Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Adapt or Perish!
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Twowolves" data-source="post: 3868216" data-attributes="member: 18093"><p>Well, I don't consider adding a template or advancing by class or HD "finagling", and "a lot" of rules is relevant. I see what you are saying, but my point was one where the new edition seems to want to sacrifice flexibility for ease of use. I am ok with that, for some game systems. I think that's just fine for more pulpy or action-theater style games. I just don't think it's what I would want in D&D. But that's just me, I guess.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Each type of monster in 3.5 is already a "class", and you can add character classes to that to further customize it. Only they made the monster classes "outsider" or "undead". To my mind, having a fighter-equivalent monster box that gives the same abilities across the board no matter if the monster is a demon, an elemental or an ooze seems to strip some flavor from the monsters, especially since one can already just add fighter levels to many of the critters in the book (or advance by HD if not).</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Except that the designers <u>already </u> just give whatever abilities they want to a monster. I was very impressed with the forethought that went into designing the 3rd ed monsters. They made a framework/system and then made the critters within that system, whereas before they just made a monster and threw it out there. To me, taking an "8HD Buiser" and then pondering what special abilities to give it is potentially less balanced than taking a monster and advancing it or templating it. I'm sure the current developers have put a lot of thought into the new monster system, and I haven't seen enough to judge yet, but I'm not thrilled by what I've seen so far.</p><p></p><p>I understand that the Challenge Rating system is really more of a guideline than a science, it still seems more thought out than picking a beastie from a box and then sticking abilities on it like some kind of Mr Potato Head. My opinion is that the game is better balanced when the NPCs use the same rules as the PCs.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Twowolves, post: 3868216, member: 18093"] Well, I don't consider adding a template or advancing by class or HD "finagling", and "a lot" of rules is relevant. I see what you are saying, but my point was one where the new edition seems to want to sacrifice flexibility for ease of use. I am ok with that, for some game systems. I think that's just fine for more pulpy or action-theater style games. I just don't think it's what I would want in D&D. But that's just me, I guess. Each type of monster in 3.5 is already a "class", and you can add character classes to that to further customize it. Only they made the monster classes "outsider" or "undead". To my mind, having a fighter-equivalent monster box that gives the same abilities across the board no matter if the monster is a demon, an elemental or an ooze seems to strip some flavor from the monsters, especially since one can already just add fighter levels to many of the critters in the book (or advance by HD if not). Except that the designers [U]already [/U] just give whatever abilities they want to a monster. I was very impressed with the forethought that went into designing the 3rd ed monsters. They made a framework/system and then made the critters within that system, whereas before they just made a monster and threw it out there. To me, taking an "8HD Buiser" and then pondering what special abilities to give it is potentially less balanced than taking a monster and advancing it or templating it. I'm sure the current developers have put a lot of thought into the new monster system, and I haven't seen enough to judge yet, but I'm not thrilled by what I've seen so far. I understand that the Challenge Rating system is really more of a guideline than a science, it still seems more thought out than picking a beastie from a box and then sticking abilities on it like some kind of Mr Potato Head. My opinion is that the game is better balanced when the NPCs use the same rules as the PCs. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Adapt or Perish!
Top