So, I was attempting to adjust Tiamat's levels the other day and... I got nothin'. Bahamut? Nope. Specifically, I'm not seeing how they came up with hit points. I've looked at the Monster Manual, the DMG, both Draconomicons, and I've seen Lolth (I don't have that MM, but I've run numbers and come away confused before), so I'm asking: does anyone know what formula they used to create Tiamat and/or Bahamut?
I do believe that there are now different rules for building monsters than in the books I have.
I'm also interested in statting up some other gods, demon lords, and others (for epic-level campaign reasons) and I'm curious if all three deities (and/or creatures like Graz'zt and Orcus) use the same formula for hit points, or if each is different.
Powers, effects, all of it, I'm having trouble figuring out where, exactly, they are coming from and how they built (and how I should build) these people.
Also, to answer the question, "Why not just make something up?": I don't want to make a god that's either too tough or too easy for its relative power level. I want my players to be super-challenged... but I'm also interested in allowing them to be victorious at some point.
Edit: NEVERMIND. Wow. I'm so incredibly dense. SO incredibly dense. I've been running around like a chicken with my head cut off staring at page 184 of the DMG and trying to reconcile anything written there with Tiamat, when all I needed to do was literally look several inches to the left. Ugh. Sorry guys. :)
EDIT 2: Uh... I'm still not getting an appropriate value for the Aspect of Tiamat? I'm getting values far lower than I should by all accounts.
So, I was attempting to adjust Tiamat's levels the other day and... I got nothin'. Bahamut? Nope. Specifically, I'm not seeing how they came up with hit points. I've looked at the Monster Manual, the DMG, both Draconomicons, and I've seen Lolth (I don't have that MM, but I've run numbers and come away confused before), so I'm asking: does anyone know what formula they used to create Tiamat and/or Bahamut?
I do believe that there are now different rules for building monsters than in the books I have.
I'm also interested in statting up some other gods, demon lords, and others (for epic-level campaign reasons) and I'm curious if all three deities (and/or creatures like Graz'zt and Orcus) use the same formula for hit points, or if each is different.
Powers, effects, all of it, I'm having trouble figuring out where, exactly, they are coming from and how they built (and how I should build) these people.
Also, to answer the question, "Why not just make something up?": I don't want to make a god that's either too tough or too easy for its relative power level. I want my players to be super-challenged... but I'm also interested in allowing them to be victorious at some point.
Off the top of my head, I'd guess that Deities and Demigods might have provided the rules.
For PF, you may want to recalculate based on the assumption that they have Outsider hit dice. That may be a lot of work, however.
Off the top of my head, I'd guess that Deities and Demigods might have provided the rules.
For PF, you may want to recalculate based on the assumption that they have Outsider hit dice. That may be a lot of work, however.
Jeff, good sir, I appreciate your response, however I'm in 4E instead of 3.X. Thanks, though, as I'm planning on converting them at some point!
I believe that originally, solo monsters had their hp calculated as though it was equivalent to 5 regular monsters (since that is what they are worth, xp wise).
However, WotC felt this was leading to especially long, grindy combats for what should be big, intense boss battles, so switched gears (I think around DMG2/MM2) so that solos hp was equivalent to around 4 regular monsters (but they typically got some extra tricks and a damage boost to compensate).
I haven't looked over those monsters specifically, but that might explain the discrepancy one way or another, depending on when those monsters were designed.
Thank you, Matthew! That will probably help, now that I can look into those. One thing, I'd like to ask, however, is, if someone has the chance, can anyone explain the aspect of Tiamat? The numbers just don't add up, and they both appear in the same book. If it's multiplied times four, that's even a larger problem. As a 17th level creature, she's been given 1,030 hit points (Tiamat herself is given the "correct" amount of 1,610 hit points for her level 35, based on the old rules). The I can't figure any possible permutation that gets me higher than just under 900, leaving a nearly 100-hit-point gap.
Also, for Tiamat herself and her aspect, I've managed to, upon noticing the chart to the right (duh, me) explain some things to myself, however I'm still a bit curious how they came up with her defenses, which don't quite fit.
I'm focusing on Tiamat first, because if I can't get one down, its unlikely that I'm going to be able to notice any sort of pattern. However Matthew, your information will probably help me greatly when I take on Bahamut (and/or Lolth, if I'm ever fortunate enough to grab her stats).
Your looking at their process backward.
Your assuming that they made a monster builder and used that to make the monsters. They didn't and by and large they don't.
First they made base numbers - those base numbers are actually the character assumptions - i.e. that a striker of level X will do Y amount of damage and have +X chance to hit. Once they had these base numbers they created the monsters - which where/are meant to be challenging to a character with the above base numbers.
Finally when they had gone through those two steps they built a 'monster builder' that gives off rough approximations of the numbers they are using.
In essence you can't really make any (or at least not very many) of the monsters using the monster builder - because they never created them with the monster builder. Exceptions likely abound with freelancer material which likely was made, more or less, with the monster builder but that's not the monsters in the core books.
With things like Gods and Demonlords its very obvious that the monster builder itself is not the authoritative source because as one gets out to these extremes the monster builder itself no longer gives out numbers that are really all that perfectly in line with the base numbers. The small discrepancy between the base numbers in use in the actual game and the formula's used in the monster builder have now compounded over 30+ levels to become quite significant and noticeable differences.
In effect...they made it up.
The last I heard (which was quite a while back I admit, since I'm not a subscriber), they didn't have Tiamat in the DDi specifically because she broke their own rules too badly to fit in. In your case I'd be more worried if I could make her work with the rest of the rules.
Jeff, good sir, I appreciate your response, however I'm in 4E instead of 3.X. Thanks, though, as I'm planning on converting them at some point!Off the top of my head, I'd guess that Deities and Demigods might have provided the rules.
For PF, you may want to recalculate based on the assumption that they have Outsider hit dice. That may be a lot of work, however.
Oh, duh! Sorry.
Yeah, I don't know. It would be weird if they used different rules for them, but that's apparently what happened.
Of course, most of the stats in 1e and 2e were just made up, too...
Well, perhaps recalculate based on their roles and standard rules, then?
|
I go with Final Fantasy Bahamut. That guy never gets involved in Battles that dont involve the PC Paladin with the Orb of Bahamut going: "Oh mighty Bahamut, Behold for I am in a nest of pure Evil - smight me and all else in a one mile radius from orbit with a breath weapon." Bahamut flies out from his nest behind moon and roasts Target with 1,000,000+ HP Breath weapon.
Thats not a guy you would care to stat.
Remember They dont appear as a godly form. They assume an Avatar: Tiamat should be regarded one head at any given moment. She isnt going to expose herself in any way that would get her harmed or reveal her presence - so stat her as an avatar - which is a measure of the degree of her physical presence on the prime plane. So what ever fits is perfectly fine.
Tiamat is a chaos monster, a primordial goddess of the ocean, mating with Abzû (the god of fresh water) to produce younger gods. It is suggested that there are two parts to the Tiamat mythos, the first in which Tiamat is 'creatrix', through a "Sacred marriage" between salt and fresh water, peacefully creating the cosmos through successive generations. In the second "Chaoskampf" Tiamat is considered the monstrous embodiment of primordial chaos.
Paracelsus thus identifies Earth as "the chaos of the gnomi", i.e., the element of the gnomes, through which these spirits move unobstructed as fish do through water, or birds through air.
And PS: Gods in D&D are meant to be wierd+. My own Pantheon has Wat the Mad who took as wife the daughters of the previous wives until he had resolve a loop where his wives were his daughter, grand daugter, great grand daughter, great-great grand daughter and great great great grand daughter...Gods are not just wierd - they should be insane on a scale you are incapable of comprehending.
Your looking at their process backward.
Your assuming that they made a monster builder and used that to make the monsters. They didn't and by and large they don't.
I'm not sure about that. Or rather - while they do tend to design more by art than formula, they do tend to stick relatively close to the numbers. You will certainly see defenses and other elements adjusted as appropriate, but they rarely stray too far from the proper hp totals.
In this case, I think Ylissa hit the relevant area - this level 17 enemy is a brute, who have more hp than most monsters. The numbers come out spot on for the original formula, as Ylissa shows above. Since Tiamat herself isn't in the CB (which I think they've said is less due to her breaking the rules, and more due to the complexity of her multiple heads), I can't easily check the numbers on that.
Now, as far as defenses go, there is often much more likelihood of them eyeballing it. Or, rather, I suspect they often start with the expected values, and then crank stuff up or down as appropriate (so the Tarrasque ends up with a Fort significantly higher than expected, but a low Reflex. Etc.)
It might well be the case that these days they are more likely to use the monster builder (though even here I think there is a lot more 'art' then formula with the core book monsters) but they certianly did not start out doing so as this question has come up before and my outline of the sequence of how they made the monsters is a paraphrase of what the designers have said when asked why the numbers are not usually identical to what one gets in the monster builder...essentially that the monster builder was created last.
Ok, from my hazy recollection of the section of 'Creating Monsters' in the DMG, a Brute has (10 + (10 x level) + Con) HP.
For a level 17 brute with 26 Con that is (10 + (10 x 17) + 26) = 206HP.
A Solo of level 11 or higher (under the original rules) has 5 times as many HP as a standard creature so this becomes 206HP x 5 = 1030HP.This 5x HP rule for higher level Solo's was later changed, so that a Solo of any level has 4x the HP of a standard creature.
I would advise consulting the relevant DMG section as my memory may be off.
That's pretty cool, actually. I discovered that my problem was that they didn't do the same thing with Tiamat core as the aspect of Tiamat. They went with an "8" instead of "10" base, even though the core, too, is a solo brute. BUT! This makes a lot of sense, so thank you. It's good to see the concept behind the things and get a peak behind the curtain.
As far as defenses: ah, thank you Ylissa, Matt, and Jeremy! That makes sense too.