Monster Highs & Lows of 2003

Shade

Monster Junkie

• Jan 1, 2004

• #1

Since it is traditionally the time for year-end lists, let's make a monster-related one!

Highs:

The Creature Catalog Conversions in this Forum - What fun this has been! It was very gracious of BOZ to open this up to the public.

Fiend Folio - WOTC's best monster book to date, IMO. A good mix of conversions and new (Planescape critters...woo hoo!)

Draconomicon - Let's hope we see more products like this.

Book of Exalted Deeds - Heralded the return of classic celestials, the celestial paragons, and did a much better job of handling the celestials than the new MM.

3.5 Changes - The new special materials and alignment DR types, the beefing up of fiends, and the simplification of assigning feats were all welcome additions.

Lows:

3.5 Changes - The simplification of the "+" system of DR to simply "magic" completely neutered many monster's DR.

MM 3.5 - Riddled with inconsistencies and errors (see celestials), a less useful monster making chapter than the article in Dragon way back when, and only two new creatures, made this more of an obligation that a "must have".

And last but not least, the artwork of the rilmani in Fiend Folio - how disappointing!

Here's hoping 2004 is a banner year!

 

log in or register to remove this ad

demiurge1138

Inventor of Super-Toast

• Jan 1, 2004

• #2

What were the "two new creatures" in the MM 3.5? I recall more than two new swarms, but what are you referring to? Also, what were the major inconsistancies in the celestials in the MM 3.5? I thought that they were better done than they were in the 3.0 MM.

Another "bad" for this year- WoTC's ignorance of their "gentleman's agreement" about conversions in the Tome of Horrors. I'd be more upset, but WoTC's versions are very good...

Demiurge out.

 

Shade

Monster Junkie

• Jan 2, 2004

• #3

demiurge1138 said:

What were the "two new creatures" in the MM 3.5? I recall more than two new swarms, but what are you referring to? Also, what were the major inconsistancies in the celestials in the MM 3.5? I thought that they were better done than they were in the 3.0 MM.

Click to expand...

The bralani and the gauth. I forgot about the swarms. The major inconsistencies were that they changed the resistances with no explanation, only to find them back to the way they were in the Book of Exalted Deeds. Perhaps they were trying to differentiate the different "races" of celestials, but as of now, it just looks like a mistake.

demiurge1138 said:

Another "bad" for this year- WoTC's ignorance of their "gentleman's agreement" about conversions in the Tome of Horrors. I'd be more upset, but WoTC's versions are very good...

Click to expand...

I wish they'd never made that agreement. I love the Tome of Horrors, and would have still bought the Tome of Horrors, regardless of whether WOTC planned to eventually convert some or all of those monsters. The Tome still stands on its own, due to the original creatures, Necromancer games creatures, and just to have alternate versions of monsters with the same name. I just think WOTC made a mistake "surrendering" some of their classic monsters. The same goes for the campaign settings they licensed out. I have no problem with d20 publishers releasing this material, and I'm interested in their take on the material, but I don't like WOTC basically giving this older material a "vote of no-confidence".

 

Leopold

NKL4LYFE

• Jan 2, 2004

• #4

High:

3.5 monster rules-simplicity and clarity
Tome of Horrors-Don't care what year this thing came out it rocked!
Creature catalog conversion-newer is better

Lows:
Penumbra Monster Besiarity-or whatever it was called. Book was awful
Elf books- How many friggin elves do we need?!?! Moon, Sun, Snow, Stars, Petri Dish, WTf?!?!?

 

megamania

Hero

• Jan 4, 2004

• #5

This is more as for me:

High-
Ran two Story hours that I am proud of
Started to work on my "official" Homebrew game
3.5 treatment of Darksun by Pazio

Lows-
Due to work load, I played only twice since July. (once was Mutants and masterminds and the other a pickup DnD)
Overall isolation from favorite hobby

Thankyou EN World for keeping my sanity.

 

Krishnath

First Post

• Jan 5, 2004

• #6

Good -
Draconomicon - Nuff said, this book is gold.
Savage Species - Come on, you know you like it.
Creature Catalog - Getting better each year.

Bad -
Races of Faerun (and other soft cover books) - No more soft cover books, please!

 

K

Knight Otu

First Post

• Jan 5, 2004

• #7

Races of Faerun (and other soft cover books) - No more soft cover books, please!

Click to expand...

Maybe I'm beginning to get stupid, but I'm quite sure that Races of Faerun is a hardcover book.

Oh, and I second the Draconomicon. Ashardalon is very happy.

 

Krishnath

First Post

• Jan 5, 2004

• #8

It is? I thought it was soft cover?

 

Shade

Monster Junkie

• Jan 5, 2004

• #9

It truly is hardcover. The only softcover FR books, to my knowledge are:

-Monsters of Faerun
-Magic of Faerun
-City of the Spider Queen
-Lords of Darkness
-Silver Marches

 

Krishnath

First Post

• Jan 6, 2004

• #10

Well, it still sucks.