Monster thac0 problems!

[Halaster Blackcloak]

Ok, as I'm writing up new monsters for Level 7 of Undermountain, I'm once again coming across strange discrepancies in monster thac0 and damage, etc. that have always plagued me.

Take for example the fomorian giant. It is listed as having 13+3 HD. On the monster thac0 chart, a monster with 13+ HD has a thac0 of 7. However, the Monster Manual lists it as having a thac0 of 9. So which is it?

If we take into account their +8 due to STR bonus, that would mean it has a STR 20, which gives it a +3 to thac0. So it we go by the fact that many monsters don't have their STR bonuses already figured into their thac0 listing in the MM, the fomorian should have a thac0 of 4 (7-3=4). If we consider it already figured in, then it's still off, because that would mean it has a base thac0 of 12.

Likewise, a cloud giant which has 16+ HD and a STR 23 gets +5 to hit and +11 damage. Its thac0 is listed as 5, although that's what it should be at 16+ HD even before adding in a STR bonus. Its real thaco should be 0. If we consider it already added in, then its real base thac0 would be 10, which is what the thac0 is for a 10th-11th level monster (11 thaco0 at 10+ HD and 9 thac0 at 11+ HD), not a 16+ HD monster!

So...how do we account for this in BIP releases? Going by previously published thac0s, they're all screwed up.

[Mira]

Monster THACO has always been a little different than PC THACO, and I've noticed that (particularly for giants) that Str is never factored in for to hit or damage.

I've always figured that the numbers listed were for the critter if not using a weapon. Having a weapon should be an advantage vs unarmed. So for giants, what I usually did was figure out a THACO based on a fighter's THACO (NOT the monster THACO) plus their Str bonus. (also give them the multiple attacks that a fighter gets) then I did damage based on 2x normal weapon damage + their Str bonus (giant sized weapons should do more damage). That always resulted in numbers better than the listed values (lower top damage, but much better average damage) and still fit into the framework fairly well.

Giants were much tougher that way when they were armed, those without weaponry reverted to their listed monster values. Remember that there were values for humanoids (elves and such) in the original MM too, yet PCs don't use those

Mira (Those who live by the sword get shot by those who don't)

[Minstrel]

I think Hal's using the chart to determine monster thac0, rather than a PC class chart, but either way it's sometimes off from what's in the MC/MM. I always figured the numbers in the monster stats were what they were for a purpose and as such went with them.

The str bonus was another matter though. Usually if a str value was listed, I added the appropriate +hit and +damage. I'd have to read through some old MC pages to say exactly why I drew that conclusion, but I think I remember seeing it spelled out for a few monsters.

[McDeath]

You'll find more than THAC0 problems. You'll also find xp values seem to be off for various reasons, movement, attacks, damage; It really depends on who developed which monster. If you go by the rules for making new monsters according to the 2nd ed DMG you'll get scores different. I suppose some is guesswork.

[Zherbus]

I don't think the MC1 and MC2 stuff was meant to be formulaic. I think it was all custom done, with the formula written up later as a guideline afterthought.

[Halaster Blackcloak]

Zherbus, that would make a lot of sense! Few monsters seem to match the DM chart that shows how to decide xp for monsters. I wonder who from TSR would have the answer?

[Zherbus]

Zeb Cook, I imagine. Anyone know how to get a hold of that rascal?

[Minstrel]

He appears to have a Q&A thread on dragonsfoot, and has posted recently.

[Halaster Blackcloak]

I was just going to mention that!

[Zherbus]

WOW. So much I want to ask...

[garhkal]

Ok, as I'm writing up new monsters for Level 7 of Undermountain, I'm once again coming across strange discrepancies in monster thac0 and damage, etc. that have always plagued me.

Take for example the fomorian giant. It is listed as having 13+3 HD. On the monster thac0 chart, a monster with 13+ HD has a thac0 of 7. However, the Monster Manual lists it as having a thac0 of 9. So which is it?

If we take into account their +8 due to STR bonus, that would mean it has a STR 20, which gives it a +3 to thac0. So it we go by the fact that many monsters don't have their STR bonuses already figured into their thac0 listing in the MM, the fomorian should have a thac0 of 4 (7-3=4). If we consider it already figured in, then it's still off, because that would mean it has a base thac0 of 12.

RESURRECTION!!

This is an argument i often have with folks all over the place, in that monsters WITH STRENGTH listings, rarely if ever HAVE THOSE strength values taken into account in BOTH their Thac0 and their listed damage. Hell as that Formorian example shows, some have a WORSE thac0 than JUST THEIR HD should give them... YET SOME STILL FEEL, that "what's listed, includes their strength AND their HD'...

So...how do we account for this in BIP releases? Going by previously published thac0s, they're all screwed up.

I have always followed the mantra, IF A monster has a Strength score listed, IT SHOULD BE counted in their Thac0 and Damage.. IE bugbear 'scouting party leader. Strength 18/18 (+1/+3), fight's as a 4th level fighter, with spec in the morning star (+1/+2). It's thac0 should be _ 17 (base for 4th level warrior), +1 (strength), +1 (+spec) = 15.
Damage would be 2d4+5/d6+6. 3/2 attack rate.

[Halaster Blackcloak]

Garhkal wrote:

This is an argument i often have with folks all over the place, in that monsters WITH STRENGTH listings, rarely if ever HAVE THOSE strength values taken into account in BOTH their Thac0 and their listed damage. Hell as that Formorian example shows, some have a WORSE thac0 than JUST THEIR HD should give them... YET SOME STILL FEEL, that "what's listed, includes their strength AND their HD'...

Yeah, it's like they failed to figure it in, but stated they did so.

I have always followed the mantra, IF A monster has a Strength score listed, IT SHOULD BE counted in their Thac0 and Damage.. IE bugbear 'scouting party leader. Strength 18/18 (+1/+3), fight's as a 4th level fighter, with spec in the morning star (+1/+2). It's thac0 should be _ 17 (base for 4th level warrior), +1 (strength), +1 (+spec) = 15.
Damage would be 2d4+5/d6+6. 3/2 attack rate.

Yeah, I'm going to go along with that for the BIP material. It seems obvious that the MM is often mistaken (it wasn't actually factored in) or incorrectly counted (the math is wrong) when it comes to STR bonus.