FriendlyFiend
Explorer
Woo-hoo! Proper, scary pit-fiends are back! ... Now if they can just up the stats on the 'loths ... 
[D&D 3.5e] That New Pit Fiend
- Thread starter Intrope
- Start date
Dave Blewer
First Post
Will the Dragon be revised though? Every revision of the game has upped their power...
Worst case scenario could be Red Dragon DR 10/Ice
Worst case scenario could be Red Dragon DR 10/Ice
Gez
First Post
Large is now Larger. Don't know if that's a correction or a clarification. 
Initiative is no more broken down (i.e., + 8 Dex, +4 Improved Init).
And, maybe that's just because of the medium used (T-shirt), but it seems "familial" abilities are no longer lumped together. Old pit-fiend had "baatezu qualities", and the general devil entry say that baatezu qualities were poison and fire immunity, cold and acid resistance 20, see in darkness, and telepathy 100 ft. New pit fiend has all of these enumerated in the statblock rather than lumped together.
Initiative is no more broken down (i.e., + 8 Dex, +4 Improved Init).
And, maybe that's just because of the medium used (T-shirt), but it seems "familial" abilities are no longer lumped together. Old pit-fiend had "baatezu qualities", and the general devil entry say that baatezu qualities were poison and fire immunity, cold and acid resistance 20, see in darkness, and telepathy 100 ft. New pit fiend has all of these enumerated in the statblock rather than lumped together.
jgbrowning
Hero
Dave Blewer said:
I hope they don't up the power level in response to the min/max group.
I like DMing (and playing) sub-optimal PCs that don't only take skills/feats/spells/classes/magic items that directly improve their chances of survival in a martial conflict.
joe b.
Dave Blewer
First Post
I agree with you, but I predict that it could be a feature of at least the most venerable dragons
BryonD
Hero
Elder-Basilisk said:
Maybe. But it may make them a much more interesting encounter.
It is way to early for me try to claim that they went to far or not far enough. But my initial reaction is that this Pit Fiend is closer to where I think a Pit Fiend should be, than the other one was. And I would prefer it be slightly over strong than to weak.
I am not sure that CR16 is bad though. If instead of your individual examples, you consider that you would have 2 fighters and a cleric and a wizard all using fairly intelligent tactics at the same time, I can see that this Pit Fiend could be in real trouble. (iow, expect only 25% resource use by the party). Maybe not, like I said, I need to know a bit more. But it does not seem clearly unreasonable.
On Dragons, I would not be suprised or disappointed if they get a bit of a power up, especially at the higher ages. But they need to re-visit the CRs. There seems to be a strong popular agreement on that.
Upper_Krust
Legend
Hi all! 
Personally I can't wait to see the Solar; given the fact the Pit Fiend now trumps it in many areas I wonder what its revised stats will look like!?
Also something no one has yet mentioned are the greatly increased base damage dice for 'larger' (large presumably?) size.
Claws are now 2d8+14 (though should that not be +13 considering Strength 37?); whereas previously they were 1d6+7.
Should we presume they are doubling the damage bonuses now at each increment?
Medium Claw 1d8
Large 2d8
Huge 4d8
Gargantuan 8d8
Colossal 16d8
...?
Zappo said:I wanna see the Balor!
Personally I can't wait to see the Solar; given the fact the Pit Fiend now trumps it in many areas I wonder what its revised stats will look like!?
Also something no one has yet mentioned are the greatly increased base damage dice for 'larger' (large presumably?) size.
Claws are now 2d8+14 (though should that not be +13 considering Strength 37?); whereas previously they were 1d6+7.
Should we presume they are doubling the damage bonuses now at each increment?
Medium Claw 1d8
Large 2d8
Huge 4d8
Gargantuan 8d8
Colossal 16d8
...?
Psion
Adventurer
Re: Re: More Pit Beef
Yes, the whiners got their way.
Feh. Devoting a whole page to each creature will waste space; some creatures quite simply do not deserve it, and they will have to come up with a lot of text for a lot of creatures that is quite likely to not be applicable to many campaigns.
The layout was a problem, but the layout could have been improved without going the space-wasteful route. For example, in the existing MM, when a creature entry includes multiple types (like demons, devils, and celestials), they currently do all the stat blocks, THEN do the descriptions. This is a problem in play because you have to page back and forth. Presenting these creatures individually, or at least divvying up the stat blocks so that they are generally on the same page or a facing page from the combat description, would have worked much better.
Alzrius said:
Yes, the whiners got their way.
Feh. Devoting a whole page to each creature will waste space; some creatures quite simply do not deserve it, and they will have to come up with a lot of text for a lot of creatures that is quite likely to not be applicable to many campaigns.
The layout was a problem, but the layout could have been improved without going the space-wasteful route. For example, in the existing MM, when a creature entry includes multiple types (like demons, devils, and celestials), they currently do all the stat blocks, THEN do the descriptions. This is a problem in play because you have to page back and forth. Presenting these creatures individually, or at least divvying up the stat blocks so that they are generally on the same page or a facing page from the combat description, would have worked much better.
Similar Threads
