Comments on: D&D Burgoo (4.0): A Howling Success?

By: Adalore

Adalore — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 01:49:37 +0000

Aye, they REALLY simplified thrianthropes, having were-wolves and etc give the 'curse' to others makes were-creatures such to me. Soo I can see making house rules for it, going to wait until I have some true DM experience how ever. Just gotta write out every ones character ability's on easy to read index cards. Who I am playing with, they are as green as I am. /smirk Ought to be fun at least.

By: Troy E. Taylor

Troy E. Taylor — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 23:19:04 +0000

I think encounters with creatures of multiple levels works -- so long as the boss creature falls within a target range of the party -- and the added monsters don't tip the scales too much. One of the weaknesses of 4E -- and this is my opinion -- is that while there is a wide range of monsters to select from -- finding monsters that group together thematically while still remaining within the same challenge range is tougher to accomplish. I'd say that DMs should freely adjust hit points, as well as selectively use powers, if trying to scale monsters. Generally, that makes more sense (weakening creatures accordingly) than trying to apply templates to toughen up monsters. You can go either way, of course. But I find with 4E, scaling down is less cumbersome than scaling up. Others may experience it otherwise.

By: itliaf

itliaf — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 17:04:30 +0000

Good call on shifters as werecreatures, Troy. I find it interesting that you suggest such a wide range of levels within a single group of monsters. So far, when building encoutners, I have kept the range of monster levels in an encounter within 5 levels or less. Has anyone else dming in 4e seen successes or pitfalls with wider--even double digit--level spreads? In theory, that sort of spread might be a good approach for a halloween game, as the main monster might be so high level that he can laugh off most attacks.