Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Metallic Dragons: Unaligned!?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Errantocracy" data-source="post: 4799972" data-attributes="member: 60415"><p>Actually, let me tell you why. Most, but not all, players tend to play good characters. Since the MM is meant to present monsters to the players to defeat (as opposed to allies) a good aligned monster is essentially a waste of paper for them. Now, there are some people that wish to play evil characters, or groups that wish to play evil parties, but there is no conceivable reason why evil characters cannot fight evil characters. In truth, there are occasions when good PCs might fight good creatures, but such a case would be rather exceptional, and creating monsters that can be used but very rarely for a majority of players seems a misuse of resources. Essentially, the inclusion of good-aligned "monsters" in the MM either forces a lower content of actually useful monsters, or else raises the cover price. Thus, the decision is one that benefits most players, while those who would prefer it the other way can easily change the alignment of creatures as they fit, rather than rail against the injustice being done to all because they find themselves in personal disagreement with the decision.</p><p></p><p>I didn't see this when I first posted. The MM is a book of combat statistics. If you're not planning on fighting on killing something . . . why do you want its combat statistics?</p><p></p><p>It's a rhetorical question, although conceivably you might answer that by suggesting the creature's possible use as an ally. In this case, however, I think the stats presented in the MM are not very useful for dealing with creatures as allies, since they are written with combat encounters against the PCs in mind. For example, if the PCs wanted to ride a metallic dragon, it might be more useful to stat it as a mount than a monster.</p><p></p><p>I suppose my point is that the MM is a book full of things to fight and kill, and that's what it should be. It's called the <strong>Monster's</strong> Manual after all, not the Allied Creature's Manual. I'm not saying that information on riding Metallic Dragons into combat against Chromatic Dragons would not be nice, but maybe it would be more at home in the PHB3 (along with information on riding Chromatic Dragons, since there are going to be Gith . . .).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Errantocracy, post: 4799972, member: 60415"] Actually, let me tell you why. Most, but not all, players tend to play good characters. Since the MM is meant to present monsters to the players to defeat (as opposed to allies) a good aligned monster is essentially a waste of paper for them. Now, there are some people that wish to play evil characters, or groups that wish to play evil parties, but there is no conceivable reason why evil characters cannot fight evil characters. In truth, there are occasions when good PCs might fight good creatures, but such a case would be rather exceptional, and creating monsters that can be used but very rarely for a majority of players seems a misuse of resources. Essentially, the inclusion of good-aligned "monsters" in the MM either forces a lower content of actually useful monsters, or else raises the cover price. Thus, the decision is one that benefits most players, while those who would prefer it the other way can easily change the alignment of creatures as they fit, rather than rail against the injustice being done to all because they find themselves in personal disagreement with the decision. I didn't see this when I first posted. The MM is a book of combat statistics. If you're not planning on fighting on killing something . . . why do you want its combat statistics? It's a rhetorical question, although conceivably you might answer that by suggesting the creature's possible use as an ally. In this case, however, I think the stats presented in the MM are not very useful for dealing with creatures as allies, since they are written with combat encounters against the PCs in mind. For example, if the PCs wanted to ride a metallic dragon, it might be more useful to stat it as a mount than a monster. I suppose my point is that the MM is a book full of things to fight and kill, and that's what it should be. It's called the [B]Monster's[/B] Manual after all, not the Allied Creature's Manual. I'm not saying that information on riding Metallic Dragons into combat against Chromatic Dragons would not be nice, but maybe it would be more at home in the PHB3 (along with information on riding Chromatic Dragons, since there are going to be Gith . . .). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Metallic Dragons: Unaligned!?
Top