The Gaming Den

Okay, I'm interested in playing a Doppelganger in an upcoming game. The problem lies in wanting to use the Frank and K method of converting monsters. I've tried running the Doppelganger through it, and came up with some odd answers. For one thing, the recommendation of using the Elite Array to determine which stats get mods means that the Doppelganger would only get stat mods to its two lowest stats--Str and Con. And since they're equal, one gets a mod of +2 and the other gets a mod of +4.

So I ask the authorities here. Should a Doppelganger get the +4 to Strength or to Con? I've listed the entry out of the SRD here, for convenience.

Size/Type: Medium Monstrous Humanoid (Shapechanger)
Hit Dice: 4d8+4 (22 hp)
Initiative: +1
Speed: 30 ft. (6 squares)
Armor Class: 15 (+1 Dex, +4 natural), touch 11, flat-footed 14
Base Attack/Grapple: +4/+5
Attack: Slam +5 melee (1d6+1)
Full Attack: Slam +5 melee (1d6+1)
Space/Reach: 5 ft./5 ft.
Special Attacks: Detect thoughts
Special Qualities: Change shape, darkvision 60 ft., immunity to sleep and charm effects
Saves: Fort +4, Ref +5, Will +6
Abilities: Str 12, Dex 13, Con 12, Int 13, Wis 14, Cha 13
Skills: Bluff +10*, Diplomacy +3, Disguise +9* (+11 acting), Intimidate +3, Listen +6, Sense Motive +6, Spot +6
Feats: Dodge, Great Fortitude
Environment: Any
Organization: Solitary, pair, or gang (3-6)
Challenge Rating: 3
Treasure: Double standard
Alignment: Usually neutral
Advancement: By character class
Level Adjustment: +4

I would say Con, they don't seem to be the strong type of monster.

Agreed. They work out cause they're going to strangle you in your sleep after pretending to be your girlfriend, but their morphic biology lends to a more natural toughness.

I prefer Con, because I think of them as hard to kill, not as lethal.

-Crissa

Looks like the rule of threes applies with this one. Con it is, then.

Honestly, a lot of monsters are based more on the "average" results of 4d6 (pick 3), which is 12, 12, 12, 13, 13, 13. It's a little better in overall modifier than the elite array (and ironically is still "low" enough that it can be rerolled if you want).

For races with extremely flat stat lines you might want to use those numbers instead, which would leave them with just a +2 Wisdom Modifier, which is a better fit I think than +2 Strength, +4 Con, -2 Charisma.

In general, a race which doesn't have even a single 15 probably isn't based on the elite array, but it may well be made with the standard elite set.

-Username17

The DMG would have us believe that all non-warrior creatures (i.e. with more than 1 HD) are based on the non-elite array (10 x 3, 11 x 3), or 3d6 for each. What's wrong with that, BTW?

Bigode at [unixtime wrote:1202480540[/unixtime]]The DMG would have us believe that all non-warrior creatures (i.e. with more than 1 HD) are based on the non-elite array (10 x 3, 11 x 3), or 3d6 for each. What's wrong with that, BTW?

It gives out stats which are way too large for most things over 3 hit dice. When you take the stat lines that such creatures get for free and then mess them with actual die rolling or point buy you get stupidly unbalanced stats.

Monsters get stats that roughly keep up with PC stats. When you add them linearly to actual PC stats things go directly to crazy town and do not pass go.

-Username17

Yeah, I always made the example of the centaur - if you don't give any stat bonuses, a centaur can still do everything expected of them.

-Crissa

What do we even expect of centaur?

Cielingcat at [unixtime wrote:1202597945[/unixtime]]What do we even expect of centaur?

That it's a guy mounted on the horse, only sitting way too far forward to be balanced. And the horse has no head. And the guy has no legs.

Balanced by what?

-Crissa

Another horse?

As in, why don't centaurs walk around on their face all the time?

Because it'd be hard to move, and uncomfortable, I imagine.

I imagine what we expect of them is more or less the same as any other party member, except better at running and carrying stuff and worse at climbing ladders. As in "Dude, just cast levitate on me already. Stop being a prick, wizard."

Centaurs would find a way to climb, they are sentient beings.
Horses, being dumb animals (relatively speaking) figure "Nup, too difficult. Might get hurt." and not only give up but actively avoid ever trying a ladder again.

But then, centaurs would have a penalty, given their odd shape certainly not made for climbing!

Horses are also far-sighted, and have two areas of focus. They can't really look at where their hooves are while moving - a centaur wouldn't have that trouble. Sure, hooves are bad for rung ladders, but feet can't close on a branch individually. So it's really just an extension of a guy with boots.

Anyhow, most races just don't need big stat bonuses to be different. Feats work just fine.

-Crissa

sigma999 at [unixtime wrote:1202629539[/unixtime]]Centaurs would find a way to climb, they are sentient beings.
Horses, being dumb animals (relatively speaking) figure "Nup, too difficult. Might get hurt." and not only give up but actively avoid ever trying a ladder again.

But then, centaurs would have a penalty, given their odd shape certainly not made for climbing!

for some reason this makes me think of a joke about elephants in trees... I don't remember a damn other thing...

I actually played a centaur monk once. I made a Reflex save with evasion at one point and my DM was having some trouble describing it. Horse in bullet-time = awkward.

Evasion in general is awkward to describe, because you never actually leave the space you started standing in. You don't even change your position. On top of all this, terrain means essentially nothing, because empty space = standing on stone = waist-deep in water when it comes to evading fireballs. Essentially every known factor for how Evasion might work is glossed over and ignored, barring some kind of odd supernatural ability to blink in and out of reality.

Prak_Anima at [unixtime wrote:1202783687[/unixtime]]for some reason this makes me think of a joke about elephants in trees... I don't remember a damn other thing...

Well apparently a Dire Elephant (MM2 p. 75) has a Climb of +23 and a Climb Speed of 10ft. Which, as was immortalized in rpg.net, explains their tactic of climbing up trees and falling on people!

Just imagine, if you will, the scene deep in the forest as the adventurers walk to their destination:

"Why is it suddenly quiet?"
"Why is there a shadow on the grass?"

From above the trees:

"MOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!"

SPLAT!

Elephants don't go Moo.

Leress at [unixtime wrote:1202937001[/unixtime]]Elephants don't go Moo.

True. But that is the best I can do for their sound effect.

I think it's "HARUMPH" or something. I'm not up to scratch on my onomatopoeias.

Anyway, that's really cool. Drop bears could count as those in an Australian Adventures campaign where even the grass can kill you.

GM: You see a-
Players: WE STAY THE FUCK AWAY FROM IT. AND CAST FIREBALL!

How about a tauric Pixie/Drop Bear?
It's invisible, too.
And hella freaky looking if you could see it.