How do you like your Monster Manuals?

[Razz]

Since Scott Rouse and other WotC staff are now checking these boards out, I really hope they take a look at this particular poll and thread.

My question to the community is basically what do you really like to see in a Monster Manual?

1) Do you like to see the traditional set of new/updated monsters?

2) Do you like to see a mix of new monsters and classed monsters from previous books?

3) Or do you like the two to simply have their own books?

I chose number 3 and my opinion on it is below.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
This started when I've read the May and Beyond previews on the D&D website and came upon this blurb on Monster Manual V:

This supplement for the Dungeons & Dragons roleplaying game presents more than a hundred monstrous foes to challenge even the toughest heroes, including draconic masterminds, demonic horrors, vengeful fey that haunt ancient ruins, and mind flayers driven mad from their journey beyond the planes. This book also provides powerful, ready-to-play varieties of popular monsters such as the hobgoblin, the kuo-toa, and the vampire, saving Dungeon Masters precious time at the game table.

In addition to scores of new monsters, this tome features sample encounters, easy-to-follow tactics, and guidance for integrating these new creatures into any D&D campaign setting.

I thought this was one of the big reasons Monster Manual IV was unpopular? Doesn't WotC learn from their mistakes?

Not many people I heard liked the classed monsters. Those that did liked them had also agreed that they belong in a book of their own, not in a Monster Manual. I am one of them. A Monster Manual is to offer NEW monsters, not NPCs.

They're very useful to the majority of gamers, yes. But they just simply don't belong in a Monster Manual. From the looks of it, they're doing the creatures from Monster Manual I that PCs commonly fight and that DMs commonly use. I hope it stays that way from here on and hope it doesn't go beyond MMI.

Actually, I don't see why these classed monsters aren't put on their website as a weekly or monthly article feature? It's filler material that belongs up there.

So let's see what creatures are left. So far they've done:

Drow
Githyanki
Gnoll
Hobgoblin
Kuo-Toa
Lizardfolk
Ogre
Orc
Yuan-ti
Vampire

So what's left? Bugbears, Centaurs, Duergar, Goblins, Kobolds, Lycanthrope, Mind Flayer, Trolls...damn, that's Monster Manual VI.

So here's to hoping Monster Manual VII has no more of these!

 

[Aus_Snow]

I hate the MMIV model of critter book.

Um. Yeah, that pretty much covers it. :\

 

[the Jester]

Yep, I put off buying MM4 until I found it used at a con for peanuts. That means that WotC didn't make anything off my purchase of it, alas.

I don't mind the occasional advanced monster in an MM- but I prefer it if, as in MM3, it's a monster from the book. However, using templates, etc. from other books is ok by me. Heck, a new template on an old monster is fine by me too!

But I don't plan on buying MM5 until I find it hella cheap and used, at this point. I could be won over, but it doesn't seem too likely to me right now.

 

[mhacdebhandia]

I have no problem with classed humanoids and other monsters. I'd rather see useable NPCs like that - especially if they're designed as standard examples of "regulation" NPC types that appear in setting material, like kuo-toa whips and monitors - than some of the half-arsed, silly creatures that have appeared in previous products.

I'd also certainly rather see, say, a troll with fighter levels or maybe even a prestige class of some sort than a war troll as a separate monster, especially if they're all designed to really strong or unusual concepts. How might a troll wizard be designed to take advantage of the troll's powerful "racial" combat ability, for instance?

I like having both new or updated monsters and classed NPCs in the same books. I mean, yeah, they're "Monster" Manuals, but what they're titled isn't really what they are. They're books filled with NPCs, most of whom are monstrous antagonists, some of whom are potentially neutral or even helpful allies.

A limited concept book like Exemplars of Evil is an interesting idea, as a sort of Rogues' Gallery product of major villains, but I wouldn't be as interested in a book full of rank-and-file type NPC antagonists.

 

[Pants]

Excellent idea, but it needs its own book or, preferably, some other sort of product.

Option 3.

 

[Thunderfoot]

I didn't buy MMIV, the first monster book from TSR/WotC that I don't own...I don't need updates, I get those elsewhere, I need new and exciting.

 

[khyron1144]

I voted for option 1.


If there are good original monsters, that's cool (ever since I got the 3e Monster Manual 2, I've had vague plans to create an adventure with a Moon Rat archvillan.), but what I really want is to be able to use my entire 1e/2e monster library without having to do any extra work myself. Actually it's a third-party book that's done the best by me in 3e: Necromancer's Tome of Horrors.


If I like a monster race and they print the level adjustment in the main moster book stats, I would make NPCs of that race myself. A classed monster of a race printed in a Monster Manual would be a wasted page to me.

 

[Valesin]

Classed monsters from other MMs is an idiotic waste of time. Honestly, is anyone who plays this game incapable of slapping 4 levels of rogue onto some stupid humanoid?

 

[I'm A Banana]

I think it would be a tragedy if they got rid of the classed monsters.

Seriously, not everyone has the time or inclination to stat up a classed beastie. Yes, it's possible. No, it's not always a good way to spend one's limited prep time.

They work as "variant creatures." And they fit best in Monster Manuals, where they can be seen, searched, and added to the database of "things to encounter."

You also left out a few options, such as: "I want a book with ONLY classed creatures, because I have more than 3,000 unique creatures and don't need any more," or "I like my monster book with ONLY new creatures, because updated creatures don't appeal to me at this point."

 

[Monkey Boy]

I voted for the new monsters + update.

This is purely from a personal perspective as I am a veteran DM. I agree with WOTC approach to making the latest monsters manuals beginner DM friendly.

We need to make DMing easier and WOTC current approach should be encouraged.