Monster Manual IV, from Amazon.com

[Felon]

Y'know, I actually was a little bothered with WotC for giving us monsters like Skullcrusher Ogres and War Trolls and white necromancer Rakshasas in previous MM's. I figured they were selling their customers short because they had to resort to tricking players by creating the illusion of new monsters rather than simply presenting a monster with class levels.

Now with all this whinging about them "wasting space" and playing dirty pool, I have to conclude I was wrong.

And no, marshals are in no way, shape, or form exclusive to the DDM game.

 

[AdmundfortGeographer]

And no, marshals are in no way, shape, or form exclusive to the DDM game.

Very true, I've seen more than a handful in play in Living Greyhawk.

 

[BryonD]

Yes, me too. There have been a few attempts at such a product - Everyone Else foremost among them. The trouble with most of these NPC books is that the designers simply seem incapable of just presenting a variety of stat blocks for generic NPCs and classed or advanced monsters without larding them down with background material.

Yeah.
But if WotC did one, especially at this late stage of the D20 market evolution, I think it could be really good.
It could be a total bust as well.
But it could be really, really good.

 

[Treebore]

I guess it is OK for WOTC to print an NPC book and call it a monster manual. I want a monster manual with what they have always had, NEW and ORIGINAL MONSTERS. Not a bunch of NPC's. I gues it is horrible of me to be upset that WOTC violated tradition. I'm sure I am horrible to not consider statted and classed monster type races as being new and original monsters instead of NPC's. I'm just going to be horrible that way.

 

[Vocenoctum]

New Ability I liked: Nashrou (demon) has Vulnerability to Criticals. Crit drops it to -10 instantly.

It's a fun flaw for a CR2 monster.

Ability I (still) don't like: Bloodhulks have "Fragile", every piercing or slashing attack does an extra 1d6 damage. (They also have Blood Bloated, giving them max hp.) I can see where it might be a useful difference and such, but still it irks me.


And, really, the biggest waste of the book seems to be the GLOSSARY.16 pages for most of what we already have in MM1? I say seems, only because I haven't read it all to compare if there were changes made that would make it's inclusion useful...

 

[Ripzerai]

Demons and yugoloths should have also used the traditional naming conventions they've used for quite some time now (although this "innovation" started with the MM3).

I'm of two minds on that. On the one hand, when you have a dozen creatures of the same race whose names all end with -loth (-daemon in 1e), a voor and defiler of fate stick out like sore thumbs. There was really no excuse for "voor" when vooroloth is just as easy (and more distinct from vorr). Defiler of fate, on the other hand, is a very evocative name, much more interesting than "gacholoth" or "defiloloth." It's a shame it just doesn't fit.

I feel the same about the arrow and sorrowsworn demons. Arrow demon is a very plain, utilitarian name - more a description than a real name. Sagittezu works much better, fitting the pattern of Latin-derived gobbledegook that reads as a creature name in the English-speaking world. Sorrowsworn, on the other hand, is poetry, juxtaposing two unrelated words in a nonintuitive yet interesting way. "Angstezu" or whatever wouldn't be nearly as good.

 

[Vocenoctum]

Also, Yuan Ti marshal has all the marshal info there, scouts have skirmish outlined, and the ninja's have their powers detailed. All in an abbreviated manner (i.e. the ninja's Sudden Strike is "as sneak attack, but no extra damage when flanking")


Also, Clockroachs are great.
"So far, all my efforts to control the silly thing have failed. Clearly there's some secret to this I have yet to unravel. As long as it's doing nothing but clearing the dungeons of refuse, I'm not concerned. But if it should decidemy familiar is trach- or I am...
Clearly, further research is called for."
-final journal entry of Ingalla Asterian, artificer.

(Too bad nearly every such IC quote is the last words of someone.

 

[Psion]

Also, Yuan Ti marshal has all the marshal info there, scouts have skirmish outlined, and the ninja's have their powers detailed. All in an abbreviated manner (i.e. the ninja's Sudden Strike is "as sneak attack, but no extra damage when flanking")

Which is why I might go ahead and use them despite not generally allowing the classes as PCs. I'll just treat them like "extra monstrous abilities."

 

[Shemeska]

That naming convention isn't 30 years old. The whole 'loth thing still seems new to me

The naming convention is as old as Yugoloths (1e Daemons) have been in print, almost as old as I am.

Let's review with every 'loth there is leading up to the ones in MMIV...

In no specific order
Ultroloth (Ultrodaamon in 1e)
Arcanaloth (Arcanodaemon in 1e)
Nycaloth (Nycadaemon in 1e, etc. The 1e 'loths used 'daemon.)
Mezzoloth
Guardian Yugoloth
Marraenoloth
Dergholoth
Piscaloth
Hydroloth
Yagnaloth
Baernaloth
Canoloth
Gacholoth

New in 3e
Skerroloth - from FF
Echinoloth - from Stormwrack

New in 3e MMIV
Voor
Corruptor of Fate

There's a rather large change in naming convention there. We go from 20+ years of calling them X-loth (or X-daemon in 1e) to something that seems out of place. It's awkward looking by comparison (though the new 'loths themselves are rather nice).

 

[Shade]

I'm of two minds on that. On the one hand, when you have a dozen creatures of the same race whose names all end with -loth (-daemon in 1e), a voor and defiler of fate stick out like sore thumbs. There was really no excuse for "voor" when vooroloth is just as easy (and more distinct from vorr). Defiler of fate, on the other hand, is a very evocative name, much more interesting than "gacholoth" or "defiloloth." It's a shame it just doesn't fit.

I feel the same about the arrow and sorrowsworn demons. Arrow demon is a very plain, utilitarian name - more a description than a real name. Sagittezu works much better, fitting the pattern of Latin-derived gobbledegook that reads as a creature name in the English-speaking world. Sorrowsworn, on the other hand, is poetry, juxtaposing two unrelated words in a nonintuitive yet interesting way. "Angstezu" or whatever wouldn't be nearly as good.

Yeah, I wouldn't mind it so much if they used a combination of names, like many of the devils (bone devil/osyluth, etc). In fact, it makes more sense to have their "Abyssal name" and "Material Plane denizens' name" for each of them. It's the simple "arrow demon" that bugs me. And the voor bothers me more, since it isn't a descriptive name, doesn't follow conventions, and is too similar to the FF's vorr and the voor larva from 2E.