Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon 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 Next
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
*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!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
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
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Monster Manual II
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="Avned" data-source="post: 2009478" data-attributes="member: 7653"><p>Well, one of the most anticipated and eagerly awaited books of 2002 from Wizards of the Coast, was the MM2. Did it live up to the hype? I don't think so. </p><p></p><p>First the good:</p><p></p><p>The book starts off with explanations of the types of monsters (Magical Beast, Construct, etc.) and various tables detail suggested ability score ranges, suggested Min/Max HD based on size, how a monster's BAB advances, which saves are good, etc. This is an expansion of the rules in the front of the first MM and is very close to the information Wizards published in Dragon magazine regarding monster creation. Overall, this is one of the best sections of the book as it really helps in monster design and creation.</p><p></p><p>The layout. While it still seems to follow the first MM's style (which I personally didnt have a problem with), this one seems cleaner for some reason. The entries seem easier to find and read. I didnt have any problems with the first MM, but this one does seem to do things better.</p><p></p><p>The artwork. The artwork in the book has its good points and its bad points. Some of it is excellent (the famine spirit, the hellfire wyrm, runic guardian, and the linnorms), some of it is a bit cartoony (jermlaine, red sundew), and some is just bad (see below). Overall, the art is mediocre. Lockwood and Reynolds did the best stuff in the book; the others, in a lot of places, leave something to be desired. </p><p></p><p>The Monsters: Some are very good. Some are not (see below). Some of the more creative ones seem to be the nethersight mastiff ( a large doglike monster that can wrench a person from the ethereal plane with its bite), the effigy, the runic guardian, the fell drakes, and some others. The Spell-stitched template is interesting.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Now the Bad:</p><p></p><p>The Art: Ok, what the heck is the blue thing that should be a boggle? That has got to be one of the worst pictures of the boggle (since it is from first edition) that I have seen. The jermlaine; a Saturday morning cartoon picture. Where is the coyote and roadrunner? The gem dragons. Why didn't Lockwood do the dragons? He knows how to draw dragons. The corpse gatherer. A pretty interesting monster, but the artwork leaves a lot to be desired.</p><p></p><p>Monsters. The selection of monsters for this book, to me, is not all that exciting or well thought out (raggamoffyn; while from an older edition of the game, its still pretty lame). And in some cases, it doesnt seem a lot of creativity went into some of them (Abeil- the bee people, the ocean strider). </p><p></p><p>In some places, Wizards completely revamped the monster from the original (which isnt bad in some cases, but what is the reasoning behind the 26 HD banshee?). Is it just me or does it seem like an overabundance of monsters have the Improved Grab ability? While useful, couldn't the designers come up with something more creative than every other monster having this ability? </p><p></p><p>The CRs seem pretty good in most places (though I think they goofed the mountain giant; CR 26?). It would've been nice to match the CRs up with the monsters from the Epic Level Handbook. The monsters in that book could easily (in some cases) beat a monster in the MM2 with an equal CR. I think some of the CR 20+ monsters in the MM2 were simply given a high CR rating because the designers decided they needed higher CR monsters for the book.</p><p></p><p>Last complaint about the monsters, the War Beast template. A monster born and raised as a mount. Is this really necessary as a template? Aren't there rules some of the monsters' entries in the MM and MM2 that talk about training a creature and raising a creature as a mount? Do we really need a template for this? Yes, this template applies to a wider range of monsters (including vermin), but I don't see the need for the template.</p><p></p><p>Overall, I wasn't very happy with the book. While there are some useful monsters in the MM2, the book as a whole leaves a lot to be desired. Just wasn't what I was expecting or looking forward to. I have heard some people complain about the lack of ecology or campaign information (the same complaints that echoed around after the MM came out). While that could be a bonus, I guess, I don't really need that information. I think I can come up with some things on my own.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Avned, post: 2009478, member: 7653"] Well, one of the most anticipated and eagerly awaited books of 2002 from Wizards of the Coast, was the MM2. Did it live up to the hype? I don't think so. First the good: The book starts off with explanations of the types of monsters (Magical Beast, Construct, etc.) and various tables detail suggested ability score ranges, suggested Min/Max HD based on size, how a monster's BAB advances, which saves are good, etc. This is an expansion of the rules in the front of the first MM and is very close to the information Wizards published in Dragon magazine regarding monster creation. Overall, this is one of the best sections of the book as it really helps in monster design and creation. The layout. While it still seems to follow the first MM's style (which I personally didnt have a problem with), this one seems cleaner for some reason. The entries seem easier to find and read. I didnt have any problems with the first MM, but this one does seem to do things better. The artwork. The artwork in the book has its good points and its bad points. Some of it is excellent (the famine spirit, the hellfire wyrm, runic guardian, and the linnorms), some of it is a bit cartoony (jermlaine, red sundew), and some is just bad (see below). Overall, the art is mediocre. Lockwood and Reynolds did the best stuff in the book; the others, in a lot of places, leave something to be desired. The Monsters: Some are very good. Some are not (see below). Some of the more creative ones seem to be the nethersight mastiff ( a large doglike monster that can wrench a person from the ethereal plane with its bite), the effigy, the runic guardian, the fell drakes, and some others. The Spell-stitched template is interesting. Now the Bad: The Art: Ok, what the heck is the blue thing that should be a boggle? That has got to be one of the worst pictures of the boggle (since it is from first edition) that I have seen. The jermlaine; a Saturday morning cartoon picture. Where is the coyote and roadrunner? The gem dragons. Why didn't Lockwood do the dragons? He knows how to draw dragons. The corpse gatherer. A pretty interesting monster, but the artwork leaves a lot to be desired. Monsters. The selection of monsters for this book, to me, is not all that exciting or well thought out (raggamoffyn; while from an older edition of the game, its still pretty lame). And in some cases, it doesnt seem a lot of creativity went into some of them (Abeil- the bee people, the ocean strider). In some places, Wizards completely revamped the monster from the original (which isnt bad in some cases, but what is the reasoning behind the 26 HD banshee?). Is it just me or does it seem like an overabundance of monsters have the Improved Grab ability? While useful, couldn't the designers come up with something more creative than every other monster having this ability? The CRs seem pretty good in most places (though I think they goofed the mountain giant; CR 26?). It would've been nice to match the CRs up with the monsters from the Epic Level Handbook. The monsters in that book could easily (in some cases) beat a monster in the MM2 with an equal CR. I think some of the CR 20+ monsters in the MM2 were simply given a high CR rating because the designers decided they needed higher CR monsters for the book. Last complaint about the monsters, the War Beast template. A monster born and raised as a mount. Is this really necessary as a template? Aren't there rules some of the monsters' entries in the MM and MM2 that talk about training a creature and raising a creature as a mount? Do we really need a template for this? Yes, this template applies to a wider range of monsters (including vermin), but I don't see the need for the template. Overall, I wasn't very happy with the book. While there are some useful monsters in the MM2, the book as a whole leaves a lot to be desired. Just wasn't what I was expecting or looking forward to. I have heard some people complain about the lack of ecology or campaign information (the same complaints that echoed around after the MM came out). While that could be a bonus, I guess, I don't really need that information. I think I can come up with some things on my own. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Monster Manual II
Top