D&D 4E 4e Monster List - Dwarven Nosepicker & Elven Butt Scratcher

[EATherrian]

I really don't understand what you're complaining about. It seems that you don't like the most common, weakest form of a humanoid foe having a unique name. I'm not sure I can get behind that sentiment: You, the DM, are the only one who ever has to see that name, and as a DM, I know that I prefer having names for things to not having names for things.

Orc Skullcrusher = Orc Warrior 1. Seriously. Really, honestly, and truly.

(Hobgoblin Rousepolishers, however, are more like Hobgoblin Warrior 5. Rouses are hard to polish.)

Edit: It seems like you've nuanced your stance. As ever in matters of taste, when the specifics of naming conventions fail to please, there's not really a lot to talk about. I like many of the monstrous job-titles we've seen so far; I'm sorry they don't do it for you.

Mostly I'm from a point that if we have to have the extra names, make them useful. Personally I'd like all the info from the MM to be as generic as possible with a few examples of more powered-up individuals and rules on how to do it.

And in deference to the Rouse, I assumed that the Hobgoblin Rousepolishers were the elite scions of the Hobgoblin race, a band of enlightened goblinoids who knew the secret of their race's creation in the fabled land of Renton, guided to victory by the Rouse, a hobgoblin of incredible might and fashion sense.

 

[catsclaw]

Now tell me the simple role of each of these just by sight: Gnoll - Clawfighter, Demonic Scourge, Huntmaster, Marauder. I can probably figure 2 off-hand and I'd still probably be wrong. I wouldn't mind names that actually told me what they did. Those are cool. It's these sorts of names I don't like.

The Huntmaster is an archer, the Clawfighter melees with claws, the Marauder melees with a spear (and bite) and the Scourge melees with, well, a scourge. I'd be curious what suggestions you have for better names?

 

[Cadfan]

Super secret ninja trick to making a [insert monster here] [insert class here].

1) Is classed monster an important NPC, or a mook for killin'?

2) If mook for killin', take already existing monster version that most resembles what you want. Delete special abilities that don't fit. For each power deleted, add a power from the class you want.

3) If important NPC, do the same for skills.

Watch as I astound!

Goblin Dagger Wielding Rogue Recipe, Makes 1.

Start with Goblin Sharpshooter.
Delete Sniper, Replace with Piercing Strike.
Replace Crossbow with Shuriken.
Describe physical appearance differently.

Shazam!

From a player's perspective, this editted goblin 1) looks like a goblin, 2) looks like a rogue, 3) fights like a rogue, 4) fights with the "goblin tactics" abilities. Now, it may be slightly off from what a real goblin rogue PC would be. It doesn't have the same breadth of abilities, for one. And it might have incorrect skill ranks, and it might have +1 to a defense here, or -1 to a defense there, that isn't correct.

But who honestly cares? It looks like a goblin rogue, fights like a goblin rogue, feels like a goblin rogue, as far as I'm concerned it IS a goblin rogue.

 

[Gundark]

Now, is it possible that they'll go too far and we'll have lower monster diversity in the 4e MM? Could be. .

I want lower monster diversity. I was sick to death of the tons of monsters that filled the monster manual (the large % I NEVER used). This keep things like orcs in the game longer.

 

[Wormwood]

Tell me what the monster (almost said mob) does.

 

[lutecius]

What a brilliant design move for 4e! Imagine how easy it will be to fill monster manuals! Just think of the money that will need to spend to keep up!

If you add another adjective, things can only get better - Red Dwarven Nosepicker! Green Elven Butt Scratcher. As opposed to the black, white and puce versions.

That’s exactly what I thought when I read about monster roles and how their skills and abilities would be trimmed down. I guess they learned their lesson from the last Monster Manuals.
It’s not that the new approach would just be an excuse to print the same stuff with small variations over and over, I don’t think that would be well received.
It could be an excuse to keep iconic monsters to sell later books, though. Just like the bard or druid were put off “because there wasn’t enough space”

I would hate to see too many variations with silly names filling the MM1.
If a dm doesn’t have time to prepare an encounter, there are these things called adventures books, where you can find all the customized ready-to-use monsters you need and whatnot.
There could be whole books full of pre-made, level-appropriate encounters for those who want it.
And if it’s not good enough to sell a book on its own merits, maybe it’s not good enough to take another monster’s place in MM1.

Now don’t get me wrong, sometimes a variant is so different that a new paragraph is justified. I find creating a whole new beast for every role just as clumsy (I would even lump the orcs, hobs and goblins into the same race, just different builds)

I won’t regret the huge stat blocks trying to cover every possible aspect of each monster but I think there should be a common base to build on rather than a series of complete rewrites.
The template system didn’t work perfectly all the time, but it was one of 3e’s greatest innovations and I hope it will still be an option.
If not, that would be really telling

 

[cdrcjsn]

A few things:

1) We've been told that a dozen or so races in the MM can be used by PCs. That means the ability to customize your very own Orc Paladin/Warlock exists on top of the random assortment of Orcs given specific builds for specific roles.

2) We've been told that templates (such as lich) can be found in the DMG. That adds even more customization (Orc Lich Paladin/Warlock of Legend?).

With the above two points, it seems like they're trying to please both types of DMs, those that like to customize, and those that would prefer the work be done for them.

3) I still don't see stats for the Nosepicker and Butt Scratcher...

 

[Lackhand]

3) I still don't see stats for the Nosepicker and Butt Scratcher...

Does the nosepicker get Knife Eye Attack? Maybe? Please?

 

[Dire Bare]

Technically, they are professional writers, as were the majority of writers for D&D since it's inception. Professional writers gave us duckbunnies, flumphs, Castle Zygag, space hamsters, digesters, skum, and the like. I think nostalgia flavors perception far more than people want to admit.

Tru dat.

In addition, I am perplexed by the number of posters that feel the various 4e names we've seen so far are lame. I find them descriptive, evocative, and interesting. So, you think the Hobgoblin Warcaster has a lame name? What would you call it instead? Most of the 4e "name-haters" often don't offer up alternatives (not that you necessarily need to provide an alternative if you think something is dumb), and if they do it's often crappy-fantasy-name syndrome like the Hobgoblin Fallondir (what's a Fallondir? I don't know? But isn't it a cool name? No.).

I keep hearing "WotC isn't good at names" and I just have to disagree. I think they're great at naming things, both in D&D and in Magic: The Gathering!

 

[Celebrim]

So, you think the Hobgoblin Warcaster has a lame name? What would you call it instead?

Brob? Gwill? Grezzil the Merciless? H'ronk the Black? The hobgoblin wizard from encounter 23?

You see, it is that 'it' part that I find rather lame. The notion that there are Hoblin Warcasters about as a class of presumably numerous identical beings is lame to me whatever you call them.

It's how I would design for a computer game... 10 years ago at that. Even the fans of the new format don't design thier encounters that way.

To tell you the truth, all this cynacism aside, it doesn't bother me too much. They can't make me play the game the way I don't want to play it. It probably is quite helpful for the DM just starting out or the guy who wants to spend an hour prepping for a 5 hour session. More power to them.

I on the other hand think the entire new design paradigm makes things harder on me, increases my prep time, makes it harder for me to DM, and so forth. If it came down to 4e versus another system, it would almost certainly lose to a different system. I'd play HERO, or GURPS, or Exalted, or BESM, or adapt some indy game mechanics or adapt the WEG Star Wars system, Chill 2nd edition, or the venerable Chaosium Coc rules depending on what I wanted to achieve. I can see what 4E is for, but it isn't for me.

I bet Steve Jackson is breathing a sigh of relief. If it wasn't for something like Munchkin, he'd have had a hard time making it through the D20 era. I expect he can look forward to a big influx of players in the future, because alot of people that found 3E 'good enough' are going to be looking around for a different option.