Are D&D 4e entries incorrect now?

[CelineSSauve]

I was doing some data entry because I got a friend who might be interested in trying D&D 4e this summer.

I haven't done data entry in ages, but I notices that as I was entering the abilities for a creature, the bonuses were incorrect. Sometimes changing with the same number entered.
They are all +2 over what the book says.
Specifically, the Grimlock Minion (Page 148 of the original Monster Manual) should have 17(+8), 12(+6), 15(+7), 14(+7), 7(+3) & 9(+4).
Instead the program is giving me 17(+10), 12(+8), 15(+9), 14(+9), 7(+5) & 9(+6).
I checked the Ice Archon Rimehammer I'd entered in a previous data entry session and its stats match page 20 of the Monster Manual.

Does anyone know if the Ruleset was "updated" at some point to cause this error?

I can't manually adjust the modifiers in the program, so I'm not sure how I can fix this... I don't want to touch any of my previously entered entries in case the same issue (bug?) makes their entries incorrect as well. :(

I'm going to put the data entry on hold for the time being, since incorrect entries are effectively useless, so I hope someone knows a solution for this.

[Apologies if this is the wrong forum for this sort of question.]

[LordEntrails]

MOD: moved to the 4E forum. I suspect someone here knows the answer.

[kevininrussia]

The stats you gave from FG is correct. Grimlocks were updated in Dungeon Magazine 194 page 75.

[CelineSSauve]

The stats you gave from FG is correct. Grimlocks were updated in Dungeon Magazine 194 page 75.

For 4e, or 4e "Next"?

I purchased the program so that I could run 4e, and it's not matching the same bonus as it should have as per the materials I paid for and am using to run 4e proper.

[Llyle]

I looked it up in my copy of the Monster Manual, p148. The entry in the Monster Manual is wrong.

The Grimlock Minion is a level 14 monster.
The Ability checks work like ther would with PCs, which is (Ability-10)/2 as Ability-Modifier plus half level.

The entry is Number (+bonus), so it gives you the monster's score in that stat first and then in parentheses the bonus to a check, should you roll an ability check for the monster.

The entry of
Str 17 (+8)
would mean the Grimlock has a Strength of 17 and has a +8 to Strength checks.
This is wrong though, as a stat of 17 would get you a modifier of 3 and as the Grimlock Minion is level 14 it would get +7 on top of that for half level. So the actual bonus for the Strength check should be +10.

This error was corrected later in the Dungeon magazine.
Have fun playing 4e, but there's no need to use mistakes they made in the books.

[CelineSSauve]

I looked it up in my copy of the Monster Manual, p148. The entry in the Monster Manual is wrong.

The Grimlock Minion is a level 14 monster.
The Ability checks work like ther would with PCs, which is (Ability-10)/2 as Ability-Modifier plus half level.

The entry is Number (+bonus), so it gives you the monster's score in that stat first and then in parentheses the bonus to a check, should you roll an ability check for the monster.

The entry of
Str 17 (+8)
would mean the Grimlock has a Strength of 17 and has a +8 to Strength checks.
This is wrong though, as a stat of 17 would get you a modifier of 3 and as the Grimlock Minion is level 14 it would get +7 on top of that for half level. So the actual bonus for the Strength check should be +10.

This error was corrected later in the Dungeon magazine.
Have fun playing 4e, but there's no need to use mistakes they made in the books.
So are all the monsters incorrect, of just that one?

If the monsters are actually weaker in the book, that's fine.

[Llyle]

So are all the monsters incorrect, of just that one?

If the monsters are actually weaker in the book, that's fine.

I don't know, since I haven't checked all the monsters in the book, but the math is easy enough to do, so you could check the monsters as you use them. Having lower bonuses to ability checks doesn't really make monsters weaker though, just a bit less competent. How often do you make ability checks for monsters?

Kruthik Hatchling is wrong, too, for example - but like I said, I didn't check all of them.

[CelineSSauve]

Kruthik Hatchling is wrong, too, for example - but like I said, I didn't check all of them.

Okay, I'll keep that in mind as I continue my data entry. Haven't gotten there as I'm doing it alphabetically and skipping a lot of 2nd and 3rd tier monsters.

[kevininrussia]

Through the life of 4e WOTC tinkered with the Monsters, updating them and modifying the monster math. Not all monsters got this treatment. I believe Monster Manual 3 and the Monster Vault has the updated math and anything else that was put out at that time. I run both old and new style monsters and never noticed that much of an issue so I would not worry about it to much. I think the issues arose in higher levels when players would lock monsters down with conditions, and the combats became a slog. So they tried to fix that.

As far as checks go, mostly I use them when my players do a Bluff or Stealth check but that happens maybe one time a game session.