[DnD 4E Discussion] Of Ammunition and Advanced Monsters
Blitzkrieg
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
According to the RAW, one of the defining components of an advanced creature (elite or solo) is their ability to take multiple actions per round. The guidance for advancing creatures, in fact, specifically states that you should add immediate actions or multi-attacks to any creature being promoted to solo class.
So.
You have a solo creature that can immediately react when he's struck, or perhaps do a double-attack as a standard action.
So what happens when you're ranger picks up a stack of inexpensive lightning arrows (30gp a shot) and proceeds to daze your solo creature into oblivion?
The only way that lightning arrow doesn't daze its target is if it misses. Suddenly your solo has this applied:
Now your immediate reactions are gone, you can't move and attack (meaning you will now quickly be surrounded), your defenses are lowered, and this lasts until the END of the attackers next turn, meaning the rest of the party could have nearly 2 full rounds to wail on you.
This costs 30gp and is fired by the ranger...who will likely have the highest attack bonus in the party (being a single stat focused striker).
From looking through the Monster Manuals, it looks like there is no built in resistance to these types of attacks. Suddenly, your level 10 ranger can easily lock down solo mobs 10 levels higher at the cost of 30gp a round.
I'm considering one of the following house rules:
1) Ammunition that triggers a status effect allows a save by the target (50% chance for normal mobs, 60% chance for elites (+2 to saves as written), and 75% chance to save for solos (+5 to saves as written))
2) Remove the first three tiers of these types of ammunition (3, 8, 13) making level 18 items the first time you can use them. This doesn't really solve the issue...it just delays it.
Thoughts?
So.
You have a solo creature that can immediately react when he's struck, or perhaps do a double-attack as a standard action.
So what happens when you're ranger picks up a stack of inexpensive lightning arrows (30gp a shot) and proceeds to daze your solo creature into oblivion?
The only way that lightning arrow doesn't daze its target is if it misses. Suddenly your solo has this applied:
- You grant combat advantage
- You can take either a standard action, move action, or minor action on your turn (you can also take free actions). You can't take immediate actions or opportunity actions.
- You can't flank an enemy.
Now your immediate reactions are gone, you can't move and attack (meaning you will now quickly be surrounded), your defenses are lowered, and this lasts until the END of the attackers next turn, meaning the rest of the party could have nearly 2 full rounds to wail on you.
This costs 30gp and is fired by the ranger...who will likely have the highest attack bonus in the party (being a single stat focused striker).
From looking through the Monster Manuals, it looks like there is no built in resistance to these types of attacks. Suddenly, your level 10 ranger can easily lock down solo mobs 10 levels higher at the cost of 30gp a round.
I'm considering one of the following house rules:
1) Ammunition that triggers a status effect allows a save by the target (50% chance for normal mobs, 60% chance for elites (+2 to saves as written), and 75% chance to save for solos (+5 to saves as written))
2) Remove the first three tiers of these types of ammunition (3, 8, 13) making level 18 items the first time you can use them. This doesn't really solve the issue...it just delays it.
Thoughts?
Blitzkrieg on
0
Posts
Another way of dealing with it is to control the amount of lightning arrows the player has very carefully. Yes, AV2 says they cost 30 gp each, but nothing says you have to make them easily obtainable or available in large quantities. They want some lightning arrows? That's fine - perhaps it requires a visit to the Elemental Chaos to create or buy them, and they can only get a few.
If you do that all you really need to do is maybe throw a power on there that automatically clears all status effects when he becomes bloodied or something, and you're probably good to go. It's hard to chain-stun/chain-daze something that gets 2+ saves per round at a +5 bonus.
Creating all future solos to be immune to lightning damage seems like a band-aid to address a design flaw in the items themselves.
Other items that do these effects have built-in attack modifiers based on the level. See the tanglefoot bag for example. At level 2 you get a +11 vs Reflex. It's not based on your character's attack modifier at all.
The problem is the direct application of the status effect with the only defense being an AC higher than the striker can reliably generate.
Like, yes, it's amazing that we can actually mathematically back things up in 4e for the first time since EVER, but the time-tested answer to this is just don't put them into play. "Lightning arrows? What are those?"
Are you the one leaving little piles of concentrated essence of magic lying around?
Well, immunity to lightning damage is only one of many options (also note that unless I'm missing something about immunity, it's not even going to grant immunity to the daze, RAW). There are plenty of solos that are designed to be reasonably effective when dazed, or to remove conditions frequently. In fact, there's pretty much a continuum of ways of dealing with this from "This solo dies when dazed" to "When dazed, this solo takes an extra standard action just for the hell of it."
That said, I'd go with whatever you think will be the most fun for you and your players, and if you don't want to mess with solo monsters, cool. If your group is going to be happiest with "look guys, as written this is pretty overpowered for 15g a pop, it operates at a flat +11 vs. AC regardless of your attack bonus and the enemy gets a saving throw to avoid the daze", then do that. Or, as above, just cut them out of the game entirely.
If they will have the most fun with "you know, you try to make a batch of these, but it just doesn't have the oomph you hoped. It'll add the enhancement bonus and lightning damage as-is, but if you want that daze, you're going to need some help. Any ideas on where to find a powerful lightning elemental?" then do that.
If they will have the most fun encountering some solos who grow when they get hit with lightning damage or are badass enough to shrug off these arrows that were wrecking controllers and artillery last encounter, then do that.
Personally, I'd rather fix the problem than just be a heavy-handed DM stopping the effects altogether.
Here's my current draft of the houserule if anyone cares:
Ammunition conveying a status effect works like alchemical magic items. When they hit, they trigger a secondary attack of 5 + item level versus the appropriate defense.
This makes a Level 13 +3 lightning arrow have a +18 vs Fortitude or take +3d6 lightning and be dazed for the cost of 650gp.
Expensive, but effective. For comparison, a level 12 Tanglefoot bag is +12 vs Reflex or immobilized or slowed until end of next turn. This item costs 500gp.
Seems balanced to me.
It also requires you to carry a method of shooting the ammunition (xbow, bow, etc).
Admittedly, both are fairly thin arguments as I think you have a good point. To be fair, though, for a ranger to keep a solo pinned down for even 3 rounds with these arrows, she'd be spending almost two thousand gold.
Sure. Or sit down with those players and go "Hey, this really isn't working out for our game. Let's cut it out for the sake of fun play for everyone. Here's your gold back, retrain that ritual for free, and let's keep on playing."
Alternatively,
a wizard makes all lightning arrows disappear and no one remembers that they ever existed! The party is the only ones who can remember and they must figure out what nefarious cause the wizard has done this in charge of! And maybe they can't restore the arrows at the end.
The above three answers are the ones printed in any GMing advice column since the 70s. Screwing around with monster stats is the wrong answer. Fix the problem, don't apply a bandaid.
"Heavy-handedness" is something that comes up when there's no clarity and continuity in your decisions, not when you curve things a little to make the game more fun for everyone.
The players are LOVING this. The problem isn't that they aren't having fun. The problem is that one series of magic items (magic ammunition) isn't designed correctly to fall in line with the rest of the game's mechanics and it is creating an imbalance that makes encounters that should be very challenging just average difficulty.
The players aren't going to complain about that. I, as DM, know that there is something out of whack and I'm adjusting those magic items accordingly.
So, for your situation, I'd consider just banning the items and going from there. Or you could make the daze a "daily item" power, or whatever.
You could also redesign your solos to respond to this item, but then you'd have a situation where "legitimate" daze powers are rendered useless.
The player doesn't really have a right to complain, you need to be able to balance encounters in your game.
I've started giving most solos ways around the effects without making them immune. Some solos get a bonus to hit and damage against any target marking them, some solos can transfer status effects with certain powers, some solos get weird bonuses when dazed or stunned, etc.
Example:
Furious Response (Free Action, when dazed)
The creature becomes enraged, gaining a +5 to hit and +10 to damage and knocking targets prone whenever it hits them until it is no longer dazed.
Dazing the creature is still useful but entails some consequences as well, you could imagine the defender saying "STOP PISSING IT OFF!" when the ranger keeps using lightning arrows.
I think you're dealing with two issues: One is that both adventurer vaults are broken as fuck and two that solos in 4th edition are poorly designed and easy to kill unless you give them multiple ways to deal with status effects.
If the world is overflowing with magic item crafting reagents than the problem isn't lightning arrows. Something else is going to be made next time and youll have to impose a limit on that. Then something else is going to get made. And so on. D&D is a tactial game and it sounds like you have smart players. With an overflow of crafting possibilities, they're going to take care of themselves. Restrict the amount of disenchantable magic items by a) giving them stuff they don't want to get rid of and b) making the reagents rare. That lets them have their lightning arrows but they have to sacrifice good magical items for the disenchant or call in favors from the merchants. You have control over that.
Do they need more lightning arrows? Than the party is going to end up making a decision over them and fighters nice armor, the rogues sweet dagger, or because of very tangible reasons pay way above what it says in the book.
At least in my group it is important that the DM and the players be working with the same set of rules. To simply ignore a status effect because I don't like it is a pretty poor bit of DMing in my book. It's important that when players invest their acquired wealth in magic items that they know it will be effective at the right tactical moment.
The houserule as I posted it will let them know clearly just how powerful their ammunition is and when to use it. I'll be playtesting it tonight so we'll see how it goes.
Honestly, I think you shouldn't just be letting them make whatever magic items they want. How did they learn how to craft magic arrows? Where are they getting the magical forge with which to make them? Also, don't just let them spent an appropriate amount of gold for the components - make them go find all the components, and make them rare as shit.
I think this problem arose because you let them have too much freedom with gaining items; as a rule, I never let people craft an item unless they've a) been taught how by an NPC who's hard to find and b) have found all the materials, not just spent the right amount of gold, because Random McVillage will not have 2kg woth of residuum, and c) have a goddamn magical forge that can actually wrangle residuum into mundane materials, because you can't just throw some random dust that appeared out of nowhere at an arrow and get MAGIC just 'cuz you took a feat.
And if you did do all that and your players just outsmarted you, well...you're straight-up fucked, then.
The designers want you to be able to create magic items. I think you're adding more houserules I am by making it so hard/impossible to do so. They have to use arcane reagents or residium to do this not gold pieces. Arcane reagents are harvested from magical beasts or purchased when rarely available. There are controls available IMC, but at 30gp a pop by the RAW we're not talking about hard-to-get items.
Well, by the RAW we're also not talking about overpowered items, either...the problem *is* the RAW.
I don't think anybody's implying that your players are not having fun, we're just asking what will give them the most fun. I can't speak for Arivia, but my point is simply that the question should not be "What's the simplest change to make?" or "Is the problem here with solos, or with this particular magical item?" or even "Am I going to be heavy-handed if I take this item away?"
Maybe you'll maximize the fun just altering the item properties - but maybe it's solos that get mad when you zap them with lightning. (I have to admit that this particular example was born of one of *my* most memorable okay uhh maybe that lightning bolt was not such a good idea sorry guys moments as a player fighting a BBEG.) Maybe it's more complicated magical item rules that require more from them than a simple "okay, you're down 120g and you've got some arrows", because everybody would love an epic quest to stick a few arrowheads into the neverending storm at the heart of the Plane of Lightning. The right answer is subjective, because everybody plays with their pretend elves and dragons a little bit differently.
Anyway, it sounds like you've settled on something. Thanks for flagging the arrows (I don't own AV2 and hadn't realized there was even magical ammo in the game - I will now acquire it for my own nefarious purposes).
PHB p 200.
Ritual Casting feat just requires that you have trained the Arcana or Religion skills.
So you're not just deciding, you're investing. The player has to have chosen that skill to train and chosen that feat to take. That means they're not doing something else (like more direct damage with weapon feats, etc).
I don't disagree that it creates these weird situations, but there it is. Ritual Casting + Enchant Item means most casters or arcane/religion oriented players can craft magic items to the extent of their party's access to arcane reagants and/or residium from disenchanted gear.
I never understood the need to ban things that can be solved with some creative encounter building.
Let's also remember that using Residuum means that either they're buying it while in town (1 to 1 in gold to residuum value, if I'm not mistaken) or are disenchanting items (at 20% market value) to get their own. If the latter, they're already funnelling some pretty hefty pieces into sparkly dust. Granted, I believe 20% is also the same standard 'vendor value' of items in the DM's guide, so they're not losing anything compared to just selling things and buying what they can with the gold.
I've got both rituals on my Cleric, and haven't used them yet. Even with a DM's houseruled 50% return on vendored or disenchanted items (yes, I've expressed concern), you're still just turning higher level gear into lower level gear, unless you're saving up a LOT of this residuum from trashed items, in which case you've probably earned it.
But on this specific topic, while I agree that having house rules in place to curtail abusive behaviour (min / max'ing or just stumbled upon), I think that removing the item itself (with an explanation) or challenging yourself as a DM to design encounters with non-bullshit ways to make them usable only occasionally, rather than all the time seems like the best approach.
Think of this; by making this house rule to 'nerf' one item, are you potentially affecting others? In trying to prevent one item from being overpowered, you might be marginalizing countless others at the same time.
I went with a secondary attack to apply the effect from magical ammunition. It is 3 + item level vs the appropriate defense.
Result was that the rangers set of Level 3 arrows worked great against weaker mobs with a lower Fort, but poorly against the stronger elites and solos who have built-in bonuses to defenses.
Overall, very effective houserule that uses other existing mechanics (alchemical items follow same mechanic).