Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Primal" data-source="post: 6365809" data-attributes="member: 30678">Seems like quite a few monsters ended up being quite bland and too simplified for my taste. I just don't have time to tinker with them, adding abilities/powers to most critters in the book, so it's becoming more and more likely that I won't enjoy DMing Next. Having said that, I think this is a good move on WotC's part, considering that easy-to-run monsters are better for newbies. Also, there may be variant rules/modules in DMG or some other supplement to make monsters more complex.One more thing; there's something 5E has accomplished I thought would be nigh-impossible for WotC to achieve, considering all the previous editions of D&amp;D. Namely, they really nailed it with the graphic design and art. The layout is well-designed; it supports colorful images and conveys all the necessary information without &quot;getting in the way&quot; or jumping at you. All the images are great and well, consistent (for the lack of a better term, since English is not my native language) with each other and faithful to the semi-realistic style they've chosen for Next. All of this means that their Art Directors have done a superb job with the books; IMO it's even better than what Sarah Robinson did with Pathfinder. And I'm saying this as a former professional AD and a PF fan. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />My only gripe is with the book covers, which try too hard to evoke &quot;old skool&quot; vibes with that annoying font, weird ampersand-logo and the bright red &quot;smudge&quot; behind the logo. But that is a minor issue. If 5E books won't grab gold for art at ENnies next year, there's something horribly wrong with the world.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Primal, post: 6365809, member: 30678"] Seems like quite a few monsters ended up being quite bland and too simplified for my taste. I just don't have time to tinker with them, adding abilities/powers to most critters in the book, so it's becoming more and more likely that I won't enjoy DMing Next. Having said that, I think this is a good move on WotC's part, considering that easy-to-run monsters are better for newbies. Also, there may be variant rules/modules in DMG or some other supplement to make monsters more complex. One more thing; there's something 5E has accomplished I thought would be nigh-impossible for WotC to achieve, considering all the previous editions of D&D. Namely, they really nailed it with the graphic design and art. The layout is well-designed; it supports colorful images and conveys all the necessary information without "getting in the way" or jumping at you. All the images are great and well, [I]consistent [/I](for the lack of a better term, since English is not my native language) with each other and faithful to the semi-realistic style they've chosen for Next. All of this means that their Art Directors have done a superb job with the books; IMO it's even better than what Sarah Robinson did with Pathfinder. And I'm saying this as a former professional AD and a PF fan. :) My only gripe is with the book covers, which try too hard to evoke "old skool" vibes with that annoying font, weird ampersand-logo and the bright red "smudge" behind the logo. But that is a minor issue. If 5E books won't grab gold for art at ENnies next year, there's something horribly wrong with the world. [/QUOTE]

Verification