Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon 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 Next
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
*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!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
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
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Encounters > Monsters?
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="(Psi)SeveredHead" data-source="post: 6156237" data-attributes="member: 1165"><p>I disagree that WotC is moving in that direction. More like the opposite.</p><p></p><p>I don't know about 3.0, because I can't find my old Monster Manual, but in 3.5 monsters such as orcs had an organization entry. It was less complete and certainly had less flavor text than the 2e entry, but it was still there.</p><p></p><p>In 4e, there was even less of an organization entry. In fact, nothing but implications. Much like 3.5's Monster Manual V, 4e's MM and Monster Vault gave "classed" or "variant" monster entries that you could construct an entire encounter with. In 4e it got more explicit; here's a controller, here's a brute, here's a brute (leader) that you could use as a chief, etc. Although there tended to be too much level variance for some humanoid monsters.</p><p></p><p>MM3 had some flavor text organization, for instance, a battle with frost giants would probably have two "waves", presumably with a short rest in between, but if the DM wants to bump up the challenge level, no short rest for you. The first wave consisted of regular level 17 brutes, and the second consisted of the chief (a 20th-level controller) and several guards (I forget the level, but they're soldiers).</p><p></p><p>Threats to the Nentir Vale had at least some organizational flavor text (some got a lot) and included numerous "monster" types of around the same level for each group. For my own purposes, I often found mixing monster sources worked best, although I feel the need to convert all those MM1 and MM2 monsters that I intend to use to MM3+ standard.</p><p></p><p>D&DN is certainly putting work into some sorts of monsters. Presumably every legendary "solo" is going to be supported by lots of flavor and off-books mechanical text like the legendary black dragon (I expect to see the same thing for monsters like the medusa), but most monster entries just have a regular monster type and a "leader", and some, such as the bugbear, only have the basic monster. At least kobolds have some variety. A lack of defined monster roles means WotC sees little need to create so many monster types.</p><p></p><p>This is based on the June Bestiary, and of course WotC might come up with a bunch more monster types in the future. There's little organizational flavor text yet, but that's not a surprise, as that's not really stuff you playtest.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="(Psi)SeveredHead, post: 6156237, member: 1165"] I disagree that WotC is moving in that direction. More like the opposite. I don't know about 3.0, because I can't find my old Monster Manual, but in 3.5 monsters such as orcs had an organization entry. It was less complete and certainly had less flavor text than the 2e entry, but it was still there. In 4e, there was even less of an organization entry. In fact, nothing but implications. Much like 3.5's Monster Manual V, 4e's MM and Monster Vault gave "classed" or "variant" monster entries that you could construct an entire encounter with. In 4e it got more explicit; here's a controller, here's a brute, here's a brute (leader) that you could use as a chief, etc. Although there tended to be too much level variance for some humanoid monsters. MM3 had some flavor text organization, for instance, a battle with frost giants would probably have two "waves", presumably with a short rest in between, but if the DM wants to bump up the challenge level, no short rest for you. The first wave consisted of regular level 17 brutes, and the second consisted of the chief (a 20th-level controller) and several guards (I forget the level, but they're soldiers). Threats to the Nentir Vale had at least some organizational flavor text (some got a lot) and included numerous "monster" types of around the same level for each group. For my own purposes, I often found mixing monster sources worked best, although I feel the need to convert all those MM1 and MM2 monsters that I intend to use to MM3+ standard. D&DN is certainly putting work into some sorts of monsters. Presumably every legendary "solo" is going to be supported by lots of flavor and off-books mechanical text like the legendary black dragon (I expect to see the same thing for monsters like the medusa), but most monster entries just have a regular monster type and a "leader", and some, such as the bugbear, only have the basic monster. At least kobolds have some variety. A lack of defined monster roles means WotC sees little need to create so many monster types. This is based on the June Bestiary, and of course WotC might come up with a bunch more monster types in the future. There's little organizational flavor text yet, but that's not a surprise, as that's not really stuff you playtest. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Encounters > Monsters?
Top