[2e] In depth Monsters

[Scowling Dragon]

Is there any add-on that allows for in-depth monster statting?

I like the simplicity of the monster stat block, but for the times that I need to fully stat a monster (Like alternate Skellies) I would like to know if there is anything for this sort pf thing.

[Matthew]

Not that I know of. Mostly if monsters are getting a detailed treatment it takes the form of "special abilities: see below" and a text write up.

[Yora]

You could write down how many hit points they actually have by taking the average roll as in 3rd Edition, and the saving throws. I have the text for how to determine saving throws right in front of me, but I think I'll spend the next 15 minutes figuring out how that is supposed to work again.

And these books are so big with so many tables. Would it have hurt to add another row to the tables rather than saying "For x you take row y from z, but for a you take row b from c. P is calculated by dividing the hit dice by 2, except when there are +n additional hit points, in which the result is increades by +1 for every +r."
AD&D math is bad!

[Scowling Dragon]

I have to agree. Its nice and simple, but its as simple as a pile of bones. Needs the meat.

[Yora]

Is there any clear indication what monster use other saving throws than the warrior ones? Or is that left entirely to the DM to decide on the fly?

[Scowling Dragon]

Not sure. Maybe I should homebrew something akin to 3es system.

[Yora]

Relatively easy. THAC0 can be transformed into BAB without problem. And if prefered, ability checks and saving trows can be made into DC 20 rolls instead of roll under rolls.

The biggest amount of work would be redoing the stat blocks for all the monsters, which in this case would be kind of the point of the whole exercise anyway.

When I've been playing around with the numbers, I noticed that the ability score modifier tables can actually be unified to a single one with very minor changes to the statistical outcome. Usually a single colum is simply moved up by one row here and another one moved down a row there, apparently for the purpose to mask the fact that they are all the same.
Same goes for thief skills, which are much more simple than they look and just written in a way that makes them more complex.

d20-fied: http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=13232745&postcount=95
d20-fied and adjusted: http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=13234574&postcount=100

Currently I am putting hope in the 5th Edition core rules. I think core only the game looks quite promising to have almost all the simplicity of 2nd Edition with much better math.

But now I want to stat up some monsters. :smallbiggrin:

[Matthew]

Is there any clear indication what monster use other saving throws than the warrior ones? Or is that left entirely to the DM to decide on the fly?

No, they basically use the fighter saving throw matrix unless they have a reason not to (for example a Nymph is pretty clearly saving on the magician table).

[Yora]

AD&D d20

{table=head]Skeleton|
Climate/Terrain:|Any
Frequency:|Rare
Organization:|Band
Activity Cycle:|Any
Diet:|Nil
Intelligence:|Non- (0)
Treasure:|Nil
Alignment:|Neutral
-|-
No. Appearing:|3-30 (3d10)
Armor Class:|13
Movement:|12m
Hit Dice:|1d8 (4 hp)
Saves:|PPD +6, RSW +4, PPly +5, BW +3, Spell +3
BAB:|+1
No. of attacks:|1
Damage:|1d6 (weapon)
Special Attacks:|Nil
Immunities:|charm, fear, hold, sleep
Resistances:|Half damage from slashing and piercing
Size:|Medium
Morale:|Special (always succeed)[/table]

{table=head]Wolf|
Climate/Terrain:|Non-tropical
Frequency:|Uncommon
Organization:|Family
Activity Cycle:|Any
Diet:|Carnivore
Intelligence:|Low (5-7)
Treasure:|Nil
Alignment:|Neutral
-|-
No. Appearing:|2-12 (2d6)
Armor Class:|13
Movement:|18m
Hit Dice:|3d8 (13 hp)
Saves:|PPD +7, RSW +5, PPly +6, BW +4, Spell +4
BAB:|+2
No. of attacks:|1
Damage:|1d4+1
Special Attacks:|Nil
Resistances:|+1 vs. charm
Size:|Small
Morale:|Average|10[/table]

Looks much better now, doesn't it? Setting specific ability scores for ability checks might be useful, but since for monsters these don't affect AC, damage, or saving throws, they are not that neccessary.

[Scowling Dragon]

It DOES look much better now. Now I wish somebody could make a converted version of the game FOR me.

[Yora]

If 5th Edition ends up overcrowded with class features in the PHB, I might come back to that.
But really, all the elegance of the 2nd Ed. monster stats are pretty much preserved in the 5th Edition stats and the Skills so far look no more complicated than proficiencies. It does look rather nice, I have to say.

[Scowling Dragon]

Meh. Lets not drag edition wars into this (The 5e thread is just so meanspirited and hateful) but lets say the devil is in the flavor text, and details.....And some other stuff.

[Kaervaslol]

I don't understand the saving throws.

In 2e is roll over target #. And the target # depends on the player, not the spell.

So the target number is always 20?

[hamlet]

I don't understand the saving throws.

In 2e is roll over target #. And the target # depends on the player, not the spell.

So the target number is always 20?

No, the target number is based upon cross referencing character class and level and is found in a chart in the PHB and DMG (I think there's a copy of it in there).

Some character classes are better at some saving throws than others. Two notable examples: 1) Clerics at very early levels are very good at saves versus poison and paralyzation and 2) towards higher levels, fighters get better saves than just about anyone, which is literally one of their stronger advantages by then.

[Yora]

In the example monster stat blocks, yes. A saving throw of 13 means you have to roll a 13 or higher. 13 or higher are 8 numbers on the d20. 12 or lower are 12 number on the d20.

With a bonus of +7, the numbers 1 to 12 would get results of 8 to 19, the numbers of 13 to 20 would get results of 20 to 27.