A.D. (after draconomicon)

[Creamsteak]

Dragon is a whole type, not just one group of creatures like Tanari and such.

As such, I'd love most of all an Undead focused book. In a very close 2nd place would be a book of Giants (including trolls and the like) and more monsterous humanoids.

 

[Painfully]

I don't feel WotC should do such books just for the sake of making them (like Mongoose IMO). The real challenge is to make monster books for those creatures that have the diversity and depth to support extensive background material, and are interesting enough that people will want to buy such information at a premium price. I thought Draconomicon was rather thin in certain parts, but it is still a worthwhile purchase.

Dragons were a natural choice. No other creatures draw out as much emotion in staple fantasy as dragons, except perhaps demons/devils and the undead. Ghostwalk discussed undead, and BoVD discussed demons and devils.

 

[johnsemlak]

Well, wotc have to consider what would be a viable product. Dragons are an easy sell, perhaps surprisingly because you don't encounter them tht often.

I think an Undead book would be the next most obvious choice.

Many other monsters or monster types are either too bland to make a good book or too specific to attract a large amount of DMs. I'd love a giant book, but I'm not sure it would be an attractive seller. I'd love a Beholder book, that might be an idea, but I wonder if many DMs would really buy it.

 

[Creamsteak]

Beholders and Illithid would really be worth it to me as well. I never had exposure to those fabled 2nd edition products, and I could honestly use the material. Hell, I only know that there are other kinds of beholders than the ones listed in the MM, but I don't know anything about them. Same goes for Illithid.

Would an Illithid book contain more information on the Gith Races perhaps? I'd enjoy it even moreso with that, I've got a sort of fascination with running a campaign focussed on those two races as soon as the Psionics Handbook Revised is released. Toss in some beholders for good measure.

 

[Brother Shatterstone]

Race books huh? Well no ones done a*decent* book on goblinoids so that would be my first choice or better yet forget the week ones and give me 256 pages of bugbears!

But to be honest I buy so many race books and such that I'm fair game for basically anything.

 

[Nightfall]

Yeah well I hope that meant you got Secrets of the Assathi then Shatterstone.

 

[Brother Shatterstone]

Yeah well I hope that meant you got Secrets of the Assathi then Shatterstone.

The who?? The what??

 

[Remathilis]

Keeping in mind the criteria...

1.) Art Heavy.
2.) Extremely Detailed.
3.) Kewl new powers for PCs...

Fey or Undead get my vote. Fey, with ideas like the feytouched, the new DR, etc and nekkid nymph babes seem almost a shoe in...

 

[Trickstergod]

Well, wotc have to consider what would be a viable product.

Many other monsters or monster types are either too bland to make a good book or too specific to attract a large amount of DMs. I'd love a giant book, but I'm not sure it would be an attractive seller. I'd love a Beholder book, that might be an idea, but I wonder if many DMs would really buy it.

See, that's the thing. There are plenty of monsters out there that would be interesting or compelling. As people mentioned, say, kobolds and oozes, I admit I giggled just a little bit, and for amusement factor alone would like to see something like that.

But amusement factor doesn't sell books, not usually, and Wizards tries to reach as broad an audience as possible.

A book on beholders might be nice, but on their own, might not be enough. A book focusing on beholders and illithids might work, however, and one with focus on those two and gith might do even better.

Even then, I'm not sure they'd get quite the strong pull WotC would want.

 

[Trickstergod]

Holy crap that's a lot of extra posting on my part.

When I first posted, an error message or a not responding message popped up. Having seen these before when I posted, and then having gone back to re-post only to find...oh..hey...double post, I made a point of looking into this thread first to see if, despite the error message, that my post had actually been put up.

Seeing that it hadn't been, I promptly went back and re-posted.

About a billion times, for each error message, each time going back to this thread before re-posting to see if the post before it had gone through, each time seeing no reply of mine listed.

Now I see why the boards were temporarily shut down earlier today. Sluggish, indeed. Gah...