Not as brutal as I recall them in AD&D. But still a total nuisance.
Spoiler
(http://www.enworld.org/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=63972&d=1410302029&stc=1)
And is there a way to resize a image post??
And oops, didnt see the MM thread below. ook!
Wow! I am completely impressed by this beastie. That's a scary mofo. Shame the rest of the previews haven't been as interesting. This Intellect Devourer is probably nastier than its 1e original.
That's not some creature to underestimate wow!
Cool!
AD&D:
AC:4
HD:6d8+6
att: 4
dmg: 1d4 x4 + psi power attack
Hide in shadow as a lvl 10 thief.
hit only by +3 or better. Immune to most spells, and lightning bolt does only 1 point per die damage.
5e:
AC:12
HD:6d4+6 (21)
att 1 + devour
dmg: 2d4+2(7) + devour for 2d10 psychic and possibly having INT reduced to zero.
Resistant to non magical weapons.
And effectively an instakill if it can beat someone unconcious in an INT vs INT contest.
While physically weaker and no longer immune to virtually everything... the new version is indeed damn scary.
Wrap the image with Spoiler, it will hide it, there's no autosizing.
Pull it's immunities and it's an easy to gang up and chop 'em to bits - the uber-creepy braineating isn't going to work against a party.
Pull it's stealth abilities, now you've greatly eliminated the chance that it's going to be able to get that party member one on one.
It *sounds* scary, but look at what needs to happen...
Intellect Devour
1. Fail a DC 12 Int save
2. The GM has to roll over your intelligence on 3d6. Have a 19 or 20? You laugh it off.
Body Thief
Fail an Int contest against a creature with an Int of 12.
Granted, if your Intellect has been Devoured, then you're not going to be saving with an Int of 0, but still, this is far from the Unholy Terror it was in earlier games.
This used to be a possible TPK monster. If you're a total bastard and have the party encounter someone with the Intellect Devourer already inside their skull and allow the Intellect Devourer to use Intellect Devour from inside the body, then now we're getting into Thing level of Horror at least until someone casts a very basic spell to drive it out.
They managed to make it *sound* more creepy, since how an Intellect Devourer did what it did wasn't very well explained in the MM before, but by completely nerfing all it's physical capabilities, the only reason to fear this thing is if you get captured and tossed in a Mind Flayer arena and you dumpstatted Int.
Quote from: CRKrueger;786357Wrap the image with Spoiler, it will hide it, there's no autosizing.
Pull it's immunities and it's an easy to gang up and chop 'em to bits - the uber-creepy braineating isn't going to work against a party.
Pull it's stealth abilities, now you've greatly eliminated the chance that it's going to be able to get that party member one on one.
It *sounds* scary, but look at what needs to happen...
Intellect Devour
1. Fail a DC 12 Int save
2. The GM has to roll over your intelligence on 3d6. Have a 19 or 20? You laugh it off.
Body Thief
Fail an Int contest against a creature with an Int of 12.
Granted, if your Intellect has been Devoured, then you're not going to be saving with an Int of 0, but still, this is far from the Unholy Terror it was in earlier games.
This used to be a possible TPK monster. If you're a total bastard and have the party encounter someone with the Intellect Devourer already inside their skull and allow the Intellect Devourer to use Intellect Devour from inside the body, then now we're getting into Thing level of Horror at least until someone casts a very basic spell to drive it out.
They managed to make it *sound* more creepy, since how an Intellect Devourer did what it did wasn't very well explained in the MM before, but by completely nerfing all it's physical capabilities, the only reason to fear this thing is if you get captured and tossed in a Mind Flayer arena and you dumpstatted Int.
What makes it scary from a player perspective is what happens if you
do fail. It doesn't matter that the numbers are statistically on your side.
Quote from: hexgrid;786385What makes it scary from a player perspective is what happens if you do fail. It doesn't matter that the numbers are statistically on your side.
Right. Illusionism. It reads scary, but doesn't play scary, players will squash that thing like a bug unless the GM works to give it a shot.
Quote from: hexgrid;786385What makes it scary from a player perspective is what happens if you do fail. It doesn't matter that the numbers are statistically on your side.
I plan on changing the 3d6 roll with a d20. With a max stat of 20, no one is immune.
On its own, even against level ones, it propably won't do much before getting squashed like the bug it is.
But a bunch, already in the head of some Thralls? Dangerous, one of them might get lucky.
The bunch above along with a Mindflayer leader and an umber hulk?
Scary. You could very well lose that high level fighter with intelligence as dump stat.
The thing looks designed with bounded accuracy in mind, I say.
They did a fine job on this one.
Creepy as hell, all kinds of potential plot hooks, and still iconic.
And we now have our second monster capable of what is essentially an ability drain. Nice thing though, is that it doesn't screw around. All or nothing.
I just thought of something pretty funny. What if someone were wearing a headband of intellect and their brain gets devoured.
Because of the magical headband the poor sap may not even realize that he's brain dead without it! :D
I now want a Mojo Devourer that drains your cool.
"Dwayne Dibbly!" *
*One for the Dwarfers out there.
That mind flayer quote at the top actually made me laugh out loud. I can't even remember the last time an official D&D rulebook actually seemed as fun to read as the 5E ones.
Quote from: Elph;786435That mind flayer quote at the top actually made me laugh out loud. I can't even remember the last time an official D&D rulebook actually seemed as fun to read as the 5E ones.
Yes.
I remember mearls posting an article on how humor has no place in D&D source- and rulebooks (I think in 4e developement circle, but I might be way of).
Let's just say I'm really glad that stance changed.
Quote from: Gold Roger;786458Yes.
I remember mearls posting an article on how humor has no place in D&D source- and rulebooks (I think in 4e developement circle, but I might be way of).
Let's just say I'm really glad that stance changed.
This is a serious game! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eCWOCPxPmus)
I don't really care how tough it is or isn't; what I dig is that it is interesting!
god help me i need to get something off my chest:
i'm a glutton for punishment so i still read the rpg.net d20 forum -- the reaction to the intellect devourer there has been...quite different from here. take it away, Sage Genesis:
QuoteI don't think the CR is a typo. It's the same for the will-o'-wisp. Some creatures are apparently meant to be "rocket tag", meaning that you're fine if they miss but you're dead if they hit.
I don't like it. The only remedies are far beyond what a level 2 party has available. I also think the ability is poorly explained; gaining knowledge of spells implies that you can cast them (or does it? I'm not sure), but is simply having knowledge of spells enough to cast Cleric spells or Warlock spells? If so, why does anybody need to follow a god or make a pact? Does the Devourer ever lose the abilities it gains from devouring brains? It doesn't say anywhere that leaving the body causes loss of knowledge, nor does it make "common sense" because it ate the brain. So doesn't that mean the typical Devourer has a ton of class abilities available to it after a while? Cool idea for a villain but inadequately explained for a monster. All in all this is turning out to be rather disappointing.
admittedly i'm cherry-picking -- Sage Genesis is a one-man olympic games of tendentious, socially-incompetent point-missing -- but the whole thread is fucked this way. here the comments are like 'cool scary monster, here are some ways to boost its threat level' and TBP's thread is this weird mix of speculating about editorial competence, bitching about the definition of 'houserule,' passive-aggressive
sotto voce moaning about 4e's 'playstyle,' seeming consensus that the rules
proscribe action first and foremost...
even i'm less imaginatively straitjacketed than that. and i'm rubbish.
thank god they're a rounding error on the hobby at large.
Quote from: Larsdangly;786550I don't really care how tough it is or isn't; what I dig is that it is interesting!
yep. the ID says 'play me' in big letters. can't ask for much more than that.
Quote from: stuffis;786961yep. the ID says 'play me' in big letters. can't ask for much more than that.
Well, maybe that it not risk blowing up a campaign without warning when used ... but then, D&D isn't a game for new and inexperienced players, is it?
(I'm not sure if I'm serious or sarcastic there; the game is pitched as the entry point to the hobby, but the playstyle it goes for, especially in its more Old-School-inspired modes, can be bizarre and demanding.)
An encounter with a weird and potentially life threatening monster is not game wrecking. It is the game.
Quote from: Larsdangly;786974An encounter with a weird and potentially life threatening monster is not game wrecking. It is the game.
neatly sums up something i couldn't understand/accept about 'old-school' play for the longest time. nicely put.
In old school games your suppose to encounter weird creatures, meet strange people, explore places, and take exotic treasure. If you die along the way that is the draw back of exploring that mysterious dungeon that you shouldn't go in the first place.
Quote from: Armchair Gamer;786970Well, maybe that it not risk blowing up a campaign without warning when used ... but then, D&D isn't a game for new and inexperienced players, is it?
(I'm not sure if I'm serious or sarcastic there; the game is pitched as the entry point to the hobby, but the playstyle it goes for, especially in its more Old-School-inspired modes, can be bizarre and demanding.)
This presumes your campaign can be "blown up" by character deaths. I say just don't build your campaigns that way. For me personally, the day I stopped building around the assumption that the players
had to survive was a moment of liberation.
But of course make sure you inform the players of this at the start of the campaign. If you explain it right, they realize it's a liberation too: yeah there's no safety net, but there's no script with plot beats to meet either.
Quote from: Armchair Gamer;786970Well, maybe that it not risk blowing up a campaign without warning when used ... but then, D&D isn't a game for new and inexperienced players, is it?
(I'm not sure if I'm serious or sarcastic there; the game is pitched as the entry point to the hobby, but the playstyle it goes for, especially in its more Old-School-inspired modes, can be bizarre and demanding.)
So what? A few characters get blowed up REAL GOOD! Roll some new ones and perhaps their luck will be better.
Its just a game. Do people freak out when its checkmate time in chess? Should you lose it when you go bankrupt in Monopoly?
Whiny bitches & sore losers shouldn't get involved in playing games.
Quote from: Shipyard Locked;787005But of course make sure you inform the players of this at the start of the campaign.
In all my years of gaming, I have only come across one person who assumed his PC was going to be always saved by 'plot'.
It seems ludicrous to me that you might have to explain in a game that involved deadly combat, that the PCs might die. A more sensible option, which no-one ever advocates, is you should sit down and tell the players if you intend to fudge the dice and always save them.
Quote from: Exploderwizard;787007Its just a game. Do people freak out when its checkmate time in chess? Should you lose it when you go bankrupt in Monopoly?
While I agree, I HAVE seen both of these things happen in real life by regular players. Especially in Monopoly. In most of my social circles, it's lovingly referred to as "the rage-quit board flipping game".
I consider it a form of unacceptable anti-social behavior to be a bad sport about loosing at games of any kind, and can be quite pissy about the idea of enabling these sorts of useless babies at a roleplaying game table. Doing so robs the game of the vital spark that comes from genuine risk and so deflates the whole experience for everyone else. I would rather do some chores around my house than waste time playing a session of D&D that contains no significant risk of character death.
As a DM I would never unfairly kill the character of such a player. But I might be standing suspiciously nearby when something unfortunate happened to him...
Quote from: jadrax;787008It seems ludicrous to me that you might have to explain in a game that involved deadly combat, that the PCs might die. A more sensible option, which no-one ever advocates, is you should sit down and tell the players if you intend to fudge the dice and always save them.
Yes, this is very telling. Why are they so embarrassed to admit what they're really doing and build it officially into their campaign's social contract at the start?
For instance, say what you will about
7th Sea's terrible design, at least it told everyone up front that death was not usually an option and alternative penalties (capture, loss of crucial time, etc) were the standard. This was done to overtly encourage a certain style of wild play.
Quote from: Exploderwizard;787007So what? A few characters get blowed up REAL GOOD! Roll some new ones and perhaps their luck will be better.
A legitimate mode of play. The questions I'd have are:
1. Does 5E warn players about this going in? That is, is it clear that a CR 2 is something that has a realistic chance of taking out a 2nd-level PC if the odds go against it? From what's present in the Basic rules, I'd suggest that the ID might be undervalued, and bounded accuracy and the potential for wide gaps between proficient and non-proficient saves mean that creatures with save or die abilities that bypass the HP system are going to be very swingy. Something like BECMI's star ratings might have been a good idea to flag monsters with unpredictable abilities like this.
2. Does the rest of the system support this? Better than 3E or 4E, but not quite as well as Basic. Probably in the same range of 'quick and easy' character generation as AD&D, maybe a step above it.
3. Is this what new players want, and will they be energized or frustrated by high-swing monsters like this, presented with minimal guidance? I have no idea; for WotC's sake, I hope they know what they're doing.
Quote from: Armchair Gamer;787047A legitimate mode of play. The questions I'd have are:
1. Does 5E warn players about this going in? That is, is it clear that a CR 2 is something that has a realistic chance of taking out a 2nd-level PC if the odds go against it? From what's present in the Basic rules, I'd suggest that the ID might be undervalued, and bounded accuracy and the potential for wide gaps between proficient and non-proficient saves mean that creatures with save or die abilities that bypass the HP system are going to be very swingy. Something like BECMI's star ratings might have been a good idea to flag monsters with unpredictable abilities like this.
2. Does the rest of the system support this? Better than 3E or 4E, but not quite as well as Basic. Probably in the same range of 'quick and easy' character generation as AD&D, maybe a step above it.
3. Is this what new players want, and will they be energized or frustrated by high-swing monsters like this, presented with minimal guidance? I have no idea; for WotC's sake, I hope they know what they're doing.
1) Does adventuring in any way seem like the safe route to fame & fortune? What is it about going into dangerous places full of monsters that would give the impression that injury and death are rare events?
2) I generated a character in 8 minutes. Not too bad at all.
3) Players who prefer less dangerous adventures should speak up or perhaps have their character retire at first level and become shopkeepers.
Quote from: Exploderwizard;7870533) Players who prefer less dangerous adventures should speak up or perhaps have their character retire at first level and become shopkeepers.
I admit I'd totally play a Harvest Moon/Rune Factory/Animal Crossing kind of game about the quaint, ordinary lives of quirky villagers. But not when I'm trying to play D&D.
Quote from: Armchair Gamer;786970Well, maybe that it not risk blowing up a campaign without warning when used ... but then, D&D isn't a game for new and inexperienced players, is it?
It has a relatively small chance of taking out a single PC (effectively requiring two Saves to be failed). That PC isn't permanently taken out and can be restored.
I am not sure how that is blowing up a campaign. I would expect that there is more danger of losing a PC permanently through HP loss in most fights.
Quote from: Larsdangly;786974An encounter with a weird and potentially life threatening monster is not game wrecking. It is the game.
Truth has a certain ring to it.
And thus the grizzled veterans of the Company of the Rusty Blade, armed with sword and spell, descended far beneath the earth, into the Dread Caves of Comfort, where they had a delightful noon tea, followed by pedicures and a lovely afternoon nap, except for mighty Sir Boris, who ventured off alone into the Temple of Fluffy Kittens and Licky Puppies and was never heard from again until almost half an hour past dinnertime.
Quote from: Raven;787189And thus the grizzled veterans of the Company of the Rusty Blade, armed with sword and spell, descended far beneath the earth, into the Dread Caves of Comfort, where they had a delightful noon tea, followed by pedicures and a lovely afternoon nap, except for mighty Sir Boris, who ventured off alone into the Temple of Fluffy Kittens and Licky Puppies and was never heard from again until almost half an hour past dinnertime.
I believe this is called D&D Expeditions or D&D Encounters.
I was roped into a Pathfinder event last year because they needed an extra player to make the table "legal" and there were 2 players who complained that their PCs took any damage during the entire adventure. Not died, not downed, just took HP loss.
Apparently, that's a thing with what's left of the hobby.
5e was built for the Diapers & Dragons playstyle so I am not surprised the Intellect Devourer would cause consternation. It does not fit the tone of the rest of the game we have seen so far.
Quote from: LibraryLass;787073I admit I'd totally play a Harvest Moon/Rune Factory/Animal Crossing kind of game about the quaint, ordinary lives of quirky villagers. But not when I'm trying to play D&D.
Agricola?
Quote from: Omega;787211Agricola?
Yeah, but more of an RPG.
Quote from: LibraryLass;787218Yeah, but more of an RPG.
Ryuutama (http://kotohi.com/ryuutama/)?
Quote from: Skywalker;787220Ryuutama (http://kotohi.com/ryuutama/)?
Hm. Interesting. Yes, very much like that, but more based around a central location than a journey.
(Golden Sky Stories also seems to appeal to this interest... clearly Japanese gamers must have a similar hankering.)
Well nice to see that you guys haven't lost your sneering contempt for people who play differently ;3
Anyhoo the issue at hand seems is sort of clouded by the fact that 4rries are involved in the conversation. The fact that an Intellect Devourer can potentially down a PC in one round is awesome and if I was less informed or more naive I'd see that as an omen that the days of padded sumo are finally over. Sadly this is not the case this: see also 5e Pit Fiend -_-
The problem with the ID is that they are seriously more dangerous as you go up in levels. Anyone who is not prioritizing INT will not only be vulnerable to their attack at level 2, they will remain exactly as vulnerable for their entire adventuring career. You simply can not have that in a CR system because as you ascend through levels you are expected to fight more Intellect Devourers in less favorable circumstances -_-
Quote from: gamerGoyf;787255Well nice to see that you guys haven't lost your sneering contempt for people who play differently ;3
Anyhoo the issue at hand seems is sort of clouded by the fact that 4rries are involved in the conversation. The fact that an Intellect Devourer can potentially down a PC in one round is awesome and if I was less informed or more naive I'd see that as an omen that the days of padded sumo are finally over. Sadly this is not the case this: see also 5e Pit Fiend -_-
The problem with the ID is that they are seriously more dangerous as you go up in levels. Anyone who is not prioritizing INT will not only be vulnerable to their attack at level 2, they will remain exactly as vulnerable for their entire adventuring career. You simply can not have that in a CR system because as you ascend through levels you are expected to fight more Intellect Devourers in less favorable circumstances -_-
If only someone would come along and free DM's from the tyranny of CR rules of thumb. I dream that one day we may all be free.
Quote from: gamerGoyf;787255You simply can not have that in a CR system because as you ascend through levels you are expected to fight more Intellect Devourers in less favorable circumstances -_-
I was not aware of that! I had no idea that per RAW, my campaign had to include X amount of intellect devourers encountered in Y conditions.
The formula to calculate that must be in the unreleased DMG somewhere. :rolleyes:
Obviously everyone remains as free as they ever were to ignore a concept like CR as something that guides the design of dungeons and NPC's. The only trouble is, if you prefer an old-school, sandbox approach in which the setting is populated independent of the levels of the adventurers who will show up at your table, you feel marginalized by the body of published adventures. The D&D (and D&D-like) part of the hobby is strongly dominated by adventure path style publications and designed, or balanced, encounters. I find it all cloying, patronizing and dull. No one is forcing me to buy these things, but it sucks to watch a hobby that used to have so many great support products migrate this direction.
Quote from: gamerGoyf;787255The problem with the ID is that they are seriously more dangerous as you go up in levels. Anyone who is not prioritizing INT will not only be vulnerable to their attack at level 2, they will remain exactly as vulnerable for their entire adventuring career.
I don't know that I'd say they're 'more dangerous' so much as that their danger is more or less level-independent, due to bounded accuracy, lack of improvement for non-proficient PCs, and the way they ignore HP. That's why I wondered if some sort of flag independent of CR might be a good idea for creatures like this.
But guidance for new DMs on 'here's what you can expect if you throw this creature up against a party' is apparently tyrannical and unfun. We must make the game as difficult to understand and run as possible! Only the Elite can play True D&D! We must cull the herd! Exterminate the unfit! EXTERMINATE!
;) :p
I swear. Sometimes discussions like these make me feel like there are people out there who can't figure things out for themselves, but need any potential issues spelled out for them in advance.
Whatever happened to hitting a roadblock (that either might not have a rule for, or even contradicts a rule), and just coming up with a solution at your table?
Do people really need an explicit instruction that says, "your PC can die as an adventurer in this game."? or "even though this creature is CR2, it can still be dangerous to a higher level PC so don't follow the CR RAW guidelines for this one"? What next, do we need to have warning lables that say don't eat the PHB?
Quote from: Sacrosanct;787275What next, do we need to have warning lables that say don't eat the PHB?
By Juiblex's chunkier ichor, could you have posted this like 30 seconds sooner?!
Quote from: Sacrosanct;787275I swear. Sometimes discussions like these make me feel like there are people out there who can't figure things out for themselves, but need any potential issues spelled out for them in advance.
Whatever happened to hitting a roadblock (that either might not have a rule for, or even contradicts a rule), and just coming up with a solution at your table?
Do people really need an explicit instruction that says, "your PC can die as an adventurer in this game."? or "even though this creature is CR2, it can still be dangerous to a higher level PC so don't follow the CR RAW guidelines for this one"? What next, do we need to have warning lables that say don't eat the PHB?
LOL!!! Gamers these days make me think of this entertaining quote:
I've *seen* the future, you know what it is. It's made by a 47 year-old virgin in gray pajamas soaking in a bubble bath, drinking a broccoli milkshake and thinking "I'm an Oscar-Meyer Wiener".
Quote from: Armchair Gamer;787273I don't know that I'd say they're 'more dangerous' so much as that their danger is more or less level-independent, due to bounded accuracy, lack of improvement for non-proficient PCs, and the way they ignore HP. That's why I wondered if some sort of flag independent of CR might be a good idea for creatures like this.
But guidance for new DMs on 'here's what you can expect if you throw this creature up against a party' is apparently tyrannical and unfun. We must make the game as difficult to understand and run as possible! Only the Elite can play True D&D! We must cull the herd! Exterminate the unfit! EXTERMINATE!
;) :p
Guidance for new DMs is a great and wonderful thing, but if that means having a CR system that tolerates no deviations or exceptions as gamerGoyf seems to be implying, well that's just unrealistic. Similarly, expecting any canned system to "level the playing field" between new DMs and experienced DMs is also unrealistic.
New DMs and players can play "True D&D" all day long, and as they play they'll become less new. Kids want to be adults, and adults want to be kids again, but somehow the experience of growing up is something to avoid? *shrug*
Quote from: Natty Bodak;787294Guidance for new DMs is a great and wonderful thing, but if that means having a CR system that tolerates no deviations or exceptions as gamerGoyf seems to be implying, well that's just unrealistic.
Having low CR monsters with save or lose/die effects that don't break the system is completely realistic. It's already real. No one complains about the 3e Cockatrice breaking CR because they live in a universe where saves scale with level. This is 100% a bounded accuracy issue.
Quote from: gamerGoyf;787340Having low CR monsters with save or lose/die effects that don't break the system is completely realistic. It's already real. No one complains about the 3e Cockatrice breaking CR because they live in a universe where saves scale with level. This is 100% a bounded accuracy issue.
I don't see how it's an issue at all, much less an issue with bounded accuracy. At best(worst?) it seems like an issue about the expectations of universal applicability and consistency of CR ratings.
Quote from: LibraryLass;787073I admit I'd totally play a Harvest Moon/Rune Factory/Animal Crossing kind of game about the quaint, ordinary lives of quirky villagers. But not when I'm trying to play D&D.
My players are clamoring for a side story party in my D&D campaign about milkmaids, saloon girls, and bath maidens seeking to marry well. Even rolled up their stats already. Haven't even set up a date & time and they are already excited to play.
Funny what happens when you offer release to Organized Players from The Rules; its like the floodgates open.
A quest to the Dread Caves of Comfort might actually be a useful idea... Fabled Druidic Luxury Spa out in the wilderness, has potential.
Quote from: Opaopajr;787365My players are clamoring for a side story party in my D&D campaign about milkmaids, saloon girls, and bath maidens seeking to marry well. Even rolled up their stats already. Haven't even set up a date & time and they are already excited to play.
Funny what happens when you offer release to Organized Players from The Rules; its like the floodgates open.
A quest to the Dread Caves of Comfort might actually be a useful idea... Fabled Druidic Luxury Spa out in the wilderness, has potential.
The idea of a ruined spa as a dungeon seems really cool to me and I don't even play D and D or get into Dungeon Crawl style play. I guess its the History Channel program on Roman bathhouses that I recently watched. Surprisingly complex places.
Quote from: Armchair Gamer;787273But guidance for new DMs on 'here's what you can expect if you throw this creature up against a party' is apparently tyrannical and unfun. We must make the game as difficult to understand and run as possible! Only the Elite can play True D&D! We must cull the herd! Exterminate the unfit! EXTERMINATE!
;) :p
Quote from: Natty Bodak;787294Guidance for new DMs is a great and wonderful thing, but if that means having a CR system that tolerates no deviations or exceptions as gamerGoyf seems to be implying, well that's just unrealistic.
As it happens, there
is guidance for new DMs about how the CR system shouldn't be taken as gospel and about how the special abilities of monsters needs to be taken into account...
Quote from: DM's Basic Rules, p56Challenge Rating
Much of the advice in this section focuses on the XP values of monsters and encounters, as opposed to their challenge rating. Challenge rating is only a guidepost that indicates at what level that monster becomes an appropriate challenge. When putting together an encounter or adventure, especially at lower levels, exercise caution when using monsters whose challenge rating is higher than the party's level. Such a creature might deal enough damage with a single action to overwhelm PCs of a lower level. Even though an ogre has a challenge rating of 2, for example, it can kill a 1st-level wizard or sorcerer outright with a single blow.
Often these monsters have special traits or features that might be difficult or impossible for characters of a lower level to deal with. For example, a rakshasa has a challenge rating of 13 and is immune to spells of 6th level and lower. Facing off against one before reaching 13th level—and, thus, gaining access to 7th-level spells—means that spellcasters won't be able to affect the rakshasa directly, putting the party at a serious disadvantage. Even though the XP value of a fight against a lone rakshasa is well within the range of a medium or hard challenge for a party of six 10th-level PCs, such an encounter would be significantly tougher for them than XP alone would suggest.
Quote from: Larsdangly;787272Obviously everyone remains as free as they ever were to ignore a concept like CR as something that guides the design of dungeons and NPC's.
The Hoard of the Dragon Queen module's first few chapters are like that. Its deliberately seeded with encounters well outside the PCs range to encourage thinking outside the tiny little hack-n-slash box. Unfortunately. Due to quirks in the production process... some encounters ended up becoming a liiiitle meaner than even they intended.
Despite 5E's claim to be more new player friendly. Several elements do require a DM more skilled to actually say when this works and when that doesnt. Or at least a new DM able to learn.
Common sense and DM knowledge of the groups characters will indicate when throwing 6 of these things at the party is a good idea, and when it is very much not. Though I love the fact these horrors are a threat even to high level characters.
Quote from: Nexus;787366The idea of a ruined spa as a dungeon seems really cool to me and I don't even play D and D or get into Dungeon Crawl style play. I guess its the History Channel program on Roman bathhouses that I recently watched. Surprisingly complex places.
"Beat with the Ugly Stick" was a module that came with one of my RPGA issues way back. It was set in the equivalent of a spa/beauty resort.
Quote from: Spinachcat;787195Diapers & Dragons playstyle.
Kudos :hatsoff:
Quote from: Blacky the Blackball;787390As it happens, there is guidance for new DMs about how the CR system shouldn't be taken as gospel and about how the special abilities of monsters needs to be taken into account...
Well, that reads to me more like "you need to take both CR and XP value into account", but my quoted comments had more to do with the zeitgeist around here than with the game itself. Regarding CR and the intellect devourer, the primary points I'd make are:
1. Given that you need
greater restoration to recover from the Intelligence wipe, the CR may be a bit lowballed.
2. The special attacks are very swingy and, outside of wizards, not the kind of thing PCs are likely to get better at avoiding with level. That may be something that the CR/XP system isn't set up to handle. Hopefully the full DMG will include some guidance on all or nothing powers (both offensive and defensive).
There is also nothing wrong with some things just being kind of scary regardless of level or other meta-game concepts.
Quote from: Exploderwizard;787449There is also nothing wrong with some things just being kind of scary regardless of level or other meta-game concepts.
Truth. PC's should not think they can go wherever, and do whatever, and never have to worry about facing an encounter that would destroy them.
Quote from: Exploderwizard;787449There is also nothing wrong with some things just being kind of scary regardless of level or other meta-game concepts.
Everyone fears the lowly Rot Grub and Ear Seeker.
Quote from: CRKrueger;787472Everyone fears the lowly Rot Grub and Ear Seeker.
This is tangential but the question has been eating at me for a while. What's the deal with Ear Seekers? The impression I got was that someone at TSR thought that listening at doors was a such a degenerate tactic that a new monster need to be written up that punished players for doing it :?
Quote from: gamerGoyf;787497This is tangential but the question has been eating at me for a while. What's the deal with Ear Seekers? The impression I got was that someone at TSR thought that listening at doors was a such a degenerate tactic that a new monster need to be written up that punished players for doing it :?
You'd be correct ... and the 'someone at TSR' was Gary Gygax.
"Because of this, continual listening becomes a great bother to the DM. While ear seekers will tend to discourage some, most players will insist on having their characters listen at doors at every pretense."--1st Edition DMG, p. 60
I know quotes like that will be used to point out how gygax viewed d&D as DM vs PCs, but I think it's more accurate to say that Gary viewed the DM as monsters. Ie., it's less about trying to screw the players as a frustrated DM, but more of, "the leader of this lair knows typical adventurer tactics, so its setting up defenses appropriately.", and nothing against the players personally
I could be wrong
Interesting, so the ear seeker is not a dick DM move but emblematic of the awkward balancing act the game has long had between its "do smart things to stay alive" play style and its "good God do something interesting already!" play style.
Quote from: Shipyard Locked;787513Interesting, so the ear seeker is not a dick DM move but emblematic of the awkward balancing act the game has long had between its "do smart things to stay alive" play style and its "good God do something interesting already!" play style.
Yes, although it's arguably either a suboptimal solution to a real problem, or a sign that the 'dungeon-crawling logistics puzzle' and 'fantasy adventure' sides of the game were already starting to show tension and conflict.
Quote from: Sacrosanct;787512I know quotes like that will be used to point out how gygax viewed d&D as DM vs PCs, but I think it's more accurate to say that Gary viewed the DM as monsters. Ie., it's less about trying to screw the players as a frustrated DM, but more of, "the leader of this lair knows typical adventurer tactics, so its setting up defenses appropriately.", and nothing against the players personally
I could be wrong
I think it's more like Gygax thought he could write a book detailing various rules, resolutions systems, and advice, and thread through it a conversational, running joke about "players screw everything up, amirite?" without it being taken as anything other than that. Little did he know that in the future, people would read it assuming he meant every word in Utmost. Seriousness.
Cf. Original D&D example of play, with the DM "Cursing the Caller's thoroughness."
Quote from: Sacrosanct;787512I know quotes like that will be used to point out how gygax viewed d&D as DM vs PCs, but I think it's more accurate to say that Gary viewed the DM as monsters. Ie., it's less about trying to screw the players as a frustrated DM, but more of, "the leader of this lair knows typical adventurer tactics, so its setting up defenses appropriately.", and nothing against the players personally
I could be wrong
That and discouraging overdoing things that needlessly bog the adventure down. A reaction to someone going "I listen at the door" over and over and over and over and over.
Its like the player who insists on trying to disbelieve EVERY encounter because one MIGHT be an illusion. etc ad tedium.
Caution is good.
Overdoing it isnt.
I can just imagine the amount of paranoia an intellect devourer would generate once the players and their characters become aware they are "out there..."
And damn I hate doppelgangers!!!
Quote from: Omega;787588And damn I hate doppelgangers!!!
Dopplegangers aren't a problem for the properly prepared party. Before starting any adventure, establish a doppleganger password within the party.
Any time anyone is not within sight of the group, when they first appear, make them give you the doppleganger password. If they are unable to do so, then kill the damn doppleganger!! :p
Quote from: Exploderwizard;787614Dopplegangers aren't a problem for the properly prepared party. Before starting any adventure, establish a doppleganger password within the party.
Any time anyone is not within sight of the group, when they first appear, make them give you the doppleganger password. If they are unable to do so, then kill the damn doppleganger!! :p
Doppelgangers can read thoughts^^
Quote from: Gold Roger;787618Doppelgangers can read thoughts^^
They're even more diabolical than that. They have ears!
Ignore these naysayers!
Exploderwizard's plan is perfect and means you have nothing to fear from us...
Erm, I mean from doppelgangers...
Quote from: jadrax;787621Ignore these naysayers!
Exploderwizard's plan is perfect and means you have nothing to fear from us...
Erm, I mean from doppelgangers...
Is it just me or does jadrax seem a little off since he went off down that side tunnel for a piss?
Quote from: Gold Roger;787618Doppelgangers can read thoughts^^
Certainly.
Surface thoughts. If you are the type of person that always has passwords at the forefront of your brain then yes the doppleganger will pick them up.
Quote from: Exploderwizard;787614Dopplegangers aren't a problem for the properly prepared party. Before starting any adventure, establish a doppleganger password within the party.
Any time anyone is not within sight of the group, when they first appear, make them give you the doppleganger password. If they are unable to do so, then kill the damn doppleganger!! :p
Provided the party's encountered a doppleganger before. If a group of PCs never have, they'd never even think to have such a precaution.
One of the tough things about player knowledge vs. character knowledge. :)
Quote from: Sacrosanct;787637Provided the party's encountered a doppleganger before. If a group of PCs never have, they'd never even think to have such a precaution.
One of the tough things about player knowledge vs. character knowledge. :)
To me, such concerns are a setting decision. Are dopplegangers a long standing documented adventuring hazard, or are they something alien that no one has ever encountered (and lived to talk about it) before the PCs?
Its the same for any monster. Either they have been recorded as existing in the world or they haven't. If there is information about such creatures available, the PCs still need to discover it in game via research before acting on it.
Quote from: Exploderwizard;787636Certainly.
Surface thoughts. If you are the type of person that always has passwords at the forefront of your brain then yes the doppleganger will pick them up.
If you can ask for a password without the correct answer coming to mind, and still somehow use the password to identify a doppelganger, you've got
remarkable mental discipline.
Quote from: Armchair Gamer;787648If you can ask for a password without the correct answer coming to mind, and still somehow use the password to identify a doppelganger, you've got remarkable mental discipline.
The part you're not getting is that you
don't ask for a password. If the returning character doesn't automatically give the correct password right away upon return you whack em!
If you have to ask for a password to begin with, your buddy just
might be a doppleganger. :)