Goblins IX: For that, you shall DIE!

[VariaVespasa]

Originally Posted by Flickerdart

I was hoping he hadn't, because we'd get another Finger Horror.

To be fair (since fairness is the rallying cry du jour..) there is absolutely nothing about the switchbeast so far that says its *supposed* to be even remotely fair for a solo orc (or group of released slaves). As far as the goblins were concerned that was sort of the whole point...

As to Mr Fingers, it was a critter in a dungeon that was supposed to have a 50% casualty rate, also not exactly "fair" as far as the balance crowd is concerned. So I'm not sure why so many people would object so much to a nasty critter but not to a nasty dungeon. Something has to produce that casualty rate, after all.

But if people are still stuck on fair I remind you with emphasis that fair merely requires that there be a way of dealing with the situation; there is not one single thing anywhere at all in any version of the D+D rules that says that way must be over the critters steaming corpse by main force. And so far there has been a way. So I suggest people worry more about the overall encounters and not the stats of any given critter in an encounter. Sometimes you have to think your way through an encounter, not brute force it, and as we know, Thunt is very much in the thinking camp. Luke beat the rancor by thinking, Kin beat Scorpikin by thinking, Min-max beat the ring duo by thinking (surely a sign of the apocalypse... :P ), and so on.

[Killer Angel]

Originally Posted by VariaVespasa

To be fair (since fairness is the rallying cry du jour..) there is absolutely nothing about the switchbeast so far that says its *supposed* to be even remotely fair for a solo orc (or group of released slaves). As far as the goblins were concerned that was sort of the whole point...

As to Mr Fingers, it was a critter in a dungeon that was supposed to have a 50% casualty rate, also not exactly "fair" as far as the balance crowd is concerned. So I'm not sure why so many people would object so much to a nasty critter but not to a nasty dungeon. Something has to produce that casualty rate, after all.

To be fair () people were mainly complaining 'cause Mr. fingers' initial stats were incoherent.

[VariaVespasa]

They were only incoherent by current ideas of balance and fairness, not in and of themselves. Its a glass cannon. Current ideas dont like glass cannons, and thats the real objection as far as I can tell, but they have their place especially in old-school play and Thunt is more old-school than not. People seem to be too stuck on the idea that if its a critter they've encountered they must be able to kill it. And, usually, not only kill it but kill it using only 1/4 of their daily resources. It should not be so to the point that people take it for granted.

[Killer Angel]

Originally Posted by VariaVespasa

Its a glass cannon. Current ideas dont like glass cannons, and thats the real objection as far as I can tell, but they have their place especially in old-school play and Thunt is more old-school than not.

Your argument has some merit.
Still, monsters in 3.5 have (usually) balanced abilities: with a certain amount of HD you'll have SAs with a certain DC, together with the size come also specific bonuses, and so on.
IMO there's nothing inherently wrong in an unbalanced glass cannon, but it's not the "standard as it should be when properly done" of 3.5 system, and the first version of Mr. Fingers didn't follow the 3.5 rules, although it claimed to do.
But I don't want to raise a dead horse.

Edit: v Douglas explained the issue far better than me.

[douglas]

There were some people objecting to how high the save DCs were and how much of a glass cannon it was, but by far the majority of the issues with Mr. Fingers were about derived stats that did not match what the rules for those stats' relationships with the base stats said they should be, and had no explanation for the discrepancy. Things like an initiative modifier of -1 despite a dexterity score of 12, and will and fort saves several points higher (by different margins) than its number of undead hit dice plus ability score modifiers could account for, all with no indication of why the differences existed or even that they were deliberate.

There were pretty close to a full dozen different mismatches like that throughout the stat page, and that is what people are talking about when they say the stats were "incoherent". It has nothing to do with balance, fairness, or anything even remotely related to the two concepts; it's all about numbers and other portions of a stat block that were not consistent with the rules for how they relate to each other - things where the criticism given if it were posted in the giantitp homebrew forum would be "your math is off" rather than anything about the concept.

[Gez]

Originally Posted by Flickerdart

I was hoping he hadn't, because we'd get another Finger Horror.

You mean, Finger Error.

[Yuki Akuma]

Originally Posted by VariaVespasa

They were only incoherent by current ideas of balance and fairness, not in and of themselves. Its a glass cannon. Current ideas dont like glass cannons, and thats the real objection as far as I can tell, but they have their place especially in old-school play and Thunt is more old-school than not. People seem to be too stuck on the idea that if its a critter they've encountered they must be able to kill it. And, usually, not only kill it but kill it using only 1/4 of their daily resources. It should not be so to the point that people take it for granted.

If something has a CR, that means it should be able to be defeated by a party of four characters with a level equal to that CR while expending 25% of their resources.

This is how the game works. There is no question about this. Sure, you can send a massively over-CR'd critter at a party for a total party kill if you want... but a party with the same level as the monster's CR should be able to beat it. That is a basic assumption of the system, and without it, everything breaks.

Mr. Fingers was horribly mismatched for his CR. His abilities would let him instantly kill half the party and then be one shot in the next turn. That is terrible homebrew.

[Qwertystop]

In other words, yes you could put something in a dungeon thats too hard for the PCs in the dungeon, but in that case the CR should be higher.

[The Glyphstone]

As it's been mentioned, the reason people complained about Fingers wasn't its relative CR or power, it was incoherent because the math didn't add up. Supposedly it was 100% legal for 3.x play, but actually deriving the formulas for things like Fortitude, Hit Points, Initiative, and Saves (both offensive and defensive) showed that Thunt had actually just written down whatever numbers looked good/cool.

[Gift Jeraff]

My main problem with the lesser finger horror is that it completely ruined the mystery/horror of Mr. Fingers. Wouldn't have been as bad if it was uploaded after the Mr. Fingers scene was finished.

I also didn't like the author insert.

[The Glyphstone]

Originally Posted by Gift Jeraff

My main problem with the lesser finger horror is that it completely ruined the mystery/horror of Mr. Fingers. Wouldn't have been as bad if it was uploaded after the Mr. Fingers scene was finished.

I also didn't like the author insert.

Author insert? If you mean Mr. Fingers was based off a recurring nightmare Thunt had, I don't see how that could be any issue at all. It's not like he made himself a character in the comic or anything.

[Gift Jeraff]

It was just a very specific backstory, and since we already knew it was a recurring nightmare of his...I don't know. Just felt kinda cheesy to me.

[Gez]

I wouldn't be surprised if many of the other non-standard monsters he has used (like the "switchbeast") also originated in dreams.

[Radar]

Originally Posted by Gez

I wouldn't be surprised if many of the other non-standard monsters he has used (like the "switchbeast") also originated in dreams.

I wonder, how would Inception look like, if they tried to invade Thunt's mind.

[Seerow]

Originally Posted by Yuki Akuma

If something has a CR, that means it should be able to be defeated by a party of four characters with a level equal to that CR while expending 25% of their resources.

This is how the game works. There is no question about this. Sure, you can send a massively over-CR'd critter at a party for a total party kill if you want... but a party with the same level as the monster's CR should be able to beat it. That is a basic assumption of the system, and without it, everything breaks.

Mr. Fingers was horribly mismatched for his CR. His abilities would let him instantly kill half the party and then be one shot in the next turn. That is terrible homebrew.

Basically this. This is also why in my fix I made the Finger Horror's goo ability an auto fail for 3hd or fewer characters, so it keeps the same "you're screwed we're all dead" feeling for low level characters, but level appropriate characters can take it down with significantly less trouble. So if used normally, it's not so bad (though a bad fort save can really make a bad day for your character who just lost a limb), but if used as it was in the comic, it has much the same effect.

[VariaVespasa]

Originally Posted by Killer Angel

But I don't want to raise a dead horse.

Of course you dont raise a dead horse- you animate it instead since its cheaper to feed and you dont have to groom it. :P

I'll buy the incorrect CR arguement to some degree, although since it can be an easy kill it comes down more to party composition/equipment and setting/playstyle for how nasty it is. (lots of range ability and good scouting makes it a lot easier than no scouting and an all melee group, etc, but I tend to think that a group that doesnt scout deserves what it gets really)

To the initiative comment specifically, as I recall this is a critter that breaks its own bones when it moves. Seems like a reasonable cause for an initiative penalty to me. Perhaps I'll go and actually read the details of that discussion sometime to see if I have further comment.

[Marnath]

Originally Posted by VariaVespasa

Of course you dont raise a dead horse- you animate it instead since its cheaper to feed and you dont have to groom it. :P

I'll buy the incorrect CR arguement to some degree, although since it can be an easy kill it comes down more to party composition/equipment and setting/playstyle for how nasty it is. (lots of range ability and good scouting makes it a lot easier than no scouting and an all melee group, etc, but I tend to think that a group that doesnt scout deserves what it gets really)

To the initiative comment specifically, as I recall this is a critter that breaks its own bones when it moves. Seems like a reasonable cause for an initiative penalty to me. Perhaps I'll go and actually read the details of that discussion sometime to see if I have further comment.

Or maybe you could not do that, and let it rest already.

[douglas]

Originally Posted by VariaVespasa

To the initiative comment specifically, as I recall this is a critter that breaks its own bones when it moves. Seems like a reasonable cause for an initiative penalty to me. Perhaps I'll go and actually read the details of that discussion sometime to see if I have further comment.

That is exactly the reason THunt gave when he got around to giving one, and that's not the problem. The problem was that this, and all of the rest of the dozen or so discrepancies, were not explained in any way in the stat page itself. The math didn't add up in a whole bunch of places, and there was nothing to indicate that it was all intentional beyond faith in the author's infallibility.

If you really want to see the train wreck of a discussion thread on the issue, here it is. Note that what I linked is the second thread on the topic, started after the first one got lost to a server crash (I think). Before it was lost, the first thread contained a post (which I admit was rudely worded) from me listing a bunch of one-liners about what was "wrong", an extremely rudely worded response from THunt giving explanations for each and every one of them, and comments from a bunch of other people very similar to many of those in the second thread.

[Aldreck]

New strip is up

[Marnath]

Spoiler

Oh wow. Biscuit is hurt a lot worse than I thought he was. At least the switchbeast has probably forgotten all about him. It looks like it's having great fun with it's new toys.

[Gnome Alone]

Um, can anyone tell

Spoiler

who killed Tul? Was it Biscuit or the switchbeast? I'm thinking Biscuit but his arms look sort of positioned wrong, or maybe just obscured, for that.

[Marnath]

Originally Posted by Gnome Alone

Spoiler

Um, can anyone tell who killed Tul? Was it Biscuit or the switchbeast? I'm thinking Biscuit but his arms look sort of positioned wrong or maybe just obscured for that.

We like to use spoilers around here for a while after the update so no one who checks here first gets the surprise ruined.

Spoiler

Biscuit axed Tul out of the air and then threw his axe at a straggler.

[The Glyphstone]

Spoiler

And that, friends, is what happens when you are Wrong Genre Savvy.

[Gnome Alone]

Well thanks, that's what I figured but it was unclear. As far as spoilers go, I get it with like a TV show where not everyone's gonna see it at the same time, what with the vagaries of Netflix and different countries and all, but I have a bit of a hard time understanding who would check out the discussion thread before the update of the webcomic it's about.... I mean, huh? I kind of, you know, do it in the exact opposite of that order. But in the interest of When In Rome... (...Kill Some Carthaginians) I suppose I'll go back and enspoilerize. Also,

Spoiler

It did actually occur to me that maybe I should use them, but I figured a character introduced and murdered on the same page was not exactly Earth Baser Darth Vader (man, auto-correct is weird) is Luke's dad level stuff.

[The Linker]

Well, its just because some people -- like me -- rely on this very thread to tell them when there's an update. The spoiler tags are to avoid someone seeing something spoiling the new comic because they accidentally scrolled too far past the 'new comic' post.

Anyway. It's not a big deal. We usually take it pretty crazy far, anyway. Past the first three or four posts it's kind of overkill.

[Emperordaniel]

Nice anticlimax.

[Draconi Redfir]

Spoiler

Poor Tul

[Felius]

Ok, there have been enough spoilers posts, if you scrolled down that much without stopping to read the comic, you'll get spoiled.

Is it just me, or did anyone got the feel that biscuit apparently insta tamed the beast?

[Qwertystop]

Originally Posted by Felius

Ok, there have been enough spoilers posts, if you scrolled down that much without stopping to read the comic, you'll get spoiled.

Is it just me, or did anyone got the feel that biscuit apparently insta tamed the beast?

He didn't tame it, he just gave it somewhere to go that had food that was less painful.

[Candle Jack]

Directing giant monsters towards other mortal foes was how Conan the Barbarian dealt with approximately 40 per cent of the creatures he faced in the comics.

If he couldn't personally kill the beast, then more often than not he was siccing it on someone else.