Is there any magic to doing this? I'm a very old-school GM and have only recently had the time/energy to sit down and make up an adventure w/my own spin on the monsters. Someone suggested in another thread I use the undead monster/3pp creation Danse Macabre to represent an agent of a fey revel. Since then I thought; what else can I reimagine as an evil fey?
So can I just get away with slapping different description/fluff on a creature and calling it something else or is there conversion that needs to happen? In the case of the Danse Macabre I'd change the undead traits to fey ones but otherwise its the same I guess; am I missing anything?
Please help teach an old dog a new trick.
No, you can pretty much get away with swapping the fluff on a creature and calling it a new creature. Distant Worlds suggests doing this to a bit of an extreme to generate most of the various alien creatures in Golarion's star system. A couple of modules use similar tricks.
Remember, though, that you're swapping more than fluff for that example. You're changing the creature's type to fey from whatever it was before (undead, in the case of your example). This alters many characteristics of the creature, and it's up to you to decide whether the change makes the creature more or less dangerous and, if so, adjust CR or other traits accordingly.
Pretty much, the only thing you may want to check is that there isn't anything that would significantly adjust the difficulty if so make the necessary changes to the xp value.
To be honest though just altering the description of a creature or the theme can go a long way to change how an encounter is perceived by the players.
Darn Ninjad
Pretty much, the only thing you may want to check is that there isn't anything that would significantly adjust the difficulty if so make the necessary changes to the xp value.
To be honest though just altering the description of a creature or the theme can go a long way to change how an encounter is perceived by the players.
Darn Ninjad
Heh.
That trick's a little harder in PF if you don't at least change the name too, thanks to Knowledge checks for ID-ing monsters being so ridiculously easy.
Check out the Gamer's Guide to Pathfinder Podcast on skinning - if I recall correctly it's mostly from the PC's perspective but still gold nonetheless.
I do it all the time. We've been playing since 2nd ed with a couple even longer so I tend to skin monsters to make things "fresher" and less routine.
To me there's too parts to the monsters and thats the stat block and the description. I don't see a problem with using a statblock for another creature with or without some minor tweaks. Saves a lot of prep time.
Creative Director
|
Pretty much, the only thing you may want to check is that there isn't anything that would significantly adjust the difficulty if so make the necessary changes to the xp value.
To be honest though just altering the description of a creature or the theme can go a long way to change how an encounter is perceived by the players.
Darn Ninjad
Heh.
That trick's a little harder in PF if you don't at least change the name too, thanks to Knowledge checks for ID-ing monsters being so ridiculously easy.
Actually... there's no reason why you can't add a +5 or +10 or higher modifier to those checks to ID unusual variants of a monster.
I ran a campaign set in a fantasy version of the Alps. One of the major early opponents were the loathsome 'snow beasts'. Fast and cowardly, they would often just pace the PCs, just out of range. They hated them.
Spoiler: They were actually baboons that I renamed.
Actually... there's no reason why you can't add a +5 or +10 or higher modifier to those checks to ID unusual variants of a monster.Pretty much, the only thing you may want to check is that there isn't anything that would significantly adjust the difficulty if so make the necessary changes to the xp value.
To be honest though just altering the description of a creature or the theme can go a long way to change how an encounter is perceived by the players.
Darn Ninjad
Heh.
That trick's a little harder in PF if you don't at least change the name too, thanks to Knowledge checks for ID-ing monsters being so ridiculously easy.
Oh, certainly. I meant if he simply do the old trick of introducing a common kobold using excitingly descriptive text. It worked really, really well back in the day.
If the creature is geniunely rare (whether an aberrant kobold, an alien boghopper that looks nothing like a kobold but has the same stats, or even a regular kobold in a setting where kobolds are rare), go nuts with it.
Side note: my party has identified every single monster I've thrown at them with Knowledge checks--even the ones with DC 15+CR. Most of them they could have taken 10 on and gotten it. It helps that they have a wizard with at least a point in every Knowledge skill, an oracle of lore with mad Charisma, and a ranger with a useful favored enemy choice for the setting. On one of them, the monster was a unique creature that they really shouldn't have had a chance to know anything about, so I gave it a 20+CR DC. They still hit it, so I essentially gave them "You have no idea what this is, but that proboscis looks extremely efficient at bleeding its enemies dry, and the way the grass is dying around it surely indicates some sort of Abyssal origin."
It depends on how much you want to put into the background of the creature and how you imagine its origins.
If it is truly unique. I would only give the PC's very basic information based on guess work. Such as you think its fey, cold Iron is usually effective against such creatures etc because if the BBEG is working on his one of a kind experimental creature of DOOM. The PC's certainly shouldn't expect to get a laundry list of its strengths and weaknesses in a single skill role. I would use this tactic sparingly though since it will make players feel like their skills are being minimized
On the other hand when dealing with something like the Snow Beasts that rkraus2 described having at least a little background fleshed out to go along with the pertinent info can let you sell your new creature to the players.
As far as mechanical stuff like the aforementioned laundry list: Go by the guidelines re: every 5 points above the DC providing one piece of useful information about it, regardless of whether the creature is run of the mill or one of a kind. Decide what "one piece of useful information" means and how many pieces it takes to get a good picture of the thing.
From the examples I've seen, making 10 or 15+ above the DC (three or four "pieces of useful information") is usually enough to gauge significant background information and most of their relevant properties (i.e., special or particularly damaging attacks, special abilities, weaknesses, immunities), while barely beating the DC might only provide the name (if it's knowable), some background (again, if it's knowable) and a couple of more easily observed properties.
In the case of uniques and never-been-seens: Since I don't like cheating them out of even background information, I instead try to imagine what an extremely well-versed, intuitive observer might figure out about the creature while combing through his vast archives of creature lore. That way, their Knowledge skill gets them fluff and crunch equivalent to what they would get for a common creature (provided their roll passed by the same amount) but still doesn't break the suspension of disbelief ("Oh, Thog know what giant bug-thing is--that bug thing named 'Starcrawler of Netheros' from planet Xarbiket that nobody on Golarion know exist yet").
Love the idea of refluffing monsters.
When players see something as dangerous they spend resoursers to be ready to what ever this great unknown thing might throw after them.
Add tentacles to something huge and people will fear grappling.
Make something have the bones outside the body - a have a bonearmor and a little disguise - players might think is some sort of undead.
Common knowledge about a creature type might include how this race of XXX and the powerfull sorceres was the cause of fall of an ancient empire - althought back then there were hordes of them and the players only face 6. - none of these refluffed hobgoblins have sorceres levels - but they do have a fireshield spell-like ability 1/day - little things - that might not change CR (much) but will make the encounter new for the plauers.
So what do little tweaks add to a monster's CR. I was toying with 2 changes for specific adventures: giving mites green skin and water breathing to make them "bog nits" that try to drown passers by; also giving an extra feat to an elite mite warrior 2 to make him an expert mounted crossbowman.
adding gills or an extra feat; do these singular tweaks up the CR?
So what do little tweaks add to a monster's CR. I was toying with 2 changes for specific adventures: giving mites green skin and water breathing to make them "bog nits" that try to drown passers by; also giving an extra feat to an elite mite warrior 2 to make him an expert mounted crossbowman.
adding gills or an extra feat; do these singular tweaks up the CR?
I depends on how much they change the combat effectivness of the creature. Example kobolds in a sewer or swamp with added gills are likely to be +1 CR in my opinion as it will allow them more likely-hood to suprise the party, but same change in a dry location woudl not maret the higher CR.
So what do little tweaks add to a monster's CR. I was toying with 2 changes for specific adventures: giving mites green skin and water breathing to make them "bog nits" that try to drown passers by; also giving an extra feat to an elite mite warrior 2 to make him an expert mounted crossbowman.
adding gills or an extra feat; do these singular tweaks up the CR?
Sometimes nothing. It depends on whether the monster is more dangerous with the tweaks, and (if so) if it's dangerous enough to warrant +1 CR. Sometimes it isn't, as is the case with the celestial and fiendish templates for very low level monsters--it's just not enough to matter.
Gills may or may not be worth a CR. I lean toward "no" for the creature entry itself, but as WeirdGM66 mentioned it may be worth a situational CR +1 in some circumstances.
An extra feat, eh? Depends on the feat. But if you're just going to give it a feat you might as well make it warrior 1/fighter 1, as that will give you pretty much the same thing. Usually, that wouldn't increase its CR. (For some reason, under the quick guidelines, adding a PC class raises the CR for NPCs but not for racial hit die monsters; I don't know why.) So the mite would be CR 1/2, I think, by the guidelines (1/4 plus two steps for class levels). Its attack bonus might be a little higher than average depending on the feat, but its damage still sucks, so CR 1/2 is probably fine.
I use the advanced and young templates as a guide. Are my changes to the statblock the equivalent of these or much more?
If I'm still not sure I'll then flick through the bestiary and have a look at creatures 1-2 CR above and below the base creature I'm using and compare my changes.
But yeah as above posters have pointed out the CR change is about combat effectiveness.
