D&D 4E 4E Giants


log in or register to remove this ad


I will miss the humanoid giants. I didn't know I had a strong attachment to them until I saw FrankDMs image. (Where is that from? It is not a 4E image) The elemental ties fluff makes sense and gives a stronger feel to giants as empire builders but a new look makes my nostalgia kick a bit. Definitely a curb my enthusiasm moment.
 

Ogrork the Mighty said:
Yet another reason why 4E is not the D&D that I know and love.
Probably, but in core D&D days of yore, there was no attempt at a cohesive origin for monsters. Giants, elementals and dragons just were, existing as a mish-mash of monsters for players to fight. Later editions sometimes gave a little nod to ecology and origins of creatures, but those bits of information still usually existed in a vacuum.

Now the core rules are attempting to explain where they actually come from and how they relate to each other, the world and the players. It helps inform coherent, logical design decisions about monsters as well. This additional back story is a huge step forward. (Even if I do plan on tearing it apart for my own campaign's mythology.)
 


I don't think that the new giants are going to LOOK like elementals, ala the example picture shown above. WotC have already said that normal elementals are getting a substantial upgrade in 4e, meaning that each elemental type will have different powers based on its element and size.

Giants have always been big humanoids resembling humans... that's why they're called giants. There are plenty of big creatures in D&D, but giants are "giant" humanoids.

PLUS, remember the cover of the new DM's Screen. THAT'S what they mean by tied more directly to the elements. That Fire Giant is practically in flames.

Mountain Giants will probably have stony skin, but more subtle... like a statue, as opposed to an earth elemental that is jagged and craggy. Storm Giants will probably call down rain, wind, and lightening.

Frost Giants aren't in MM1 because they needed to hold back some iconic monsters for MM2 to make it more "core" feeling. Having Frost Giants in MM2 will lend legitimacy to the other monsters of the book.
 


Now the core rules are attempting to explain where they actually come from and how they relate to each other, the world and the players. It helps inform coherent, logical design decisions about monsters as well. This additional back story is a huge step forward. (Even if I do plan on tearing it apart for my own campaign's mythology.)
Another reason for this is because they are trying to come up with reasons why monsters will work together.

They've mentioned Fire Giants and Azers and Hellhounds. So you can have a more dynamic encounter, with all of these, rather than 'just some fire giants' or 'just some azers'.
 

SCMrks said:
Elements seem to be getting a big role in 4th Ed.
Yeah, I noticed that too. Mostly good, but I think it's a little too much (IMO). I believe that the Giants IMC will be tied to "Natural Forces", representing the Primordial Prime Material, not Elements per se. Between demons, elementals and the various Djinn/Dao/Efreet, etc. we already have plenty of "Elemental" flavored baddies.

SCMrks said:
dragons are the brillant astral spirits of the raw elements (pg 24 R&C).
I think it would be more accurate to say they were Astral Spirits fused with Elemental Energy and given Material (as in, "Prime Material") form.
 

Not too impressed with the change (particularly if that is actually 4th Edition art for the giant). I don't have too much of a problem with tying elements and giants but it seems it would be an ideal opportunity to add to D&D's overall breadth of monster mythology via new monsters rather than making radical alterations to something already existing.
 

Remove ads

Top