MONSTER MANUAL 4: More Monsters/Less Fluff or Vice Versa?

[The_Gneech]

Well, I'm afraid I'm gonna have to disagree with pretty much everything you said.

Sorry, but the new stat block and the numerous amount of info on a creature is just too much information. I'd rather have more monsters than more fluff. Some of it is useful, Ecology for instance.

The fluff is what makes a monster interesting! A stat block is not a neat encounter, it's just a pile of numbers.

Knowledge checks (DMs are now too lazy to be a little creative in assigning a DCs and information on the fly?), and Sample Encounters?

Which leads to the course WotC has been taking with its books lately: They're writing more and more material for lazy people. Adventures, Knowledge checks, Sample NPCs, and now Sample Encounters and Typical Treasure? Or is this something to make the D&D Minis game easier?

Wow, way to be insulting, dude. And what the flying heck could Knowledge checks and treasure have to do with the minis game? Are you on drugs?

But let's not go off topic. I'm curious as to how others think of the new monster format. Obviously, we're going to have 3-4 pages per monster, which leaves us with, what, 50 new monsters? Blech, my money can be better spent elsewhere. I'd rather have more monsters, less crappy material I won't ever use than vice versa.

I like the new monster format. I like having a wealth of information and a context for a creature as well as an interesting encounter I can just plug right into my game. Being lazy, I work two jobs and have about two, maybe three hours to prepare for any given session, so I have to use all the lazy-person resources I can get.

-The Gneech

 

[delericho]

So don't be a DM if one cannot make the time.

Good plan! Of course, given the extreme rarity of good DMs, and the fact that there are fewer and fewer people out there who can make the time, even with all the help we get, it'll get harder and harder to find a good game, so people will quit, and the game will die.

Far better, I would have thought, for Wizards to support people who are too 'lazy' to do that work themselves. Besides, laziness is just a question of degree. A sufficiently motivated DM will create all his own monsters, so has no use for a MMII, never mind MMIV.

It's only a strong opinion that I have with WotC books as of late. A lot of material I scoff at because I would rather have the tools to create my own material than to use things I will only ever use once in my gaming such as adventures and sample encounters. Sample NPCs are just a waste, I always make my own, and the new PrC format telling you how to play a PrC is also a waste because I and my players tailor the PrC "fluff" to their own likings. I can name more and more things. Does this stop me from buying WotC books? No, as long as they still give a healthy dose of PrC, feats, spells, monsters, tools, good "fluff" (like those in Power of Faerun and Hordes of the Abyss), etc. in the books.

Actually, I do mostly agree with your sentiment - I think the pendulum has swung too far towards 'fluff', and I think it needs pushed back a bit. But I object to being called lazy because I no longer have twenty hours a week to work on my campaign, and would prefer to have someone else do the borning mechanical bits so I can do the fun stuff.

That's what I thought D&D was, making the game your own using the rules given and a sprinkling of rules from Unearthed Arcana and house ruling stuff. Not being spoon-fed everything to you.

I enjoy creating adventures, storylines, and worlds. I hate dealing with stats for various things. If Wizards of the Coast want to produce materials to allow me to enjoy the fun parts of the hobby while minimising the parts I don't like, I'm not going to complain.

Maybe everyone likes the spoon-feeding, but I'm not a "baby" to the game and feel the material is unnecessary, a lot of it deserves to simply be D&D website articles.

So, you want the material, but you want it given to you for free? Last time I checked, the people who work for Wizards want paid, so there's a limit to how much free stuff they can give us.

But again, it's my opinion on the matter, and for all I know, all these weird changes with the format from PrC to monsters might be the "4E" everyone's looking for. Who knows?

Wizards have changed the formats because they think the new methods do a better job of presenting information. They are, or at least should be, constantly looking for ways to improve the game. Thus, they try new formats. Whether these make it into 4e remains to be seen.

 

[Kanegrundar]

I'm firmly in the give me good fluff camp for my monsters. Monsternomicon was the first monster book for 3.5 that really made the monsters feel like something more than a collection of stats. I like the treasure outlines, especially if it lists items that can be harvested from the creatures, it really fleshes out the monster and make treasure more interesting than the simple 1d4 gold and 2 1,000 gp gems on monsters that it doesn't make any sense for them to be carrying such things. Give me interesting, original, well-written monsters, with good fluff and I'm happy.

 

[DaveMage]

So don't be a DM if one cannot make the time.

The comeback to this is that if you don't like the book, don't buy it.


Both statements, of course, are completely useless for constructive dialogue.

 

[Gold Roger]

So don't be a DM if one cannot make the time.

It's only a strong opinion that I have with WotC books as of late. A lot of material I scoff at because I would rather have the tools to create my own material than to use things I will only ever use once in my gaming such as adventures and sample encounters. Sample NPCs are just a waste, I always make my own, and the new PrC format telling you how to play a PrC is also a waste because I and my players tailor the PrC "fluff" to their own likings. I can name more and more things. Does this stop me from buying WotC books? No, as long as they still give a healthy dose of PrC, feats, spells, monsters, tools, good "fluff" (like those in Power of Faerun and Hordes of the Abyss), etc. in the books.

That's what I thought D&D was, making the game your own using the rules given and a sprinkling of rules from Unearthed Arcana and house ruling stuff. Not being spoon-fed everything to you.

Maybe everyone likes the spoon-feeding, but I'm not a "baby" to the game and feel the material is unnecessary, a lot of it deserves to simply be D&D website articles.

But again, it's my opinion on the matter, and for all I know, all these weird changes with the format from PrC to monsters might be the "4E" everyone's looking for. Who knows?

Sorry dude, but that's an awefully arrogant and insulting way to put ones position.

For one, you're about my age. At our age we've got lots of time and free energy to put into the game, but many players are older than that, have fulltime jobs or businesses, as well as families. Should those guys be by your point forbidden to game?

Others love the act of DMing itself, but not the preparation and number crunching. Are those supposed to be forbidden.

D&D is an adaptable game, but in the end it's a fully developed game as well. D&D will always go along with a strong implied setting you can play without change if you want. That has nothing to do with being spoon fed, it's rather like a ready meal you just have to put into the microwave.

Some people like to leave behind all that stuff the books take care of for them, but not not because they are lazy or stupid, but because they don't have the time or prefer to concentrate on other parts of the game first. That may be to much fluff for you personally, but I'm pretty sure in the grand picture it's actually a pretty solid balance.

 

[Felon]

Sorry dude, but that's an awefully arrogant and insulting way to put ones position.

That's our Razz!

Personally, I think he'll provide a good litmus test for how inflammatory someone can get on this forum before facing more than a mild admonition from a moderator. Shows the rest of us how far the envelope can be pushed.

As for the MMIV--folks, lets face it, it's a rare thing to see a new monster that's utterly unlike anything we've seen before. I like the "quality over quantity" approach.

Didn't the Monsternomicon receive universally positive reviews for providing this level of detail for GM's?

 

[MerricB]

They're writing more and more material for lazy people.

Yes, Gary Gygax was writing for lazy people when he wrote the Descent into the Depths of the Earth. Tolkien was writing for lazy people when he wrote the Lord of the Rings. So was Charles Dickens when he wrote Oliver Twist. They could have come up with that themselves. Did you build your own car?

What a set of idiotic statements (I can't even call them arguments) you come up with.

DMs have different strengths. By providing me with monsters, Wizards allows me to concentrate on the parts of the game I enjoy and am good at. By using pregenerated adventures, I can run 3 games a fortnight and only need to write original material for one of those games.

Instead of shrinking D&D back into a place where only the most dedicated people can play - all 5 of them - Wizards help make the game accessible to more people.

The scary thing is that this doesn't make the game less imaginative. If I don't like a bit of flavour text written for something, I replace it with something of my own. If I do like the flavour text, I still have to work out how to work it into my game.

 

[Henry]

My thoughts exactly, there needs to be a happy medium between the two. And there never is. Either it's too much crunch (which makes one such as me happy, but isn't fair to everyone else) or too much fluff. Lately, there's just been too much fluff. I get my fluff from Dragon Magazine or my own imagination, I have no need for this in WotC books I pay $30+ for monthly.

But wherever WotC gets their customer feedback from sounds like it's from teenagers and pre-teens to me. No one will ever know what goes on inside their minds, but it's looking pretty sad to me from my perspective.

How about wait and see if the pendulum shifts back in the other direction first, as it did in 2002 and 2003, making you happier and people like me less likely to buy the books?

From my perspective, I have so much "crunch" I'm drowning in it -- more than I'll ever use in the next 20 YEARS of gaming. (God knows our group has only used maybe all of 15 books worth of stuff in the past 5 years of weekly gaming!) Then again, I'm also a DM who doesn't even use all the stats given; I shorthand my monsters and NPC's as it is. The more attention paid to each creature, the better for me. Something like the Monsternomicon would set the type of standard I'd want to see from WotC. People who like nothing but straight mechanics, though, would consider it a waste of space.

 

[Snotlord]

I'm happy to see a format with more meat. I'm unable to put in the long hours of prep-time, so this is a great change of pace for me.

Lighten up Razz, and let it grow on you.

Edited for politeness. Merric is the best thing at ever happened to this board.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

Wow, this review has made me more annoyed with Razz than with the book. So, in keeping with that: I give Razz's review a rating of 1.5 out of 5, while there are some good ideas present they are presented poorly and in an inflammatory manner. There is also way too much fluff present in his review, expressing his opinions as stetements of fact, and not enough crunch, clearly this review is intended for the use of lazy readers who cannot be bothered to take a look at the free sample and make up their own minds.

The Auld Grump