Author Topic: Adapting 4th ed way - slightly different rules for monsters  (Read 2217 times)

Offline ImperatorK

  • Legendary Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2313
  • Chara did nothing wrong.
    • View Profile
    • Kristof Imperator YouTube Channel
Adapting 4th ed way - slightly different rules for monsters
« on: January 30, 2012, 11:04:19 AM »
I don't know 4th ed rules, but from what I heard they have different rules for PCs and monsters. In 3.5/PF you essentially use the same rules for both. Why not establish some special rules that only concern monsters or only PCs?
For example I'm thinking on making it my houserule to give PCs full HP at each level, while NPCs and monsters will still get only half HD (or roled, if you're old-school).
What other houserules could there be?
Magic is for weaklings.

Alucard: "*snif snif* Huh? Suddenly it reeks of hypocrisy in here. Oh, if it isn't the Catholic Church. And what's this? No little Timmy glued to your crotch. Progress!"
My YT channel - LoL gameplay

Offline awaken_D_M_golem

  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 7639
  • classique style , invisible tail
    • View Profile
Re: Adapting 4th ed way - slightly different rules for monsters
« Reply #1 on: January 30, 2012, 06:34:37 PM »
hmm ...  :???


4e regular standard monsters = Companion Characters
But the CCs are supposed to be behind the PCs in power.
CC at +1 level to the party, is almost equal to a PC in game maths
... it's a little boring, but it's very regularized.

Class Template is a cut rate version of a normal PC class, with other goodies.
Increases a standard to an elite / basically *2 of a normal standard.

Feats + Gear + inside Class trickery+ Ppath stuff + EpicD stuff
... offsets the 1/2 per level PC numbers vs. 1/1 per level Monster numbers.


It's sorta a game maths way, of ditching the CR + LA + class level business.

How to convert ... idk?
Your codpiece is a mimic.

Offline Bauglir

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 629
  • Constrained
    • View Profile
Re: Adapting 4th ed way - slightly different rules for monsters
« Reply #2 on: January 31, 2012, 02:33:50 AM »
My reasoning is because the distinction is arbitrary enough as it is. Particularly when it comes to playable monsters, where different rules land you with a PC who is generally a "lesser" version of whatever their race is, but better at general adventurerness. But, mostly, it's about elegance for me. Having different rulesets like that smacks of a kludge, like making non-combat NPCs and objects immune to damage. Ideally, the system should have support for letting players take over any creature in the game, provided it's appropriate for the power level - even mindless things could be one-off temporary characters or vehicles for the players who only want to kick in doors and murder up some monsters.

That said, there are settings where giving the PCs special rules is appropriate, usually when the PCs are supposed to be special people. In a campaign I ran a while ago, the PCs were gestalt. Most NPCs weren't, because the PCs were the Big Damn Heroes of the entire setting, and wound up becoming living gods by the end of it. Similarly, and on a lesser scale, the max HP thing. They don't get max HP just because they're PCs, but because they're badasses who're much tougher than anybody has a right to be. Put another way, they're PCs because they're the jackasses lucky enough to have rolled max on all their hit dice.

Selection bias can account for differences like that, but from what I've heard, in 4E the systems are completely divorced - for monsters, you assign stats as you need to and toss in one or two each of at-will and encounter abilities, and then cross-reference with the guidelines for what a monster of a given CR ought to have for its numbers; all of this is basically arbitrary "Okay, let's use whatever works" design. Put another way, it seems like 4E basically doesn't have a system, and relies on Rule 0 to fix that. For players, you follow the system of character creation. That said, I've not looked at 4E since it's release, so there are likely dozens of people who are more familiar with it and with less hazy memories that can correct me.

Offline Cagemarrow

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 192
  • New to the new boards
    • View Profile
Re: Adapting 4th ed way - slightly different rules for monsters
« Reply #3 on: February 02, 2012, 07:57:14 AM »
I personally as a Player and DM absolutely hate when players can't learn to do the same things as monsters, if they are willing to spend the appropriate resources to do so. The rules should apply the same way for everyone, period. Its the only way for the universe to be "fair". Specific exceptions can apply based on magic and/or special training but again if players are willing to learn this they should be able to do it as well.

For example I don't see any reason why a barbarian couldn't learn the Awesome Blow or even the Thick Skin feats as long as he could somehow meet the requirements.

Offline awaken_D_M_golem

  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 7639
  • classique style , invisible tail
    • View Profile
Re: Adapting 4th ed way - slightly different rules for monsters
« Reply #4 on: February 02, 2012, 05:01:02 PM »
4e feats can come over with no problem. All of them.
Heck, you could require PCs to take one per level,
and with all the 4e restrictions still in place.
Adapt them a little = Trained + 5 in UMD feat ... rather nice

4e like skill groupings are in UA / SRD already.
Some can be too much early game.
Pales toward 4th level 3e spells.
Your codpiece is a mimic.