Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tzarevitch" data-source="post: 6399066" data-attributes="member: 1792">Where did you get the idea you were the only one &quot;not 100% impressed?&quot; Quite a few people have expressed dissatisfaction of varying levels. Ignoring how they statted some creatures, mine are:1. Incomplete indexing - The table of contents at the front and the index at the back are basically the same thing. Yet there is no listing by CR, which would be the most helpful thing for the DM. 2. Illogical layout- the book actually has THREE MMs inside of its covers, each with its own internal sub-listing. There is the main one, Appendix A and Appendix B. Appendix B of NPCs makes sense because it is a different type of listing. There is no good reason for Appendix A. I thought it was the table of normal animals at first; but it isn't. It has a random assortment of animals, vermin, plants and monsters, most of which should have been in the main MM listing. Why is an axe beak in the Appendix but a pteradon isn't? You basically have to know which index the creature is in. 3. Artwork quality but in some case it is clearly there to waste space - Page 164-165 for example. 164 has a nice picture of a deep gnome. 165 under &quot;Goblin&quot; however wastes half the page with a poor watercolor of a village in a swamp or something. The bottom quarter of p150 has pictures of ... giants' rocks. Half of page 221 where the Illithid entry is, is filled with a picture of a cave. As you can see, I am not 100% impressed by any means. The issues I have with it are ones that could've been avoided with better layout and editing, but I rate it as good to very good. I've never seen a MM that I was 100% impressed with. The closest by far is Pathfinder (and I say this as someone who does not play Pathfinder and does not like the 3.5 system.)</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tzarevitch, post: 6399066, member: 1792"] Where did you get the idea you were the only one "not 100% impressed?" Quite a few people have expressed dissatisfaction of varying levels. Ignoring how they statted some creatures, mine are: 1. Incomplete indexing - The table of contents at the front and the index at the back are basically the same thing. Yet there is no listing by CR, which would be the most helpful thing for the DM. 2. Illogical layout- the book actually has THREE MMs inside of its covers, each with its own internal sub-listing. There is the main one, Appendix A and Appendix B. Appendix B of NPCs makes sense because it is a different type of listing. There is no good reason for Appendix A. I thought it was the table of normal animals at first; but it isn't. It has a random assortment of animals, vermin, plants and monsters, most of which should have been in the main MM listing. Why is an axe beak in the Appendix but a pteradon isn't? You basically have to know which index the creature is in. 3. Artwork quality but in some case it is clearly there to waste space - Page 164-165 for example. 164 has a nice picture of a deep gnome. 165 under "Goblin" however wastes half the page with a poor watercolor of a village in a swamp or something. The bottom quarter of p150 has pictures of ... giants' rocks. Half of page 221 where the Illithid entry is, is filled with a picture of a cave. As you can see, I am not 100% impressed by any means. The issues I have with it are ones that could've been avoided with better layout and editing, but I rate it as good to very good. I've never seen a MM that I was 100% impressed with. The closest by far is Pathfinder (and I say this as someone who does not play Pathfinder and does not like the 3.5 system.) [/QUOTE]

Verification