Armed with a stack of monster books...

[blargney the second]

Sounds cool! If you want a quick & easy list of printed NPCs in sourcebooks, don't forget the Index of Sample NPCs thread. The most recent version of the list is this Excel file. It's a time saver so you get access to lots of printed material without the hassle of thumbing through a bajillion books.
-blarg

 

[Echohawk]

When preparing these dungeons, I made up a list of all monsters in the proper EL range (11-14) from the MM, MoF, MM2, MM3, MM4 and FF - as my own computer went ka-boom back a month or so ago, this is all on paper.

Ooh! I spy a golden opportunity to shamelessly plug my monster index. If you follow that link, you'll find a spreadsheet of all the monsters from WotC 3.X sources, including their CRs. (Actually, the spreadsheet contains a lot more monster information than that, but if you play with the filters, you should be able to quickly generate a list of all 3.X creatures with a specific Challenge Rating.)

 

[Shade]

That sounds great!

I also had a really fun fight the other day. I sicced my players (low epic, lvl 21-22) on a CR 27 Gibbering orb (with a slightly lower AC, so probably CR 26). For a while there we thought it was going to be a TPK; out of 8 party members, one round found three of them swallowed and six of them insane. It was really fun! I think it had been a while since I had truly challenged them in a fight.

I've got one of these on deck for the next session. My party's a bit higher level, so hopefully they'll fare a bit better!

 

[Razz]

See, that's the reason why we really need a "classed monster" book, to have this ready for a bunch of common humanoid antagonists!

No wonder monster books are the favourite of many DMs (and thus we're already on MM5, eh?).

I agree. They need to lose the "classed monsters" from the Monster Manuals and give them a book of their own. I personally don't like classed monsters...in my Monster Manual where I want something completely 100% unique (or converted from older editions).

 

[MerricB]

I agree. They need to lose the "classed monsters" from the Monster Manuals and give them a book of their own.

No, they don't.

I subscribe to the old definition of monster, where a monster is conceptually *anything* you could meet. I consider it a great mistake that the "Men" entry is gone from the Monster Manual. I want to see Bandits, Brigands, Pirates and Pilgrims in the MM.

I also prefer having a different range of creatures in each MM: classed monsters, unique monsters, advanced monsters, and really weird things. I do *not* want to see the mistake that Hackmaster made: the Cyclopedia approach is awful beyond belief.

I don't want to see too much of any monster book be devoted to classed monsters, but neither do I want them to go altogether.

Cheers!

 

[Olaf the Stout]

Ooh! I spy a golden opportunity to shamelessly plug my monster index. If you follow that link, you'll find a spreadsheet of all the monsters from WotC 3.X sources, including their CRs. (Actually, the spreadsheet contains a lot more monster information than that, but if you play with the filters, you should be able to quickly generate a list of all 3.X creatures with a specific Challenge Rating.)

Thanks for the link Echohawk. I was after something exactly like that!

Olaf the Stout

 

[JustinA]

I also prefer having a different range of creatures in each MM: classed monsters, unique monsters, advanced monsters, and really weird things. I do *not* want to see the mistake that Hackmaster made: the Cyclopedia approach is awful beyond belief.

This seems like a massive non sequitur: How did you get from "classed opponents are better suited to a dedicated supplement" to "a finite series of over-priced books with every monster in alphabetical order"?

Honestly, this is what I want to see:

- Monster Manuals include, where appropriate, 2-3 classed or otherwise advanced versions of monsters where appropriate. These are included in the ORIGINAL listing of the monster. (And would have been perfectly appropriate for a deluxe reissuing of the original MM.)

- A BOOK OF ORCS, A BOOK OF DROW, and similar volumes dedicated to the more popular and frequently used creatures with a wide variety of classed versions and unique builds across the full 1-20 range of opponents.

This gives me generalized and well-organized utiltiy in the MMs and specialized support when I need it.

The current sytem gives me nothing. The generalized support is unorganized and difficult to utilize (since it's spread across multiple books) and there's no specialized support at all.

 

[Nightfall]

Merric,

While you're are too cheerful by half, it's GREAT to see your posts again!!


Btw monster books RULE!

 

[MerricB]

Merric,

While you're are too cheerful by half, it's GREAT to see your posts again!!

Thanks, Nightfall.

I've been rather busy on boardgamegeek.com recently: very, very good site for all boardgames.

Btw monster books RULE!

Yes, they really do.

Cheers!

 

[Nightfall]

Merric,

Can't say I've been at that place or even a happy place. But even so glad to see you and yes as you said (and I did too) monster books are awesome.

God I wish there was an FC III...