Monster Manual: I miss the fluff.

[OchreJelly]

I also have the MM nostalgia. It was my first gaming book, and I remember taking 1E MM on a long fishing trip to Canada. Good times.

That being said, I think table utility as a reference manual trumps fluff every time. In fact they way they have incorporated the fluff into the lore checks is quite ingenious. You get fluff integrated with mechanics very nicely that way.

Keep in mind, there will always be “ecology of…” pieces in Dragon for years to come to recycle the more longer-winded fluff pieces.

 

[Felon]

My first MM was the MM1 for ADnD, it had a giant fighting a ranger-looking dude on the cover.

I used to love browsing it and reading about the enemies. The current MM is an excellent tool for DMs, but not nearly as nice for just reading.

I remember I once totally ripped off their vampire section for a 7th grade english paper- I put almost all of the factoids in there: things like you to kill them with a stake, or in a day they would be back in the coffin etc. The teacher wondered how i "knew so much" about them.

These days, that paper would have things like "vampires can turn to a misty cloud that flies at 10 feet per second. They can then turn back to a vampire AND attack you in just 6 seconds."

I strongly suspect that WotC's strategy is to make the ecology stuff a part of the online Dungeon mag.

I misse the fluff too. It was great for idea mining. OTOH, the 4e MM has an incredible amount of critters packed into it.

 

[Matrix Sorcica]

My first MM was the MM1 for ADnD, it had a giant fighting a ranger-looking dude on the cover.

Wasn't that the MMII?

 

[SuperGnome]

I'd like 2e fluff with 4e statblocks please. Thank you.

 

[Grazzt]

Wasn't that the MMII?

Yeppers. It was. MM 1e (original cover) had a bunch o' monsters on the covers (roper, troll, dragon I believe, etc)

 

[EATherrian]

I also have the MM nostalgia. It was my first gaming book, and I remember taking 1E MM on a long fishing trip to Canada. Good times.

That being said, I think table utility as a reference manual trumps fluff every time. In fact they way they have incorporated the fluff into the lore checks is quite ingenious. You get fluff integrated with mechanics very nicely that way.

Keep in mind, there will always be “ecology of…” pieces in Dragon for years to come to recycle the more longer-winded fluff pieces.

This news saddens me. I really used to enjoy reading the Monster Manual to get some new ideas or inspiration. I can't see me reading crunch for any reason except immediate use. As to the Dragon idea and the multitude of fluff books I think this is what they are intending. But to me Dragon and Dungeon are cancelled and dead and if they can't put even some fluff in the MM I'm not going to bother with the extra books for it. Even after play-testing I'm ambivalent about 4E. I have almost every book from the last three editions but all I'm getting with 4E is going to be the core 3. I guess that means I don't deserve complete information.

 

[pukunui]

I have almost every book from the last three editions but all I'm getting with 4E is going to be the core 3. I guess that means I don't deserve complete information.

That's right because with 4e, there's no such thing as "the core 3". Every book is going to be core, so if you want to have "complete information", you're going to have to get every book.

 

[EATherrian]

That's right because with 4e, there's no such thing as "the core 3". Every book is going to be core, so if you want to have "complete information", you're going to have to get every book.

I know that's the idea, but that's not going to happen.

 

[Jedi_Solo]

I don't have the books yet but I am firmly behind the idea of 'less fluff and more critters'.

Less fluff makes it easier to port the critter of choice for the session into whatever world I'm playing in. Why should space be wasted on saying the Orcs and Goblins are traditional blood enemies (to make up an example) if I want them working together or have two other critters be known to work together if I want them to be at war for a storyline.

Sure, they can easily be tossed out. I know, while I usually am a player when I have guest-DMed I usually tossed the fluff from the 3.X MM and did what I want anyway.

I want the numbers. Leave the fluff for the setting books and the fluff books. Those are fun to read (I love flipping through the 3.X FR Faiths and Pantheons) but I don't want the fluff to get in the way when I'm looking for critters for the PCs to kill.

More critters per book is a big plus for me.

 

[Mirtek]

I miss the 2e level fluff in a number of books.

I miss it too, missed in in the 3.x MM and it seems I will miss it in 4e too