I just noted the increase of complaints on how a group eats single monsters too easily and just peeked in my 4E DM guide (the blasphemy!) to see whether there couldn't be something useful...
4E solo monster is apparently given hp well beyond it's HD (4-5 times more), flat bonus to it's saves and AC (but not to all saves - I think that it's correctly encouraging to leave a soft spot for PCs to exploit) and the DM is suggested to add an extra standard action every round or to give more at-will powers. Advancing the monster by adding two quick templates should also do the tricky according to that book, but I think that putting the advanced and giant templates would work in PF without some further tweaks IMO.
So... How would you make a quick fix solo monster?
I'd consider these:
a) Flat multiplication of the hp in addition to advanced template (x3 should be enough tome make the BBEG last quite a few rounds). It can't hurt IMO if the monster is about to withstand a concentrated assoult of the whole party.
and perhaps some of these
- Double feats - Using feats like Quicken Spell-like Ability to save some actions for something else. And of course Combat reflexes and cleave for the same thing. Toughness and various focus feats would also work well to fine-tune the result IMO.
- Giving big monsters area attacks, using crush and tail sweep and breath dragon special attacks for inspiration (giant throwing boulders that will roll in a line or shatter to a cloud of sharp fragments for example).
- Liberal distribution of potions in monster treasure/equipment, especially haste and other such stuff, but I'd be careful with things giving just bonuses, like Heroism.
I wouldn't try that second standard action without a few mock rounds that the DM would roll with the individual monster before the session.
Another solution that stroke me was using the monster as it stands, but instead exchanging the monster type for this.
There are some good ideas in 4.0. In particular, the idea of solo monsters vs group monsters, where solo monsters are able to make up for the action economy losses you'd have with only one monster in 3.x. It is a very good idea. Another possibility would just be giving a monster two initiative counts, though I think that could be really wonky and dangerous.
The economy of actions is what hurts the most. From playing RL I have noticed that big single monster fights include something that ties up the players action. Either the BBEG has some extra mooks on summon, or has a terrain advantage, or traps, etc. They also tend to able to dish out enough damage that the fighter types think twice about soaking a full attack from them. Templates are a good way to accomplish this, but I would avoid going overboard without some valid story reason. Call me a purist, but i would wonder why a super-owlbear wasn't a major threat to the countryside if he didn't have backstory and local nickname.
I'm working on a modular construct BBEG. Think War of the Worlds war machine.
Each leg is a creature with its own actions, with limitations on their movement in relation to the central component.
I'll post up the rules for how it operates once it's finished.
You could easily build a 'boss' template.
I'd throw in double actions, and double hit points to start.
To avoid "AAAND now it's the boss's turn", where you kill the closest PC, I'd use iterative initiative, like people do with multiple attacks.
Ex) Roll initiative: Spells go on initiative, bite attack on init -5, claws on init -10.
Without something like that you'll have problems, like Sakura said.
As someone who plays 4e, I feel the need to point out that single monster fights are still typically a bad idea thanks to the action economy. The only time single monster fights really work is when they can either shut down/disable members of the party, or when they have a whole lot of attacks that hit a really big area to make sure all the players are getting hit.
A somewhat easier way to do it is simply allow the "boss" monster to have multiple actions.
|
I just did this, with custom made monsters based off Metroid Prime.
Each PC got an extra standard action per turn, and all boss monsters got Dylan Actions (a la Demogorgon).
It worked out quote well, with 10 fights taking up about 75% of our 9 or so hour game day.
With more players, I'd lose the extra action, but keep boss monsters dual action abilities.
|
I just noted the increase of complaints on how a group eats single monsters too easily and just peeked in my 4E DM guide (the blasphemy!) to see whether there couldn't be something useful...
While I don't traverse the 4e forums (no interest), gamers in my local area complain about solos being too easy or simply a matter of 'whittling down the HP'. I wouldn't suggest the use of solos except in corner cases (such as BBEG escapes from previous encounter to return after quaffing a few potions).
The best advice I can give for the Group vs. BBEG battle is - Add more creatures. Never do 1 vs party if you can help it. A twin, a couple younger ones, or just good old mooks will make the encounter much better.
I have also noticed that if you are doing a single encounter for the day, the party can beat EL + 4 or 5 stuff without too much chance of a character getting killed.
|
|
Phrenic Beholder.
Every turn, negates all the magic you can throw at him, can Telekinesis, Finger of Death, Disintegrate, Flesh to Stone, and Charm different targets.
Then, he gets his Psionic abilities.
Against the right kind of party, say, no more than 5 PC's, this is pretty much the only kind of single monster I'd put against a decent threat group.
I am always a fan of Clones, Simulacra, Projected Images, simple dopplegangers, real Doppelgangers, and allies with Ressurection.
Nothing says "I love you" like a thought-dead, hated BBEG, with a serious jonesing for PC blood. Oh by the way, he legitimately knows the party's tactics, and is a perfect candidate for templates.
Savage Tide has a particularly good version of this enemy, it's one of the reasons I enjoyed running it so much.
Yea, we all heard that for single party vs monster use more monsters instead thing over and over, but I'm looking for a quick fix when this solution is simply inappropriate. Sometimes it really is and I can't give every hermit a bunch of summoning scrolls, a pack of dogs or something like that.
Good that you mentioned the environment and traps, I forgot to mention those. Even a simple villain can throw around a smoke-screen of sorts (smoke sticks are your friends), effecively limiting the party's actions, or start a fire, if the wind blows in PCs direction.
It's also a good idea to give the creature some lockdown ability. Casters have them built-in, but what about the others? Certainly, large wolf can trip and move away, giants have awesome blow, basilisk can turn into stone...
Toward the multi-segmented monster. I's a cool concept for really large creatures, but it's also time-intensive to create such creature with no default guide-line. It certainly isn't the quick solution you'd want to rely upon if your group suddenly encountered a single monster and you didn't want to give them a cakewalk.
I don't want to push the creature forward too much, as it would massacre the party, but I still want it to be able to put up some fight and drain resources as it should even against those action economy odds.
Good ideas so far, keep it up people! :)
Well, if all else fails, let the monster move more then once ;p
Lots of ideas here, but I know that all of my players (for a total of 10 players so far since 4e came out) unimously agreed that one of the things they disliked the most about it was different rules for good guys and bad guys.
So while it's all fine and dandy to say "Let the monster go twice" or "let the monster break this rule or that rule", there are just some groups where that's not an option.
What if the monster is a big dumb old hill giant? Or a lumbering T-Rex? Or just a 10th level human fighter?
What then do I tell the players when that "monster" goes twice per round? "It's a Lightning-Warp-T-Rex" isn't going to cut it. Or, it might cut it once but absolutely not twice. And when they ask why a 10th level fighter can take two sets of actions each round and they cannot, I better have a reason that is better than "Just cuz I say so."
For the groups who want a single set of rules, rules they know, rules they can point to in the book, just making up non-rule broken stuff on the fly would be very disatisfying to say the least.
So, at least for me, if I'm going to use a solo encounter, it's just going to be big enough to handle itself. I won't attack a 4th level party with a solo owlbear. Maybe a solo troll might work. And I won't attack a 10th level group with a solo 10th level fighter. He will bring friends, or he'll be more like 15th level, or both.
It's not rule-breaking to assume the monster rolled an average of 7 on all its d8 HD. Improbable, but within the rules. It's not rule-breaking to make that owlbear just a little bigger (a couple extra HD and a bonus to STR and CON). It's an alpha owlbear, a pack-leader, the strongest owlbear in the forest. Might even legitimately advance it per the rules in the Bestiary.
And if all else fails, the solo encounter will be well prepared. Ambushes, environment, traps, buffs, etc. Anything and everything I can think of within the rules to give him enough advantage to last a few rounds and challenge the group.
But I won't, and many other DMs won't (I personally can name 3 other DMs that I have gamed with in the last 3 years and they all feel exactly the same way - counting me that's 4 out of 4) simply make it a warp-owlbear that full-attacks three times per round and spits lightning bolts out of its eyeballs.
What I'm saying here is that the game we're actually playing, Pathfinder, has plenty of things we can do, all within the Pathfinder rules, to beef up solo encounters. There is no need to drag in stuff from other systems, and if we do, there is definitely no need to throw the Pathfinder rules out the window while we're at it.
Lots of ideas here, but I know that all of my players (for a total of 10 players so far since 4e came out) unimously agreed that one of the things they disliked the most about it was different rules for good guys and bad guys.
So while it's all fine and dandy to say "Let the monster go twice" or "let the monster break this rule or that rule", there are just some groups where that's not an option.
What if the monster is a big dumb old hill giant? Or a lumbering T-Rex? Or just a 10th level human fighter?
What then do I tell the players when that "monster" goes twice per round? "It's a Lightning-Warp-T-Rex" isn't going to cut it. Or, it might cut it once but absolutely not twice. And when they ask why a 10th level fighter can take two sets of actions each round and they cannot, I better have a reason that is better than "Just cuz I say so."
For the groups who want a single set of rules, rules they know, rules they can point to in the book, just making up non-rule broken stuff on the fly would be very disatisfying to say the least.
So, at least for me, if I'm going to use a solo encounter, it's just going to be big enough to handle itself. I won't attack a 4th level party with a solo owlbear. Maybe a solo troll might work. And I won't attack a 10th level group with a solo 10th level fighter. He will bring friends, or he'll be more like 15th level, or both.
It's not rule-breaking to assume the monster rolled an average of 7 on all its d8 HD. Improbable, but within the rules. It's not rule-breaking to make that owlbear just a little bigger (a couple extra HD and a bonus to STR and CON). It's an alpha owlbear, a pack-leader, the strongest owlbear in the forest. Might even legitimately advance it per the rules in the Bestiary.
And if all else fails, the solo encounter will be well prepared. Ambushes, environment, traps, buffs, etc. Anything and everything I can think of within the rules to give him enough advantage to last a few rounds and challenge the group.
But I won't, and many other...
Sing it brother!! I was speechless when i saw people advocating giving monsters/npcs extra attacks, etc.
I'd walk.
Aye, but just advancing the monster is somewhat problematic as the borders among easy/challenging/TPK are a bit closer to each other than we may like. Two sets of actions are certainly problematic and untried, butthey certainly have their place here for completeness. Personally I'm looking for a quick and dirty solution that I can occasionally pull out of my toolbox when I need it. Such things should be simple and relatively TPK proof, because the need to fudge heavily hurts the game in the end.
Another thing I'd try is slaping sime damage resistance on the monster, which effectively expands the hp pool, but it also favors heavy hitters. Fast healing and regeneration are also possible, but jus like many things tey aren't always appropriate.
|
Are you guys really having this much issue with action economy?
I've run to 10th level the Shattered City, and most fights are "Solo" fights. The party is 4 guys (very recently added 2 cohorts, but they are ineffective multi-class guys from the back of the book). And while I have only had 1 death in 10 levels I have had several fights that came VERY close to TPKs.
Now with that said it does seem to be easier "of late". I have considered throwing in "chump fodder" or upping stats; I just worry about the whole "how much is too much" aspect of that.
Max hp for a solo isn't unreasonable. Those hit dice are there for a reason.
Area effect attacks in the form of some granted magical ability, spells which are beefed by a deal with a devil or a magic item with 3 or 4 charges left on it. The skies the limit.
Finally, a theft from JRPG's. End bosses with multiple forms. Intellect devourers are inherantly built for this. I once had the ghost of a dwarven brawler jumping from body to body (the players had to knock out each one, innocent NPC's and all) until he ran out of possessie's and the party faced his ultimate large sized incorpreal form.
All this is well within the boundry of believable rules. No one should have reason to female dog.
EDIT: it's called the BBEG for a reason. If it couldn't take out a handful of mooks by itself then why would it be in charge?
I dont typically run 1 BBEG against a party due to larger than standard party size in our groups and the action economy issues brought up by it. When I do occasionally run one, typically the base creature is CR+2 or +3 and then I add templates as appropriate, for truly Big BEG I add the advanced and Giant templates, for caster types I typically add the advanced template twice. I finish them up by adding Ability Focus to one of their strong abilities if I feel its justified and then maximize their HP.
Sometimes it goes really well, other times they get dusted quickly (instant death 20,20,confirm optional rule seems to do in quite a few, but it makes for good cinematics).
Here're the solo rules I use (taken from Rewarding Roleplaying):
Solos
Solo creatures are the most fearsome monsters the PCs will ever face. Solo creatures, by definition, must be encountered alone. Solos have abilities specifically designed to allow them to overcome the “economy of actions” and compete against a party of adventurers. If allies arrive to assist a solo creature, downgrade it to an elite. To create a solo creature:
* Multiply its hit points by the number of PCs it is facing (e.g. four PCs, 4 x hit points)
* Start the creature with 2 Action Dice per PC it is facing. These Action Dice function as described above.
* Do not adjust the creature’s CR.
Just as with elites, creatures can gain or lose their solo status as you see fit, depending on the needs of the encounter. Certainly, if a solo is not fighting alone, you should reduce it to elite status.
When you create a solo by increasing its hit points, create one normal hit point pool for each PC, with the creature’s normal number of hit points in each pool. If a PC drops, scratch off that entire chunk of bonus hit points unless doing so will render the solo unconscious or dead.
The Action Deficit
Even with the modifications above, a solo creature still faces one major disadvantage: the action deficit. The creature gets two actions per round compared to two actions per round per enemy that the solo faces. You can help offset this disadvantage with the following special ability:
Extra Action (Ex) Once per round at initiative count minus 10, the solo gets a single extra standard action. If the adjustment reduces the initiative court for the extra action to zero or less, the solo forfeits its extra action that round. For example, if the solo's initiative roll totals 15 it gets to act normally at 15 and then gets an extra standard action at 5.
Here's some preliminary stuff I hashed out in the last ten minutes. I plan on adding a whole bunch of stuff to fill out its abilities and tidy things up. The legs will end up having the crush ability of dragons and the core will have an array of ranged attacks and blasts.
The main point of interest is the modular rules at the bottom of the page. It probably still needs work. Point stuff out that I might have missed.
I'm working on a modular construct BBEG. Think War of the Worlds war machine.
Each leg is a creature with its own actions, with limitations on their movement in relation to the central component.
I'll post up the rules for how it operates once it's finished.
There have been bosses in the Final Fantasy games like that, where separate parts acted independently. I know, that's a video game series and not DnD/PF, but still, the concept is the same. It's a really good idea.
What I'm still trying to work out is how I want to handle spell targeting. The easy solution is to treat each module as a separate creature for all purposes except where stated there. But that can produce some odd effects, such as getting several saves against things like sanctuary.
Even in GURPS, where action economy is even more critical, I had to often beef up solo creatures, with at least multiple attacks, as raising HP and/or damage was the standard approach. The same applies to D&D.
New monsters are generated every day, via homebrew, third party, and game developers, with all sorts of wierd abilities, magic items, etc. that make them unique, but I never hear someone crying foul because it is not done within the "rules".
I probably don't understand the basis for concern, but my initial impression is I would be stifled as a DM if players were analyzing everything I threw at them in regards to "rules". I know rules are very important for organized play, or open games, but to be honest, I don't play those very often.
Mmmh, action economy. Couple solutions there. Effects that punish those that attack (energy aura, sticky skin), curses that affect those that target directly (ages them with a neg level) or a rapidly degrading enviorment (shifting into Ravenloft as BBEG dies).
I probably don't understand the basis for concern, but my initial impression is I would be stifled as a DM if players were analyzing everything I threw at them in regards to "rules". I know rules are very important for organized play, or open games, but to be honest, I don't play those very often.
You've obviously never met my players :(
I can't agree with special BBEG powers. What is good for the goose and all that. You might as well just roll a d20 for a hit/save and say "Gee! another threatened critical thats ten in a row!" even if its a 1. Nah, that ain't fair.
However they didn't get to be BBEG without good reason. Give them max hit points, a +X Profane Bonus for "dealing with the devil" stuff already possible within the rule set. Demons have Fullfill Other's Wish for a reason. Otherwise it feels like cheating to me.
EDIT: And caltrops, lots of caltrops.
I see a couple of issues with solo monsters, but come to different conclusions depending on what type of encounter it is. Frankly, with a four person group, as most published adventures are designed for, solo monsters are at somewhat of a disadvantage from action economy, but it really gets bad with larger groups. You have to adjust the encounter to make it more challenging for larger groups.
A solo monster in a random encounter or a non-critical encounter is one thing. I generally don't worry too much about cranking up the difficulty on those. OK to give the party an easy one now and then.
If it's a boss monster, however, the culmination of an adventure or at least part of an adventure, it's important to make the encounter truly climactic, and that means you have to keep it from being a cakewalk. The key for me is to play the creature intelligently (assuming it is an intelligent foe). It should be near impossible to surprise a boss in his lair. In fact, bosses should usually be assumed to have some means of warning them well in advance when adventurers come to call, and be assumed to have prepped for the fight with buffs. It is one type of fight to surprise an evil wizard in his sanctum sanctorum, it is a different fight entirely if he has time to cast several buff spells, ready an action and/or summon help. That's not to say that a party can't, if they really plan well, overcome defenses and warning systems and catch the boss unprepared. If they come up with a great plan, I have no problem with rewarding them with an easy kill. That should be the exception rather than the rule, however, unless your players (and their PCs) are all suprageniuses, or at least significantly smarter than the boss they are coming to kill. Remember that it is perfectly legitimate to tell a PC who created a min/maxed god of death fighter with an intelligence of 6 that he can't really contribute anything to a planning session beyond a lot of interruptions asking the others to speak slower and use words with fewer syllables.
I don't advocate breaking the rules to build up the boss monsters. Few things, in my experience, are less of a drag to parties than realizing that their foes are able to do things the rules prevent them from doing. It's also not necessary, just play those bosses like the alpha dog survivors they are, particularly the smart ones. Even ones with ordinary intelligence should be assumed to have highly honed survival instincts.
Finally, don't be afraid to have the boss run away if the fight looks bad for him. Most bosses should be able to accurately assess their survival chances in a battle quickly, and will have a way out prepared for such a situation. Few, if any, will fight to the death in a hopeless situation. What they are likely to do is take a powder, get help, and come back mad, at a time of their own choosing, when they can manipulate the odds in their favor. When a boss gets away and comes back to haunt the PCs later, it really helps build the flavor of a campaign. And the players are so much more excited, when, after several encounters with their nemesis, they are finally able to corner him and bring him to bay.
Aye, but just advancing the monster is somewhat problematic as the borders among easy/challenging/TPK are a bit closer to each other than we may like.
I submit that bending the rules of the game, especially cornerstone rules like conservation of actions, will make the borders of which you speak even more problematic than they would be by simply staying within the established framework of the existing rules.
I probably don't understand the basis for concern, but my initial impression is I would be stifled as a DM if players were analyzing everything I threw at them in regards to "rules". I know rules are very important for organized play, or open games, but to be honest, I don't play those very often.Rules are also very important for a type of immersive roleplaying where you try to get into the mind of the character and understand the world from their point of view. For the character the rules like the laws of physics and provide an in game explanation of events. Something that appears to break the rules then needs to be explained away well enough to allow the immersion to continue.
True this!
+1
Finally, don't be afraid to have the boss run away if the fight looks bad for him. Most bosses should be able to accurately assess their survival chances in a battle quickly, and will have a way out prepared for such a situation. Few, if any, will fight to the death in a hopeless situation. What they are likely to do is take a powder, get help, and come back mad, at a time of their own choosing, when they can manipulate the odds in their favor.
You left out the best trick:
Instead of having the boss wait until his entire dungeon of mooks is destroyed, have him join in on some of those battles too. It's basically doing what I quoted from Brian here, but doing it in advance. Preemptively getting help from the guys he's already got working on his side.
This is espcially fun if the BBEG is a spellcaster/buffer. Why let his puny little orcs face the party on their own, when he can show up, haste them, enlarge a few, drop a Mass Bull's Strength on them, etc. He could even be gone before the first round of battle, or he might stick around to debuff the party in round one before he vanishes off to prepare his next set of minions - and if the PCs take too long dealing with the first minions, that next set might show up before the fight is over, and they might be hasted too.
And while the party is mopping up two encounters, the BBEG teleports behind thim and nukes their casters in the back, catching them between a vrock and a hard case...
I like the template idea. Instead of beefing up a BBEG in general general offense, perhaps looking at the flip side and concentrating on purely defensive measures to give the BBEG more staying power? Economy of actions becomes less of an issue if those multiple actions have diminished results.
I like the idea of a Boss template. Make if focus on purely defense. That way you avoid TPK territory by upping the BBEG through advancing it in general.
For instance, it could provide:
+2 HP/HD and +2 luck bonus on all saving throws, skill checks, and AC.
You've obviously never met my players :(
I probably don't understand the basis for concern, but my initial impression is I would be stifled as a DM if players were analyzing everything I threw at them in regards to "rules". I know rules are very important for organized play, or open games, but to be honest, I don't play those very often.
+1 My players know the rules and we all expect each other to follow them
I like the template idea. Instead of beefing up a BBEG in general general offense, perhaps looking at the flip side and concentrating on purely defensive measures to give the BBEG more staying power? Economy of actions becomes less of an issue if those multiple actions have diminished results.
I like the idea of a Boss template. Make if focus on purely defense. That way you avoid TPK territory by upping the BBEG through advancing it in general.
For instance, it could provide:
+2 HP/HD and +2 luck bonus on all saving throws, skill checks, and AC.
I like the idea I already give my bad guys hp per dice or max minus 2 and if the party is just walking through all the mooks I max out the BBEG HP
I can't agree with special BBEG powers.
Okay. What's your suggestion?
Give them max hit points, a +X Profane Bonus for "dealing with the devil" stuff already possible within the rule set.
So, instead of no special BBEG powers, you recommend...special BBEG powers.
Solo bad guys are always Destined for Greatness as per most Adventure Paths. This means they rock the 25 or 30 point buy build.
They have PC wealth. Why not? They're raw.
They need good saves. Outsiders are good at this.
They are prepared for the PCs using divination or status magic.
And they should usually have some mean as hell thing to do right on round one.
Second Darkness - Alicavniss Vonnarc casts time stop and gate and summon monsters in some friends and then hastes all of them.
Curse of the Crimson Throne - Lady Andaisin is a flying opponent underground who flies away and commands the PCs to fall prone before busting out slay living.
Let's not talk about Vimanda Arkona, who transforms into a PC ally and tries to trick them before ambushing them-- and she's got two javelins of lightning and the highest AC seen so far in the game paired with 15 DR/good and piercing and spell resistance... and then she's a monk, with good saves. Super staying power!
Or most of the solo bosses in Scarwall, which are all destroyers of men or monsters from beyond space and time...
Council of Thieves - Ilnerik Sivanshin allows the PCs to surround him so that he can whirlwind attack with his level draining slam... while blurred and hasted, with monstrous saves again.
If the monster can't yank the chainsaw to life and saw into the PCs for one round at least, he's not worth it. He needs to survive at least five rounds to get the most mileage out of his abilities, and the best way to do that is for him not to fight in a giant room, for him to have a high AC and for him to have really decent saves... so strive for that, whatever you make.
I can't agree with special BBEG powers.Okay. What's your suggestion?
Give them max hit points, a +X Profane Bonus for "dealing with the devil" stuff already possible within the rule set.So, instead of no special BBEG powers, you recommend...special BBEG powers.
Well done for selected quotes!
All I suggested are already within the rules. No fancy house rules or stuff like that. No extra actions just because, etc. But stuff which can be used by players and GMs alike.
All I suggested are already within the rules. .... But stuff which can be used by players and GMs alike.
As is what I and other folks have suggested. Unless, of course, it is your contention that adding to or changing the rules in creative ways is somehow not within the rules. The majority of posts in here have been about special BBEG rules, including some in which people decry such rules.
BTW, is the requirement that all rules be used by players and GMs alike actually in the rules? Or is that just one of your house rules?
I like the idea I already give my bad guys hp per dice or max minus 2 and if the party is just walking through all the mooks I max out the BBEG HPI like the template idea. Instead of beefing up a BBEG in general general offense, perhaps looking at the flip side and concentrating on purely defensive measures to give the BBEG more staying power? Economy of actions becomes less of an issue if those multiple actions have diminished results.
I like the idea of a Boss template. Make if focus on purely defense. That way you avoid TPK territory by upping the BBEG through advancing it in general.
For instance, it could provide:
+2 HP/HD and +2 luck bonus on all saving throws, skill checks, and AC.
In the end, it's just an alternate version of the advanced simple template, with a slightly different purpose:
Advanced simple template: use it for beefing up otherwise weak monsters in relation to the party
Boss template: use it for beefing up a monster with an already capable offense, that you want to weather the PC's storm through economy of actions.
But doesn't all of this boil down to a simple thing - using a slightly higher CR creature if it's going solo?
Besides, if it's a solo BBEG, it should be a high-CR challenge anyways - and as CR increases, so do special abilities. Who says those extra HD have to come from racial hit dice? Make that hill giant a barbarian. Give the BBEG some ability bumps. Give the gnoll chieftan a couple levels of cleric and have him drop some channeled energy.
Not sure there's any need for custom BBEG feats/abilities when there's so much there in the rules for monster advancement as it is.
If the monster is a melee creature, usually just upping the CR works, but for bad guy wizards, they might as well be pinatas if they are solo.
I really like the homebrew feat idea. I would extend it with a full feat chain.
One Against Many
Prerequisite: 5HD
When outnumbered and alone you may activate this feat to gain one extra standard action per round for up to one round per hit dice. Should you cease to be outnumbered or alone the effect ends. You may do this once per day. The extra action takes place at your normal initiative -10.
Improved One against Many
Prerequisite: 10HD, One Against Many
When outnumbered 3 to 1 or more and alone you may activate this feat to gain one extra full round action per round for up to one round per hit dice. Should you cease to be outnumbered or alone the effect ends. You may do this once per day. The extra action takes place at your normal initiative -10.
Greater One against Many
Prerequisite: 15HD, Improved One against Many
When outnumbered 4 to 1 or more and alone you may activate this feat to gain one extra full action and a standard action per round for up to one round per hit dice. Should you cease to be outnumbered or alone the effect ends. You may do this once per day. The extra full round action takes place at your normal initiative -10. the extra standard action takes place at your normal initiative +10.
Back against the wall
Prerequisite: One Against Many
While One Against Many is active, you gain a +1 circumstance bonus to your AC for each creature by which you are outnumbered.
Lucky to be Single
Prerequisite: 10HD, One Against Many
While One Against Many is active, you may reroll a single d20 roll each round.
There is nothing to stop the PC from taking these feats, but they will find them less than useful most of the time.
Some side notes:
1. A caster using these feats will screw themselves if they summon monsters as they immediately lose the bonus of the feats.
2. The +10 to initiative on the last feat is to give the solo creature a better chance of taking at least 1 standard action before the PCs.
But doesn't all of this boil down to a simple thing - using a slightly higher CR creature if it's going solo?
Besides, if it's a solo BBEG, it should be a high-CR challenge anyways - and as CR increases, so do special abilities. Who says those extra HD have to come from racial hit dice? Make that hill giant a barbarian. Give the BBEG some ability bumps. Give the gnoll chieftan a couple levels of cleric and have him drop some channeled energy.
Not sure there's any need for custom BBEG feats/abilities when there's so much there in the rules for monster advancement as it is.
The problem is usually in the fact that whatever you advance, you advance it both offensively and defensively. When you make something that will be a tough nut to crack for the party, you often also make it a killer for regular PCs. Auto hit and heavy damage against even high AC PCs means that the party either kills quick (which is kinda anti-climatic and it's also prevented by boosted defenses) or runs (which is often an undesireable result).
To discourage players a little better you should require the feat taker to just be alone, or have no ally within 60' actively participating in the fight (archers and spell types can still attack from a distance). Thus players will pretty much never want to take them.
Good idea, I like it! (stolen)
To discourage players a little better you should require the feat taker to just be alone, or have no ally within 60' actively participating in the fight (archers and spell types can still attack from a distance). Thus players will pretty much never want to take them.
Good idea, I like it! (stolen)
Note the requirement is alone AND outnumbered.