Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Curated monster lists - world building
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Remathilis" data-source="post: 9241236" data-attributes="member: 7635"><p>I still find it a valid point when it comes to curation. Most DMs spend lots of time explaining the intricacies of player facing elements, but far less rigid work DM facing elements. Harengon was a new fey race introduced in Witchlight and later MotM. If they were another Monster in a supplement, most DMs would not give it' much more thought than that. It could exist as an interloper from the feywild, or in hidden communities deep in ancient woods like other humanoids. But outside the few DMs who will ban it on sight due to personal preference or strict theming (like running Athas for example) most DMs would not consider the implications of yet another animal-based humanoid monster.</p><p></p><p>But WotC provided PC stats for them, and that changed everything. Because someone might pick them one day, and that requires effort to either nip it in the bud or integrate them into the world ahead of time. I'm sure there are kitchen sink DMs who don't consider that until someone asks to play one, but the previous discussion was an exploration of how curated PC options are superior to kitchen sink worlds, so it would follow that if curation is good for player options to keep consistent to a theme, vision, or design principle, the same thing would be true of DM options. A world based on Tolkien does not fit the Gothic monsters of Horror, Norse myth loses its theme when you're fighting Cthulhu. A grimdark world doesn't have a place for a rabbit-fey humanoid, PC or monster. </p><p></p><p>What I suspect is that most DMs do informally check monsters when designing an adventure, but make that call only at the time of design. Thus, a monster lives in one of two states: existence (been used in the game before) and potentially (has not) with some exceptions for definitely doesn't (orcs on Krynn) whereas PC options are defined ahead of time in a hope to avoid hard feelings when a player asks to play X and the DM says no.</p><p></p><p>I'm framing my argument in more neutral terms here because I do feel there is a point beyond gotcha with this. If internal consistency was the primary factor, it would apply to all aspects of the game, monsters included. But I suspect it has more to do with expectation control than world building the vast majority of the time. Few players get upset when they don't meet or fight orcs, but do get upset if told they can't play as one.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Remathilis, post: 9241236, member: 7635"] I still find it a valid point when it comes to curation. Most DMs spend lots of time explaining the intricacies of player facing elements, but far less rigid work DM facing elements. Harengon was a new fey race introduced in Witchlight and later MotM. If they were another Monster in a supplement, most DMs would not give it' much more thought than that. It could exist as an interloper from the feywild, or in hidden communities deep in ancient woods like other humanoids. But outside the few DMs who will ban it on sight due to personal preference or strict theming (like running Athas for example) most DMs would not consider the implications of yet another animal-based humanoid monster. But WotC provided PC stats for them, and that changed everything. Because someone might pick them one day, and that requires effort to either nip it in the bud or integrate them into the world ahead of time. I'm sure there are kitchen sink DMs who don't consider that until someone asks to play one, but the previous discussion was an exploration of how curated PC options are superior to kitchen sink worlds, so it would follow that if curation is good for player options to keep consistent to a theme, vision, or design principle, the same thing would be true of DM options. A world based on Tolkien does not fit the Gothic monsters of Horror, Norse myth loses its theme when you're fighting Cthulhu. A grimdark world doesn't have a place for a rabbit-fey humanoid, PC or monster. What I suspect is that most DMs do informally check monsters when designing an adventure, but make that call only at the time of design. Thus, a monster lives in one of two states: existence (been used in the game before) and potentially (has not) with some exceptions for definitely doesn't (orcs on Krynn) whereas PC options are defined ahead of time in a hope to avoid hard feelings when a player asks to play X and the DM says no. I'm framing my argument in more neutral terms here because I do feel there is a point beyond gotcha with this. If internal consistency was the primary factor, it would apply to all aspects of the game, monsters included. But I suspect it has more to do with expectation control than world building the vast majority of the time. Few players get upset when they don't meet or fight orcs, but do get upset if told they can't play as one. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Curated monster lists - world building
Top