Monster Manual IV - an ongoing review

[Dark Psion]

You can't. To include psionic material would require too many pages of explanations. You'd need to explain Power Points, Psionic Focus, give every power description a monster has, reprint lots of feats, and so on.

To include a scout just required a very short description of Skirmish and Battle Fortitude, as follows:
Skirmish (Ex): +1 bonus on damage rolls and to AC in any round during which the scout moves at least 10 feet. Complete Adventurer 12.
Battle Fortitude (Ex): Bonus on Initiative checks and Fortitude saves while wearing light or no armour and carrying a light load. Included above. Complete Adventurer 12.

That was it. Compare how much text you'd need for even a 4th level psion.

Cheers!

... And for the Ninja,... and for the Warlock,...and for the Marshal.

That's three suplemental books right there, why not one more?

The problem is that there are those who seem to forget that the Githyanki and Githzerai were created to be the ultimate Psionic adversary.

But then they also forget the Githyanki worship no gods, so you really can't have a Githyanki Blackguard. Why not use a Psychic Warrior/ Lurk combo for a Captain, it would be much more interesting?

 

[demiurge1138]

The only thing that bothers me about the new stat block is that when Power Attack is figured in to the attack, the amount of points put into Power Attack is not called out, which makes it hard to reverse engineer to select a different amount of Power Attack.

It's worth noting that there's no creatures with auto-Power Attack in their statblocks in MMIV. At least, none that I remember, unlike in the FC 1, where it's all over the place.

Demiurge out.

 

[blargney the second]

But then they also forget the Githyanki worship no gods, so you really can't have a Githyanki Blackguard.

PrC Requirements: The character must have made peaceful contact with an evil outsider who was summoned by him or someone else.

I agree with you that psioncs would have been nice on the githyanki! I also agree with Merric that it would require a significant page cost to put psionics in MM4. I think they made the right choice - the opportunity cost would have been too high.

 

[GQuail]

... And for the Ninja,... and for the Warlock,...and for the Marshal.

That's three suplemental books right there, why not one more?

I think Merric covered this pretty well, actually: the Ninja doesn't need as much space to sum up his abilities as a Psion would. Warlock and Marshal probably the same as well: by level, you'll get a tighter stat-block out of them than a Psion if you have to explain all the powers, focus rules etc they have running.

The same factor prevents, for example, the Incarnum or Tome Of Magic classes appearing in such a product. There's just too much you'd need to explain before you could successfully use it: any new spell system will always have too much baggage.

(I'm reminded of the RPG stat blocks in the DDM packs, which feature Psionics and other non-core classes, races etc in their makeup: but the abbreviated nature shows the difficulty in doing that with space constraints.)

The problem is that there are those who seem to forget that the Githyanki and Githzerai were created to be the ultimate Psionic adversary.

Well, they have (and I suspect always will have) their spell like abilities listed as "Psionics" in the MM: no-ones forgotten their history per se., but having them be Psionic and having them with classed from the XPH are not inseperable goals. (And if they are, why the hell are Gith, Mind Flayers, etc in the core Monster Manual?)

For what it's worth, in my own campaign the Gith are an extinct race who have recently returned following weird bloodline shenanigans: and in doing so, the first Gith has also been the first Psion in an age. So I'm not here to say "Psionics are rubbish", and I'm not opposed to slipping a Soulknife into my own campaigns. ;-)

But then they also forget the Githyanki worship no gods, so you really can't have a Githyanki Blackguard. Why not use a Psychic Warrior/ Lurk combo for a Captain, it would be much more interesting?

As mentioned, the Blackguard requires no divine patron: heck, in core D&D, gods are by no means obligatory anyway, so a Githyanki cleric wouldn't defy all reason either.

It just comes down to portability: A Blackguard I would feel safe about dropping into pretty much any game I was running, a Warlock I'm pretty sure could bes ummed up in a short block, a Spirit Shaman might take some doing but could maybe be managed. But including your dream XPH/CP class character either requires me to have two non-core books rather than just the one to use the stat block or requires a damn large amount of explanation so I can use it with nothing but the core rules.

 

[amethal]

MM IV came just in time for me.

The PCs had just entered a 5 room "dragon themed" dungeon, and I was all set to use one of each of the chromatic dragons. Now I'm using dragonspawn instead, and the players haven't a clue what to expect next.

The CRs are too low for our current party, so I'm advancing them, but that's not very difficult.

A whitespawn berserker (with 12 barbarian levels) on an iceskidder mount gave the party's heavily armoured paladin an extremely nasty shock, and he would have died had not the mage used wall of force to keep the monster away while the party regrouped and re-assessed the situation.

The blackspawn stalker was also lots of fun. I only had two players for that part of the dungeon. They guessed it could shoot webs, but when it shot two at once and entangled them both simultaneously they got very nervous.

Next week - greenspawn razorfiend, bluespawn godkiller and then the apparent "climax" with a redspawn arcanis on a redspawn firebelcher.

Unfortunately for them, the redspawn isn't the BBEG. That honour is reserved for a souped up Aspect of Tiamat.

The spawn are tailor made for this very silly dungeon. I'm not sure how much use I'll get out of them in a normal adventure, but at the moment I'm a fan.

 

[Matafuego]

Thanks a lot MerricB, I really enjoy reading your reviews and it's giving me a new insight into the book, though I really hate the monsters with classes...

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Of course complaints come through strong on the net. This doesn't lead to the conclusion that the complaints are meaningless.

Good thing that I didn't say that, then.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

You can't. To include psionic material would require too many pages of explanations. You'd need to explain Power Points, Psionic Focus, give every power description a monster has, reprint lots of feats, and so on.

Couldn't they just give them one or two abilities for the non-psionic sorts and include the actual psionic statblock info in a paranthetical aside for people with XPH?

 

[Psychic Warrior]

Meh, There has certainly been some complaints against MM2. But I don't recall nearly the level as has shown against MM4. I also don't recall the nature of the complaints being at all the same.

Of course complaints come through strong on the net. This doesn't lead to the conclusion that the complaints are meaningless.

There is bias in the data, but the bias is fairly constant. MM4 has had a lot more to complain about than MM2.

Look at Amazon. MM2 = 4 stars, MM4 = 2 stars. If the complaints come through stronger, then how did MM2 pull off 4 stars? (MM3 also got 4, MM1 is a little lower, which I assume has some "I hate 3.5" weight and still beats MM4)

I'm amazed you're basing this off of Amazon ratings - a more meaningless stat I can't really imagine.

 

[BryonD]

I'm amazed you're basing this off of Amazon ratings - a more meaningless stat I can't really imagine.

Comments here were already being discarded.
It is just another data point.
Regardless of the nature of Amazon ratings, the fact that MM4 is clearly different from the other MMs in a manner consistent with expectations is not meaningless.