Monsters not following pc's rules


Prerelease Discussion

51 to 83 of 83 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Liberty's Edge

\/\/arlok wrote:
Apparently it's harder to recover from being downed by a boss than a mook.

This is both true and misleading. They've clarified that your Death Save DCs are based on the Level of the monster who downed you.

So, in practical terms, yes bosses are harder. But not because they have some metagame 'boss' trait, it's the same reason they do more damage with attacks or have better Saves: They're higher Level.


I'm okay with monsters not following rules, because it becomes easier to target certain ranges of values so that the CR system can actually work better, which in 3.X and PF1 were kind of crap shoots.

Besides which, with racial HD and special abilities, bonus feats, etc monsters haven't ever really followed PCs. Now they're just making it more obvious.


Yeah, but we don't know the ogre's racial HP modifier. If they use those rules for monsters as well as player races.

Liberty's Edge

Dragon78 wrote:
Yeah, but we don't know the ogre's racial HP modifier. If they use those rules for monsters as well as player races.

Comparing Redcap and Ogre, I don't think it's possible that they are. The math wouldn't make much sense and it's completely counter to the stuff they've revealed about their monster design standards.


dragonhunterq wrote:

Monsters have never followed the same rules as PC's. They have pretended to, but the reality is they simply haven't.

"Oh! this critter needs an extra feat, we can't give it 2 more HD without messing with the planned CR. I know, we'll just give it a bonus feat..."

On the flipside there is "This monster still needs 3 feats? Just give it toughness, alertness and weapon focus."

I feel the 3rd edition monster creation rules were unnecessarily limiting. For PCs it makes sense to have bonuses and abilities tied into level progression, so that all players build from the same basis and you don't end up with someone (willingly or unwillingly) much more powerful than the others.

For NPCs and monsters, all this is entirely unnecessary, they just need to have the necessary statistics to be able to interact with all the rules outside of character creation. But these have no obligation to be tied together in ways that PC abilities do. That NPC over there is a blacksmith. She has 4 ranks in Craft (Blacksmithing), 2 in Diplomacy and 2 in Sense Motive. Her BAB +0 because she has no combat training and she has 10 hit points, because she's still fairly tough. Her ability scores are STR 12, DEX 10, CON 13, INT 10, WIS 11, CHA 11 and her AC is 10 because she has no armor on. Her NPC level (which replaces her number of hit dice for things that interact with that) is 1, based on on her average damage output/hit bonus/hitpoints/AC.

I know im using rules elements that arent a part of PF2e, but this is just meant to show that it could be this easy to make a non-player character.

This, in essence is how Savage Worlds and 5e handle NPCs and monsters and it makes custom creating them worlds easier (Savage worlds has no levels or CRs though, and in 5e npcs/monsters actually still have Hit Dice probably only because those are used for recovering HP during short rests, and PRoficiency is tied to their CR to maintain bounded accuracy)


Threeshades wrote:


This, in essence is how Savage Worlds and 5e handle NPCs and monsters and it makes custom creating them worlds easier (Savage worlds has no levels or CRs though, and in 5e npcs/monsters actually still have Hit Dice probably only because those are used for recovering HP during short rests, and PRoficiency is tied to their CR to maintain bounded accuracy)

They could still tie proficiency bonus to Hit Dice for all monsters, not just some, and maintain BA, all that happens is some monster attack bonuses and/or spell DCs and saves go up by 1 or 2, and in 5th Ed monsters need all the help they can get.


Jester David wrote:


Bosses

I'm a big fan of legendary monsters in 5e. Because it's not just a case of "boss monsters get extra actions" but "creatures of legend get more actions". It's as much tied to story. It's not some monster gaining special powers because of its role in the adventure, like minions or elites in 4e.

Yeah, 5th edition isn't that bad, ideally I should have picked a 4th edition example to support my point.


Deadmanwalking wrote:
Dragon78 wrote:
I wonder if Con actually has any effect on monster HP at all. It is hard to tell considering how monsters stats are done now.

It doesn't seem to. Ogres have HP on par with max Con 3rd level Barbarians but only a +2 Con Mod.

I'd be surprised if we get too many high Con monsters without decent HP for thematic reasons, but I doubt it's a relevant concern mechanically.

Is there a possibility the monsters size playes a role?


John John wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Dragon78 wrote:
I wonder if Con actually has any effect on monster HP at all. It is hard to tell considering how monsters stats are done now.

It doesn't seem to. Ogres have HP on par with max Con 3rd level Barbarians but only a +2 Con Mod.

I'd be surprised if we get too many high Con monsters without decent HP for thematic reasons, but I doubt it's a relevant concern mechanically.

Is there a possibility the monsters size playes a role?

Yes, I am wondering if size will affect HP (like ancestry bonus HP or something), or if it's just role.

Liberty's Edge

John John wrote:
Is there a possibility the monsters size playes a role?

Yes. I don't personally think it will, but it would be consistent with the monsters shown if it did.


Yeah, monster size could effect HP.

I wonder if Constructs and Undead still have no Con score.


Personally, my preference would be to keep the number of unique powers and abilities in the game to a bare minimum. Is there really any reason to have separate stats for Dwarf, Elven, and Orc warriors, or Tigers and Owlbears?

Just create a Warrior Level 1 or Beast Level 4 entry, slap CR appropriate HP, AC, and damage on the sucker and call it a day.


Pathfinder Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Dragon78 wrote:

Yeah, monster size could effect HP.

I wonder if Constructs and Undead still have no Con score.

The Grim Reaper shown during the banquet had a Constitution bonus, but it was the same as his Charisma. Could it be that they just copied the bonus in the off chance you would need it in some way? Or is the rule changed for that and Undead now have CON? Or they decided this one in particular would be different (even if it's not in PF1)?


Jester David wrote:
Yeah, the town guard shouldn't have amazing powers or maneuvers that the PC's fighter can't replicate,

I don't much mind that, particularly if their ability is either a simplified version of a PC ability, or something that feels like it could be a PC ability. For some examples of these from 5e:

The Veteran NPC/Monster wields a longsword and a shortsword. It has the Multiattack ability, which gives it two attacks with the longsword and a third with the shortsword if the shortsword is drawn. A dual-wielding PC would have to use their bonus action to attack with the shortsword, but that sort of micro-management is too much trouble for the monster version.

There are many NPC-type monsters that have some version of Parry: as a reaction, add a few points to AC against one attack. This is similar to a feat available to PCs. However, in one adventure there'a an NPC with the Parry & Counter ability: add +3 AC against one attack as a reaction, and if that causes the attack to miss they can make an attack of their own as part of the same reaction. There's nothing quite like that for PCs (the closest is the Riposte maneuver a Battlemaster fighter can learn), but it feels very thematic for this style of NPC.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
james014Aura wrote:
Mudfoot wrote:
I just need to know what happens if I give an ogre a battleaxe and chain mail instead of the club and hide it gets in the Bestiary. In 1e you had to guess.

I don't recall any guessing in PF1E to that effect. Swap damage dice, remove one armor value and apply the other instead.

Sheesh. Children. I was talking about AD&D 1e.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Elfteiroh wrote:
Dragon78 wrote:

Yeah, monster size could effect HP.

I wonder if Constructs and Undead still have no Con score.

The Grim Reaper shown during the banquet had a Constitution bonus, but it was the same as his Charisma. Could it be that they just copied the bonus in the off chance you would need it in some way? Or is the rule changed for that and Undead now have CON? Or they decided this one in particular would be different (even if it's not in PF1)?

I really, Really hope this means Constructs and Undead have Con scores, insomuch as monsters have Con scores in PF2 ed.

The lack of Con score "because they're not alive," has always made golems and other constructs... not... work right, and the bonus hit points based on size don't make it better. It's especially visible when you compare low CR Constructs with high CR constructs. The Caryatid Column (CR 3,) whose 3 HD & 20 bonus hit points for being medium put it at 36 hp, right between the average hit points for a CR 3 & CR 4. Meanwhile the stone golem (CR 11), with 14 HD and 30 bonus hit points for being large has 107 hp, right between the average hp for a CR 8 & CR 9. The higher the hit dice a construct has, the more of a glass jaw it has. And that's before we talk about Fort saves.

And creating beastly, meat-wall, brute undead is tough unless you to give them a high Charisma just for the sake of their HP & Saves.


Mudfoot wrote:
james014Aura wrote:
Mudfoot wrote:
I just need to know what happens if I give an ogre a battleaxe and chain mail instead of the club and hide it gets in the Bestiary. In 1e you had to guess.

I don't recall any guessing in PF1E to that effect. Swap damage dice, remove one armor value and apply the other instead.

Sheesh. Children. I was talking about AD&D 1e.

Actually the AD&D1 statblocks weren't too bad for weapons!

Ogre's damage is 1-10 or by weapon, and then it adds the note:

AD&D Monster Manual wrote:
"(If weapon type is used to determine damage/attack, give a standard bonus of +2 hit points to ogres and leaders/chieftains gain an additional +1/+2 bonus.)"

So normal weapon damage +2 for the mooks.

EDIT: AC is harder though. Armor is listed in many cases, but not all.


Elfteiroh wrote:
Dragon78 wrote:

Yeah, monster size could effect HP.

I wonder if Constructs and Undead still have no Con score.

The Grim Reaper shown during the banquet had a Constitution bonus, but it was the same as his Charisma.

Right on, thanks for this, so, ability scores of non are no more. And with no more ability damage/drain, there is no danger of dying when you hit 0 Con.

Liberty's Edge

Weather Report wrote:
Right on, thanks for this, so, ability scores of non are no more. And with no more ability damage/drain, there is no danger of dying when you hit 0 Con.

The latter isn't necessarily true. There are definitely things that mimic Ability Damage (the Enfeebled Condition gives you a penalty on all Str-based stuff equal to its level, for example), and having one kill you when it takes your bonus down to a -5 penalty is totally possible (indeed, given that Shadows inflict Enfeebled, this may well be what happens at some point with them).

It would probably be a specific ability that does that though, not an automatic result of the Condition.


Deadmanwalking wrote:
Weather Report wrote:
Right on, thanks for this, so, ability scores of non are no more. And with no more ability damage/drain, there is no danger of dying when you hit 0 Con.

The latter isn't necessarily true. There are definitely things that mimic Ability Damage (the Enfeebled Condition gives you a penalty on all Str-based stuff equal to its level, for example), and having one kill you when it takes your bonus down to a -5 penalty is totally possible (indeed, given that Shadows inflict Enfeebled, this may well be what happens at some point with them).

Ah, so you can be enfeebled to death once you hit -5. So they are keeping non-HP death in the game, just stalled out.

Liberty's Edge

Weather Report wrote:
Ah, so you can be enfeebled to death once you hit -5. So they are keeping non-HP death in the game, just stalled out.

We actually don't know this. Shadows do HP damage now as well as inflicting Enfeebled, so they could just kill you that way.

But they could have the Shadows also kill you if they make you Enfeebled enough. It's a rules interaction that could exist. We don't know that it does, since nobody took more than Enfeebled 2 or 3 in the Shadow encounter during the Glass Cannon Podcast (which is all we've seen of Shadows), but my point was that we also don't know it doesn't. And that even if Shadows don't do that, something else could.


Deadmanwalking wrote:
Weather Report wrote:
Ah, so you can be enfeebled to death once you hit -5. So they are keeping non-HP death in the game, just stalled out.

We actually don't know this. Shadows do HP damage now as well as inflicting Enfeebled, so they could just kill you that way.

But they could have the Shadows also kill you if they make you Enfeebled enough. It's a rules interaction that could exist. We don't know that it does, since nobody took more than Enfeebled 2 or 3 in the Shadow encounter during the Glass Cannon Podcast (which is all we've seen of Shadows), but my point was that we also don't know it doesn't. And that even if Shadows don't do that, something else could.

So, 5 is the highest a condition can go? I like that they are moving away from SoD, this is where the 4-tiers off success comes in, saving from a Medusa's gaze, etc.

Liberty's Edge

Weather Report wrote:
So, 5 is the highest a condition can go? I like that they are moving away from SoD, this is where the 4-tiers off success comes in, saving from a Medusa's gaze, etc.

No clue! There's apparently some limit (though also, Shadows can apparently break it), but what it might be? We have no idea.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Paizo Charter Superscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

I just remember Jason detailing the death and dying rules on a Paizocon panel and gleefully declaring "There is no dying 4!" :)

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Zaister wrote:
I just remember Jason detailing the death and dying rules on a Paizocon panel and gleefully declaring "There is no dying 4!" :)

This is true. The Condition beyond Dying 3 is Dead (which now specifies that you are unable to act!). :)

Other Conditions may have different limits and consequences, however.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Zaister wrote:
I just remember Jason detailing the death and dying rules on a Paizocon panel and gleefully declaring "There is no dying 4!" :)

This is true. The Condition beyond Dying 3 is Dead (which now specifies that you are unable to act!). :)

Guess it's time to retire that old joke.

Rest in peace sweet prince...


Tarik Blackhands wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Zaister wrote:
I just remember Jason detailing the death and dying rules on a Paizocon panel and gleefully declaring "There is no dying 4!" :)

This is true. The Condition beyond Dying 3 is Dead (which now specifies that you are unable to act!). :)

Guess it's time to retire that old joke.

Rest in peace sweet prince...

We got in-depth rules for that debuff now:

3PP got em first


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The other issue with monsters not following PC's rules.

Picture this:

The party is about to face off against a monster. But then they are able to sort out their differences with it. Now it agrees to help them.

Suddenly the non-PC aspects become much more important. Does that "reasonable in a single combat" ability remain balanced when it's switched sides?


Mekkis wrote:

The other issue with monsters not following PC's rules.

Picture this:

The party is about to face off against a monster. But then they are able to sort out their differences with it. Now it agrees to help them.

Suddenly the non-PC aspects become much more important. Does that "reasonable in a single combat" ability remain balanced when it's switched sides?

I think this is why they moved off the Starfinder system, where it would be a problem. Don't think monsters in 2E are gonna be wildly different from PCs in power.


Mekkis wrote:

The other issue with monsters not following PC's rules.

Picture this:

The party is about to face off against a monster. But then they are able to sort out their differences with it. Now it agrees to help them.

Suddenly the non-PC aspects become much more important. Does that "reasonable in a single combat" ability remain balanced when it's switched sides?

I looked this up in the Sacred Book of the DPR Spreadsheet, and it said this never happens, and thou shalt take a -2 penalty to all attacks for the next 40 days for bringing it up. :)

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Mekkis wrote:

The other issue with monsters not following PC's rules.

Picture this:

The party is about to face off against a monster. But then they are able to sort out their differences with it. Now it agrees to help them.

Suddenly the non-PC aspects become much more important. Does that "reasonable in a single combat" ability remain balanced when it's switched sides?

This is a problem if things like enemy AC or to-hit are outside PC ranges, not if they're built differently but wind up with the same totals.

This is thus not a big issue in PF2.


Can't we solve the "reasonable in a single combat, but not all day" abilities monsters have by limiting them via uses per day (or other periods of time) like we've always done?


Mudfoot wrote:
james014Aura wrote:
Mudfoot wrote:
I just need to know what happens if I give an ogre a battleaxe and chain mail instead of the club and hide it gets in the Bestiary. In 1e you had to guess.

I don't recall any guessing in PF1E to that effect. Swap damage dice, remove one armor value and apply the other instead.

Sheesh. Children. I was talking about AD&D 1e.

I got that. :)

I would say that "in (AD&D) 1E you have to decide." "Guess" implies that there's some right answer that you might miss, whereas "decide" means that you are free to pick the answer that you want. And if you're concerned about consistency there is an example of a better armored ogre in the Monster Manual entry for "ogre".

51 to 83 of 83 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion / Monsters not following pc's rules All Messageboards
Recent threads in Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion