Pathfinder 1E Bestiary 4 or do we really need another monster book?

[Angrydad]

Yeah MM 3 was pretty heavy power creep/out of whack CRs.

How so? I picked it up and haven't really noticed anything jumping out as unbalanced. Admittedly, I haven't had chances to use the vast majority of the critters in a game session yet.

 

[brvheart]

Yep, the CRs in MM 4, MM 5, and the Eberron Core Rulebook all show significant power-creep relative to MM 1. We got a major shock the first time I used one of those monsters against a core-only bunch of PCs.

A big part of the issue is that the core of 3.5e was written on the assumption that PCs wouldn't be optimised, that they would mostly be single-class, and that they would find items using the DMG's random treasure tables, rather than buying them (or making them in any numbers). Obviously, those assumptions were very quickly shown to be faulty!

Another part of the problem was that big bits of 3e just aren't as robust as they seem. Basically, anything higher than about 10th level, anything to do with item creation (and, by extension, purchase), anything to do with monster-as-PC (or shapeshifting), and the multiclass system are all problematic. I get the impression that while the game as a whole was massively playtested, that effort was massively concentrated on some areas, with others only getting a minimum of attention.

But that wasn't necessarily the fault of the rules system itself. IMHO, it worked. The issues were with the optimization and item creation that got wacky and no controls were put over it. And this has carried over into pathfinder. If the game went back to what it was intended it would have been and be a better game without the power creep. This is also why I did not use the later sources that really intensified the power creep, like most of everything from PHB II and on. Being on the DNDR committee, we did have at least some input into what went into 3.5, but only so much.

 

[Lwaxy]

I sure hope it is the last monster book... after all I am still using the D&D ones and lots of 3rd party stuff, too.

 

[Argyle King]

Plus, there's Cthulhu.

Really?

 

[megamania]

Needed? No
Truth be told, all one really needs is the core three books to play DnD. PHB, DMG and the basic first MM.

But there is always something new, un thought of and fun in a book. So long as its not like MM 5 which was... basic humanoids with this class and this class.... that was disappointing and well.... bogus.

 

[Gundark]

To answer the original question: YES!

Let's try an experiment: Let's replace the word "monster" with some other words and see if a similar sentiment makes any sense.

We already have plenty enough monsters. Why would anyone want more than what's already out there?

We already have plenty enough non-player characters. Why would anyone want more than what's already out there?

We already have plenty enough spells. Why would anyone want more than what's already out there?

We already have plenty enough magic items. Why would anyone want more than what's already out there?

We already have plenty enough campaign settings. Why would anyone want more than what's already out there?

We already have plenty enough adventure modules. Why would anyone want more than what's already out there?

We already have plenty enough fantasy fiction. Why would anyone want more than what's already out there?

One could make an arguement that each of the above statements are true. What one person perceives as interesting the another perceives as bloat

 

[Gundark]

And considering that Paizo GIVES their material away for free in the PRD, I won't begrudge them a new bestiary every year. Game material in HTML $0, Electronic Art (PDF) $10, Fancy Hardcover $40.

I'm assuming that the issues with the OP isn't so much an issue with cost, but more of one of Paizo's allocation of resources. Putting out a new monster book means that they aren't putting out another type of book, one that may have more appeal to the OP

 

[Nightfall]

The OP might not like monster books. But I do.

 

[Wicht]

Monster books are my favoritist of Roleplaying books

 

[DaveMage]

Really?

Yep.

Bokrug, Cthulhu, and Hastur are stated up as "Great Old Ones" (pages 135-141).