# Lolth!



## Mouseferatu (Jun 7, 2010)

Holy _crap_, Lolth is nasty! 

Dungeons & Dragons Roleplaying Game Official Home Page - Article (Lolth)

Just as a sample, I give you:

*Dominating Rebuke* (charm)  *  At-Will
_Trigger:_ An enemy hits Lolth.
_Effect (Immediate Reaction):_ The triggering enemy is dominated until the end of the enemy’s next turn.


----------



## Scholar & Brutalman (Jun 7, 2010)

Actually, that's _half_ of Lolth. They don't list the Spider Queen form, only say she turns into it.

Edit: and after seeing what the paragon party I'm DMing through Scales of War does to poor solos, I looked at that and thought "against a level 30 party, I wonder if she'd ever get an action."


----------



## Mouseferatu (Jun 7, 2010)

Scholar & Brutalman said:


> Actually, that's _half_ of Lolth.




Which I guess makes this one "Lol"? 

Interestingly, since she doesn't assume the spider form until reduced to 0, that means that if you haven't completed the quest to keep her from discorporating, you won't ever face the spider form.


----------



## the Jester (Jun 7, 2010)

Mouseferatu said:


> Which I guess makes this one "Lol"?
> 
> Interestingly, since she doesn't assume the spider form until reduced to 0, that means that if you haven't completed the quest to keep her from discorporating, you won't ever face the spider form.




The book may make it more clear- I'd wager that you fight her in one form, she changes form and you fight til she's bloodied in the second form before she discorporates. 

Aargh!! I want the MM3 so damn bad!!


----------



## Mentat55 (Jun 7, 2010)

The entry points out that Lolth discorporates at 25% HP, so presumably when bloodied in Spider Queen form.  That makes sense, as the form presented in the preview does not have the Discorporate ability.

The lack of multiple initiative actions makes the drow form of Lolth less imposing than I was hoping for.  The ability to deny one set of PC actions every round with Dominating Rebuke is pretty rough, though, and helps balance the economy of actions slightly.  Poison Strands, if used properly, could tie up one or more melee PCs.  

Her damage seems underwhelming at first, but she does a lot of ongoing poison damage, and Lolth's Retribution means that if you are attacking her, you are going to continue to take damage.  If someone has poison resistance, however (and at epic tier it would probably be in the resist 15 range), they are going to be relatively unscathed by her attacks.    

Her AC, Reflex, and Will are high for a level 35 lurker -- a deviation from the MM2 and Monster Builder math, but then again, she's Lolth.  She doesn't seem all that lurker-ish, but solo lurkers are tough to pull off.  And she's not immune to attacks from non-epic creatures -- something we've seen with every other god, I think.  

An interesting interpretation of the goddess -- and I am VERY curious what the Spider Queen form looks like.


----------



## FireLance (Jun 7, 2010)

These stats definitely seem to be just for the first part of a multi-part fight: the hit points are fairly low - standard for a 35th-level elite skirmisher or controller with 29 Constitution.


----------



## Mouseferatu (Jun 7, 2010)

Mentat55 said:


> The entry points out that Lolth discorporates at 25% HP, so presumably when bloodied in Spider Queen form.  That makes sense, as the form presented in the preview does not have the Discorporate ability.




That could be. I assumed that the text referred specifically to the form presented, but there's no reason it should.

I do hope it's a little clearer in the book, but I think you're probably right.

I'm also not sure I've ever seen a power that does 50 ongoing damage before...


----------



## Runestar (Jun 7, 2010)

Wow...I think this is by far the most complex stat block I have seen so far, and it is only for one of her forms.


----------



## Jhaelen (Jun 7, 2010)

FireLance said:


> These stats definitely seem to be just for the first part of a multi-part fight: the hit points are fairly low - standard for a 35th-level elite skirmisher or controller with 29 Constitution.



Yep. HP are very low. At first I assumed that maybe they increased damage to compensate - but no such luck.

A multi-part fight makes sense and sounds interesting!


----------



## Mengu (Jun 7, 2010)

Runestar said:


> Wow...I think this is by far the most complex stat block I have seen so far, and it is only for one of her forms.




It's not that complex really. The tactics would be:

[sblock]Round 1, Teleport 8, pop Impenetrable Darkfire for CA and defense, Attack with Scourge, slide target to where they can be most effective, then action point and use Insidious Poison to get an extra attack. If someone hits you (which should be difficult without AoE's) without dazing or stunning, use dominating Rebuke.

Round 2, if not stunned or dazed, then give someone a kiss and use Insidious Poison if it recharged. If no recharge, Scourge someone, Action point, Scourge again. If you didn't need your move, pop poison strands as a minor. Then Impenetrable Darkfire drops, remember to use dominated minion before being forced into Form of the Spider Queen.
[/sblock]

I think it will probably be a fun two rounds. Note the 2 action points, so you'll have an action point to spend practically every turn. There's hoping your other form has 2 AP's as well.

If I wanted to make the fight a little more epic, I would give her a few companions, maybe a leveled up Balor or something, maybe a few Mezzodemon Shocktroops. Her damage potential when she is not dominating is rather low to be any significant threat for the two round pre-fight.

I guess if the Spider Queen Form is statted as an actual Solo, rather than another Elite, then the pre-fight suddenly makes more sense, to force PC's to blow their nova and stun powers in those first few rounds, and have a real fight afterwards.


----------



## lukelightning (Jun 7, 2010)

Mouseferatu said:


> *Dominating Rebuke* (charm)  *  At-Will
> _Trigger:_ An enemy hits Lolth.
> _Effect (Immediate Reaction):_ The triggering enemy is dominated until the end of the enemy’s next turn.




Is that an immediate reaction? Or as many times in a round as possible? This seems like a strange power to give her, since she doesn't seem to be an enchantress/dominator/mind goddess.


----------



## TerraDave (Jun 7, 2010)

I am really liking the previews from this. 

Which is odd, as I had no intent of buying another 4E MM (or crunchy hardback).


----------



## MrMyth (Jun 7, 2010)

I've definitely been impressed by the solos in MM3. The other big bads (Imix and Ogremoch) actually have even more complex stat blocks than this, but that is because they only have one form! Fortunately, even with the complexity, all the stats (for any given form) still fit on a single page. And with the new format, remain relatively easy to run.


----------



## Mengu (Jun 7, 2010)

lukelightning said:


> Is that an immediate reaction? Or as many times in a round as possible?




The text you quoted says immediate reaction, so... it just might be what it says it is.


----------



## Klaus (Jun 7, 2010)

Mouseferatu said:


> Which I guess makes this one "Lol"?
> 
> Interestingly, since she doesn't assume the spider form until reduced to 0, that means that if you haven't completed the quest to keep her from discorporating, you won't ever face the spider form.



If I read it correctly, seems like you'll never face her in Spider Queen form until you've earned it by completing the quest.

Which I'm perfectly fine with.


----------



## Runestar (Jun 7, 2010)

To Mengu,

Thanks for the summary of her attack sequence. I guess it seems like the most obvious and intuitive use of her abilities, but it seems a little lackluster for a lv35 solo (too little damage and too much control, at least to me). It appears that her effectiveness is really contingent on darkfire blinding as many PCs as possible. 

The designers apparently took heed of the supposed problems plaguing solos in general and giving her some defenses against them (auto-saves vs status effects, some controller-ish abilities such as immobilizing melee tanks or dazing pesky PCs altogether). 

Can anyone provide a summary of the favoured tactics of her subsequent forms and how they are expected to play out?


----------



## Scribble (Jun 7, 2010)

TerraDave said:


> I am really liking the previews from this.
> 
> Which is odd, as I had no intent of buying another 4E MM (or crunchy hardback).




I kind of thought I'd be in the same boat about crunchy hardbacks- But the MMs have the lore, which seems to draw me in quite a bit.

The other stuff, the player focused stuff... I leave that to the Compendium/CB.


----------



## lukelightning (Jun 7, 2010)

Mengu said:


> The text you quoted says immediate reaction, so... it just might be what it says it is.




Um, I blame Corellon and those goody-goody elves for clouding my vision....


----------



## Klaus (Jun 7, 2010)

Runestar said:


> To Mengu,
> 
> Thanks for the summary of her attack sequence. I guess it seems like the most obvious and intuitive use of her abilities, but it seems a little lackluster for a lv35 solo (too little damage and too much control, at least to me). It appears that her effectiveness is really contingent on darkfire blinding as many PCs as possible.
> 
> ...



Here's what it says:



> *Lolth in Combat*
> 
> Lolth guards herself with demonic servants and the most powerful of her loyal drow servitors, and relies on these bodyguards to dispatch those who dare to challenge her in her home. Any adventurers who defeat her guards earn her grudging respect, and her first inclination is to seduce such heroes to her side, weaving intricate webs of deceit and flattery. Those who prove intractable, however, soon discover that her reluctance to join in battle is no indication of weakness.
> 
> Lolth fights in her drow form, wielding a terrible barbed scourge that secretes a virulent venom. She uses poison to wrack the bodies and wrench the minds of her foes, turning them upon each other and punishing them when they attack her. When Lolth is seemingly slain, she undergoes a terrible transformation into her true spider form, striking fear into her enemies’ hearts. As a spider, she fights with her bite and her blade-tipped legs, spewing acid-coated webs.


----------



## Pseudopsyche (Jun 8, 2010)

Klaus said:


> If I read it correctly, seems like you'll never face her in Spider Queen form until you've earned it by completing the quest.
> 
> Which I'm perfectly fine with.



My interpretation differs. Her "Spider Queen" form also has 634 hp, and the trigger for Divine Discorporation is "Lolth drops to 317 hp or fewer." So when the sidebar states, "When Lolth drops to one-quarter of her hit points," I believe it refers to her total hit points across both stat blocks. Without completing an appropriate quest, she transforms after taking 634 hp damage and then discorporates for a while after taking another 317.


----------



## Pseudopsyche (Jun 8, 2010)

Mentat55 said:


> An interesting interpretation of the goddess -- and I am VERY curious what the Spider Queen form looks like.



The "Lolth the Spider Queen" stat block is simpler. She doesn't get a lot of attacks, but they're quite potent. She has Burning Webs, a 1/round minor-action attack that's a close burst 5, targets only enemies, immobilizes (save ends), and inflicts ongoing 30 acid damage after one failed save. She also has a nasty immediate interrupt, Impaling Legs, that triggers whenever an enemy enters a square within 3. Her standard action attacks do get stronger, too. I'll be curious to see how she holds up.


----------



## TarionzCousin (Jun 8, 2010)

Is drow *everything* simply better than non-drow everything?


----------



## Nahat Anoj (Jun 8, 2010)

I've got MM3.  Lolth has two forms  - a humanoid form (35 solo lurker) and a spider form (35 solo brute).  Both have 634 hps, their own attacks, defenses, action point pool, etc.

When Lolth's humanoid form is reduced to 0 hp, she automatically transforms into the spider form.  This is actually a triggered attack- when she transforms, she does an attack that stuns on a hit and gives vulnerability to damage (save ends).  

When Lolth's spider form is bloodied (that is, when Lolth is reduced to a quarter of her overall hps), Lolth discorporates.  So she stays around a bit longer than other gods.


----------



## doctorhook (Jun 9, 2010)

Anybody else notice that Lolth is a "(god)" in the description line of her statblock? Interesting change of language from previous deities. First, Tiamat was merely a "Huge immortal magical beast (dragon)". Next, Vecna was a "Medium immortal humanoid, deity (undead)". Then, Bahamut was back to merely "Huge immortal magical beast (dragon)". Now, Lolth is a "Medium immortal humanoid, drow (shapechanger, god)".

Is it a typo? I've noticed that this line of the statblock has been woefully inconsistent across products, with regard to subtypes.

Personally, I prefer the word "deity" as a descriptor of fictional gods -- it has fewer RL religious connotations than calling something "god".


----------



## TarionzCousin (Jun 9, 2010)

TarionzCousin said:


> Is drow *everything* simply better than non-drow everything?






doctorhook said:


> Anybody else notice that Lolth is a "(god)" in the description line of her statblock? Interesting change of language from previous deities. First, Tiamat was merely a "Huge immortal magical beast (dragon)". Next, Vecna was a "Medium immortal humanoid, deity (undead)". Then, Bahamut was back to merely "Huge immortal magical beast (dragon)". Now, Lolth is a "Medium immortal humanoid, drow (shapechanger, god)".



Lolth is, of course, better than everybody else.

It's a drow thing.


----------



## Runestar (Jun 9, 2010)

Does the god subtype bring with it any special connotations or abilities, or is it just a fanciful descriptor with no real benefits?


----------



## Mentat55 (Jun 9, 2010)

Most, if not all, deities to this point have been immune to attacks by characters less than 20th level.  So maybe the "god" keyword has that as an implicit feature?  Still, I thought that was something they were trying to avoid -- monster features that don't appear in the statblock.


----------



## Klaus (Jun 9, 2010)

Runestar said:


> Does the god subtype bring with it any special connotations or abilities, or is it just a fanciful descriptor with no real benefits?






Mentat55 said:


> Most, if not all, deities to this point have been immune to attacks by characters less than 20th level.  So maybe the "god" keyword has that as an implicit feature?  Still, I thought that was something they were trying to avoid -- monster features that don't appear in the statblock.




This.

Up until now, every deity came with a sidebar explaining how they break the rules. I guess now that's all been categorized into a keyword (Lolth is the first deity to appear in a 4e MM, so it makes sense for her to add that keyword to the game).


----------



## Runestar (Jun 9, 2010)

> Most, if not all, deities to this point have been immune to attacks by  characters less than 20th level.




If a party that low is somehow able to defeat lolth without said provision, I would say something is seriously wrong. Based on stats alone, the PCs shouldn't stand a chance!

Besides, why bother with this stipulation if you know that no one is going to fight lolth that early?


----------



## doctorhook (Jun 10, 2010)

Runestar said:


> Does the god subtype bring with it any special connotations or abilities, or is it just a fanciful descriptor with no real benefits?



I don't have the book yet, but I'm certain it's fanciful; all descriptors and subtypes have been thus far, except for where they interact with the occasional magic item or ability. As I pointed out above, they are quite inconsistent, as well. For example, Drow in Monster Manual 1 don't even have the "drow" subtype -- they're just "Medium fey humanoids". For what little it's worth, this line in the statblocks of monster in Keep on the Shadowfell is sometimes totally different from the one in the statblock of the same monster in the Monster Manual, although that might just be a change in design philosophy. (KotS used a lot more subtypes, IIRC.)

As I'm looking over the first two Monster Manuals, I'm noticing that subtypes are usually found on creatures whose name doesn't indicate their nature. For example, Duergar have the "dwarf" subtype, but Dwarves don't. Most Eladrin don't have the "eladrin" subtype, but the Coure of Mischief and Strife does (on the page right next to an eladrin without the subtype, no less). However, most goblins don't have the goblin subtype, _including_ the Lolthbound Goblin -- but _not including_ the Lolthbound Goblin Slave on the same page in MM2. Go figure.

Given the lack of significant mechanical effect, I'm going to chalk these inconsistencies up to their insignificance. It's not cool, but at least it doesn't wreck anything.



Mentat55 said:


> Most, if not all, deities to this point have been immune to attacks by characters less than 20th level.  So maybe the "god" keyword has that as an implicit feature?  Still, I thought that was something they were trying to avoid -- monster features that don't appear in the statblock.



I'm with Runestar; they may have just stopped bothering to print that bit, because of the extreme unlikelihood of any 19th level characters ever being a threat to a creature with these stats. However, if it ever came up in game, I'd still apply the "20+" rule anyway, because I know it. Also, can anyone even confirm that this sidebar actually doesn't appear in the book? We know the excerpt wasn't complete...

I'm still inclined to believe that there's nothing to this "(god)" subtype bit, except for what we're already familiar with. I just would've preferred the word "(deity)", like they've used before.


----------



## RangerWickett (Jun 10, 2010)

A group of 11th level PCs go on a quest, open a portal to Lolth's realm, and march through with 50,000 archers. Nat 20s add up.


----------



## Aegeri (Jun 10, 2010)

RangerWickett said:


> A group of 11th level PCs go on a quest, open a portal to Lolth's realm, and march through with 50,000 archers. Nat 20s add up.




Only to be met by an infinite horde of demons that rip them all to pieces.

Natural 2s and above add up faster than natural 20s.


----------



## keterys (Jun 10, 2010)

So... maybe I'm just not reading it well, but is there anything that would keep Lolth from just being stunned or dominated (end of somebody's next turn) the whole fight?


----------



## Dr_Ruminahui (Jun 10, 2010)

Well...

As a solo she gets +5 to all saves;
She can dominate a creature that hits her as an immediate interupt (which can make sustaining challenging); and
She gets a save as soon as she is affected by a "save ends" effect.

But that's it.


----------



## doctorhook (Jun 10, 2010)

RangerWickett said:


> A group of 11th level PCs go on a quest, open a portal to Lolth's realm, and march through with 50,000 archers. Nat 20s add up.



If my PCs somehow managed to pull off assembling such an army and opening a portal, I might actually let them give it a shot... but rest assured, it would go very badly for most of those soldiers.


----------



## keterys (Jun 10, 2010)

Dr_Ruminahui said:


> Well...
> 
> As a solo she gets +5 to all saves;
> She can dominate a creature that hits her as an immediate interupt (which can make sustaining challenging); and
> ...




Immediate Reaction, actually. So, can't do it if she's dazed or stunned.

And she's _great_ at avoiding save ends effects, but has nothing against end of next turn effects. So, if the group has a couple rounds worth of dazed or stunned until end of next turn amongst their 20 dailies and 20 encounter powers (or at-wills, with the right - hopefully fixed soon - feat), she's doomed.


----------



## RangerWickett (Jun 10, 2010)

This seems to be a good argument for allowing saving throws to end not just "save ends" effects but also "until end of next turn" effects.


----------



## Stoat (Jun 10, 2010)

The only important function of the descriptors and subtypes is that they make it easier to find monsters using the Compendium.

Since I use the Compendium all the time, I'd like it if WotC was consistent in its use of descriptors and subtypes.


----------



## Mirtek (Jun 10, 2010)

For those who have the MM3: Is the "god" keyword explained in the glossary?


----------



## MrMyth (Jun 10, 2010)

Mirtek said:


> For those who have the MM3: Is the "god" keyword explained in the glossary?




Not that I can find.


----------



## Nahat Anoj (Jun 10, 2010)

RangerWickett said:


> This seems to be a good argument for allowing saving throws to end not just "save ends" effects but also "until end of next turn" effects.



Yeah, more and more I'm thinking of letting this be the case.



Mirtek said:


> For those who have the MM3: Is the "god" keyword explained in the glossary?



No.  Neither is "deity," actually.


----------



## Dr_Ruminahui (Jun 10, 2010)

keterys said:


> Immediate Reaction, actually. So, can't do it if she's dazed or stunned.
> 
> And she's _great_ at avoiding save ends effects, but has nothing against end of next turn effects. So, if the group has a couple rounds worth of dazed or stunned until end of next turn amongst their 20 dailies and 20 encounter powers (or at-wills, with the right - hopefully fixed soon - feat), she's doomed.




Yeah, I had misread your post, but still ended up kind of answering it - you are quite right that a party with a number of end of turn nerfs can take her out of the fight for quite some time.

Though, the dominate interupt can still be useful in that - if she uses it before she's first stunned on the person stunning her, that at least prevents that PC from doing it to her again next round.  Of course, it doesn't help if another PC can do it to her instead, though.

But aside from that minor, minor caveat, I agree with you.


----------



## keterys (Jun 10, 2010)

Dr_Ruminahui said:


> YThough, the dominate interupt can still be useful in that - if she uses it before she's first stunned on the person stunning her, that at least prevents that PC from doing it to her again next round.




Sadly, it's a reaction, not an interrupt. So, being dazed or stunned makes it impossible to use, even once.

Hopefully the players don't know she can do that, so maybe she gets a chance to dominate the leader who gives the group +8 to hit her... before she proceeds to lose the fight  I'd not be surprised if a lot of groups do lead right off with dazing or stunning attacks on solos, though.


----------



## Dr_Ruminahui (Jun 10, 2010)

But the trigger is being hit by the attack.  So my understanding would be that the following occurs:

1.  She is hit.  The immediate reaction triggers, though doesn't take effect until after the attack.

2.  The attack stuns her.  Normally this prevents the triggering of immediate reactions, but as it has already been triggered.

3.  The attacker is dominated.

Now, if it were an immediate interupt, that would make things wonky.  She's attacked, the dominate interupts the attack, meaning that the attacker is dominated prior to the attack and Lolth instead has the dominated PC attack someone else.

That said, the difference between interupts and reactions is a bit hazy, and there have been all kinds of discussions on the issue, such as what happens when an immediate interupt attack for dropping to 0 HPs kills the attacker.


----------



## Nahat Anoj (Jun 10, 2010)

Dr_Ruminahui said:


> But the trigger is being hit by the attack.  So my understanding would be that the following occurs:
> 
> 1.  She is hit.  The immediate reaction triggers, though doesn't take effect until after the attack.
> 
> 2.  The attack stuns her.  Normally this prevents the triggering of immediate reactions, but as it has already been triggered.



The immediate reaction is triggered, but hasn't been taken yet.  The immediate reaction can only be taken after the triggering action has been completely resolved.  If the triggering action results in bestowing the stunned condition, then Lolth can't take immediate actions and can't dominate the target.

Immediate reactions *can* interrupt movement, but that's the only interrupt effect listed.


----------



## Dr_Ruminahui (Jun 11, 2010)

Hmm... seems I need to brush up on my immediate actions - I guess I know what I'm reading after I get home.

But that makes sense - if a PC can shift as immediate reaction from an attack, if the attack knocks them unconscious they can't shift as they are unconscious.

So yeah, if the rules work that way, Lolth pretty much has no defence from "end of turn" conditions other than having her allies beat on the PCs that can inflict them... which is a bit sad.

Personally, the next time WotC does a rules reset, they need to think seriously on the difference between "save ends" and "end of next turn" - more and more, "end of next turn" is better, which really doesn't make any sense when "save ends" is supposed to be better (as evidenced by attacks that are "save ends" on a hit and "end of next turn" on a miss - hoping to miss just seems wrong).


----------



## Runestar (Jun 11, 2010)

So that free-save ability still does nothing to protect her against the bane of solo encounters? Bug or feature? When I first saw that writeup, my immediate reaction was "Hah! No more stunlock!". Or at least, successfully chaining consecutive stuns/dazes is much harder than before.


----------



## Dr_Ruminahui (Jun 11, 2010)

Well, it certainly does help her against "save ends" powers... its the "until end of next turn" powers that it does nothing for.

Not having played above heroic and not really having looked that far ahead, I don't know how common daze and stun "end of next turn" are, but given that "end of next turn" is _supposed_ to be weaker than save ends, there are presumably some.  How prevelant, though, will likely depend on party and PC builds - not sure how many rounds an optimized party could keep her locked down.

Pretty damn big chink in her armour, though, if you ask me.


----------



## Nahat Anoj (Jun 11, 2010)

Dr_Ruminahui said:


> Hmm... seems I need to brush up on my immediate actions - I guess I know what I'm reading after I get home.



Here's the Immediate Action entry from the Compendium:



> Trigger: Each immediate action—usually a power—defines its specific trigger. The one type of immediate action that every combatant can take is a readied action.
> 
> Once per Round: You can take only one immediate action per round, either an immediate interrupt or an immediate reaction. If you take an immediate action, you can’t take another one until the start of your next turn, but you can’t take an immediate action on your own turn.
> 
> ...


----------



## Mengu (Jun 11, 2010)

Note to self: When you get MM3, open up Lolth, next to "Immune poison" write down ", stun, daze".

I don't see why gods couldn't have such immunities. You could add even a few more like "attack penalty, save penalty, vulnerability". Those immunities ought to make it an interesting fight.


----------



## Runestar (Jun 11, 2010)

Mengu said:


> Note to self: When you get MM3, open up Lolth, next to "Immune poison" write down ", stun, daze".
> 
> I don't see why gods couldn't have such immunities. You could add even a few more like "attack penalty, save penalty, vulnerability". Those immunities ought to make it an interesting fight.




I thought the general tradeoff behind the short durations for daze/stun/misc disabling effect (compared to 3e at any rate) is exactly that you get to use them on virtually any foe. Similarly, sneak attack does less damage, but you can use them on any enemy. 

Giving blanket immunity would kinda defeat the purpose, IMO.


----------



## Puggins (Jun 11, 2010)

I'm considering replacing "until end of turn" effects with "(any attempted save ends this effect)."

In Lolth's case, it would make her absolutely immune to "until end of turn" effects, but hey... she's a god.


----------



## keterys (Jun 11, 2010)

I'd suggest just changing them to any successful save also ends this effect, and keeping the end of next turn as a maximum.

But, whatever's easier. The tricky part there will be some classes won't be able to mark her. At all.


----------



## Puggins (Jun 11, 2010)

keterys said:


> I'd suggest just changing them to any successful save also ends this effect, and keeping the end of next turn as a maximum.
> 
> But, whatever's easier. The tricky part there will be some classes won't be able to mark her. At all.




Ah, I wasn't talking about a blanket replacement- should've been more nuanced when I said it.  Marking effects would be an obvious exception.  Can't think of any other off the top of my head, but I'm sure there are some.

I think your version is probably better, if not longer in wording... "until the end of the target's next turn or until the target successfully saves against this effect."


----------



## Al'Kelhar (Jun 11, 2010)

FireLance said:


> These stats definitely seem to be just for the first part of a multi-part fight: the hit points are fairly low - standard for a 35th-level elite skirmisher or controller with 29 Constitution.






Jhaelen said:


> Yep. HP are very low. At first I assumed that maybe they increased damage to compensate - but no such luck.
> 
> A multi-part fight makes sense and sounds interesting!






Mentat55 said:


> Her AC, Reflex, and Will are high for a level 35 lurker -- a deviation from the MM2 and Monster Builder math, but then again, she's Lolth.




Everyone knows the _real_ Lolth has AC -10 and 66hp.

Cheers, Al'Kelhar


----------



## spinmd (Jun 11, 2010)

FWIW, when the mechanics of being a "deity" were first introduced in the Draconomicon: Chromatic Dragons, it said the following in the sidebar:

From pg 244

Deities always roll saving throws in response to an attack or effect that imposes a condition or deals ongoing damage, even if that effect normally does not allow a saving throw.

Personally, I would play Lolth like that.


----------



## Mengu (Jun 11, 2010)

Runestar said:


> I thought the general tradeoff behind the short durations for daze/stun/misc disabling effect (compared to 3e at any rate) is exactly that you get to use them on virtually any foe. Similarly, sneak attack does less damage, but you can use them on any enemy.




Yeah, unfortunately, person 1 stuns round 1, person 2 stuns round 2, Lolth dies her first death. And her dirtiest trick on dominating someone can't even be used when she is dazed.

For a solo, 1 round of stun is not a "short duration", it is an eternity. 5 PC's get to beat on her in that duration, and then 5 PC's get to beat on her again until she can get a turn, assuming she hasn't been stunned again by someone else.

Even if she is immune to stun and daze, she can be taken down but at least, it'll be a fight. I'm not normally a fan of neutering a PC's ability either but, I'll make exceptions for gods.

As a more general note, if a solo takes 5 turns, and if stun takes away 1 of those turns, it would be fair. If a solo takes 1 turn, and it takes 5 stuns to take that turn away, it would again be fair. But when a solo takes 1 turn and 1 stun takes it away, the solo doesn't really have a chance. This is the fundamental reason for solos being such push overs. Any condition inflicted on a solo is 5 times as powerful.


----------



## Mirtek (Jun 11, 2010)

spinmd said:


> FWIW, when the mechanics of being a "deity" were first introduced in the Draconomicon: Chromatic Dragons, it said the following in the sidebar:
> 
> From pg 244
> 
> ...



 But they already changed it to only effects that allow a saving throw for Vecna and Torog


----------



## Jhaelen (Jun 11, 2010)

Mirtek said:


> But they already changed it to only effects that allow a saving throw for Vecna and Torog



Well, that's because Vecna and Torog are weakling gods


----------



## UngeheuerLich (Jun 12, 2010)

There needs to be a general rule, that conditions can always be saved against, no matter what the power says...

this would not only make monster resilence abilities better, but also player abilities that grant saves, which will ultimately lead to more fun. 

As a second rule: powers always last until the end of your next turn if a miss entry says that, even if the save at the end of turn was successfull.


----------



## keterys (Jun 12, 2010)

UngeheuerLich said:


> As a second rule: powers always last until the end of your next turn if a miss entry says that, even if the save at the end of turn was successfull.




Err, why? So that missing is better than hitting?


----------



## Mengu (Jun 12, 2010)

keterys said:


> Err, why? So that missing is better than hitting?




No that's already the case (or so it feels sometimes). He's trying to make hitting at least as good as missing, but sometimes better. So, if a power says "Hit: Dazed (save ends); Miss: Dazed until the end of your next turn", then even if the target makes their save, they would still continue to be dazed until the end of your next turn. One way to do this would be to change the miss line to an effect line.


----------



## keterys (Jun 12, 2010)

Ah. 

So... Lolth would still be screwed, under that theory. I don't think that's quite the right angle.


----------



## UngeheuerLich (Jun 12, 2010)

No, because the other change allows immediate saves for "until end of next turn" effects


----------



## MrMyth (Jun 12, 2010)

Right, the issue is two-fold. 

In theory, Condition (Save Ends) is supposed to be more powerful than Condition Until the End of Your Next Turn. 

In practice, however, it can be weaker in two possible ways. For one, while it has the potential to go longer, if they do make their initial save, the condition may be gone by your next turn. (So you don't benefit from any Combat Advantage or other boons it might offer you.)

For another, (Save Ends) effects have a lot more counters than ones that do not allow a save.

Thus, in order to fix the problem, one needs to make it so that enemies that can counter (Save Ends) can also counter Until the End of Your Next Turn, while also making it so there is never a circumstance in which (Save Ends) is a shorter duration than Until the End of Your Next Turn.


----------



## Mengu (Jun 12, 2010)

MrMyth said:


> In practice, however, it can be weaker in two possible ways. For one, while it has the potential to go longer, if they do make their initial save, the condition may be gone by your next turn. (So you don't benefit from any Combat Advantage or other boons it might offer you.)
> 
> For another, (Save Ends) effects have a lot more counters than ones that do not allow a save.




Actually there is a third issue with save ends, if the monster initiative goes right after you, they get to shed the condition before any of your allies might benefit from it. In the case of conditions like -2 AC (save ends), this is a big bummer.

What's worse, the creatures you typically want to hit with save ends conditions (elites and solos) can shed those conditions easier. And if you use those conditions on standard creatures, they tend to die before the save might even matter.



MrMyth said:


> Thus, in order to fix the problem, one needs to make it so that enemies that can counter (Save Ends) can also counter Until the End of Your Next Turn, while also making it so there is never a circumstance in which (Save Ends) is a shorter duration than Until the End of Your Next Turn.




Right, I think balance is key here. We want PC abilities to be useful about 65% of the time, and want a monster to be able to counter them about 35% of the time to provide the right dose of challenge. I don't know, the percentages may be tweaked, but at the very least some monsters need a few counters.


----------



## Aegeri (Jun 12, 2010)

Mengu said:


> No that's already the case (or so it feels sometimes). He's trying to make hitting at least as good as missing, but sometimes better. So, if a power says "Hit: Dazed (save ends); Miss: Dazed until the end of your next turn", then even if the target makes their save, they would still continue to be dazed until the end of your next turn. One way to do this would be to change the miss line to an effect line.




That is an absolutely terrible fix. 

Honestly, solos need to be able to save against action denial effects by paragon and especially epic to maintain their challenge. That's just sort of the reality here. The fix shouldn't be so unfair or extreme though that daze and stun etc are useless. It should though provide a fair and reasonable way for a solo to prevent being completely locked down by these effects - because right now stacking them turn by turn cannot be prevented in any manner. They've become better than save ends effects because of this - there is no need to make an entirely new problem by making save ends effects just as broken.

Edit: Mengu the problem with simplistic numbers like that as applied to a solo is a solo is five monsters. A stun is therefore in an encounter removing _five_ monsters (or 100% if it is by itself) worth of creatures from the encounter. Solos have to disproportionately deal with save ends effects and until end of next turn effects - as they are worth much more total experience overall in the encounter. Letting one power shut down the entire encounter or the majority of it is the inherent problem with solo monsters.

Edit2: For the record this "fix" if any should be targeted where it matters in either paragon or epic tier. By this point PCs have a lot of daze, stun, dominate and similar "Until end of next turn" lockdown effects. It's the cumulative effect of having about two billion of these to constantly throw on a solo ensuring it never has an action that is another part of the problem. If these effects weren't so prevelent and 4E stuck to mostly save ends effects, it wouldn't be so bad.


----------



## UngeheuerLich (Jun 12, 2010)

I agree that solos may need a general fix. But allowing a save for EONT conditions may be the first part.

Maybe instead of changing save end effects to last until end of next turn, you should also allow for a save for eont effects at the end of turn phase, so that they may escape. Or maybe let solos always be able to grant themselves saves as an opportunity action.


----------



## Mengu (Jun 13, 2010)

Aegeri said:


> That is an absolutely terrible fix.
> 
> Honestly, solos need to be able to save against action denial effects by paragon and especially epic to maintain their challenge. That's just sort of the reality here. The fix shouldn't be so unfair or extreme though that daze and stun etc are useless. It should though provide a fair and reasonable way for a solo to prevent being completely locked down by these effects - because right now stacking them turn by turn cannot be prevented in any manner. They've become better than save ends effects because of this - there is no need to make an entirely new problem by making save ends effects just as broken.
> 
> ...




If you read a few of my earlier posts, we're saying exactly the same thing. I wasn't proposing the fix as the only fix. The other part of the fix needs to be allowing a portion of creatures a save on certain conditions, whether the condition normally grants a save or not. So, we're basically beefing up both save ends conditions, so people aren't trying to miss to get the better "eont" condition, and at the same time we're trying to beef up some monsters so they get saves regardless of the condition being save ends or "eont" (such as Lolth).

I don't think such an implementation is easy or likely, but I believe it would address both some lock down frustration, and some "save ends powers = bad" perception.


----------



## Bill Hooks (Jun 14, 2010)

Hi,

Delurking to brainstorm some possible ways to deal with stunlock, apart from outright immunity:

1. Maybe have some Interrupt powers that let a Solo convert Stun or Daze to lesser conditions, Vulnerabilities, or outright damage;

2. Give a Solo nuisance abilities that are triggered by Stun or Daze, like reactive close bursts, summoning minions or pooping dangerous terrain.


----------



## keterys (Jun 14, 2010)

Well, in the case of something like Lolth, you could easily have her body disappear and turn into, say, a zone of biting spiders (automatic damage for entering or ending turn in kinda thing) for the duration.

So, good for getting a breather, potential, but _horrible_ for killing her.


----------



## Bold or Stupid (Jun 14, 2010)

My rewrite of Orcus turned him into a roiling portal to the abyss that damaged the entire encounter when he was stunned.


----------



## Aegeri (Jun 14, 2010)

To be honest, I'm most fond of a solo that has multiple attacks in a standard action and instead of being dazed/stunned it loses an attack. For example the Heroslayer Hydra loses 1 attack per daze/stun condition upon it, but otherwise isn't bothered by daze/stun. I like this a lot as it keeps daze/stun useful but it isn't about to be dominating the fight. Predictably enough said Hydra was a good challenge to an epic level party - when you can't lock it down and it has actions you end up with a great fight! Who would have guessed?

I'm also a fan of multiple initiative solos where a daze/stun removes an activation instead of normally affecting it. These solos are the best designed in 4E are coincidentally also produce the most fun battles. 

This is where I think a solo rule that generally affects daze and stun conditions would be the best. It's action denial that truly screws solos and not general debuffs (though they don't help, in the end if you can't act at all you can't challenge anyone!). Making save ends effects better than "until end of next turn" is another entirely separate issue with its own problems. In reality save ends effects prove to be very good on normal monsters, but are worthless against solos due to their +5 saves. If you basically sabotage "until end of next turn effects" being better inherently on solos you make that balance much better anyway.

Because in the end the main advantage of "until end of next turn" is on solos. That's why you see PCs proliferate these, because the biggest and supposedly nastiest monsters are most trivially defeated with them. If solos are saving either way, then save ends becomes automatically better. If they're going to fail a save then save ends means it stays around longer, while they're going to have the same duration (or less) with an "until end of next turn" effect.

Against regular monsters the 50% chance of the effect continuing to last is good enough to keep save ends competitive. Change this dynamic with solos and you'll find PCs will be wanting to miss less with save ends effects on hits (and until next turn effects on a miss).


----------



## MortalPlague (Jun 14, 2010)

One way I've looked at the stun / daze issue for solos is to relegate those two conditions to a weaker version (specific to solos).  Maybe daze instead causes the solo to grant CA?  Stun might stack that with a penalty on attacks?


----------



## BrokeAndDrive (Jun 14, 2010)

spinmd said:
			
		

> Deities always roll saving throws in response to an attack or effect that imposes a condition or deals ongoing damage, even if that effect normally does not allow a saving throw.




Would this work? (modeled after the line in Vecna and Torog [I think], to be added under the Triggered Actions section of every being with the god, deity, primordial, or whatever such keyword)


*Immortal/Primordial Resistance* (no action*, when [Whoever] is hit by an attack or effect that imposes a condition or deals ongoing damage, even if that effect normally does not allow a saving throw; at-will)
[Whoever] makes a saving throw. On a save, [Whoever] is unaffected by the effect.

*or should this say Free, or be omitted altogether?


----------



## keterys (Jun 14, 2010)

The multiturn solos actually tend to be the most screwed by 'stunned until next turn' powers, since they're the attacker's turn, so a Behir will be stunned for three of its turns by one hit. Then they can use the next power.


----------



## Dr_Ruminahui (Jun 14, 2010)

One thing... does the "gets a save versus all conditions" apply to being marked as well?


----------



## BrokeAndDrive (Jun 14, 2010)

Dr_Ruminahui said:
			
		

> One thing... does the "gets a save versus all conditions" apply to being marked as well?



According to this handy link, Marked is indeed a condition.  Therefore, yes.

Of course, you or your DM can very well say "Nuh uh."


----------



## Aegeri (Jun 15, 2010)

keterys said:


> The multiturn solos actually tend to be the most screwed by 'stunned until next turn' powers, since they're the attacker's turn, so a Behir will be stunned for three of its turns by one hit. Then they can use the next power.




The better ones just lose an activation, not their entire set of turns. That's why I rather like them.



			
				Dr_Ruminahui said:
			
		

> One thing... does the "gets a save versus all conditions" apply to  being marked as well?




Strictly put yes, but the way I houseruled it meant that I targeted the specific action denial conditions that caused the problem - I left other effects alone for the time being.


----------



## keterys (Jun 15, 2010)

Aegeri said:


> The better ones just lose an activation, not their entire set of turns. That's why I rather like them.




I couldn't find any solos that do that, at all - could you give some examples?

Hydras lose one of their attacks each time they're dazed or stunned, but don't get multiple turns and, well, kinda suck as solos in general. Some other creatures like Behirs and Demogorgon get multiple turns, but a stun or daze until the end of the attacker's next turn (standard duration) will affect them for all of those turns.


----------



## Saagael (Jun 15, 2010)

Aegeri said:


> The better ones just lose an activation, not their entire set of turns. That's why I rather like them.




I haven't run a solo with multiple turns per round, but I have one coming up in a week or so, and this is what I'm doing to reduce the severity of stun/daze. Specifically, the power states:

"Whenever [creature] is subject to a daze, stun or dominating effect that is not save ends, that effect is removed at the end of [creature]'s next turn."

It has the side-effect of making some players not benefit from the daze/stun/dominated, but that's fine with me. If they want to lock the solo down, they'll have to work for it. Save ends effects are still good, since they will always last as long as End of Next Turn effects.

Anyway, back to talking about Lolth, I really like what I'm seeing. I love ongoing damage with powers, because it's a condition that doesn't limit a characters' abilities, but is still threatening. Can't wait to see what the spider form is.


----------



## Aegeri (Jun 15, 2010)

keterys said:


> I couldn't find any solos that do that, at all - could you give some examples?




The most obvious one is Tiamat! Her power Quintuple Brain is the most powerful one of these as well, as she only loses her next activation and multiple daze/stun effects do not stack. There are other monsters that function like this, but they are really all over the place and so it can be hard to remember them. Such creatures do exist though.


----------



## keterys (Jun 15, 2010)

Ah, right. I forgot that she wasn't appearing in the Compendium.


----------



## Aegeri (Jun 15, 2010)

keterys said:


> Ah, right. I forgot that she wasn't appearing in the Compendium.




I wish I could remember the others - they do exist but I feel they aren't from core books they are from adventures and similar. Either way though the ability is not without precedent and I can affirm works extremely well.


----------



## MrMyth (Jun 15, 2010)

The Sharn gets it, at least vs daze and stunned - though it is still based on auto-saving. I ran a fight with one the other day, though, and simply declared that all daze and stunned effects cleared at the end of its turn, and it didn't feel overpowered. 

It actually resulted in the party using more interesting tactics to coordinate their strikes, which was even better!


----------



## keterys (Jun 15, 2010)

Yeah, the Sharn is still screwed by them without the modification. Ah well, hopefully this is something that will be fixed in 5e


----------



## pippenainteasy (Oct 13, 2011)

Mirtek said:


> But they already changed it to only effects that allow a saving throw for Vecna and Torog




Tiamat's statblock says "makes an immediate saving throw against effects that a save can end."

In the nature of deities description right under Tiamat's statblock says "deities make a saving throw even when the effect doesn't normally end on a save."

So it seems kind of obtuse, but it's saying a god can make a saving throw against (save ends) effects, and gods treat all effects as (save ends) effects.


----------



## Journeymanmage (Oct 13, 2011)

Thanks for the info, but ...

16 month old Threadromancy


----------



## pippenainteasy (Oct 13, 2011)

Journeymanmage said:


> Thanks for the info, but ...
> 
> 16 month old Threadromancy




As opposed to...making a duplicate topic?...



keterys said:


> The multiturn solos actually tend to be the most  screwed by 'stunned until next turn' powers, since they're the  attacker's turn, so a Behir will be stunned for three of its turns by  one hit. Then they can use the next power.




I think multi-turn solos are even more screwed by zone powers, since  everytime they start their turn within the zone they take damage, which  means they need to continue backpeddling and doing ranged attacks,  because engaging in melee and face stacking zone/aura damage make them  fall even faster.


----------



## keterys (Oct 13, 2011)

Yep... sure would be nice to have a general rule of 1/round max for all zones.


----------

