Help Me Understand the Difference Between Classed Monsters and MM5 Monsters

Einan · Aug 27, 2007

Alright, so the MM5 has been pointed at as a preview of 4e. Now I need some clarifications.

When MM4 came out, there was a lot of uproar over the classed monsters section. The general consensus as I saw it was that it was too much space devoted to making monsters that a DM could easily make himself.

Now, the MM5. I bought this before the 4e announcement, looked it over and discovered hobgoblins with class abilities, without actual classes. Why is this an improvement? It seems to me that they just did the exact same thing as a classed monster, but removed the class part and kept the class ability parts. So, I'm somewhat unimpressed. Why is this an improvement over the classed monsters? Help me, ENWorld, you're my only hope!

I'm not looking to troll for why or why not MM4 or MM5 was teh suck, but why this is an improvement or what improvements it foretells.

Thanks!

EINAN

(Not to add tangents, but I want to be excited by 4e, but my major beef is: THEY ANNOUNCED IT NINE MONTHS BEFORE IT'S COMING OUT! ARGGGHH?!?! So now I have nine months of preview and teases and hype before the actual product comes out. No product short of a divinely inspired tome could POSSIBLY live up to this. I really think WOTC dropped the ball on this point. End tangent.)

Shawn_Kehoe · Aug 27, 2007

Einan said:
Alright, so the MM5 has been pointed at as a preview of 4e. Now I need some clarifications.

When MM4 came out, there was a lot of uproar over the classed monsters section. The general consensus as I saw it was that it was too much space devoted to making monsters that a DM could easily make himself.

Now, the MM5. I bought this before the 4e announcement, looked it over and discovered hobgoblins with class abilities, without actual classes. Why is this an improvement? It seems to me that they just did the exact same thing as a classed monster, but removed the class part and kept the class ability parts. So, I'm somewhat unimpressed. Why is this an improvement over the classed monsters? Help me, ENWorld, you're my only hope!

I'm not looking to troll for why or why not MM4 or MM5 was teh suck, but why this is an improvement or what improvements it foretells.

Thanks!

EINAN

(Not to add tangents, but I want to be excited by 4e, but my major beef is: THEY ANNOUNCED IT NINE MONTHS BEFORE IT'S COMING OUT! ARGGGHH?!?! So now I have nine months of preview and teases and hype before the actual product comes out. No product short of a divinely inspired tome could POSSIBLY live up to this. I really think WOTC dropped the ball on this point. End tangent.)

The theory goes like this:

Since PCs encounter a wide variety of situations over the campaign, and are in effect "the stars of the show," they need certain mechanical complexities to remain versatile.

Monsters, on the other hand, have an average game life of 5 turns. So while you could add 5 levels of rogue or fighter to a hobgoblin, much of the mechanical complexity of the fighter class is wasted, since the hobgoblin will only live for 30 seconds anyway. The result is inefficient creature design - a creature that is complex to comprehend and create, and will seldom be used to its full potential.

Mearls' theory behind MM 5 was to design monsters for specific roles, and only give you stats required to fulfill that role. If you want a raging hobgoblin, give it the rage feature - but don't worry about giving it a barbarian's full skill progression.

Shawn

Shortman McLeod · Aug 27, 2007

Shawn_Kehoe said:
Mearls' theory behind MM 5 was to design monsters for specific roles, and only give you stats required to fulfill that role. If you want a raging hobgoblin, give it the rage feature - but don't worry about giving it a barbarian's full skill progression.

I love this idea, yet I wonder how many 3.5 DM's were already doing this? I know I was, and still do.

I mean, seriously, how many DM's actually sit down and write up a complete, detailed stat block for every monster their PCs will encounter?

Shawn_Kehoe · Aug 27, 2007

Shortman McLeod said:
I love this idea, yet I wonder how many 3.5 DM's were already doing this? I know I was, and still do. I mean, seriously, how many DM's actually sit down and write up a complete, detailed stat block for every monster their PCs will encounter?

I've been running published modules for a while now, but when it comes to stat blocks I still tend to extract the 20% of the information that I will use 80% of the time. It saves a lot of page flipping.

MadMaxim · Aug 27, 2007

Shortman McLeod said:
I love this idea, yet I wonder how many 3.5 DM's were already doing this? I know I was, and still do. I mean, seriously, how many DM's actually sit down and write up a complete, detailed stat block for every monster their PCs will encounter?

Well, I usually do that... :\

Rodrigo Istalindir · Aug 27, 2007

Shortman McLeod said:
I love this idea, yet I wonder how many 3.5 DM's were already doing this? I know I was, and still do. I mean, seriously, how many DM's actually sit down and write up a complete, detailed stat block for every monster their PCs will encounter?

Never. I give the monsters what I think would be appropriate and fun within the context of the planned encounter, do a quick eyeball check to make sure I didn't do anything too overboard in terms of # of feats or skill points, etc., and that's it.

Jhaelen · Aug 28, 2007

Shortman McLeod said:
I mean, seriously, how many DM's actually sit down and write up a complete, detailed stat block for every monster their PCs will encounter?

I do, sort of. I don't do it for monsters I use straight from the book, but I definitely do it for any monsters I advanced, gave class levels or templated.

In the beginning I just jotted down the differences to the original creatures but that made them extremely difficult to use properly in a fight.

To the OP's question: I asked myself the same question and I don't think it's much of an improvement, really. For some monsters I'm actually considering to redo them as a classed version, e.g. the Shadowflayer. I think they would work a lot better than the MM5 version if they actually had ninja or assassin class levels...

Others probably work better the way they are because they received neat abilities over and beyond what would be possible by applying class levels, like the Kuo-Toa whips.