• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

I Have A Copy of Monster Manual 5.

demiurge1138 said:
Perhaps that, using this schema, ogre magi are the air magi (what with their perfect fly speeds, invisibility at will and cone of cold).

Demiurge out.

I was just thinking that a few moments before you posted this. I can see it that way. They're already blue-skinned, too, a proper color for air (I'm guessing white skin will be for the ice/water magi maybe?).
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Razz said:
Aww, no Air? What gives? How could they do Elemental Magi and do only three and not the complete 4?

Also, I'd like to know what the feats do. I recognize some as reprints, but others there are brand new

Oh. Ooops. It was air, earth and fire. No water. My bad.
 


helium3 said:
Oh. Ooops. It was air, earth and fire. No water. My bad.

Eh? No Water? So is the ogre magi supposed to represent the water one or something?

Does it explain anywhere in the text why there's no Water Elemental Magi?
 

Razz said:
Eh? No Water? So is the ogre magi supposed to represent the water one or something?

Does it explain anywhere in the text why there's no Water Elemental Magi?

No, it doesn't really explain it anywhere. Maybe they're saving it for MM6.
 

Razz said:
I also wish they would stop with the "theme" thing. A whole entry on an illithid city called Thoon? MMIV had Lizardfolk tribes...I really don't like seeing these in a MONSTER MANUAL, to be honest. They just don't belong. Again, they worry about splitting the fan base, but they are literally doing that by combining material in ONE book.
Just because it's not for you is hardly evident of damaging their entire fanbase. You never do seem to latch on to that little point.
 



Felon said:
Just because it's not for you is hardly evident of damaging their entire fanbase. You never do seem to latch on to that little point.

A little late on replying to that one, which was already corrected by Helium3 a long while back? It's almost as if...hmm...you just felt like picking on opinionated me? So typical of some of the posters here when they cross my posts here. Sad...

In any case, I was referring to the fact that some of the WotC staff on the FUTURE RELEASES forums on their website had informed many of us that the reason they won't do new creatures in one book with classed monsters/NPCs in its own separate book is because they don't want to split the market.

In retaliation to that, I was saying that makes no sense to pour both into one book and further limit the content of both (e.g. the same page count instead of an increased page count in order to better share the two concepts). Instead of pleasing a majority, you end up giving less to both sides which leaves the same amount angry and the rest foolishly complacent with it.
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top