3.5 Quick Notes

[FDP Mike]

Just a couple of points ....

On CR, LA, and ECL: CR has nothing to do with ECL. The former is a measure of a monster's power level relative to an encounter with PCs. The latter is a number designed to measure a creature's power level relative to continued play as a PC and for gaining XP. ECL is calculated by adding the creature's racial HD and any class levels. (Gah! I hope that doesn't break my NDA! Better check Savage Species .... )

On the MM layout: Man, some of you folks should wait until you see the actual book! The layout (at least in my photocopied draft version) is certainly similar in overall look to the 3E MM, but it's a lot cleaner and flows so much better. Pretty much each monster has its own stat block and write-up as opposed, say, to the cramming together of multiple stat blocks in the 3E MM such as with devils or demons. (The only time you get a couple of stat blocks together is if the entry includes an advanced/classed version of the "base" creature, or in instances such as animated objects and the several examples of skeletons.) The 3.5E MM is far easier to use and read, though the differences from its predecessor might at first appear subtle and not so distinct.

I like the templates being listed alphabetically. Somehow, this choice makes sense. YMMV, of course.

Finally, I don't recall WotC ever stating that we would see "one monster per page" in the MM. Does anyone have a reference for this?

Just give the books a chance. I think you'll be impressed and pleased.


Take care,
Mike

 

[Olive]

Re: Re: Re: 3.5 Quick Notes

A while ago when Bastards and Bloodlines came out, a pretty good book, I told the author that I felt that there shoudl be a seperate listing for CR and ECL. He disagreed. Just pointing out for those who feel that the CR does = ECL, that it is not the official way things go.

Then he's obviously insane. It's not just official, it's a good idea.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi there FDP Mike!

Just a couple of points ....

On CR, LA, and ECL: CR has nothing to do with ECL. The former is a measure of a monster's power level relative to an encounter with PCs. The latter is a number designed to measure a creature's power level relative to continued play as a PC and for gaining XP.

If CR has nothing to do with ECL, why then are PCs rated at +1 CR/Level?

eg. A 20th-level character is ECL 20 AND CR 20

Yet a 3.5 Pit Fiend is CR 20* but NOT ECL 20.

*I don't yet have the 3.5 MM so consider that a guesstimate.

Is it only me who spots the incongruity here? How can a Characters Level parallel both CR and ECL whilst a Monsters CR and ECL are different!?

Incidently, consider this a rhetorical question as I already have the answer...even so it would be nice to hear what people think.

ECL is calculated by adding the creature's racial HD and any class levels. (Gah! I hope that doesn't break my NDA! Better check Savage Species .... )

I would be very wary of this idea...all Hit Dice were certainly not created equal.

 

[bwgwl]

Chapter One: Monsters A-Z
Chapter Two: Animals
Chapter Three; Vermin

see, this is what i don't get: why separate out animals and vermin into their own chapters but then not give templates their own chapter?

why are templates thrown in with the other monsters when animals and vermin aren't?

i don't like having templates mixed in because they aren't functionally the same as other monsters. a normal monster is a ready-to-use stat block; a template is a recipe for modifying an existing creature.

i know in the Fiend Folio they give an example creature first, with a complete stat block, and then give the template recipe, so in a way, it's just like a normal monster in its alphabetical place.

but for some reason i have a hard time wrapping my brain around looking for a template in the main body of the book. i keep expecting them to be all collected in an appendix.

i guess it's because when i know i want to use a template, i want to be able to go directly to the part of the book that has them, so i can look at them all at once. i don't want to be flipping through all the normal creatures' stats also.

i suppose that's part of the reason why animals and vermin are kept separate -- when you know you want a real animal and not a monster, you know exactly where to look.

which makes mushing all the templates in with the other creatures a hard concept for me to understand.

 

[Psion]

see, this is what i don't get: why separate out animals and vermin into their own chapters but then not give templates their own chapter?[/qutoe]

Actually, I sort of like this change. They list immediately usable versions of the creature in the mainstream of the text. Generally I like that.

What I do not like is what they did in fiend folio where the only stat blocks they had for some creautures were creatures with class levels without an accompanying basic stat block and hope they don't do something like this in MMr.

 

[bwgwl]

Actually, I sort of like this change. They list immediately usable versions of the creature in the mainstream of the text. Generally I like that.[/B]

yes, i don't mind the example templated creature being there, but i'd still like the template separate.

i'm pretty sure i'll need, for example, the half-illithid template by itself a lot more frequently than i will specific stats for a half-illithid lizardman. so IMO the template has precedence over the example critter, and they should be grouped by template, not by the creature.

 

[thalmin]

The advantage to templates being in the main text would be for the newcomer. Someone not used to 3.0MM would look for a skeleton, vampire, werewolf, zombie in with the regular monsters. If you don't know which creatures are templates in the first place, how would you know where to look? Now, if you want a template, you still can find it, they just aren't all in one section.
Why not do the same for animals and vermin? Got me.

 

[Numion]

Bummer. I was really looking forward to this idea (it just seemed like a really nice touch), but if those are the main monsters with tactics, I doubt I'll be using the tactics that much. That said, the rest of it sounds good AFAIC.

Best,
tKL

I would've liked to see tactics section for kobolds:

round 1 : Charge and strike
round 2 : Die