D&D 5E 5th edition Monster Manual: I think the really nice art detracts from the mediocre functionality of the book.

[Imaro]

Most of what the druid needs is in the PHB in the back. Are you actually going to claim the MM is DM because it might contain something a class can use? The DMG is supposed to contain player options so are you going to sit there and claim it's not supposed to be DM only?

I'm saying exactly what I said... that your assertion that the MM is only for DM use is incorrect... no more and no less. The DMG contains campaign options... big difference.

 

[Mistwell]

Actually, though I disagree with Sailor Moon in most of what she (or he) is saying in this thread, I do agree here. I do tons of monster creation/conversion work without having a specific encounter in mind. Heck, once I've got reliable 5e monster creation guidelines (i.e. once the DMG is in my big sweaty hands), I will probably start a 5e version of my Monster Project, converting all the monsters that I wish were in 5e, many of which I'll probably never get around to using (based on my experience with my 4e Monster Project, which has hundreds of monsters that I've not used in 4e).

Fair enough. I don't have time to create a monster I don't plan to use, myself. I am guessing the intent of the monster creation rules is for people to use them to create monsters they will use in encounters.

 

[Chest Rockwell]

Fair enough. I don't have time to create a monster I don't plan to use, myself. I am guessing the intent of the monster creation rules is for people to use them to create monsters they will use in encounters.

Oh, I love converting just for the fun, one of my favourite aspects of 5th Ed is the ease of converting pre-4th Ed material, I have been a converting-maniac for the last couple of years (races, classes, prestige classes, monsters, spells, magic items, weapons, etc).

 

[Mistwell]

Oh, I love converting just for the fun, one of my favourite aspects of 5th Ed is the ease of converting pre-4th Ed material, I have been a converting-maniac for the last couple of years (races, classes, prestige classes, monsters, spells, magic items, weapons, etc).

I appreciate the work people put into conversion (particularly when the post them online). I do wish I had the time for stuff like that.

 

[Sacrosanct]

I've created a bunch of monsters for 5e and will continue to do so, mostly without any specfic type of encounter in mind. Also, CR is very much loosely designed, and anyone who has DM'd 5e with more than a half dozen monster types would probably agree. It's a good basis to go off of, but you have to take into account the environment in which the monster will be encountered. It is not a hard fast rule.

 

[Chest Rockwell]

I appreciate the work people put into conversion (particularly when the post them online). I do wish I had the time for stuff like that.

I do admit, I sneak the work in at work!

 

[Tormyr]

With the advent of the MM, their really is enough information to create customized monsters, it just takes more work until the DMG comes out in November/December.

A huge number of creatures are available since last Friday. For a lot of cases, just dropping in the 5e version and adjusting #s of creatures for balance will be sufficient. Especially if the CR is 2 or above.

The basic DMG states that traits can be added/swapped without adjusting the CR. So a Veteran can become a High Elf Veteran and keep its CR. This also allows you to make a lizardfolk berserker for instance. Just give it the ability to hold its breath for 15 minutes and choose whether a +3 to AC from natural armor is better than the unarmored defense that the berserker would otherwise use.

For monsters that are not in the MM, such as an allip, there is enough information to faithfully recreate it using a 5e mindset. Choose a creatue that is as similar as possible from the standpoint of CR first and then features and traits if possible and natural vs equipment attacks if possible. Strip the traits that are not applicable and add in the traits that are applicable. The allip would get incorporeal and undead. It would also have a Wisdom version of the ability drain attack I saw on another creature that allowed the Wisdom damage to be healed on a short rest. With a few of those things added in, the allip will be perfectly serviceable in the campaign.

For classed NPCs, this will be a little more difficult if what you want is not in the NPC appendix.

I put together a CR progression of the various wizards available in the MM, starter set and HotDQ. There are only about half a dozen, and fewer if you take out the ones that have significant magic items that will skew their CR. I am not putting it up here because it would be enough information to recreate the NPCs without the MM. If you put them in a table with CR going 1 to 20 and write out the NPCs' #of hit dice, spellcaster level, and ability scores, you can then fill the blanks in with either averages or slowly increases numbers for the CRs that do not have an NPC. You can then choose a CR and see what the appropriate wizard stats would be.

This kind of setup, while it will not take long for the various NPC classes. Depending on which books you have access to, you can create these charts for fighters, rogues, druids, clerics, etc. One of the NPCs in HotDQ is even an eldritch knight. While it will take a little time to set up, it will make things a lot easier while waiting until December for the DMG.

Yes, all of these options take some work and time. But even if the DMG was already out, it would be taking time to customize creatures anyway. Just customizing a creature says that you are ready for a time commitment. I would argue that it is possible to get a good enough version of custom creatures right now.

 

[billd91]

I'm saying exactly what I said... that your assertion that the MM is only for DM use is incorrect... no more and no less. The DMG contains campaign options... big difference.

I think the size of this difference is largely an idiosyncratic judgment. For most of D&D's history, the MM has been considered just as DM-oriented as the DMG. The fact that players occasionally have reasons to use either doesn't really change that.

Whether the monster building guidelines are in the MM or DMG seems to be an issue of preference more than anything else. Having it with the rest of the monsters, as with 3e and PF, supports a certain kind of convenience - having it in the DMG supports another.

 

[fanboy2000]

I think some of you are forgetting that the DMG is supposed to be carrying tons of modules that allow for varied play, magic items, more DM optional player options, a section on how to actually DM, probably more info on the planes, poisons and traps, and now monster creation. How thick do you think the DMG is going to be?

This really confuses me. Like what are you afraid monster creation is going to take the place? What's not going to be in the DMG that you would rather have than monster creation?

So they couldn't have made the MM the flagship manual of the monster series by giving it the tools to do custom monster creation along with monsters and just extended the monster lineup in the MM II and III?

They could have, but I prefer that they did this.

I'm sure people wouldn't be too, pardon the term I'm going to borrow, butthurt if monsters like the Flumph and a few others didn't make it in the manual I and saved for the manual II or maybe III.

Had they done it your way, I'd be complaining that to many of my favorite monsters won't be coming out for a very long time.

One of the reasons I think this MM is so big and is catalog is that there are no plans for a MMII. Heck, there's no guarantee that a Psionoics Handbook is going to be out anytime soon. If it's out by next year's Gen Con, I'd be surprised.

IIRC, one of the reasons Gith___ weren't in the 3.0 MM was because they were saving them for the Psionics Handbook. And I think it was a mistake. With 4e, a lot of iconic monsters were pushed to MMII, and I wasn't happy with that either. And I like 4e. This MM is, for better or for worse, the MM for a while. It needed to have as many monsters in it as possible because we're not getting more MMs for a while.

Again I will repeat. How thick do you think the DMG os going to be? If they are complaining about page count with the PHB and MM, they are going ro do the same with the DMG. This would probably mean they are either going to leave out a lot of what people want, or give bits and pieces of everything to the point where you feel like there os so much missing. I remember NPC creation being in the DMG but not monsters.

I'd argue that NPC creation is in the MM!

I rather like the reboot, although I may be in the minority. I've learned to avoid fanboy sections on the Internet.

Did someone summon me?

 

[Chest Rockwell]

I'd argue that NPC creation is in the MM!

Yep, now, Monsters/NPCs, there's a fine line.