-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
Pathfinder 1E WotC desperately needs to learn from Paizo and Privateer Press
- Thread starter Failed Saving Throw
- Start date
Nikosandros
Golden Procrastinator
Well, I think that it is a matter of personal tastes. I find the white space in 4e manuals to be truly excessive and I don't have any problems reading the 3.x manuals.
Last edited:
...Uh, white space does not literally mean "space that is the color white." It refers to blank parts where there isn't anything down.
You can keep the background white
The issue I have with the MM and the statblocks is that they're more or less not really that neccesary anymore now that the monster builder exists. Even without the monster builder, you have more then enough statblocks to last you a lifetime, and with the monster builder (And quite frankly, the tech stuff for 4e IS good enough to be a damn good buy), you will never want for a monster statblock again.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying we should be super exacto on everything. As someone who pretty much never played in Greyhawk, the different bits on religion that class write ups had did nothing for me. But I think we could do better then is already there.
Obryn
Hero
Yep, there's definitely personal taste involved. But I can say, for myself, I had to print out monsters ahead of time in 3e, but often don't bother with 4e. The stat blocks are legible at an arm's length, and the clean layout helps me keep track of where I am pretty well. So while I miss fluff, and earlier on I complained about its lack, I have learned that this way of doing things has its own advantages.
-O
Nikosandros
Golden Procrastinator
The layout in 4e is very legible, you'll get no argument from me.
I can see why they went that route, but I personally think that they went somewhat overboard.
delericho
Legend
Actually, "Old World Bestiary" has a number of really significant weaknesses.
1. Basically, and primarily, there's just too much fluff. Given the size of the book, and given also that it is the only monster book for the game in question, the range of monsters provided is insufficient. Critically, the book doesn't include many, or indeed any, stats for human opponents. Given the prevalence of such antagonists in the game, this is a critical weakness. (3e D&D made the same mistake - it makes prep so much longer when you have to generate all the stats by hand.)
(Obviously, a D&D Monster Manual is unlikely to ever be the only monster book for the game, mitigating this latter concern.)
2. One of the things they do do to cut down on the size of stat-blocks is reduce the talents to a single word name, meaning you have to cross-reference several books in play. The full talent descriptions should be included in the descriptions. (3e also made this mistake with feat names; 4e does much better in that regard.)
The fluff that is there is extremely good; it's just that it gives rise to several other weaknesses in the book.
I agree. Some DM's don't want "forced" fluff, but many do. I do. I can always change it. And more importantly, your point regarding newbies!
That's really the only thing I find lacking in the 4e MM format. A brief text description. Not every creature gets a picture, and sometimes the pictures they get are crap! (subjective, I know)
Of course, without a text description, the reader can't notice when the art doesn't match the text!A clever solution to an old problem!
If you look back to what the developers at wizards were posting around the time, one of the columns dealt with the fact that "box text" tended to make players eyes glaze over. IIRC, the column recounted how a developer had walked around the areas at GenCon where people were playing D&D and observed the players reaction to the DM. The observation was that when the DM was reading off the page, the players were listless and inattentive. When the DM was narrating on the fly, the players were much more attentive.
The revelation there was that text meant to be read aloud is wasted on the majority of players. A good DM is telling the story, not reading it aloud. So essentially, I think that the 4e manuals intentionally stripped out things, like monster descriptions, that were meant to be read aloud as sort of a way of forcing the DM to improvise.
It's a change in philosophy that may not suit everyone. I suspect that while the old way of description-heavy modules may have bored everyone but the 1 in 5 players that enjoys being read to, the new way of sparse modules may provide a worse experience for players that don't have the sort of improvisational DM it takes to liven the the experience up.
Hussar
Legend
Maybe it's because I went back and reread my Basic/Expert books recently.
Look at the monster writeups in those books. You get four (sometimes five) monsters per PAGE! A statblock that is about eight lines, 2 columns, a paragraph, sometimes two, of information about the monsters and that's it.
Yet, B/E is heralded as one of the greats of the game. It was certainly the gateway game for many here. Obviously back in the early 80's when many of us got our start, we didn't need two or three paragraphs of nothing but fluff about a given monster. Why do we need it now?
Look at the monster writeups in those books. You get four (sometimes five) monsters per PAGE! A statblock that is about eight lines, 2 columns, a paragraph, sometimes two, of information about the monsters and that's it.
Yet, B/E is heralded as one of the greats of the game. It was certainly the gateway game for many here. Obviously back in the early 80's when many of us got our start, we didn't need two or three paragraphs of nothing but fluff about a given monster. Why do we need it now?
cignus_pfaccari
First Post
Our eyes didn't glaze over so much as brim with rage over the complete and utterly bizarre machinations found in many box texts.
"You're mad, mad as hell at the AI..."
(interrupting) "The hell we aren't, we just want to be left alone!"
DM: HA! It's box text, it can make you do ANYTHING!
Players: (cry)
Brad
2 words: Bigger base.
There are more gamers now than ever. Perhaps in that time period, DMs tended to be the more creative (and probably more widely read) types who yearned to world-build and design. (That would at least conform to my personal observations over 30+ years in the hobby, and it seems to accurately describe many, if not all, of the more respected RPG designers.) On average, those DMs probably didn't need much fluff to inspire them- they were looking for critters to conform to their pre-conceived notions about what monsters fit their adventure/campaign ideas.
Today, you're probably seeing more DMs who are in that position because someone in the group has to do it. There's more need for creative "training wheels" for those DMs to get a feel for the process & responsibility of running a game from the lonesome side of the screen.
That said, even though I've been GMing various systems since 1980 or so (about 3 years after finding the hobby), I still think that good, well-written fluff can be a launching pad for the imagination for any DM. An ecology, a personality, a social interaction common a creature may inspire a campaign. It could also trigger a connection to OTHER things in your brain so that you re-write the fluff. That's how I came to design Cyberman/Dalek-esque Warforged into a homebrew.
Of course, ANYTHING that catches the imagination can inspire me to write something for a game- music, art, science. See my sig for my favorite thread: its as full of ideas as a black monolith is full of stars.
Similar Threads
