Monster Manual IV - an ongoing review

[Psion]

I see no reason why we should be intimidated into including it.

"Intimidated"? Sheesh, where did that come from? The rhetoric with which you are framing this discussion seems a bit bizarre to me.

The reason that they should WANT to do so is because the Githyanki are one of a few reserved properties that identify the D&D metasetting and they should want to maintain the heritage and distinct flavor of that property, instead of watering it down to be "just another monster is a bookful of new monsters from the monster mill."

 

[Hussar]

In all honesty, Githyanki have always been a planar critter for my money. I never really got into psionics in any edition, so, for me, the idea of Astral beings serving their undying lich queen with that bloody fantastic pic in the original Fiend Folio will always be my Githyanki of choice.

Considering the very strong reactions that psionics engenders, both pro and con, perhaps leaving them out wasn't such a bad idea.

 

[BryonD]

Considering the very strong reactions that psionics engenders, both pro and con, perhaps leaving them out wasn't such a bad idea.

Right, cause they sure dodged the controversy this way....


Seriously, I still think that if they are not going to do psionics, then that is fine. But come on, there are a great many other completely non-psi races they could have selected. Why go out of your own way to alienate a fraction of your customers????

 

[GQuail]

Right, cause they sure dodged the controversy this way....


Seriously, I still think that if they are not going to do psionics, then that is fine. But come on, there are a great many other completely non-psi races they could have selected. Why go out of your own way to alienate a fraction of your customers????

"alienate" seems a major over-reaction: the stats in question are perfectly usable regardless of your use of the XPH or not, are they not?

 

[GQuail]

The reason that they should WANT to do so is because the Githyanki are one of a few reserved properties that identify the D&D metasetting and they should want to maintain the heritage and distinct flavor of that property, instead of watering it down to be "just another monster is a bookful of new monsters from the monster mill."

As Hussar says: you say their core niche is "psionic", others might say "planar", and things like "Red Dragon allies" or "Mind Flayer foes/former slaves" would probably coe up as well.

As long as there is a core Githyanki, Githzerai, Mind Flayer etc stat block, you can expect to see that stat block with core book classes applied in various places. What if a Dungeon adventure features a Githyanki fighter, or a prestige class in a new book has a Mind Flayer sorcerer as an example, or a Duergar miniature appears with stats for it as a Cleric? Exactly why is the Mind Flayer in Weapons of Legacy not using the XPH OK, but the Githyanki in Monster Manual IV out of bounds, when both come from books using non-core classes in other stat blocks?

(This is probably getting really off-topic and ruining MerricB's insights onto a controversial book. Apologies, my Aussie chum!)

 

[BryonD]

"alienate" seems a major over-reaction: the stats in question are perfectly usable regardless of your use of the XPH or not, are they not?

I was responding to a post about "very strong reactions". Heck, I even quoted it.
Without confusing D&D as being a life important topic, I'll say it was not at all an over-reaction within this scale and context.

And well presented psi versions would be useable with or without the XPH, so no point there.

And again, why not just do another monster and avoid the whole matter?

 

[ragboy]

As Felon notes, the Monster Manual team were clearly working from the principle of making everything stand on its own: the Scout levels could be added, a short blurb explains the class' unique powers and the monster is as useable in my game as any other.

The Psionic stuff is SRD and freely available. I'm not sure that this is valid, except for lazy folk. I'm not calling _you_ lazy...what I mean is that the information is there, readily available and free...githyankis and githzerai have traditionally been psionic monsters, as have yuan-ti [did they get any psionic treatment...haven't heard them mentioned in this debate?] so it would have been nice to see them given expansion in MMIV for those that care to dig up the rules and read them. They could have easily made the psionics piece a "plug-in" sidebar with just the stats needed to run the 'yanki or 'zerai as a psionic class.

On the MMIV, I don't have it, but I flipped through it at the store. I wasn't impressed then (though I liked the addition of the 'traditional' races in NPC form). This thread has convinced me otherwise, though. I shall buy it.

 

[Psion]

As long as there is a core Githyanki, Githzerai, Mind Flayer etc stat block, you can expect to see that stat block with core book classes applied in various places. What if a Dungeon adventure features a Githyanki fighter, or a prestige class in a new book has a Mind Flayer sorcerer as an example,

I think you are saying that I am complaining about a sin of commision when in fact I am complaining about a sin of omission. It's not the existence of a creature statted up without the psionic classes that concerns me. A mind flayer can be a sorcerer, and all the classed Githyanki that are in the MMIV are things I could use.

But, I have stood my ground against those who have attacked MMIV on the notion of including classed versions of existing creatures because I feel that generelly speaking, the classed creatures would make up a warband or team or tribe or what have you, that would be a challenging and rationally organized opposition for the players. It's just that the Githyanki lack that virtue by omitting one of their central schticks, thus I don't think they earn their stripes the way the other classes creatures do.

If I can't utilize the classed creatures in the book out of the box as a representative cross section of the opposition, then it seems to me that the MMIV has lost its major selling point on distributing creatures in that format.

or a Duergar miniature appears with stats for it as a Cleric? Exactly why is the Mind Flayer in Weapons of Legacy not using the XPH OK, but the Githyanki in Monster Manual IV out of bounds, when both come from books using non-core classes in other stat blocks?

You are going to strange lengths to mischaracterize me or make my position seem more extreme. Have I ever commented on WoL? Since I have not (indeed, I don't even own it), I think you are hardly in a position to contrast my viewpoints on a supposed contradiction when I have presented no viewpoints on WoL.

 

[GQuail]

And well presented psi versions would be useable with or without the XPH, so no point there.

I think it's clear you and I disagree on this, so there's no point in touching it again.

And again, why not just do another monster and avoid the whole matter?

Becuse they appear in core rules, and are thusly not married to the XPH rules. In 3.0 you would maybe have a point since they weren't core monsters; though even there, they appeard in the Manual of the Planes exempt from the PsiH rules.

The insistance that a core race always come accompanied with non-core trappings or it isn't being done "properly" strikes me as strange. i can't think of another race it would apply to: perhaps the problem here is that the half-way house of "Psionics as Spell Like Abilities" of the core rules allows for the inclusion of monsters that others feel should be getting an "all XPH or nothing" approach. If so, it's not the MMIV's authors fault they worked with that hey had.

 

[GQuail]

The Psionic stuff is SRD and freely available. I'm not sure that this is valid, except for lazy folk. I'm not calling _you_ lazy...what I mean is that the information is there, readily available and free...githyankis and githzerai have traditionally been psionic monsters, as have yuan-ti [did they get any psionic treatment...haven't heard them mentioned in this debate?] so it would have been nice to see them given expansion in MMIV for those that care to dig up the rules and read them. They could have easily made the psionics piece a "plug-in" sidebar with just the stats needed to run the 'yanki or 'zerai as a psionic class.

Well, I'm not lazy, because I both use the SRD and own the XPH.

Still, I don't think saything tha the existence of SRD Psionics rules makes it fair game for use in core products is really a solid train of thought: the SRD is an onine D&D resource that not every player knows about, just like a minority of players read Wizards website and this message board. Hell, wizards don't really make the SRD public as "free rules" but as "developer tool": the absence of UA should make tha tclear.

I believe Merric's original point was that he didn't see how a plug-in set of psionic stats would work, and I agree with him: though like I've said before, a web enhacement is something I could see. If we still had the Psionics articles on te D&D site, they would probably go into that, but they see to have run their course.