Monster Manual 2...super rant!!!

[RobNJ]

Yes, but WHY did they decide not include the Aerial Servant, Brownie, Hippocampus, Kelpie, Leprechaun, Mongrelman, Nereid, Spriggan, and Yeti? Instead, they decided to put in these "experimental", as some say, monsters.

Clearly because they didn't consult you first. I'm sure if you were making all the decisions for them, Hasbro would be purchasing AOL Time Warner at the opening bell on Monday.

 

[Grazzt]

Wow. I never played 1e but with everyone saying how much they want this book (and 400 monsters for $30 is a steal), I just got to have it.

When does this thing come out agian?

November 2002.

You guys have seen the preview on Necromancer Games site right? There is also a link to it on my site.

 

[Darkness]

I'll trade your MM2 for my MM2.

Y'know, the one released by TSR?


Cedric.
aka. Washu! ^O^

The one from the 80s? If so, it might be of interest to a collector...

 

[Sir Edgar]

Clearly because they didn't consult you first. I'm sure if you were making all the decisions for them, Hasbro would be purchasing AOL Time Warner at the opening bell on Monday.

I don't think it's a matter of consulting me first, but perhaps reviewing the work previously published.

 

[Kesh]

Oooh, this is very nice! I'll have to look into it when the book is released.

Mostly for the Flind. Ya know. 'cuz he's a gnoll. Only bigger.

 

[Tuerny]

I don't think it's a matter of consulting me first, but perhaps reviewing the work previously published. [/QUOTE

They obviously did review the work previously published, otherwise they would not have included any material from previous editions at all. They picked those monsters that they thought would add something to the game and threw in a few new monsters in order to give something new to those who have seen all of the 2nd and 1st edition monsters before and want something new and innovative before.

It isn't a matter of incompetency that they made the decisions that they but rather a matter of determining what monsters they felt were actually worthwhile to be introduced or reintroduced to 3e in this particular book.

 

[Grazzt]

It isn't a matter of incompetency that they made the decisions that they but rather a matter of determining what monsters they felt were actually worthwhile to be introduced or reintroduced to 3e in this particular book.

Exactly. Plus, WotC said a long time ago that the new MM2 would focus on higher CR monsters. There are a lot of old monsters that just didnt fit here. Same for types. If they had too many of one type of monster in the book, people would b*t*h about that too.

 

[Tuerny]

Exactly. Plus, WotC said a long time ago that the new MM2 would focus on higher CR monsters. There are a lot of old monsters that just didnt fit here. Same for types. If they had too many of one type of monster in the book, people would b*t*h about that too.

Hey Scott, thanks for agreeing with me

I have a question for you about the Tome of Horrors. What does it offer to someone who isn't neccessarily nostalgic about older editions of D&D? Anything in particular that would cause it to stand out as a book I should pick over any of the other numerous monster offerings out there?

 

[RobNJ]

Exactly. Plus, WotC said a long time ago that the new MM2 would focus on higher CR monsters. There are a lot of old monsters that just didnt fit here. Same for types. If they had too many of one type of monster in the book, people would b*t*h about that too.

Testify! Sing it!

It's like Wizards is a 500 pound epileptic standing in a glass kittens showroom. Whenever it sneezes there's an avalanche of, "Dear Christ that sucks!" before it even has the chance to pocket its corporate hankey.

I must wonder why a group that has collected to discuss the D&D game is so dead-set on complaining about everything the minute it comes out, or moments before.

 

[Grazzt]

Hey Scott, thanks for agreeing with me
[/qb]

Most welcome.

I have a question for you about the Tome of Horrors. What does it offer to someone who isn't neccessarily nostalgic about older editions of D&D? Anything in particular that would cause it to stand out as a book I should pick over any of the other numerous monster offerings out there?

Hmmm- seen the preview yet? Check the Necromancer Games site (link is in my sig) for the preview to the Tome.

What makes it stand out? Well- the plethora of monsters for one. Around or over 400 monsters total in the book (full art for all). Sure there are a lot of conversions that may not mean much to younger players or even older players that just never played 1e...but the monsters are there. All 400+ of them to be used as the DM wishes.

And not all are conversions. There are at least 120 new monsters (elemental dragons come to mind...dragons born of the very elements that exist on the various elemental planes but occassionally ride a vortex from their home plane to the Material Plane; corruptor demons...demons that allow and encourage good-aligned spellcasters to summon them...only to corrupt them into evilness as time goes by).

The Types are varied (elemental, dragon, outsider, etc.) as well as the CRs (from 1 to epic level for the unique outsiders). Psionics are included as well (psionic rats come to mind....as well as Psionic Elementals...creatures formed of psionic energies).