Stunlock: A DM's Worst Nightmare

[Tequila Sunrise]

I understand how stunlocking works in principle, but I've never experienced it in play. So I'm going to run a few 'worst case scenario' epic mock combats, to play test a couple anti-stunlock mechanisms.

My question is: What is the worst case scenario, from a DM's point of view? I'm not going to build complete 28th level PCs with feats and items and whatnot, but I'd like an idea of how much stun power a 28th level party can pack. Can I assume that every encounter/daily attack power involves stun? Half? On average, how many save penalties can one character cram down a monster's throat consistently?

Thanks.

EDIT: See post 29 for play test report!

 

[Saagael]

Its not so much about save penalties (it was when the Orb wizard was around), but rather about lots of "end of next turn" stuns. You can't save out of those stuns, and unless you give the solo monster a way to get out of them, a team of 4 PCs have enough EoNT stuns to lock a monster down for several rounds.

 

[Upper_Krust]

As mentioned in a previous thread, a combination of my Boss Monster and Boss Resilience Traits make stun-locking a thing of the past without totally nerfing the stun/daze/immobilize conditions.

You can see them in my Kronos super-solo stat-block.

Wrath of the Titans – Kronos Eternity Publishing

 

[Tequila Sunrise]

Its not so much about save penalties (it was when the Orb wizard was around), but rather about lots of "end of next turn" stuns. You can't save out of those stuns, and unless you give the solo monster a way to get out of them, a team of 4 PCs have enough EoNT stuns to lock a monster down for several rounds.

I guess I should be specific about the anti-stunlock stuff I'm play testing. The first is Upper Krust's two monster traits, which essentially turns stun effects into something roughly comparable to daze. (I don't need to play test them to know that they work, but I feel like from a player's PoV they might work too well.)

The other anti-stunlock measure I'll play test is my own invention: I give the solo a certain number of saves at the beginning of each turn, with and without bonuses, which it can use to end even UENT effects. So in this case, consistent save penalties matter.

 

[D'karr]

I guess I should be specific about the anti-stunlock stuff I'm play testing. The first is Upper Krust's two monster traits, which essentially turns stun effects into something roughly comparable to daze. (I don't need to play test them to know that they work, but I feel like from a player's PoV they might work too well.)

The other anti-stunlock measure I'll play test is my own invention: I give the solo a certain number of saves at the beginning of each turn, with and without bonuses, which it can use to end even UENT effects. So in this case, consistent save penalties matter.

One of the "problems" with giving some monsters ways of getting out of stun is that they usually end up not really imposing a penalty on the creature. So it seems that the stun has no effect at all.

I endorse many different ways of getting out of a stun because I think variety is good.

If you have the creature pay a "price" for getting out of the stun then it feels like the stun is actually doing something. Making a save where a creature would not normally get one is not paying a price. It's getting a benefit for free. However, if you make the creature pay for that save with resources, or simply pay to get out of the effect you are actually keeping the stun effective. For example a solo dragon might decide to take damage to get out of the stun condition. But an elite pays HP to attempt a save. Variety and all.

This serves two purposes. By taking damage the creature gets out of the stun condition but is harmed in the process, making the stun still effective at some level. It also cuts down on grind, as the creature gets whittled down faster making combats faster.

 

[Tequila Sunrise]

If you have the creature pay a "price" for getting out of the stun then it feels like the stun is actually doing something. Making a save where a creature would not normally get one is not paying a price. It's getting a benefit for free. However, if you make the creature pay for that save with resources, or simply pay to get out of the effect you are actually keeping the stun effective. For example a solo dragon might decide to take damage to get out of the stun condition. But an elite pays HP to attempt a save. Variety and all.

I'm not crazy about the idea of essentially turning stun powers into high-damage powers, but for argument's sake, how much damage would you suggest is a good price for shrugging off stun?

 

[D'karr]

I'm not crazy about the idea of essentially turning stun powers into high-damage powers, but for argument's sake, how much damage would you suggest is a good price for shrugging off stun?

I don't see it as making stun a high-damage power. I see it as a creature having an "option" to get out of the stun. If the creature wants to stay stunned all it's doing is getting damage from the party without doing any itself. With this option it's a sacrifice, do it to get a chance to do something, or don't do it and take the consequences.

I think the best part of this is that it allows the DM complete flexibility in how he wants particular creatures to be affected.

You can implement damage using tier specific ongoing damage values (5, 10, 15) for heroic, paragon, epic. You can do it using damage expressions from the revised pg. 42 table. Match damage to the creatures level and use the expressions as you see better representing the action (limited, or normal). You can do it as a function of healing surges. Half of the value of a healing surge for low damage. A healing surge for high-damage.

It also gives you the choice of more options. Some creatures will use this "damage option", some will get the "save option", others will get the "multiple action" options, and some will simply stay stunned. This gives the DM added flexibility and variability in monster design.

 

[Tequila Sunrise]

It also gives you the choice of more options. Some creatures will use this "damage option", some will get the "save option", others will get the "multiple action" options, and some will simply stay stunned. This gives the DM added flexibility and variability in monster design.

I know some DMs have fun coming up with a variety of anti-stun mechanisms, but I like to standardize stuff like this. I write a lot of monsters, and having standardized caste abilities makes writing them easier. It also makes running them easier in combat.

 

[Lord Ernie]

I take a page out of WotC's book and usually build my Solo (and some Elite) Monsters with actions and traits like on the latest version of the dragons:

Action Recovery
Whenever the dragon ends its turn, any dazing, stunning, or dominating effect on it ends.

Instinctive Assault
On an initiative of 10 + its initiative check, the dragon can use a free action to use bite or claw. If the dragon cannot use a free action to make this attack due to a dominating or stunning effect, then that effect ends instead of the dragon making the attack.

Something else you can do (or better yet, in addition) is giving your Solo a full set of actions (minor, move, standard, immediate) for each PC, with an initiative count for each.

This ensures that, first of all, you don't suffer stunlock for too long, and second, that the stun attempt still does something, and it doesn't make the player feel like his power was useless (I really don't feel like reverting to the old style "you suck against this monster" approaches). Be sure to add in some narration on how the dragon (in this case) looked like it was about to breathe on them, but the stun prevented it.

Another alternative (or at Epic, addition) could be something like the Purple Wurm's ability, in addition to an immediate action retaliation attack:

Ponderous
The purple worm can take immediate actions while stunned, dazed, or dominated.

You can even add the several initiative counts thing from above for an even more dangerous monster (because more immediate actions).

One last idea, and something I've used with every Solo since I read the article on them, is the three-stage solo idea I read somewhere, which changes most of the monster's stat block at each stage, and has them shrug off effects at that time, too. I found it on these forums, but I can't find it in my history at the moment...

 

[keterys]

A usual epic party might have a couple single target stuns or dominates.

A control-oriented party might have builds like an invoker who, per encounter, does a close burst 6 stun and a blast 6 dominate, alongside a druid who does 4 single target dominates per encounter.

So, the range is pretty sharp.