|
>>
|
No. 28827
File
129602066814.png
- (397.26KB
, 638x579
, 凛制服03a(近).png
)
>>28824
The basic idea is that including a bunch of monsters with a laundry list of powers slows down gameplay and is both a waste of design space (how many of these powers is the monster going to actually get to USE) and a burden on the DM to keep sorted out (if you have 3-4 monsters that each have unique triggered effects, just remembering THAT much can be a pain, even more is even worse).
Why do you think so many encounters consist of, say, 3 of a particular monster type, 2 of another monster type, and 2 of a third monster type, and maybe 1 elite or controller? It's not lack of creativity, it's to keep things manageable. If you had, say, 7 monsters, each with their own unique power list, that seems like a daunting encounter to DM to me. Part of the setup of 4E is intended to let you use more monsters to challenge players, but using too many unique monsters runs the risk of bogging the game down and being too complicated for both DM and player to keep straight.
>As well, what would be better? Monsters that hit hard but have few HP, or which drain the party's resources slowly while being monsters to take down? The latter feels thematically amazing but I fear it'd be a drag, whereas the former is obviously much more threatening to TPK if it isn't dealt with appropriately.
I generally don't mess with monster HP totals, I use the default values suggested. But I'm more of the opinion that it's okay to have a climatic, epic struggle against an encounter that takes a long time now and then, as long as you don't make every encounter such a slog.
|
