What do you want from the Monster Manual?

[ForeverSlayer]

Perhaps. But, I feel, in general, the tribal monsters especially and all monsters to a certain extent, do get repetitive. We [anyone who's been playing for any amount of time] have a built in knowledge or at least conception of what a kobold or a goblin or orc is like. To keep them from being repetitive, then that puts the onus on the DM to take some time and make them their own (as, I feel, it should be).

The MM doesn't have to give me 3-5 different kobolds or goblins or orcs so I can be "different" with "my" masterpiece kobold/goblin/orc. The themes presented for PCs should be more than adequate to give your tribal humanoids some diversity without necessarily having to each be a special snowflake...but if you want that "extra level of complexity", the guidelines are there for you to implement (probably detailed in the DMG but I see no reason not to have some guidleines in the front or back in an appendix of the MM as well.)

If the PC "barbarian" who has the berserker theme can do XYZ, then why shouldn't an orc with the same theme? You don't have to give me a separate stat block for "Orc Berserker."



I'm thinkin' something like this...I open the MM and turn to "Goblin."

There, with a lovely picture, is the stat block for joe-shmoe-average goblin warrior that you are going to be encountering 8 or 9 times out of 10. The "skirmisher" Theme [just as example] is built in to the stats and detailed in the fluffy description goodness. As well as things like "tribal organization/life", size of the "average" community, how many goblins get a "captain/elite warrior", how many more have a king with/among them, etc. How they thrive on/excel at Ambushing, setting (and luring into) traps, etc...general tactics.

Then in a nice, neat lil' sidebar, colored block off to the side:

"To diversify your band/tribe of goblins, the following additional themes and abilities are suggested: Archer, Hunter, Spearman, Sneak Attack, or any other Skill or class ability of the Rogue class.

To create a goblin shaman or witch-doctor: +X to AC; -Y to HP; Apply the shaman and or sorcerer Themes with spells appropriate for [up to] a 4th level caster; or any other Skill of the Mage or Cleric class.

To create a goblin king/chieftain: +X to AC; +Y to HP; remove attack penalty for acting in daylight; any other Skill or Class ability of the Fighter class.

Elite/Bodyguards of the goblin tribe: +X to AC; automatic max hit points; remove penalty for acting in daylight; add the "hunter" Theme or any Combat Maneuver [Exploit/Fighting Style/whatever they will call them] available to the Fighter Class."

​

That sounds like more than enough. "Goblin Archer" vs. "Goblin Trap-layer" vs. "Goblin Ambusher" or "Goblin Bone-caster Rune-Wizard", etc. etc. Is not necessary.

So if you want just want an average goblin [normal stat block] using a bow, no sweat. But if you want an "Archer" goblin, with whatever tricks that will entail, you can just tack it on. OR/AND for those who like going totally "off-piste" they have the door open to add in pretty much anything via theme and/or background and/or class abilities you want.

The DM who wants Kobold "Wyrm Priests" or "Dragon Shields" or ranger frost-goblins who mush along sleds pulled by dire ice-toads and fight with arcebuses, having discovered gun-powder, as well as having tracking and stealth in tundra terrain, and "favored enemy" of the caribou-riding "snow elves" they vie for hunting territory with...is welcome, as s/he always has been, to do so however they like, make them the creatures they want.

But the MM doesn't have to be [it simply can't possibly be] filled with multiple pages of different permutations for the same creature, generally speaking (not counting the aforementioned up thread "big categories" like giants, elementals, dragons, etc. which obviously need more than 2 pages for the various types.), simply because we live in an era of "immediate access all of the time."..at least not without a 500 page Monster Manual, which is, you must admit, rather unrealistic.

If you [not any "you" here specifically, the general "you"] want the special snowflake goblins, put in the time, roll 'em up! And, hopefully, Have a ball doing it!

"But I don't have the time! The book needs to do it for me." is not a valid argument. So, you don't have the time? So what? Play 'em. Tweak 'em. Play 'em again. Learn the game and it should come fairly easily. It went to easy? Make 'em tougher next time. Try 'em again. It was too hard (gods forbid a TPK!)? Make 'em weaker.

And since it will be the same as using the PC themes/backgrounds, it shouldn't take too long before you know what each theme entails (or can easily access it through the PHB).

Orcs might have the "berserker" theme built-in to their stat block, Kobolds, almost certainly, would have the skirmisher themes built in or perhaps a "Miner" background. Gnolls maybe get a "hunter/tracker" theme built-in?...with, then, other suggested themes or abilities in the side bar for diversification.

Does this sound like a "giant leap back in usefulness"?

Yes, you still might have to "tack something on", but maybe not if "savage hunter gnolls" works for you...or at the very least most of your average encounters are taken care of with the "generic/average guy" stats.

The amount of work in adding a theme should be significantly less than what I've heard about 3e style monster-building...and [rather importantly to my mind for 5e] no "online monster builder" is necessary...I'm sure they'll still have/offer one, but it's not necessary. And, for those that enjoy that level of complexity/work, you could still do up individual goblins/orcs/etc., more or less, from scratch if you wanted to.

But only 1 "average-joe" stat block is needed as your baseline. Not an "average" stats, "elite" stats, "solo" stats..."spell caster stats" and whatever else people think are flavorful...which, in reality, would be an endless list. Yes, we've been told "minions" [in some form/implementation] will still be in the game. That's fine...make that the baseline/average guy then.

I'm rambling a bit here, I think. But...yeah...

One stat block with sidebarred suggested extra themes/abilities. Should still be easily doable, and easily integrated, along with whatever fluff/description is presented within a 2 page spread. I think it sounds like a reasonable compromise and gives everyone some measure of what they prefer to work with [I think].

Happy Thursday, all.
--SD

This is exactly how I want the MM to be. This way actually gives a lot more options than having 5 different goblins listed because of book space. Let me design my goblins if I want them different.

If you are seriously pushed for time in such a way that an extra few minutes is going to ruin you then I would suggest being a player instead of a DM. I don't want the tools of the DM to be limited because some people don't have the time.

I want quality, not quantity.

 

[Jinete]

The MM doesn't have to give me 3-5 different kobolds or goblins or orcs so I can be "different" with "my" masterpiece kobold/goblin/orc. The themes presented for PCs should be more than adequate to give your tribal humanoids some diversity without necessarily having to each be a special snowflake...but if you want that "extra level of complexity", the guidelines are there for you to implement (probably detailed in the DMG but I see no reason not to have some guidleines in the front or back in an appendix of the MM as well.)

So if you want just want an average goblin [normal stat block] using a bow, no sweat. But if you want an "Archer" goblin, with whatever tricks that will entail, you can just tack it on. OR/AND for those who like going totally "off-piste" they have the door open to add in pretty much anything via theme and/or background and/or class abilities you want.

I would LOVE this. Also if there was a DDI "Monster builder" which would automatize this process I would get a subscription in a heartbeat.

 

[I'm A Banana]

The MM doesn't have to give me 3-5 different kobolds or goblins or orcs so I can be "different" with "my" masterpiece kobold/goblin/orc. The themes presented for PCs should be more than adequate to give your tribal humanoids some diversity without necessarily having to each be a special snowflake...but if you want that "extra level of complexity", the guidelines are there for you to implement (probably detailed in the DMG but I see no reason not to have some guidleines in the front or back in an appendix of the MM as well.)

The question here is: what is a Monster Manual for?

Is it a book of raw ingredients you combine as you please?

Or is it a book of prepared meals that you can then disassemble and recompile as you please?

I'd argue that the latter book is much more useful to the people who actually need an MM -- who need a book to tell them how to run monsters and what the hell an aboleth is.

If you make a book full of raw ingredients, and then give some advice about how to combine them, it's not going to be as effective.

And the "core books" need to be geared toward the brand new player, IMO. When people say they play D&D, they have the three core books in mind. If a new player can't just buy the PHB, the DMG, and the MM and have a night's worth of gaming sitting in front of his face, that's a problem, IMO.

So the reason you might need 3-5 goblins is because that's how you encounter them.

Sure, a trained DM can add themes and templates. But a new DM isn't going to bugger with that. This means that the core book is not very useful for a brand new DM, at the table. That's a big problem in my mind.

 

[avin]

People not wanting extra monsters may not be used to the EZ mode of 4E's MMs.

These (4E MM) books are poorly written, their art displeases a lot of people... but having different shades of monsters ready to use it's just fantastic.

Why should I waste my time creating monster using rules of a sidebar if I can get them ready? I like options. We should remember that a single DM life is not the same of a married with children DM's life.

I can live with one version of each monster if Wotc decides to move back to offline Monster Builder, which I can use on poor wi fi hotel rooms or during my air trips.

But that won't happen due to piracy...

 

[steeldragons]

The question here is: what is a Monster Manual for?

Is it a book of raw ingredients you combine as you please?

Or is it a book of prepared meals that you can then disassemble and recompile as you please?

The former. Obviously.

I'd argue that the latter book is much more useful to the people who actually need an MM -- who need a book to tell them how to run monsters and what the hell an aboleth is.

No. I mean, yes, I know this is your view. But no. That is not so. Your latter is for people who need their dungeons/lairs/encounters all worked out for them in a neat little package. That is not "how" the game has ever been nor should be learned to play.

Give a man a fish and he eats for the day. Teach a man to fish and he eats forever.

If you give me a "meatloaf" monster manual. Yay! I have a meat loaf. It will probably be delicious!

If you give me ground beef, an onion, some garlic, salt n' pepper, maybe some ketchup...some people like eggs in it, some add green pepper or bread crumbs or cumin. I can come up with half a dozen "meatloaves" of my own design...or maybe I make some hamburgers, instead,...or meatballs...or sloppy joes.

THAT is the purpose of the Monster Manual. THAT is the purpose of learning to play the game. Not being given a game to play...That's a computer game...or a board game...but it is not a table-top RPG.

If you make a book full of raw ingredients, and then give some advice about how to combine them, it's not going to be as effective.

Seems to have been entirely effective since the creation of the game. Why would it not be effective now?

And the "core books" need to be geared toward the brand new player, IMO.

No argument there. Handing the new player fully "built" combinations of monsters as the developers see fit to combine them in the book is not the way for a new player to learn and learn to ENJOY D&D.

When people say they play D&D, they have the three core books in mind. If a new player can't just buy the PHB, the DMG, and the MM and have a night's worth of gaming sitting in front of his face, that's a problem, IMO.

So the reason you might need 3-5 goblins is because that's how you encounter them.

Sure, a trained DM can add themes and templates. But a new DM isn't going to bugger with that. This means that the core book is not very useful for a brand new DM, at the table. That's a big problem in my mind.

The 'new player" more likely than not, might not have any books. They're being brought into the game by a more experienced player or DM that they know. A friend, a family member, someone they struck up a conversation with at the local comic/gaming shop. I would not expect them to have all of the books on their own before they sit down...maybe their own PHB for the very enthusiastic.

I also wouldn't expect, if they did have all of their own books, that they'd have books filled with meatloaf...So, enjoy the meatloaf...Next week/game, guess what?...MEATLOAF! Yaaay. Instead of "enjoy whatever combination of ingredients you want."

A Monster Manual that offers the "packaged encounters" you propose is then telling people they have to disassemble and rearrange as they like.

How is that "better", more intuitive or easier than saying here's the ingredients...just assemble and season to taste as you want? You're adding, as a necessity, another level of work...another step to pull apart the pre-made package, which, it seems to be by everything I've read, is NOT what people, new or old, want. "Ease of use" does not equate to "Do it all for me."

And while your meatloaf, as I said, would be delicious...it is not some simple thing to pull it apart, add in the peppers I want and put it back together as a meatloaf. (in fact it's damn near impossible in the case of actual meatloaf).

Just give me the ingredients. Everyone needs to learn to cook for themselves.
--SD

 

[ForeverSlayer]

The former. Obviously.



No. I mean, yes, I know this is your view. But no. That is not so. Your latter is for people who need their dungeons/lairs/encounters all worked out for them in a neat little package. That is not "how" the game has ever been nor should be learned to play.

Give a man a fish and he eats for the day. Teach a man to fish and he eats forever.

If you give me a "meatloaf" monster manual. Yay! I have a meat loaf. It will probably be delicious!

If you give me ground beef, an onion, some garlic, salt n' pepper, maybe some ketchup...some people like eggs in it, some add green pepper or bread crumbs or cumin. I can come up with half a dozen "meatloaves" of my own design...or maybe I make some hamburgers, instead,...or meatballs...or sloppy joes.

THAT is the purpose of the Monster Manual. THAT is the purpose of learning to play the game. Not being given a game to play...That's a computer game...or a board game...but it is not a table-top RPG.



Seems to have been entirely effective since the creation of the game. Why would it not be effective now?



No argument there. Handing the new player fully "built" combinations of monsters as the developers see fit to combine them in the book is not the way for a new player to learn and learn to ENJOY D&D.



The 'new player" more likely than not, might not have any books. They're being brought into the game by a more experienced player or DM that they know. A friend, a family member, someone they struck up a conversation with at the local comic/gaming shop. I would not expect them to have all of the books on their own before they sit down...maybe their own PHB for the very enthusiastic.

I also wouldn't expect, if they did have all of their own books, that they'd have books filled with meatloaf...So, enjoy the meatloaf...Next week/game, guess what?...MEATLOAF! Yaaay. Instead of "enjoy whatever combination of ingredients you want."

A Monster Manual that offers the "packaged encounters" you propose is then telling people they have to disassemble and rearrange as they like.

How is that "better", more intuitive or easier than saying here's the ingredients...just assemble and season to taste as you want? You're adding, as a necessity, another level of work...another step to pull apart the pre-made package, which, it seems to be by everything I've read, is NOT what people, new or old, want. "Ease of use" does not equate to "Do it all for me."

And while your meatloaf, as I said, would be delicious...it is not some simple thing to pull it apart, add in the peppers I want and put it back together as a meatloaf. (in fact it's damn near impossible in the case of actual meatloaf).

Just give me the ingredients. Everyone needs to learn to cook for themselves.
--SD

Couldn't have said it better me self.

 

[jshaft37]

So the reason you might need 3-5 goblins is because that's how you encounter them.

Sure, a trained DM can add themes and templates. But a new DM isn't going to bugger with that.

An experienced DM doesn't need to either. I have read several blog posts (sly flourish, critical hits, ID DM, etc) who suggest grabbing monsters as they are and playing. It was even a topic of discussion on a recent Tome Show.

 

[ForeverSlayer]

An experienced DM doesn't need to either. I have read several blog posts (sly flourish, critical hits, ID DM, etc) who suggest grabbing monsters as they are and playing. It was even a topic of discussion on a recent Tome Show.

I'm not being a butt when I say this.

And?

 

[jshaft37]

I'm not being a butt when I say this.

And?

Although I'm sure that comment was meant to be snide, I will respond none the less.

The bloggers/designers that I referenced have made their work and opinions available to the public. Many have read said work and have formed opinions about the bloggers based on that work. Of those that I mentioned some have been recognized throughout the community and been awarded by this very website.

The point is not to do redundant work. It is wasted time. There are plently of creatures in MM3, MV, MV:TttNV that are already great designs.

Pouring over every detail and trying to reinvent every wheel doesn't automatically make a DM good. In the end it just matters if the DM and players have fun. I'd rather play the game than prep the game, and those who want to prep their game for hours can still do that if the MM provides fluff and additional information.

 

[I'm A Banana]

The former. Obviously.

I humbly submit that your perspective is not the only valid perspective. Obviously.

That is not "how" the game has ever been nor should be learned to play.

Why not?

Give a man a fish and he eats for the day. Teach a man to fish and he eats forever.

What if that man doesn't know what a fish is? And doesn't really need to fish because hamburgers are growing on trees?

If you give me a "meatloaf" monster manual. Yay! I have a meat loaf. It will probably be delicious!

If you give me ground beef, an onion, some garlic, salt n' pepper, maybe some ketchup...some people like eggs in it, some add green pepper or bread crumbs or cumin. I can come up with half a dozen "meatloaves" of my own design...or maybe I make some hamburgers, instead,...or meatballs...or sloppy joes.

THAT is the purpose of the Monster Manual. THAT is the purpose of learning to play the game. Not being given a game to play...That's a computer game...or a board game...but it is not a table-top RPG.

What if we give you a meatloaf and show you how we made it, so that you can either eat meatloaf, or make something else?

Seems to have been entirely effective since the creation of the game. Why would it not be effective now?

Because change is a constant and the environment in which D&D dwells in 2013 is not the same as the environment in which it dwelt in 1975. To bury one's head in the sand and ignore that is a mistake, I think.

Handing the new player fully "built" combinations of monsters as the developers see fit to combine them in the book is not the way for a new player to learn and learn to ENJOY D&D.

Your point about how "it's always been this way!" doesn't convince me that you're right about this. I am going to need more persuasive arguments.

A Monster Manual that offers the "packaged encounters" you propose is then telling people they have to disassemble and rearrange as they like.

How is that "better", more intuitive or easier than saying here's the ingredients...just assemble and season to taste as you want? You're adding, as a necessity, another level of work...another step to pull apart the pre-made package, which, it seems to be by everything I've read, is NOT what people, new or old, want. "Ease of use" does not equate to "Do it all for me."

Because it's a lot easier to make meatloaf if you get shown a recipe than if you just are handed a pile of ingredients and told to throw them together however you want.

It's a lot easier to fish if you get shown how rather than if you just get handed a net and pointed at the nearest lake and told to do it however you want.

The MM I'm proposing is a recipe book for adventures. The old formula of shoving a pile of statblocks down your gullet is much less viable in 2013 than it was when Gygax conjured the image of a monster manual from the aether.

I kinda like that description, actually. A recipe book for adventures. It combines (GENERIC FOOD ANALOGY) and adventures.

Just give me the ingredients. Everyone needs to learn to cook for themselves.

You don't learn how to cook from ingredients.

You learn how to cook from recipes. Which give you an expected contribution, and an expected outcome, and an expected experience.

You don't learn how to fish from a net and some twine and a twig and some worms.

You learn how to fish from being shown what to do, to get a desired outcome.

A giant pile of ingredients is completely ineffective for learning how to assemble them in a useful and productive way.

So, yeah, I'm still not convinced.