PDA

View Full Version : 4e excerpt - Swarms



ShadowSiege
2008-05-22, 11:32 PM
Original Article (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4ex/20080523a)

And the article in its entirety:

Excerpts: Swarms
4th Edition Monster Manual

We’ve looked at minions, but how about even smaller creatures appearing in even greater number? In today’s preview, R&D’s Mike Mearls shows us how swarms work in 4th Edition.

Well, the release of the new game is right around the corner, so it's time to blow the lid off this thing. Since 4E was first announced, gamers have besieged us with phone calls, emails, and even a protest march demanding one thing above all else: How do swarms work in 4E?

Well, the day is at hand. We're about to pull back the curtain on what might be the greatest stride forward in swarm design known to mankind. But first, how did we end up in this glorious state?

Well, swarms are cool, but researching how we think swarms might actually work into D&D was not so cool. For this, we locked a designer in a sealed box with 100,000 ants. We threw rocks at hornets' nests, drop kicked beehives, and stuck our hands into crates of scorpions. From these experiences, we drew the following conclusions:

1. Oh my god, insects can sting.
2. No, seriously. That HURTS.
3. We decided that any of those feats were more fun than the 3E swarm rules.

The 3E swarm rules fell into the trap of simply trying to model reality as we know it, from movies, comics, or the real world. That might be a great move if you want to build a simulator, but it isn't so hot for a game. Instead, we wanted rules that were evocative. You should feel like you're fighting a swarm, but that feeling should be less like boredom and more like "GET THESE THINGS OFF OF ME."

So, a few highlights about 4E swarms:

1. Swarms are hard to hurt. Hacking at a pile of bugs with a sword is inefficient, but it's also scary to face a monster that's hard to hurt. The swarm marches on in a relentless wave. We liked that feel, and we could easily set the swarm's hit points to balance the effect.
2. They're hard to push around, again to make them feel relentless.
3. They can go almost anywhere. Closing a door doesn't do much to slow down a swarm. The bugs simply crawl under it, or through the cracks in the door's frame.

Originally, a single swarm "monster" was four Medium size groups of creatures. They worked similarly to minions, but the effect on the table was disappointing. Swarms didn't feel like tides of hungry critters, more like disposable bags of hit points. We tried toughening them, but that worked against the 4-for-1 discount they offered. In the end, we dropped the split and worked to simplify and streamline our existing rules.

So, now the swarm piece of the 4E puzzle has fallen into place. 4th Edition is right around the corner, and with it endless waves of hungry bugs, drakes, and other nasties.
--Mike Mearls

From the Monster Manual Glossary:

Swarm: A swarm is considered a single monster even though it is composed of several Tiny creatures. Most single swarms are Medium, but some can be larger.

A swarm takes half damage from melee and ranged attacks. It is vulnerable to close and area attacks, as indicated in the monster’s stat block.

A swarm is immune to forced movement (pull, push, and slide) effects from melee and ranged attacks. Close or area attacks that impose forced movement affect the swarm normally.

A swarm can enter or move through an enemy’s space; this movement does not provoke opportunity attacks. An enemy can enter a space occupied by a swarm, but the space occupied by the swarm is considered difficult terrain, and doing so provokes an opportunity attack.

A swarm can squeeze through any opening large enough to accommodate even one of its constituent creatures. For example, a swarm of bats can squeeze through any opening large enough for one of the bats to squeeze through. See the Player’s Handbook for squeezing rules.

Needlefang Drake Swarm

Savage marauders the size of cats, needlefang drakes swarm over their victims, pull them to ground, and strip them to the bone in seconds.
Needlefang Drake Swarm
Level 2 Soldier
Medium natural beast (reptile, swarm)
XP 125
Initiative +7Senses Perception +7
Swarm Attack aura 1; the needlefang drake swarm makes a basic attack as a free action against each enemy that begins its turn in the aura.
HP 38; Bloodied 19
AC 18; Fortitude 15, Reflex 17, Will 14
Immune fear; Resist half damage from melee and ranged attacks;
Vulnerable 5 against close and area attacks.
Speed 7
MeleeSwarm of Teeth (standard; at-will)
+8 vs. AC; 1d10 + 4 damage, or 2d10 + 4 damage against a prone target.
MeleePull Down (minor; at-will)
+7 vs. Fortitude; the target is knocked prone.
Alignment Unaligned
Languages —
Str 15 (+3)
Dex 18 (+5)
Wis 12 (+2)
Con 14 (+3)
Int 2 (-3)
Cha 10 (+1)

Needlefang Drake Tactics
Incited by hunger, needlefang drakes fearlessly rush toward their prey, knock it prone (using pull down), and use their swarm of teeth to feast upon it.

Stirge Swarm

Stirges are bloodsucking, bat-like horrors that lurk in caves and ruins. Lone stirges are little more than pests and nuisances—but they are rarely encountered alone. Stirges tend to gather in large flocks that can exsanguinate an adult human in a matter of minutes.
Stirge Swarm
Level 12 Brute
Medium natural beast (swarm)
XP 700
Initiative +9Senses Perception +6; darkvision
Swarm Attack aura 1; the stirge swarm makes a basic attack as a free action against each enemy that begins its turn in the aura.
HP 141; Bloodied 70
AC 24; Fortitude 21, Reflex 24, Will 23
Resist half damage from melee and ranged attacks;
Vulnerable 10 against close and area attacks
Speed 2, fly 6 (hover)
MeleeBloodsucking Swarm (standard; at-will)
+15 vs. AC; 2d6 + 4 damage, and ongoing 5 damage (save ends).
Alignment Unaligned
Languages —
Skills Stealth +14
Str 8 (+5)
Dex 16 (+9)
Wis 10 (+6)
Con 11 (+6)
Int 1 (+1)
Cha 4 (+3)

Stirge Swarm Tactics
Stirge swarms gave rise to the old dwarven saying: “I don’t have to outrun the stirges, I only have to outrun you.” A hungry swarm will chase its prey for miles, if need be.

Be sure to return Monday for a look at Fallcrest!


Not much to say. The needlefang drake one looks especially nasty with the knockdown and double damage to prone targets. I'd have preferred the excerpt on undead that they promised us.

Additionally, exsanguinate is a great word.

EvilElitest
2008-05-22, 11:33 PM
well this looks pretty good actually, generally how i imagined swarms
from
EE

Tough_Tonka
2008-05-22, 11:33 PM
Wow what are the odds we'd post this link at the same time?

ShadowSiege
2008-05-22, 11:35 PM
Wow what are the odds we'd post them this this link at the same time?

It is a rather odd occurrence.


well this looks pretty good actually, generally how i imagined swarms

*GASP* EE approves of something 4e. The Brass City must have frozen over :p

EvilElitest
2008-05-22, 11:39 PM
*GASP* EE approves of something 4e. The Brass City must have frozen over :p

Actually, through your fanaticism might not allow you to see it, i'm actually pointed out some good things about 4E. For example, i supported the idea of a new edition when it was first announced. I don't want to destroy 4E, i just don't like. Trying to have a critical option on 4E, so simply saying "OH gods, he is an anti 4E fanatics" only hurts your own points
from
EE

Cuddly
2008-05-22, 11:40 PM
Actually, through your fanaticism might not allow you to see it, i'm actually pointed out some good things about 4E. For example, i supported the idea of a new edition when it was first announced. I don't want to destroy 4E, i just don't like. Trying to have a critical option on 4E, so simply saying "OH gods, he is an anti 4E fanatics" only hurts your own points
from
EE

Wow, that's a lot of ad homs bundled into one paragraph.

EvilElitest
2008-05-22, 11:42 PM
Wow, that's a lot of ad homs bundled into one paragraph.

Part of a super plan,. i don't like being characterized and i don't like my points being considered less valid because of my options
from
EE

ShadowSiege
2008-05-22, 11:43 PM
Wow, that's a lot of ad homs bundled into one paragraph.

I apparently didn't make it clear that I was saying it in a tongue-in-cheek fashion.

EvilElitest
2008-05-22, 11:44 PM
I apparently didn't make it clear that I was saying it in a tongue-in-cheek fashion.

Fair enough

On topic, i've always liked the ideas of swarms in 3E, and i think 4E is handling what made swarms good well

from
EE

Rockphed
2008-05-22, 11:55 PM
For those of us with who aren't rules lawyer Ninjas, what are the differences between 3rd edition swarms and 4th edition swarms?

EvilElitest
2008-05-22, 11:58 PM
For those of us with who aren't rules lawyer Ninjas, what are the differences between 3rd edition swarms and 4th edition swarms?

Apart from mechanical details, not much i think, unless i missed something, i think the idea of swarms is still the same
from
EE

tyckspoon
2008-05-23, 12:04 AM
It seems like they're a little bit more fragile- there is no absolute immunity to physical damage, so you're not completely boned without area damage. They're also smaller. A default 3.5 swarm took up a ten-foot space (four squares), while these example swarms are both Medium, which presumably still means they only take one square and are probably composed of fewer creatures.

They seem to have gotten more dangerous, since they retain the ability to make a free attack (any known definition or function of 'aura' yet? I'm assuming it means every adjacent square) in addition to having a normal attack. The example Needlefang swarm looks particularly mean, with a good chunk of HP, free attack, and ability to knock down victims.

Temp.
2008-05-23, 12:08 AM
I'm surprised that weapons are allowed to do half damage to all swarms. That's much more than I'd expect.

In the case of rats, bats, lizards or other larger animals, I have no disagreement. In the case of insects I'm not sure I like it at all. It doesn't make sense to me that swords and arrows would significantly damage a cloud of wasps. It also seems like it would reduce the desparation parties typically experience when they're reduced to swinging torches and throwing oil flasks at the things.

So if I ever DM 4th edition and feel inclined to throw in an insect swarm, I'll probably hork 3rd edition's full negation of weapon damage.

Beside that, I don't see anything objectionable.

Jarlax
2008-05-23, 12:11 AM
am i missing something or are these stat blocks missing the "basic melee attack" described in swarm attack. as the only attacks i see are powers.

pull down as a minor action is a nasty power, that means on its turn the swarm makes a basic attack on anyone in its radius, performs pull down as a minor action, then uses its swarm of teeth, with a move action remaining to reposition itself.

as for stirges, they have a solid hide skill for lurking in a room if they beat the PCs perception scores.

i am also getting some excellent inspiration from the mummy and the mummy returns on how to deploy large numbers of swarms in a dramatic encounter, rather than a combat encounter.

Cuddly
2008-05-23, 12:13 AM
I'm surprised that weapons are allowed to do half damage to all swarms. That's much more than I'd expect.

In the case of rats, bats, lizards or other larger animals, I have no disagreement. In the case of insects I'm not sure I like it at all. It doesn't make sense to me that swords and arrows would dignificantly damage a cloud of wasps. It also seems like it would reduce the desparation parties typically experience when they're reduced to swinging torches and throwing oil flasks at the things.

So if I ever DM 4th edition and feel inclined to throw in an insect swarm, I'll probably hork 3rd edition's full negation of weapon damage.

Beside that, I don't see anything objectionable.

The 3E swarm rules fell into the trap of simply trying to model reality as we know it, from movies, comics, or the real world. That might be a great move if you want to build a simulator, but it isn't so hot for a game.

If you need it spelled out for you:
non-casters can do stuff, too

EvilElitest
2008-05-23, 12:16 AM
I'm surprised that weapons are allowed to do half damage to all swarms. That's much more than I'd expect.

In the case of rats, bats, lizards or other larger animals, I have no disagreement. In the case of insects I'm not sure I like it at all. It doesn't make sense to me that swords and arrows would dignificantly damage a cloud of wasps. It also seems like it would reduce the desparation parties typically experience when they're reduced to swinging torches and throwing oil flasks at the things.

So if I ever DM 4th edition and feel inclined to throw in an insect swarm, I'll probably hork 3rd edition's full negation of weapon damage.

Beside that, I don't see anything objectionable.
I think the deal with insect swarms is that they have more hit points, but your sword brings down a lot


The 3E swarm rules fell into the trap of simply trying to model reality as we know it, from movies, comics, or the real world. That might be a great move if you want to build a simulator, but it isn't so hot for a game.

If you need it spelled out for you:
non-casters can do stuff, too

Making a realistic game, if done well, doesn't have to limit the non casters. WotC just didn't handle 3E well
from
EE

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-05-23, 12:28 AM
The 3E swarm rules fell into the trap of simply trying to model reality as we know it, from movies, comics, or the real world. That might be a great move if you want to build a simulator, but it isn't so hot for a game.Why I won't be buyng 4.0.

Temp.
2008-05-23, 12:29 AM
If you need it spelled out for you:
non-casters can do stuff, tooOh, now I get it.Thank you for using small words that I can understand.

And I recognize that this is a problem. That doesn't mean that I don't find the concept of fighting off a cloud of insects with a stick to be objectionable. If I need to tweak the rules to make the game both work and make sense, I will. That's what DMs do. That doesn't mean I need to hold the non-casters' hands and tell them that the world keels over for them just for the sake of "giving them something to do." If they want to get rid of a swarm, I'll let them do so if the way they're trying to do it makes sense.

Reel On, Love
2008-05-23, 12:31 AM
Why I won't be buyng 4.0.

Because... simulating reality as much as possible isn't it's primary priority?

(How do you manage to play 3E, then?)

Cuddly
2008-05-23, 12:32 AM
Yeah, I'm sure that Temp.--who was clearly stating his own opinion (that it breaks INTUITIVE VERISIMILITUDE in some limited occasions, since it seems like it kind of does--if you jab a cloud of mosquitoes with a rapier, how much damage would you realistically expect to do?), and doing so in a way that doesn't imply anything is really wrong with the actual system, or that his opinion is THE ONE TRUTH ZOMGZ--deserves to be yelled at and then spoken down to patronizingly without his actual opinion being addressed beyond a flat "YOUR WRONG".

Well done. (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SarcasticClapping)

No, the author was laying out that sometimes INTUITIVE VERISIMILITUDE has to be broken in order for the game to run as a game and not as a simulator. This sort of attitude has led to the quadratic caster and linear warrior.

Cuddly
2008-05-23, 12:35 AM
Oh, now I get it.Thank you for using small words that I can understand.

And I recognize that this is a problem. That doesn't mean that I don't find the concept of fighting off a cloud of insects with a stick to be objectionable. If I need to tweak the rules to make the game both work and make sense, I will. That's what DMs do. That doesn't mean I need to hold the non-casters' hands and tell them that the world keels over for them just for the sake of "giving them something to do." If they want to get rid of a swarm, I'll let them do so if the way they're trying makes sense.

I stopped playing melee classes (unless they had a lot of spellcasting) because of DMs like you. And 3e really encouraged that sort of DMing.

Falrin
2008-05-23, 12:36 AM
I'm rather enthousiastic about the panic-infusing attacks:

Being kept on the ground or losing hp/rouns can be quit scary, that's how I like my swarms.

We'll see how this plays out in game, the old swarms seemed to lack effectiveness prety quickly.

or am I the only one left commenting the swarm?

The_Snark
2008-05-23, 12:48 AM
The 3E swarm rules fell into the trap of simply trying to model reality as we know it, from movies, comics, or the real world. That might be a great move if you want to build a simulator, but it isn't so hot for a game.

I both agree and disagree here. On the one hand, the 3e swarm rules can be annoying; it limits people who don't have area effects, like fighters, to handing potions to the useful people. If they're fortunate, they have a torch or lantern so that they can at least take actions, although they're not really going to impact much. If they're really lucky, their weapon has the flaming property, or something, so they can deal 1d6 damage per round. So in that sense, I totally agree with the 4e stance- reduce some of those immunities, and in return, make killing them much more urgent by having them deal more damage for their level.

But on the other hand, I simply hate the visual of a fighter charging at a swarm of wasps and killing it with his sword. And I'm sure it will be possible with a high-enough level fighter.

Reel On, Love
2008-05-23, 12:51 AM
But on the other hand, I simply hate the visual of a fighter charging at a swarm of wasps and killing it with his sword. And I'm sure it will be possible with a high-enough level fighter.

He swings it so hard he rush of air in his sword's passage kills them.

Edea
2008-05-23, 01:03 AM
Or he might knock the swarm out with the odor of his sweaty socks.

illathid
2008-05-23, 01:10 AM
I think a bit of this discussion might be premature. We have yet to see any insect swarms and so we can't say we know exactly how they work. In fact given 4e exception based design, insect swarms could very well work differently than normal ones.

Draz74
2008-05-23, 01:20 AM
am i missing something or are these stat blocks missing the "basic melee attack" described in swarm attack. as the only attacks i see are powers.
"Basic melee attack" means any power that has the sword-with-a-circle-around-it icon.

Attacks really are no different from at-will powers in most cases. And even if they are different, WotC is assuming "monsters will never use their mundane attacks if they could use a beneficial at-will ability instead," so many monsters have a "basic attack" with a special effect (like double damage vs. prone).


pull down as a minor action is a nasty power, that means on its turn the swarm makes a basic attack on anyone in its radius, performs pull down as a minor action, then uses its swarm of teeth, with a move action remaining to reposition itself.
Nasty yes indeed. Or actually, here's what it does on its turn:


Reposition or Pulldown
Pulldown
Swarm of Teeth or Pulldown


Then, on everybody else's turn, it hits them with Swarm of Teeth if they start out within (or next to) it.

FoE
2008-05-23, 01:27 AM
I think a bit of this discussion might be premature. We have yet to see any insect swarms and so we can't say we know exactly how they work. In fact given 4e exception based design, insect swarms could very well work differently than normal ones.

Thank you for making that point. In fairness, both of the examples given in this excerpt are for larger creatures; the drakes are described as "cat-sized." However, the examples given for swarms of insects may apply an exception to the "swarms take half-damage from melee attacks" rule.

On the other hand, 4E swarms seem to have high hit points — both the examples and the description of swarms indicates this — so the half-damage from melee attacks might not be that bad. And this "attack aura" ability ... if I'm reading it correctly, it looks like a 4E swarm can attack multiple characters so long as they are in an adjacent space, because they get a free action. So they definitely seem more lethal.

In the case of the needlefang drakes, the "pull down" ability seems to be a strategy of attack rather than a substitute for "distraction," since they effectively double their damage when an opponent is prone. Neat. :smallsmile:

Animefunkmaster
2008-05-23, 01:35 AM
I think a bit of this discussion might be premature. We have yet to see any insect swarms and so we can't say we know exactly how they work. In fact given 4e exception based design, insect swarms could very well work differently than normal ones.

Agreed. So far, what this shows me is that even though they say swarms are different they really aren't (Knocking down is pretty similar to distraction). There are some swarms in dnd that can be dealt damage with melee weapons. I imagine there will be some swarms where this won't be the case in 4e as well. Killing a swarm with a well placed arrow really seems weird to me.

Khanderas
2008-05-23, 02:03 AM
Considering how in the flavor text, the author mentions how hounded they have been about people demanding they show how swarms work... they show so little.
I mean "swarms are big groups of small creatures, that you cant push or trip. oh and they take half damage from weapons (both melee and ranged)"

First of all that is really short and OH so obvious. Especially when they write about how anticipated this information is, they can't get away with such a bare description and two sample swarms.
Second of all, no difference between a "swarm" of 10 bats or a swarm of 10 million ants (one of those can be magic missiled down, but if you are trying to kill the soldier ant army with single target attacks you will be leaving nothing but bones).
Second and a half the point of a swarm should be that the swarm has too many members to reliably kill them by normal attacks. Half damage ? Well that just means you hit two more times. Whatever. That is not a swarm. That is a bunch of minions, only nonintelligent. The sewers are covered in rats, driven crazy by bloodlust. The fighter powerattacks and they all die.
Third they talk about the horror of swarms. Sure, I would panic quite a bit if I was in a room covered in bees, but where is the crunch, or even the hint of the fear factor crunch ?

This info I judge to be deficient and lacking. Thanks for bringing it here though, its the WoTC who should have known better.

Sebastian
2008-05-23, 02:25 AM
Fair enough

On topic, i've always liked the ideas of swarms in 3E, and i think 4E is handling what made swarms good well

from
EE

I don't. Even for 4e standard there is just too much of... let's call it cognitive dissonance necessary to make it work.

For example, you can sneak attack swarms, how that works exactly?
And from what we know swarms can be tripped too (i.e. sent prone) tha would be something I'd like to see.

or how the marked ability works with a swarm, expecially a mindless one (even if, to be fair, I've still to understand how the mark ability works at all, and I don't mean as a mechanic)

And this is just from the top of my head, I'm sure if I'd look I'd find some other powers and ability that if applied to swarms would make me go WTF

But this apply to most of 4e rules so it is not really a problem.

FoE
2008-05-23, 02:39 AM
OK, I'm a little fuzzy on this area, but doesn't "immune to forced movement" preclude tripping? Being new to the game, I may be wrong on this point, I admit.

Khanderas
2008-05-23, 02:55 AM
OK, I'm a little fuzzy on this area, but doesn't "immune to forced movement" preclude tripping? Being new to the game, I may be wrong on this point, I admit.
I would count swarms immune to that effect yes.
But then swarms would be vulnerable to be knocked around whirlwind like effects and "sonic booms" that would be forced movment that makes sense.

Oslecamo
2008-05-23, 02:57 AM
They look nice. Swarms were indeed somewhat hard to kill in 3e.

They're also the first monsters I see wich may actually give the party a run for their money. High speed, resistant to everybody but the wizard, can trip the weaker guys and chew them over before anyone notices what's hapening.

However, what I think is more funny is this:

Swarm:Noom Noom Noom Noom
Paladin: I challenge thee to a duel!
Swarm: Accck, we must obey to the challenge!
Paladin:Wow, never noticed that I could challenge thousands of enemies at once...

Badgerish
2008-05-23, 03:02 AM
from the (limited) quickstart rules, "forced movement" is 'push', 'pull' and 'slide', but i can see how 'trip' could be part of that.

good point on insect swarms may take less or even no damage from normal attacks
good point on sneak-attacking a swarm <scratches head> ray of frost will slow reduce the speed of the entire swarm as well

if there are 'burst' or 'close' attacks with weapons... these will get the bonus damage from area attacks.

there was one big thing i was hoping for, with swarms, but that hasn't happened. As you damage the swarm, it's size and attack-power remain constant. I understand that it would mean extra condition-tracking and different rules for swarms (but that's part of the point of exception-based design).

looking at the statblock again, it shouldn't be hard to houserule this in, at least in spirit.

depleted:
when a swarm hits 'bloodied' (which is marked on the sheet and a common mechanic) reduce the damage/attacks and possibly the size of the swarm.


However, what I think is more funny is this:

Swarm:Noom Noom Noom Noom
Paladin: I challenge thee to a duel!
Swarm: Accck, we must obey to the challenge!
Paladin:Wow, never noticed that I could challenge thousands of enemies at once...
it's a funny image, but it's not fully "you must accept the challenge" it's "accept the challenge or burn with holy fire... your choice"

edit: sending a swarm 'prone', just thought about this.

trip/knockdown could represent disrupting the swarm so much it's got to take an action to recover. same mechanical effects, i think (easier for melee to hit, as they are distracted. hard for ranged to hit, as they are spread out. must spend a (move?) action to get back into normal bitin' mode)

so, how do you generally knock people prone? big force blasts, makes sense. brute-force melee attacks, makes sense. skillfully tripping with a whip/spiked-chain/hooked-polearm/monk, admittedly doesn't make sense

KIDS
2008-05-23, 03:47 AM
It's nice enough; though I remember not having ever used them in 3E because they would wipe out the party, here looks somewhat the opposite... maybe they should have put it quarter instead of half damage?

Khanderas
2008-05-23, 04:06 AM
It's nice enough; though I remember not having ever used them in 3E because they would wipe out the party, here looks somewhat the opposite... maybe they should have put it quarter instead of half damage?
I can live with quarter, its better then half anyway.
Better yet standard equipment should include oil for some firebombs or simply make trample attacks. Squicky yeah, but if you are killing a roach swarm, just running though them should be safer, faster and more damaging then trying to cleave them with a broadsword (just dont trip).

bosssmiley
2008-05-23, 04:13 AM
However, what I think is more funny is this:

Swarm:Nom Nom Nom Nom
Paladin: I challenge thee to a duel!
Swarm: Accck, we must obey to the challenge!
Paladin:Wow, never noticed that I could challenge thousands of enemies at once...

Oh dear, potential for Bag o' Rats redux perhaps? :smallamused:

Nice to see that WOTC have tumbled to the realisation that swarms are basically a highly mobile, angrily buzzing form of ooze at last. Immune to forced move is a nice touch.

*heh* @ Stirge swarms.

kamikasei
2008-05-23, 04:13 AM
It's nice enough; though I remember not having ever used them in 3E because they would wipe out the party, here looks somewhat the opposite... maybe they should have put it quarter instead of half damage?

Remember, it's not one of these swarms vs. the entire party, it's one per player or mixed in with another encounter. The players can't gang up to beat on one of these swarms and add up their half-damage to great effect; they're facing other enemies too. Imagine something close to a 3.5e swarm encounter: four players vs four medium swarms adding up to one large swarm, except each can damage everything adjacent to it, which is like a 3.5e swarm having four attacks a round...

The_Snark
2008-05-23, 04:59 AM
*heh* @ Stirge swarms.

Frankly, I always wondered why there wasn't a swarm version in the first place. They're the right size, after all. Maybe somewhere, in some obscure monster book, there is.

(The other creature I always felt would lend itself well to a swarm format would be neogi spawn, but that's neither here nor there.)

Oslecamo
2008-05-23, 05:05 AM
Remember, it's not one of these swarms vs. the entire party, it's one per player or mixed in with another encounter. The players can't gang up to beat on one of these swarms and add up their half-damage to great effect; they're facing other enemies too. Imagine something close to a 3.5e swarm encounter: four players vs four medium swarms adding up to one large swarm, except each can damage everything adjacent to it, which is like a 3.5e swarm having four attacks a round...

Say hello to the 3.5 large swarm, wich can indeed go over 4 players at the same time and damage them all.

And let's not talk about the cranium pack swarm, wich doesn't only deal damage and distraction to those in it's area, it can also either cast as a sorceror or as a psion.

Tsotha-lanti
2008-05-23, 05:09 AM
Finally, stirges in a swarm. Not that I didn't homebrew that for 3.5.

Single stirges never made any sense. And if PCs had Combat Reflexes, they were pretty much immune to stirges.

kamikasei
2008-05-23, 05:15 AM
Say hello to the 3.5 large swarm, wich can indeed go over 4 players at the same time and damage them all.

Er, yes. An individual 4e medium swarm can damage all adjacent to it. But to emulate a 3.5e swarm, you take four of them so that it's a full CR-appropriate encounter for the four-person party, and are left with a collective swarm the size of the 3.5e one, each of which can damage everyone adjacent, and which between them can do this four times a round. That was my point.

kamikasei
2008-05-23, 05:17 AM
Considering how in the flavor text, the author mentions how hounded they have been about people demanding they show how swarms work... they show so little.

You know... I think he might have been just a little tongue-in-cheek there.

Oslecamo
2008-05-23, 05:23 AM
Er, yes. An individual 4e medium swarm can damage all adjacent to it. But to emulate a 3.5e swarm, you take four of them so that it's a full CR-appropriate encounter for the four-person party, and are left with a collective swarm the size of the 3.5e one, each of which can damage everyone adjacent, and which between them can do this four times a round. That was my point.

Only if the party is stupid enough to stay near them, or if they're triped, but even then a double move can get them out of reach before the swarm's turn starts again.

Like they said, 4e swarms feel more like a cinematic thing. The party is rewarded by attacking the swarm while retreating like screaming girls to avoid the free attacks.

Reel On, Love
2008-05-23, 05:25 AM
The party is rewarded by attacking the swarm while retreating like screaming girls to avoid the free attacks.

When I run a swarm in 4E, screaming like a little girl will get you a +2 defense bonus.

OzymandiasVolt
2008-05-23, 05:40 AM
Swarms that knock you down and tear you apart? Yes please.

Oslecamo
2008-05-23, 05:45 AM
When I run a swarm in 4E, screaming like a little girl will get you a +2 defense bonus.

Roleplaying giving bonus on D&D? Blasphemy!:smalltongue:

Duke of URL
2008-05-23, 06:31 AM
Two notes addressing random comments:

1) Why are all swarms the same size? They don't have to be, they are providing the base swarm creature. You can easily simulate larger (or even smaller) swarms by using the monster advancement rules they previewed a while back; the system is supposedly designed to allow you to adjust a monster's level by +/- 5 that way.

2) A reminder to DMs to not make swarms too hard by playing them too intelligently. They are animal intelligence (at least in the examples), and swarms should... well... swarm. Trying to optimize their tactics simulates more intelligence than they have; you can do that, of course, but you may want to up the swarm's level accordingly.

SamTheCleric
2008-05-23, 07:01 AM
The 3E swarm rules fell into the trap of simply trying to model reality as we know it, from movies, comics, or the real world. That might be a great move if you want to build a simulator, but it isn't so hot for a game.

That sentence gives me warm fuzzies.

Also... these guys would like to borrow a cup of sugar.

http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/art_preview/20080523_114889_0.jpg

Starsinger
2008-05-23, 07:15 AM
That sentence gives me warm fuzzies.

Also... these guys would like to borrow a cup of sugar.


The very large one seems to have stolen Mr. Nexx's face...

Rutee
2008-05-23, 07:18 AM
A thought. Tiny creatures can apparently serve as the basis for a swarm.

I'm making a pack of angry housecats.

SamTheCleric
2008-05-23, 07:22 AM
LoLcat Swarm!

Rutee
2008-05-23, 07:30 AM
Lead by Holy Kitty.

Oslecamo
2008-05-23, 07:30 AM
Blasphemy! Everybody knows that housecats are too proud to fight in teams!

Tey would rather fight each other first, and the winner will have the honor on feasting upon the party's blood.

BTW, housecats are confirmed as a solo monster lv1, with rules to improve it all the way up to lv 30.

Starsinger
2008-05-23, 07:38 AM
Lead by Holy Kitty.

Is that like, a Prophet of Cieling Cat?

puppyavenger
2008-05-23, 07:47 AM
two thing
1. I'm a bit anoyed that the basic swarm seems to be how many allycats can fit in a 5-foot sqaure
2. I for one agree hat swords should'nt do that much damage to a swarm of millions of locuss.

EvilElitest
2008-05-23, 09:01 AM
Because... simulating reality as much as possible isn't it's primary priority?

(How do you manage to play 3E, then?)

No because lack of verisimilitude and inconsistency makes a game play like Fable, and act like 300.



But on the other hand, I simply hate the visual of a fighter charging at a swarm of wasps and killing it with his sword. And I'm sure it will be possible with a high-enough level fighter.
I can see your point, but i can also imagine a fighter's sword destroying whole bunches of the swarm due to size. and against other swarms (Vipers, small monsters ect) it makes sense. Maybe insects should get melee DR



He swings it so hard he rush of air in his sword's passage kills them.
ok that is just stupid


Considering how in the flavor text, the author mentions how hounded they have been about people demanding they show how swarms work... they show so little.
I mean "swarms are big groups of small creatures, that you cant push or trip. oh and they take half damage from weapons (both melee and ranged)"

First of all that is really short and OH so obvious. Especially when they write about how anticipated this information is, they can't get away with such a bare description and two sample swarms.
Second of all, no difference between a "swarm" of 10 bats or a swarm of 10 million ants (one of those can be magic missiled down, but if you are trying to kill the soldier ant army with single target attacks you will be leaving nothing but bones).
Second and a half the point of a swarm should be that the swarm has too many members to reliably kill them by normal attacks. Half damage ? Well that just means you hit two more times. Whatever. That is not a swarm. That is a bunch of minions, only nonintelligent. The sewers are covered in rats, driven crazy by bloodlust. The fighter powerattacks and they all die.
Third they talk about the horror of swarms. Sure, I would panic quite a bit if I was in a room covered in bees, but where is the crunch, or even the hint of the fear factor crunch ?

This info I judge to be deficient and lacking. Thanks for bringing it here though, its the WoTC who should have known better.
eh? Could you explain that please




I don't. Even for 4e standard there is just too much of... let's call it cognitive dissonance necessary to make it work.
i've always liked the idea of a mass of small creatures too weak on their own acting as a swarm.



For example, you can sneak attack swarms, how that works exactly?
And from what we know swarms can be tripped too (i.e. sent prone) tha would be something I'd like to see.

Ok, i'll give you that, they should be immune to those things, because otherwise it is silly



or how the marked ability works with a swarm, expecially a mindless one (even if, to be fair, I've still to understand how the mark ability works at all, and I don't mean as a mechanic)

And this is just from the top of my head, I'm sure if I'd look I'd find some other powers and ability that if applied to swarms would make me go WTF
I see your point, but i don't think the idea of swarms themselves is bad,so much as WotC's way of doing it (possible)



But this apply to most of 4e rules so it is not really a problem.
well yeah, its 4E, thats a given



That might be a great move if you want to build a simulator, but it isn't so hot for a game.
showing as per usual, that WotC has no idea how to make a game



A thought. Tiny creatures can apparently serve as the basis for a swarm.

I'm making a pack of angry housecats.
no commoner will be safe again

Little_Rudo
2008-05-23, 09:17 AM
I imagine an attack against an insect swarm disperses some of the swarm. For example, if a fighter swings a sword at a swarm of hornets, some of the hornets will dispurse. (Though they'll still deal the same damage, for simplicity's sake.) When the swarm hits 0 HP, it's dispersed enough to no longer be a threat.

SamTheCleric
2008-05-23, 09:27 AM
showing as per usual, that WotC has no idea how to make a game

No. This shows that WotC and you have different ideas of what a game should be.

Starsinger
2008-05-23, 09:45 AM
showing as per usual, that WotC has no idea how to make a game

And how, pray tell, should a game be made?

Tough_Tonka
2008-05-23, 09:51 AM
Say hello to the 3.5 large swarm, wich can indeed go over 4 players at the same time and damage them all.


What at the odds all 4 players are going to be in a 4x4 square?

Since each 4e swarm can attack everything adjacent to it, each of these swarms has a 9 square danger zone. Run into 4 of these buggers and the PCs have a 36 square danger zone; that sounds a lot harder to avoid to me.

Tough_Tonka
2008-05-23, 10:06 AM
And how, pray tell, should a game be made?

Have you not been paying attention to the 4e nay-sayers? Its obvious that in real RPG:

1. Every Class class needs to have rules completely different from each other. Otherwise the players will get lazy and stupid.

2. Whether a low level character lives our dies should be dependent on a single d8 roll. Otherwise the characters are basically starting out as gods.

3. The fighter needs to sit in the corner and wait to pick off the few remaining survivors of the wizards save or die spells. If the fighter can figure out something logical and effective let him; if he wanted to break the laws of physics he should of played a caster.

4. Your character's shopping choices are more relevant than his or her class features. Teach's players valuable life lessons.

5. 10 points of damage translates to getting your spleen ripped out. Its not like hps an abstraction.

6. DMs need to roll diplomacy checks for conversations between NPCs talking in another continent than PCs. Because they don't matter if they aren't using PC rules (didn't you pay attention to Brown vs. Board of Education).

I'm sure will find a few more things a real RPG needs after the next 4e preview , but until then heres a reminder.:smallsmile:

LeZebra
2008-05-23, 10:30 AM
I think this is my first post. I am liking 4e and am trying to stay positive. I ignore most of what anyone says if it includes the word verisimilitude. I can’t see how anyone expects dnd to be in any way realistic. The designers of 4e seem to be streamlining the rules at the expense of even more realism so we can all eat a few more chips, make a few more laughs and not get so stressed out over every encounter (at least, I got stressed a lot when I ran games...maybe I’m not as fast at mathematics or good at controlling five peoples’ opinions all at once...so this new game is looking like more fun).

Anyway. On swarms...ahem, the topic.

Let’s not forget the two major changes they’ve applied to swarms in 4e:
1. They aren’t using that contiguous square krap to simulate how swarms can maneuver around the battlefield viper-like and reach out to engulf more than one PC. They’ve changed them to having an aura and being able to attack all those within that aura. I really like this, since it solves the same sort of abstraction that swarms aren’t just crowding around in that 5’x5’ square...they’re buzzing and crawling all around it and should you get close enough to the scrum, the swarm can extend and bite atcha.

2. They don’t have to enter your square! Gah. I hated how they had to enter the square of the opponent. Not because it wasn’t realistic, quite the contrary, that’s the only reason I enjoyed it. But the whole provoking, swarms can’t provoke, nauseating etc was just annoying. It seems their response to this is now they, and the PCs can move through each other, considering difficult terrain and provoking (both ways), but the automatic damage thing is gone. There’s still a to hit, which I think is nice (and balanced).

3. Someone mentioned, finally, how these are singular creatures. You’re not going to fight just one of them. You’re going to fight them plus a pack of goblins who know not to walk on those squares because they’re full of centipedes, and then snipe at you when you do. Or maybe you’ll fight 4 of these and their auras would reach out and bite all over. I can definitely see how multiple swarms could just be recognized as a partially broken up gigantic swarm. No intelligent fighting necessary; you enter a hive of bees’ territory, they are all programmed to attack.

4. Though I will say the Nauseation is now being translated into different types of attacks (like the knock prone of the Needlefang Drakes), but I do hope to see some other factors that I consider classically swarm-like. Primarily confusion. I feel like if you are within their aura then you should be susceptible to just swinging wildly, or getting crushed locusts in your eyes, or something. This could even give them an added defense against their vulnerable Close ranged attacks (which, since the Dragonborn is introduced in 4e won’t be that unusual in the PC’s arsenal).

Okay, those are my thoughts.

RukiTanuki
2008-05-23, 04:33 PM
Thanks, LeZebra and Tough_Tonka. My snarky side and apologetic side (wait, why am I defending liking something?) both had a good laugh. :)

Given what Worlds and Monsters said about Pixies, I can't wait for the wailing gnashing of teeth that will be the 4th Edition Pixie Swarm...

Oslecamo
2008-05-23, 05:42 PM
What at the odds all 4 players are going to be in a 4x4 square?

Since each 4e swarm can attack everything adjacent to it, each of these swarms has a 9 square danger zone. Run into 4 of these buggers and the PCs have a 36 square danger zone; that sounds a lot harder to avoid to me.

Say hello to the 3.5 swarm template, wich says that a swarm can change it's shape at will as long as it still fills the same number of squares. So it can stretch like a snake to better catch the party. And if they get separate too much, it just becomes easier for the swarm to take them one by one.

Seriously, I'm somewhat sick of people complaining of 3.5 problems that wouldn't exist if they bothered to just read the 3.5 rules.

Here are the most common I see on the boards:


Clerics don't need to be healbots anymore! Oh, wait, they also didn't need in 3.X...


Minions are so cool and original! Because the WOTC ninjas would come to your house and kill you if you tried to throw several weak monsters at the players in 3.5, sure.


Yeah, 4e will totally rock, once I houserule half of it to my liking and ignore the other half!
This is stupidly common. Makes me wonder if anyone noticed you could also houserule and ignore stuff in 3.X.

Artanis
2008-05-23, 05:44 PM
Yeah, 4e will totally rock, once I houserule half of it to my liking and ignore the other half!
This is stupidly common. Makes me wonder if anyone noticed you could also houserule and ignore stuff in 3.X.
With this, I think it's the other way around in most 4e discussions. Some of the naysayers completely ignore the possibility of houseruling in 4e, instead choosing to complain about some nitpicky detail that can be houseruled away in five seconds.

Rutee
2008-05-23, 05:46 PM
See, that's Holy Kitty...

*Sidesteps the rest of the argument*

Starbuck_II
2008-05-23, 05:50 PM
Minions are so cool and original! Because the WOTC ninjas would come to your house and kill you if you tried to throw several weak monsters at the players in 3.5, sure.


Difference: Minions can actually hit you. Several weak monsters usually can't.

Animefunkmaster
2008-05-23, 05:55 PM
With this, I think it's the other way around in most 4e discussions. Some of the naysayers completely ignore the possibility of houseruling in 4e, instead choosing to complain about some nitpicky detail that can be houseruled away in five seconds.

I don't feel like those of us who dislike 4e forget that we can houserule things. I think we are disappointed because we need to.


Difference: Minions can actually hit you. Several weak monsters usually can't.

I disagree. There is flanking, charging, high ground bonuses (thats a +5 right there), and *gasp* aid another. Abuses of aid another is one of the key (mis)uses in Lord of Procrastinations 'Nanobots Conquer D&D'. Groups of weak monsters in 3.x are still very useful, if you use them correctly.

Reel On, Love
2008-05-23, 06:15 PM
Because weak monsters will always be able to charge into a flanking high-ground position, amirite?

And with Aid Another, OK, the whole group of weak monsters hits you once for very minor damage.

Rutee
2008-05-23, 06:18 PM
3rd ed requires heavy houseruling to work Minions, guy. Sad but true. Either they need houseruling to get absurd BAB with low HD, or they need to be treated completely different.

Azerian Kelimon
2008-05-23, 06:21 PM
3.5 defenders, you're not seeing the problem. Sure, 3.5 weak monsters work as minions...for keeping meleers at bay. A caster one shots them with a spell. That won't happen in 4th, apparently.

Animefunkmaster
2008-05-23, 06:29 PM
3.5 defenders, you're not seeing the problem. Sure, 3.5 weak monsters work as minions...for keeping meleers at bay. A caster one shots them with a spell. That won't happen in 4th, apparently.

What is stopping it?


Because weak monsters will always be able to charge into a flanking high-ground position, amirite?

And with Aid Another, OK, the whole group of weak monsters hits you once for very minor damage.

No your are indeed correct, they will not be able to do it all the time, but if have a lot of low level monsters they should at least be able to flank and set it up so an alley can charge.

And as for the damage, it is the same with how they developed minions in 4e

Their attack bonus should be similar to monsters of their level, though their damage is a fraction of other monsters.

The big difference in 3.x and 4e for minions is the 1 hit ko. The smaller difference is the attack bonus, which if you are scaling minions, dependent on party strength, you should scale what you consider a weak monster for the 3.x party (no house rules required). A little more work, for sure, that is what was streamlined.

Reel On, Love
2008-05-23, 06:37 PM
What is stopping it?

Monsters having level-appropriate defenses and not taking damage on misses.

The wizard launching a Fireball into a group of minions has roll Intelligence vs. (level-appropriate) Reflex. He kills several, but several more survive--crispily, but they survive. And they run up and smack him around a little.

As opposed to 3.5, where he launches one Fireball and takes out all the minions, period.


Edit: no, 4E minions can hit.

Look, setting up flanks is doable. Charging (once) is doable. But constantly settling up flanks and room for charges? You have to charge into the nearest available square. So one minion has to go around and not get flanking or charging so another can charge, and you're going to do this a couple times at most, and repositioning will screw the whole set-up. It's really Not That easy.

Rutee
2008-05-23, 06:42 PM
The big difference in 3.x and 4e for minions is the 1 hit ko. The smaller difference is the attack bonus, which if you are scaling minions, dependent on party strength, you should scale what you consider a weak monster for the 3.x party (no house rules required). A little more work, for sure, that is what was streamlined.
What difference? Minions were still OHKOs in 3.X

Azerian Kelimon
2008-05-23, 06:45 PM
Rutee has it right, but the problem is that only the wizard has the OHKO, because he got Hiss of Sleep while the n00bs that his party members are chose daggers and swords over spells.

Starsinger
2008-05-23, 06:47 PM
See, that's Holy Kitty...

*Sidesteps the rest of the argument*

That still leaves Holy Kitty's relationship to Cieling Cat unanswered...

Animefunkmaster
2008-05-23, 06:50 PM
Look, setting up flanks is doable. Charging (once) is doable. But constantly settling up flanks and room for charges? You have to charge into the nearest available square. So one minion has to go around and not get flanking or charging so another can charge, and you're going to do this a couple times at most, and repositioning will screw the whole set-up. It's really Not That easy.

Minions are supposed to last more than a few rounds? Is that what your saying? I am not expecting them to be more than a nuisance, which is what I gathered from the 4e excerpt is what a minion is supposed to be.

I'll give you the level appropriate defense. That indeed is working to have the minion survive a few more hits (which seems counter intuitive to there 1hp, but thats just how the game works I suppose), good call. I also feel that magic got brought down a lot, so it wouldn't surprise me that Area damaging spells from a wizard would have something in there that wouldn't kill all minions.

Reel On, Love
2008-05-23, 07:03 PM
Minions are supposed to last more than a few rounds? Is that what your saying? I am not expecting them to be more than a nuisance, which is what I gathered from the 4e excerpt is what a minion is supposed to be.
They're supposed to last more than one round, certainly. Four minions are supposed to be equal to one normal opponent. What's "minion"-level in 3.5--Monsters with a CR of party level - 5? Four of those sure ain't equal to one monster of CR = party level.


I'll give you the level appropriate defense. That indeed is working to have the minion survive a few more hits (which seems counter intuitive to there 1hp, but thats just how the game works I suppose), good call. I also feel that magic got brought down a lot, so it wouldn't surprise me that Area damaging spells from a wizard would have something in there that wouldn't kill all minions.

1 HP is there so that when you do hit, they go down. But you aren't guaranteed to kill one per swing, or all of them with a single AoE power.

EvilElitest
2008-05-26, 08:07 PM
And how, pray tell, should a game be made?
From an intellegent view point, with full understanding on how the mechanics effect your world. what destroyed 3E was the fact that WotC didn't consider how the rules would effect the world, and just didn't organize or think it out.


Have you not been paying attention to the 4e nay-sayers? Its obvious that in real RPG:

So hypocrisy and ignorance? double points

1. Every Class class needs to have rules completely different from each other. Otherwise the players will get lazy and stupid.

2. Whether a low level character lives our dies should be dependent on a single d8 roll. Otherwise the characters are basically starting out as gods.

3. The fighter needs to sit in the corner and wait to pick off the few remaining survivors of the wizards save or die spells. If the fighter can figure out something logical and effective let him; if he wanted to break the laws of physics he should of played a caster.

4. Your character's shopping choices are more relevant than his or her class features. Teach's players valuable life lessons.

5. 10 points of damage translates to getting your spleen ripped out. Its not like hps an abstraction.

6. DMs need to roll diplomacy checks for conversations between NPCs talking in another continent than PCs. Because they don't matter if they aren't using PC rules (didn't you pay attention to Brown vs. Board of Education).

[/QUOTE]

1) Actual class consistency and well thought out class rather than redundant and repeatative uninterestedly generic similar classes? Yeah, i'd go with that. If your going to use a class system, instead of a free for all system like Gurps, then classes should be distinct and unique
2) Actually i've never claimed that, i just the silly anti death rules as they are PC centric and inconsistent. True, i don't expect you to actually attempt to understand any anti 4E points but..
3) i've never made that claim. I don't like how unbalanced fighters are in 3E, and i've complained about it many times in the past. I think they shouldn't use magic and shouldn't be unbalanced. Separate but equal
4) ?
5) having things go down one hit is very silly however
6) no, just that logic needs to guide the world, not absurd dramatics



With this, I think it's the other way around in most 4e discussions. Some of the naysayers completely ignore the possibility of houseruling in 4e, instead choosing to complain about some nitpicky detail that can be houseruled away in five seconds
1) I dislike the system itself, not nit picks
2) when you need to homebrew a stupid rule, just because you can use rule 0 doesn't make the rule any less bad. Under that logic, 3E is a perfect system

As for minions in 3E, just make one generic stat and cut and paste
from
EE