, in one of the Codex of Betrayal articles in DDI. So obviously, I'm not a believer that all Big Bads have to be solos. ;))
Since it bothers you, by all means, feel free to swap Nibenay's and L-P's stat blocks. I promise you, I won't be upset. ;)
The real questions are, Why is a solo built to use allies?
Because if you don't use allies with a solo in 4th edition, the solo will get the crap smacked out of him/her/it in a handful of rounds by any party with an inkling of tactical thinking, no matter how many sweet powers he/she/it has.
Whatever you say, dude. A poorly built encounter is just that. Saying a solo sucks without allies is beyond wrong. You can min/max/optimize all you want in order to claim solos suck, all the while your DM isn't using terrain, hazards or traps and throwing you up against easy wins.
I'd love for you to join us the next time we attempt the medusa's lair. It's a heroic tier encounter and so far, harder than some of the epic tier encounters we've faced. No one's succeeded at Medusa's lair yet. It's a blast! I don't even want to think about what our DM is doing with Lolth. I don't think that encounter will be beatable, and it's completely balanced. (all the encounters are balanced, is what I mean. Just very, very hard because the DM is very clever)
PS MY favorite Dark Sun Pc from the early 90s was a Templar of Lalay Puy, the Oba Queen. Nibinay will be the focus of my upcoming Dark SUn campaign. So I am very happy to see them previewed. I am so excited for Dark Sun.
Whatever you say, dude. A poorly built encounter is just that. Saying a solo sucks without allies is beyond wrong. You can min/max/optimize all you want in order to claim solos suck, all the while your DM isn't using terrain, hazards or traps and throwing you up against easy wins.
Terrain, hazards, and traps are all "allies" of the solo.
A typical solo-as-written, by themselves, will be mudstomped by even a less-than-average party. Considering my entire point is that encounters with solos need to be made more interesting, I'm going to assume you agree, despite the condescending attitude toward... my abilities as both a DM and a player, I guess?
Terrain, hazards, and traps are all "allies" of the solo.
I can't even take you seriously at this point, if you really believe that. Maybe you're correct and I just don't know it. I'd love some examples of how allied effects work with terrain, hazards, traps and obstacles. Seriously. I'v never seen a trap spend a healing surge or gain a +2 to its next saving throw and I'v never seen terrain shift thanks to an allied effect. But I have seen traps and hazards harm solos. I have seen terrain work against solos. Does that make them allies of the pcs? No.
I'd love to learn something new.
A typical solo-as-written, by themselves, will be mudstomped by even a less-than-average party.
Again, a poorly designed encounter is just that.
Considering my entire point is that encounters with solos need to be made more interesting
I thought your point was solos suck without "allies" and without "allies" they're no challenge at all. My point is that if you need "allies" in order for your solo encounter to be interesting or challenging, then maybe you need to start thinking about terrain, hazards, traps and obstacles and less about adding more monsters. I'm not saying a solo with allies isn't interesting or fun, I'm saying it is not required to be interesting, fun or challenging. Something you obviously do not agree with considering your original reply.
, I'm going to assume you agree,
Then you would assume wrong, as I do not share your view on solos.
despite the condescending attitude toward... my abilities as both a DM and a player, I guess?
Actually, it was a mocking attitude because of your condescending and semi-insulting reply. I'm sure you're an excellent player and the perfect DM. (psst, that was patronizing, so you get my meaing clearly this time <--- That was condesending)
Because if you don't use allies with a solo in 4th edition, the solo will get the crap smacked out of him/her/it in a handful of rounds by any party with an inkling of tactical thinking, no matter how many sweet powers he/she/it has.
This is one of the first lessons any DM learns when designing one's own encounters.
I don't need extra bodies to throw at my players in order to make a solo encounter challenging. Solos do not need allies, although using allies isn't a bad thing, but it is not required. You obviously don't understand this from what you said in your reply. At least, that's what it appears to be.
For the record, I'm willing to have a civil discussion or we can keep going at each other like a couple of dysfunctional 6 yr olds. Your call.
Imagine WotC had called solos...big dudes. A final boss battle would contain minions, standards, elites, and a big dude. Maybe then it would have been easier to imagine using them with allies, since solo is such a misleading term. Mouseferatu was not the first to point this out, its an old idea from the boards, dating from the first year of 4e.
Except, flashback didn't point anything out other than solos without allies get beat down. Which is not true. A single creature (solo) can be very challenging when the encounter is built around the solos capabilities. As I said before, terrain, traps, hazards and obstacles are the answer to "solos suck alone". None of which are allies. At least, as far as I know, they are not allies. They're neutral. They play against everyone equally, pc or monster. I'v yet to see an allied effect target a trap, terrain, hazards or obstacles.
Not an effect, mind you. An "allied effect" (as in target ally) Which probably won't ever happen beyond the special circumstance, or the exception, as is known in 4e. Generally, none of those things are "allies".
Your confusion seems to derive from my use of the word "allies" as a plain English noun instead of the game-specific term referring to who or what can or cannot be the target of various powers. I apologize for the ambiguity.
To clarify: "traps and hazards are allies" only means that a 500 XP solo and 4 100 XP traps/hazards is the functional difficulty equivalent of a 500 XP solo and 4 100 XP regular monsters.
To reiterate: a cunning, tactically-savvy, omniscient DM wielding a solo-as-written without some manner of support purchased from the encounter budget or terrain-that-is-heavily-weighted-against-the-players-but-doesn't-grant-XP will get steamrolled by an average party of players that has any level of tactical aptitude. If the players are capable of wielding any level of control with any level of proficiency, the solo does not have the economy of actions to deal with an entire party without additional support.
To summarize: the poorly-named "Solo" monster type is designed to be run with support of some type. This support need not be monsters. It sounds like you or your DM does that, which is great, and does not contradict my point.
Fans of the setting will always want to discuss these kind of things, and while "I changed it into my game" approachs will probably be common and fully respectable, at the moment "officially" the Oba is a lot stronger than Nibenay [emphasis mine], and it will be like that by default for most games.
I do not understand this. A monster is not inherently solo or elite or standard or minion, he's one of those things at a time for the purpose of an encounter. In the best of worlds all MM1-MM3 monsters would be in quadruplet, but instead they gave us guidelines in the DMGs on upgrading and downgrading monster roles. I repeat, not upgrading or downgrading the monster, but his role. It's what Mouseferatu acknowledged/pointed out earlier.
And the reason you don't understand is that you're taking a very advanced (and allow me, reactive - as in, "I'll rule 0 everything that doesn't make sense") approach to the game.
What I'm saying, on a much simplier scale, is that the new blood learning about SKs for the first time will think that the Oba is a LOT more powerful than Nibenay. That Nibenay is the sly political genious while the Oba is the fearsome godlike power, and they will think that in a direct confrontation, Nibenay would flee.
And that leads me to the point, Mouseferatu.
I understand the decision you took when choosing the solo/elite format, I simply disagree with it. It probably benefits the game-ish aspect of the, uhm, game - allowing greater variety in confrontations - but it really hurts the consistency. Understanding abstractions like lvl 21 minions with 1 hp is much easier than understanding abstractions like having several supposedly similar beings being so massively different.
More importantly, and I think this is the real "offender" here, is the names picked. If you made a handful of SKs solos and most of them elites, I would have applauded and approved and cheered the smart design.
Making the most powerful SK an elite and one of the "average" ones one of the most powerful solos in 4th edition history will certainly confuse the audience.
Bear in mind that I have complete faith in what you're doing with the new DS, and I'm completely supportive of an approach that makes the Oba more powerful than Nibenay in the new "canon" - but that needs to be said and supported.
I support the idea of a "not all SKs are equally powerful" approach. I do not support the idea of a "Nibenay is as strong as the Oba but he goes down in a round of dailies because it's a game" approach.
Plus, while I may just assume you're just more creative than Nibenay's designer, I think your writeup of Lalai-Puy just shows that creative freedom on solos leads to much more unique beings. Your Oba is fantastic, she's full of unique and vicious abilities that will force the players to adapt or fail, and will certainly make her feared.
I could rename Nibenay a Shadowscarred Otyugh and put him in a run of the mill encounter and he wouldn't particularly stand out. It's not just that he's not powerful, he doesn't tap his creative potential in my eyes.
We're discussing the least of problems - restatting mobs is so easy in 4th edition - but I think this is a case of one exceptionally well done writeup making a fairly uninspired one stand out like a sore thumb.
1) While the SKs may be the "closest thing to gods" in Athas, they're not gods. (Actually, in 4E, they may not even be the closest things, if any of the primordials are still around. I'm not saying they are, mind you. I'm saying if.)
*Does the little happy dance.*
I'd really LOVE to see the compendium feature more powerful solos than the SKs. All in all, the SKs rule a small portion of Athas, and we keep being told that out there there's something so bad that the SKs may be a blessing rather than a curse.
If my game ever gets to epic, I'm fully willing to see my PCs leave the Tyr region and travel to new lands filled with primordials so big that dragons make nests in their nostrils.
What I'm saying, on a much simplier scale, is that the new blood learning about SKs for the first time will think that the Oba is a LOT more powerful than Nibenay. That Nibenay is the sly political genious while the Oba is the fearsome godlike power, and they will think that in a direct confrontation, Nibenay would flee.
...and I do not care about these people. Like all other players and DMs (me and you, once), with time they will learn the nuances of the game and catch the differences and see older material with a new understanding. It's an ungoing process that never quite ends, of this I'm sure you're also aware. They are even welcome to ask questions, and we will make it easier for them to understand.
What's more to say on this subject?
Wow, what's with the crazy burst of hostility?
Dude, honestly, no hostility or anything like that. I was just being a sarcastic ass. I suppose it's impossible to tell through text. Yes, my post was aggressive, but not hostile.
Your confusion seems to derive from my use of the word "allies" as a plain English noun instead of the game-specific term
Yup, because when you say "allies" and your talking about the game, I can only interpret your meaning in the context of the game. I can't remember a single allied effect that targets traps, hazards or obstacles and allied effect never target terrain (IIRC). Although all of those things can be targets of effects, just not allied effects.
To reiterate: a cunning, tactically-savvy, omniscient DM wielding a solo-as-written without some manner of support purchased from the encounter budget or terrain-that-is-heavily-weighted-against-the-players-but-doesn't-grant-XP will get steamrolled by an average party of players that has any level of tactical aptitude. If the players are capable of wielding any level of control with any level of proficiency, the solo does not have the economy of actions to deal with an entire party without additional support.
Again, this is simply not a fact. It is your opinion and your opinion is supported by many. But it is not fact. And by what you say, you seem to be cleverly masking that you mean if anyone gets beat by a lone solo with no allies, they must not be very good at the game or know how to play very well. Which simply isn't the case. Solos have the ability to outlast pcs through greater HP, they have (usually) either great damage potential or serious control functions and can be capable of dropping one or two of the stronger pcs in a few rounds.
Again, while I do see your point and I'v seen what you're talking about play out in games, you're not correct. Solos don't always get beat without any support (allies of any kind) and enough players have been sorely beaten down by solos that they (solos) do exactly what they're suppose to. (provide a difficult event but lose in the end) Monsters are suppose to lose, solos are suppose to lose after hurting the pcs. But Solos can and sometimes do, win.
To summarize: the poorly-named "Solo" monster type is designed to be run with support of some type. This support need not be monsters. It sounds like you or your DM does that, which is great, and does not contradict my point.
And this is where I do not agree. The majority of solos are designed to fight alone. Solos are often considered "bosses" and it's not uncommon to fight a solo as an n+4 encounter. Dms and even designers can claim whatever they want, but the solo description and not the name of the creature type says otherwise. (dmg pg 55) Where is specifically says it was built to fight alone.
This has never been an issue with the name. I don't know where anyone comes up with "you're confused because it's called a solo" which is amusing. The confusion comes from people claiming what you just claimed. Because you're describing a possible way to fight solos, but not what solos are built for. They're (majority) not built to have allies of any kind. They're built to fight alone. As an n+4 encounter, a solo has the advantage over the players. As a level n encounter, it's a fair fight.
As a level n-1/-2 you can begin throwing in additional "allies" to increase the encounter level and as a level n-4/-5 solo, you can completely go crazy with the encounter design, as the solo ends up being similar to an elite of a slightly lower level than the pcs. This is where you can start throwing multiple solos in the same encounter. This all assumes 5 pcs. 4 pcs changes the challenge of a single solo, as does 6 pcs.
Average players using unoptimized characters will find solos challenging if the DM plays a solo to be challenging. Those same players will find solos easy if the DM plays a solo to be easy. Optimized characters can find anything easy and usually require specific adjustments to every encounter in order to find anything challenging. (usually with a n+1 or n+2 adjustment)
So, while there are many different ways you can design a solo encounter, with traps, hazards or other monsters, those are not how solos were designed by default. People can argue this, as anything, but reading the description of a solo monster, the book tells us the purpose of a solo. Playing against solo monsters with unoptimized characters shows us that solos can be very difficult if the DM plays them to be such. No adjustments needed.
So, either wotc screwed up with not only the description of what a solo monster is, but also with the design of most solo monsters, or people play with optimized characters while their DM runs solo monsters without adjustments. In my experience, it's not the former.
Just for fun, try out a n+5 solo encounter without being optimized and tell your DM to pull no punches. Run the same encounter 3 times and compare notes. I bet you'd probably end up with a TPK at least once, if you manage to defeat the encounter, give yourself a pat on the back and kiss your dice. Then run an encounter with five level n-5 solos without optimized characters and tell your DM to "try and kill you". As someone who playtests a lot of monsters and character builds, I have a ton of fun with the above encounters.
Thanks for the discussion, we will have to "agree to disagree" and again, no hostility, dude. It's all astral diamonds between us.
If Nibenay's personality/style suggests that he should encounter the PCs with more allies at his side, whereas Lalali-Puy's personality/style suggests that she's likely to have fewer, then for this to work mechanically, he needs to be an elite while she needs to be a solo.
I'm not quite with you here.
By making Nibenay an Elite, what the mechanics are saying is that (a) Nibenay will be encountered with more allies at his side and (b) Nibenay needs those allies in order to threaten the PCs. This latter point inarguably flies in the face of the established setting fluff. The seclusion which provides Nibenay's title of "Shadow King" is due in no small part to the sorcerer-king's markedly inhuman appearance. This draconic appearance (retained in 4E, as evidenced by the illustration accompanying Nibenay's stats) is the direct result of Nibenay's advancement on the path to dragonhood. Quite simply, the more dragonlike your appearance, the more magically and psionically powerful you are. Nibenay is the most dragonlike sorcerer-king, according to the known setting fluff. Therefore, Nibenay must be the most magically and psionically powerful sorcerer-king.
After all, if the designers' intent is that Nibenay be encountered with more allies, then why not make him a regular Level 29 monster? That maximizes the amount of allies that can appear at the Shadow King's side. He can have a fire team of templars, pet defilers, or gladiator-bodyguards in the fight. Nibenay is an Elite monster precisely because he's not a regular Level 29 monster. He's one of the most powerful beings in the Tablelands. Once we've agreed on that point then, as the saying goes, we're just haggling over the price. Based on the known setting fluff, it's very difficult to argue that, of all the sorcerer-kings in the Tablelands, Nibenay is the one who is only marginally tougher than any other Level 29 monster. Bumping a monster to Elite or Solo status is a tacit, mechanical admission that the monster is more powerful than its peers. Nibenay should be the benchmark for powerful Level 29 Athasian monsters, not the mid-range. I will be very curious to see what Level 29 Athasian monsters to receive Solo status in the Creature Catalog.
If the intent is to have more shadow wives (templars), pet defilers, or elite guards involved in a battle with Nibenay, then that effect can be achieved with minions without diminishing the individual power of a sorcerer-king. If you still want to highlight the narrative of Nibenay being surrounded by powerful allies in battle, then go through the trouble of discounting the minions in the narrative, not Nibenay. If the PCs fought the Most Shadowy Wives in the early epic tier as regular Level 21 Soldiers, for example, then bring the Most Shadowy Wives back and restat them as Level 29 Soldier-Minions for the fight with Nibenay, the Level 29 Solo. By the time a character reaches the mid-epic tier in 4E, the player has sufficient meta-game knowledge to know that Elites aren't as strong or powerful as Solos. 4E pounds this concept into the heads of DM and players alike, since so much of what defines "strength" and "power" in 4E rests on the ability to survive and dominate combat. When Nibenay succumbs to literally half of the damage that the Oba does in the course of the fight, a 4E player has been trained to think that Nibenay is weaker than the Oba.
So, either wotc screwed up with not only the description of what a solo monster is, but also with the design of most solo monsters, or people play with optimized characters while their DM runs solo monsters without adjustments. In my experience, it's not the former.
It's not that they screwed up, but rather than it used to be true, but is no longer, as player characters experienced power creep that monsters did not share (prior to MM3, naturally).
Just for fun, try out a n+5 solo encounter without being optimized and tell your DM to pull no punches. Run the same encounter 3 times and compare notes. I bet you'd probably end up with a TPK at least once, if you manage to defeat the encounter, give yourself a pat on the back and kiss your dice. Then run an encounter with five level n-5 solos without optimized characters and tell your DM to "try and kill you". As someone who playtests a lot of monsters and character builds, I have a ton of fun with the above encounters.
I was going to go back and mention that there are plenty of ways to make these encounters challenging, including a n+x encounter, after a couple milestones, with a lot of hostile terrain (which inflates the difficulty without taking out of the budget), and/or using the new damage expressions or particular controller-heavy templates, etc.
As someone similarly self-described, I still maintain that it takes several of those factors to mitigate the disparity between a solo and a party of PCs.
I guess let's take it a little more outside the realm of anecdotal experience: I don't feel that an n-level solo is the same level of challenge as 5 n-level regular monsters, but rather requires additional support of one type or another to match the intended challenge level.
Thanks for the discussion, we will have to "agree to disagree" and again, no hostility, dude. It's all astral diamonds between us.
We cool, we cool.
If Nibenay's personality/style suggests that he should encounter the PCs with more allies at his side, whereas Lalali-Puy's personality/style suggests that she's likely to have fewer, then for this to work mechanically, he needs to be an elite while she needs to be a solo.
I'm not quite with you here.
By making Nibenay an Elite, what the mechanics are saying is that (a) Nibenay will be encountered with more allies at his side and (b) Nibenay needs those allies in order to threaten the PCs. This latter point inarguably flies in the face of the established setting fluff. The seclusion which provides Nibenay's title of "Shadow King" is due in no small part to the sorcerer-king's markedly inhuman appearance. This draconic appearance (retained in 4E, as evidenced by the illustration accompanying Nibenay's stats) is the direct result of Nibenay's advancement on the path to dragonhood. Quite simply, the more dragonlike your appearance, the more magically and psionically powerful you are. Nibenay is the most dragonlike sorcerer-king, according to the known setting fluff. Therefore, Nibenay must be the most magically and psionically powerful sorcerer-king.
After all, if the designers' intent is that Nibenay be encountered with more allies, then why not make him a regular Level 29 monster? That maximizes the amount of allies that can appear at the Shadow King's side. He can have a fire team of templars, pet defilers, or gladiator-bodyguards in the fight. Nibenay is an Elite monster precisely because he's not a regular Level 29 monster. He's one of the most powerful beings in the Tablelands. Once we've agreed on that point then, as the saying goes, we're just haggling over the price. Based on the known setting fluff, it's very difficult to argue that, of all the sorcerer-kings in the Tablelands, Nibenay is the one who is only marginally tougher than any other Level 29 monster. Bumping a monster to Elite or Solo status is a tacit, mechanical admission that the monster is more powerful than its peers. Nibenay should be the benchmark for powerful Level 29 Athasian monsters, not the mid-range. I will be very curious to see what Level 29 Athasian monsters to receive Solo status in the Creature Catalog.
If the intent is to have more shadow wives (templars), pet defilers, or elite guards involved in a battle with Nibenay, then that effect can be achieved with minions without diminishing the individual power of a sorcerer-king. If you still want to highlight the narrative of Nibenay being surrounded by powerful allies in battle, then go through the trouble of discounting the minions in the narrative, not Nibenay. If the PCs fought the Most Shadowy Wives in the early epic tier as regular Level 21 Soldiers, for example, then bring the Most Shadowy Wives back and restat them as Level 29 Soldier-Minions for the fight with Nibenay, the Level 29 Solo. By the time a character reaches the mid-epic tier in 4E, the player has sufficient meta-game knowledge to know that Elites aren't as strong or powerful as Solos. 4E pounds this concept into the heads of DM and players alike, since so much of what defines "strength" and "power" in 4E rests on the ability to survive and dominate combat. When Nibenay succumbs to literally half of the damage that the Oba does in the course of the fight, a 4E player has been trained to think that Nibenay is weaker than the Oba.
Absolutely, it is a perception issue. The design team can say it isn't about making the fluff-stronger character more mechanically tough as well until they are blue in the face. Time after time after time, people's perceptions will be colored by what is actually presented. The design team can write in, explictly, that Nibenay is the most powerful SK in the Tablelands all day, and twice on Sunday, but the player-base is more likely to reach their conclusion based on the mechanical reality presented, IMHO.
Not to mention what I stated earlier: Nibenay is not the most likely to fight with allies.
Abalach-Re of Raam is the most likely to do what this version of Nibenay does: fight with a bunch of underlings surrounding her while she plays support, hides, etc. She is the one who keeps herself dug in behind layers of bodyguards, templars, etc, everywhere she goes.
Hamanu, too, fulfills this sort of role much better, albeit if leading an army or one of his elite half-giant units inside of Urik. He is the consumate leader type, knowing exactly what to drop where, who to attack when, in a manner that best supports the troops he leads in to battle.
If you read the fluff, the Shadow King is the most likely to fight through proxies. He is the most likely to remain in complete seclusion, and allow the massive, efficient bureaucracy he has carefully constructed over millennia take care of most matters without having to show his face in any way, shape or form. Once Nibenay deems you worthy of showing himself, he is there to take care of what his underlings could not accomplish. He is a dramatic entrance making, behind the scenes manipulating events without getting his hands dirty, leading to an "If you want something done right, do it yourself." sort of personality. He is not a "Get those fools, my minions!!!" sort. Fighting through proxies until you make an appearance is quite a bit different from supporting a bunch of allies as your main means of engagement. It is indicative of a very different personality than the one we've been presented with.
Yup, because when you say "allies" and your talking about the game, I can only interpret your meaning in the context of the game. I can't remember a single allied effect that targets traps, hazards or obstacles and allied effect never target terrain (IIRC). Although all of those things can be targets of effects, just not allied effects.
Dude, that's awesome! I'll design a unique BBEG's powers to affect allied traps, hazards, and terrain found in the specific encounter in which he's found.
Yup, because when you say "allies" and your talking about the game, I can only interpret your meaning in the context of the game. I can't remember a single allied effect that targets traps, hazards or obstacles and allied effect never target terrain (IIRC). Although all of those things can be targets of effects, just not allied effects.
Dude, that's awesome! I'll design a unique BBEG's powers to affect allied traps, hazards, and terrain found in the specific encounter in which he's found.
That's what makes homebrew a wonderful thing. Although I'm still trying to find a precedent for a monster's allied effect targeting traps, hazards, obstacles or terrain. If any of those things can officially be considered "allies" then something should exist. Although, official doesn't mean jack when it comes to homebrew.
I could completely picture a danger room like encounter area with traps, hazards and terrain reacting to specific abilities of a monster. Would be the perfect encounter for a solo warforged.
If you read the fluff, the Shadow King is the most likely to fight through proxies. He is the most likely to remain in complete seclusion, and allow the massive, efficient bureaucracy he has carefully constructed over millennia take care of most matters without having to show his face in any way, shape or form. Once Nibenay deems you worthy of showing himself, he is there to take care of what his underlings could not accomplish. He is a dramatic entrance making, behind the scenes manipulating events without getting his hands dirty, leading to an "If you want something done right, do it yourself." sort of personality. He is not a "Get those fools, my minions!!!" sort. Fighting through proxies until you make an appearance is quite a bit different from supporting a bunch of allies as your main means of engagement. It is indicative of a very different personality than the one we've been presented with.
I likewise believed that Nibenay would be more of a Lurker than an Artillery - but I'm not the one writing the books. Anyways... the fluff describes him as "changed". So, I'll go with this fluff for now and hope to see another more Lurker-y version of Nibenay in the future.
In that sense all of the published adventures are homebrew, since a lot of each encounter's props work in the favor of the BBEG and cannot be used/tapped by the PCs: magic obelisks, teleportation circles working in unique ways, spawning pools from which minions can be called forth as minor actions, etc.
Alluring Obelisks are a perfect example of how a trap can be used to aid a solo. But, the Alluring Obelisk isn't an "ally" of Orcus and Orcus has no allied effects that trigger off of the Obelisks. Being immune to the effects of something doesn't make it your ally. Since it's in an official product, it's not homebrew.
I'm pretty certain traps, hazards, obstacles and terrain cannot be allies as they don't fit the brief description of "willing", so far I'v only gotten one reply over in the Q&A forum, so I'm still waiting, but so far it's a "no". I'm still looking though. So, while those things can fill in for allies, they are not, by the limited definition, actual allies.
Specific can always beat the general rule, but the general rule is more often encountered and I'v yet to find anything supporting allied effects targeting traps, hazards, terrain, obstacles or being triggered by those things. Although effects can target them and probably trigger them. It's allied effects I'm looking for. Granted, I'm not looking that hard, as I'm pretty sure I won't find anything.
But if you're looking for such a precedent: the description of Blast Pods states they can distinguish between allies and enemies. A Muck Tentacle is triggered when "an ally" speaks a command word. Other traps only mention "enemies of X" or "allies of Y."
On the other hand a BBEG could have powers that affect props. Something akin to this: every power it's got has a secondary effect that mentions one particular prop on the field, allowing it to shoot at/affect the PCs/move X squares. They might be small flying stone tetrahedrons with crackling black lightning that can immobilize all within 1 square and inflict ongoing necrotic damage.
Traps and Hazards, to work with a BBEG, would need to be designed from scratch, or a conragous DM might add an addendum to existing ones (without knowing how it would affect the XP budget).
On the other hand a BBEG could have powers that affect props. Something akin to this: every power it's got has a secondary effect that mentions one particular prop on the field, allowing it to shoot at/affect the PCs/move X squares. They might be small flying stone tetrahedrons with crackling black lightning that can immobilize all within 1 square and inflict ongoing necrotic damage.
The core problem of making a solo BBEG fight work isn't making it balanced, it's making it fun.
Solos are, in my opinion, the most interesting monsters, but making them work right is hard. They got plenty of issues - first and foremost being hit point sponges after the party depleted dailies and encounter powers - and any additional content should be tailored by DMs to make sure the flow of the fight is kept interesting and fun.
Traps and hazard work exceptionally well if they're tailored around the party's strength and weaknesses - most solos are actually balanced even alone, just boring, and as such, environment can spice things up.
Putting dangerous slopes in a fight against a solo with plenty of push and slide effects can be great as long as the party has tools to turn the tables and either counter the hazards or use them against the solo. The goal should striking some balance where the environment becomes a playground that highlights the solo's abilities, promotes and rewards the players' creativity and most specific tools, and also distracts from the attack-attack-attack-at will-at will routine that later rounds would become.
Traps and Hazards, to work with a BBEG, would need to be designed from scratch, or a conragous DM might add an addendum to existing ones (without knowing how it would affect the XP budget).
Yeah, there are a couple that work like this presently. Their powers refer to "allies of X" or "enemies of X" (see Mind-Control Pillars).
Those are in DMG2?
I'd need to check, but I think in the original introductory 4th edition adventure "Keep on the Shadowfell" there were several "hazards" (rune circles) that worked along the lines of "while standing here use a standard action to heal allies" or "use a standard action to harm enemies". I'd need to check back, but I seem to recall something very similar to what Jon is speaking of.
Those are in DMG2?
No, Dungeon 158. It's a hazard built to work with a specific creature, its powers target "Each of Gondra's enemies in burst."
Force Pods (which can "distinguish between enemies and allies") are from Dungeon 159, and I'm inclined to think it's just an odd choice of wording to produce a desired effect.
The magic circles in KotS are "Features of the Area" (rather than traps or hazards) and strictly affect Kalarel and undead (which would, both amusingly and iconically, also apply to Revenant players). Interestingly, the Thing in the Portal is a Hazard that refers to "opponents" though (not enemies, mind you).
Perusing the traps in the compendium, most traps target ANY creature, or use keywords to limit their targets, like "when a non-demon creature" or "each non-evil creature in burst."
This is way off-topic, but I'm enjoying it at least.
While it's not exactly what I was hoping for, the Mind Control Pillars of Gondra is close. If Gondra had some sort of allied effect that triggered off the traps actions, it would be perfect. But it doesn't help that the players can gain control of the trap and turn it against Gondra. More of a weapon than an ally. Although, that is yet another perfect example of how traps can work with monsters!
Force Pods on the other hand, seriously suggest that they can be allies of creatures. It can tell the difference between enemies and allies, and the encounter includes creatures. So I think we have a winner here. While "allies" tend to be creatures, I think force pods could be considered creatures that are also traps. While there is still no allied effects triggered off them, I'd still say they could be allies.
It might be a stretch for some, as you could say force pods consider only other force pods allies. But I don't see any sort of movement for the traps, so I'd say that's good enough to support the astral stalker and larva mage as allies of the force pods. At the very least, it's a precedent for traps considering creatures, allies! I don't know if the creatures consider the traps, allies, but I'm willing to overlook that for now.
Those are in DMG2?
I'd need to check, but I think in the original introductory 4th edition adventure "Keep on the Shadowfell" there were several "hazards" (rune circles) that worked along the lines of "while standing here use a standard action to heal allies" or "use a standard action to harm enemies". I'd need to check back, but I seem to recall something very similar to what Jon is speaking of.
Those would be props, aka doodads.