4e Has Less Raw Content: Fact!

[ExploderWizard]

So, why not have a single stat block and you can slap on whatever humanoid description you feel like? Or, better yet, a collection of stat blocks ranging in power level and tactics, that you can slap on whatever description you like?

Why does every creature need a new stat block when there is no particular mechanical difference?

Exactly. Why do we need 5 or 6 completely different stat blocks for goblins when one will do then just add abilities based on role. This would allow for more race/ ability combos without reprinting statblocks for the monster.

The defining difference is that the method you describe is simply cloning a set of combat statistics with new skin. It also points out that ecology and culture are meaningless. There are major differences in an air elemental and a hippogriff beyond combat statistics. If not then it is a bland flavorless world indeed.

 

[jgbrowning]

Yes, but I don't think that point has any meaning. The response to your point is: so what? If they had added a bunch of filler text and not increased the price, would we be any better off? The books would have more "content" that way, after all.

Just because something is objective doesn't make it meaningful.

Since there is content that could have been added that isn't filler and there is also white space available for that added content, I have to say that, yes, we would have been better off, IMO. There were two birds to be killed by one stone and it wasn't done. Hopefully MM2 will not have the same problems.

joe b.

 

[ExploderWizard]

So basically, 4e is a list of what 6 monsters with "random" abilities tacked on and levels...

More than 6 but a lot less than what could have been included for that page count to be sure.

 

[Hussar]

Exactly. Why do we need 5 or 6 completely different stat blocks for goblins when one will do then just add abilities based on role. This would allow for more race/ ability combos without reprinting statblocks for the monster.

The defining difference is that the method you describe is simply cloning a set of combat statistics with new skin. It also points out that ecology and culture are meaningless. There are major differences in an air elemental and a hippogriff beyond combat statistics. If not then it is a bland flavorless world indeed.

Agreed. But, again, do you need the RULES to tell you the differences. Mechanically, a hippogriff would work perfectly well for an air elemental. It's got fly by attack, gets bonuses to attack when flying. What else does it need?

The fluff? Well, that's what the DM is for. I don't need anyone to tell me what an air elemental eats for breakfast. That's my job when I'm building my world.

 

[Scarbonac]

the "champion"

Due to a bizarre confluence of factors (including looking through my bifocals wrong) I read this as "the cinnamon" and started musing about what "the cinnamon goblin" would be capable of before I realized what it actually said.

 

[Dinkeldog]

Exactly. Why do we need 5 or 6 completely different stat blocks for goblins when one will do then just add abilities based on role. This would allow for more race/ ability combos without reprinting statblocks for the monster.

The defining difference is that the method you describe is simply cloning a set of combat statistics with new skin. It also points out that ecology and culture are meaningless. There are major differences in an air elemental and a hippogriff beyond combat statistics. If not then it is a bland flavorless world indeed.

Inside a dungeon, culture and ecology aren't all that important. I can try to somehow develop a food chain, some kind of economy, and basics in personality, if that's going to be warranted. It depends on what my group wants--if they're wanting a slash-and-hack day, then none of that matters. If they're in the mood for a heavy role-playing weekend, then that's different.

One of the strengths of 3E was that it provided more separate types of monsters and allowed for advancing the monster. The problem was that advancing the monster required a computer program in order to make sure I didn't miss a saving throw or to-hit bonus, or size variations, which threw everything off again.

The 4E alternative that I've had friends walk-through, is how to take a base monster and throw on a template, and then describe in a couple minutes what special abilities it would have in and out of combat.

In 1E, everything was very static. Both editions move from that static quality, but in different ways. I can understand certain people preferring the 3E method, and I can understand others preferring the 4E method.

 

[Fenes]

In 1E, everything was very static. Both editions move from that static quality, but in different ways. I can understand certain people preferring the 3E method, and I can understand others preferring the 4E method.

I prefer the "don't sweat the details when adjusting monsters" way. Works very well in my 3.0E campaign.

 

[Dasch]

I would say that it is more of a marketing scheme. They put less content in the first book so they can make a second book. I am not saying it is a bad thing. It is just a way for companies tomake money.

 

[Hussar]

I prefer the "don't sweat the details when adjusting monsters" way. Works very well in my 3.0E campaign.

How is, "I don't use these rules and just ignore them" a case of working very well?

 

[ExploderWizard]

Agreed. But, again, do you need the RULES to tell you the differences. Mechanically, a hippogriff would work perfectly well for an air elemental. It's got fly by attack, gets bonuses to attack when flying. What else does it need?

The fluff? Well, that's what the DM is for. I don't need anyone to tell me what an air elemental eats for breakfast. That's my job when I'm building my world.

For me a MM is more than just a collection of combat statblocks. We expect different things from similar products.