Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="CuRoi" data-source="post: 5463888" data-attributes="member: 98032">I will second that. I'm looking at my AD&amp;D Monstrous Manual at the moment. Each page is completely dedicated to an individual monster. Just under 1/2 of the top of each page includes a stat block and a picture (both taking up the same amount of space). Every monster has a section on Habitat / Society and Ecology which takes up roughly 1/2 of the text area on the page. Combat is about 1/4 of that text area and the remaining quarter is descriptive text that includes what amount to roleplaying tips and physical descriptions.&nbsp;Open any 3e monster manual and you're lucky to see a paragraph on physical description along with maybe very brief notes about the creature outside of combat. The biggest section is the &quot;Combat&quot; section and for many monster, the stat blocks are much larger than the flavor text.&nbsp;I'd say thats a pretty significant difference between the two. They were willing and able to devote a full page to each critter and give a run down of things like habitat, ecology and detailed physical / behavioral info for a DM to use for inspiration. It's the reason I still take my AD&amp;D Monstrous Manual and DMG to the gaming table even though I run 3e games.&nbsp;Again, not trying to say which is &quot;better&quot; here - 3e or 2e or 4e or whatever-e. Maybe it is better to leave all the non-combat stuff completely up tot he DM? However, I definitely feel there was a much stronger focus on combat in 3e than previous editions and that previous editions provided more non-combat inspiration.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="CuRoi, post: 5463888, member: 98032"] I will second that. I'm looking at my AD&D Monstrous Manual at the moment. Each page is completely dedicated to an individual monster. Just under 1/2 of the top of each page includes a stat block and a picture (both taking up the same amount of space). Every monster has a section on Habitat / Society and Ecology which takes up roughly 1/2 of the text area on the page. Combat is about 1/4 of that text area and the remaining quarter is descriptive text that includes what amount to roleplaying tips and physical descriptions. Open any 3e monster manual and you're lucky to see a paragraph on physical description along with maybe very brief notes about the creature outside of combat. The biggest section is the "Combat" section and for many monster, the stat blocks are much larger than the flavor text. I'd say thats a pretty significant difference between the two. They were willing and able to devote a full page to each critter and give a run down of things like habitat, ecology and detailed physical / behavioral info for a DM to use for inspiration. It's the reason I still take my AD&D Monstrous Manual and DMG to the gaming table even though I run 3e games. Again, not trying to say which is "better" here - 3e or 2e or 4e or whatever-e. Maybe it is better to leave all the non-combat stuff completely up tot he DM? However, I definitely feel there was a much stronger focus on combat in 3e than previous editions and that previous editions provided more non-combat inspiration. [/QUOTE]

Verification