How Weird are Monsters?

Last night's game (I'm playing, not running) had an encounter that got me thinking. Forgive a brief campaign story for context.

The game is a Savage Worlds conversion of the Rules Cyclopedia. We are playing high-expert level (name level+) PCs. I'm a crotchety mystic (monk). An NPC ally is clearing a wilderness hex for his keep and we're helping out. The MU plans to build her tower nearby and the Elf is eyeing an ancient wood as his realm. At a nearby lake, the cleric has discovered some magic-infused clay under the water that can make clay golems. The trouble? A mysterious swirl (small whirlpool) in the water appears at different spots at different times. We observed a shepherd from a local population suddenly break off from his friends and flounder out into the water only to disappear beneath the surface. The party has decided that whatever it is must be destroyed. I'm personally convinced it's Nixies and the elf might not want to go murdering fellow fae, especially if he wants to be their local lord. Also, if I'm right, the shepherd is not dead. Currently, I'm outvoted.

OK, end of story.

I've talked a lot here not only about various D&D monsters, but also about the kind of world they might live in. This got me wondering about the general perception of monsters and magical beasts in a D&D setting. Not by the players, but in-game for the characters.

Obviously there can be a wide spectrum on this. There can be worlds where it's perfectly normal to have ogres drinking in a tavern. Other settings might not even have demihuman PCs. All of this is perfectly valid.

The question is; how weird is it to run into true "monsters" in your world? At what point does that creature stop being just some critter or fella going about his business and become, well, monstrous? To be sure, there are all sorts of dangerous things in your typical fantasy setting, including people. Combat is almost certainly going to happen at some point, but not necessarily.

The party in my earlier story might well be justified in going straight to combat-mode in some settings, whereas in another world such actions could even be criminal. It's up to the DM and the players to work out which kind of a world they're playing in, so everyone is on the same page.

RSA/RMA: Invisible Stalker

It's a spell! No, it's a monster! No, it's a spell and a monster! It's the Invisible Stalker! It's a Random Spell + Monster Assessment!

This one has been around for nearly every edition of D&D that I know of, yet it seldom comes up in play. The BX version of the creature only appears if summoned via the 6th level MU spell of the same name, which may be unique for a creature listed in the monsters section; unless you include elementals, which can be summoned in three different ways (staff, device, or spell).

Invisible Stalker (from Cook)

AC: 3
HD: 8*
Move: 120' (40')
Att: 1
Dmg: 4d4
No. App: 1
Save: F8
Morale: 12
Treasure: Nil
AL: N

Since it's summoned via a 6th level spell, it makes sense that this is a fairly tough creature: good AC, high HD, respectable damage, and infallible morale score are enough to make a bad time for anyone the stalker is sent after or who gets in its way.

The stalker is summoned via spell to perform some task for the magic-user. It could be to kill someone, but it might be an entirely different objective. Unlike automatons like zombies or golems, the stalker is 'very intelligent.' So much so that it may try to subvert the spirit of the command while obeying the letter of it because it resents being summoned (much like an Efreet).

Other factors that make the stalker so dangerous is its innate invisibility. While BX does not go into detail, other editions describe the ability as persisting even if the creature attacks and not being affected by dispel magic. Further, it surprises on a 1-5 (thanks to the invisibility) and is described as a "faultless tracker" (similar to an Amber Golem).

There is no duration to the spell. The Invisible Stalker remains until its task is complete, it's slain, or the 5th level clerical spell dispel evil banishes it. A scenario that requires the presence of fairly powerful characters: a 7th level cleric for banishing and/or an 11th level MU for summoning. This implies that the creature really shouldn't be too common before PCs have a few levels under their belts. ISs do not appear randomly; in the wilderness or in dungeons. They should be placed deliberately if they show up at all (unless summoned by a PC).

As a DM, I can imagine scenarios where an NPC wizard summons an IS and sends it on a mission that conflicts in some way with the PCs' goals. It isn't sent specifically to kill the party, but it will eliminate obstacles as necessary. Remember that stalkers are intelligent, they will solve problems creatively.

Likewise, I expect a scroll or other non-permanent item that allows summoning an Invisible Stalker falling into the party's hands could cause a good deal of plot-fodder. If they aren't careful, they may find that they don't quite get the results they hoped for.

The Monster Mash

  

The other night I stumbled upon the fact that iTunes had several classic horror/monster movies at very low prices. I picked up what many consider the unholy trinity of OG Halloween films: Lugosi's Dracula (1931), Karloff's Frankenstein (1931), and Chaney's Wolfman (1941).

It had been decades since I had seen any of these and could hardly pass up the chance to add them to my library. All three films are short (under 90 minutes each), so I watched them over the last couple of nights. There have been so many attempts to remake and reboot these stories in film over the years, I was eager to go back to the source a bit. I have read Stoker's book, but not Shelley's. The Wolfman was an original screenplay.

Rather than enter into an exhaustive review of each film (You can find those online, and written by better qualified critics than your truly!), I thought I'd talk a little about what struck me after having not seen these films after so many years.

First of all, leaving aside things like primitive special effects (Any movie 70+ years old gets a pass there!), I was struck at how simple these films were. I don't mean they were crude, but they were distilled down to only the bones of the story. In both Dracula and Frankenstein's  cases, to the point where large chunks of the original story were simply dropped. Obviously at the time these were made, the studios didn't necessarily know they were filming anything that would become so iconic. They were making movies to sell tickets at the matinees.

The theme that ran through all three of these films was that modern man scoffed at the supernatural or divine at his peril. This is an idea that is still used quite a lot today. But back when these movies were made, the medium of film was, if not novel, the dominant form of entertainment and there were still new things to see.

In Dracula we see Renfield (his character was combined with Harker's) dismissing the villagers' warnings about going on to the castle at night. When the Count arrives in London society, Mina and the others accept him at face value. When van Helsing arrives, his greatest challenge is getting the people to believe that there are such things as vampires and the Count is one of them. The actual slaying of Dracula takes place off screen and is almost anticlimactic.

Frankenstein sets a wonderfully gloomy tone with the doctor and Fritz (no, not "Igor") robbing a grave. His fiancé and friends are worried about his odd behavior and confront him at the lab, where he is ready to bring his creation to life. He succeeds but is horrified at its violence ("Bad Brain!"). At the end, after the creature has gotten loose and wreaked its havoc, the doctor joins the villagers in hunting it down. After the monster is destroyed in a burning windmill, the doctor convalesces at his father's home. The implication is that his efforts to destroy the monster, along with the mental strain of his realization that it was a bad business to begin with, caused a breakdown.

Both of these cases are man vs. monster. There is an evil loosed upon the modern world. Men must recognize and defeat the evil.

But the Wolfman is different.

Lon Chaney Jr. plays Larry, the 2nd son of a lord who had gone to America to make his own way. When his brother dies, Larry returns as heir apparent. He and his father begin to reconnect and Larry notices a pretty girl in a shop. After some frankly creepy stalking by today's standards (watching her through a telescope), he convinces her to walk out with him to a gypsy camp where they can have their fortune's told. The upshot is one of the gypsies (played in fact by Bela Lugosi) is a werewolf and attacks one of the girl's friends. Larry beats the creature off with a silver handled walking stick but is wounded. The werewolf dies from the battering and turns back into Bela.

I tell this much of the plot to set the scene on Larry waking from his ordeal after being brought home. For a large stretch of the remaining film, it could be viewed as Larry losing his mind. It's in many ways a psychological thriller. He believes he killed a wolf, but instead there lies a dead man. He's told the legend of the werewolf and how surviving victims become wolves. His father, his doctor, and the local law are rational men and believe Larry is simply traumatized. And the argument could be made for it. Does he really change or is he suffering from a split personality? His victims can't say, they're dead! You could watch it from either perspective until the end, when the monster is confronted and defeated by a surviving witness.

What made the Wolfman different? I'm not sure. Perhaps it was the fact it was an original story instead of an adaptation. Maybe it was because it was made later. What I can say is that, after watching these classics through a much older pair of eyes, I was happy to revisit all three. But I would pick Chaney's film as the best "horror" movie.

RMA: Wood Golem

Looking over my many old RMAs, I see that I've now covered every golem from BX except this one. I'll be honest. The wood golem has never seemed that impressive to me. They are, to be sure, the weakest of the golems; both in terms of  puissance and any special abilities. Let's just jump into the stats first, shall we? Since it's so brief, I'm including the full write up of this variety for reference.

Wood Golem (from Cook)

AC: 7
HD: 2+2
Move: 120' (40')
Atk: 1 (fist)
Dmg: 1d8
No. App: 1
Save As: F1
Morale: 12
TT: Nil
AL: N


These monsters are crude manlike figures about 3' tall, rudely hacked from wood. They move stiffly and have a penalty of -1 on their initiative rolls. They burn easily, saving at -2 and suffering one extra point of damage per die from fire-based attacks.

So! Where to begin? Even with golem immunities, this thing is pretty wimpy. with an average of 11 hit points and the armor class of a hireling, the only thing keeping it going is the need for magic to hit it. It packs a punch for something kobold-sized, but then its punch is essentially getting hit with a baseball bat.

It's fire vulnerability and slowness are the kickers, though. There is a pretty good chance that someone in the party goes first. At that point, the thing is an oil flask and a torch away from oblivion. So what's the problem? It's a starter golem. Something easy for the players to smack down and move on from. After all, we don't want to make things too hard on th- BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!

aheh - Sorry! I couldn't get through that sentence with a straight keyboard. That is NOT how things are done here!

OK. So we've got a lemon of a monster. How do we make some limoncello out of this?

Of course you can tweak the stats, make a giant one, and so forth. But lets work with the numbers we've been given, shall we?

"crude manlike figures about 3' tall, rudely hacked from wood." But does it HAVE to be crude? I mean, that's really just cosmetics, right? A grey orc's stats aren't necessarily any different than a green one's, so why do all wood golems have to look like this? What if they were, I don't know...

CREEPY @$$ DOLLS!!

They'd still be slow and flammable, but infinitely more unnerving to have one staring at you than something like Little Wooden Boy:

Now admittedly, that's just flavor text. What about making them more effective monsters?

One thing to keep in mind is that golems are created by someone. Usually at great effort and cost. Even a wooden golem isn't cheap, so you want some kind of ROI.

So who says Wood Golems are for combat?

The relevant definition of "Golem" here is "an automaton or robot." A wood golem could be a handy little servant for some wizard, possibly carved into a whimsical shape. It's size would allow it to move through small passages (Like a -heheh- "dumb. waiter"). It could also be a form of home security by scurrying about, triggering traps according to circumstances. If anyone came across it and it wanted to conceal its nature, it could just go limp in a corner.

My players would go to extreme lengths to leave this scene the hell alone!

If caught, it can fight, albeit not extremely well. That's not its function though. Its job is perform various tasks for the master. It's a spanner in the works. A little robotic assistant that can cut the rope or pull the lever while the PCs are busy fighting the "boss." It can be sent off to run some errand while its master is doing something completely different.

After all, there are no strings on it!

RMA: Bone Golem

We miss you, Steve Z.

When I was a lad, playing 1st edition AD&D, golems were flesh, clay, stone, or iron. It wasn't until I discovered Moldvay/Cook years later (my "Basic" had been Holmes) that I found out about bronze, wood, amber, and bone golems; not to mention living statues.

To me, these somehow underscore "Classic" D&D's distinct flavor, especially B/X's. There's a weirdness to B/X that always seemed lacking in AD&D to me. Maybe it's the artwork, maybe it's the more streamlined rules, but some of these critters were just more wild and FUN to me. I'm sure that's just a personal bias, but there it is.

Anyway, on to old tanglebones here (that's for you Moorcock fans).

Bone Golem (from Cook Expert) 

AC: 2
HD: 8
Move: 120' (40')
Atk: 4 (weapons)
Dmg: by weapons
No. App: 1
Save: F4
Morale: 12
AL: N

OK, first off. One of the things I love about the BG is that it looks kind of like an undead, but it's not. So clerics might waste time trying to Turn Undead or people might waste holy water (Or does one dare hope a Protection from Undead scroll?) on the thing. Also, in my games undead radiate evil for Detect Evil purposes, and this fella doesn't.

Next up, it's got all the great golem immunities: sleep, charm, hold, gas, and non-magical weapons.

Each golem type listed in Expert has a fun little ability or twist to it. Granted the wood golem's are disadvantages (fire and poor initiative), but I still appreciate the extra effort in the details. The Bone Golem's is 4 attacks per round (!) due to extra limbs grafted on. It can only target two people at a time, but still! Even with smaller weapons like shortswords, the thing is a macabre Cuisinart. 8 HD means it's attack rolls aren't too shabby either. A fun twist is the option to give it two 2H weapons (e.g. polearms) and let it do more damage per attack with only 2/round.

It's AC is decent but not unhittable. Again, 8 HD means it's probably in the fight for a little while.

Its Treasure Type -like all golems- is Nil, which means players may want tot think carefully about whether engagement is worth the effort.

So, tactics for it and to fight it?

As a GM, I would place this as a guardian for some tomb or temple. Maybe the bones of heroes were used to serve the cause without foul necromancy being involved. Tactically, it might appear as a pile of bones in an ossuary, magically assembling itself if the sacred place is desecrated.

"Creating a golem is costly, time consuming, and beyond the power of player characters in the D&D Expert rules." (X33) So they shouldn't be random fodder or too casually placed in the game. Someone, at some point, went to a lot of effort to put it wherever it is, so make it count.

Depending on the group it faces, it might focus all four attacks on one PC at a time until it drops the strongest foe, before moving on.

Fun thought #1: Give it two swords (1d8 each under the variable damage rules) and a longbow in the other pair! If you allow missile attacks while engaged in melee, the thing can be peppering the mage with arrows while fending of the melee types.

Fun thought #2: Cover the BG in armor head to toe. Even if it doesn't affect its AC, it may take the PCs a little longer to figure out what they are dealing with.

Fun thought #3: Use up one hand to give it a shield for -1 AC.

Fun thought #4: It's a walking weapons rack. The magic weapons in the treasure hoard are the ones it's using. If the fighter wants that shiny +2 longsword, he's going to have to beat the thing wielding it. I once gave a Bone Golem a +1 battle axe and a +1 glaive. The dwarf (I let them use battle axes as traditional weapons despite their 2h status) and polearm-favoring fighter PCs were very happy after they beat the thing. The dead thief's player, not so much.

When facing the BG, players should have magic weapons and straight damage spells (fireball, etc.) available. Golems are nasty business in general. In most cases they have a specific task to perform and if you have to back off and come back better prepared, then do so. If you absorb some punishment, it shouldn't be too hard for non-beginner PCs to whittle down its hit points. Ranged attacks are your friend if it's sporting only melee attacks, and it's not too terribly fast (or slow) movement-wise.

RMA: Living Statues

These always seemed sort of the "poor man's golem" to me. They are much less powerful overall, and fill basically the same niche. They are immune to Sleep, but lack the other "golemic" immunities. Nevertheless, there are some fun bits in these entries for those who care to give them a whirl.

The B/X rules list three examples, but suggest the DMs feel free to make up their own living statue types. Here's what Moldvay gives us:

• Crystal: No. App 1d6; AL L; AC4; HD3; MV 90'(30'); Att2 (1d6/1d6); Save F3; Morale 11
• Iron: No. App 1d4; AL N; AC2; HD4; MV 30'(10'); Att2 (1d8/1d8 + special); Save F4; Morale 11
• Rock: No. App 1d3; AL C; AC4; HD5; MV 60'(20'); Att2 (2d6/2d6); Save F5; Morale 11

A couple of things strike me as I'm looking at the stats. First off, they have different alignments. Not to mention having alignments at all! This, coupled with the lack of Charm immunity, makes me wonder if they have sentience of some sort. This is further reinforced by a morale of 11. Not 12 like a golem, 11. So that means it's possible for the thing to flee. Verrrry interesting.

Crystal statues offer a lot of interesting possibilities. Imagine one that looks like a crystalline rock formation, ambushing spelunking PCs and blending in with the cavern walls. I also imagine beautifully formed ornamental statues in a palace or temple that serve as guardians when needed. PCs might even be loathe to smash one because it looks valuable. They aren't too scary by themselves, but up to six of them with 2 attacks each? That's a rough encounter for low-ish level parties.

Iron statues have the amusing feature that they seem to be giant magnets. A non-magical weapon that strikes it gets stuck until the statue is killed. I would find it amusing to have it flee with the party's gear stuck to it except that the thing is so darned slow. Even without that, two 1d8 attacks per round is a rough time for someone.

Rock statues are kind of like the Bronze Golem with their lava innards, but instead just heat and scalding hemorrhages, they spray this stuff out of their fingertips like a super-soaker for 2d6 x2 per round! Hilarious!

RMA: Golem, Bronze

I posted about the amber golem a little while ago. There are lots of golems in classic D&D. It seems stone, iron, and flesh are the ones that see the most play, but some of the others are darned cool. And scary as all get-out.

First off, some stats (from Cook):

Bronze Golem

No. Appearing: 1

AL: N

AC: 0

HD: 20

Move: 240' (80')

Att: 1 (fist)

Damage: 3-30 + special

Save: F10

Morale: 12

Well, eek.

They are described as resembling fire giants, which would put them at approximately 16' tall. 3d10 damage from a fist is bad enough, but the thing is full of liquid fire! This means it's scalding even to touch. A hit does another d10 damage from the heat alone (unless a resist fire or similar is in effect). This also means it's immune to fire-based attacks. (Some like it hot, I guess!)

Oh yes, there's one more thing I neglected to mention about this patina'd powerhouse. If you do manage hurt it with that lovely +3 longsword you're carrying, the wound sprays liquid fire on you! You can make a save to avoid it, otherwise 2d6 damage from what's basically lava spattering your face.

Moving on from the fiery aspects, did you happen to notice that movement rate? I guess being 16' tall gives it a long stride. It has AC 0, which is darned respectable, and TWENTY hit dice! Even a middle range model is sporting close to –if not over– a hundred hit points. It also means it's hitting rather often.

Like all golems, it cannot be hit with non-magical weapons. It is immune to Sleep, Hold, and Charm spells as well as poison gasses, etc. So, if you're facing one of these things, what's the plan?

I recommend panic.

Seriously, though. It only gets one attack per round, and that's melee (not ranged). Keep your distance. Resist Fire would be a handy low level spell for this situation. Ranged attacks, especially spells like Lightning Bolt. A wand of cold would be nice, too. If you have to close, blunt weapons like a cleric's  +1 mace will avoid cutting the thing's "skin." Or he might use the spell Striking on a club to let it hit. Although even without the heat/fire damage, the cleric needs to be ready with some healing!

I can imagine this thing guarding a lost temple or a wizard's prize possession. Best of all, it doubles as a furnace, keeping the place warm in winter!

RMA (Random Monster Assessment): Amber Golem

Now I don't really know how this one slipped past me, because it is just too cool!

Golem, Amber (from LL 79)

No. Enc.:  1 (1)

Alignment:  Neutral

Movement:  180' (60')

Armor Class:  6

Hit Dice:  10

Attacks:  3 (2 claws, bite)

Damage:  2d6/2d6/2d10

Save:  F5

Morale:  12

Description: These golems are made of petrified tree sap, and this golden stone is commonly formed into the shape of dire wolves or large cats. They have the ability to detect invisibility to a range of 60', and are able to track any being.

Also, "all golems are unaffected by ordinary weapons. In addition, golems have no true intelligence, and are thus unaffected by hold, charm, or sleep spells. Since they are not truly alive, they are unaffected by poison or gases."

So check this bad boy out. It's faster than a human being, heck it's faster than a warhorse. A riding horse will outpace it, but the A.G. can track any being and doesn't have to rest. At AC6, 10HD, and unaffected by nonmagical weapons, it is not easy to put down. A 10HD critter has a THACO of 11, so it is hitting most of the time with its THREE attacks per round!! Not to mention the insane amount of damage it's dealing with those attacks. (An average of ≈25 points per round!) 

The detect invisible is a nice touch as well. This thing is like an magical terminator. It doesn't think, it doesn't feel, it doesn't eat, and it doesn't sleep. You can't hide from it. It just relentlessly tracks down its target and WHAMMO! I can easily envision scenarios where a ticked off NPC with resources commissions one of these suckers to hunt down an adventuring party that had crossed him.