Oh No, More Bosses: Oozes, Slimes, and a Duplicating Wizard

Banner Patreon 800 x 100

07-22-15 Feature Art 800 x 450

Remember how, months ago, I promised there would be more boss fighty goodness? Well, here’s some more boss fighty goodness. Let’s not f$&% around with long-a$& introductions, though. Let’s talk about swarms and oozes and duplicators.

Share and Share Alike

Now, I’m going to assume you’re already familiar with the whole Paragon thing I’ve been building up. If not, you can go back and read Part 1 (about two-headed, two-tailed, bifurcated snakes) and Part 2 (about elementals that change forms). And you can also check out a little extra bit of fun in a transforming volcano dragon I wrote for the July 4th holiday (if you’re not American, please don’t enjoy that monster; it’s for Americans only!).

Now, the basic premise behind the Paragon System is “you can build an awesome super monster by cramming several monsters into the same body and giving the whole thing some sort of cool gimmick.” And I accomplished that by basically having the monsters take turns. When you kill one monster, the next one pops out like a stripper jumping out of a corpse. Or a cake. Whatever. You celebrate birthdays your way and I’ll celebrate them my way.

But once you figure out how to cram multiple monsters into one body, the next logical question is “can the individual monsters come out to play any time they want?” After all, you’ve got the hit points and actions of several monsters. Why not let those hit points and actions run loose on the battlefield. Now, I know what you’re going to say: “isn’t that just having several monsters running around on the battlefield?” And the answer is yes. Obviously, if you just want three monsters running around on the battlefield, you can have three monsters running around on the battlefield. But then we get back to that idea of “gimmicks.”

The point of Paragon monsters has always been less about creating ways to make balanced monsters and more about creating unique and interesting battles. When you get down to it, a boss fight isn’t JUST a hard fight. There’s always something special about it. The creature is unique and different in some way. It does something nothing else can do.

And that’s why, once I figured out how to cram multiple monsters into one body, I immediately started wondering about getting them apart again. Because I was now seeing these monsters as weird “clouds of monsters.” Why couldn’t they come apart? Why couldn’t they go back together again? And that leads me naturally to oozes, swarms, and duplicators, monsters that should be able to come apart and maybe even go back together again.

Elegance and Paragon Actions

The first thing I wanted to do was to create a creature that could just break apart. Video games are full of these things. You whack them, they split apart. And that’s easy enough to do, right? After all, once you have the whole hit point pool thing and a mechanic that gives a creature a number of turns equal to the number of hit point pools, it’s easy to imagine just fissioning off those pools to allow it to spawn copies of itself. So you can easily just build an action like this:

Paragon Division. <<Creature>> splits into two new <<creatures>>. <<Creature’s>> hit point pools, including the current and maximum hit points in each pool, are divided as evenly as possible amongst the new <<creatures>>. Apart from the hit points, the new <<creatures>> have identical statistics. Each creature is worth half as many experience points as the original when defeated.

Nothing really has changed here. You’re just taking the hit point pools and spreading them out between two bodies. And, in theory, the new creatures could do that again and again. But this is where things get complicated. And the reason they get complicated is because I actually worked backwards.

See, I didn’t start with a creature chopping in half. I actually started with a more complicated idea. I started with the idea of a swarm of bugs that could separate and come back together. The cloud of insects could go in two different directions, becoming two different creatures. And later, they could reunite, becoming one again. That seemed like a really cool idea. And again, I can figure out the actions easily enough. Well, sort of. I mean, take a look.

Paragon Replication. <<Creature>> may spawn a duplicate of itself by transferring one or more of its hit point pools to the new <<creature>>. The new <<creature>> has the same statistics as the original, however it only has as many hit point pools as are transferred to it. It has any many current hit points in each pool as are transferred to it. The original <<creature>> loses the transferred hit point pools completely; they are not reduced to zero. Any effects based on the number of hit point pools are refigured based on the new number of hit point pools for both creatures, including number of turns in combat. The new creature is not worth any experience points when defeated.

Paragon Absorption. <<Creature>> is adjacent to a Paragon creation of the same name, it may absorb that <<creature>>. The absorbed target is destroyed. <<Creature>> gains the hit points pools of the target, including the current hit points and maximum hit points. If any of those pools has been reduced to zero, <<creature>> gains that pool, but that pool is still reduced to zero. All effects based on the hit point pools of <<creature>> are refigured based on the new number of hit point pools.

The first problem I ran into is one that I am only going to mention briefly. These things were very difficult to word properly. And it took a lot of edits to shorten them up and still get all the information I needed to get in there. And honestly, I could have written as a single wall of text or I could have just made this part of the mechanics of hit point pools. But, once again, I wanted everything to be self contained. I wanted to have to do as little as possible aside from just adding traits to a monster stat block.

The second problem I ran into had to do with the hit-point mechanics. As I started fiddling with this s$&%, I ran into a very odd difficulty. On the surface, they seem simple enough: track each hit point pool as a separate thing and just give it to whatever monster has it at the time. But when you look deeper, things get very weird once you have partially damaged hit point pools mixing with undamaged ones and ones reduced to zero.

I admit that it’s only weird in my head. Mechanically, there’s nothing wrong with any of it. It would work just fine. But my brain was really bothered by the idea. And that lead me to an interesting place. Because, as I thought about it, I realized that the creature separating to chase multiple targets around the room is pretty scary. But there’s nothing inherently scary or useful about the creature reuniting. In fact, whenever the creature rejoins, that makes it less scary. And that wouldn’t do.

What if I could solve both problems at once. What if the creature could naturally “even out” its hit points. When it reunites, all of its current hit points get evenly distributed amongst its various hit point pools. That would be pretty f$%&ing terrifying, actually. Because eliminating a hit point pool is the way to rob the creature of actions. And because damage doesn’t “spill over” from pool to pool. An ooze with 6 hit point pools each with just 1 current hit point in them is scarier than an ooze with 6 hit points left in its last hit point pool because it gets six turns and it still takes six hits to kill. In effect, allowing the creature to shuffle its hit points like that would be the equivalent of forbidding the party from focussing fire in a battle with multiple creatures. It creates a tactical disadvantage. And it adds a level of complexity and depth to the fight.

The trouble with that is that shuffling the HP pools is a math heavy thing to do. It takes time. And you don’t want to do it constantly. If the ooze has six turns, you don’t want to do all that math six times a round. But, at the same time, I think the depth and tactical complexity does make it worth doing the math ONCE per round. Remember, complexity is the currency with which you buy depth.

First, the action itself is pretty simple again.

Paragon Stabilization. <<Creature>> may distribute all of <<creature’s>> current hit points evenly amongst all of <<creature’s>> hit point pools above zero. <<Creature>> may not distribute hit points to any pool that has been reduced to zero.

That last bit, by the way, keeps it from “resurrecting” hit point pools that have been killed. We don’t want that. But now comes the really hard part. The action economy.

That Stabilization thing? How often should it happen? Is it automatic? What sort of resources should it use up? Obviously, I want the creature to do it once a round. And obviously, I also want it to happen when the creature recombines. But no more than that. And do I want the creature to give up some of its actual combat output JUST to rejigger its hit points? I mean, I’m not sure I technically call it healing. It keeps some pools (i.e.: creatures) alive longer, but it does so by shortening the lifespan of other pools (i.e.: creatures).

And that is how Paragon Actions were born.

Some Paragon Creatures have special actions they can take once per round (not once per turn). They are similar to the Lair Actions that some powerful enemies have in the Monster Manual (in fact, that’s what I modelled them on). But unlike Lair Actions, they travel with the creature and allow the creature to do something that counts as a sort of gimmick. Which, again, is precisely what Lair Actions do. A gimmicky once per round addition to the fight.

So, I had this list of tools to work with at last.

Paragon Actions
On initiative count 20 (losing initiative ties), <<creature>> may take one of the following actions.

Paragon Stabilization. <<Creature>> may distribute all of <<creature’s>> current hit points evenly amongst all of <<creature’s>> hit point pools above zero. <<Creature>> may not distribute hit points to any pool that has been reduced to zero.

Paragon Replication. [[<<Creature>> uses Paragon Stabilization. Then,]] <<creature>> may spawn a duplicate of itself by transferring one or more of its hit point pools to the new <<creature>>. The new <<creature>> has the same statistics as the original, however it only has as many hit point pools as are transferred to it. It has any many current hit points in each pool as are transferred to it. The original <<creature>> loses the transferred hit point pools completely; they are not reduced to zero. Any effects based on the number of hit point pools are refigured based on the new number of hit point pools for both creatures, including number of turns in combat. The new creature is not worth any experience points when defeated.

Paragon Absorption. <<Creature>> is adjacent to a Paragon creation of the same name, it may absorb that <<creature>>. The absorbed target is destroyed. <<Creature>> gains the hit points pools of the target, including the current hit points and maximum hit points. If any of those pools has been reduced to zero, <<creature>> gains that pool, but that pool is still reduced to zero. All effects based on the hit point pools of <<creature>> are refigured based on the new number of hit point pools. [[<<Creature>> may immediately use Paragon Stabilization]].

Notice that the bits in double square brackets are optional. They require the creature to have the Paragon Stabilization option. Also, notice my use of the angle brackets to put variables in the text. This just makes it easier to copy and paste.

In addition, I also had this. This isn’t a Paragon Action though. It’s Reaction. Something the PCs do causes the creature to split apart.

(Reaction) Paragon Division. When <<creature>> has more than one hit point pool and <<condition occurs>>, <<creature>> splits into two new <<creatures>>. [[Before the division, <<creature>> uses Paragon Stabilization.]] <<Creature’s>> hit point pools, including the current and maximum hit points in each pool, are divided as evenly as possible amongst the new <<creatures>>. Apart from the hit points, the new <<creatures>> have identical statistics. Each creature is worth half as many experience points as the original when defeated.

And now I had all the tools I needed to build some swarms and oozes.

Almost…

See, the splitting/recombining/juggling HP thing is fun and all, but I wanted something more actively interesting. I wanted the number of pools the creature had to have some sort of direct effect. And with both swarms and oozes, an obvious solution presented itself.

Paragon Expansion. <<Creature>>’s size is based on the number of pools of hit points it has above zero. At six or more, <<creature>> is huge. At four or more, <<creature>> is large. At two or more, <<creature>> is medium. At one, <<creature>> is small.

That, by itself, may not be THAT interesting. But, in a minute, you’ll see why I put it in. The trick was to build things that keyed off the size of the creature.

The Umbral Pudding

Umbral Ooze Stat Block

First, here’s a simple one. The Umbral Pudding is just a big ole goo pile. It’s immune to slashing and lightning, but those two things also cause it to split in two. Yeah, it’s pretty much just an ochre jelly. I won’t lie. Except that it has eight turns every round and can grapple the hell out of people. Which, by itself is pretty scary. But when you add the HP juggling on there, it becomes terribly scary.

And here’s an example of The Angry Approach to Metagaming. This is a creature that works whether you understand it or not. And, in fact, works better when you DO understand it. Because of the grappling thing and the size component, it’s a pain in the ass when it’s big. And because of its stabilization, it can be very hard to deal with through attrition. You almost WANT to get it to divide up because it can’t keep stabilizing if it’s spread too thin (ha) and it can’t grapple multiple creatures once its too small. But, breaking up it means dealing with eight different targets running around the battlefield. It’s a tough choice. And one that gets more interesting if the party knows something about the creature. This is actually a creature that works best if the party fights it more than once. Like, imagine a sewer infested with the things. The party can encounter ones of various sizes and learn the ins and outs of dealing with them.

The Umbral Pudding is a good challenge for four to five 3rd or 4th level PCs. Remember, it’s 400 XP (50 XP x 8), but also eight creatures worth of difficulty (multiplier 2.5). So, that’s 1,000 XP worth of difficulty.

The Berserker Wasp Swarm

Berserker Wasp Swarm Stat Block

The Berserker Wasp Swarm is something I started working on because of an unrelated megadungeon project of some kind (hint, hint). The swarm mechanics are the most interesting part and they’ve already been covered. But I also want to call attention to the size mechanic. Note that the creature attacks EVERY CREATURE in its space. When it is huge (at six pools), it can cover nine squares on the battlefield and it has eight turns every round. That, again, makes the fight very complex. Like the ooze, the swarm is easier to deal with when it is all spread out (so it can’t stabilize). But if the party spreads out, the swarm will spread out too and it will still be dangerous. However, if any members of the party stay close together (to defend each other, say, or heal each other), parts of the swarm will recombine and start shuffling hit points. But if the party stays TOO spread out, their weaker members are going to be defenseless and trapped in a wasp cloud.

For some real fun, add an escort mission to this monster. And laugh your a$& off.

Just to run the math, this creature is best against some 5th level PCs. It’s 1,200 XP (200 XP x 6), but also six creatures worth of difficulty (multiplier 2). So that’s 2,400 XP worth of difficulty. That’s a hard to deadly 4th level encounter or a moderate 5th level encounter.

Bonus! Nongahnim

My Patreon is doing amazingly well. So I decided to work my a$& off and futz with a different duplication mechanic. I’m literally adding this at the last minute and I’m not going to talk about it too much. I think the stat blocks speak for themselves. But here’s WHY Nongahnim exists.

If you can have a creature spawn a copy of itself by getting rid of a hit point pool, you can have a creature power a completely different creature with a hit point pool. After all, if the CR of the basic creature that you turned into a Paragon is the same as the CR of any other creature, their output should be close enough to equal that you could spend a hit point pool to “buy” another creature. And, hell, you could even get a refund by destroying that creature. Right?

My first idea was a necromancer that spawned skeleton monsters using his HP. If you killed the skeleton, he lost the HP he invested. But he could dismiss the skeleton to get his HP (and his extra combat turn) back. Simple, right?

Spawn <<New Creature>>. <<Creature>> may reduce one of <<creature’s>> hit point pools to zero to spawn <<new creature>> in any space within <<range>>. <<New creature>> appears and may take its turn immediately after <<creature>>. <<New creature’s>> current hit points are equal to the number of hit points lost by <<creature>> when reducing its hit point pool to zero, up to <<new creature’s>> listed maximum hit points. <<Creature>> may not reduce <<creature’s>> last hit point pool to zero use this effect.

Unmake <<New Creature>>. <<creature>> may destroy one of <<creature’s>> spawned <<new creatures>> within <<range>>. <<New creature>> is immediately reduced to zero hit points and destroyed. <<Creature>> heals a number of hit points equal to <<new creature’s>> current hit points before it was destroyed. <<Creature>> may divide this healing between multiple hit point pools and even apply it to a pool that has already been reduced to zero.

You can work out how those work. But then I said “f$&% that noise. Skeletons suck. I want one of those video game wizards that spawns extra copies of himself and you can’t tell which one is real.” So, remember the lightning spewing duplicating wizard from The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past, I made Nongahnim.

It is just something I slapped together quickly as a proof of concept, but check him out. I did some crazy stuff in there though. The teleportation effect tied to his spawning and the ability to shuffle turns between him and his spawn are there solely to keep the players from being able to keep track of the real one vs. the duplicates. Sort of a shell game. Anyway, have fun with him if you want.

Nongahnim Stat Block

Phantom Nongahnim Stat Block

He’s good for a 10th level party. I’ll let you do the math.

Also, bonus question: can you figure out why it’s not only legit, but good balance to give each Phantom Nongahnim a full complement of spell slots? Because it is. And there is a reason. It actually points out a flaw in Paragon Monsters when it comes to spellcasting.

Get all four stat blocks in one easy to download PDF!

Banner Patreon 800 x 100

21 thoughts on “Oh No, More Bosses: Oozes, Slimes, and a Duplicating Wizard

  1. >Also, bonus question: can you figure out why it’s not only legit, but good balance to give each Phantom Nongahnim a full complement of spell slots? Because it is. And there is a reason. It actually points out a flaw in Paragon Monsters when it comes to spellcasting.

    Paragon creatures are basically just multiple creatures of the same CR stuffed into one statblock. If you have all of a Paragon creature’s hit point pools share a single set of spell slots, when one of its hit point pools is eliminated the next hit point pool will start with less spell slots if the previous hit point pool used any spells, which reduces its CR ruining the encounter balance.

    In the case of your duplicating wizard, which is 3 CR 7 wizards in one, he can actually create more than 3 copies of himself over the course of a fight through clever reabsorption and hit point reallocation. But if he does those copies will have less hit points than normal which reduces their CR so the encounter should still be balanced correctly. Super neat.

    Looking forward to the inevitable multi-headed creature article.

  2. “When it is huge (at six pools), it can cover nine squares on the battlefield and it has eight turns every round.”

    This is from the part about the wasp swarm. Why does it get eight turns? It has only six hp pools. It seems to me that I am missing something.

    And about the bonus question: Well the flaw about Paragon Spellcasters is that they get only one chunk of spell slots, when it’s actually several spellcasters in one body. So if you want the CR/experience/balancy things to be correct, TECHNICALLY you would have to track slots for every hit point pool each. That would be kind of a mess, wouldn’t it? Also that would, theoretically, mean, that if the third hp pool of our theoretical paragon spell caster didn’t have any spell slots left, he couldn’t cast spells when it’s his third turn, but he could with his first and second, and that would be kind of hard to explain.
    So basically the flaw is that the Paragon rules haven’t touched spell slots yet I guess? You have three monsters, but they have to share one pool of slots, so they are technically weaker than one would think.

  3. My new campaign just got more awesome. The Paragon actions idea will make my Host goblins far more interesting. Thanks Mr Angry GM, Sir!

  4. Another mechanic that could be added to these type of creatures are abilities that can only be used when all parts have reformed into the original. This would provide the incentive to reform and create interesting strategic possibilities. For example, I want to create a demon lord in the vein of Jubilex, the slime lord, as the big bad for my game. He can split into multiple parts, but then maybe he won’t be able to cast his highest level spells, summon demons, or use his ultimate abilities. He may still be able to use his acid spitting ability, but the damage done would be divided by the number of parts.

  5. I’d just have the spellcaster multiply their spell slots for each level by the number of hit point pools above zero. Though it’s not something I’d do for the spellcaster that could split like the Duplication Wizard.

    • Though it could be problematic if you make a creature that isn’t just multiples of the same creature smashed together.

      Maybe just add the spell slots together per level for each creature and note it in the stat block. So let’s say a 5th-level wizard type spellcaster and a 7th-level cleric type would have: 8/6/5/1 spell slots.

  6. Still loving Paragon monsters and loving this new application.
    But I still wonder whether it is in the spirit of your idea to let them move their full speed on each of their paragon turns.
    A pair of goblins could not reach and attack a PC 50 feet away but a paragon monster can get a hit in. This also can get silly quickly when using a high number of HP pools.

    Maybe this is just something to keep in mind when building these and I can’t think of a better approach but I have not seen you address this point yet.

  7. This isn’t a direct critique of Nongahnim or anything, more just a random musing of monsters and spell slots. So I guess looking at more angles on your spell slot question.

    Spell slots on monsters seem kinda of silly, don’t they? After all the work you put into selecting all the spells they can use, most of the time the monsters will die or have to retreat before they even use 20% of their slots. Plus, D&D 5e combats are kind of designed to be resolved within 3-5 rounds. My personal past grievances with this issue was with the pathfinder spellcaster statblocks, since those had to be put with a strategy or it’d take a night of sitting down and just reading about what each of their spells did, when all it amounts to is just casting at most 3 spells off that list per combat.

    Here’s another few random musing points… if we’re going to give monsters fireball or something, according to calculations in DM guide, that would jump their Offensive CR to 18 — just with fireball — unless you like… just say it can’t hit more than 2 targets or something. Or, we’d have to make up a “Lesser Fireball” for the monsters to use to use them in lower CRs. Hell… even if the monster’s defensive CR was 1/8th monsters just wouldn’t be allowed to use fireball until CR 8.

    (8d6 = 28; 20ft sphere / 5 = 4 targets; 28 x 4 = 112 damage)

    Plus, since offensive CR according to DM Guide is calculated by the average damage dealt within 3 rounds, I feel like I should assume that if a monster has 3 castings of a spell, you shouldn’t even bother checking it off when you cast it, you may as well just say it’s “at-will” since if he lasts longer than 3 rounds it’s going to muck up the Offensive CR. Sure you can fix this by just averaging by more rounds or something, but I dunno if Offensive CR is built to be accurate past 3 rounds, nor if it’s worth even bothering with.

    Which is I suppose goes around to your inquiry — how long do you expect paragon monsters to last in rounds, usually? In Nongahnim’s case, each Nongahnim has about 7 rounds of powerful damage spells they can cast before they have to switch to cantrips. Nongahnim is awesome and all, but I kinda doubt any of his forms will survive 7 rounds against a level 10 party, which still adds a lot of unused spell slots… wait a minute, it wouldn’t be 7 rounds because he gets multiple turns and uses the same exact pool a singular spellcasting monster would, thus he’d burn through it far faster than necessary! That’s the issue!

    So, maybe you’re setting up for a “Paragon Recharge” in the future or something, but here’s how I’d fix it. I’d probably give my Paragon monster Innate Spellcasting ability and just give them their damage spells as an at-will. I know spell slots make things more interesting because you can cast them at higher levels with higher save DCs/damage but here’s another quick and moddable way to facilitate higher spell slots into Offensive CR ability and have it within the “per 3 rounds” calculations — Metamagic. Borrow the mechanics from rechargeable breath attacks (Recharge 5-6), have Paragon spellcasters be able to cast one of their at-wills as an “Empowered spell” that boosts the DC/damage of one of their at-will spells, just like casting at a higher spell slot. This alleviates the spell slot problem, prevents more paperwork having to track slots, and still gives a tactical threat the longer he lives, and fits in the Offensive CR calculations!

    • I agree! spell slots seem like a waste of time on monsters, especially spellcasters. your creature just needs a couple of good thematic spells, and a bit of a strategy on when to use each one (which TBH will probably even out into basically level-appropriate spells & spellslots, but there’s no need to be SO formal when you’re making up monsters, IMO)

    • If the only conceivable thing you could do with a paragon was fight to the death, this might be the case. But my party has a habit of surprising me with how they choose to interact.

      What if they parley with the “monster”? Or join forces (even if temporarily)? What if they decide to play a drawn out cat-and-mouse strategy because they like playing stealth-based capers?

      It’s important, I believe, to flesh out casters with all their spells in order to deal with such eventualities. It certainly doesn’t hurt to have more spells listed than might be used in a straightforward monster mash.

  8. Does a paragon creature have a single “current” hit point pool that all damage must apply to? Or can an attacker choose which pool to attack? I think it’s the former but I could find that clearly stated.

    When a Nongahnim unmakes a phantom, it can apparently allocate the returning hit points across pools any way it wants including zero hp pools. But it can’t actually heal a zero hp pool by other means? If that pool was zero because it spawned a phantom, does the overall enemy now get 4 actions? Three for the non-zero pools on the true creature and one for the phantom?

    Since he can allocate the restored hp anyway he likes, does that mean that the order of the pools matters?

    The initial descriptions of replication and absorption mention that some creatures won’t have the stabilization ability. That sounds complicated. For example a creature with pools at 15/15/15/7 replicates without stabilizing, resulting in 15/7 and 15/15? Do I have the option of going to 15/15 and 7/15?

    Then the replicant takes damage and goes to 15/1. Then the two creatures merge again, still without stabilizing. Do we now have 15/1/15/7? Does it matter which creature absorbed which? Can it reorder its pools anyway it likes? I hope the answer is that replication and absorption always require stabilization.

  9. Bonus Questions Answer
    I actually intuitively reacted to this problem when I paragon’d a vampire wizard. When his first of two hp pools ran out, I just felt like I should refresh all his spells. If a paragon monster is multiple creatures crammed into one body, you need multiple creatures worth of spell casting power crammed in there too. With only one creature worth of spells taking two or more creatures worth of actions, you’d run dry way too fast.

  10. Hey Angry, great article! I’ll definitely be using these at some point.

    One quick thing I noticed. For the Wasp swarm, you have Paragon 1 (200 xp) 6 creatures, as opposed to the other 2 where you put the total added up XP after the paragon number e.g. Paragon 6 (6,900) 3 creatures. Just wanted to let you know, and congrats on the successful Patreon!

  11. I suppose the spell casting problem is that unless you split you only get one compliment of spells vs 3 for all creatures. Also if you recombine aspects, unless they all cast the same spell, it probably becomes pretty murky math.

  12. Good article, will have to make some modifications due to the fact that I am still using 3.5 but that’s easy enough.

  13. Ok, I’m going out on a limb here, I think the wording of re-absorption is problematic. From what it says, re-absorption destroys the old clone. Then next turn you can make a /new/ clone, with a reset spell list.
    What I’m saying is, isn’t it possible to continuously respawn clones and continuously blast their daily? True it’d take two turns to do, and true in the grand scheme of things it might not make that much difference if it dies quickly enough.
    Maybe stating that hp pools have their own spell slots? That don’t reset when absorbed?

    Cheers Angry

  14. These are SO super cool. I have a question, though:

    Paragon Exhaustion/Fury state that the first initiative is determined with advantage then subsequent initiatives are inserted after player’s turns… and that works great for a paragon creature that represents fewer monsters than there are PCs. But, what happens when an Umbral pudding representing 8 creatures fights a party of 4 adventures?

    I might be missing something, but the creature’s initiative + immediately after any one of four player’s turns = five. What happens to it’s other three actions? Are they lost? Do they pile up at the end of the initiative order in a quivering mass of oozy death? Or may the paragon creature double up on actions during the round if it represents more creatures than players?

  15. I immediately began thinking about a huge shoggoth that split off mini shoggoths that split off smaller shoggoths. After reading these, I almost actually want to run a D&D game now. Maybe when I get finished with my current campaign – as soon as my players decide they will go do the think they know they need to do.

Leave a Reply