Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Razz" data-source="post: 3497897" data-attributes="member: 3014">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:DrowGithyankiGnollHobgoblinKuo-ToaLizardfolkOgreOrcYuan-tiVampireSo 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!</blockquote>

Verification