L&L 4/16 - A Walk Down Monster Lane

[avin]

There was no way for 2nd Edition Grognards to indicate their preference for the binder format?

I love AD&D2E Monstrous Manual and have no trouble indicating that. There was even a box for comments.

"Dear Wotc, please, bring Yugoloths back, kthxbai"

 

[UngeheuerLich]

It had possibly one or two minor issues, but that was far and away the best poll I've seen to date in the 5e design process. Someone actually knew what they were doing.

Maybe because this is actually a serious poll?

 

[Mattachine]

Good poll, over all.

The monster list was interesting . . . but most of the iconic monsters are already set to appear in the new monster book.

 

[Weregrognard]

My comments on the survey:

1. Use the 2e Monstrous Manual for format/inspiration.

2. Remove seldom used, non-iconic monsters, and replace them with iconic monsters from all editions (e.g. devil/demon lords, twig blights)

3. ????

4. Profit!

 

[hemera]

I had to vote for Modrons, because...they're Modrons. I mean come on! Plus yugoloths and giff and arcane. (Because I'll never stop loving my spelljammer)


Go go gadget other category!

 

[TerraDave]

There was no way for 2nd Edition Grognards to indicate their preference for the binder format?

Or their disdain for it.

(It really just didn't work that well in practice).

Agree that the Monstrous Manual should be the one true model for all other monster books.

 

[Minigiant]

I wrote in Jiang Shi.

I also had a "include the harvesting checks for every poison form every monster" comment.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

Don't really care about specific monsters, as long as about 65% to 75% of the first MM is devoted to the classic, highly useful creatures, over a wide range of levels.

I do care about layout. Please, no short entries that split pages--especially if I have to flip the page. If that means they go crazy on lore and illustrations to round out one entry, and skimp a bit on the next, then that's fine.

 

[Quickleaf]

Good survey! Hell yes bring modrons back

I added that on Question #9 about "how many variations within a single monster entry" that they should let monster frequency and natural/lore divisions be their guide. Orcs, goblins, and drow would benefit from several types while a dragonne or quickling really only needs one type. Dragons have had age categories thru every edition and trolls have aquatic counterparts called merrow - those make for natural variations - whereas something like a stone golem wouldn't benefit much from having multiple types.

 

[Shemeska]

Modrons yes. And for the first edition ever, put the 'loths in the first MM so they don't seem like secondary fiends.

As for the poll options, a lot of critters from 'Monsters of Faerun' IIRC, which is sorta odd.