"Bait Monsters" and the "Trained Mindset"

[Irda Ranger]

Giants are actually a perfect example of a creature for which I'd want a monster class. They hi 4 HD, they're basically ogres. Up to 6, they're trolls or minotaurs. Around 12, they go Huge and become "true" giants. And so on. Slap on certain abilities (regeneration, energy subtypes, etc.) as needed with a given CR modifier. It's a thought.

Based on my read of the designer's comments, I think the 4E MM will do you one better. I'm pretty sure they're going to have a "Brute Advancement Table" for all Brutes to be leveled up with. In that case it really will be simple to scale up a Hill or Fire Giant.

I would say that anything in the 3.5 SRD Monster listing that does not get left out on the "Stupid or Redundant Monster Principle" should be in the first Monster Manual.

I disagree with this premise. There should be no tenure of monster status. To grant such would be an unacceptable restriction on the creativity of the design team of the new edition. The 3.5 SRD has been around for years now, and has had a lot of time to add monsters since the 3E MMI came out. I don't want a mindless re-hash of already published materials; I want the designers to really design, to take a fresh look at monsters in the game, and maybe come up with some really cool innovations.

Also, the terms "Stupid" and "Redundant" are subject to a lot of debate. As point of evidence, most of the posters on this thread seem to think that the Frost Giant is redundant, so you wouldn't even accomplish ostensible goal of getting the Frost Giant back in the 4E MMI (depending on whose point of view the designers accept).

Also, using your "Stupid or Redundant" filters, I could probably filter out a lot of iconic monsters. Take drow for example. Do they really need their own stat block, or are they just an elf template and some flavor text?

 

[jester47]

Irda,

That is a good point. It begs a clarification: At that point when I said 3.5 SRD, I really meant the stuff that the Legend/FairyTale/GenericFantasy S&S monster, what I have now realised is the "Public Domain Monster" category. Take the Monster books for WarhammerRPG2.0, Gurps, Rolemaster/Harp, D&D (all iterations), C&C, Basic Fantasy, and other fantasy RPGs and you start to see a general heritage of creatures. These are the creatures I think should ALWAYS be in the MM1.

As for stupid/redundant: that was a summation of the process that the WotC designers were using. Not a criteria of my own. The designers have said that if another creature operates like the creature listed then the other creature is rolled into that creature (like the succubus). If it offers no usable role (this is highly debatable) then it just gets to wait for a tweak or will never appear.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

Take the Monster books for WarhammerRPG2.0, Gurps, Rolemaster/Harp, D&D (all iterations), C&C, Basic Fantasy, and other fantasy RPGs and you start to see a general heritage of creatures. These are the creatures I think should ALWAYS be in the MM1.

So basically, take the monster books for a universal system, D&D, two other games that are D&D without the name, a very old fantasy RPG no longer on the market AFAIK, and two iconic properties that don't actually HAVE the monster that's under debate?

How about, just off the top of my head, Exalted, Runequest and Fantasy HERO, all of which are currently in publication and considerably bigger than, say, Rolemaster? If you're going as far as C&C, may as well throw the World of Darkness games, Mutants and Masterminds and Spirit of the Century in, too.

WH, C&C, Runequest, Fantasy HERO and Exalted do not have a "frost giant" in their core monster materials. Ditto WoD, M&M and SotC.

Nor does the frost giant bear much resemblance to the mythic giants I'm aware of; its Norse ancestry is questionable, considering that the Jotuns, who I've seen referred to as 'frost giants' outside D&D material, are powerful enough to threaten the Aesir gods and far beyond the ability of mortals to fight. Even after the buffing giants got in AD&D 2e, they're still nowhere near that level.

Now, with that said, I actually think the frost giant may be worth keeping because it DOES have a fairly rare schtick: it's a cold-oriented creature. That's actually quite rare, at least going by the 3.5 MM1. The fire giant is the one I would make into a sidebar in the core rules, since fire-using, fire-based and fire-oriented creatures are a dime a dozen and it's mechanically little more than a temperature swap of the frost giant.

 

[jester47]

I have read quite a bit about Norse mythology and frost giants ("rimtursar") are mentioned as a separate entity. They are not expanded upon more and Thor never faces specified "frost giants." The Norseness of frost giants is essentially one reference. The fire giants are the giants from Muspelheim, led by Surt, the archetypical fire giant. They are never described as "giant dwarves" that keep hell hounds as pets. I can't see the mythological connection other than that both D&D fire giants and Surt are black (Surt by the way means "black"). Giants in Norse mythology are also never referenced to as "hill giants", "cloud giants" or "storm giants."

Those giants are a part of D&D mythology but they bear very small resemblance to giants as they are described in Nordic mythology.

Frost Giants as D&D knows them most likely come from the Robert E. Howard Conan story "The Frost Giant's Daughter." Thus the argument that they are Fantasy Public Domain Monsters.

 

[jester47]

So basically, take the monster books for a universal system, D&D, two other games that are D&D without the name, a very old fantasy RPG no longer on the market AFAIK, and two iconic properties that don't actually HAVE the monster that's under debate?

How about, just off the top of my head, Exalted, Runequest and Fantasy HERO, all of which are currently in publication and considerably bigger than, say, Rolemaster? If you're going as far as C&C, may as well throw the World of Darkness games, Mutants and Masterminds and Spirit of the Century in, too.

WH, C&C, Runequest, Fantasy HERO and Exalted do not have a "frost giant" in their core monster materials. Ditto WoD, M&M and SotC.

Nor does the frost giant bear much resemblance to the mythic giants I'm aware of; its Norse ancestry is questionable, considering that the Jotuns, who I've seen referred to as 'frost giants' outside D&D material, are powerful enough to threaten the Aesir gods and far beyond the ability of mortals to fight. Even after the buffing giants got in AD&D 2e, they're still nowhere near that level.

Now, with that said, I actually think the frost giant may be worth keeping because it DOES have a fairly rare schtick: it's a cold-oriented creature. That's actually quite rare, at least going by the 3.5 MM1. The fire giant is the one I would make into a sidebar in the core rules, since fire-using, fire-based and fire-oriented creatures are a dime a dozen and it's mechanically little more than a temperature swap of the frost giant.

I really could care less about Frost Giants, I just figure you have Giants of Cold in Norse Myths and you have Howards Frost Giants. What I am really talking about is that if they can take out frost giants why not string us along and take out assorted dragons and other creatures (which I expect may very well happen) What I am argueing for is a core of monsters you know you will always have. WotC is talented enough to give us good new monsters so the stringing out of PD monsters does them no service.

 

[pemerton]

a very old fantasy RPG no longer on the market AFAIK

Just a small quibble - two version of Rolemaster ("Classic" = RM2, and RMSS/RMFRP) are currently in print and available from ICE's web site - although the Classic version of Creatures and Treasures has not yet been released.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

Just a small quibble - two version of Rolemaster ("Classic" = RM2, and RMSS/RMFRP) are currently in print and available from ICE's web site - although the Classic version of Creatures and Treasures has not yet been released.

OK, cool. I didn't know it was still in print.

Did Creatures and Treasures have frost giants?

 

[Kunimatyu]

I have read quite a bit about Norse mythology and frost giants ("rimtursar") are mentioned as a separate entity. They are not expanded upon more and Thor never faces specified "frost giants." The Norseness of frost giants is essentially one reference. The fire giants are the giants from Muspelheim, led by Surt, the archetypical fire giant. They are never described as "giant dwarves" that keep hell hounds as pets. I can't see the mythological connection other than that both D&D fire giants and Surt are black (Surt by the way means "black"). Giants in Norse mythology are also never referenced to as "hill giants", "cloud giants" or "storm giants."

Those giants are a part of D&D mythology but they bear very small resemblance to giants as they are described in Nordic mythology.

Not to quibble overmuch, but weren't the giants that created the clay man with a horse's heart animating it known as hill giants? Didn't the giant who stole Iduna(and her apples) refer to himself as a Storm Giant?

 

[Pale]

I skipped through half of the thread, so forgive me if this has been brought up already.

But if Frost Giants aren't in MM1, then you can bet your last dollar that they'll be in Tome of Horrors 4E from Necromancer Games come July.

 

[Irda Ranger]

But if Frost Giants aren't in MM1, then you can bet your last dollar that they'll be in Tome of Horrors 4E from Necromancer Games come July.

We have stumbled upon Mearls' secret plot to steal sales from the corporate monster that is Hasbro and hand them to the independent and passionate gamer-publishers!

If you can't beat, join 'em - and then betray them from within! Trojan Horses FTW!!