Post by jeff on Nov 12, 2016 19:31:49 GMT -6
So, I've always wanted to make monsters simple. 5E does not do this well, fyi. I don't want to have to look up anything except maybe a special ability. I also want to be able to throw a Fire Giant at a 2nd level party without the utter certainty of a TPK. The RAW can, of course, sufficiently model this by having a 5 HD Fire Giant instead of an 11+2 HD one. I also have to scale back damage, but how much damage should a 5HD Fire Giant do? 2d+2 seems excessive, but 1d+2 seems . . . not right also.
What follows is an idea and I would like some feedback. These are pretty much core to my ideas about my own game, so be gentle (but firm). I'll sum it up using bullet points:
Using this method, I can easily throw any monster I want at the players and scale it as I see fit. If I want my medusa more powerful, I can use a 7 HD medusa vs a 4 HD one. There is only one attack table to memorize, the L1-3 Fighting Man table from p. 19 of the Men & Magic book (17 hits AC 2, etc.)
Let's compare a 8 HD Fire Giant (i.e. a Super Hero Fire Giant) in this system to one in OD&D.
This System OD&D
Average HP 52 42
Average Damage per Hit 19.5 9
Roll needed to hit AC 2 9 7
Average damage/round vs. AC 2* 11.7 6.3
*average/round is calculated by determined by calculating average damage on a hit (google dice probability for more info, or just use anydice.com) divided by percentage chance of hitting on a d20 roll)
All other stats are pretty much the same. Clearly the 8 HD giant is very dangerous because of the amount of damage potential, but that's really a nice side effect of the simplification. It curbs HD bloat for monsters and makes them really powerful without having to give them extremely high HD numbers (and thus, extremely high chances to hit). AC is as relevant at lower levels as it is at higher ones for players, and DMs don't feel the need to stick +3 or higher armors and shields out there so that their 8 HD players can face an 11 HD monster without fear of it hitting them almost every single round.
8 HD wouldn't be your average Fire Giant. This would be a leader, perhaps a chief or one level below the chief. There wouldn't be a huge difference between a 9 HD and 8 HD giant, but there would be a fairly significant difference between a 7 and 8, because of the extra damage potential. A 7 HD Fire Giant would have 46 HP on average and do 8.45 damage per round.
I am on the fence about the multiple dice of damage at the 4 and 8 HD thresholds. They tie in nicely with the Hero/Super Hero concept which I really love, but it might be too much.
I was planning on giving the damage buffs to PCs also. So a 8 HD Fighting Man would do 3 dice of damage also, and thus could fight an 8 HD giant and have a chance of winning.
Hopefully this isn't too confusing.
Looking forward to hearing your feedback.
What follows is an idea and I would like some feedback. These are pretty much core to my ideas about my own game, so be gentle (but firm). I'll sum it up using bullet points:
- HD represent overall combat ability of anything (monster, PC, etc). As such, monsters can have anywhere from 1/2 to 20 Hit Dice.
- Number of HD = bonus to hit, so a 4 HD monster gets +4 to their attack roll and would need a 13 on a d20 to hit AC 2 in a descending AC system (all monsters use the L1-3 Fighting Man table from p. 19 of M&M)
- HD dice type (d6 in OD&D, d8 in most other flavors), is variable and based on the size of the creature as an adult.
- HD dice types are as follows Tiny (d4), Small (d6), Medium (d8), Large (d10), Huge (d12), Gargantuan (d20). A pixie is tiny, a dragon is huge, a minotaur is large, a giant is huge, a titan is gargantuan, etc.
- Damage dice match the HD dice type regardless of weapon used, so a Tiny monster does d4 damage per hit, a Gargantuan does d20 per hit.
- 4 HD+ monsters do 2 dice of damage (a 4HD Tiny monster does 2d4 damage, a 5 HD Huge monster does 2d12 damage)
- 8 HD+ monsters do 3 dice of damage
Using this method, I can easily throw any monster I want at the players and scale it as I see fit. If I want my medusa more powerful, I can use a 7 HD medusa vs a 4 HD one. There is only one attack table to memorize, the L1-3 Fighting Man table from p. 19 of the Men & Magic book (17 hits AC 2, etc.)
Let's compare a 8 HD Fire Giant (i.e. a Super Hero Fire Giant) in this system to one in OD&D.
This System OD&D
Average HP 52 42
Average Damage per Hit 19.5 9
Roll needed to hit AC 2 9 7
Average damage/round vs. AC 2* 11.7 6.3
*average/round is calculated by determined by calculating average damage on a hit (google dice probability for more info, or just use anydice.com) divided by percentage chance of hitting on a d20 roll)
All other stats are pretty much the same. Clearly the 8 HD giant is very dangerous because of the amount of damage potential, but that's really a nice side effect of the simplification. It curbs HD bloat for monsters and makes them really powerful without having to give them extremely high HD numbers (and thus, extremely high chances to hit). AC is as relevant at lower levels as it is at higher ones for players, and DMs don't feel the need to stick +3 or higher armors and shields out there so that their 8 HD players can face an 11 HD monster without fear of it hitting them almost every single round.
8 HD wouldn't be your average Fire Giant. This would be a leader, perhaps a chief or one level below the chief. There wouldn't be a huge difference between a 9 HD and 8 HD giant, but there would be a fairly significant difference between a 7 and 8, because of the extra damage potential. A 7 HD Fire Giant would have 46 HP on average and do 8.45 damage per round.
I am on the fence about the multiple dice of damage at the 4 and 8 HD thresholds. They tie in nicely with the Hero/Super Hero concept which I really love, but it might be too much.
I was planning on giving the damage buffs to PCs also. So a 8 HD Fighting Man would do 3 dice of damage also, and thus could fight an 8 HD giant and have a chance of winning.
Hopefully this isn't too confusing.
Looking forward to hearing your feedback.
. I've been toying with this idea for quite some time (2012-ish), and it makes a lot of sense. I haven't had a chance to use it much in play, since I'm running 5th edition, but 5E really ascribes, conceptually, along the same lines.