[AD&D] Monster's STR scores

Knightsky · November 11, 2006, 08:31:16 PM

Okay, those of us who have played 1st and/or 2nd ed. AD&D know the various Strength scores of the various giant-races (from the sub-table describing the Girdle of Giant Strength), and we know that ogres had 18/00 strength (as mentioned in the description of the Gauntlets of Ogre Power), but what were the STR scores of dragons and other big-and-bad creatures? I want to say that I've seen a chart listing the relative STR scores of various monsters in 1st/2nd ed terms, but darned if I can find such a table.

Blackleaf · November 11, 2006, 08:48:00 PM

Well if a chart like that existed, the first thing I'd wonder is why do monsters that are on average stronger than humans not get any bonuses to hit / damage like PC/NPCs do? (Or penalties for that matter)

blakkie · November 11, 2006, 08:52:52 PM

Quote from: StuartWell if a chart like that existed, the first thing I'd wonder is why do monsters that are on average stronger than humans not get any bonuses to hit / damage like PC/NPCs do? (Or penalties for that matter)

I'm pretty sure it was all just mixed in to the stat block. Sort of like it is now, but now it is straightforward to deconstruct the combined number in a 3e statblock back into it's components. Remember that they needed the chart because it wasn't a simple progression of bonus vs. Str like 3e is.

Sosthenes · November 11, 2006, 10:30:24 PM

Simplicity. Pre-3E creatures mostly had one listed stat (Int), and only humanoids had specific strength scores (IIRC). The complete stat block of D&D 3 makes the game rather flexible, but it's one reason why monsters have also become more complicated. If you add class levels, it gets worse...

blakkie · November 12, 2006, 09:41:25 AM

Quote from: SosthenesIf you add class levels, it gets worse...

....while getting much, much better! I love "monsters" that are advancable and can easily have classes added to, it's one of my favourite 3e additions to D&D.

Sosthenes · November 12, 2006, 05:53:08 PM

Quote from: blakkie....while getting much, much better! I love "monsters" that are advancable and can easily have classes added to, it's one of my favourite 3e additions to D&D.

I prefer it, too. But it does make the stuff slightly more complicated. I think the benefits outweigh the costs, but it _does_ take more time for the GM to prepare. Sadly enough a lot of that stuf could be automated, yet I never written a program to do exactly that. Maybe it's time to break out the development environment...

jrients · November 12, 2006, 09:36:26 PM

IIRC Strength rated beyond 18 did not exist as a game concept until after the publication of the original Monster Manual. As a rule of thumb I'd assume that most large monsters would have Strength rated at 18 (no percentile). Exceptions could be made by comparing size to the various giants.

KenHR · November 13, 2006, 09:10:26 AM

Quote from: jrientsIIRC Strength rated beyond 18 did not exist as a game concept until after the publication of the original Monster Manual. As a rule of thumb I'd assume that most large monsters would have Strength rated at 18 (no percentile). Exceptions could be made by comparing size to the various giants.

Supplement I: Greyhawk had the percentile strength scores.

Re: the original post, I always figured the monster hit dice and associated attack matrix figured strength, etc. bonuses in as written. Much like AC is an abstraction including a monster's DEX.

jrients · November 13, 2006, 09:20:06 AM

Quote from: KenHRSupplement I: Greyhawk had the percentile strength scores.

Right. Which I would not use for monsters. I'd generally stick with 18 (no percentile). I meant to indicate that at one time there was no such thing as a 19 rated strength. Sorry if I was unclear.

QuoteRe: the original post, I always figured the monster hit dice and associated attack matrix figured strength, etc. bonuses in as written. Much like AC is an abstraction including a monster's DEX.

Yeah, I totally agree. But that doesn't help you if a critter needs to bend bars, so some DMs will want a Str score.

Sacrificial Lamb · November 14, 2006, 03:56:55 PM

Part of me wishes AD&D (1st or 2nd) had ability scores listed. Other games like Call of Cthulhu and Gamma World were able to list attributes, without drowning the GM in game rule complexity. The lack of ability scores almost made things MORE complex, actually. For example, if I use a spell to drain Strength from an Earth Elemental, what effect does it have? I'll be damned if I know. In the past, I was forced to just make it up.

Granted, I love makin' up house rules....but when the existing rules framework has this stuff there already, it makes my job as a GM easier...