# [D&D 3.5e] That New Pit Fiend



## Intrope (Jan 29, 2003)

If you haven't read it yet, Go Here and scroll to the bottom.

Update: Go Here Instead

All Done? OK, here's my take:

Damn. That bad boy is going to be putting the smack down!

He's pretty much better than the 3e Pit Fiend in *Every Way!*
-More Hit Dice, More Armor, Better Stats (gained *14* Dex), Does wadloads more damage, more skills, more feats. 

Now, the write-up itself is interesting. 

First, we've got more basic details (base attack value, grapple check, touch and flatfoot AC, Single and Full attacks separated, more descriptors--extraplanar and Baatezu). 

Second, we have a Tactics block that lists round by round actions. Nice, and it looks like pretty decent tactics too! 

Third, it looks like the Outsider Monster Type now gets more Feats (it has 3 more, but should only get one more from hit dice alone) and more Skill Points [edit: not actually; see Zappo's post on page 2 for a breakdown] 

Forth, it's 5th round action includes the option to flee via _Greater Teleport_, which I guess is a new spell (or maybe a rename of Teleport w/o Error). Also, Mass Hold Monster is used in Round 1.

Fifth, no CR is listed; it may have just been omitted from the T-shirt, but it's surely much higher than before!

Sixth, in the Tactics block the Pit Fiend only uses Quicken Spell Like Ability Once (on the first round). Which is strange, since the existing description of QSL in the Dragon entry would allow it to do 1/round. If so, I'd expect it to crank out a bonus spell-like ability every round!

Seventh, they've added new spells to the Pit Fiend's list: Mass Hold Monster, Greater Teleport (assuming this isn't Teleport w/o Error) and Power Word, Stun (ouch!).

Anyway, anyone else care to comment?

Edit: added 6 & 7); changed the skill points (I was wrong--thanks Zappo!)

Edit 2: Linked to the WotC page with the Pit Fiend stats, which is a little different (probably typos in the original!)


----------



## MerricB (Jan 29, 2003)

Looks absolutely brilliant.

Neither Challenge Rating nor Alignment are listed - remember, they are both in a different area of the stat block along with organisation, so probably have been omitted from the write-up or t-shirt.

Cheers!


----------



## Thorntangle (Jan 29, 2003)

He's a bad mama-jama. CR is rumored to be unchanged.

Shows off a lot of rule changes, full attack/standard attack breakouts, DR, facing/size, tactics. Sweet.


----------



## Intrope (Jan 29, 2003)

Thorntangle said:
			
		

> *He's a bad mama-jama. CR is rumored to be unchanged.
> 
> Shows off a lot of rule changes, full attack/standard attack breakouts, DR, facing/size, tactics. Sweet. *




Unchanged? Yikes!  I think that's a little rough for CR 16, myself.


----------



## Technik4 (Jan 29, 2003)

*Getting Chills..*

Just looking at the stats! Can't wait to see possible new art, full explanation of spell-like powers, and the REST of the monsters manual. Don't say noone warned you, have that $90 saved up post-haste *grovel*. Now I just have to figure out which one Im gonna read first...

Technik


----------



## mearls (Jan 29, 2003)

This is really cool. I don't know how often I or other DMs I know would forget to use a monster's special abilities or flub the difference between full and standard attacks. The new Monster Manual is shaping up to be really, really cool. I hope the the tactics thing becomes a d20 standard; I know that I've wanted to see something like that for a while. Now I can use it, point to WotC, and say "Hey Mr. Editor, that's how *they* do it."

Very cool stuff.


----------



## MerricB (Jan 29, 2003)

More little things:

*Face/Reach:* 10 ft./10 ft. - this ties into no more odd facings (like 5' x 10')

*Skills:* Disguise +29 (+31 acting) - does this mean the conditional synergy bonus from Bluff has been included?

Cheers!


----------



## Alzrius (Jan 29, 2003)

I'm slightly skeptical of the change to the DR hierarchy in 3.5E, but thats more my being huffy over issues of reverse-compatibility. That said...

I am completely in love with the new statistics seen here! We actually get tactics listed! And the attack values are made easy to understand in what a full and partial attacks are! And, glory of flories, "Extraplanar" is now a real subtype! This is something I've wanted since 2E. Admittedly we don't know what it does yet, but if its like what I think it is, this will be the best edition of D&D we've seen yet, IMO.

It also helps that they seriously boosted that pit fiend's stats and abilities, which is great. I've always held that fiends, especially the upper-end fiends, should be extremely difficult challenges, and now it looks like they finally are!


----------



## Quasqueton (Jan 29, 2003)

*why*

Sure, I can understand and appreciate cleaning up the way creatures are listed. But why the material/stat changes?

Why the increased HD? (+5HD)

Why change the ability scores? (a total of +54 points!)

(With the increased HD and constitution, this pit fiend has more than double the hit points.)

Why change the natural armor bonus? (+3)

Why an increase in SR? (+4)

Why reduced acid and cold resistance? (-10)

Why add mass hold monster? power word stun? 

This is not updating and cleaning of the pit fiend listing -- this is substantial change. 

Quasqueton


----------



## Crothian (Jan 29, 2003)

My guess is because the older version wasn't powerful enough.


----------



## Quasqueton (Jan 29, 2003)

> My guess is because the older version wasn't powerful enough.




So what was it? 

Its abilities were not worthy of the CR16 rating? Then the CR should have been adjusted, not the stats.

It was not powerful enough for the title "pit fiend"? In that case, make a "greater pit fiend" or something.

I was looking forward to 3.5 before seeing this. But now I'm worried. If this is a sample of adjustments their making, they are going to far, unnecessarily.

People say dragon CRs are too low. Does this mean the new designers should weaken dragons to match their CR, or increase the single number of the CR to match the current dragon?

I am far from a naysayer. I looked forward to D&D3 when hints were coming out. I have been looking forward to 3.5. But now I'm shocked. This new pit fiend is a different beast than the standard pit fiend. And I can't see why.

Quasqueton


----------



## Crothian (Jan 29, 2003)

What's wrong with a more powerful Pit Fiend?


----------



## Deadguy (Jan 29, 2003)

I think it's still a little too soon to get so worried Quasqueton! 

I suspect that the reason for the changes are the far higher levels of playtesting that _all_ the monsters have now received. It's thus been possible to see _what_ abilities are really effective against typical PCs, and what are just window-dressing.

Further I suspect that the Pit Fiend will prove to amongst those that are _most_ changed: it's an archetypal beastie that players like to test their characters against.

So, let's stay cool and wait and see.


----------



## MerricB (Jan 29, 2003)

Because they thought it would be a good idea for some reason.

Hmm... just thought of the one thing that is not 100% backwards compatable here: all those people who wrote as the stats for their Pit Fiend: "Hp 802, see MM". The hit point totals may be off.

Minor point, though. 

There has been additional design since the original Pit Fiend; it may well be they thought some of the additional feats and abilities should be added to what should be a powerful creature (see Quicken Spell Ability, which isn't in MM1 as I recall), and had to change a few other things to make the additions fit properly.

Cheers!


----------



## Technik4 (Jan 29, 2003)

*I can see why....*

The whole game is getting a facelift, not just a few aspects. People who have done extensive research into CRs and that sort of thing generally agree that SOMETHING is wrong. Well, when you start fixing things it starts as a ripple and extends and extends. I dont think the former entry fit the former MM entry "Pit Fiends are the undisputed leaders of the baatezu."

But they will now.

I never understood why monsters didnt have more dex (they arent ALL lumbering).

A very old white dragon had 330 hp and was CR 16. A pit fiend had 123 hp and was CR 16. Sounds like one of em doesnt suck anymore.

The most powerful thing a pit fiend could do (formerly) was cast a meteor storm, after that they became a fighter with too few hp, too few feats, and regeneration.

Now, they will be at very least more feared. The natural armor was probably just to round out its AC to 40. The SR was probably redone (for most monsters with SR) with products that had "greater spell penetration" in them. Funny thing, Greater Spell Penetration may appear in the phb...

Technik


----------



## Quasqueton (Jan 29, 2003)

> What's wrong with a more powerful Pit Fiend?




Nothing. But that is what the advancement rules are for (add hit dice or classes accordingly). This is a substantial change in the creature's stats.

This is not a tweak to make sure the creature's stats match up with and follow the rules. (Which is what I was expecting.) This is a rewrite. With this, every instance of pit fiends in previously published D&D3 materials is very wrong. For instance, hit points have more than DOUBLED.

If you were to take away the name of this stat listing, I don't think you'd recognize this creature as a pit fiend. Try it with someone who is familiar with D&D devils but hasn't seen this new version yet.

Quasqueton


----------



## beta-ray (Jan 29, 2003)

I guess part of the "worry" is the future lineup and those who have signed on early will be left behind.

How much backwards compatibility should it have? Not sure, but the people saying "now I will be forced to buy it" are usually greeted with "no one is forcing you to". The more things that are changed, the less that argument works. Yeah no one is holding a +2 arrow to your head, but still thinking about how things might change and no longer apply to the now OLD 3e... ugh.

Yeah it might be an overreaction at this point, but there is a tiny bit more cause to "worry" now.


----------



## Crothian (Jan 29, 2003)

I think the wide increase in power is a good thing, it means they are not doing a little tweek here and there but a full revision.  Monte said that what he expected in another thread and I'm happy to see it's right.


----------



## darkbard (Jan 29, 2003)

*with regards to the whole backward compatability issue...*

i think the point about backward compatability is that previous products will not be completely unusable.  sure, they're going to require tinkering to conform to the new rules set.  if you don't want to use the new rules, you can just use older products as is and with the old rules books.  you can keep your game exactly as it is and make full use of products published prior to the rules revision.  however, any new products [post rules-revision] will not be compatable with your old rules books.  the issue isn't so much "you don't have to use the new rules" but "if you want to make use of new products, you will need the new rules".


----------



## jgbrowning (Jan 29, 2003)

*Re: with regards to the whole backward compatability issue...*



			
				darkbard said:
			
		

> *i think the point about backward compatability is that previous products will not be completely unusable.  sure, they're going to require tinkering to conform to the new rules set.  if you don't want to use the new rules, you can just use older products as is and with the old rules books.  you can keep your game exactly as it is and make full use of products published prior to the rules revision.  however, any new products [post rules-revision] will not be compatable with your old rules books.  the issue isn't so much "you don't have to use the new rules" but "if you want to make use of new products, you will need the new rules". *




Actually if they continue to re-write like this 3E will be pretty much as compatable as [hyperbole]3E is to 1E[/hyperbole].  (running Against the giants right now.. remember when giants had 60 hp?) There will be so much you have to modify to blance the old written material with the new material(EL's, stats blah blah) that they should just come out and say, "these rules will pretty much invalidate much of whats gone before. you can modify them to suit your need but its not really compatable." instead of saying you won't have to do such.

joe b.


----------



## Quasqueton (Jan 29, 2003)

> i think the point about backward compatability is that previous products will not be completely unusable. sure, they're going to require tinkering to conform to the new rules set. if you don't want to use the new rules, you can just use older products as is and with the old rules books. you can keep your game exactly as it is and make full use of products published prior to the rules revision. however, any new products [post rules-revision] will not be compatable with your old rules books. the issue isn't so much "you don't have to use the new rules" but "if you want to make use of new products, you will need the new rules".




Isn't this like going from AD&D2 to D&D3? So D&D3.5 is more a new edition than a revision?

Concerning the pit fiend: was it broken or inaccurate according to the rules? If not, why make the major changes?

The major thing that is bugging me here is that these changes weren't *necessary*. Has anyone complained that the pit fiend needed these changes?

Quasqueton


----------



## Talath (Jan 29, 2003)

This new pit fiend kicks arse! Hell yeah!


----------



## Deadguy (Jan 29, 2003)

Quasqueton said:
			
		

> *The major thing that is bugging me here is that these changes weren't necessary. Has anyone complained that the pit fiend needed these changes? *




My suspicion? Yes. Like I say, the Pit Fiend is an archetypal monster against whhcih many, many PCs have been sent. I shouldn't be surprised that at least _some_ of the change is as a result of the feedback from these encounters. The rest, of course, is the consequential changes from the rules tidying and reorganisation.


----------



## Alzrius (Jan 29, 2003)

Quasqueton said:
			
		

> *Isn't this like going from AD&D2 to D&D3? So D&D3.5 is more a new edition than a revision?*




A new edition would mean that the same actions have new mechanics to revise them. This is just changing some terms and clarifying meaning, but not totally re-inventing the wheel. It is exactly what the designers told us, just a revision, not a new edition.



> *Concerning the pit fiend: was it broken or inaccurate according to the rules? If not, why make the major changes?
> 
> The major thing that is bugging me here is that these changes weren't necessary. Has anyone complained that the pit fiend needed these changes?*




Point taken, but when you get down to it, none of the changes were "necessary". We've been playing 3E for over two years now, and while some things were imperfect, it was still a viable system. Nothing is being changed out of necessity, but simply because the changes can make the game better.

In the case of the pit fiend, according to the rules nothing was broken in its stats, but there's more than just rules to look for. There is the intent of the monster. It's my opinion that pit fiends should be stronger than just CR 16, and given that assumption (which seems to be the one the revision team had in mind when rewriting this monster), this new pit fiend is a very good thing.

I didn't expect the monsters to be revised to the level that we've seen with this pit fiend, but so far, while I have concerns, I haven't seen anything that gives me any real cause to complain.


----------



## Talath (Jan 29, 2003)

Quasqueton said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Isn't this like going from AD&D2 to D&D3? So D&D3.5 is more a new edition than a revision?
> 
> ...




To be honest, I thought the Pit Fiend was a wuss. This new souped up Pit Fiend is exactly what I wanted. Well, not exactly, but he is more powerful.


----------



## Mortaneus (Jan 29, 2003)

I don't mind in the slightest if they buff the Pit Fiend up.  They were WAY too wussy before.  The best they could do was teleport and boom.  They sucked in close.  Now, however....

What does worry me, though, is what OTHER changes have they made to creatures?

Also, if the pit fiend is this nasty, what did they do to the Balor???


----------



## smetzger (Jan 29, 2003)

The modification of the Pit Fiend in and of itself is not that big a deal. 

Butt...

If many monsters are modified to the extent the Pit Fiend has been, I will not be happy.


----------



## jgbrowning (Jan 29, 2003)

Alzrius said:
			
		

> *A new edition would mean that the same actions have new mechanics to revise them. This is just changing some terms and clarifying meaning, but not totally re-inventing the wheel. It is exactly what the designers told us, just a revision, not a new edition.*




But only if you believe that a "revision" requires new mechanics. If i remember properly, ADnD2 wasn't that much different than ADnD1. (could be wrong here, been a long time) at least right when it came out.

Personally, their definition is lacking. By their defintion you could change *every single statistic for every single monster, making kobolds CR20's and dragons CR1's* and not have a revision.

There's a lot more to "revision" than just changing mechanics Which btw, they've done... see DR changes?  that's a mechanic change. I guess they'll just have to "revise" their definition of "revise" to mean "only core mechanics changing means a revision"

Their saying that this is not a revision is a bold faced lie.  Its a revision.  It may not be as big a revision as 2E to 3E, but its a revision.


joe b.


----------



## Epametheus (Jan 29, 2003)

Hmmm...

On one hand, Pit Fiends becoming beefier is cool.  They were way too frail for infernal generals.  Also, note that it would require Greater Planar Binding or Greater Planar Ally to summon a Pit Fiend now.

Maybe vrocks won't suck anymore...

On the other hand, I'd rather not have to buy copies of books I already own...  But it'll probably bite me in the ass if I don't, which is kinda annoying.


----------



## Alzrius (Jan 29, 2003)

jgbrowning said:
			
		

> *But only if you believe that a "revision" requires new mechanics. If i remember properly, ADnD2 wasn't that much different than ADnD1. (could be wrong here, been a long time) at least right when it came out.
> 
> Personally, their definition is lacking. By their defintion you could change every single statistic for every single monster, making kobolds CR20's and dragons CR1's and not have a revision.
> 
> ...




Jb, you misunderstood me, though from reading my own quote, I might have been a bit unclear.

I never said this wasn't a revision, since it obviously is. What I meant was that things were being reassigned and reinterpreted, but new mechanics for things were not being created, hence, while a revision, it was not a new edition of the D&D game. Its 3.5E, not 4E. That's what I meant.


----------



## jgbrowning (Jan 29, 2003)

Alzrius said:
			
		

> *Jb, you misunderstood me, though from reading my own quote, I might have been a bit unclear.
> 
> I never said this wasn't a revision, since it obviously is. What I meant was that things were being reassigned and reinterpreted, but new mechanics for things were not being created, hence, while a revision, it was not a new edition of the D&D game. Its 3.5E, not 4E. That's what I meant. *




Ah, yes i did misunderstand.  Sorry, my bad.  I do think however that, given the history of AD&D1 to AD&D2, the definition of a "new edition" isn't always as drastic as the difference between 2E and 3E.

joe b.


----------



## Droogie (Jan 29, 2003)

jgbrowning said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Ah, yes i did misunderstand.  Sorry, my bad.  I do think however that, given the history of AD&D1 to AD&D2, the definition of a "new edition" isn't always as drastic as the difference between 2E and 3E.
> 
> joe b. *




Hmm, that being said, it sounds like the changes are going to be more drastic than I thought. Even tho everyone calls the revisions "3.5e", I deluded myself into thinking it was just going to be clarifications, little tweaks, and refinement: 3.1. 

I guess it really will be half-way to 4e. 

Not that I have a huge problem with that. I'm glad someone lit a fire under the refinement process-- think how long 1st and 2nd Ed. festered without some fresh air.

But I feel bad for the folks with huge collections of d20 books, because backward compatibility (and FORWARD compatibility, like Darkbard mentioned) seems like a bigger issue now.


----------



## Perithoth (Jan 29, 2003)

*More Pit Beef*

Hey All,

I am the scooper who posted up the t-shirt stats for the Pit Fiend.

If people are wondering why the Pit Fiend is getting beefier, it is simple... it is a signature monster and it was not living up to its name in its origional 3.0 form. Since this is the only stat block from the new system I had to post up I have no idea if it is the sign of all monsters to come or is an aberation because they wanted to make this bad boy tougher.

Andy C, stated at the meeting that all monsters will be getting their own page in the new MM. No more breaking across the page. All monsters will have art for them too. The book will increase in size to 320 pages but will still be $29.95.

Personally, if the Pit Fiend Stats are a sign of what's to come in the MM, bring it on... as a Judge for a Living Campaign this will help me out when the mod says, "See the Monster Manual" for the monster listed in the encounter.

Other things that I am remembering. I asked about the Lycantrope templates and templates in general. Andy and Skip said the templates will be cleared up. In fact they love templates because it gives the DM and writers more monsters to play with without having to purchase a new book. This is good because the Lycanthropes section is super unclear.

The example of the new process given was simple, a were-wolf is really a multi-class monster and you add levels of "wolf" to the base creature.

That's all for now,

Bryan Blumklotz
AKA Perithoth
Lord of Grumpiness


----------



## Alzrius (Jan 29, 2003)

*Re: More Pit Beef*



			
				Perithoth said:
			
		

> *If people are wondering why the Pit Fiend is getting beefier, it is simple... it is a signature monster and it was not living up to its name in its origional 3.0 form. Since this is the only stat block from the new system I had to post up I have no idea if it is the sign of all monsters to come or is an aberation because they wanted to make this bad boy tougher.*




It's an Aberration now and not an Outsider?! Oh no!  Seriously though, thats what a lot of us thought; that such a monster was just meant to be tougher.



> *Andy C, stated at the meeting that all monsters will be getting their own page in the new MM. No more breaking across the page. All monsters will have art for them too. The book will increase in size to 320 pages but will still be $29.95.*




Ha! They finally caved on that huh? I knew those excuses we were being fed when 3E was released about why the entries would be broken across the pages was so much bunk! Although this makes me think that new monsters won't be added despite the page increase then. It's just old monsters all getting a page of their own.



> *Other things that I am remembering. I asked about the Lycantrope templates and templates in general. Andy and Skip said the templates will be cleared up. In fact they love templates because it gives the DM and writers more monsters to play with without having to purchase a new book. This is good because the Lycanthropes section is super unclear.
> 
> The example of the new process given was simple, a were-wolf is really a multi-class monster and you add levels of "wolf" to the base creature.*




Hmm, I'm glad they're revising templates, but I don't like the example given. Templates are supposed to be apart from levels. You add it, and then thats it across the board, no levels necessary. Well, I guess we'll see.


----------



## Knightfall (Jan 29, 2003)

I will reserve judgement until I see the new books.  It does sound like the 3.5E MM is definitely one to get, simply for the cool new art and one page per monster format.  (I prefer that.)

Cheers!

KF72


----------



## demiurge1138 (Jan 29, 2003)

I'm very fond of the NeoPit Fiend. For one thing, silver weapons are useful again! Second, I like the idea of the tactical breakdown. Only problem is that it would now be even worse for players to read the MM.

Demiurge out.


----------



## Lord Zardoz (Jan 29, 2003)

*Re: why*



			
				Quasqueton said:
			
		

> *Sure, I can understand and appreciate cleaning up the way creatures are listed. But why the material/stat changes?
> 
> Why the increased HD? (+5HD)
> (With the increased HD and constitution, this pit fiend has more than double the hit points.)
> ...




I think I can partly answer those questions.

With the current implementation of Damage Reduction, against any party with a cleric or wizard who has access to Greater Magic weapon, Damage Reduction is a non issue.  And it is quite likely that many creatures were balanced with the consideration that in CR appropriate combats, the damage reduction would actually matter.  That is enough to explain many of the changes in the DR system.

In addition to that, in the greater scheme of things, it is quite likely that  
the more common DR penetrating weapons will be common enough for parties at some point in any sufficiently long running campaign.  In those situations, in order to keep the Pit Fiend as at least a "Viable" opponent against more powerful parties, that you need to be able to fall back on the most reliable of survival measure.  High HP and a good AC tend to remain effective even when every other defence is bypassed.

END COMMUNICATION


----------



## tabrumj (Jan 29, 2003)

Personally I think the new Pit Fiend looks cool. I never really used high CR outsiders because they seemed a bit weak to me. Now I will.

I am gratefull that they aren't just changin a few rules. When you create a new book like this you really need to tweak the monsters to take into account both a better understanding of old rules and any new rules that were written.

So long as they don't change any really core mechanics I won't have a problem.


----------



## Staffan (Jan 29, 2003)

*Re: Re: More Pit Beef*



			
				Alzrius said:
			
		

> *Ha! They finally caved on that huh? I knew those excuses we were being fed when 3E was released about why the entries would be broken across the pages was so much bunk! *



I don't so much mind monster descriptions broken across pages, a la Homunculus (MM page 120). However, they should keep the stats together, so things won't look like some places in the animal appendix (e.g. page 202-203).


----------



## Elder-Basilisk (Jan 29, 2003)

This really has me concerned about the ability of PCs to function. 

If that is still a CR 16 creature, it's SR will mean that a 16th level wizard with greater spell penetration will need to roll a 16 in order to effect it with any spells. Without Greater Spell Penetration, there's no point in even trying. And the wizard had better have his spells prepared as Sonic damage and have Greater Spell Focus in the school or they probably won't do anything anyway. Heck, even with all that, the odds of both getting past the pit fiend's SR and getting it to fail a save are probably 1 in 20. (Actually, assuming a starting 16 int, a +6 headband, and 4 level increases  Greater Spell Focus: Necromancy, the Horrid Wilting DC could be 30. Which means there's actually a 50% chance the Pit Fiend could fail. So with Greater Spell Focus and Greater Spell Penetration, the best a wizard can manage is a one in ten chance of dealing significant damage to the Pit Fiend with direct damage magic).

So wizards will need to do other things against it. But other things like what? If the current Summon Monster charts are kept, there's nothing that will even be able to hit the pit fiend's armor class--let alone get past it's holysilver DR. (Unless the PC summons another demon or a devil of course). So evocations are out. Summonings are out. About the only thing left is buffing fighters with mass haste, etc. But how will they do against it?

16th level fighter defense focussed: attack bonus +30/+25/+20 (+16 BAB +8 str (26 str-16+3 (level)+1 inherent+6 belt) +5 weapon +1 weapon focus).
Damage: 1d10+15 +2d6 vs evil (+5 Holy Bastard Sword) avg 26.5/hit
AC: 46  (10+7 (+5 lg shield) +13 (+5 fullplate of moderate fortification) +5 amulet of natural armor +5 ring of deflection +4 Haste +1 dex +1 dodge feat)

Granted, this is something of a best case scenario. Even then though, the fighter is only likely to do 42 points of damage per round. And, while the Pit Fiend isn't too likely to hit him (requiring a 16+ to hit) it's got much worse things to do to him like quickened mass hold monster+Coup de Grace (hey, he's Eevil).

How about an offense focussed 16th level character?
Attack bonus +33/+28/+23 (+16 BAB +11 str (str 18+3 level +1 inherent+6 belt +4 rage) +5 weapon +1 weapon focus)
Damage: 1d12+23+2d6 vs evil (+5 Holy Silver Greataxe)
AC: 44 (10+5 (+3 animated large shield) +10 (+5 mithral breastplate) +5 amulet of natural armor +5 ring of protection +4 dex +1 dodge feat +4 haste)

This fighter is likely to do 68 points of damage per round. Still, the meteor swarm will take him out before he beats the pit fiend--assuming the quickened mass hold monster doesn't do it first.

The party's cleric might send him packing with Holy Word but faces the same spell resistance problem as the wizard--he needs to roll a 16 in order to touch the creature (and that's with Greater Spell Penetration). He might ward the party with Holy Aura too. But that's unlikely to do any good. SR 25 won't help much when the thing's caster level is figured in (probably at least 17 considering the spells it tosses). And its other effects won't beat the Pit Fiend's SR. When summoning monsters, the cleric suffers the same problem as the wizard. . . except he can't even summon the demons or devils that might get past its DR.

So, assuming that the rogue is a similar damage dealer to the defensive fighter (unlikely as rogues won't be hitting AC 40 easily) and that there's an offensive fighter in the group and that both of them make their saves against the fear and the mass hold monster and that the meteor swarm doesn't kill either of them for some reason, they might just kill it by round 3 or 4. However, I can't see that fight as being 20% of their resources. It sounds a lot more to me like a tough fight or even "pull out all the stops because otherwise you'll all die."

In essence, the rules change made the creature tougher--certainly more than CR 16--but much less interesting to fight since it's really only vulnerable to one or two tactics. I'm glad that outsiders are getting more hit points. They've always gone down like chumps when I've used them. However, increasing their SR, to unbeatable levels and pumping their AC and physical attacks etc too is likely to make them uninteresting creatures to fight.


----------



## FriendlyFiend (Jan 29, 2003)

Woo-hoo!  Proper, scary pit-fiends are back! ... Now if they can just up the stats on the 'loths ...


----------



## Zappo (Jan 29, 2003)

I wanna see the Balor!


----------



## Dave Blewer (Jan 29, 2003)

Will the Dragon be revised though?  Every revision of the game has upped their power...

Worst case scenario could be Red Dragon DR 10/Ice


----------



## Gez (Jan 29, 2003)

Large is now Larger. Don't know if that's a correction or a clarification. 

Initiative is no more broken down (i.e., + 8 Dex, +4 Improved Init).

And, maybe that's just because of the medium used (T-shirt), but it seems "familial" abilities are no longer lumped together. Old pit-fiend had "baatezu qualities", and the general devil entry say that baatezu qualities were poison and fire immunity, cold and acid resistance 20, see in darkness, and telepathy 100 ft. New pit fiend has all of these enumerated in the statblock rather than lumped together.


----------



## jgbrowning (Jan 29, 2003)

Dave Blewer said:
			
		

> *Will the Dragon be revised though?  Every revision of the game has upped their power...*




I hope they don't up the power level in response to the min/max group.

I like DMing (and playing) sub-optimal PCs that don't only take skills/feats/spells/classes/magic items that directly improve their chances of survival in a martial conflict.

joe b.


----------



## Dave Blewer (Jan 29, 2003)

I agree with you, but I predict that it could be a feature of at least the most venerable dragons


----------



## BryonD (Jan 29, 2003)

Elder-Basilisk said:
			
		

> * However, increasing their SR, to unbeatable levels and pumping their AC and physical attacks etc too is likely to make them uninteresting creatures to fight. *





Maybe.  But it may make them a much more interesting encounter.

It is way to early for me try to claim that they went to far or not far enough.  But my initial reaction is that this Pit Fiend is closer to where I think a Pit Fiend should be, than the other one was.  And I would prefer it be slightly over strong than to weak.

I am not sure that CR16 is bad though.  If instead of your individual examples, you consider that you would have 2 fighters and a cleric and a wizard all using fairly intelligent tactics at the same time, I can see that this Pit Fiend could be in real trouble.  (iow, expect only 25% resource use by the party).  Maybe not, like I said, I need to know a bit more.  But it does not seem clearly unreasonable.

On Dragons, I would not be suprised or disappointed if they get a bit of a power up, especially at the higher ages.  But they need to re-visit the CRs.  There seems to be a strong popular agreement on that.


----------



## Upper_Krust (Jan 29, 2003)

Hi all! 



			
				Zappo said:
			
		

> *I wanna see the Balor!  *




Personally I can't wait to see the Solar; given the fact the Pit Fiend now trumps it in many areas I wonder what its revised stats will look like!? 

Also something no one has yet mentioned are the greatly increased base damage dice for 'larger' (large presumably?) size.

Claws are now *2d8*+14 (though should that not be +13 considering Strength 37?); whereas previously they were *1d6*+7.

Should we presume they are doubling the damage bonuses now at each increment?

Medium Claw 1d8
Large 2d8
Huge 4d8
Gargantuan 8d8
Colossal 16d8

...?


----------



## Gez (Jan 29, 2003)

Constrict also gone from 2d4 to 2d8 (and the Str bonus is massive).


----------



## Psion (Jan 29, 2003)

*Re: Re: More Pit Beef*



			
				Alzrius said:
			
		

> *Ha! They finally caved on that huh?*




Yes, the whiners got their way. 



> *I knew those excuses we were being fed when 3E was released about why the entries would be broken across the pages was so much bunk!*




Feh. Devoting a whole page to each creature will waste space; some creatures quite simply do not deserve it, and they will have to come up with a lot of text for a lot of creatures that is quite likely to not be applicable to many campaigns.

The layout was a problem, but the layout could have been improved without going the space-wasteful route. For example, in the existing MM, when a creature entry includes multiple types (like demons, devils, and celestials), they currently do all the stat blocks, THEN do the descriptions. This is a problem in play because you have to page back and forth. Presenting these creatures individually, or at least divvying up the stat blocks so that they are generally on the same page or a facing page from the combat description, would have worked much better.


----------



## dravot (Jan 29, 2003)

Elder-Basilisk said:
			
		

> *This really has me concerned about the ability of PCs to function.
> 
> If that is still a CR 16 creature, it's SR will mean that a 16th level wizard with greater spell penetration will need to roll a 16 in order to effect it with any spells. Without Greater Spell Penetration, there's no point in even trying. And the wizard had better have his spells prepared as Sonic damage and have Greater Spell Focus in the school or they probably won't do anything anyway. Heck, even with all that, the odds of both getting past the pit fiend's SR and getting it to fail a save are probably 1 in 20. (Actually, assuming a starting 16 int, a +6 headband, and 4 level increases  Greater Spell Focus: Necromancy, the Horrid Wilting DC could be 30. Which means there's actually a 50% chance the Pit Fiend could fail. So with Greater Spell Focus and Greater Spell Penetration, the best a wizard can manage is a one in ten chance of dealing significant damage to the Pit Fiend with direct damage magic).
> *




Your math is a bit off there.  A 16th level wizard would need to roll 16 to bypass an SR of 32.  If the wizard had Greater Spell Penetration, they'd need to roll 12 or higher (12 + 16 caster level + 4 GSP), but your point still stands.


----------



## MinscFan (Jan 29, 2003)

Oh boy. I'm a little bummed that they have changed the basic stat block. That means every monster database out there is now invalid. They've also (essentially) made all the third-party creature books that came out as obsolete as 2nd edition material is to 3rd edition -- so along those lines, this is looking like a new version of D&D. While I want to see what the books contain before final judgement, it is not looking like it will be easily "compatible" with earlier material, whether created by WoTC or not. That's a major bummer.

I wonder if these changes will be in the Monstrous Races book? If not, they will have again released the cart before the horse -- a.k.a. Deities and Demigods, then Epic Level Handbook.

By adding a new base type (extraplanar) haven't they have also made other non-WoTC d20 stuff less compatible with the game? 

I expect errata will fly, especially for spells -- and that includes in the previous WoTC class books.

This looks very much like version 3.5, not 3rd edition revised.

After saying that, I do like the revised stuff I've seen so far. The way they are handling monsters entries looks promising.

Tim


----------



## Henry (Jan 29, 2003)

No one mentioned this, but I want some answers:

WHY THE HECK does a pit fiend have a +31 to the Tumble skill??????????????

Can't you just see a pit fiend doing a dive and roll, or a backflip, over the heads of the fighters to claw the party wizard to ribbons? 

I guess the earlier poster who called him a "NEO" Pit Fiend wasn't far off the mark...


----------



## Quasqueton (Jan 29, 2003)

> Hmm, that being said, it sounds like the changes are going to be more drastic than I thought. Even tho everyone calls the revisions "3.5e", I deluded myself into thinking it was just going to be clarifications, little tweaks, and refinement: 3.1.
> 
> I guess it really will be half-way to 4e.




This was EXACTLY my thinking too.



> Also, note that it would require Greater Planar Binding or Greater Planar Ally to summon a Pit Fiend now.




A good side effect of the stat changes? Or a good reason for the stat changes?



> The modification of the Pit Fiend in and of itself is not that big a deal.
> 
> Butt...
> 
> If many monsters are modified to the extent the Pit Fiend has been, I will not be happy.




My thinking here too.

I've never used a pit fiend against any PCs, and I didn't have plans for one in the near future. But when they offer up this example of what they're doing, it makes me think all creatures will get a boost/alteration in power this drastic.

I appreciate and approve of how they are writing up the stat block for 3.5. Will make things much clearer. And the fact the whole creature will be on one page, together is a great boon to DMs.

I could understand changing some creatures' stats to more follow their own rules. For instance, I could see the pit fiend being altered to jive more with a fiendish template (or vise-versa). In 3.0, there is no real relationship between a "standard fiend", the fiendish template, and the half-fiend template. I would think that if they were to change the pit fiend stats, it would be to better match the "fiend" pattern.

But looking at this creature's stats, I don't see a pattern or reasoning. 

I see they added 5 hit dice. Was that a randomly chosen number? 

They get 54 more points in their ability scores. At least I see a pattern here. A pit fiend gets +26 strength, and +16 to each of the other abilities.

They give it +3 natural armor bonus. Was this just to round out the AC to 40 since the dex mod changes it from 30?

They get +4 to their spell resistance. How do they get this number? It does not raise the stat to HD x2 as the current fiendish template suggests. So why change this to 32 from its previous 28? Is there a game mechanics reason? Or just a change based on "feel"?

Their acid and cold resistance is dropped from 20 to 10. Why? Everything else got tougher. This breaks the upward pattern the other changes show. Is this somehow tied to their HD as suggested by the current fiendish template?

Why add two new powers - mass hold monster and power word stun? Are these just tacked on? Is there a game mechanic reason why pit fiends needed/should have these two?

See, I'm not opposed to them making some changes to clearify things and bring abberant creatures back into line with the rules. But when the changes seem to be without pattern or logic or reason, it is bad.

For the pit fiend, they should figure out exactly what it means in the game to be a fiend. Then make sure the pit fiend, other "standard fiends", the fiendish template, and the half-fiend template all followed those guidelines. The same with celestials, dragons, lycanthropes, humanoids, etc.

But this stat block is just _changes_. Is there a pattern/rule here? Or are these changes just because someone thought "it would be cool" to up the power?

Quasqueton


----------



## Darkness (Jan 29, 2003)

> Str 37, Dex 27, Con 27, Int 26, Wis 26, Cha 26




With pit fiends having these stats, deities' ability scores almost pale by comparison unless they are of a very high level and/or divine rank.


----------



## Zappo (Jan 29, 2003)

Let's see if I can discern how many skill points it has.

No ranks in Balance (the +10 comes from synergy and dex). 21 in Bluff. 21 in Climb. 21 in Concentration. No ranks in Diplomacy (+10 from synergy and cha). 21 in Disguise. 21 in Hide, assuming that "Larger" gives a -4. 21 in Intimidate (with a +2 synergy from Bluff). 20 in Jump (with a +2 synergy from Tumble). 21 in each of his three Knowledge skills. 21 in Listen, Move Silently, and Search. Apparently 23 in Spellcraft, which is illegal - probably Knowledge (arcana) now gives a synergy bonus to Spellcraft? 21 Spot. No survival (it's listed to note the bonus on "other planes", whatever that means). 21 in Tumble (with a +2 synergy from Jump).

That makes for 335 skill points. 336 if 35 in Jump is a typo and should be 36 as I suspect.

336=16 x 21 = (8 + 8) x (18 + 3).

Theory: outsiders get skill points exactly as rogues, (8 + INTmod) x (HD + 3). This is nice because it simplifies monster designing: now we can simply give them 8+INTmod maxed skills.

So now Outsiders get the fighter's BAB, the monk's saves, and the rogue's skills. Scary. Good thing they don't have the barbarian's hit points.

Edit:
It's interesting to note that mr. Pit Fiend, lord of the Baatezu, most deceitful of devils, lacks Sense Motive. 
Now all those folk tales about farmers tricking the Devil make sense.


----------



## Dave Blewer (Jan 29, 2003)

MinscFan said: 



> made all the third-party creature books that came out as obsolete as 2nd edition material is to 3rd edition




This is a good point actually.


----------



## Intrope (Jan 29, 2003)

Zappo, Outsiders already get Fighter BAB, Monk Saves and Rogue Skill Points. But I'm glad you did the math for me; in my short look at it, I thought he was getting *10* skill points per level, which would be really out of hand.

I also figured out one other thing: based on his number of feats, they've increased the feats for Outsiders (and perhaps others) to 1 + 1 per 3 HD from it's current 1 + 1 per 4 HD. That puts them more in line with PC feat counts, too.

On the reduction to Acid/Cold Resistance, they may have decided that he had too many high resistances. 

I do find Tumble +31 to be, well, weird. Same goes for Climb and Jump (it can fly 60', why does it need to jump?). On the other hand, it has a fairly nice Hide & Move Silently check; even against a 16th level party it has some chance of getting the drop on them from concealment (bad. very bad).


----------



## mmadsen (Jan 29, 2003)

*Templates vs. Monstrous Multiclassing*



> The example of the new process given was simple, a were-wolf is really a multi-class monster and you add levels of "wolf" to the base creature.



Excellent!  Monstrous multiclassing makes so much more sense for werewolves, vampires, fiends, etc. If the character is supposed to become increasingly monstrous over time, just add levels!


----------



## Eridanis (Jan 29, 2003)

Well, MM 3.5E is now moving from my "look at" list to my "most likely will buy list." Including tactics is a beautiful thing - as mearls said, how many times do DMs forget a particular ability in the laundry list of cool things powerful creatures can do? Now the DM has a baseline to plan out his encounters from.

And U_K, I too am drooling to find out about the solar. Always one of my favorites from the 1st edition MM2, up there with the phoenix.


----------



## Dave Blewer (Jan 29, 2003)

Completely agree with this, I love the idea!  

The only problem I can see is that it leaves the monsters in third party books a little bit lacking.  Maybe a fan based website can/will start up where combat tactics for these OGL creatures can be catalogued?


----------



## Shard O'Glase (Jan 29, 2003)

I really don't like this holysilvered weapon thing for the DR.  The game was item intensive enough, now the fighters will almost need 3-4 primary weapons just to do their jobs.


----------



## HeavyG (Jan 29, 2003)

Darkness said:
			
		

> *
> With pit fiends having these stats, deities' ability scores almost pale by comparison unless they are of a very high level and/or divine rank. *




They'll be revising the deities' stats too !  

Sheesh, Darkness, pay attention !


----------



## Flexor the Mighty! (Jan 29, 2003)

The more I see things like this and other revision details I know that I'm off the new material wagon.  I've spent too much on 3rd party stuff to have to rework that to fit the new rules when I want to use it.   This is an early judgement and will be revised when I can see the books, but I'm probably left behind again.   I'm not buying new core books and don't feel like having to modify all my current stuff to fit the new rules, have to redo encounters in modules to factor in the less power of 3e MM stuff, etc.   I'll do that on five buck ESD's of classic 1e mods but not a 15 bucks 3e mod.


----------



## Dave Blewer (Jan 29, 2003)

> I really don't like this holysilvered weapon thing for the DR. The game was item intensive enough, now the fighters will almost need 3-4 primary weapons just to do their jobs.




Maybe, maybe not.  I think that there will be a lot of spells that can be cast upon weapons that give them the properties that they need to overcome the DR...

Also,  The DR has been lowered as well DR 15 seems to be the highest that it now goes.


----------



## ashockney (Jan 29, 2003)

*Pit Fiend*

This, my friends, is crunchy bits of goodness.  They know full well that this little bad boy will sell them books.

To all the posters that don't like the changes, but haven't ever used a pit fiend:  Please don't complain.  I respect your right to an opinion, but your opinions don't hold as much weight in my eyes as those of posters who have run such games.  I'm not singling out anyone's post, merely making a general comment about opinions on high-level play.

The high level monsters in the Monster Manual were very poorly designed in my opinion, with the exception being Dragons.  It was abundantly obvious they weren't playtested well.  As a result, I'm confident we'll see these types of changes to many of the higher CR creatures, but very few changes to anything CR 10 and below (other than the mechanics previously addressed).

One thing still missing, that I'm hoping will be available somewhere on the "page" dedicated to each monster are the stat blocks that include information on the "buffed" equivalent for the creature, such as with the Unholy Aura and other spell-like abilities that are necessary to compete with heavily buffed high level PC's.  

Additions of different types of AC's and common types of attacks (standard, full, grapple) to the stat block are very nice additions.  Thank you!

Why were these changes needed?  Where did the numbers come from?  Playtesting.  I used pit fiends and other fiends, in my games and the numbers on this guy (hit points, AC, and SR) are very close to what they've developed.  Close enough that I can say confidently they were not arbitrarily "pulled from the air".  On the contrary, these are the appropriate levels required to truly challenge a 15th or 16th level party.  Anything less is a joke, and will get summarily steam-rolled by the amazing offensive firepower of a well equipped high level party.

As it regards the lowering of some of the resistances.  Bravo!  The wizards in my campaign were often highly frustrated by the combination of "high saves, high SR, and high energy resistance". As a result they turned to save/die or save/hold spells to forego the energy resistance piece.  By lowering these to more reasonable numbers, a well placed Cone of Cold or Chain Lightning may be a worthy competitor to Disintegrate or Hold Monster.

On the thought of all the existing "3rd Party Material" being uncompatible.  Hold on a second!  Two ways to look at this.  The character classes haven't changed significantly, so you can still use all the encounter, etc, as they've drawn them up.  No real significant changes (maybe some with spells).  Who cares if the Skeleton has DR 5/Blunt or DR 5/+1?  Run it!  It will work fine.  They're going to get blasted by your cleric anyway!  I see this as completely the opposite.  Here's a great opportunity for everyone who's produced something to date to send out an "update" which could be free, or...

could be a nice little unexpected revenue boost for not a ton of a additional work.  Just a different perspective on what many have touched on. 

IE, see Creature Collection "revised"...)

Monstrous multi-classing.  I love it.  It works much better than ECL's.  Now, let's see if they figure out that the next challenge is how do you effectively spread out all of those abilities to ensure that someone  who takes one or two levels of outsiders gets "good" abilities, but not significantly better abilities than someone taking two levels of fighter or a prestige class!

Can't wait for more 3.5 goodness.  I'm very pleased with the new Pit Fiend, top to bottom.


----------



## Quasqueton (Jan 29, 2003)

> To all the posters that don't like the changes, but haven't ever used a pit fiend: Please don't complain. I respect your right to an opinion, but your opinions don't hold as much weight in my eyes as those of posters who have run such games. I'm not singling out anyone's post, merely making a general comment about opinions on high-level play.




You may not be singling anyone out by name, but I'm the only one who's mentioned having never used pit fiends. So I guess that means you are talking to me.

Let me restate/rephrase my position. I am not focused on just the _pit fiend_ as a specific creature. I am focused on the _example_ they've presented to showcase how they are "revising" things. The pit fiend just happens to be the example they gave. And as an example, I can see they have not just revised the listing, they have changed the creature.

If they had listed an ogre as the example, I would be shocked and dismayed to see 5 HD, +2 natural armor increase, and +12 to ability scores. That would be a serious change, not an update.

Now, if the pit fiend truly is an example of what they're doing to the monster stats, my above ogre changes fits right in. "It's about time the ogre was truly a powerful monster."

Notice I have not complained about fixing the feats to match the base rules [every three levels]. The pit fiend listed as the example now works "correctly". And following that example, ogres should get another feat also for being 4HD. But now, following the given example, the designers may very well make a 5HD ogre. They've set the precedent for whimsical changes.



> I'm very pleased with the new Pit Fiend, top to bottom.




And it is indeed a "new" pit fiend. Will all the other creatures be similarly "new" instead of updated to match the revised rules?

Quasqueton


----------



## Greatwyrm (Jan 29, 2003)

The more sweeping the changes are, the better the conversion notes in the DMG better be.  Of course, I'm assuming such notes will exist.  I'm still going to reserve judgment on 3.5 until I can see it for myself.  However, if my collection of 3rd party stuff suddenly becomes much more difficult to use, I will not at all be happy.


----------



## Upper_Krust (Jan 29, 2003)

Hi Eridanis! 



			
				Eridanis said:
			
		

> *And U_K, I too am drooling to find out about the solar. Always one of my favorites from the 1st edition MM2, up there with the phoenix.  *




I just hope they switched the Planetar's Sword back to its 1st Ed. origins.

None of this +3 Greatsword nonsense; what happened to its +4 Bastard Sword of Sharpness and Wounding!?


----------



## Upper_Krust (Jan 29, 2003)

*Re: Pit Fiend*

Hi there ashockney! 

I know a few people have touched on this before...



			
				ashockney said:
			
		

> *Why were these changes needed?  Where did the numbers come from?  Playtesting.  I used pit fiends and other fiends, in my games and the numbers on this guy (hit points, AC, and SR) are very close to what they've developed.  Close enough that I can say confidently they were not arbitrarily "pulled from the air".  On the contrary, these are the appropriate levels required to truly challenge a 15th or 16th level party.  Anything less is a joke, and will get summarily steam-rolled by the amazing offensive firepower of a well equipped high level party. *




Are you suggesting the aforementioned revised Pit Fiend represents a *moderate** challenge for a party of 16th-level characters!?

*will result in a loss of 20% of the parties resources?

Personally it appears a *lot closer* to a 50/50 chance encounter for such a party!


----------



## Zappo (Jan 29, 2003)

Intrope said:
			
		

> *Zappo, Outsiders already get Fighter BAB, Monk Saves and Rogue Skill Points. But I'm glad you did the math for me; in my short look at it, I thought he was getting 10 skill points per level, which would be really out of hand.*



Not exactly; outsiders currently get (8+INTmod)xHD skill points. 

While a rogue gets (8+INTmod)x(level+3), because he gets four times at first level.

The change brings the monster rules more in line with the PC rules, and I applaud that. Disparity between the treatment of PCs and monsters was and still is one of the things that irks me about D&D, even 3E.


----------



## incognito (Jan 29, 2003)

Love the new pit fiend with a few nit-picks.

some of the stats are quite high.  
The AC is pretty high, I would've preferred 3-5 lower.
same for SR, but only 2-4

Other than that, many high CR devils and demons were a joke for thier CR.  Marilith, Balor, Pit fiend, etc.

Now they are tough "on CR" encounters. Like Garillion, Rhemoraz, and Ghoul.

Good, becasue I want my players to poop thier pants when they see a demon or devil.


----------



## WizarDru (Jan 29, 2003)

MinscFan said:
			
		

> *Oh boy. I'm a little bummed that they have changed the basic stat block. That means every monster database out there is now invalid. They've also (essentially) made all the third-party creature books that came out as obsolete as 2nd edition material is to 3rd edition -- so along those lines, this is looking like a new version of D&D. *




While I understand what you're saying, I'm just not as concerned about this.  First, the stat blocks in many products, INCLUDING WOTC's, have not been consistent in format.  WoTC alone produced three different versions.  This new revised format is much nicer for the DM to get the information he needs, when he needs it, IMHO.  Second, it's just not that different.  This isn't a change from AC: -2 to AC:18 (*), it's just a change in printed format, mostly.  The rules changes behind it aren't the stat block's responsibility.


_* - (I'm assuming AC -2 works out to something completely different than the number I just gave here.  I don't even remember how AC used to work under 1e, never played 2e, and don't really want to be reminded.   Thanks.)_


----------



## Azure Trance (Jan 29, 2003)

I have the Tome of Horrors and CC2 as well as the Monsternomicon; hope they don't change too many things around :/


----------



## ashockney (Jan 29, 2003)

Quasqueton said:
			
		

> *
> 
> You may not be singling anyone out by name, but I'm the only one who's mentioned having never used pit fiends. So I guess that means you are talking to me.
> *





My intent TRULY wasn't to single you (or anyone) out.  It was a general comment towards everyone who posts on how good/bad high level stuff is impacted when they haven't played high level.



			
				Quasqueton said:
			
		

> *
> And it is indeed a "new" pit fiend. Will all the other creatures be similarly "new" instead of updated to match the revised rules?
> 
> Quasqueton *




Agreed.  And I agree with your assessment that the "magnitude" of change seems greater than what has been advertised to date.  Having said that, I DID really think that the monsters of CR 11+ were ALL in need of revision (except Dragons).


----------



## Knight Otu (Jan 29, 2003)

Ladies and gentlemen, the lower planes just became more dangerous.

That's a good thing. 

Changes to the stat-block format - a good thing, having information at hand when neccessary.

Outsider type beefed up - That's a thing I'm concerned about. They were already rather powerful to begin with, and now they gain feats as characters, it appears.

Facing - No more odd facings I'm a bit sad about, but overall it could prove to be a good thing. I hope they don't adopt the standardized facings of d20 Modern - Some creatures are a bit bigger than that!

New DR - Overall, I believe this is a good change. Most characters will still be able to hurt beasts once in a while, even with magical weapons. Plus, the seemingly expected/feared flood of special materials might not happen. According to the compiled info:



> That's right to bypass the Pit Fiend's DR15/holysilver, a Paladin will need at a minimum a +1 holy silvered weapon




Holysilver seems to be a magical silver weapon with the holy enhancement, not a single material. (and I would expect a few sentences like "This material x functions as material y for purposes of DR).

New ability scores for pit fiend - as Darkness said, these stats make some deities look pale in comparison.

New subtypes - Yes! YES! YE ... er... sorry  

Tactics are a good addition.

(And I don't think this is CR 16 anymore.)


----------



## shilsen (Jan 29, 2003)

Zappo said:
			
		

> *I wanna see the Balor!  *




I just wanna see the Solar now. If it's as much more powerful than the revised Pit Fiend as the MM Solar was stronger than the MM pit fiend, hoo boy!


----------



## ashockney (Jan 29, 2003)

> Are you suggesting the aforementioned revised Pit Fiend represents a moderate* challenge for a party of 16th-level characters!?
> 
> *will result in a loss of 20% of the parties resources?Are you suggesting the aforementioned revised Pit Fiend represents a moderate*




Yes.

A 16th level party has got some really, really ridiculous resources.  See...Mass Heal, Abi-Dalzim's Horrid Wilting, 8d6 Sneak Attack, and Fighter/Barbs with 200+ HP and 40+ AC's.  This guy will give 'em a good fight.  Could he kill PC's?  Yep.  And PC's have the resources to deal with that.  Granted, I'm not assuming you've got to "rezz" every fifth encounter here, but a good 16th level party of four has the capacity to deal 300+ hp damage per round pretty consistently.  You've got to really "shore up" the hp and defenses on these bad-boys to give them a run for their money.


----------



## Celebrim (Jan 29, 2003)

I agree that the outsiders, especially the Devils, in general where to weak to offer an appropriate challenge to PC parties of the level thier CR indicated.  On the other hand, I feel that the Dragons where tougher than their CR indicated.   So, I'm not unhappy to see that some minor changes are occuring to correct this.  Outsider's do probably need a boost to become reasonable challenges.  Dragon CR probably does need to go up.  

But that doesn't mean I'm thrilled about the particular changes in question.   

1) The attribute increases are only slightly short of insane.  A Pit Fiends attributes should be roughly on par with the best unmodified attributes of a typical 16th level character, with the exception of STR and CON.  That is to say, a pit fiend ought to be no more agile than a 16th level thief sans attribute boosting items, no more intelligent than a 16th level wizard, etc.  Because of size, STR should be about +8 above a 16th level unraging barbarian.  This is in my opinion necessary for a since of heroism.  With the exception of CON, all the stats are unnecessarily about +6 too high, and out of scale with all other published material on dieties, outsiders, and what not.

2) In general, the increases in attributes and other features seem to be intended to balance the creature against only the most tricked-out, well equiped min/maxed, using-all-the-splat-books, fighting for every edge teflon characters.  That really bothers me.  The SR climb in particular is worrisome, even assuming that's not a type and it shouldn't be SR 36.  I do hope that the CR of the creature (or whatever system replaces CR because CR needs a whole lot more revision than the Pit Fiend ever did) raises to the more appropriate 19 or 20 that it looks like to me.   Or maybe the new CR system will assume a party of six characters instead of 4.  Who knows.


----------



## Quasqueton (Jan 29, 2003)

> Agreed. And I agree with your assessment that the "magnitude" of change seems greater than what has been advertised to date.




We agree to agree. 



> Having said that, I DID really think that the monsters of CR 11+ were ALL in need of revision (except Dragons).




This is where I lack the experience to comment. But it would seem to be more in the spirit of a simple revision to adjust the CR numbers down, rather than pump the creatures up. One is "backward compatible", the other is not.



> No more odd facings I'm a bit sad about, but overall it could prove to be a good thing.




This seems like it would cause more problems that it solved. But I'm open to explanation.

A horse in 3.0 takes up 5'x10' facing. A man on horse back can reach everwhere but directly in front of his mount.

If 3.5 gives a horse 10'x10' facing, how does this affect the rider's reach?

And using the pit fiend as an example - it went from a 5'x5' facing with 10' reach to a 10'x10' facing with 10' reach. Doesn't this effectively increase his reach by 5'? He'll now be threatening 36 squares rather than 25 squares [if we include his own square(s)].

Can someone with Chainmail experience explain this?

Quasqueton


----------



## Celebrim (Jan 29, 2003)

> This seems like it would cause more problems that it solved. But I'm open to explanation.
> 
> A horse in 3.0 takes up 5'x10' facing. A man on horse back can reach everwhere but directly in front of his mount.
> 
> If 3.5 gives a horse 10'x10' facing, how does this affect the rider's reach?




Well, assuming that people aren't jumping to conclusions about no more odd facings, even beyond the wierdness of the mechanics it seems rather logically offensive that a pair of horses side by side have a 20' frontage.


----------



## Upper_Krust (Jan 29, 2003)

me said:
			
		

> *Are you suggesting the aforementioned revised Pit Fiend represents a moderate* challenge for a party of 16th-level characters!?
> 
> *will result in a loss of 20% of the parties resources?Are you suggesting the aforementioned revised Pit Fiend represents a moderate**






			
				ashockney said:
			
		

> *Yes.*




Lets examine that.

If a single monster represents a moderate challenge, then four such monsters represent a 50/50 challenge; and subsequently one such monster must therefore represent a 50/50 challenge for a single 16th-level character.

Is the Revised Pit Fiend a 50/50 challenge for a 16th-level PC...

No, its much more powerful.



			
				ashockney said:
			
		

> *A 16th level party has got some really, really ridiculous resources.  See...Mass Heal, Abi-Dalzim's Horrid Wilting, 8d6 Sneak Attack, and Fighter/Barbs with 200+ HP and 40+ AC's. *




Mass Heal is as broken as Heal, which as we know is all set for revision.

Horrid Wilting is only going to do about 40 damage; *if* it penetrates the SR. The Fiend is almost certain to make the save.

Sneak Attack still has to hit (approx. 50% chance?) and surmount Damage Reduction.



			
				ashockney said:
			
		

> *This guy will give 'em a good fight.  Could he kill PC's?  Yep.*




Indeed.



			
				ashockney said:
			
		

> *And PC's have the resources to deal with that.  Granted, I'm not assuming you've got to "rezz" every fifth encounter here, but a good 16th level party of four has the capacity to deal 300+ hp damage per round pretty consistently.*




Not against the revised Pit Fiend they won't.



			
				ashockney said:
			
		

> *You've got to really "shore up" the hp and defenses on these bad-boys to give them a run for their money. *




I think a lot of people refer to a moderate encounter when they really mean difficult encounter; as herein.


----------



## The Serge (Jan 29, 2003)

I was trying to keep out of this conversation, but oh well.

I have played Pit Fiends.  Quite extensively.  In fact, for almost two years, one of my gaming group's most persistent foe and nemesis was a Pit Fiend.  Also, I've spent a lot of time working on epic versions of Devils at our website, so I'm fairly familiar with these critters.

Simply put, this is what the Pit Fiend should have been all along.  However, I don't know that I'm pleased with what this revision says about what we should expect with 3.5.  Frankly, I think it's a little much.  Rather than gamers just receiving corrections and errata in official form, we are receiving a brand new entity.

Heightened abilities, more feats, better skills, more resistant DR, higher SR.  This is a brand new monster I would expect for a brand new version for D&D, not a corrected monster for 3ed D&D.  This concerns me a lot.

While I'm not all that excited about 3.5, I've every intention to buy the revised material.  But, this will have a tremendous impact on numerous resources if the changes to the Pit Fiend are any indication of other changes.

As for CR, the Pit Fiend in 3ed was more than a match for four 16th level characters.  This Devil's manueverablility really makes it a threat.  A Pit Fiend with space can _teleport_ more than 400 feet away and start lobbing _fireball_.  Or it can _dispel magic_ and cast _meteor swarm_.  Sure, 16th level characters prepared for a Pit Fiend will have some defenses up, but some can easily be eliminated with a well worded _wish_.  But, as far as I've seen, Pit Fiend CR is not like Dragon CR; i.e. it's not based upon the preparation of the party.  A Pit Fiend with _improved invisibility_, even when cast in the middle of fight, can wreak havoc.  I know from personal experience.

As for this revision, I see this as at least CR 20... if not more, assuming the means of calculating CR are the same.  Frankly, I'm not all that excited about this primarily since it puts _everything_ out there out of wack if this is the kind of change we should expect in everything else.


----------



## ashockney (Jan 29, 2003)

UK, just curious...

Have you ever run a 16th level party through a module?  

I've done it twice.  And 17th and 18th and 19th.

They are tougher than hell.

The 16th level party has the capacity to deal 300 hp damage per round.  Yes.  I'm talking about CAPACITY here, not "what I'll do against a 40 AC and 36 SR". That would kill the Pit Fiend outright.  Round 1.  Probably before he got his first action.  How do you prevent that from happening?  Massive defenses.  

Kick up that AC and SR so that only about half the stuff thrown at him hits.  Now you're down to roughly 150 hp/round...we're on the right track.

Why stop there?  Buff up those Saves, mix in some immunities, and slather on some damage and energy resistance.  Very nice.  If he's lucky, this step cuts it down to about 100 hit points a round.  

Our poor friend has increased his life expentancy to 2 rounds.  Nice job!

Now, Mr. Fiend (like his friends call him) isn't going to just stand around and take it.  Nope, he's going to bring it back, hard core.  

He's got a couple real nice stun and hold effects. What's that really do? Probably negate 1/4 of the damage output for one round or two at the most.  Keep in mind a 16th level party has a counter-measure for pretty much everything, and that's IF you can get it past their considerable defenses.  Spell Turning and Free Action come to mind.  But, let's hope the party was stupid and didn't have those defenses up or with them at the time.  So we'll knock a couple of actions out of the middle, and say Mr. Fiend's survived to Round 3.  Amen!

So Mr. Fiend now brings it!  Meteor Swarm, ha, ha!
24d6 = 24x3 average = 72 points of damage.  Assuming no SR, no ER, no Imp Evasion, and no ridiculous saving throw (yes, I'm talking to the Paladin and Monk in the back with big smiles on their faces).  Well, this will definitely "threaten" the mage, but pretty much everyone else is shrugging it off or down about 1/4 of their HP. So he's definitely picking on the mage, cause now he's going to go put some melee whoop ass on him!
Assuming of course he can find him.  But let's pretend he can.  The silly mage forgot to mem any good defensive spells today.  At this point in time...we're up to about round 3, and the pit fiend stomps over to the mage, busts him up, and disrupts his spell!  D'oh!  This is probably where the "likely to die" character would come in.  This largely depends on initiative and the previous actions of the cleric.  Most likely the cleric would see fit to healing up Mr. Mage, but if they didn't.  Uh-oh. 

Rinse and repeat.  More of the same, but the outcome is pretty heavily favoring the advantage to the party.

I did all of the above, btw, assuming no haste, which using our current 3rd Ed rules, would have AUTOMATICALLY been provided, of the MASS HASTE variety, as the first action in the first round.  Significantly increasing the defenses of the party and allowing the Cleric to get off things like Mass Heal and Break Enchantment while dishing out some loving.

This isn't a shot or an attack.  Just merely sharing my experiences, and justification for why I'm not surprised Mr. Fiend is a good CR 16.  

Check out the beasties in MM2 for more examples of better challenges appropriate to the level above CR 11.


----------



## jgbrowning (Jan 29, 2003)

hrm, never run higher groups than 14th so the below may be just a pile of poo poo.


wouldn't Mr. fiend 
round 1. _quickened mass hold monster_, grapple cleric.  
round 2. _quickened mass hold monster_, hopfully coup de grace cleric?

rinse and repeat?

and if you face 2 Mr. fiends wouldn't the two _quickened mass hold monsters_ a round eventually get your group of 4 PCs?

why would he ever use damaging spells when he can mass hold monster?  he can just teleport about, (staying out of the reach of dimensional anchor), and just keep mass hold monstering?

I assume im missing somethin here....

joe b.


----------



## MinscFan (Jan 29, 2003)

> While I understand what you're saying, I'm just not as concerned about this. First, the stat blocks in many products, INCLUDING WOTC's, have not been consistent in format. WoTC alone produced three different versions. This new revised format is much nicer for the DM to get the information he needs, when he needs it, IMHO. Second, it's just not that different. This isn't a change from AC: -2 to AC:18 (*), it's just a change in printed format, mostly. The rules changes behind it aren't the stat block's responsibility.




True -- about the format. But more is obviously changing than the format. Perhaps all monsters have new stats/abilities/spells -- it seems that way.

Serge, in a  private e-mail discussion, pointed out that the changes we have seen thus far seem to put more of the grunt work on DMs. Converting 3.0 to 3.5 whenever we need older material in a new game -- GAWD, did anyone think we would be calling material released last year for D&D 3E old?? -- will become the work of the DM. 

I rarely use non-WoTC material without modification as it is, and rarely WoTC now that I think on it, so that isn't a big deal. 

Essentially, this move could halt the production of third party products due for release this year so they can wait for the new SRD.

NOW - do I like the new Pit Fiend. Yup. I can't wait to see what they do with other denizens of the planes, and with dragons.


----------



## Upper_Krust (Jan 29, 2003)

Hello again ashockney! 



			
				ashockney said:
			
		

> *UK, just curious...
> 
> Have you ever run a 16th level party through a module?*




Not in 3rd Ed. 

Though I have done a lot of playtesting, notably so with PCs and Pit Fiends (not yet with this revised version though).



			
				ashockney said:
			
		

> *I've done it twice.  And 17th and 18th and 19th.
> 
> They are tougher than hell.*




Tougher than nine hells though? 



			
				ashockney said:
			
		

> *The 16th level party has the capacity to deal 300 hp damage per round.  Yes.  I'm talking about CAPACITY here, not "what I'll do against a 40 AC and 36 SR". That would kill the Pit Fiend outright.  Round 1.  Probably before he got his first action.  How do you prevent that from happening?  Massive defenses.
> 
> Kick up that AC and SR so that only about half the stuff thrown at him hits.  Now you're down to roughly 150 hp/round...we're on the right track.
> 
> ...




I still think you are vastly underselling this Revised Pit Fiend.  

Four Revised Pit Fiends (in your estimation) are approximately equal to a party of four 16th-level PCs. Yet you believe a party of 16th-level characters would be a match for them?



			
				ashockney said:
			
		

> *Check out the beasties in MM2 for more examples of better challenges appropriate to the level above CR 11. *




There are only three monsters (other than the Gem Dragons which I am not going to study for the sake of brevity) within the entire Monster Manual 2 which come close to rivalling the challenge of a Revised Pit Fiend:

The Dread Linnorm; Corpse Tearer and the Hellfire Wyrm.

So if you are going to claim that a Revised Pit Fiend is a moderate challenge for a 16th-level party then so must practically everything in the Monster Manual 2! Not that such an appeal to authority is the basis of my argument of course.


----------



## ashockney (Jan 30, 2003)

jgbrowning said:
			
		

> *
> 
> wouldn't Mr. fiend
> round 1. quickened mass hold monster, grapple cleric.
> ...




The cleric is the MOST likely guy in the party to make his save and be defended against Mass Hold Monster.  Great Will Save, and Great Wisdom Bonus, and Resistance Bonus to saves from Buff spells = low probability of success.  They also are the caretakers of Freedom of Movement.  Very likely to be up (or get up quickly), which would negate the Hold and the Grapple.  

Same tactic vs. the Rogue.  Now that's gonna get ugly in a hurry unless his buddies bail him out.  Which they fairly easily can.

Two Mr. Fiends is a different scenario.  Now you're talking EL 18 vs. EL 16 and yes, that scenario gets real ugly real fast.  From that point on, the PC's MUST have defenses and buffs up to be able to contend.  Which, at this level, they typically do.


----------



## jgbrowning (Jan 30, 2003)

ashockney said:
			
		

> *
> 
> The cleric is the MOST likely guy in the party to make his save and be defended against Mass Hold Monster.  Great Will Save, and Great Wisdom Bonus, and Resistance Bonus to saves from Buff spells = low probability of success.  They also are the caretakers of Freedom of Movement.  Very likely to be up (or get up quickly), which would negate the Hold and the Grapple.
> 
> ...




actually i was having him attack the cleric because the cleric would be the most likly to save and he has all the spells that can save the other party members. and now the clerics grappled and his spells become more problematic.

if he gets grappled (even if not held) the constant mass hold monsters will eventually get the low will save guys  (fighter, rogue) leaving only the wizard.

course even if the cleric saves 80% of the time, he's at 1/2 chance of failure after only 3 rounds. Wonder what the actual statistical breakdown of the expected saves vrs the mass hold moster spell really looks like for each class...

i think its a bit more than a CR16. We'll have to see if they upped the CR.


joe b.


----------



## ashockney (Jan 30, 2003)

> Tougher than nine hells though?




Now THAT'S thinking high-level play!!!  

And, no, probably not on most days.  



> Four Revised Pit Fiends (in your estimation) are approximately equal to a party of four 16th-level PCs.




According to the way the CR/EL system works.  Yep.  Granted, the Pit Fiends are tougher in many aspects, particulalry their well-roundedness.  However, our party is better in each respective area (Fighter, Arcane Spellcaster, Rogue, and Cleric) and furthermore will probably have even more synergy because of the way they work together better.

Having said that, I would have no problem conceding certain key strengths to the Pit Fiends in comparison (Meteor Swarm, High SR, Special Qualities, and Insanely High Attributes).



> Yet you believe a party of 16th-level characters would be a match for them?




A match?  16th Level Party against an EL 20 encounter.  The party could win, but they'd need luck and decent prep to do it.  More often than not, however, I think the mortality rate would exceed 50% for that kind of encounter.  



> There are only three monsters (other than the Gem Dragons which I am not going to study for the sake of brevity) within the entire Monster Manual 2 which come close to rivalling the challenge of a Revised Pit Fiend:




Hmmm....

Tempest, page 193, CR16

324 hp
24 AC (Ok, that blows, no pun intended...really)
4 attacks doing 2d8+13 (21x4 = 84 hp avg capacity in melee)
Only good save: Fort
SQ: Elemental, DR 15/+2, 
Str 29, Con 28, the rest crap
Whirlwind Ability...which is sick

So, in comparison...the Pit Fiend is far more well rounded, however the damage capabilties are very similar, and the tempest has a wicked-tough damage shield that deals damage AND negates without a save Ref DC31!  This effectively takes out most front line melee PC's!                                                                                                                     
Tetramorph on the next page is in the same ballpark.  Awful AC, 300+ hp, SR 32 (sounds familiar), and a wicked tough attack effect (Entropic Touch).  

Most of the MM2 monsters have one really sick ability, and a variety of defenses that would be required at the appropriate CR level to "compete".

Don't get me wrong.  I'm not saying EVERY CR16 should look like the Pit Fiend.  No, I want the Pit Fiend to be the high end of CR16 (much like the Dragons of appropriate age category).  However, all CR16 creatures need to look much closer to this Pit Fiend, than to what was published originally in MM.


----------



## Celebrim (Jan 30, 2003)

Perhaps your point might have more substance if we could actually see a sample character sheet for one of your PC's at 16th level.


----------



## The Serge (Jan 30, 2003)

Assuming that the default SR is 12 + CR, then the revised Pit Fiend's CR is 20.


----------



## jgbrowning (Jan 30, 2003)

The Serge said:
			
		

> *Assuming that the default SR is 12 + CR, then the revised Pit Fiend's CR is 20. *




Now that's believable.

joe b.


----------



## Celebrim (Jan 30, 2003)

Actually, it is very believable.  And yes, a tricked out party in which the DM has been fairly free in providing the players with the magic items that they want and has been allowing a large ammount of non-core material is probably at 16th level very much the equal in combat of a party of average playtest 20th level characters, and can probably toast a party of 20th level characters from a low magic campaign where the DM insists all feats and spells be balanced against those provided by the core material.

For myself though, I'm too old or cynical or something to buy into this 'bigger is better' mentality.  When I see this Pit Fiend, what I see is a monster that is so high end that I'll almost never get to use it.  Now that the top is off the can of worms, I'll probably end up reworking all the high end monsters to my desires anyway - for instance knocking about 30 attribute points off, and 3 or so natural armor, and maybe recalculating damage for a large creature instead of huge (I can always advance the monster to get back to huge if I need tougher foe.  I mean I have no problem suggesting that the toughest fiends in the pit are 36 HD or more).  That would I think put him back down around a 16 CR I feel comfortable with.


----------



## Alzrius (Jan 30, 2003)

You know, I think the thing I find most upsetting about this entire thing with the new pit fiend is that about a week ago, I wrote Morrus a submission proposal for EN Mag saying I'd do a write up for a new subtype for creatures who venture off-plane, and that it'd be called Extra-planar...I think I can guess how that proposal is going to be answered now.


----------



## Upper_Krust (Jan 30, 2003)

Hi ashockney mate! 



			
				ashockney said:
			
		

> *Now THAT'S thinking high-level play!!!
> 
> And, no, probably not on most days. *








			
				ashockney said:
			
		

> *According to the way the CR/EL system works.  Yep.  Granted, the Pit Fiends are tougher in many aspects, particulalry their well-roundedness.  However, our party is better in each respective area (Fighter, Arcane Spellcaster, Rogue, and Cleric) and furthermore will probably have even more synergy because of the way they work together better.*




I don't think the party are necessarily better in all respective areas. I think it could outfight the fighter and outspell the wizard/sorceror.

...not to mention out tumble the rogue. 



			
				ashockney said:
			
		

> *Having said that, I would have no problem conceding certain key strengths to the Pit Fiends in comparison (Meteor Swarm, High SR, Special Qualities, and Insanely High Attributes).*








			
				ashockney said:
			
		

> *A match?  16th Level Party against an EL 20 encounter.  The party could win, but they'd need luck and decent prep to do it.  More often than not, however, I think the mortality rate would exceed 50% for that kind of encounter.*




Against four such monsters I think the party would have little or no chance, certainly far from the 50/50 the rules would attest (assuming CR is 16).



			
				ashockney said:
			
		

> *Hmmm....
> 
> Tempest, page 193, CR16
> 
> ...



The Tempest has slightly more hit points; much inferior AC; much inferior Attack Bonus; Deals less damage on average (even if it does hit with all attacks); has pathetic (by comparison) spell-like abilities; no spell resistance; inferior ability scores. Basically its a one trick pony.



			
				ashockney said:
			
		

> *Tetramorph on the next page is in the same ballpark.  Awful AC, 300+ hp, SR 32 (sounds familiar), and a wicked tough attack effect (Entropic Touch).*




The Teratomorph is much like the Tempest, a one trick pony. In fact it only gets one attack per round.



			
				ashockney said:
			
		

> *Most of the MM2 monsters have one really sick ability, and a variety of defenses that would be required at the appropriate CR level to "compete".*




Indeed. You are going to get that 'surprise' factor that the Pit Fiend probably won't have; but thats not an indictment of its power.

I think you must have noticed with even a cursory glance at the Monster Manual 2 how much tougher the Revised Pit Fiend is compared to the majority of CR16~28 monsters within its pages. 



			
				ashockney said:
			
		

> *Don't get me wrong.  I'm not saying EVERY CR16 should look like the Pit Fiend.  No, I want the Pit Fiend to be the high end of CR16 (much like the Dragons of appropriate age category).  However, all CR16 creatures need to look much closer to this Pit Fiend, than to what was published originally in MM. *




I think you are falling into the same trap as the Monster Manual did with dragons.

It artificially lowered the CR of dragons so they would represent a more difficult challenge; in effect they 'broke' the whole purpose of CR, and practically insulted every DM in the process. 

Whats the point of having the whole system setup to represent a moderate challenge then purposefully tinker with certain CRs? Are DMs not smart enough themselves to know how tough they want the challenge to be that WotC have to trick them!?


----------



## Darkness (Jan 30, 2003)

HeavyG said:
			
		

> *They'll be revising the deities' stats too !
> 
> Sheesh, Darkness, pay attention !  *




Agreed. If they don't revise DDG, ELH, etc., all those books will hardly be very usable for 3e rev, power-wise.


----------



## Darkness (Jan 30, 2003)

ashockney said:
			
		

> *Tempest, page 193, CR16
> 
> 324 hp
> 24 AC (Ok, that blows, no pun intended...really)
> ...



We don't yet know how close 3e rev PCs will be to 3e PCs, though; maybe (okay - _probably_) they will be boosted as well.


----------



## Quasqueton (Jan 30, 2003)

*advanced pit fiend*

Several folks in this thread have mentioned how the 3.0 pit fiend needed a boost in power to be the big terror they are billed as. Well, remember that the monsters listed in the MM are considered the smallest, weakest, and most common of the given species. So to make the more impressive version, instead of changing the base pit fiend stats, you could just use the advancement rules for 3.0. Here is an advanced pit fiend. (Note this is not even the most advanced possible.)


Devil, Pit Fiend
Huge Outsider (Baatezu, Evil, Extraplanar, Lawful)
Hit Dice: 26d8+182 (299 hp)
Initiative: +4 (+4 Improved Initiative)
Speed: 40 ft., fly 60 ft. (average)
AC: 31 (-2 size, +23 natural) touch 8, flat footed 21
Base Attack/Grapple: +26/+44
Attack: Claw +35 melee (1d8+11) Full Attack: 2 claws +35 melee (1d8+11) and 2 wings +33 melee (1d6+5) and bite +33 melee (2d8+5 and poison plus disease) and tail slap +33 (2d6+5)
Face/Reach: 10 ft./15 ft.
Special Attacks: Constrict 2d6+16, fear aura, improved grab, spell-like abilities, summon baatezu.
Special Qualities: Acid resistance 20, cold resistance 20, DR 25/+2, fire immunity, poison immunity, regeneration 5, see in darkness, SR 28, telepathy.
Saves: Fort +22, Ref +15, Will +20.
Abilities: Str 33, Dex 11, Con 25, Int 20, Wis 20, Cha 16.
Skills: /snip - didn't have time to go through all these, but it would have 338 skill points to work with
Feats: Cleave, Expertise, Great Cleave, Improved Disarm, Improved Imitative, Iron Will, Multi-Attack, Power Attack, Quicken Spell-like Ability.

Tactics Round-by-Round
The pit fiend opens with spell-like powers, attempting to neutralize dangerous opponents before entering melee combat.
Round 0: Unholy aura; activate fear aura; quickened summon Baatezu.
Round 1: Hold person against unarmored opponent (preferably a spellcaster).
Round 2: Meteor swarm against as many foes as possible, approach worst-injured enemy.
Round 3: Full attack against injured enemy.
Round 4: Continue melee against injured enemy, or hold person against annoying spellcaster.
Round 5: Repeat from round 1; or greater teleport to safety if endangered. 


The above pit fiend stats are using the 3.0 rules, but with the 3.5 layout. I still hold that the base stats didn't need changing. To make a more powerful pit fiend, a DM only needs to spend a few minutes (as I just did here) to advance the creature, or maybe add class levels to it. Imagine a standard pit fiend with a dozen fighter or sorcerer levels!

Quasqueton


----------



## ashockney (Jan 30, 2003)

> We don't yet know how close 3e rev PCs will be to 3e PCs, though; maybe (okay - probably) they will be boosted as well.




This is an excellent point as well.  Even a simple little nerf like what they did to HASTE makes a combat with this big boy MUCH tougher.



> Perhaps your point might have more substance if we could actually see a sample




Here's some basic stats from a 12 Rog/4 Fighter..
Init: +12
HP: 128
AC: 34 (38 w/Haste)+Displacement

(on AC he deals an average of 58 points to me in a Full Attack action, with my displacement cut that to 29 on average)

Saves: 14/20/8

(60% chance of taking no damage from meteor swarm, he'd kill me with the Mass Hold Monster unless I had Freedom of Movement up going in, but worst case the cleric removes it on his next action, his poison/disease attack could prove troublesome)

MS/Hide: +35, Tumble: +25, UMD/DD: +15

Uses Keen Falchion +5 (WF, WS, IC, Exp Tact, and Opportunist)and routinely gets 6d6 Sneak Attack on every swing, crits on a 12+, with base damage in the 2d4+10 range.  His attack routine is +27/+22/+17 with an extra +27 from hasted action and an extra +27 from Exp Tactician and hopefully an extra +27 from Opportunist(he will always seek circumstance bonuses from things like flanking, attacking from above).

When everything gets going with Imp Invs up, that's 6 attacks total, 4 attacks with about a 50/50 chance of hitting straight up on Mr. Fiend, or a against his flat footed AC32, that's a 75% chance to hit.  Throw in a 45% chance of critting on each successful hit.  Two more attacks coming with a 25% (50%) and 5%(30%) chance of hitting.  Assuming some averages let's say I hit on 2 attacks and crit on one of those.  Both attacks have sneak attack, which deals 14+18 on the first hit, and 28+18 on the second for a total of 78 points of damage a round on average.  You don't want to see when I get lucky and crit three times in a round.

Granted...this is using quite a few assumptions.  But it sets the stage that this guy could fairly easily deal enough damage to take out the pit fiend in about 4 rounds by himself.


----------



## Upper_Krust (Jan 30, 2003)

Hello again mate! 



			
				ashockney said:
			
		

> * Granted...this is using quite a few assumptions.  But it sets the stage that this guy could fairly easily deal enough damage to take out the pit fiend in about 4 rounds by himself. *




More than a few... 

Assumes a lot of spells already active on your part; though not its part.

The Pit Fiends _Unholy Aura_ bestows +4 to AC (not sure if you took this into account?).

Doesn't take into account the summoned Gelugon backup (which it could actually use again 'quickened' on the second round without affecting its other tactics).

Assumes Mass Hold Monster (DC 26?) is saved or in some way proves ineffective. Otherwise game over.

Assumes Power Word Stun proves ineffective. Otherwise game over.

Assumes this keen falchion +5 is holy-silver.

Looking at the stats for the revised Pit Fiend it is not very far off the current Solar in terms of Challenge.


----------



## Anabstercorian (Jan 30, 2003)

I'm reallly not sure how this will work out, but either way, I'm sure that any significantly altered creatures will wind up with significantly altered CR's.


----------



## ashockney (Jan 30, 2003)

> The Pit Fiends Unholy Aura bestows +4 to AC (not sure if you took this into account?).




I didn't, excellent point.  But to point of this discussion.  At least we're even having a discussion.  Go back and take a look at the CR16 stuff in the MM.  It would all be auto-hit and probably about half the hit points, which means one round takedown.



> Doesn't take into account the summoned Gelugon backup (which it could actually use again 'quickened' on the second round without affecting its other tactics).




You know what?  I wasn't considering the summoned pet at all.  Depending on how that Gelugon looks, I think that's a really compelling arguement for this guy's CR to be above 16.  The good news from my perspective, is that they're much closer to where they need to be to deal with a high level party's resources.  I didn't even try real hard on this guy, the only thing on the character that's non-core is Expert Tactician.  You can imagine how all the prestige classes and splatbooks factor into this equation at high level.   



> Assumes Mass Hold Monster (DC 26?) is saved or in some way proves ineffective.




The Mass Hold Monster is ineffective if he's got Freedom of Movement up.  But if not, he's toast every time he decides to drop that spell.  Rogues and will saves are always a bad combination.


----------



## coyote6 (Jan 30, 2003)

The question I have is this: given the revised pit fiend stats, it seems very likely that 3.5e monsters will be very different from 3.0e monster, especially the higher-end things like outsiders. This is, of course, a bit vexing (given that it looks like it will invalidate not just the 3.0 MM, but the MM2, parts of the BoVD, MotP, FRCS, OA, Monsters of Faerun, DDG, ELH, etc., not to mention many 3rd party d20 supplements); but it also raises questions about material WotC has yet to release.

To wit: why should I buy the yet-to-be released Fiend Folio? Either it will be (a) actual 3.0 material, and thus obsolete before it hits stores, or (b) a preview of 3.5, and thus useless to me now. So why should I bother buying it, at least when it's released -- sure, after 3.5 is out, I'll know whether I want more 3.0 material or never want to see it again, so I'll be able to judge the Folio's value to me. But right now, I don't see a reason to buy the book when it comes out. And after 2-3 months, I'm not likely to bother going back to buy it.

The same question would seem to apply, to a lesser degree, for Savage Species, Races of Faerun, and the Unapproachable East book, to the extent that those books include new critters.

I wonder if any WotC folk are reading this.


----------



## jasamcarl (Jan 30, 2003)

coyote6 said:
			
		

> *The question I have is this: given the revised pit fiend stats, it seems very likely that 3.5e monsters will be very different from 3.0e monster, especially the higher-end things like outsiders. This is, of course, a bit vexing (given that it looks like it will invalidate not just the 3.0 MM, but the MM2, parts of the BoVD, MotP, FRCS, OA, Monsters of Faerun, DDG, ELH, etc., not to mention many 3rd party d20 supplements); but it also raises questions about material WotC has yet to release.
> 
> To wit: why should I buy the yet-to-be released Fiend Folio? Either it will be (a) actual 3.0 material, and thus obsolete before it hits stores, or (b) a preview of 3.5, and thus useless to me now. So why should I bother buying it, at least when it's released -- sure, after 3.5 is out, I'll know whether I want more 3.0 material or never want to see it again, so I'll be able to judge the Folio's value to me. But right now, I don't see a reason to buy the book when it comes out. And after 2-3 months, I'm not likely to bother going back to buy it.
> 
> ...




What about the monster do you find incompatible with current 3e? The changes are primarily in formatting not rules or even balance. If you think this thing is too potent at CR16, Wotc has been going in this direction atleast since the MMII, in that those monsters' CRs were determined with a more realistic view of the power of high level characters. I'm sure the Fiend Folio will be the same. The minor rules changes in skill points, BAB, will make barely a dent in its challenge.

Quite franks, beyond pumping up the arguably weak classes as well as high-level monsters, I see very few balance or compatibilitiy issues with the new rules, unless you are completly anal.


----------



## Lord Ben (Jan 30, 2003)

You can change werewolves to 10/silver and still have an elder earth elemental at 10/+3 or something.  Just because you change some creatures doesn't mean you need to change everything to ignore the +'s.  If some things still have +'s then any thing in a supplement will still be valid, or the DM can change if he sees fit.


----------



## Aloïsius (Jan 30, 2003)

> Check out the beasties in MM2 for more examples of better challenges appropriate to the level above CR 11.




Let's compare the new Pit Fiend, CR unknown, with a monster from MM2, the Fiendwurm (CR28).

HD Pit fiend : 18d8+144 (255hp)
HD Fiendwurm :24d10+216 (348)

Init Pit Fiend : +12
Init Fiendwurm : +5

Speed Pit Fiend 40, fly 60
Speed fiendwurm 60, burrow 60

AC Pit Fiend 40 (touch 17)
AC Fiendwurm 27 (touch 7)

Attack Pit fiend 2 claw +30 (2d8+14), 2 wings +28 (2d6+7) bite +28 (4d6+7+poison+disease), tail slap +28 (2d8 +7)

Attack fiend wurm bite +33 (2d8 +19)

Special attack pit fiend : constrict 2d8+28, fear aura, improved grab, spell-like abilities, summon baatezu

Special attack fiend wurm : death rift, demonic belch, improved grab, swallow whole

Special qualities Pit Fiend : Acid, cold resistance 10, DR 15/holysilver; fire, poison immunity, regeneration 5, see in darkness, SR 32, telepathy

Special qualities Fiend wurm : acidic hide, acid immunity, DR 15/-tremorsense, portal

Save baatezu : for+19, ref+19,will +21
Save Fiend wurm : for +23, ref +15, *will +10*

So what ? If the MM2 is right about CR (wich I seriously doubt), the new pit should be between CR 25/30. Come on : Will +10 and no spell resistance : even a level 10 wizard may use Hold monster with some great chance of success against this CR 28 creature.


----------



## jasamcarl (Jan 30, 2003)

Aloïsius said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Let's compare the new Pit Fiend, CR unknown, with a monster from MM2, the Fiendwurm (CR28).
> 
> ...




Is it mere coincidence that you choose one of only a few creatures in the book with inflated CRs? In fact, besides this and the mountain giant, I'm having trouble thinking of any creatures this 'easy'.


----------



## Celebrim (Jan 30, 2003)

ashhokney: Well, to be honest, I think your suggested character is meat to this pit fiend, but I'm not going to get into a "Well, he would do this, but then the character would do this arguement with you."  

But I do think it is entirely unreasonable to think that a Int 25+ creature is going to stay toe to toe with a melee combat expert.  Instead, at Int 25+ he has practically prescient judgement.  He often knows what the players are going to do before they do it.  Play him smarter than you are yourself by a degree that you can't even comprehend.  Comparitively he is as much more intelligent than the average human, then the average human is more intelligent than plankton.  Several things you haven't taken into account.

1) Mr. Fiend can fly and cast fireball at will.  Your falchion is virtually useless.  Hope you have alot of holy silvered arrows.
2) Mr. Fiend can teleport at will.  Add this to your algorithm.  If Fiend drops below 50% h.p., teleport away and return when regeneration restores h.p. 3 minutes later.  Repeat ad infinitum.
3) Mr. Fiend can dispel magic at will - which will serious impare your Freedom of Action, Haste, and other protections.  If you come in buffed up, smart Mr. Fiend (look at that intelligence) casts a dispel and teleports away.   Regenerates, cast improved invisibility, teleports back in, casts dispel and rinces and repeats until your spells become depleted.  Mr. Fiend isn't going to run out.   Party spell casters will.
4) Mr. Fiend can suggestion and charm person at will - your Freedom of Action won't help much against that.
5) Mr. Fiend can use Improved Invisibility at will.   Check out that move silently score.  Who is going to catch who flat footed?
6) There is a reasonable chance that your rogue/fighter fled the pit fiends fear aura right off the bat.
7) Mr. Fiend can Blasphemy at will.  There is no saving throw.  Look it up.  Quickened Blasphemies would be ugly.
8) Mr. Fiend has improved grab, constrict, and +36 grapple checks.  Hope you have been buying escape artist.  If you are grabbed, Mr. Fiend can power attack you into mush, fly away with you, or teleport to great height and drop you, or teleport into a dungeon or hostile environment (Hell?) drop you, and teleport out again.
9) Mr. Fiend can summon two Gelugon allies, who are together probably as dangerous as the Pit Fiend is.   Many of your tactics require flanking and so forth.  Why is a 25 int creature going to let himself be flanked given his allies and manueverablity?  Caught in a position where he might be flanked next round, he blasphemes and moves away.   Or he simply blasphemes every round and lets the Gelugon's chew you up.
10) Being a godlike smart fiend, Mr. Fiend undoubtably took the chance to Unhallow his location long before the party got there.   He probably tied something nasty like Dispel Magic on it, so that any enemy that approaches him suffers a Dispel Magic before combat even really begins.

And all this assumes that Mr. Fiend looks like Mr. Fiend and is bothering with combat at all, given that Bluff, Disguise, Intimidate, Diplomacy, etc.


----------



## Darkness (Jan 30, 2003)

ashockney said:
			
		

> *This is an excellent point as well.  Even a simple little nerf like what they did to HASTE makes a combat with this big boy MUCH tougher.*



Now that you mention it, yeah, we don't even know much about 3e revised spells, for that matter.

(Magic items probably won't change too much, but apart from that - who knows...)


----------



## jgbrowning (Jan 30, 2003)

Celebrim said:
			
		

> *1) Mr. Fiend can fly and cast fireball at will.  Your falchion is virtually useless.  Hope you have alot of holy silvered arrows.
> 2) Mr. Fiend can teleport at will.  Add this to your algorithm.  If Fiend drops below 50% h.p., teleport away and return when regeneration restores h.p. 3 minutes later.  Repeat ad infinitum.
> 3) Mr. Fiend can dispel magic at will - which will serious impare your Freedom of Action, Haste, and other protections.  If you come in buffed up, smart Mr. Fiend (look at that intelligence) casts a dispel and teleports away.   Regenerates, cast improved invisibility, teleports back in, casts dispel and rinces and repeats until your spells become depleted.  Mr. Fiend isn't going to run out.   Party spell casters will.
> 4) Mr. Fiend can suggestion and charm person at will - your Freedom of Action won't help much against that.
> ...




Thanks for the list.  I'm glad to see others play their monsters like I do. (like i'd play my characters )  Although some of the above can be countered, some of them are very very nasty.

joe b.


----------



## Lord Ben (Jan 30, 2003)

Celebrim said:
			
		

> *1) Mr. Fiend can fly and cast fireball at will.  Your falchion is virtually useless.  Hope you have alot of holy silvered arrows.
> *




Or you could have a potion of fly or a mass fly spell.  At 20th level (to make it harder to dispel) that's fairly difficult to get rid of.   Fireball isn't tough at all at this level either.  10d6 just isn't a lot if you're well prepared and have items.  It's tough, but not unbeatable.


----------



## jgbrowning (Jan 30, 2003)

ashockney said:
			
		

> * Here's some basic stats from a 12 Rog/4 Fighter..
> Init: +12
> HP: 128
> AC: 34 (38 w/Haste)+Displacement
> ...




Actually worst case is the cleric rolls badly and is held as well .

Second to worst case is cleric is grappled by mr. fiend, and you're held w/o access to freedom of movement.  

joe b.


----------



## Ferret (Jan 30, 2003)

They also lumped together the attack and damage(SIIS)


----------



## ashockney (Jan 30, 2003)

> Well, to be honest, I think your suggested character is meat to this pit fiend,




By himself, agreed.



> but I'm not going to get into a "Well, he would do this, but then the character would do this arguement with you."




Nor am I.  Just posting some basic stats to help set the "level" for those who've never run at this level.  



> I'm glad to see others play their monsters like I do.




Seconded.  The problem was, out of the MM, after the party finally cuts through all the political, diplomatic, and henchmen of the BBEG...feh.  It was a little disappointing.  This guy...let's just say I don't think anyone will be disappointed, least of all the DM! 



> Actually worst case is the cleric rolls badly and is held as well .




"Ok, who'd we leave our scrolls of True Ressurection with?  That one's going to cost us!"


----------



## Quasqueton (Jan 30, 2003)

*tail wagging the dog*



> The problem was, out of the MM, after the party finally cuts through all the political, diplomatic, and henchmen of the BBEG...feh. It was a little disappointing. This guy...let's just say I don't think anyone will be disappointed, least of all the DM!




So someone's idea of a BBEG at the climax of a 16th-level adventure is to use a CR16 creature right out of the MM?

A BBEG climax fight for a 16th-level party should be about CR20. And instead of looking through the MM or MM2 (or anything else) for a properly challenging monster, or even taking a standard CR16 pit fiend and advancing/increasing him to a proper level, someone relies on the WotC team to change the default and basic pit fiend into a more powerful creature?

As I said in an earlier post, the listed creatures in the MM are the weakest and most common of their species. 

But now when you run a group of epic-level characters against this new pit fiend, the complaint will be "the pit fiend is not impressive against characters of his level."

Quasqueton


----------



## jasamcarl (Jan 30, 2003)

I would like to make it simple for all of those who hold that Wotc is changing the nature of the game and does not trust DM judgment. For one, if DM judgement is so dang important, than that invalidates the entire point of CR, which is to set up an objective measurement of challenge based upon presumably wider playtesting than the individual DM was capable of conduction. Two, the definition of a CR 16 creature is simple; he is suppossed to on average consume 25% of a 16th level parties resources. After much feedback, many have found that some high-level beasts do not accomplish this end, so it is reasonable to bump up their power. Wotc's latest monster supps reflect this reality.

So assuming you wish to trust in the CR system at all, bumping up the challenge of some monsters to meet their CR seams perfectly reasonable. You can argue as to whether or not they have gone to far, but to opposse this on principle seems rather silly.


----------



## ashockney (Jan 30, 2003)

jasamcarl said:
			
		

> *After much feedback, many have found that some high-level beasts do not accomplish this end, so it is reasonable to bump up their power. Wotc's latest monster supps reflect this reality.
> *




Bingo!

You nailed it far more directly than I've been able to in the last three pages.

And the point is, yes, I would like to be able to open the MM and pull out a creature and run it.  I can do it at 1st level, 5th level, and 10th level. Why not 15th level and 20th level?


----------



## Quasqueton (Jan 30, 2003)

Let's see, some consider the pit fiend to not be an actual CR16 challenge. Maybe it is just a CR14 as written.

Which is simpler and more "backwards compatible"?

- change the CR to the appropriate level

- alter the whole creature beyond what has come to be accepted as a standard creature in the game

Will they now weaken dragons to be more in line with their undervalued CR? Or will they bump up the CR number to reflect the actual challenge? From the example they've offered with the pit fiend, I expect dragons to loose hit dice and special abilities in revised edition.

Quasqueton


----------



## Pants (Jan 30, 2003)

The Pit Fiends are right below the Dukes and the Archdevils in power and are a meager CR14?  That's just not right.  Although, I do think they may have gone a bit too far in pumping him up.


----------



## Enkhidu (Jan 30, 2003)

Hi Quasqueton!

I think one of the problems people are having in general with what little we know about 3.5e is that WotC has stated that it will be backward compatible with 3e. But I think their idea of backward compatible is different than what you're thinking it is.

From what I can see, backward compatible to WotC seems to be "you still use d20 for most resolution, you still have levels, cast spells, etc and it's really close in the big scheme of things to how you do it in 3e, to the point where it's recognizable as D&D."

The other side of the discussion has the definition of "the new material coming out in 3.5 will fit seamlessly with all available core material and material built off of the SRD." 

Now if I'm off base about that, let me know, but I think that's the jist. I'm probably not right on the money about either side, but am taking the extremes to prove a point.

Truthfully, I think 3.5e will be somewhere in the middle - it will fit well with most published material, though small adjustments will have to be made across the board, much like Windows 2K and XP were (yes, I'm using them as an example because I think WotC is adopting this unbelievably successful business model). Will most things that ran in 2K going to run in XP? Yes. Are there a few that won't? Yes. Is an app built for 2K going to have small (sometimes unnoticable) bugs when run in XP? Yes.

Most things people want to do with D&D 3e are going to be possible with only a few changes under 3.5e. But adjustments will have to be made, and "power users" of the systems will be the most affected (if you've beaten the system to death and learned to powergame all to heck, you'll have more work to do to adjust than someone who uses the mechanics more casually - personally, this is the thing I'm dreading, as I just got used to 3e's quirks!).

I could go on, but I figure you've got my meaning - things will change, but it won't be quite as bad as you think...


----------



## Upper_Krust (Jan 30, 2003)

Hello again ashockney mate! 



			
				ashockney said:
			
		

> *I didn't, excellent point.  But to point of this discussion.  At least we're even having a discussion.  Go back and take a look at the CR16 stuff in the MM.  It would all be auto-hit and probably about half the hit points, which means one round takedown.*




Agreed.

Personally I see a 12th-level party representing a 50/50 challenge against a core rulebook Pit Fiend.

With a 16th-level party representing a 50/50 challenge to a revised Pit Fiend.



			
				ashockney said:
			
		

> *You know what?  I wasn't considering the summoned pet at all.  Depending on how that Gelugon looks, I think that's a really compelling arguement for this guy's CR to be above 16.*




I made a slight mistake, it can only quicken a certain power once per day. But the example remains the same since it could quicken the Mass Hold Person instead.



			
				ashockney said:
			
		

> *The good news from my perspective, is that they're much closer to where they need to be to deal with a high level party's resources.*




Indeed.



			
				ashockney said:
			
		

> *I didn't even try real hard on this guy, the only thing on the character that's non-core is Expert Tactician.  You can imagine how all the prestige classes and splatbooks factor into this equation at high level.  *








			
				ashockney said:
			
		

> *The Mass Hold Monster is ineffective if he's got Freedom of Movement up.  But if not, he's toast every time he decides to drop that spell.  Rogues and will saves are always a bad combination. *




A lot of stuff hangs on a knife edge.


----------



## Elder-Basilisk (Jan 30, 2003)

Which would seem to indicate CR 16 for the current pit fiend and CR 20 for the revised one. A party of characters going up against a creature of their CR is supposed to win without too much problem--just 20% of their resources used up.

A single encounter that a party of equal level has only a 50/50 chance of defeating at all is EL their level +4 or +5



			
				Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> *Hello again ashockney mate!
> 
> Personally I see a 12th-level party representing a 50/50 challenge against a core rulebook Pit Fiend.
> 
> ...


----------



## Upper_Krust (Jan 30, 2003)

Hi there Elder-Basilisk! 



			
				Elder-Basilisk said:
			
		

> *Which would seem to indicate CR 16 for the current pit fiend and CR 20 for the revised one. A party of characters going up against a creature of their CR is supposed to win without too much problem--just 20% of their resources used up.
> 
> A single encounter that a party of equal level has only a 50/50 chance of defeating at all is EL their level +4 or +5*




Thats true if we assume the relationship between Level (or CR) and Encounter Level is 1=1. 

Of course that relationship is not 1=1, but since I don't want to hijack this thread:

http://pub36.ezboard.com/fgameschat19968frm10.showMessage?topicID=13.topic


----------



## jasamcarl (Jan 30, 2003)

Quasqueton said:
			
		

> *Let's see, some consider the pit fiend to not be an actual CR16 challenge. Maybe it is just a CR14 as written.
> 
> Which is simpler and more "backwards compatible"?
> 
> ...




And if they simply did that there would be a dearth of recognizable high level advasaries in the game. They could make up more, yes, but that would take up a larger page count than might be economical.


----------



## Saeviomagy (Jan 30, 2003)

Lets take a look at some of the points made:

*Changing the CR would have been easier than changing the creature stats*
No, it wouldn't. Suddenly every adventure with a CR 16 creature has to be altered to contain a better creature, or the balance of the adventure is thrown off (that climactic battle becomes a walk in the park). End result: Different monster stats, work from the DM to find a new monster that fits the theme, instead of just looking up the new monster stats.

*This monster is too tough*
In general, a wide complaint has been that high-level D&D breaks down. Creatures are too easy, combats are too short and mages rule the roost instead of supporting a well-balanced party. I can't forsee this guy going down to the typical one round of instakill spells which appear to be the norm. That's a good thing.

If he mass hold persons the entire party, the party have done something wrong. If he fails to get someone who is capable of casting dispel magic (that includes a rogue with a wand) or even if said spellcaster has a silent, still dispel on call, then the party are liable to be free in a short period of time, let alone if the mage or cleric do something like counterspelling it in the first place, as they should probably be doing.

Also note that the meteor swarm is probably going to be hitting for 24d6 on a single target, most other targets will be taking 12d6 or 6d6.

Finally, we don't know which abilities were taken AWAY from the creature. Has anyone looked at the effects of a symbol of hopelessness or persuasion? They're right up there with mass hold monster. There's a lot there that we don't really know about.


----------



## rangerjohn (Jan 31, 2003)

The problem with this is your treating the pit fiend like W.O.T.C. treats dragons as if the party is going to be prepared for them.  That's not likely with a pit fiend improved invisibity, flight, teleport, planar travel of some sort I would presume, high move silently, disguise and bluff; this thing screams ambush!


----------



## Olive (Jan 31, 2003)

but why would a pit fiend ambush you? personally if there's a chance of meeting a pit fiend, my party would know about it.


----------



## Technik4 (Jan 31, 2003)

The biggies...

Summon another Pit Fiend or Friend
Huge Stats
Huge AC
Huge Attacks and Damage
Awesome SR
Power Words (no saving throw)
Grappling

The things they can "also" do that shouldnt bother PCs of high level (due to the spell Permanency, various magical items, and various spells/enhancements that HATE evil).

Improved Invisibility - easily countered
Hold Monster - easily prepared for/countered
Meteor Storm - decent damage, but a 1-shot deal. Might not hit everyone.
Flight - Damn near everyone should be flying by 16th level, especially if your opponent is!
Dispel Magic - Almost a waste of an action for the fiend, Greater Dispelling is what you want at high levels. If the Pit Fiend has time to dispel things (or attempt to) things should already be going his way as it is.
Resistances
DR (Im sure players will find ways around the DR in this version too, it just might mean a backup weapon or an extra spell cast by the cleric).

Is he tough? Hell yeah. Is he undefeatable? Nah. Ive seen 16th level transmuters that can still try and polymorph him (a quickened Poly Other followed by a Poly Object, thats a 25% chance (random guess, not stat analysis) the fight is over before it started. Then theres 3 more PCs! Horn of Blasting anyone? I hear stunned things arent too difficult to take out.

Also what about the fact that a lot of games have more PCs but less character levels. 5 level 15s and the fight is easier, 6 or 7 14s and its easier still, you can only avoid flanking for so long...

I think he puts the RRRRR, back in CR.

Technik

PS- As others have said, I think the higher the CR the more changes youll see, the lower the fewer. This guy is pretty scary even if youre a 20th level character...just like a dragon 4 CRs lower than the party is still pretty frightening.


----------



## Celebrim (Jan 31, 2003)

Olive: For the obvious reason that the Pit Fiend isn't walking around mortal planes as a 15' tall engine of destruction.  It is walking around as a well dressed charming human nobleman (polymorph self) doing his best to decieve people (bluff) and get them to unwittingly do his bidding.  That failing, he plays the classic role of the Devilish temptor, 'I'll give you exactly what you want... it will only cost you your soul.'   Only when that fails is he likely to resort to displays of force (intimidation) and the overt use of his extensive spell powers, and only when that fails is he going to bother with combat and then only on his terms (all that intelligence + teleport at will).


----------



## Celebrim (Jan 31, 2003)

"Ive seen 16th level transmuters that can still try and polymorph him (a quickened Poly Other followed by a Poly Object, thats a 25% chance (random guess, not stat analysis) the fight is over before it started."

Only if someone is around to kill whatever he turns into in the remainder of the round.  This guy has innate polymorph self, and even if you where to argue that the spell-like ability requires a vocal component to cast, you can't reasonably argue that the Fiend hasn't used it once in the last 15 hours just to keep his defences going.   It doesn't cost the Fiend a dang thing to do so.  But, yes, in general there is a chance of a instant death spell like Disentigrate getting through the Fiend's defenses, and that might be the easiest way to dispose of this monster.  Also, clerical spells give a variaty of potent attacks against outsiders.

I think you are underestimating his array of spell powers.  In particular, just because he doesn't have Greater Dispelling, doesn't mean that Dispel Magic is a waste (assuming the foes aren't 20th level or better), particularly because he can choose one spell-like ability to quicken per round.  Also, again remember that he can tie Dispel Magic to his Unhallow ability.  If each only brings down 25% of the parties defences, you are still ahead of the game - in large part because you have so many angles of attack.  The thief and the fighter are helpless against your Will save attacks without a buff.  The cleric without fire resistance is defenseless against your flame attacks.  If you dispel a flight ability, maybe you can gain an absolute advantage on that character at a latter point.  (If it was Greater Dispelling instead of dispel magic, it would just be sick.)  As far as the fiend is concerned, anything that can't kill him in the course of two rounds, or can't teleport at will, or can't prevent him from teleporting is NOT A THREAT AT ALL.   

The Fiend has nothing to lose by fighting a PC party on 20 separate occasions over the course of an hour or a day to wear off the PC's defences, potions, spells, and so forth.  The Fiend has nothing to lose by leaving if the PC's are more prepared than he is at the moment.  I'd play this fiend with the initial goal of conquering one party members defences, and in some fashion dispose of that party member.  Who has the weak will save.  Exploit it.  Who doesn't have fire resistance.  Exploit it.   Who has a poor Fort save.   Exploit it.  It wouldn't have to be in combat.  I'd be prefectly happy to charm person a character at a latter point (DC 19 or so, see ya rogue), then make reasonable suggestion that the charmed character leave with his new friend, and then leave the character somewhere out of the way while I dealt with the rest.   I'd be perfectly happy to get the party to go all out, and if I survived one round retire for a little while to regenerate.  Poison a party member, then flee.  Wear them down.  20% of the party resources spent, 0% of the Fiends (provided I've held off on my once per day powers).   Repeat.  Keep in mind.   You are immortal.  You don't tire.  You don't have to sleep.   You don't get sick; mortals do.  Your power is native to you.  You aren't afraid; you make mortals afraid.   You can wait until the mortals show their weakness.   They can't stay awake forever.   They can't fight forever.  They can't cast spells forever.  You heal in moments; they heal (sans spells) in days.   Every round is just that, a round; not the whole war.


----------



## Technik4 (Jan 31, 2003)

*More than the Numbers*

Your analysis is correct, but in my experience flawed. First of all, if this fight is taking place in the fiend's territory, most of what you said is true. However, most fiends as part of a module/story/what-have-you are transient characters. IE- they just got there and theyre trying to seize power, they got summoned and are trying to break away. In any case, they dont have the time to just be harrying potential adventurers, they are looking out for their arch-nemesis, the clerics with the banishment spells ready. Dont forget something like Protection from Evil can keep the dark forces at bay.

These guys are tough on their turf, but on the material plane they are in constant trouble (and perhaps fear) of getting banished back to the planes they rule with such an iron fist.

Just remember, we havent seen the revised Banishment, Dismissal, or any of the "of evil" spells...

Technik


----------



## Elder-Basilisk (Jan 31, 2003)

Nice try but not even close. Assuming an absolute  best case scenario:
Transmuter 16, Int 30, Dex 24, greater spell penetration, greater spell focus Transmutation, improved initiative, point blank shot, precise shot, Heighten Spell and weapon focus: ray.

Round 1 Heightened Disintegrate (attack bonus +17 w/in 30' (DC 32)) followed by Quickened polymorph other DC 28.

Step 1: Hit with the Disintegrate (95% chance)

Step 2: beat SR. The character has only a 45% chance of defeating SR with each spell.
Step 2: get him to fail his save. The pit fiend needs to roll a 13 to make the first save (40% chance) and a 9 to make the second save (60% chance).

So the odds of the pit fiend succumbing to the disintegrate is 26%. The odds of him succumbing to the polymorph other is 18%. The odds of getting him with one or the other is 39%. (Although maybe we shouldn't count the polymorph other because even as a newt, the pit fiend can still summon Baatezu, Mass Hold Monster, and Meteor Swarm the party). 

However, by this point we're discussing a character with godly stats (natural int 18 and dex 18 with +6 enhancement items for both, 4 stat increases in int and a +2 inherent bonus to int). We're also looking at a character who's specifically designed to disintegrate outsiders. And who burns through at least half of his highest level spells. If we drop him back just a little (assume that he has item creation feats instead of Greater spell penetration and greater spell focus) the chance of taking out the pit fiend in round 1 goes down to 17.5% and we're still talking about a highly optimized character--optimized for this specific scenario.

Take a character who started out with a 16 int and a 14 dex (pretty reasonable stats for most campaigns) and didn't get an inherent bonus. Now there's only a 12% chance of the pit fiend going down to a round 1 instant death spell. If PCs are taking odds like that (or even like the hyper-optimized wizard's 26% chance) they're pretty desperate.

Take a creature with AC 25, 2 attacks per round at +15/+10 for 1d12+8 damage, 2 HD and 30 hit points, and saves of +10/+10/+10. Using the logic you're using on this pit fiend, I could call it CR 1 because it's got a 30% chance of going down to a 1st level wizard's (int 18, with spell focus) sleep or color spray in round 1. As Porgy and Bess sing, "It ain't necessarily so."



			
				Technik4 said:
			
		

> *Is he tough? Hell yeah. Is he undefeatable? Nah. Ive seen 16th level transmuters that can still try and polymorph him (a quickened Poly Other followed by a Poly Object, thats a 25% chance (random guess, not stat analysis) the fight is over before it started. *


----------



## Technik4 (Jan 31, 2003)

Ok, ignore the feats concerning getting the disintegrate to hit (since it aint hard) and we'll assume that he had either an 18 or a 16 and took spell prodigy. Hes a highly optimized transmuter, its just as effective against everything with armor that can be disintegrated.

So, the important thing is Int 30, focus and greater focus, penetration and greater penetration. We'll throw the same spells, the disintegrate will still probably hit (maybe only 90% chance now). So, going by your percentages, with a heightened disintegrate and a quickened poly other on the first round we have almost a 40% chance of the encounter being over.

Next round how about a Poly any object (same DC as disintegrate) and a quickened bestow curse (going for the 50% chance to act). Now we've spent all of our highest level spells. Lets move to the cleric.

Ok, simply put the cleric can end this fight "at will" if they have holy word memorized. The fiend has no way to stop this, and he wont be coming back for a day. Thats 24 hours the party has spent making sure it has the "right" stuff memorized (and prebuffed) for round 2 the next day. And guess what? If day 2 is going bad, I bet the cleric memorized holy word again just in case. There is also harm (however its reworded, it will still be powerful). The cleric can whip up an area of Forbiddance so the party needn't worry about fiend attacks day and night, and he can also summon his own allies that should be able to last a few rounds toe-to-toe.

As far as knowing about the fiend, perhaps in a shadowrun game the PCs have no idea they are actually dealing with a dragon, but in d&d there are divinations, detection spells, informants, deities, and any number of other ways to discern the truth about things. If all else fails, a 5th level True Seeing can get the job done.

I wont even go into the fighter or rogue scenario since it really isnt my forte (also, nor would they likely be able to produce the immediate end of the fiend on round 1 like wizard and cleric).

Suffice to say, a 16th level party can still deal with this fiend, they just have to have some wiff of foul "fiendish" play.

Technik


----------



## jgbrowning (Jan 31, 2003)

Technik4 said:
			
		

> *Ok, ignore the feats concerning getting the disintegrate to hit (since it aint hard) and we'll assume that he had either an 18 or a 16 and took spell prodigy. Hes a highly optimized transmuter, its just as effective against everything with armor that can be disintegrated.
> 
> Technik *




Rule 1. Core Book only. Balance issues deal with Core book feats/items/spells/PrCs/monsters/material only.

If it ain't in the Core Book, you shouldn't be counting on it as a measure of "balance." Even it if comes from a WotC product.  Perhaps *especially* because it comes from a WotC splat or campaign book. 

Anything outside of the Core books is pretty much guaranted to be something that raises power level.


joe b.


----------



## Victim (Jan 31, 2003)

Well, if the revised Pit Fiend is still CR 16 or 17, then I'd say the game is demanding unbalanced, rather twinkish characters.  Not that that is inherently bad.  However, I'd prefer kind of easy monsters that are good opponents for unoptimized characters, and then twink out monsters with higher starting stats, etc for especially skilled parties.


----------



## Pants (Jan 31, 2003)

I'm assuming that WotC will change Quicken-Spell-like Ability til it's more reasonable, as in the version in the BoVD and the MMII (Each of a creatures spell-like abilities can be quickened *once* per day.  The feat can be taken multiple times and it stacks).  It's a lot less broken than the one currently in the MM.


----------



## Surefoot (Jan 31, 2003)

Yes; otherwise it would have used a quickened ability every round in the strat section


----------



## Numion (Jan 31, 2003)

I've got plenty of experience of DMing high-level D&D. Most of the evil outsiders in 3.0 are a joke. It would've been simpler to change the CR, I guess, but these dudes should be the high-end monsters, to be fought when the prime material plane has few challenges to offer. 

My players are pretty competent powergamers though, and didn't have much trouble putting out 200+ points of damage / character at non-epic levels.


----------



## Technik4 (Jan 31, 2003)

j browning: Care to take bets that PHB wont have some new feats, especially some with "Greater" in them 

If you only use the core books then Id say nearly everyone ends up taking the same feats, doesnt sound like too many options. I fully expect the revised phb to have many new feats, probably a scattering from "splat books" which incidentally are set in the assumed campaign world, greyhawk, and are therefore not anymore under or overpowered than said assumed world.

After all, the monsters got quicken spell-like ability. If characters can get spell focus and greater spell focus whos not to say the monsters cant get ability focus and greater ability focus? Or should those only be in a "higher" magic campaign?

Technik


----------



## Celebrim (Jan 31, 2003)

Pants: I would assume so, because a Quickened Blasphemy every round would be just wrong.

Surefoot: I would assume it can use a Quickened Spell-Ability every round, provided that it never quickens the same power twice in the same day.  I have no idea why the tactics don't use a Quickened ability in every round, unless of course, in 3.5 you can only quicken one spell like ability per day - which turns Quicken Spell-Ability from the uber monster feat into almost a waste of a feat.  The inability to Quicken more than one ability would drop my assessment from CR 20 to CR 19 right off the bat, but then again Haste got nerfed too.


----------



## JohnClark (Jan 31, 2003)

This may have been answered earlier in the thread, but I wasn't able to find it so I'll ask it here. Does DR of 15/holysilver mean that your weapon has to be silvered and have the holy enchantment? Or does it mean you have to have a weapon made of some substance called holysilver?


----------



## Knight Otu (Jan 31, 2003)

According to the text, holysilver seems to be silver with the holy enchantment.


----------



## CRGreathouse (Jan 31, 2003)

I looked at the Pit fiend, and therearea few things there that just don't add up (or at least, under 3.0).  some of these are obviously typos, but some may be real changes.  Here's my list:

* Size: Larger rather than Large.  This seems to work the same as Large (-1 size panalty to AC); perhaps it is a reference to face/reach as well as size category?
* Hit points:  By the standard formula, the 18d8+144 pit fiend should have 225 hit points (or 288 if he got max).
* Grapple: Should be +35 under the standard rules (unless I'm missing something).
* Damage: Should be one point lower across the board (e.g. 2d8+13, not 2d8+14)
* Saves: I'll assume that the copy on Morrus' page has a typo and the Reflex save hasn't been renamed.
* Feats: As mentioned before, 1+HD/3.  Also, I assume the third feat is "Improved Initiative" (although the alternative would explain the pit fiend's Disguise score...).


----------



## jgbrowning (Jan 31, 2003)

Technik4 said:
			
		

> *j browning: Care to take bets that PHB wont have some new feats, especially some with "Greater" in them
> 
> If you only use the core books then Id say nearly everyone ends up taking the same feats, doesnt sound like too many options. I fully expect the revised phb to have many new feats, probably a scattering from "splat books" which incidentally are set in the assumed campaign world, greyhawk, and are therefore not anymore under or overpowered than said assumed world.
> 
> ...




Of course there'll be new feats.  They want people to have some reason to buy their books.

The reason why i say core books only, it that that is really the only part of DnD (and not even all of the core books) that is accessable to everyone. Most people agree the core books are "the game" while there is very large disagreement about everything else.

Ie. you're supposed to be able to play the game with only those three books. whether you think its limiting or not is your opinion.

If monsters are "balanced" against feats/spells/blah that are not in core books the monsters are not really balanced. If the monster is a CR 16 for a twinked out splat book group of 4 PCs, the monster is probably not balanced for 4 regular PCs.

joe b.


----------



## Dark Wolf 97 (Jan 31, 2003)

*what about the Balor?*

I've always loved the Balor, and I sincerely believe it doesn't stack up to 18 CR, so maybe it will be beefed up like the Pit Fiend.


----------



## Shard O'Glase (Jan 31, 2003)

This is a SR based comment.  So far in 3e I've never felt that I had to take spell penetration and GR SP, they would of come in handy but I could get by without them.  If other monsters SR is boosted along with the pit fiends these feats may just become necesities for high level play.

And my opinion is that if a feat becomes a necesity it should just be part of the class.  I hope the high SR is just an aberation or they did something for the primary spellcasters to help them penetrate SR without virtually making spell penetration feats a high level requirement.


----------



## Intrope (Feb 1, 2003)

CRGreathouse said:
			
		

> *I looked at the Pit fiend, and therearea few things there that just don't add up (or at least, under 3.0).  some of these are obviously typos, but some may be real changes.  Here's my list:
> 
> * Size: Larger rather than Large.  This seems to work the same as Large (-1 size panalty to AC); perhaps it is a reference to face/reach as well as size category?
> * Hit points:  By the standard formula, the 18d8+144 pit fiend should have 225 hit points (or 288 if he got max).
> ...




I have been wondering about these. The Hit points are weird; I can't come up with any way to get that number (it's 3 more than 6/die, and only 1 more than 8 at first hit die, and 6 thereafter). 

The grapple and damage are calculated as if he had 38 STR, but that would mean both the STR and the Attack Bonuses were wrong. Maybe they've added +1 Damage per size category above large?

Of course, it's possible that these are straight-up typos by the scooper. He got these off a T-shirt, didn't he? Did he actually have the shirt, or did he, say, take a picture with a digital cam and transcribe it from there?

Anyway, it's another mystery. And with that, I think we've beaten this poor fiend to death


----------



## Elder-Basilisk (Feb 1, 2003)

Technik4 said:
			
		

> *Ok, ignore the feats concerning getting the disintegrate to hit (since it aint hard) and we'll assume that he had either an 18 or a 16 and took spell prodigy. Hes a highly optimized transmuter, its just as effective against everything with armor that can be disintegrated.*




_Highly optimized_? It's hard to get more optimized for this situation than that without using a noncore race to get starting int 20. The rules shouldn't be balanced around the assumption that every character will have maximum possible stats and optimal feats.

*



			So, the important thing is Int 30, focus and greater focus, penetration and greater penetration. We'll throw the same spells, the disintegrate will still probably hit (maybe only 90% chance now). So, going by your percentages, with a heightened disintegrate and a quickened poly other on the first round we have almost a 40% chance of the encounter being over.
		
Click to expand...


*
I only see maybe a 25% chane of the encounter being over in one round. Quickened polymorph other doesn't do much to the pit fiend. All of his spell like abilities still work. So he can still Quickened Unholy Aura (or Quickened polymorph self) and meteor swarm.

The only thing Polymorph other will do is reduce his insane natural armor bonusses and stats so that the fighters can reliably hit him until he polymorphs into something else on the next round.

*



			Next round how about a Poly any object (same DC as disintegrate) and a quickened bestow curse (going for the 50% chance to act). Now we've spent all of our highest level spells. Lets move to the cleric.

Ok, simply put the cleric can end this fight "at will" if they have holy word memorized. The fiend has no way to stop this, and he wont be coming back for a day. Thats 24 hours the party has spent making sure it has the "right" stuff memorized (and prebuffed) for round 2 the next day. And guess what? If day 2 is going bad, I bet the cleric memorized holy word again just in case. There is also harm (however its reworded, it will still be powerful). The cleric can whip up an area of Forbiddance so the party needn't worry about fiend attacks day and night, and he can also summon his own allies that should be able to last a few rounds toe-to-toe.
		
Click to expand...


*
Holy Word isn't likely to do much to the pit fiend. It still has to beat SR. Even assuming that the cleric has Greater Spell Penetration (hardly an obvious feat choice for most clerics), he would still get at best a 45% chance of sending the fiend away. It's better than disintegrate in this case but not by much.

Forbiddance--aren't we assuming that the cleric has the multiple thousands of gp worth of material components for this spell and that the pit fiend both fails his spell resistance and fails his save. It's unlikely to be an effective solution to a pit-fiend sized problem. Even if it automatically prevents the pit fiend from teleporting in on top of them it doesn't do anything to keep the pit fiend from teleporting in 50 yards away and walking over to them (well it might if there were much chance the pit fiend would fail his save and the forbiddance would get past the fiend's SR but there isn't much chance of that).


*



			As far as knowing about the fiend, perhaps in a shadowrun game the PCs have no idea they are actually dealing with a dragon, but in d&d there are divinations, detection spells, informants, deities, and any number of other ways to discern the truth about things. If all else fails, a 5th level True Seeing can get the job done.

I wont even go into the fighter or rogue scenario since it really isnt my forte (also, nor would they likely be able to produce the immediate end of the fiend on round 1 like wizard and cleric).

Suffice to say, a 16th level party can still deal with this fiend, they just have to have some wiff of foul "fiendish" play.

Technik
		
Click to expand...


*
I think you're seriously underestimating the fiend. Anyway, all of your arguments could still be used to justify a +10/+5 AB, 1d8+8 damage, AC 30, 30 HP 2 HD creature with +10/+10/+10 saves being CR 1. The first level optimized illusionist or enchanter has more chance of taking him out in round 1 than your optimized transmuter has of taking the 3.5e pit fiend out in round 1.


----------



## Technik4 (Feb 1, 2003)

Well, I dont have the books with the iconics in them (although it appears that book will be somewhat out of date as well) but could you post the 15th level version of the iconic wizard?

And were you kidding with GSP not being obvious for a cleric? What feats do clerics take? They get ~2 feats at first level from domains, and a feat at first level. Once again, if you have access to the iconics, please post the 15th level iconic cleric (or at least his feats and stats).

If you assume the PCs are unoptimized or even purposely built weakly than the CR system will no doubt not aid you much. Similarly, if your players arent familiar with how the game works, the system is pretty useless.

As far as forbiddance, considering we're talking about 16th level characters, sure lets assume they have a few thousand gold lying around (or easily obtainable from an NPC on loan, or in exchange for dealing with a Lord of the Hells coming to town). Needless to say, all of these SR saves the fiend is making, hes gonna fail one eventually.

I dont understand youre comparison to  this 2HD monster...it doesnt make sense. Youre assuming an entirely linear system, and any system with spells that arent all balanced at the same level somewhat assumes that things wont be linear. Or at least not entirely linear to the extent its a little insulting to see that at the end of your post.

Technik


----------



## jgbrowning (Feb 1, 2003)

Technik4 said:
			
		

> *Well, I dont have the books with the iconics in them (although it appears that book will be somewhat out of date as well) but could you post the 15th level version of the iconic wizard?
> 
> And were you kidding with GSP not being obvious for a cleric? What feats do clerics take? They get ~2 feats at first level from domains, and a feat at first level. Once again, if you have access to the iconics, please post the 15th level iconic cleric (or at least his feats and stats).Technik *




15th cleric: 
hp: 101
Ac: 24 (+1full plate)
init: 0
spd:20 ft
Morningstar (+1 magic) +13/+8/+3 (+2 dam)
L-crossbow +12 (+1 dam)
f:+13/ R+7/ W+17
spellcraft +18/ concentration +20
spells perday:
6/8/8/7/6/6/5/3/2

feats: Scribe scroll, brew potion, combat casting, forge wand, heighten spell, maximize spell

s:13 d:8 (10) with item c:14 i:10 w:18 (22 with items) chr:12

-------------------------------------------------------
15th wizard:
hp 59
ac 20
init +7
spd 30ft
1/4 staff +8/+3 (+1dam)
f: +8/ r+11/w+13
any 2 skills +23/ concentration +19/ alchemy +21
4/6/5/5/5/5/3/2/1

feats: scribe scroll, toughness, combat casting, brew potion, imp init, lightning reflex, quicken spell, heigten spell, craft wonderous item, heighten spell (odd heighten twice/ next in line is ) spell penetration.

s:10 d:14 (16 item) c:13 i:18 (22 item) w:12 ch:8

-----------------------------------------------------------------
I guess these guys are sub-par.  Btw Greater Spell Penetration isn't in the PHB.

joe b.


----------



## Intrope (Feb 1, 2003)

It's worth noting that _Polymorphing_ the Pit Fiend is actually a great tactic; polymorphed creatures lose Su abilities, which includes Damage Reduction. Also, if polmorphed into a human it would have an AC of 10. 

If we assume the twinked out transmuter is accompanied by a simlarly twinked out Great Sword Fighter (30 STR, +5 Keen Great Sword, Hastened, Weapon Focus & Specialization, Improved Critical, Power Attack) he can very nearly drop it in one attack sequence (average of 251.55 points, counting criticals) on average, if he does and all-out power attack. (note that if you can think of a monster to poly Mr. Fiend into with a worse AC than 10, he might be able to take him all the way down in one round--I thought of a Gelatinous Cube--275 damage!--but you can't Coup de Grace it then).

However, Mr. Fiend isn't dead though--his regeneration still applies. Once he is down, a weapon that negates his Regen can be used to Coup de grace him, though. 

Note that it still has all of it's other defenses (in particular, SR is Ex). 

Of course, disentagrating it would be even better--but you can't quicken a disentagrating while you can Quicken Poly Other.

Aslo note that even if it survives the Polymorph, it has to dispel it to regain it's DR--if it Polymorph's back into Pit Fiend form, it won't regain it!

Edit: If he's a Barbarian, he can actually pump out 275 damage against the Pit Fiend in Human form. Huzzah!


----------



## jgbrowning (Feb 1, 2003)

Intrope said:
			
		

> *he can very nearly drop it in one attack sequence (average of 251.55 points, counting criticals) on average, if he does and all-out power attack.  *




mr. fiend won't move to prevent full attacks? 

edit: luckily i am not mr. fiend. i forgot about haste. 

joe b.


----------



## jgbrowning (Feb 1, 2003)

jgbrowning said:
			
		

> *
> 
> I BLAME THE ELVES!
> 
> joe b. *


----------



## reiella (Feb 1, 2003)

Banishment

For Cleric, minimum Will Save of 19 (10+3+6), not too difficult for the Pit Fiend to break (in fact impossible)

For Wiz/Sorc, min Will Save of 20 (10+3+7), again not too difficult for the pit fiend to break.

Not too far fetched to assume that the spellcaster by 16 level has somewhere around 18 in their prime spellcasting ability, no?  That just bumps each of them up by one however, not much.  But again, it's just assuming an 18 in their stat.

Also, with banishment, you actually have an interesting Focus component, one that also results in the DC being 2 higher (and provides a +1 to breaking SR).  So we have a 22 Will DC (and 17+d20 to break SR) for the cleric, and a 23 Will DC (and 17+d20 to break SR).

Still pretty much impossible.

Now might possibly be easier for me to make the example with the wizard (Because they are more likly to be stat focused on simply int).  Wouldn't be too unreasonable to assume a +4 Headband of Intellect (shuffles the DC up to 25).  Typically maybe a +1 inherent bonus to a stat, which is ineffectual mostly.

Feat wise, it's silly to assume a spellcaster would take Spell Focus : Abjuration (a cleric/exorcist might), and Spell Pentration in general isn't seen as being as useful.  A heighten feat might be had, but it isn't too likly to be prepared with Banishment.

Now taking into account the Dismissal adjustments (which I'm not sure actually apply but it's fairly minor), -MonsterHD + CasterLevel... result -1 to the save,  so save DC of 24.

Mediocre spellcaster has a 30% of breaking SR, and a 10% chance of getting the Pit Fiend to fail their save.  About a 3% chance for putzy wizard to 'defeat' the Pit Fiend in first round, with no special prep (beyond preparing Banishment and having something Pit Fiend fears).   Not much of anything, eh? .

Assume Putzoman is slightly prepared and has 2 or 3 items that said Pit Fiend doesn't like (like oh say, the fighter's holysilver sword, the cleric's holy symbol, and let's say a some holy water.  -sidenote, I'm intentionally being putz about the items, although they are valid choices given the current Banishment description).  SR check changes to 19+d20 (+2), the save dc jumps up by 4 (to 28).

Now MPutzoman has a 40% chance of breaking SR, and a 30% chance to get past the save.  So about a 12% chance of defeat.  Not too bad for one spell .  Of course, this assumes a wizard who had an 12 (4 =13, 8=14,12=15, 16=16). int.  Using standard matrix, shuffle the starting int up to 15 (pretty much just a +1 to save DC, maybe a +2 given the assumed inherent bonus above-saveDC 30).

Putzo has the same 40% chance of beating SR and 40% chance to get past save, a simply 16% chance.

Not a real 'excess' of preparedness, and a 'reasonable' chance to deal with the Pit Fiend in one shot.  The added benefit is Banishment would work doubleduty to clear out the summoned fodder mister Pit Fiend leads with.

Sidenote, unless Summon Baatezu gets majorly changed, if said Pit Fiend uses a non-targeted Dispel, some chance of him sending his buddy back to the Nine Hells.

Only real level of 'preparedness'/specialization is from the Focus components of the spell, and actual continued preparedness in that respect continues to raise the chances of poofing (5% on SR, 10% on Save DC, possibly double if your DM lets ya find a rare focus).  Although, one thing I see happening, is that the monsters SR is slightly more significant than the normal, and may make the Penetration feats more desirable.


----------



## Intrope (Feb 1, 2003)

Go Here to see an updated Pit Fiend Stats by WotC!

Alright, now we can see:
it's Large, not Larger
It has 225 hp (not 255), which is average on each die.
Grapple is still +36, and damage +14/+7 which doesn't match STR 37.
It's Ref(lex), not Fef(lex) (pure typo)
Skill points were all correct (meaning that we're still one point of, by Zappo's count)
Tactics are all the same. 

Not much new here, of course. Still, the Grapple and Damage thing is odd. Again, maybe you get to add you size mod to your damage?


----------



## Knight Otu (Feb 1, 2003)

Intrope said:
			
		

> *
> Not much new here, of course. Still, the Grapple and Damage thing is odd. Again, maybe you get to add you size mod to your damage? *




That's an interesting thought... But that doesn't really explain the grapple discrepancy. Maybe the progression now is +-5/+-10... for the grapple bonus?


----------



## Elder-Basilisk (Feb 1, 2003)

I suppose it may be a little insulting. However, the point is that there is usually a chance for PCs to take down even significantly more powerful foes in round 1 with a save or die spell. That's what save or die spells are good for.

Consequently to speculate that it would be possible for a nearly perfectly optimized 16th level wizard to take down Mr. Pit fiend in one round with a pair of 8th level save or dies does not constitute evidence that CR 16 is an appropriate rating for the Baatezu.

In fact, the evidence is exactly the opposite. The 2HD monster (my reductio ad absurdium example) example is obviously not CR 1 just because an optimized wizard can (35% chance) take him down in round 1 with a save or die. Similarly, a 6th level fiendish cleric is not CR 3 because a 3rd level cleric stands a 25% chance or so of taking him down with a hold person spell. Nor is a 20th level rogue CR 11 because an optimized wizard stands a good chance of taking him down in round 1 with a Finger of Death.

Consequently, it doesn't tell us much of anything about the Pit Fiend's CR that a nearly perfectly optimized 16th level wizard stands a 25% chance of taking him down with a heightened disintegrate and also has a chance of weakening him with a quickened polymorph.

The point isn't that a 16th level party couldn't defeat this pit fiend but rather that defeating the pit fiend is *likely* to take up more than 20% of their resources.

Well, that and also that the rules shouldn't assume a perfectly optimized party when figuring CRs. (Just assuming a balanced party makes them unrealistic for many games).



			
				Technik4 said:
			
		

> *
> I dont understand youre comparison to  this 2HD monster...it doesnt make sense. Youre assuming an entirely linear system, and any system with spells that arent all balanced at the same level somewhat assumes that things wont be linear. Or at least not entirely linear to the extent its a little insulting to see that at the end of your post.
> 
> Technik *


----------



## Melriken (Feb 2, 2003)

Um, people that is not a high end wizard...

6 transmuter 10 red wizard to start with (red will be in the new DMG) gives you +5 to your rolls...


----------



## Simulacrum (Feb 2, 2003)

Melriken said:
			
		

> *Um, people that is not a high end wizard...
> 
> 6 transmuter 10 red wizard to start with (red will be in the new DMG) gives you +5 to your rolls... *




2 problems here.

1. Red Wizards are a very unlikely to be truly played by a PC, 
in a realistic campaign youre goiing to be a disposible puppet for your entire life (and after that too), you will be followed by every single step you make and overshadowed and blackmailed and threatened your whole career.
Red Wizards normaly dont overspecialize too much, because they usualy take skills and feats to enhance their political and sozial powers.

2. Most Red Wizards have to trade in 2 even more likely 3 Schools of Magic, believe me that makes you very very vurnable and predictable. Thats why Red Wizards tend to stick around only on very very save terrain. Everything else is just too risky.
PC Red Wizards wouldn't go through all these risks and extra penaltys and have virtually no freedom on top of that too!
Thus a Red Wizard can hardly be seen as a good example for a high end wiz, he is at best a curiosity and exeption.

and even more:

3. every creature capable to cast Greater Dispelling and with hit die at least equal to the Red Wiz, can make VERY short work of him, against Dispelling creatures all their super powerful DC is worh NOTHING. (Dispels dont care for high DC)
(Pit fiend can quicken GDM and after that shred the Red Wizard to tiny pieces, or ready an counter spell and after that giving him something quickened in return that hurts very very bad.)

Everyone is fooling himself in thinking that everything you need to be a uebercaster is a maximum pumped DC is fataly wrong.
In truth such a character is even less likely to make it to high levels than a Wiz who takes care to boost his weaknesses instead of his strengths. Caster who only care for boosting DC's are doomed to lose. (Spellturning...ouch!)


----------



## Melriken (Feb 2, 2003)

Simulacrum said:
			
		

> *
> 
> 2 problems here.
> 
> ...




Yes, I agree.  I personaly almost always play wizards, and I would NEVER play a red wizard (and if I did it would me more for the circle ability then the spell power).  However the objection was not that red wizards are cool, but that other people were making the clame that:



> it would be possible for a nearly perfectly optimized 16th level wizard to take down Mr. Pit fiend in one round




when the wizard they are refering to is NOT pushed to the limit on the points that he is 'optimized' to.  The fact of the matter is that you can build a 16th level wizard with a good chance of droping that fiend on round one. (+5 spell power, +4 greater spell focus, 8th level dicenigrate, 18 int, +6 headband, +4 level, +4 inherint (not likely, but *possible*) = 30dc, and +25 caster level check, thus the fiend needs an 11 save, and the caster needs a 7 SR check, thus 50% and 70% or a 35% chance that the fiend dies to the first spell first round)

my argument is not that you will ever see such a character, but simply that the one listed earlyer was NOT optimized, but mearly a nice solid wizard (something I would view as what an Iconic Wizard should be.)

The last time I ran a higher level game the normal encounters were CR 3-4 above the groups level, and the big fights were 6 above the party simply because no encounter at thier level even phased them, they walked over it and kept going, no one took significant damage (the fighter had 90%+ HP remaining, and none of the casters had taken damage and had most spells left)

I would peg the CR for this pit fiend at 17, possibly 18 or 16.  I dont think it is something that a party of level 16 characters couldnt take out.

paladin with spirited charge, a lance, a horse, a good strength, True Strike from a ring of spell storing, power attack, and charging with rinohide armor... hmm, 16 smite, 16 power attack, 10 str, 7 (+5 holy evil outsider bane lance) 1 moral (well, +2 a lot, but +1 will do (emotion, bard singing, cleric spell, ect)) = +50 damage, weapon does 4x damage so we have 200 + 4d6 + 4 x 1d8 damage? attack bonus is +16 level - 16 power attack + 20 true strike + 2 charge + 6 cha (smite) +7 enhancement +10 str = +45 to hit
Hmm, hits on a 2, does average 232... yeah that would be a dead pit fiend
the paladin would need haste from the wizard or an item, but it is again possible for a level 16 character to kill the fiend in ONE ROUND.  will you see characters like this much? NO.  Do they exist? Yes.

I personaly think that the new pit fiend should be CR 17, it is a little strong at 16, but I do NOT think it should be 20, it would be a pushover again...

as to people asking what is easyer, changing the listed CR or the stats... well that depends on how the monster has been used.
Do Modules
a: say, I need a CR 16 monster, should be an evil outsider... hmm, Pit Fiend would work.
-or-
b: hmm, I need something that will chalange the party... hmm after looking at the stats of all the monsters, and runing sample combats I think that the most appropriate chalange would be a pit fiend.

well the point of the CR system is that people want to do (a) and thus for the CR to mean what it should then you need to change the stats to match the CR so that older modules are still compatable (unless they have been build assuming that the Pit Fiend was NOT CR 16, but actually the CR 14 or less that it deserved)


----------



## Simulacrum (Feb 2, 2003)

Nope again. 2 Problems.

1. No matter how twinked out the Wiz may be (in fact it nearly dosnt matter at all) the Pit fiends chances are way better than you calculate them.
-
The fact alone that he can just use Greater Dispel on a minor whim drops your chances to get him in round 1 seriously.
In fact the Pit boy is more likely to kill your twink 16th lvl Wiz before.

And dont tell me something about buff etc. that doesnt count. The Pit boy would be buffed too then.

Only eye for an eye truly counts in such a comparision, or else you could bias the situation towards the character ad infinitum.
(yeah why not put the fiend into a cage, make him bound, blinded, and give yourself some funky artifacts just to make sure??)

The Paladin you posted is a bad joke the pit fiend is going to kill him before he knows whats happening (remember he can *fly* and teleport and throw out nasty quickened spells before you can even act and give you some major headache that will keep you from attacking him for the round--> and what not)
Sorry the new Pit Fiend is the new überking in Hell and on most prime worlds he gets lose...and no matter how twink the chars get in an eye for an eye situation YOU ARE GONNA LOSE SORE WHIMP


----------



## MerricB (Feb 2, 2003)

Regardless of whether or not the Pit Fiend could be slain in the first round by a properly optimised party, one must also consider what happens if the Pit Fiend is the second or third encounter of the session.

Challenge Ratings generally seem too low if they're the first encounter of the day... however, when the party has used up some of its resources, then things get interesting.

Cheers!


----------



## Elder-Basilisk (Feb 3, 2003)

Melriken said:
			
		

> *when the wizard they are refering to is NOT pushed to the limit on the points that he is 'optimized' to.  The fact of the matter is that you can build a 16th level wizard with a good chance of droping that fiend on round one. (+5 spell power, +4 greater spell focus, 8th level dicenigrate, 18 int, +6 headband, +4 level, +4 inherint (not likely, but *possible*) = 30dc, and +25 caster level check, thus the fiend needs an 11 save, and the caster needs a 7 SR check, thus 50% and 70% or a 35% chance that the fiend dies to the first spell first round)*




Too bad I don't know how to do big red blinking fonts. *It is utterly irrelevant to the Pit Fiend's CR that a hyper-optimized Red Wizard can get a 35% chance of dropping him in the first round.* At all levels, optimized characters using save or die spells have a chance of taking down much more powerful foes in one round. That's what Save or Die spells are for. 

An optimized 11th level Necromancer has a good chance of taking down a generic 20th level wizard with a Finger of Death in round 1. That doesn't make the 20th level wizard CR 11.

An optimized 3rd level cleric has a reasonable chance of taking down a generic 12th level fighter (+5 cloak, Iron Will=Will save +11; the cleric's DC can easily be 19 (16 wisdom, greater spell focus) yielding the exact same chance as the Red Wizard has for a round 1 kill) in round 1 with a hold person. That doesn't make the fighter CR 3.

The wizard example has never proved anything and never will.

*



			my argument is not that you will ever see such a character, but simply that the one listed earlyer was NOT optimized, but mearly a nice solid wizard (something I would view as what an Iconic Wizard should be.)
		
Click to expand...


*
[Sarcasm on]Hmm. Iconic wizards should all start out with 18 int, a 16+ dex, spell focus, greater spell focus, spell penetration, greater spell penetration, have the highest level int item they can afford and have 2 wishes or a +2 Tome by level 16? Oh yeah, and he also carries around a heightened disintegrate.

Let me guess, you're expecting that the default stat generation for 3.5 e to be all 18s?[/Sarcasm Off]

Other than the fact that there are a lot of people who like playing D&D at power levels where their characters aren't guaranteed to (and probably won't have) a single 18, the argument is flawed when it comes to challenge ratings because it assumes that the character is perfectly optimized for the situation. Why not an Evoker with an Empowered Otiluke's Freezing Sphere or an empowered, maximized Sonically Substituted Fireball? That wizard is also optimized. Will we assume that wizard when you want to know the EL of thirty eighth level fighters supported by an 11th level wizard and a 10th level cleric? Because if we can, those fighters won't last very long. On the other hand, our save or die optimized wizard is going to be at a significant disadvantage.

*



			The last time I ran a higher level game the normal encounters were CR 3-4 above the groups level, and the big fights were 6 above the party simply because no encounter at thier level even phased them, they walked over it and kept going, no one took significant damage (the fighter had 90%+ HP remaining, and none of the casters had taken damage and had most spells left)
		
Click to expand...


*
That was "the last time" you ran a high level campaign. What happened the time before that? Was there a time before that? Do you fudge your die rolls? Do you use save or die monster abilities? Do you coup de grace players? What kind of stats did you let the PCs start with (If you ask me, more than 32 point equivalent is worth at least ECL +1)? Are your players better tacticians than you are?

Anecdotes are not evidence. Unless there are a lot of people with demonstrated skill and experience DMing who keep a handle on PC power levels who have this problem I'm not going to jump to the conclusion that your PCs had it easy because high end CRs are underestimated. There are plenty of other explanations of the evidence available.

*



			I would peg the CR for this pit fiend at 17, possibly 18 or 16.  I dont think it is something that a party of level 16 characters couldnt take out.
		
Click to expand...


*
Let me see, defeating a monster of the PC's level should take up 20% of the PCs resources. . . . So if it's CR 16 then a party of 16 level characters shouldn't have much problem taking it out should they?

*



			I personaly think that the new pit fiend should be CR 17, it is a little strong at 16, but I do NOT think it should be 20, it would be a pushover again...
		
Click to expand...


*
Doesn't "uses up 20% of the party's resources" sound like a pushover to you? Tough encounters are supposed to be higher than the PC's level or come at the end of a series of encounters (which should either use up things like the heightened disintegrate or the fighter's hit points or the clerics (healing) spells).


----------



## Simulacrum (Feb 3, 2003)

Word Elder!
I really cant understand why people always expect to be on top of everything. I like the Pit fiends status of near invincibility.
In a balanced 1 on 1 situation truly eye for an eye the pit fiends is going to say: ALL YOUR BASE ARE BELONG TO US! (*insider gag*)


----------



## Leopold (Feb 3, 2003)

Here's the kicker i have. The new revised info basically makes all the monster books, monster creation books, etc invalid. 

Now before i start hearing rule 0, and "You don't have to use them!" or "convert them yourself!" flames. I want people to honestly sit down and look at what is being done to the monster process and layout.


No longer is it easy to say "Baatzu traits" and have it mean one thing.  No doubt if devils and demons get a rework then so probably will celestials. DR is another key rework here no longer will it all be the same now it's going to vary unless there is a standarad setup and maintained. Your golem's might not have the uber 50/+3 anymore so this changes many things in many books (Tome of Horrors, Monster Handbook, Creature Catalog, etc.)

The purpose of the OGL is to establish a standard and stick to it. Now that this standard is getting reworked we are going to be stuck with a few scenarios.

1. The companies will work like mad and give us web errata on how their monsters will now look and work.

2. The companies will do nothing.

3. The companies will rework the monsters and put out revised books.

2 of the 3 scenarios will cost companies time and money to do. It won't be easy doing this to convert thousands of monsters over to the new system. This will take time. 2 of the 3 are a lose for the DM's/Players as they will either have no material or they will have to flip between printed pages and new pages. Only 1 of the 3 is a lose/lose for everyone as that means that they won't be doing anything to 'fix' the new problem.


I like having a revision of the rules, sure it's great, but seriously this is going to be a PIA for everyone unless they either adopt the new system fully and convert by hand or just ignore the system and stick with the original. Going 50/50 may present some problems but that will remain to be seen.

I only hope and pray companies are looking into this and planning to revise their work and their products with the new system coming into place as per the OGL/D20STL


----------



## Melriken (Feb 3, 2003)

Elder-Basilisk said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Too bad I don't know how to do big red blinking fonts. It is utterly irrelevant to the Pit Fiend's CR that a hyper-optimized Red Wizard can get a 35% chance of dropping him in the first round. At all levels, optimized characters using save or die spells have a chance of taking down much more powerful foes in one round. That's what Save or Die spells are for.
> *




Much better argument.  No, the Wizard really doesnt prove anything, building one character of each class that could kill the pit fiend alone with around 50% success might, but I really dont feel like it, and am not familiar enough with all the classes to do it easily.  And even if I did do it, it would only prove that the Fiend was CR 16 in power gaming, not in standard play.



			
				Elder-Basilisk said:
			
		

> *
> [Sarcasm on]Hmm. Iconic wizards should all start out with 18 int, a 16+ dex, spell focus, greater spell focus, spell penetration, greater spell penetration, have the highest level int item they can afford and have 2 wishes or a +2 Tome by level 16? Oh yeah, and he also carries around a heightened disintegrate.
> 
> Let me guess, you're expecting that the default stat generation for 3.5 e to be all 18s?[/Sarcasm Off]
> *




Actually I think that Iconic Wizards should have 16+int, 12+ dex, spell focus, spell penetration, one or two metamagic feats (like Highten spell, empower, or extend spell), have a decent to good Int bonus item, and at some point use wish to raise thier int.

do I think all wizards need greater focus/pen? no.
Do I think that the Iconic wizard Must have greater focus/pen? No.
Do I think that it would be reasonable for the Iconic Wizard to have one of the two? Yes.
Do I think it would be reasonable for the Iconic Wizard to have Both? Yes, but only at high levels (say 18~20?)

What I originaly ment was that the Iconic wizard should be fairly focused on spell casting, but be able to cast all the spells (ie not a specialist wizard).  I think that most of the wizards feats should be stuff like meta-magic feats or spell focus/spell penetration feats.  I do not like the fact that the iconic wizard has a bunch of item creation feats.  I personaly think that scribe scroll and possibly ONE more would be more than enough. But then that is me.  I was not trying to argue that the wizard stated above should be the Iconic wizard, and I appoligize for that misunderstanding.



			
				Elder-Basilisk said:
			
		

> *
> That was "the last time" you ran a high level campaign. What happened the time before that? Was there a time before that? Do you fudge your die rolls? Do you use save or die monster abilities? Do you coup de grace players? What kind of stats did you let the PCs start with (If you ask me, more than 32 point equivalent is worth at least ECL +1)? Are your players better tacticians than you are?
> *




I have DMed 2 games at what I would consider high levels (16+)  The both times I felt that I had to send more firepower at the players then the CR would suggest.  The DMG says that they should fight about 4 encounters at thier CR a day.  I was using 6 to 8 encounters at or above thier level every day and taking away about half to three quarters of the groups resources.

I have played in three more high level games with someone who I think is a highly experienced DM, in one of those games he used monsters +2 CR above us, and for XP calculations treated them as CR 2 below what they are listed as.  In the second game he gave the monsters significant stat bonuses (+4~10 per stat to each of 3~5 stats) and still complained that the monsters didnt seem strong enough.  and that was on advanced monsters as well as normal ones.  In the third game he gave all monsters with decent intelegence magic items as NPCs, and declared that the items were bound to those creatures and could not be looted or used by anyone else.  This was on top of the treasure for the monster. (yes the monster used its treasure)

Do I fudge die rolls? nope... well I did one time, but it wasnt a high level game and it was to help the monsters.

Do I save or die players? Yes, do I coup de Graes players? When the opertunity comes up, usually it doesn't.

players start with a point buy, 25-32 points depending on the different games...

are my players better tactitions then me? No, I really dont think so



			
				Elder-Basilisk said:
			
		

> *
> Anecdotes are not evidence. Unless there are a lot of people with demonstrated skill and experience DMing who keep a handle on PC power levels who have this problem I'm not going to jump to the conclusion that your PCs had it easy because high end CRs are underestimated. There are plenty of other explanations of the evidence available.
> *




exactly what I was trying to provide, someone else had said much the same, I was adding my testimony to his... and waiting for others to do the same.



			
				Elder-Basilisk said:
			
		

> *
> Let me see, defeating a monster of the PC's level should take up 20% of the PCs resources. . . . So if it's CR 16 then a party of 16 level characters shouldn't have much problem taking it out should they?
> 
> Doesn't "uses up 20% of the party's resources" sound like a pushover to you? Tough encounters are supposed to be higher than the PC's level or come at the end of a series of encounters (which should either use up things like the heightened disintegrate or the fighter's hit points or the clerics (healing) spells). *




No, 20% of your resources is not a pushover, a pushover is something that can't hit the characters without a natural 20, and the characters hit with natural 2s.  A push over is something that the fighter can kill by himself, and lose less then 10% of his HP.  20% of your resources is something that you actually had to work together to kill without it hurting you too much.  20% of your resources is almost everything that one character has.
20% of the party's resources is 80% of one characters resources, not the figher taking damage that is 80% of the wizards HP, the wizard using spells equal to 80% of the fighters daily alotment, or the rogue sneeking up behind something, and leaving it so close to death that the wizard is able to hit it with his staff and kill it before it gets a turn.


All in all I think that the arguments about how re-working the DR system will invalidate much of the third party monster books is a great argument.  I can only hope that the new DMG, or MM talks about what changes to make to the old DR to bring it into the new system... of course you could just leave it alone as long as it only requires a magical +... I mean the big change is to make things that require silver actually require silver.  The Fiend's changed to make it more interesting, and if you feel like changing the DR on 3rd party monsters similarly then do it... take 50% of the DR, and drop +1 from the over come, and add a material to it. leaving atleast +1 behind.

People hate change, but then how interesting would life be without change?


----------



## (Psi)SeveredHead (Feb 21, 2003)

It has decent save DCs - alas, my PCs have kick-butt saving throws, since I just love that Hold Monster spell. D'oh!


----------



## takyris (Feb 21, 2003)

Just as a completely random side note, let me state firmly that if "Quicken Spell-Like Ability" doesn't get some serious limitations or pre-reqs in it, it's gonna revolutionize the game.  I thought I'd take a cue from the 3.5E Pit Fiend while trying to keep my Pit Fiend book legal, so I swapped Improved Initiative for Quicken Spell-Like Ability.

Yes, it was stupid.  One battle, multiple dead PCs, and fifteen rounds of Quickened Blasphemy later, I realize that.  Had the party prepared exhaustively for the fight by giving everyone in the group Protection from Fire, Spell Immunity: Fireball and Wall of Fire, Haste, Spell Resistance, and Magic Circle Against Evil, it would have been a bloodbath.  As it was, SR27 versus the 3.0E Pit Fiend's 17th-level caster ability meant that on a 10 or higher on the SR roll, a given PC lost his next turn to Dazedness.

On the other hand, the party's rogue finally got to use one of his Thunderstones.  On himself.  He voluntarily failed his save and is now deafened... 

-Tacky


----------



## Celebrim (Feb 21, 2003)

I thought you couldn't quicken the same spell like ability twice in the same day?


----------



## hong (Feb 21, 2003)

takyris said:
			
		

> *Yes, it was stupid.  One battle, multiple dead PCs, and fifteen rounds of Quickened Blasphemy later, I realize that.  Had the party prepared exhaustively for the fight by giving everyone in the group Protection from Fire, Spell Immunity: Fireball and Wall of Fire, Haste, Spell Resistance, and Magic Circle Against Evil, it would have been a bloodbath.  As it was, SR27 versus the 3.0E Pit Fiend's 17th-level caster ability meant that on a 10 or higher on the SR roll, a given PC lost his next turn to Dazedness.
> *




The problem here is not with Quicken Spell-Like Ability, it's with blasphemy being usable at will. Our group ran into the same situation a couple of sessions ago, where we fought a bunch of demons including a hezrou. By the book, the hezrou could have just kept throwing blasphemy at us each round, while its allies carved us up. The DM's solution was to limit blasphemy to be usable once every 1d4 rounds, which at least gave us a chance to fight back.


----------



## Savage Wombat (Feb 21, 2003)

I was noticing how powerful Quicken Spell-Like Ability looked myself.  So I made special care to look for it in Savage Species - and it's been severely altered.  Limitations on how powerful an ability it can be used on, and how often - that's why the Pit Fiend tactics only have it used once.

I hope you'll find the new version more balanced.


----------



## Piratecat (Feb 21, 2003)

Any guesses as to the DC and effect of its fear ability? Not that... ahem... I'm going to use it next game.  Or anything.


----------



## Victim (Feb 21, 2003)

I looked up Blasphemy.

The dazing line of effects only works against creatures native to your plane.  So a Devil will have a hard time using it on most adventuring parties, since it's from Baator/9 Hells, and most adventurers are from the prime.


----------



## hong (Feb 21, 2003)

Victim said:
			
		

> *I looked up Blasphemy.
> 
> The dazing line of effects only works against creatures native to your plane.  So a Devil will have a hard time using it on most adventuring parties, since it's from Baator/9 Hells, and most adventurers are from the prime. *




D'oh!  

Well, screw that, then. 

Although this is still only half the problem solved, since that session involved us travelling to the Demonweb Pits (part of the Abyss). The first blasphemy thrown at us would probably have seen half the party sent home to the Prime.


----------



## Piratecat (Feb 21, 2003)

Yup. Not often you use _dimensional anchor_ as a defensive spell, eh?


----------



## Victim (Feb 21, 2003)

But Holy Word works the same way when evil outsiders are on the Prime.  Turnabout is fair play, right?  The only difference is that characters probably don't have SR.


----------



## Celebrim (Feb 21, 2003)

Well, as a sonic effect the best solution to Blasphemy is to not hear it.  The second best solution is to emply staggered ranks, so that the spell casters and other support characters are outside the 30' radius of effect.  However, I do admit that it is an awfully strong spell to be usable at will.


----------



## shilsen (Feb 21, 2003)

Victim said:
			
		

> *I looked up Blasphemy.
> 
> The dazing line of effects only works against creatures native to your plane.  So a Devil will have a hard time using it on most adventuring parties, since it's from Baator/9 Hells, and most adventurers are from the prime. *




Actually one of the latest FAQ updates stated that the dazing and other effects do affect non-native creatures too. here's the question and answer. Frankly, I prefer the FAQ approach.

Q: The descriptions of the spells blasphemy, holy word, word
of law, and word of chaos say that if you are on your home
plane, casting one of these spells banishes those not of your
plane back to their home planes, and creatures native to
your plane (with an alignment opposed to the spell) suffer
various ill effects. Several evil outsiders have this spell-like
ability. How does this spell-like ability work for an outsider
on the Prime Material Plane, which is not its home plane.
Conversely, when these outsiders are on their home planes,
how are these spells useful? For example, what use is word
of law to a devil on Baator, where just about everything is
lawful evil?

A: If the subjects of any of these spells are not extraplanar
elementals or outsiders, they suffer effects according to their
alignments and Hit Dice. In spite of what the beginning of the
third paragraph in each spell’s description says, you don’t have
to be native to the caster’s home plane to be affected.
If the spell’s subjects are extraplanar elementals or outsiders,
and the caster is on his or her home plane, the spell blasts the
subjects back to their home planes. These creatures also suffer
effects according to their alignments and Hit Dice. Being
returned to their home plane is an additional effect, not an
alternate effect, as the spells’ descriptions imply.


----------

