How do you like your Monster Manuals?

[Jdvn1]

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

Didn't they say that sales weren't affected at all, indicated that it wasn't unpopular at all?

EDIT: emphasis mine...

There's a few reasons to try it in the first place, and a couple more to keep doing it. The most important factor is that, while there were critics on message boards, plenty of other people liked their inclusion. AFAIK, we didn't see signs anywhere else (customer surveys, sales) that indicated that the book was poorly received.

http://enworld.org/showpost.php?p=3498297&postcount=8

 

[frankthedm]

Originals and updates is what i prefer in a monster book. A sprinkling of a class here and there like the MM was fine {advanced stone golem, level 4 ogre barbarian). MM4 went too far.

To me, it seemed like wotc intentionally padded the page count and made 2 books {MM4 & MM5] out of one book's worth of monsters.

 

[Obergnom]

actually, I really like MM4s classed monsters. Why? To me, Drow as shown in the MM1 are useless, unless I take the time and put some levels upon them. It is not to much work, but I tend to do a lot of winging, and thats where these Classed Monsters fit in perfectly.

Last week I did a midnight campsite encounter with 40 Orcs and I needed a leader to spice things up a bit... I knew there were some cool NPCs in MM4, opened it, chose the War Howler. I do not think I could have winged a barbarian bard, I would have gone with the standart orc barbarian as a leader instead.

 

[delericho]

None of the above.

Ideally, the original MM should have included ecology information for the monsters, classed versions of humanoids, and all the other stuff from the MMIV format. Those classed monsters are actually useful, so I like them.

Given that this is not the reality we must work with, then I'll grudgingly accept the MMIV/MMV format for such things. But where I feel MMIV (at least) falls down is that many of the classed monsters are too 'easy'. I don't need a book to add 3 levels of Ranger to a Gnoll for me - I can do that myself. Either add some odd combinations, or templates, go for a higher level, or something.

(I noted Mearls commented in another thread that many of the 'classed' monsters in MMV now include new feats, templates, or other special powers that you somehow can't get anywhere else. I'm not sure this is a necessary step, and I'm not even sure it's necessarily desired. As far as I can tell, the tools we already have are actually fine... I just felt the MMIV should have gone further in making use of what's already available. I cannot comment further, however, until I see MMV.)

As for whether the 'classed' monsters should be in MMV and beyond, or whether they should be relegated to some other book... I don't care. Monster Manuals have long since gone beyond the point of diminishing returns for me, but the classed monsters remain useful. So, put them in MMs and I'll buy the MMs. Take them out of the MMs and into some sort of "Rogue's Gallery", and I'll buy that instead. Either way, Wizards sell me one book.

 

[Jolly Giant]

I love monster books! I've got MM1, MM2, MM3, FF, even Monsters of Faerun and a few 3rd party collections. I was planning to buy MM4, but when I heard about all the classed monsters I changed my mind. Sounds like MM5 will be the same, so I guess I won't be getting that either. A definite vote for option 1, IOW.

 

[tylerthehobo]

As a DM who often runs games on the fly at games shops, at friends' houses, the MMIV statted monsters have been extraordinarily valuable. Sure, I've got a slew of sheets of statted out Orcs and the like tucked in the back of my MMI, but being able to just pull a statted/classed monster out of the book is handy. No, I don't want the book to be all that - and I certainly didn't like the draconian rip-offs that populated much of the last MM - but anything that can be done to save me prep time is valuable.

 

[Drkfathr1]

See, I think this is a good example of "bad" business decisions on WotC's part.

I love MM's that just have original monsters without statting out older monsters with class levels. That's what I want in a MM, and we all know those books sell oodles and oodles of copies.

I wouldn't mind having a SEPERATE book with statted humanoids, that I could use when I needed it. Thus, I would buy TWO seperate products. It would be like having the chapter from the SW RPG book with examples of NPC's and opponents.

But when you try to squeeze both into one product, you're making a product that only appeals to one group or the other, and it doesn't get to be all it can be if it was only one or the other.

It seems to me, that the no-brainer here, would be to produce two books. Nearly twice as many sales, and everyone gets what they want. In this case, I would have bought 2 books from WotC, but instead, I bought 0.

 

[Obrysii]

How do I like them?

All new monsters in the old monster format.

 

[blargney the second]

I don't really care, as long as the monsters in the manual are compelling and useful. (Oh, and illustrated!)
-blarg

 

[GuardianLurker]

I voted #1. I could see the space a "Classed Monster" book would follow, but the problem I have with it is that doing so is a little too limiting, in one way or another. Let's start with what the purpose of a "Classed Monster" book is - it's to save me (the GM) time. No more, no less. I don't spend my valuable prep time cranking out an advanced critter, I just look up the Monster/Class/Level combo I want, and there it is.

Examples:
1) Full monster NPC descriptions - stats, personality, motivations, plot hooks, etc. The more specific/detailed you get, the more adaptation I have to do to fit things into my campaign. At the worst end, I might as well just be rolling my own. Plus, the format they're using (by necessity) is very long, which dramatically decreases the number of different Monster/Class/Level combos they can detail, leaving great big holes in the book. At best, you could get "Tribe" books, focusing on a single kind/group of monsters, but even then, it'd still have holes and adaptation problems.

2) Old 1e "Rogues Gallery" style - just the stat's, Man. Preferably in a highly condensed format that can be presented in one monster/class/level per line in a table. Think the back of the old 1e DMG, or the NPC section in the 3e DMG, but applied to everything, instead of just human/PC class combos. I'd actually prefer this, but given WotC's current stat-block track record, I hate to think what would come out. It'd probably kill John Cooper if he reviewed it. Plus let's face it, it'd be *boring*. *Incredibly* useful, but *boring*.

3) A 3.5 edition of Savage Species that collects (and corrects) all the rules for advancing, templating, classing, and creating critters. And provides "turn the crank" instructions. But now I have to do all the work myself, which is what it's supposed to do for me. (Still it'd be nice to have complete rules that work and are accurate.)