Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
General Monster Manual 3 Thread
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="Jack Jericho" data-source="post: 5213622" data-attributes="member: 91421"><p>I do not think Lolth is as tough as many people seem to think. Someone with the Lord of Fate destiny would make 4E Lolth cry as she spends the majority of the encounter dominated.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Overall, I think the monsters in the book are nice. Having a little more fluff is nice. I know many people want rules in place of fluff, but sometimes MM1 was so sparse with fluff that I was unsure what a creature was even supposed to be. A few of the older monsters had neither descriptive text to tell you what the creature looked like nor a picture. Fluff for a monster should be about the monster though. Stories and excerpts from a campaign or an encounter that someone ran is something that should be reserved for an ecology of article or -at best- a sidebar.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The change in damage is interesting, but I am not sure what this means for D&D overall. I do believe the damage increase was needed, but I have two concerns about it.</p><p> </p><p>1) Many of the damage increases were done with increased static damage instead of adding more dice of damage. While it is a good thing to allow higher level monsters to do more consistant damage, I feel that such a sudden increase in guaranteed damage is something which probably was not playtested as much as it should have been. I also feel that more variable damage would make monster critical hits seem more special.</p><p> </p><p>2) The current books really are starting to seem quite different from the first batch of 4E. While I am glad work is being done to improve the system, I think there comes a point when the new design direction of 4E seems different enough from where 4E first started to give someone a little concern about how well mixing and matching old and new elements will work out. I have a feeling that Essentials and the Rules Compendium will bring more change than I originally anticipated. </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The book is good. I had a chance to look through it at the store and then again when looking through a copy owned by a friend. I am waiting to buy it until I see if one of the local stores here has a copy with better physical quality. A few of the ones I looked through at the local book store had some rather noticeable physical defects. It surprised me to find this because it is not a problem I had noticed since the first three books.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Jack Jericho, post: 5213622, member: 91421"] I do not think Lolth is as tough as many people seem to think. Someone with the Lord of Fate destiny would make 4E Lolth cry as she spends the majority of the encounter dominated. Overall, I think the monsters in the book are nice. Having a little more fluff is nice. I know many people want rules in place of fluff, but sometimes MM1 was so sparse with fluff that I was unsure what a creature was even supposed to be. A few of the older monsters had neither descriptive text to tell you what the creature looked like nor a picture. Fluff for a monster should be about the monster though. Stories and excerpts from a campaign or an encounter that someone ran is something that should be reserved for an ecology of article or -at best- a sidebar. The change in damage is interesting, but I am not sure what this means for D&D overall. I do believe the damage increase was needed, but I have two concerns about it. 1) Many of the damage increases were done with increased static damage instead of adding more dice of damage. While it is a good thing to allow higher level monsters to do more consistant damage, I feel that such a sudden increase in guaranteed damage is something which probably was not playtested as much as it should have been. I also feel that more variable damage would make monster critical hits seem more special. 2) The current books really are starting to seem quite different from the first batch of 4E. While I am glad work is being done to improve the system, I think there comes a point when the new design direction of 4E seems different enough from where 4E first started to give someone a little concern about how well mixing and matching old and new elements will work out. I have a feeling that Essentials and the Rules Compendium will bring more change than I originally anticipated. The book is good. I had a chance to look through it at the store and then again when looking through a copy owned by a friend. I am waiting to buy it until I see if one of the local stores here has a copy with better physical quality. A few of the ones I looked through at the local book store had some rather noticeable physical defects. It surprised me to find this because it is not a problem I had noticed since the first three books. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
General Monster Manual 3 Thread
Top