MichaelSomething
Legend
I'll say this until my dying day...
Writing 4E in Gygaxian prose would have improved people's opinions on it considerably.
Writing 4E in Gygaxian prose would have improved people's opinions on it considerably.
Would have lessened my opinion of it.I'll say this until my dying day...
Writing 4E in Gygaxian prose would have improved people's opinions on it considerably.
I've been thinking about this, and I think one better way to present monster stats would be something like this:To avoid stat block clutter while retaining flavour I suggest just giving monsters after a certain CR, such as the Pit Fiend something like limited wish at will but then make a point of noting its 3 favoured spells. But make its stat block centred around the three most unique features of that monster.
This prompted me to revisit some of my old posts refuting the claim that the 4e MM is distinctly lacking in "lore". Here are some:There's a definite design tension here between what's most playable and usable for reference at the table and what's helpful and gives the DM ideas for scenario design and non-combat use of different monsters and NPCs.
Micah and others have said that they really found the longer 2E and 3E write-ups useful in terms of defining how these monsters could interact with the world, not merely how they fight the PCs. And I'll agree, so did I. Your example of the Marileth creating zombies is a great one. That's genuinely helpful for worldbuilding and scenario design.
Some selections from the 4e MM, starting at the start but then cutting to Mearls' favourite:
Aboleths are hulking amphibious creatures that hail from the Far Realm, a distant and unfathomable plane. They live in the Underdark, swimming through drowned crannies or creeping through lightless tunnels and leaving trails of slimy mucus in their wake. Malevolent and vile, aboleths bend humanoid creatures to their will, and more powerful aboleths can transform their minions into slimy horrors. . . Sometimes aboleths live together as a brood or even in a collection of broods. . .
Abominations are living weapons that were created during the ancient cosmic war between the gods and the primordials. Some of these creations were enormous, others small. Some were singular beings of terrific power, while others were legion. A few abominations stand apart as failed or incomplete divine experiments that have either been locked away or forgotten. . .
Angels exist as expressions of the Astral Sea, sentient energy in humanoid form. They most often serve the gods, so some believe that the gods created them. In reality, angels are powerful astral beings who appeared during the first moments of the creation of the Astral Sea. Different types of angels have different callings; they are literally manifestations of celestial vocations. Perhaps it was the needs of the gods that caused the astral stuff to spew them forth, but it was not a conscious act of creation. During the great war between the gods and the primordials, angels offered themselves as warriors to the gods that best encompassed their calling . . .
*************
Hook horrors drag victims to their deaths using their powerful hooked arms. These pack omnivores scour the Underdark in search of live prey, foraging when necessary.
Hook horrors communicate with one another using a complex series of clicking noises they make with their mouths and carapace. The eerie clicks echo in the Underdark, warning prey that death is near. . .
Hook horrors are so good at climbing and jumping that they often attack from an unexpected direction. . .
A hook horror sometimes flings a tasty victim at the feet of its packmates . . .
Hook horrors live in total darkness. They can see in lit environments, but in the dark of the deep earth they navigate using echolocation. They also make clicking noises to communicate with one another. An Underdark explorer might become aware of nearby hook horrors by these noises. . .
Although they hunt in small packs, hook horrors also gather in larger groups called clans. A particular clan, ruled by its strongest egg-laying female, ranges over a wide area in the Underdark. Its members defend clan territory fiercely from any intruder, including unrelated hook horrors. . .
Hook horrors are omnivorous but prefer meat to plants. Rumor has it that they prefer the flesh of drow over any other. Not surprisingly, drow slay wild hook horrors and take young and eggs to raise as slaves.
Obviously what counts as a "story idea" is to a significant extent in the eye of the beholder. But these monsters seem to me all to have pretty clear and strong places in the world, with associated lore. I don't see the oft-mooted contrast with earlier MMs.
On the intelligence of aboleths - according to their stat blocks they are all INT 23, which I think answers that question. They are also all trained in Arcana and Dungeoneering, which provides us with more information about their knowledge and inclinations.
On the sociality of aboleths - besides being told that they sometimes live in broods (you seriously want a % chance for this?), there is this from p 8 that I didn't bother to quote:
Aboleths lair in the deepest reaches of the Underdark, having slipped into the world from the Far Realm. However, lone aboleths can be found closer to the world’s surface, haunting ruins, deep lakes, and old temples without hope or want of companionship. In many of these places, kuo-toas serve them.
On the place of aboleths in the larger world, we have all that I've quoted: they come from the Far Realm, they live in broods in the Underdark but solitary ones haunt deep lakes and temples closer to the surface, perhaps served by kuo-toas. We also have this, from the DMG p 161:
the most alien creatures known [are] aberrant monsters such as the aboleth and gibbering orb. These creatures don’t seem to be a part of the world or any known realm, and where they live in the world, reality alters around them. This fact has led sages to postulate the existence of a place they call the Far Realm, a place where the laws of reality work differently than in the known universe.
So we know also - if we hadn't worked it out from the description already give plus the illustration on p 9 of the MM - that aboleths are alien horrors.
As to their goals which they pursue with their aid of their enslaved humanoid and willing kuo-toa servants: I assume that this is the sort of thing a GM might work out. What do alien entities do? Observe humanity? Ignore it? Do things that seem irrational to us because our puny minds can't comprehend the motivations of such otherworldy beings?
Have you really looked at aboleths, realised that they're mind-enslaving entities from another alien world, and then been puzzled as to how you might work them into your game?
Here is what I found on the aboleth in the 2nd ed Monstrous Manual:
The aboleth is a loathsome amphibious creature that lives in subterranean caves and lakes. It despises most land-dwelling creatures and seeks to enslave intelligent surface beings. It is as cruel as it is intelligent. . .
An aboleth brood consists of a parent and one to three offspring. Though the offspring are as large and as strong as the parent, they defer to the parent in all matters and obey it implicitly. Aboleth have both male and female sexual organs. A mature aboleth reproduces once every five years by concealing itself in a cavern or other remote area, then laying a single egg and covering it in slime. The parent aboleth guards the egg while the embryo grows and develops, a process that takes about five years. A newborn aboleth takes about 10 years to mature.
The aboleth spends most of its time searching for slaves, preferably human ones. It is rumored that the aboleth use their slaves to construct huge underwater cities, though none have ever been found. The aboleth are rumored to know ancient, horrible secrets that predate the existence of man, but these rumors are also unsubstantiated. There is no doubt that aboleth retain a staggering amount of knowledge. An offspring acquires all of its parent’s knowledge at birth, and a mature aboleth acquires the knowledge of any intelligent being it consumes.
This doesn't tell me the motivation of aboleths either; nor how often they live in broods rather than on their own (the number appearing is 1d4, but I have never assumed that this is to be taken as a demographic statistic - apart from anything else, a linear shape doesn't look right for that). It has what is, for me, needless details about their reproduction (I haven't got room for proper stat blocks, but I've got room for that?). It uses unnecessary words to tell me stuff that the 4e entry conveys via the Arcana and Dungeoneering entries.
It adds information about underwater cities, in the form of "rumours", but doesn't mention deep lakes, temples or kuo-toa, so it's not as if it has more world-oriented information. Just different.
This actually fits my impression of 2nd ed material: an obsession with reproduction and aspects of demography more generally, but many words for little actual story.
I'll do one comparison: gnolls.
Gygax's AD&D:
Gnolls travel and live in rapacious bands of loose organization, with the largest dominating the rest. These bands recognize no other gnoll as supreme, but they do not necessarily dislike other bands, and on occasion two or more such groups will ioin together briefly in order to fight, raid, loot, or similarly have greater chance of success against some common foe or potential victim. They are adaptable and inhabit nearly any area save those which are arctic and/or arid. They hove a so-called king, very powerful personally and with a double normal-sized following, but his authority extends only as far as his reach
<This is followed by rules for the ration of leaders to followers, and numbers of women and children in lairs>
Gnolls are subterranean 85% of the time, but occasionally (15%) they will take up residence in an abandoned (or cleared) village or building of some sort.
<This is followed by chances of various sorts of hangers on, like trolls or giant hyenas, and numbers of captives in a lair, and distribution of armaments among gnoll warriors>
Gnolls will generally be on friendly terms with orcs, hobgoblins, bugbears, ogres, and even trolls - providing the weaker types are not very much weaker in numbers and the gnolls are relatively equal in strength to the
stronger monsters.
Gnolls are strong, but they dislike work and are not good miners. They have infravision. They speak their racial tongue, chaotic evil, troll, and often (60%) orcish and/or hobgoblin.
<The entry concludes with a visual description of gnolls, their armour and their typical lifespan>
2nd ed AD&D:
Gnolls are large, evil, hyena-like humanoids that roam about in loosely organized bands. While the body of a gnoll is shaped like that of a large human, the details are those of a hyena. They stand erect on two legs and have hands that can manipulate as well as those of any human. They have greenish gray skin, darker near the muzzle, with a short reddish gray to dull yellow mane. Gnolls have their own language and many also speak the tongues of flinds, trolls, orcs, or hobgoblins.
Combat: Gnolls seek to overwhelm their opponents by sheer numbers, using horde tactics. When under the direction of flinds or a strong leader, they can be made to hold rank and fight as a unit. While they do not often lay traps, they will ambush or attempt to attack from a flank or rear position. <There is then an account of the distribution of weapons among gnolls>
Habitat/Society: Gnolls are most often encountered underground or inside abandoned ruins. When above ground they operate primarily at night. Gnoll society is ruled by the strongest, using fear and intimidation. <This is followed by all the stuff about leaders, hangers-on, women and children, and captives as is found in the AD&D MM. On a quick scan it's all identical>
Gnolls will work together with orcs, hobgoblins, bugbears, ogres, and trolls. If encountered as a group, there must be a relative equality of strength. Otherwise the gnolls will kill and eat their partners (hunger comes before friendship or fear) or be killed and eaten by them. They dislike goblins, kobolds, giants, humans, demi-humans and any type of manual labor.
Ecology: Gnolls eat anything warm blooded, favoring intelligent creatures over animals because they scream better. They will completely hunt out an area before moving on. It may take several years for the game to return. <FInally there is the same information about lifespan as found in the MM entry>
3E:
Gnolls are hyena-headed evil humanoids that wander in loose tribes <on warm plains, according to an Environment entry, which is followed by various groupings; and the text below then has some visual description>
A gnoll is a nocturnal carnivore, preferring intelligent creatures for food because they scream more. Gnolls tend to think with their stomachs, and any alliances they make (usually with bugbears, hobgoblins, ogres, orcs or trolls) often fall apart when the gnolls get hungry. They dislike giants and most other humanoids, and they disdain manual labor. . . .
Gnolls speak Gnoll . . . [and] like to attack when they have the advantage of numbers, using horde tactics and their physical strength to overwhelm and knock down their opponents. They show little discipline when fighting unless they have a strong leader; at such times, they can maintain ranks and fight as a unit. While they do not usually prepare traps, they do use ambushes and try to attack from a flanking position <this is followed by mechanical details about how gnolss use the Hide skill>
A tribe of gnolls is rules by its strongest member, who uses fear, intimidation, and strength to remain in power. If a chieftain is killed, the stronger members of the tribe fight to be the new chieftain. If these combats take to long or several combatants die, the tribe may break up into a number of bands that go their separate ways. Gnolls rever the phases of the moon, but most tribes have no true clerics.
A band or tribe includes as many non-combatant young as adults. Gnoll lairs are fortified surface encampments or underground complexes. Gnolls take prisoners for use as slaves <followed by statistical info that is the same as in AD&D> Slaves (usually humans, orcs, or hobgoblins) suffer a high attrition rate because of the gnolls' appetite.
Their special patron is the demon lord Yeenoghu, how looks like a gaunt gnoll. Most gnolls serve and revere Yeenoghu rather than worshipping a deity.
4e (Monster Manual, not Essentials Monster Vault):
Gnolls are feral, demon-worshipping marauders that kill, pillage, and destroy. They attack communities along the borderlands without warning and slaughter without mercy, all in the name of the demon lord Yeenoghu. . . .
Gnolls are nomadic and rarely stay in one place for long. When gnolls attack and pillage a settlement, they leave nothing behind except razed buildings and gnawed corpses. Gnolls often decorate their armor and encampments with the bones of their victims. Impatient and unskilled artisans, they wear patchwork armor and wield weapons stolen from their victims.
Gnolls don’t bargain or parley, and they can’t be bribed or reasoned with. Gnolls are often encountered with hyenas, which they keep as pets and hunting animals. They also work with demons.
Gnolls detest physical labor and often use slaves to perform menial chores. The life of a slave in a gnoll camp is brutal and short. That said, slaves who show strength and savagery might be indoctrinated into the gnoll vanguard. Such creatures are usually broken in mind and spirit, having become as cruel and ruthless as their captors.
As the mortal instruments of the demon lord Yeenoghu, who is called the Beast of Butchery and Ruler of Ruin, gnolls constantly perform atrocities. When not scouring the land in Yeenoghu’s name, gnolls fight among themselves and participate in rituals that involve acts of depravity and self-mutilation. . . .
Gnolls raid and war in rapacious packs, their numbers supplemented by demons (especially evistros and barlguras), raving slaves, and beasts driven to madness and cruelty.
Powerful humanoids sometimes manage to take gnolls as slaves or even to raise gnoll pups as servants. Such gnolls serve their masters as fierce warriors.
<This is followed by some suggested groupings of gnolls with demons and hyenas, and a colour picture; the stat blocks tell us that gnolls have low-light vision and speak Common and Abyssal>
The 4e entry has less statistical demographics than the others (especially the AD&D ones). It has more cultural information (eg their scavenged weapons and armous, and the ritual of depravity and self-mutilation). I'm not trained in using formal metrics to measure quantities of information, but I don't think there is less information in that 4e lore than the lore from previous editions. And of course much of the lore is constant throughout - they are raiders, they take slaves, they ally with other evil humanoids, they don't like manual labour.
EDIT: In the past I think I've done goblins, aboleths (or maybe saw that done by someone else), drow and (I think) vampires. I didn't quite know what gnolls would turn up, but am completely unsurprised by the result.
I find demographics pretty easy to handle - I'll combine my own working knowledge of human demographics with my memories of Tolkien with my encounter- and scenario-building needs - but am very happy to have someone else lay out the basics of the mythic history for me. (And I find 4e to be a nice compromise between the relative silence of earlier editions, and the extrememe intricacies and complexities of Glorantha.)
They're compared to treants, not farmers - and treants don't cut down, burn or eat the trees they shepherd. And unlike birds they have INT Very (11-12). I did say "seeming contradictions" - maybe in the author's mind this all made sense - but to me it reads more like sloppy writing.
Quite a bit of that 2nd ed "flavour text" is actually mechanical information (especially in the Combat section). For example, the Galeb Duhr entry tells me that:
Galeb duhr can cast the following spells as 20th-level mages, once per day: move earth, stone shape, passwall, transmute rock to mud, and wall of stone. They can cast stone shape at will.In 4e this information would all be in the statblock, and in my view much easier to read and process because of that.
They can animate 1-2 boulders within 60 yards of them (AC 0; MV 3; HD 9; Dam 4d6) as a treant controls trees.
Galeb duhr suffer double damage from cold-based attacks and save with a -4 penalty against these attacks. They are not harmed by lightning or normal fire, but suffer full damage from magical fire (though they save with a +4 bonus against fire attacks).
As to whether I've cherry-picked my 4e examples - well, I have mentioned some of the ones that I'm particularly fond of, but in a discussion about Hook Horrors a couple of months ago, after Mearls discussed them in his Legends and Lore column, I established that basically all the flavour that he provided, derived from the 2nd ed entry, was present in the 4e MM:
These pack omnivores scour the Underdark in search of live prey, foraging when necessary. Hook horrors drag victims to their deaths using their powerful hooked arms.
Hook horrors are omnivorous but prefer meat to plants. Rumor has it that they prefer the flesh of drow over any other. Not surprisingly, drow slay wild hook horrors and take young and eggs to raise as slaves.
Hook horrors live in total darkness. They can see in lit environments, but in the dark of the deep earth they navigate using echolocation. Hook horrors communicate with one another using a complex series of clicking noises they make with their mouths and carapace. The eerie clicks echo in the Underdark, warning prey that death is near. An Underdark explorer might become aware of nearby hook horrors by these noises.
Although they hunt in small packs, hook horrors also gather in larger groups called clans. A particular clan, ruled by its strongest egg-laying female, ranges over a wide area in the Underdark. Its members defend clan territory fiercely from any intruder, including unrelated hook horrors.
I agree that the info on zombie is less - a lot of cultural knowledge is presupposed by the designers, I think. But here are the flavour highlights of the 2nd ed entry on zombies:
Zombies are mindless, animated corpses controlled by their creators, usually evil wizards or priests.
Zombies are typically found near graveyards, dungeons, and similar charnel places. They follow the spoken commands of their creator, as given on the spot or previously, of limited length and uncomplicated meaning (a dozen simple words or so).
Zombies cannot talk, being mindless, but have been known to utter a low moan when unable to complete an assigned task.
How do these non-intelligent creatures figure out who to grab? The text is as silent, in that respect, as the 4e text. In both cases, all we are told is that they follow the commands of their creators.
Well, we are told that
Most zombies are created using a foul ritual. Once roused, a zombie obeys its creator and wants nothing more than to kill and consume the living.
Corpses left in places corrupted by supernatural energy from the Shadowfell sometimes rise as zombies on their own. These zombies have no master and generally attack all living creatures they encounter.
So I think this is the origin of all zombies, including hulks (presumably they come from bigger bodies, given their size) and gravehounds (which presumably come from dogs or wolves, given their name, their attacks and their pictuer). Chillborn have a cold aura, do cold damage, are shrouded in a mist (according to the picture - and I think we can infer it's an icy mist) and explode in a burst of cold when killed. Given their name, I would guess that they might arise from corpses corrupted in cold places; or just that they are zombies particularly expressive of the "chill of the grave".
I'll agree that we are not told how rotwing zombies get their batwings. I personally didn't find that that impeded my desire or ability to use rotwing zombies in my game, but I may be an outlier in this respect.
There is also all of this (MM p 133):
Gnolls are nomadic and rarely stay in one place for long. When gnolls attack and pillage a settlement, they leave nothing behind except razed buildings and gnawed corpses.
Gnolls often decorate their armor and encampments with the bones of their victims. Impatient and unskilled artisans, they wear patchwork armor and wield weapons stolen from their victims.
Gnolls detest physical labor and often use slaves to perform menial chores. The life of a slave in a gnoll camp is brutal and short. That said, slaves who show strength and
savagery might be indoctrinated into the gnoll vanguard. Such creatures are usually broken in mind and spirit, having become as cruel and ruthless as their captors.
Gnolls are often encountered with hyenas, which they keep as pets and hunting animals. They also work with demons. As the mortal instruments of the demon lord Yeenoghu, who is called the Beast of Butchery and Ruler of Ruin, gnolls constantly perform atrocities. When not scouring the land in Yeenoghu’s name, gnolls fight among themselves and participate in rituals that involve acts of depravity and self-mutilation.
Gnolls don’t bargain or parley, and they can’t be bribed or reasoned with.
Here is what the 2nd ed MM has to offer:
Gnolls are large, evil, hyena-like humanoids that roam about in loosely organized bands. Gnolls seek to overwhelm their opponents by sheer numbers, using horde tactics.
Gnolls are most often encountered underground or inside abandoned ruins. When above ground they operate primarily at night. Gnoll society is ruled by the strongest, using fear and intimidation.
Gnolls eat anything warm blooded, favoring intelligent creatures over animals because they scream better. They will completely hunt out an area before moving on. It may take several years for the game to return.
There is also the obligatory demographic information. Taken in total, I don't see how this is more flavour than the 4e MM, or even really comparable flavour.
If the designers want to stick in demography that's their prerogative, though I would prefer that it be called out in a discrete part of the entry so I don't have to wade through it to find the interesting stuff.
The point of my post upthread wasn't to dispute the inclusion of demography. It was to deny the claim made by [MENTION=11697]Shemeska[/MENTION] (but also very frequently by very many others) that, in contrast to the 2nd ed MM which "strikes the balance of crunch and flavor that I want, and only in a few instances since then have we really seen as well done of an integration of stat blocks and ecology . . . the 4e MM . . . had -under virtually any metric- the lowest amount of monster detail and flavor text of any monster book in the history of D&D".
So far I've compared the entries for goblins, gnolls, galeb duhr and zombies and established that this is not true. Nor is it true for hook horrors. I cited the 4e text upthread; here is the 2nd ed text:
Hook horrors do not have a smell to humans and demihumans, but an animal would detect a dry musty odor. They communicate in a series of clicks and clacks made by the exoskeleton at their throats. In a cave, this eerie sound can echo a long way. They can use this to estimate cavern sizes and distances, much like the sonic radar of a bat.Compared to the 4e info, I learn a little more about their cave layout, their smell, and that things that catch them will eat them (though that may not be a uniquely defining property of hook horrors). But the 4e info tells me about their preference for drow flesh. This is another example that fails to persuade me of the greater detail of flavour text in the 2nd ed MM.
The eyesight of the hook horrors is very poor. They are blinded in normal light. They use their extremely acute hearing to track and locate prey.
A clan of hook horrors most often lives in caves and underground warrens. The entrance is usually up a vertical or steeply sloped rock wall. Each family unit in the clan has its own small cavern off a central cave area. The clan's eggs are kept in the safest, most defensible place. The clan is ruled by the eldest female, who never participates in combat. The eldest male, frequently the mate of the clan ruler, takes charge of all hunting or other combat situations and is considered the war chieftain. Members of a clan rarely fight each other. They may quarrel or not cooperate, but they rarely come to blows. Clans sometimes fight each other, but only when there is a bone of contention, such as territorial disputes. It is rare for a clan of hook horrors to want to rule large areas or to conquer other clans.
Hook horrors have poor relationships with other races. Although they do not foolishly attack strong parties, generally other creatures are considered to be meat. They retreat when faced with a stronger group. Hook horrors do not recognize indebtedness or gratitude. Their simple language does not even have a term for these concepts. Just because a player character saves the life of a hook horror does not mean that it will feel grateful and return the favor.
Although hook horrors are basically omnivores, they prefer meat. They can eat just about any cave-dwelling fungus, plants, lichens, or animals. Hook horrors are well acclimated to cave life. They have few natural predators, although anything that managed to catch one would try to eat it.
If people don't like the 4e flavour text - for example, because they dislike the mythical history it presupposes - that's their prerogative. But to assert that, "by any metric", it has "the lowest amount of monster detail and flavor text of any monster book in the history of D&D" is simply false. As the examples I've posted illustrate.
I agree that the stats in MM3 and the MVs are clearly better than the original MM. But I don't agree that the MM was garbage - once you correct for its damage problem, and for brute to-hit, it's got some mechanically interesting monsters. And at low levels you don't even need to correct the damage. The Deathlock Wight, for example, is in my view the best low-level undead creature ever published for D&D. And the goblins and hobgoblins are great!
I also prefer the MM flavour text to that in the MM3 and MV (MV2 is a different matter - it's flavour text is excellent). The MM3 and MV flavour text is wordy and ponderous, in my view, whereas the MM is generally tight and to the point.
Here are some of the highlights of the 4e MM entry on goblins:
* Goblins are as prolific as humankind, but are less creative and more prone to warlike
behavior. Goblins’ bellicose nature can be traced, in part, to their reverence for the god Bane, whom they see as the mightiest hobgoblin warchief in the cosmos.
* Goblins are cowardly and tend to retreat or surrender when outmatched. They are fond of taking slaves and often become slaves themselves.
* Goblins form tribes, each ruled by a chieftain. The chieftain is usually the strongest member of the tribe, though some chieftains rely on guile more than martial strength.
* Goblins live in the wild places of the world, often underground, but they stay close enough to other humanoid settlements to prey on trade caravans and unwary travelers. A
goblin lair is stinking and soiled, though easily defensible and often riddled with simple traps. Goblins sleep, eat, and spend leisure time in shared living areas. Only a leader has private chambers.
* Hobgoblins rule the most civilized goblin tribes, sometimes building small settlements and fortresses that rival those of human construction.
* Hobgoblins once had an empire in which bugbears and goblins were their servants. This empire fell to internal strife and interference from otherworldly forces—perhaps the fey, whom many goblins hate.
* Hobgoblins developed mundane and magical methods for taming and breeding beasts as guards, laborers, and soldiers. They have a knack for working with wolves and worgs, and some drake breeds owe their existence directly to hobgoblin meddling. Given their brutal magical traditions, hobgoblins might have created their cousins in ancient times: Bugbears
served as elite warriors, and goblins worked as scouts and infiltrators. The disintegration of hobgoblin power led to widespread and diverse sorts of goblin tribes.
Here is the habitat/society information on goblins I found here, which seems to be a cut-and-paste of the AD&D 2nd ed MM:
* Goblins live only 50 years or so. They do not need to eat much, but will kill just for the pleasure of it. They eat any creature from rats and snakes to humans. In lean times they will eat carrion. Goblins usually spoil their habitat, driving game from it and depleting the area of all resources. They are decent miners.
* Humans would consider the caves and underground dwellings of goblins to be dank and dismal. Those few tribes that live above ground are found in ruins, and are only active at night or on very dark, cloudy days. They use no form of sanitation, and their lairs have a foul stench. Goblins seem to be somewhat resistant to the diseases that breed in such filth.
* Goblins live a communal life, sharing large common areas for eating and sleeping. Only leaders have separate living spaces. All their possessions are carried with them. Property of the tribe is kept with the chief and sub-chiefs. Most of their goods are stolen, although they do manufacture their own garments and leather goods. The concept of privacy is largely foreign to goblins.
* Goblins often take slaves for both food and labor. The tribe will have slaves of several races numbering 10-40% of the size of the tribe. Slaves are always kept shackled, and are staked to a common chain when sleeping.
* A goblin tribe has an exact pecking order; each member knows who is above him and who is below him. They fight amongst themselves constantly to move up this social ladder.
* Goblins hate most other humanoids, gnomes and dwarves in particular, and work to exterminate them whenever possible.
* A typical goblin tribe has 40-400 (4d10 x 10) adult male warriors. In addition to the males, there will be adult females equal to 60% of their number and children equal to the total number of adults in the lair. Neither will fight in battles. [There are also rules for placing tougher goblins in the tribe. In 4e, these rules are found in the encounter and adventure design guidelines in the DMG.]
I don't see any significant contrast here between "incorporating goblins into a campaign" and "feeling like a board game". The 2nd ed entry has more precise demography. The 4e entry has more history (both mythic and more recent). I personally prefer a game in which mythic history is more significant than demography, and so prefer the 4e flavour text.
I'm not familiar with all the 2nd ed Monster Books. But I have a MM, MM2 and FF for AD&D, and know them pretty well. And I also have a 3E MM. I simply don't accept that the 4e MM has less detail in its flavour text than those books.
I've given the goblin example already. Other highlights of the 4e MM include the entry on spiders (which tells me that Lolth was once a goddess of fate, and learned the art of weaving from spiders), the entries on demons and devils (which have far more detail on their mythic histories, and their planar setups, than either the 1st ed MM - or even the MM2 - or the 3E MM), the entry on dragons (which has more detailed mythic history than AD&D or 3E, and comparable further flavour) and the entry on hydras (which once again has a mythic history not found in Gygax's MM or in 3E).
Plus there is the implicit flavour. For example, the 4e MM gives Azer and Galeb Duhr a backstory that links them to the backstory for dwarves (found predominantly in the PHB), and thereby a place in the world, which they did not have in the AD&D MM2 or in the 3E MM.
Here is the 4e MM flavour text for Azer:
Long ago, all dwarves were slaves to the giants and titans. Today’s dwarves are the descendants of those who freed themselves. Azers are dwarves that did not escape captivity before they were corrupted and transformed into fiery beings by their overlords. Although a few have escaped captivity since, most azers remain bound to their fire giant masters to this day. . .
In fire giant strongholds, azers perform menial tasks better suited to smaller hands, and they act as a front line in defense.
How is that in anyway inadequate as flavour text? It tells you how the monster came to be. It tells you where it can be found and what it will be doing. And most importantly, it gives the monster a narrative place in the game - a servant of a greater evil; a creature that came into its servitude unwillingly, via a fall or corruption; a creature that the player of the dwarf PC can experience as sympathetic ("There but for the grace of Moradin . . . ") or as repulsive ("Those snivelling Azer who could not free themselves - a shame to dwarves everywherer!") or in other, more subtle ways.
Here is the flavour text for Galeb Duhr:
Remorseless creatures of living stone, galeb duhrs often serve hill giants or earth titans, and their nature is similarly harsh and unrelenting. . .
Long ago, all dwarves were slaves to the giants and titans. More than one variety of dwarf failed to escape during the initial revolution, including the galeb duhrs. However, unlike the azers that continue to serve their masters in the Elemental Chaos, many galeb duhrs have slipped away from their brutish masters into the world. On the other hand, some still serve their hill giant and earth titan overlords, both in the Elemental Chaos and in the natural world.
Compare that to the flavour text from the 2nd ed Monster Manual:
*Galeb duhr, thought to be native to the elemental plane of Earth, are sometimes encountered in small family groups in mountainous regions of the Prime Material plane. They live in rocky or mountainous areas where they can feel the earth power and control the rocks around them. Galeb duhr have no natural enemies, other than those who crave the gems they collect. In some strange way, galeb duhr feel responsible for the smaller rocks and boulders around them, in much the same way that a treant feels responsible for trees in its neighborhood. A traveler who disturbs the area near a galeb duhr does so at his own peril.
* Galeb duhr eat rock, preferring granite to other types, and disdaining any sedimentary type. The rocks they eat become part of the huge creatures; such a meal need take place only once every two or three months. It is not known how (or whether) galeb duhr reproduce, but "young" galeb duhr have occasionally been reported
* The “music” of the galeb duhr often provides the first evidence that these creatures are near -- and usually the only evidence, as the unsociable galeb duhr are quick to pass into the ground when they feel the vibrations of approaching visitors. Sitting together in groups, the galeb duhr harmonize their gravelly voices into eldritch tunes; some sages speculate that these melodies can cause or prevent earthquakes. Others argue that the low rumbling produced by these creatures is a form of warning to others in the group, but there is no conclusive evidence either way.
* While galeb duhr seem to have no visible culture above ground, they are known to collect gems, which they find through their passwall ability. They sometimes have small magical items in their possession, evidently taken from those who attacked them to take their gems. Besides the gems that they carry with them, galeb duhr are likely to know where many other gems are, as well as veins of precious metals, such as gold, silver, and platinum, though galeb duhr seem to have no interest in these minerals for themselves. A few powerful mages have been able to bargain with the galeb duhr for this information. This is a difficult agreement to consummate, for the galeb duhr are valiant fighters, and usually have no difficulty in escaping from any harm if they are inclined to do so. Further, the galeb duhr are territorial, and would be irritated at any attempt to make use of this knowledge in their vicinity.
Under what metric is this superior? Putting to one side the seeming contradictions (they feel responsible for the rocks and boulders in their neighbourhoods, but also eat them; they have no visible culture, but collect gems and create vocal music together), the only part of this entry that motivates the PCs to interact with a galeb duhr is the lust for gems and precious metal. The only part of that flavour text that makes me not judge it obviously weaker than the 4e text is the reference to the "music" of the galeb duhr preventing or causing earthquakes - this could actually be incorporated into the 4e flavour very nicely, because of the obvious link to the notorious dwarven fondness for the stentorian chanting of dirges.
I'm doing imps and vampires (with reference to the MM, whereas [MENTION=87792]Neonchameleon[/MENTION] has referenced the MV).
Imps
Here is the flavour text on imps from the Monstrous Manual:
Imps are diminutive creatures of an evil nature who roam the world and act as familiars for lawful evil wizards and priests. . . Imps are beings of a very evil nature who originate on the darkest of evil planes. Their main purpose on the Prime Material plane is to spread evil by assisting lawful evil wizards and priests. When such a person is judged worthy of an imp's service, the imp comes in answer to a find familiar spell.
Once they have contacted their new "master", imps begin at once to take control of his actions. Although imps maintain the illusion that the summoner is in charge, the actual relationship is closer to that of a workman (the imp) and his tools (the master).
Although an imp's body can be destroyed on the Prime Material plane, it is not so easily slain. When its physical form is lost, its corrupt spirit instantly returns to its home plane where it is reformed and, after a time, returned to our world to resume its work.
While they are technically in the service of their master, imps retain a basic independence and ambition to become more powerful someday. . .
Imps are the errand boys of the powerful evil beings who command the darkest planes. They often act as emissaries and agents, but their primary task is to enhance the spread of evil in our world.
There's a lot of repetition there, but the gist is pretty clear.
In the 4e MM, imps are under the "devil" entry, which has a 1000+ word history of, and guide to, the Nine Hells. It talks about the devils' betrayal of their former divine master, their use of bargains to secure mortal souls, etc. Here is the flavour text from the 4e MM that is additional to that background, and particular to imps:
Imps act as spies and emissaries for more powerful devils. Mortals often make bargains with imps, thinking that the weak devils are easy to control. Ultimately, most imps prove their loyalties lie with the Lords of the Nine and not any mortal master.I think that conveys as much information as, if not more than, the 2nd ed entry. In particular, it explains how it is that imps take control of their "masters", namely, by feeding them information about magical secrets and thereby engendering a lust for power that they can in turn satisfy, by urging to greater and greater evil.
Imps are devious and deadly mischief-makers. They take pleasure in tricking mortals into harming one another. . .
Imps partner with mortals who seek magical power. By helping their “masters” attain new spells or locate magic items, imps foster a madness for power that leads their masters to perform evil acts. . .
Imps possess impressive knowledge about magical subjects. They gain most of their information from other devils, from past experience, or from spying efforts of their own.
What 4e doesn't have is the find familiar spell - the recruitment of imps by mortals (and vice versa) is a matter primarily of free roleplay. Whether that's an improvement or a detriment is, I think, a matter of taste.
Vampires
From the 2nd ed Monstrous Manual:
Of all the chaotic evil undead creatures that stalk the world, none is more dreadful than the vampire. Moving silently through the night, vampires prey upon the living without mercy or compassion. Unless deep underground, they must return to the coffins in which they pass the daylight hours, and even in the former case they must occasionally return to such to rest, for their power is renewed by contact with soil from their graves.
One aspect that makes the vampire far more fearful than many of its undead kindred is its appearance. Unlike other undead creatures, the vampire can easily pass among normal men without drawing attention to itself for, although its facial features are sharp and feral, they do not seem inhuman. In many cases, a vampire's true nature is revealed only when it attacks. . .
Any human or humanoid creature slain by the life energy drain of a vampire is doomed to become a vampire himself. Thus, those who would hunt these lords of the undead must be very careful lest they find themselves condemned to a fate far worse than death. The transformation takes place one day after the burial of the creature. Those who are not actually buried, however, do not become undead and it is thus traditional that the bodies of a vampire's victims be burned or similarly destroyed. Once they become undead, the new vampire is under the complete control of its killer. If that vampire is destroyed, the controlled undead are freed from its power and become self-willed creatures. . .
Vampires live in areas of death and desolation where they will not be reminded of the lives they have left behind. Ruined castles or chapels and large cemeteries are popular lairs for them, as are sites of great tragedies or battles. Vampires often feel a strong attachment to specific areas with some morbid significance, like the grave of a suicide or the site of a murder.
When deciding on a course of action or planning a campaign, vampires move very slowly and meticulously. It is not uncommon for a vampire to undertake some scheme which may take decades or even centuries to reach its conclusion. Because of the curse of immortality that has fallen upon them, they feel that time is always on their side and will often defeat foes who might otherwise overcome them; the vampire can simply go into hiding for a few decades until the passing of the years brings down its enemies.
Vampires are normally solitary creatures. When they are found in the company of others of their kind, the group will certainly consist of a single vampire lord and a small group of vampires which it has created to do its bidding. In this way, the vampire can exert its power over a greater range without running the risk of exposing itself to attack by would-be heroes.
In general, vampires feel only contempt for the world and its inhabitants. Denied the pleasures of a true life, they have become dark and twisted creatures bent on revenge and terror. When a vampire creates another of its kind, it considers the new creature a mere tool. The minion will be sent on missions which the vampire feels may be too dangerous or unimportant for its personal attention. If the need arises, these pawns will gladly be sacrificed to protect or further the ends of their master. . .
The vampire has no place in the world of living creatures. It is a thing of darkness that exists only to bring about evil and chaos. Almost without exception, the vampire is feared and hated by those who dwell in the regions in which it chooses to make its home. The vampire's unnatural presence is all-pervasive and will cause dogs and similar animals to raise a cry of alarm at the presence of the creature.
Vampires sustain themselves by draining the life force from living creatures. Unless they have a specific need to create additional minions, however, they are careful to avoid killing those they attack. In cases where the death of a victim is desired, the vampire will take care to see that the body is destroyed and thus will not rise as an undead.
From the 4e MM:
Sustained by a terrible curse and a thirst for mortal blood, vampires dream of a world in which they live in decadence and luxury, ruling over kingdoms of mortals who exist
only to sate their darkest appetites. . .
Gifted and cursed with undead immortality, vampire lords trade many of the abilities they had in life for dark powers, including the power to create broods of vampire spawn. . .
Living humanoids slain by a vampire lord’s blood drain are condemned to rise again as vampire spawn—relatively weak vampires under the dominion of the vampire lord that created them. . .
A living humanoid slain by a vampire lord’s blood drain power rises as a vampire spawn of its level at sunset on the following day. This rise can be prevented by burning the body or severing its head.
A living humanoid reduced to 0 hit points or fewer—but not killed—by a vampire lord can’t be healed and remains in a deep, deathlike coma. He or she dies at sunset of the next day, rising as a vampire spawn. A Remove Affliction ritual cast before the afflicted creature dies prevents death and makes normal healing possible. . .
A vampire lord can make others of its kind by performing a dark ritual (see the Dark Gift of the Undying sidebar). Performing the ritual leaves the caster weakened, so a vampire lord does not perform the ritual often.
In this case, the Monstrous Manual has more than the MM - especially the stuff about (i) vampire lurking among the living, (ii) their penchant for ruined castles and chapels (though that is pretty stock standard stuff) and (iii) their meticulous planning. That's the first 2nd ed/4e comparison I've done where I feel the 2nd ed Monstrous Manual actually has more interesting material than the 4e MM (Galeb Duhr's in 2nd ed, as I noted upthread, had one interesting titbit that 4e could usefully borrow, but I still felt 4e was better overall).
That sounds pretty similar to what Middara (an adventure board game) does. Every monster has an “AI” (a script it follows) that you evaluate on its turn. It makes for pretty solid gameplay, but it’s very game-y. I think the simulation and immersive types would hate it in action (especially once they realized the script can be manipulated, and people started taking advantage of it).Combat Block. This is where you put their general stats, HP, AC etc. But you don't list all of their actions in bulk and expect the DM to intuit what their usual combat strategy should be. Instead, you put the creature's combat algorithm/tactics: The typical set of actions the monster will take in best circumstances to use its best ability, as well as any alternative approaches if its initial approach is denied. So, instead of listing every single spell a lich would use (and expecting the DM to know which of the 24 spells it'd prefer to use on turn 1), this section would list its ideal 3-turn strategy: Something like: Turn 1: Mass Hold Person, Turn 2 & 3: Disintegrate until no enemies are standing. And then you can list 2-3 alternative actions it might take in specific circumstances, with more intelligent/boss-like monsters getting more tactics listed: The lich might prefer a Fireball if 3 or more enemies are stacked together, or that it will cast Power Word Kill the moment there's an enemy under 100 HP etc. That way, the combat stats are both intuitive and simple to use (and probably take up less space), and you keep the lore box for simulation purposes (here, it might list all the Divination spells the Lich might have, as well as some bullet points for roleplaying a lich and so on).
I wouldn't want it for an RPG, but that sort of thing is very fun in a board game. I judge them on different standards (video games too, for that matter).That sounds pretty similar to what Middara (an adventure board game) does. Every monster has an “AI” (a script it follows) that you evaluate on its turn. It makes for pretty solid gameplay, but it’s very game-y. I think the simulation and immersive types would hate it in action (especially once they realized the script can be manipulated, and people started taking advantage of it).
Perhaps algorithm was too strong a word. What I essentially want is the actions section being designed not around the types of actions (a section for Actions, a section for Bonus Actions etc.), but instead being designed around a synergistic sequence that would normally be sequestered in a Tactics header. That way, you don't need books like The Monsters Know What They're Doing to tell you the monster's optimal strategy, the game already tells you how best to utilise the monster's abilities. You're of course free to diverge from it if the situation calls for it (so it's not a hard-coded AI), but I think this would at least help new DMs run monsters more effectively.That sounds pretty similar to what Middara (an adventure board game) does. Every monster has an “AI” (a script it follows) that you evaluate on its turn. It makes for pretty solid gameplay, but it’s very game-y. I think the simulation and immersive types would hate it in action (especially once they realized the script can be manipulated, and people started taking advantage of it).
4e stat blocks were meant to incline towards this (eg I remember reading a designer discussion of the Mind Flayer stat block along these lines).Perhaps algorithm was too strong a word. What I essentially want is the actions section being designed not around the types of actions (a section for Actions, a section for Bonus Actions etc.), but instead being designed around a synergistic sequence that would normally be sequestered in a Tactics header. That way, you don't need books like The Monsters Know What They're Doing to tell you the monster's optimal strategy, the game already tells you how best to utilise the monster's abilities. You're of course free to diverge from it if the situation calls for it (so it's not a hard-coded AI), but I think this would at least help new DMs run monsters more effectively.