I Have A Copy of Monster Manual 5.

[bento]

MM5 more than makes up for it. I think this may be one of the best, if not the best, of the series. A great many of the critters in here are both thematically and mechanically interesting, with some cool new abilities.

But I thought the best part of it was the themed critters. The skull lords and associated undead, the tirbana, the elemental magi, and the mockery bug (shades of the Thing) are all enough to inspire entire adventures; and the section on Thoon is enough to build an entire campaign off of.

MM5 is a perfect example of a design philosophy that I've been touting for years now: Specifically, that a D&D book needs not only to be mechanically solid, but inspirational and interesting to read. I don't just want tools, I want ideas and plot hooks to spur the imagination.

This reason is probably why I found value in Lords of Madness and Libris Mortis while passing on MMIV. New monsters are great, but even cooler is going the extra step by giving me information on how to build a better encounter.

I'm not the kind of DM that will throw monsters in willy-nilly, but build on a theme. Variations and more importantly aspirations of the monsters are what builds memorable adventures. Giving me four or five examples of liches, each with their own story of how they came to be and what they are working towards (LM p151-156) will inspire me more to add them to an adventure than just a two page splat (MM p166-168) in a monster book.

 

[Ripzerai]

Tirbanas are insects that require humanoid hosts to complete their life-cycle. They form a sort of hive in cities and towns and begin using captured people to make more spawn.

Sounds exactly like the hivebrood from the 0D&D Creature Catalogue (and the 2e Mystara MC). Exactly. So this might be another converted creature to add to Razz's list.

Hivebroods, at least, weren't much like red slaadi/xill/etc. in the way they reproduce. They didn't simply lay eggs in their chests.

 

[DMH]

The mockery bug sounds like a critter from the second MC for Dark Sun. It absorbed DNA via bloodfeeding and turned partially into whatever it ate. After feeding on a variety of monsters, it would make mongrel men look normal.

 

[orcmonk220]

Anyone feel the urge to have a civil war campaign climax between Mind Flayer and the Thoons???

Evil goodness....

 

[Dire Bare]

And "Exarch" is just one of those terms that, we'll have to accept, has multiple meanings in the game, since these exarchs have nothing to do with the Exarchs of Bane or Hextor.

Actually, both uses of "Exarch" are appropriate, no multiple meanings here. "Exarch" is a real world religious title (look it up!). An Exarch of Bane is a dude in the religious hierarchy of Bane's church, he/she serves Bane.

The MMV Exarch serves a dragon, rather than a god. Slightly different use of the term unless the template supposes a religious devotion to the dragon, but not really a different meaning.

 

[Dire Bare]

Sounds exactly like the hivebrood from the 0D&D Creature Catalogue (and the 2e Mystara MC). Exactly. So this might be another converted creature to add to Razz's list.

Hivebroods, at least, weren't much like red slaadi/xill/etc. in the way they reproduce. They didn't simply lay eggs in their chests.

Haven't seen MMV yet, and my OD&D memories of the Hivebrood are hazy. But if these new bugs are practically identical to the Hivebrood . . . . then why didn't they just simply update/convert the Hivebrood!?!?!

While I don't know yet if this is the case here, it's one of my pet peeves when Wizards designs a "new" creature that fits the same niche as a classic. Just freakin' update the classic monster for Pelor's sake! I also hate it when they take a classic monster (such as the Water Weird) and tag it's name to a completely different beastie (I think they did this with the Mountain Giant too, if I remember correctly).

Okay, sorry, mini-rant over.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I felt the same way you did about the MM2 weirds, DB, at first. The old water weirds were kind of dumb, though. The new ones are a lot more interesting, although I would have liked to have seen the old ones converted as well in the same volume.

 

[Mouseferatu]

although I would have liked to have seen the old ones converted as well in the same volume.

Not sure if it helps you, but Dragon #347 has an Ecology of the Elemental Weird. In it, it includes the stats for the "old-style" weirds, as larval forms of the MM2 weirds.

 

[Razz]

Haven't seen MMV yet, and my OD&D memories of the Hivebrood are hazy. But if these new bugs are practically identical to the Hivebrood . . . . then why didn't they just simply update/convert the Hivebrood!?!?!

While I don't know yet if this is the case here, it's one of my pet peeves when Wizards designs a "new" creature that fits the same niche as a classic. Just freakin' update the classic monster for Pelor's sake! I also hate it when they take a classic monster (such as the Water Weird) and tag it's name to a completely different beastie (I think they did this with the Mountain Giant too, if I remember correctly).

Okay, sorry, mini-rant over.

My problem with WotC is them having this anathema to converting older edition creatures in the first place. MM3, 4, and 5 have 90% new creatures. Yet folks like me are still waiting on, say, the incomplete list of Rilmani given back in 3E Fiend Folio and still no sign of the other 3 and no sign of any more yugoloths either. And who knows when the Hierarch Modrons will ever get done, seeing how that ended up being 1/3 completed and no sign of the rest being done.

The thing is, there's so much potential and classic goodness to the creatures in older editions that can not only be converted to 3.5E, but given a new spin to it (especially if it wasn't interesting in the first place, make it interesting!). Besides, why are they worried about not using NEW creatures with this newer generation of customers anyway? The newer customers won't know the difference. Unless someone actually tells them it's from an older edition updated to 3.5E, and even then who cares? The customer gets the benefit of a "new" creature (to them) anyway and us veteran gamers receive our updates.

I am hoping the Digitial Initiative will meet these needs as I have given up on waiting for this stuff to appear in print books. :\

 

[Maggan]

Besides, why are they worried about not using NEW creatures with this newer generation of customers anyway?

I'd guess two reasons:

1. If they convert something old, they will get flack for doing it wrong. However they chose to do it, odds are those "old" gamers won't agree to it. Or at least, someone is bound to make a stink about it on the internet, thereby making it less fun and fulfillling trying to please the rest.

2. It is more fun creating new stuff than redoing someone else's work.

I think it's mostly 2, but some of 1 also enters into it, I believe.

/M