|
Post by countingwizard on Sept 3, 2019 10:12:23 GMT -6
Does anyone know where I can find a comprehensive list of AD&D monsters from MM1, FF, and MM2 that also lists the level of the monster? Unfortunately, not me. I have a spreadsheet of all the AD&D monsters and even made columns for XP/level, but never filled them in! Yeah. Google turned up Echohawk's spreadsheet, but that doesn't have xp or level for the AD&D stuff.
|
|
|
Post by talysman on Sept 3, 2019 10:32:32 GMT -6
Does anyone know where I can find a comprehensive list of AD&D monsters from MM1, FF, and MM2 that also lists the level of the monster? Kellri's blog has a download called CDD #1 Statblock Reference. It doesn't literally say "monster level", but it has all the statblocks for monsters from those three books listed with their XP. In conjunction with the table of XP per monster level from the DMG appendix C, that'll get you what you need. Kellri also has an OSRIC monster spreadsheet for download, but I didn't check it out. It might have monster level in it. Or, if not, it should have all the info from CCC #1, so you could add a column that calculates monster level based on XP.
|
|
eotb
Level 1 Medium
Posts: 22
|
Post by eotb on Sept 4, 2019 23:54:09 GMT -6
Most of the MM monsters are given level designations in OSRIC. Kellri’s resources likely also have this, but if not you can check there.
|
|
|
Post by coffee on Sept 5, 2019 7:17:11 GMT -6
Have you checked on Dragonsfoot? They have a much bigger AD&D emphasis there, and might already have what you're looking for.
|
|
|
Post by geoffrey on Sept 5, 2019 7:28:51 GMT -6
Does anyone know where I can find a comprehensive list of AD&D monsters from MM1, FF, and MM2 that also lists the level of the monster? Consult pages 139-140 of the AD&D Monster Manual II for Dungeon Monsters by Level and Frequency at That Level. Therein are listed all dungeon monsters (from MM, FF, and MMII) by level (1 through 10), categorized by frequency. For example, here is the list for 1st-level monsters: LEVEL I MONSTERSCommonBandit Bat Beetle, Giant Fire Character Party Dwarf, Hill Dwarf, Mountain Goblin Orc Rat Rat, Giant Shrieker Throat Leech UncommonBat, Giant Booka Bowler Cat, Wild Gibberling Hobgoblin Jermlaine Kobold Piercer Rothe Scum Creeper Skunk Snyad Xvart RareAnt, Giant Badger Berserker Bookworm Bullywug Carbuncle Cave Cricket, Giant Caveman Dire Corby Jaculi Killmoulis Mite Norker Pedipalp, Large Rot Grub Skeleton Vilstrak Vulchling Zombie Very RareAl-mi'raj Berserker Demon. Manes Devil, Nupperibo Ear Seeker Elf, Wood Gnome Halfling Larva Minimal, War Dog Minimal, Wolf Skeleton, Animal Squirrel, Giant Black Squirrel, Normal Termite, Giant Harvest Tween Webbirds
|
|
|
Post by countingwizard on Sept 5, 2019 9:11:09 GMT -6
Believe it or not I started with that MM2 section, but it leaves out a lot of monsters from the wilderness and changes some of the levels. Ended up going through each book and monster listing individually. I'll post it when I finish up.
|
|
|
Post by geoffrey on Sept 5, 2019 11:05:49 GMT -6
Ah, that makes sense. I wondered if it might be unsuitable. I kept thinking, "How is everyone missing this?" I look forward to what you come up with.
|
|
|
Post by countingwizard on Sept 9, 2019 7:16:52 GMT -6
Alright. So I finished my list. I made it by level and category (personal). I also included detail. drive.google.com/open?id=1jTMiJXr9mD8ut13OULb2VzNDSfM0nKNiOeIujy6cpTQMy methodology was to assign a specific level to each monster to base monsters off of for difficulty/number appearing modifications, but for structured groups with many different creature types/components such as bandits, formians, and giant termites I did not specify the individual types and only indicated the level at which they appear as a group. If I had to do it all over again, I would go through each of the monster manuals alphabetically and spell out the name of each monster exactly how it appears, and then add in the monsters unique to the encounter tables (such as Cleric Vampire and M-U Vampire). Because I started using the AD&D encounter tables, and then the MMII custom encounter tables, the way I spelled out monster names is inconsistent with the books in many cases. I would also list the level of each individual monster for those "structured groups" I mentioned.
|
|
|
Post by countingwizard on Sept 9, 2019 7:26:11 GMT -6
Using my new monster list I was able finish mapping out the vertical side-view of my dungeon and the connections between them. 14 layers (or levels if you prefer), 29 levels (or areas if you prefer).
Still to-do before NTRPG Con 2020: 1. Fill out wandering encounter tables for each level. 2. Fill out unique encounter tables for each level. 3. Describe the unique features, general features, lairs, and any unique tricks or traps to be found in each level; working from bottom to top. (Most of this is in my head, scribbled in my journal, or scattered in electronic notes on googledrive.) 4. Map each level working from bottom to top. 5. Draw/commission the map of the city of Partholon that lays atop the megadungeon. 6. Write up sets of rumors to be unlocked and disbursed the deeper adventuring parties go. 7. Create a new Planet Eris DM Screen.
|
|
|
Post by grodog on Sept 9, 2019 8:30:17 GMT -6
Alright. So I finished my list. I made it by level and category (personal). I also included detail. drive.google.com/open?id=1jTMiJXr9mD8ut13OULb2VzNDSfM0nKNiOeIujy6cpTQMy methodology was to assign a specific level to each monster to base monsters off of for difficulty/number appearing modifications, but for structured groups with many different creature types/components such as bandits, formians, and giant termites I did not specify the individual types and only indicated the level at which they appear as a group. I'll have to take a look at the file to grok what you're saying here, but I think you mean that you're assigning baseline difficulty on the baseline monster vs. monster + leader types or monster + helping creatures/allies, etc., right? If I had to do it all over again, I would go through each of the monster manuals alphabetically and spell out the name of each monster exactly how it appears, and then add in the monsters unique to the encounter tables (such as Cleric Vampire and M-U Vampire). Because I started using the AD&D encounter tables, and then the MMII custom encounter tables, the way I spelled out monster names is inconsistent with the books in many cases. I would also list the level of each individual monster for those "structured groups" I mentioned. Using filters that should be pretty easy to fix, I think? Definitely curious to see your groups, as well!---I tend to think of the clean-up crew as a dungeon-level-independent group of monsters, for example, along with vermin: to my mind, both should largely appear throughout a mega-dungeon, regardless of the monster's level/HD vs. the dungeon's level. Using my new monster list I was able finish mapping out the vertical side-view of my dungeon and the connections between them. 14 layers (or levels if you prefer), 29 levels (or areas if you prefer). Still to-do before NTRPG Con 2020: 1. Fill out wandering encounter tables for each level. Are you taking into account rival NPC parties, as well? They're mostly level-independent too, now that I think about it (after the first few levels, per the DMG). 3. Describe the unique features, general features, lairs, and any unique tricks or traps to be found in each level; working from bottom to top. (Most of this is in my head, scribbled in my journal, or scattered in electronic notes on googledrive.) 4. Map each level working from bottom to top. I like your "working from the bottom up" approach---may have to give that some more thought for my Castle Greyhawk! Allan.
|
|
|
Post by countingwizard on Sept 9, 2019 10:19:49 GMT -6
I'll have to take a look at the file to grok what you're saying here, but I think you mean that you're assigning baseline difficulty on the baseline monster vs. monster + leader types or monster + helping creatures/allies, etc., right? Using filters that should be pretty easy to fix, I think? Definitely curious to see your groups, as well!---I tend to think of the clean-up crew as a dungeon-level-independent group of monsters, for example, along with vermin: to my mind, both should largely appear throughout a mega-dungeon, regardless of the monster's level/HD vs. the dungeon's level. Are you taking into account rival NPC parties, as well? They're mostly level-independent too, now that I think about it (after the first few levels, per the DMG). I like your "working from the bottom up" approach---may have to give that some more thought for my Castle Greyhawk! Allan. I took the level designated by either the manual the monster came from (MM2, Fiend Folio), or based on the calculated XP that the DMG uses to designate the level of a monster. I'm using this level as a loose measure of difficulty to introduce monsters around that dungeon level, and to adjust the number of monsters appearing. In the monster manuals, sometimes the number appearing is for a lair, other times it is for wandering. I will probably look first to see if there is a number appearing listed on an existing wandering monster table and adjust from there based on actual level of the monster; or if the monster is not on a table, look up and decide if it is a lair. If it is a number relating to a lair I'll make up a judgementally arbitrary amount; I have the feel for which monsters appear alone or in small groups, and which ones appear in large numbers and grow exponentially the deeper they are encountered. A few of my level assignments were to a group (like giant bees or aspis), and may have been more judgmental instead of by a set rule. For bees, if worker bees are present I pretty much know that some soldier bees are going to be interspersed (but at fewer numbers than found deeper). For aspis the opposite is true since the lower level larva and (females?) are specifically noted as rare, so I assigned them the level of the common appearing aspis type. As far as filtering to correct entries, several "group" specific entities like bandit leader types F-M/CLR/M-U, Aspis types, Dragon HD sizes are all missing and would need to be added. My thought was to save myself some time, and if I added a monster of that type I would reference what HD size or type is appropriate for that level in the monster manual entry. My monster category groupings reflect the info I need to build and stock my dungeon (greek & weird fiction). I actually have a separate list of unique monster names that don't appear in the known monster lists, but I wanted to limit their use in the campaign. Stuff like Medusa's two sister-types, each possessing different sets of powers that aren't petrification; and the truly gargantuan weird eldritch horrors that can be found deeper within the dungeon; levitating monsters the size of whales floating through dark caverns, jelly fish types, and keening horrors. Rival NPC parties will be part of the Unique encounter subtable for each level. I haven't landed on a methodology for generation yet. This is going to be a convention campaign dungeon I will run 3 or 4 times a convention, so I'm thinking about recording the different parties that embark into the dungeon and recording the individual characters in each party; and just building an encounter list using just those and dead characters. I also want to include some of non-adventurer parties such as the clerics, f-m, and m-u groups that can be found in the LBBs and Monster & Treasure Assortments. My feeling is that those are usually groups of same-class characters supported by henchmen or hirelings/mercenaries. Jimm Johnson suggested I build this dungeon from the bottom up and I finally arrived at the conclusion that he is right. I want players to find more novelty and things of interest the deeper they go, and I have found that with other mega-dungeons the top down approach runs out of steam after the first two or three levels of creativity. In addition it makes it possible to build clues, artwork, references, etc. if I have already placed the object/creature in the dungeon. There will be a handful of artifact level items to be found throughout the dungeon; and the core conceit of adventuring into the dungeon will be to recover "The Palantir of Ouranos" (i.e. the Amulet of Yendor) that was cast into the depths of the abyss. As far as building my encounter tables, I have to rely more on Holmes than AD&D for probabilities and structure. The way that the encounter probability chart is built assumes that monsters from a dungeon level are found across the entire dungeon level (even if they are side areas or alternate areas). With Holmes I'm able to be a bit more flexible and build out a set of monsters for each area, and then include a chance of monsters from connecting areas appearing in the current area. My structure is currently: 1. Random roll for encountering monster from different connecting areas (d12). Options are: same level, 1 area away, or 2 areas away. If it is an area away, I assign the possibilities a number and roll randomly to determine. Same if it is two areas away, but requiring two rolls. 2. I want my encounter tables to have at least 12 slots. 1 result is reserved for the Cleanup Crew subtable, and 1 result is for a unique encounters subtable. Some areas are not suitable for cleanup crew or unique encounters, so I will replace them with specific monsters. My cleanup crew table is the same set of monsters no matter what level they appear on, but my unique encounters subtable is specific to the area.
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Sept 10, 2019 9:16:00 GMT -6
Using my new monster list I was able finish mapping out the vertical side-view of my dungeon and the connections between them. 14 layers (or levels if you prefer), 29 levels (or areas if you prefer). Still to-do before NTRPG Con 2020: 1. Fill out wandering encounter tables for each level. 2. Fill out unique encounter tables for each level. 3. Describe the unique features, general features, lairs, and any unique tricks or traps to be found in each level; working from bottom to top. (Most of this is in my head, scribbled in my journal, or scattered in electronic notes on googledrive.) 4. Map each level working from bottom to top. 5. Draw/commission the map of the city of Partholon that lays atop the megadungeon. 6. Write up sets of rumors to be unlocked and disbursed the deeper adventuring parties go. 7. Create a new Planet Eris DM Screen. I hope you give us a go at this awesomeness at our Camp Allen Mini-con! Fight on!
|
|
|
Post by countingwizard on Sept 10, 2019 10:45:21 GMT -6
Using my new monster list I was able finish mapping out the vertical side-view of my dungeon and the connections between them. 14 layers (or levels if you prefer), 29 levels (or areas if you prefer). Still to-do before NTRPG Con 2020: 1. Fill out wandering encounter tables for each level. 2. Fill out unique encounter tables for each level. 3. Describe the unique features, general features, lairs, and any unique tricks or traps to be found in each level; working from bottom to top. (Most of this is in my head, scribbled in my journal, or scattered in electronic notes on googledrive.) 4. Map each level working from bottom to top. 5. Draw/commission the map of the city of Partholon that lays atop the megadungeon. 6. Write up sets of rumors to be unlocked and disbursed the deeper adventuring parties go. 7. Create a new Planet Eris DM Screen. I hope you give us a go at this awesomeness at our Camp Allen Mini-con! Fight on! You did hear the part about 29 areas right? Some of those will also be 2-page maps.
|
|
|
Post by countingwizard on Sept 20, 2019 9:59:00 GMT -6
Does anyone have an opinion on level depth and difficulty? OD&D uses the 6th level as the most difficult level of monster, while AD&D uses 10th. I also think I read in the DMG that deeper levels may add retinues to the monsters encountered instead of adding multiple of the same monsters.
My concern is that with 14 dungeon levels, the special abilities of the monsters encountered at this depth will make it an unfun impossible nightmare deathmarch to the final goal. I've got 4 levels beyond 10 to populate with monsters, and I feel that I should be shifting the [monster] threat of deeper areas towards strange and unfamiliar monsters that are unique to the campaign, but which players must learn how to deal with via trial and error rather than player knowledge and mastery of the monster manual.
How do you guys view the proper progression of monster difficulty as they get deeper, especially at the extreme end of the spectrum where dungeons theoretically could go on endlessly?
Should deep dungeons be about increasing the difficulty exponentially, fighting gods ala BECMI, etc. or do you agree with me that they should remain places of exploration whose difficulty is partly a factor of being able to reach them in the first place?
|
|
|
Post by grodog on Sept 20, 2019 12:49:50 GMT -6
How do you guys view the proper progression of monster difficulty as they get deeper, especially at the extreme end of the spectrum where dungeons theoretically could go on endlessly? I don't use a 1:1 mapping of dungeon level depth and monster difficulty in my version of Castle Greyhawk, since PCs may move up/down the levels with some rapidity (willing and otherwise ). So, several adjacent dungeon levels are set to the same average monster level of difficulty, but with different ranges for the min/max level of difficulty in any given level; see www.greyhawkonline.com/grodog/gh_castle_grodog.html#levels for what that looks like. I'm not sure if that kind of schema will address the concerns you're raising, countingwizard but perhaps it might help some? Allan.
|
|
|
Post by delta on Sept 20, 2019 13:06:31 GMT -6
Does anyone have an opinion on level depth and difficulty? OD&D uses the 6th level as the most difficult level of monster, while AD&D uses 10th. I also think I read in the DMG that deeper levels may add retinues to the monsters encountered instead of adding multiple of the same monsters. I think that more important than the monster level ideces is the monster determination matrix involved (the roll for what level of monster you get at a given dungeon level). The OD&D matrix is too harsh and the AD&D matrix is too easy (over-correcting), really. Ideally there should be something in the middle (e.g., the M&TA product gives evidence in this direction). Personally I kind of iron things out and say on standard dungeon level N we expect PCs of level N, and also a median monster of equivalent hit dice (EHD) N. I haven't played this at the very deep levels, but note in my computer-based assessments that some monsters have very high EHDs, such as purple worms (32) and vampires (38). So regardless of what monster level table they appear in, even on the 12th dungeon level they should probably only appear solo, with room for teams of such at levels below that. In theory, at least.
|
|
|
Post by talysman on Sept 20, 2019 14:46:01 GMT -6
I've thought about monster level vs. dungeon level a couple times, but have never completely decided what to do about it. Above a certain level, the original rules basically halve the dungeon level and adjust that to get the base monster level, which I think is a good idea: start off with the first three or four dungeon levels getting worse quickly, but slow that progression down afterwards so that you aren't flooding the level with Level 6 monsters so early. The original rules also basically have a monster level range on each dungeon level running from adjusted dungeon level -1 to adjDLvl +3. But if, as Delta suggests, the difficulty gets too brutal too fast, it might be wise to knock off the Level+3 monsters from the level and slow down the progression even more so that you aren't even seeing Level 6 monsters until at least the 7th dungeon level. I'm thinking something like: Dungeon Level | Base Monster Level |
---|
1 | 1 | 2-3 | 2 | 4-6 | 3 | 7-9 | 4 | 10-12 | 5 | 13+ | 6 |
Monster Level Adjustment Roll: 1d6 | Adjusted Monster Level |
---|
0-2 | -1 | 3-4 | Base | 5 | +1 | 6+ | +2 |
Current practice is to roll for which table to use every time you roll to stock a room randomly or determine a wandering monster. But a smarter way to do it would be to roll at the beginning for each of several roles to fill: - Level Boss: +1 to Adjustment roll
- 1-3 Common Creatures: no modifier to Adjustment roll
- 1-3 Less Common Creatures: -1 to Adjustment roll
Fill whichever roles you already have in mind, then roll for the other monsters before designing the level. Build your wandering monster tables primarily from that list, perhaps filling in other slots with vermin or raiding monsters from another level. Depending on the rolls, you can interpret different storylines for the level. For example, if the Boss is the same level as one or more other creatures, the level may be subdivided into territories, with either a truce or an open war in progress. If a Less Common creature winds up with a higher level than any of the other creatures, it may act as an elite squad taking orders from the boss.
|
|
eotb
Level 1 Medium
Posts: 22
|
Post by eotb on Sept 21, 2019 10:25:53 GMT -6
Monsters are like spells; not all of a given level are equal in threat. There’s usually an upper tier and a lower tier.
When I have more then 10 levels I don’t use one level to a set of level monsters. More than one level will have level IV monsters, etc. just think of X as “deepest” instead of literally level X
|
|
|
Post by countingwizard on Sept 24, 2019 8:15:14 GMT -6
How do you guys view the proper progression of monster difficulty as they get deeper, especially at the extreme end of the spectrum where dungeons theoretically could go on endlessly? I don't use a 1:1 mapping of dungeon level depth and monster difficulty in my version of Castle Greyhawk, since PCs may move up/down the levels with some rapidity (willing and otherwise ). So, several adjacent dungeon levels are set to the same average monster level of difficulty, but with different ranges for the min/max level of difficulty in any given level; see www.greyhawkonline.com/grodog/gh_castle_grodog.html#levels for what that looks like. I'm not sure if that kind of schema will address the concerns you're raising, countingwizard but perhaps it might help some? Allan. I've been reading through your dungeon and those are some sprawling maps. I noticed one of your levels actually decreases somewhat in monster difficulty from the level above it. I'm not sure I ever found your monster tables though. Does your dungeon share the same encounter table even for side-levels? So far what I'm getting from you guys is that: 1. I should mix monster level difficulties in a single level (already doing). 2. I should distribute monsters across what levels I do have rather than directly correspond monsters to their listed level (strictly or loosely). Note that I believe this makes it more difficult to organically grow a dungeon over time and add to it. 3. No complaints about introducing unfamiliar monsters as a form of difficulty. I want each level and side-level of the dungeon to be inhabited by a specific/distinct set of monsters, that can be found occasionally roaming up to n area-connections away. Right now that is 2, but I'm considering making it longer. Basically if an encounter indicates a monster is from a different level, I'll have to trace the source along n number of paths, rolling to randomly determine path choice at each connection.
|
|
eotb
Level 1 Medium
Posts: 22
|
Post by eotb on Sept 24, 2019 11:10:28 GMT -6
2. I should distribute monsters across what levels I do have rather than directly correspond monsters to their listed level (strictly or loosely). Note that I believe this makes it more difficult to organically grow a dungeon over time and add to it. I want each level and side-level of the dungeon to be inhabited by a specific/distinct set of monsters, that can be found occasionally roaming up to n area-connections away. Right now that is 2, but I'm considering making it longer. Basically if an encounter indicates a monster is from a different level, I'll have to trace the source along n number of paths, rolling to randomly determine path choice at each connection. If organically growing a dungeon over time then it doesn't really matter; use monster level = dungeon level and readjust the spread of monster levels over the dungeon levels as they've grown beyond 10 - that's what restocking is for. What I took from your posts is that you were trying to come up with a system to outline (at a minimum) what monsters go on what level before play begins for the entirety of the dungeon. My posts do presume in such an instance that the DM has an initial number of dungeon levels in mind. I can do organic, and I can do organized planning, but I can't really do organized planned organic. Others may be more talented in that area that I.
|
|
|
Post by ffilz on Sept 24, 2019 11:42:05 GMT -6
I don't think you need to have all your levels planned out in order to use organized tables. If you have a general thought you want a dungeon to be as many levels as you need, but you're only going to plan out a few levels (or even just one) at the start, have your tables of monster levels and just use what's appropriate for those levels. As you add levels and sub-levels, decide at that time what "level" they are going to be, and continue to use your tables. You definitely don't need to decide, well, I only want to draw up 3 levels right now, so each level has to have two monster levels assigned to it.
|
|