monster manual

[Rakusia]

was thinking should certain player classes have access to either the monster manual or be able to write their own. like druids and rangers for example. to me it would make sense for a hunter to make notes on certain animals that he has encountered and keep track on how he beat them how many attacks they could handle. now personally i would go with after encounter do a gather information check and if successful allow them to copy the monster manual entry into their characters log book. otherwise if they just got to use monster manual they would be able to look at any creature they wanted

 

[Greenfield]

I have no problem with a player cracking the book if they're planning to summon something, though by the book most of the critters on the Summon Monster list are either Fiendish or Celestial. The MM version of the critter, straight, isn't what they're summoning.

The only time I have a problem with people cracking the books is when they're trying to look up a spell, item, class and/or creature that they're currently facing.

 

[the Jester]

was thinking should certain player classes have access to either the monster manual

Not in my campaign.

 

[was]

..You run the risk of constantly meta-gaming players if you are continually giving them access to the manual. IME, knowing all the stats and resistances of what they face will also take much of the mystery and fun out of encounters as well.
..I think that it is fine if the characters want to write their own beastiary, based solely on their own experiences. Like if a fireball doesn't appear to hurt the red dragon. Giving them access to MM entries, however, is a problem. Those entries contain a lot more information than the PC's would normally be privy to simply by killing a creature. Maybe if they observed the creature in the wild, then captured one and studied it and later dissected it. It might take a pc years of study to fully detail an animal like the MM.

 

[pemerton]

was thinking should certain player classes have access to either the monster manual or be able to write their own.

In 4e this is handeld via Monster Knowledge checks to learn the personality, abilities, resistances etc of a creature.

 

[Herzog]

3.5 also has that mechanic.

The best way to handle this is to let players compile a stat block list of all the monster they can summon ( inluding the template changes) so they don't need the MM during play.

 

[Li Shenron]

was thinking should certain player classes have access to either the monster manual or be able to write their own. like druids and rangers for example. to me it would make sense for a hunter to make notes on certain animals that he has encountered and keep track on how he beat them how many attacks they could handle. now personally i would go with after encounter do a gather information check and if successful allow them to copy the monster manual entry into their characters log book. otherwise if they just got to use monster manual they would be able to look at any creature they wanted

I don't see it as a major problem to let the players read the MM, after all a lot of them own a MM themselves and there is nothing you can do to prevent them from reading it at home!

But I would stay far away from making assumptions like the above, on the ground that "it makes sense", because often the opposite assumptions makes sense as well.

A hunter learns to know her prays sure, but it is a very strong assumption that a hunter in a fantasy world has the opportunities for fighting a lot of creatures of the same type, except for harmless game like deers and hares.

If you say that a Ranger with a chosen favored enemy (the best candidate for this) should be allowed access to full stats of monster X, you are implying that there are plenty of monster X in the world in the first place, that the Ranger has actually met several of monster X and survived, or there are reliable books available written by people who have, and that it has been possible to figure out the details (the characters don't know "numbers" but if the player has them available, we can say the character is aware of whatever equates to those numbers in fantasy world terms).

Are they reasonable assumption? Yes.
Should you take them for granted? Hell, NO!

When I DM a game, my typical fantasy world setup is "low-magic medieval europe-styled points of darkness". That actually means the world is not full of monsters and most importantly is not full of books.

OTOH there's nothing wrong with setting the game in a world where monsters are a common sights, and you can find manuals and teachers in every village.

So before you make those assumptions you must check with your DM and understand what kind of fantasy setting she is running.

 

[jasper]

Before 3.5, I had monster manuals in my world. If the cheat sheet could be found it was about 1K gp price per hit dice of monster. Then the player could read the monster manual at the table. Also I had the pc track the monsters they killed. I forgot gp I charged for off board/down time research on the monsters they killed.
But I like the idea of monster knowledge skill check, with the fact the DM will thrown in a +/- depending on pc history /monster rareity.

 

[Grazzt]

Not in my campaign.

Mine either. Players NEVER get to see the monster books or stats.