DM, making monster, skipping prereqs

[Deaxsa]

pretty self-explanatory. i'm making a monster (it's an advanced wolf), would stuff like allowing it to ignore the int 13 for combat reflexes be okay, or not? (it has got wis 14, if that matters). point is, i don't want to take this too far in avoiding prereqs, but... it's literally incapable of being better at the thing it's good at.:smallfrown: which imo is stupid. (granted, i could give it something like this (http://dndtools.eu/feats/shining-south--25/hyena-tribe-hunter--1420/), but that would also be stretching/ignoring prereqs). at any rate, what is the playground's opinion on this?

[Stux]

My opinion is it really doesn't matter as long as the monster is going to be fun and challenging for the players. Sure if you call this out explicitly as a standard wolf and then it does stuff that a standard wolf can't do then maybe you would have players with an understandable complaint. All you have to do is dress it up a little. This is a special wolf. It's mutated, or corrupted, or enchanted, or whatever makes sense.

If you don't like the idea of explicitly giving it a feat when it doesn't meet the prereqs though simply make a custom monster that has what the feat offers as a trait. Issue totally avoided.

[Flickerdart]

pretty self-explanatory. i'm making a monster (it's an advanced wolf), would stuff like allowing it to ignore the int 13 for combat reflexes be okay, or not? (it has got wis 14, if that matters). point is, i don't want to take this too far in avoiding prereqs, but... it's literally incapable of being better at the thing it's good at.:smallfrown: which imo is stupid. (granted, i could give it something like this (http://dndtools.eu/feats/shining-south--25/hyena-tribe-hunter--1420/), but that would also be stretching/ignoring prereqs). at any rate, what is the playground's opinion on this?
Combat Reflexes does not have any prerequisites.

[danzibr]

Yeah, Flickerdart is right. You're thinking Combat Expertise?

Anyway, I agree with Stux. Make whatever you want. If your characters would have more fun by facing homebrewed monsters, so to speak, then by all means. I actually do this a lot.

For example, the boss fight of level 1 was a human brawler dude named Joe. He drank a potion of Enlarge Person and I gave him free Improved Grab with no penalty. He picked someone up in his left arm, someone up in his right arm, kicked a dog. Someone did Command and made him drop the people he was holding. They had a great time.

[Deaxsa]

My opinion is it really doesn't matter as long as the monster is going to be fun and challenging for the players. Sure if you call this out explicitly as a standard wolf and then it does stuff that a standard wolf can't do then maybe you would have players with an understandable complaint. All you have to do is dress it up a little. This is a special wolf. It's mutated, or corrupted, or enchanted, or whatever makes sense.

If you don't like the idea of explicitly giving it a feat when it doesn't meet the prereqs though simply make a custom monster that has what the feat offers as a trait. Issue totally avoided.

huh. but i don't want to make the whole damn thing houseruled, especially when i have told people they can't get feats because of the prereqs (like the bab requirement on manyshot)(granted, i have done stuff like allow crossbow sniper to be applied to bows, but still). so i guess i'm not really asking for some way to squeeze around it by RAW, but rather, should i break RAW or not? maybe change combat expertise to allow anyone with int or wis 13+ to take the feat, would that be OK? i'm simply conflicted about this, and i have an aversion to allowing this out of the blue, while i probably would have disallowed it in the past. :smallfrown:

additionally, this creature is very, very likely to become an animal companion in the near future. that's the real kicker.

and yes, i am talking about combat expertise.

[Stux]

Personally I have no problem at all with fiat-ing it if it makes the creature more flavourful. It depends on your group though. It's not really a house rule in my opinion, it is a niche case. It is a unique creature with an unusual ability.

[holywhippet]

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/hydra.htm

Aside from INT 13 not being required, Hydra's have combat reflexes and they have an INT of 2. D&D is full of hand waving requirements as required, take a look at the monk class and the feats it gets despite not meeting requirements.

[nedz]

Redesigning monsters is not really house-ruling, it's your world.

Also, several of the monsters in the books break the rules.

[holywhippet]

Also, several of the monsters in the books break the rules.

Arguable since the rules you are thinking are for PCs and to some extent NPCs. Anyway, the rules for D&D say that specific beats general so if a monster or class is stated to have something they normally couldn't then they simply have it.

[Freddrick]

Why did the wolf need combat expertise? Is that a prereq for a different feet you want to give it?

Depending on how the monster was advanced you may be able to consider it a bonus feat.

If the animal will end up as a player companion then I would keep the requirement and come up with a different (temporary) reason for giving the animal an AC boost.

-Freddrick

[Deaxsa]

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/hydra.htm

Aside from INT 13 not being required, Hydra's have combat reflexes and they have an INT of 2. D&D is full of hand waving requirements as required, take a look at the monk class and the feats it gets despite not meeting requirements.

that's a bonus feat...


eh, ok, i guess i'll do this. i just did not want to make a creature that is houseruled to hell and back (rules exist for a reason), or make an animal companion that overshadows the melees.

edit: gave it "hyena tribe hunter" refluffed as "pack hunter" (after all, it's a wolf... its 'tribe' is all about tripping)

[originalginger]

Animals and monsters are not player characters, and in most cases aren't even humanoid.

The way I see it prerequisites normally applied to PCs in no way apply to a wolf, or any other creature, barring perhaps Orcs, Kobolds, and the like that are reasonably humanoid, and even then I think it's dubious at best to assume they would need the same prerequisites.

[TuggyNE]

@OP: If you want Combat Expertise for Improved Trip, remember that essentially all wolves get Improved Trip for free as a bonus feat, and do not need the prerequisites.

[Lord Vukodlak]

@OP: If you want Combat Expertise for Improved Trip, remember that essentially all wolves get Improved Trip for free as a bonus feat, and do not need the prerequisites.

Wolves get the trip special attack(which is better as they can trip for free off a bite attack), they don't in fact have improved trip, the feat however WOULD give them a +2 to their trip attempts.

[TuggyNE]

Wolves get the trip special attack(which is better as they can trip for free off a bite attack), they don't in fact have improved trip, the feat however WOULD give them a +2 to their trip attempts.

I stand corrected! And puzzled at my faulty memory.

[KillianHawkeye]

Wolves get the trip special attack(which is better as they can trip for free off a bite attack), they don't in fact have improved trip, the feat however WOULD give them a +2 to their trip attempts.

Improved Trip grants a +4, not a +2.

[CRtwenty]

I usually ignore prereqs when making monsters. But that's my style.

[nedz]

Arguable since the rules you are thinking are for PCs and to some extent NPCs. Anyway, the rules for D&D say that specific beats general so if a monster or class is stated to have something they normally couldn't then they simply have it.

I think that you may need to improved your mind reading :smallamused:

The rules I was thinking of are many of the 59+ Dysfunctional Monsters, not all of which fit into this category — though many do.

[Crake]

Wolves get the trip special attack(which is better as they can trip for free off a bite attack), they don't in fact have improved trip, the feat however WOULD give them a +2 to their trip attempts.

It would also give them an extra attack after they trip. So they bite, get a free trip attempt, and if they succeed, they get another free bite.

[Yuki Akuma]

You're totally allowed to give things racial bonus feats they don't meet the prerequisites for. If it's an advanced wolf, you can say this sub-species of wolf is really good at tripping things (if it's Improved Trip you want Combat Expertise for).

This way you don't even need to give it Combat Expertise, just Improved Trip.

[Urpriest]

Regardless, it's not going to become anyone's animal companion, since it's an advanced wolf. So you don't need to worry about that.

[Flickerdart]

I would be very cautious with giving monsters things they don't qualify for. A CR20 monster packed with feat-chain cap feats is going to be a lot more dangerous than advertised, likewise a CR10 monster with a feat that you normally couldn't get until 20. If your monster doesn't qualify for a feat you want to give it, sometimes there's a very good reason for that.

[zlefin]

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/intro.htm#Feats

I'd recommend not giving any monsters additional bonus feats (using the specific definition of bonus in that entry).

[gr8artist]

I think one or two adjustments for a low level creature are fine. Just give some indication that this is not the normal member of its species.

[aeauseth]

Advancing a wolf and giving it Hyena Tribe Hunter seems fine to me, call it something else (since the wolf isn't a human). Perhaps hyena blooded?

I'd be careful about stat based prereqs. Particulariy when related to INT. I generally don't allow animals to have discretionary use based items or feats. The trip on the wolf is great, it trips after every successful attack. But a wolf deciding on when to use Power Attack or Combat Expertiese seems pretty iffy. Animals just aren't that smart to decide when to use a particualry feat or ability. Don't let the rules or prereqs get in the way of making interesting monsters, just make sure the monsters and their associated ablities are withing the flavor of the creature.

For tripping you might consider Ability Focus (+2 trip DC).

[Urpriest]

For tripping you might consider Ability Focus (+2 trip DC).

What would that do? Tripping doesn't offer a saving throw, and the things it does offer don't scale the same way as a saving throw so it's not like someone would consider adding +2 to those checks to be equivalent.

Anyway, the basic question here is, what do you actually want this wolf to do? Chances are we can tell you a variety of feat chains that will make it more effective and that it can actually qualify for.

[Ravens_cry]

For monsters, it makes sense. Humans can learn things that come naturally to certain animals. So a feat for a human could simply be what they are for a monster.