Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 5185100" data-attributes="member: 87792">As a DM, there are two things I need to know to run any monster.&nbsp; Its rough capabilities and how it thinks.&nbsp; The way it thinks can be broken into two things - its tactical sense and its motivation.Where WoTC excels with the monster manual is the tactical sense of the monsters.&nbsp; The MM and particularly the MM2 are outstanding about this.&nbsp; They tell me how the various monsters move, how they think, how they react, and how they organise.&nbsp; And do so far more clearly than in any other edition of D&amp;D - just the difference between Goblin Tactics and the Kobold's Shifty makes Goblins and Kobolds more different in 4e than Kobolds are than Half-Orcs in any previous edition.&nbsp; They react differently, move differently, and behave differently.&nbsp; And all this despite a small statblock.The second part of the information I need as a DM is best summed up as the old actor's question &quot;What's my motivation?&quot;&nbsp; And here is where WoTC sucks.&nbsp; For unnamed characters, pay, fear, or group loyalty are just fine.&nbsp; But more important ones need both foreground and background (to borrow Weem's description) - and WoTC seems to make these thin whereas Paizo excels most of the time.&nbsp; If I have a history, I can work out whether someone is likely to have e.g. good riding skills.&nbsp; If I have a motivation I can tell how someone will act mid term (rather than short term - which the statblock covers) when a PC throws the inevitable spanner in the works.&nbsp; And no module writer can cover everything.Questions of motivation don't belong in the MM (except as minor hooks) unless it's for a specific world (Privateer's excellent Monsternomicon for 3e is the best single world monster manual I've read).&nbsp; They belong in the module.&nbsp; Or the worldbook.I wonder whether it is because the 4e monster manuals are so good and provide so outstanding a mix of fluff and rules that WoTC is so weak on the motivation side.&nbsp; On the other hand, the 3e statblocks are dire (hell, they make you look up other books, which defeats the point) - which forces Paizo modules to be good at the motivations because they aren't doing much with the tactical reactions.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Neonchameleon, post: 5185100, member: 87792"] As a DM, there are two things I need to know to run any monster. Its rough capabilities and how it thinks. The way it thinks can be broken into two things - its tactical sense and its motivation. Where WoTC excels with the monster manual is the tactical sense of the monsters. The MM and particularly the MM2 are outstanding about this. They tell me how the various monsters move, how they think, how they react, and how they organise. And do so far more clearly than in any other edition of D&D - just the difference between Goblin Tactics and the Kobold's Shifty makes Goblins and Kobolds more different in 4e than Kobolds are than Half-Orcs in any previous edition. They react differently, move differently, and behave differently. And all this despite a small statblock. The second part of the information I need as a DM is best summed up as the old actor's question "What's my motivation?" And here is where WoTC sucks. For unnamed characters, pay, fear, or group loyalty are just fine. But more important ones need both foreground and background (to borrow Weem's description) - and WoTC seems to make these thin whereas Paizo excels most of the time. If I have a history, I can work out whether someone is likely to have e.g. good riding skills. If I have a motivation I can tell how someone will act mid term (rather than short term - which the statblock covers) when a PC throws the inevitable spanner in the works. And no module writer can cover everything. Questions of motivation don't belong in the MM (except as minor hooks) unless it's for a specific world (Privateer's excellent Monsternomicon for 3e is the best single world monster manual I've read). They belong in the module. Or the worldbook. I wonder whether it is because the 4e monster manuals are so good and provide so outstanding a mix of fluff and rules that WoTC is so weak on the motivation side. On the other hand, the 3e statblocks are dire (hell, they make you look up other books, which defeats the [I]point[/I]) - which forces Paizo modules to be good at the motivations because they aren't doing much with the tactical reactions. [/QUOTE]

Verification