Monster Manual IV, from Amazon.com

[Voadam]

I want a cheap non-drm version of it. These are things I want to copy and paste.

I like expanded background descriptions, I want MMs to be more evocative with info I can use outside of running a combat.

 

[Shemeska]

The expanded ecology information is a good thing, it goes back to the best parts of the 2e Monstrous Compendiums. That's to be commended, and more flavor and background is almost always a good thing.

But several things take the wind out of the book's sails. I may yet get the book, but I'll need to go through it more in detail than the quick run through that I did the other day.

1) Wasting space on monsters we already have, just with class levels added to them. That's a good idea for some DMs, but it's not something that is deserving of being in a monster manual, nor something I expect in a monster manual.

2) Then turning around and not using any psionic classes on the githyanki that you're adding class levels to and presenting as new nifty monsters. Made of lose and fail right there.

3) Let me mentally smack with a rolled up copy of the Weekly World News, leaving an imprint of Bat Boy in smeared ink on the nose of whoever decided to use the Marshal class out of the Minis Handbook on a creature in the MMIV. Bad! No treat for you! Keep DDM seperate from actual D&D, thank you very much.

4) Dropping the naming convention for Yugoloths that has been in place for around thirty years. The 'loths themselves are rather nice, and I'll give them credit for that, but I'll be renaming the Voor and Corrupter of Fate as the Vooroloth and Lesser Gacholoth respectively.

 

[Dark Psion]

When Monster Manual 3 came out, I had convinced myself I didn't need another monster book. Then they put up the art gallery and I had to have it.

But this book's art gallery http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ag/20060710a
doesn't make me want this book. Also, it is only 3 pages?

The MM3 was 9! Most other books are 4 to 6. Did they leave a bunch of art out or is this all there is in this book?

 

[Shade]

I don't have the book, and probably won't get it anytime soon. This is a sad day for me...it's the first monster book I haven't bought as soon as it was available for as long as I've been actively playing.

While I haven't seen the book in its entirety, I don't feel I'm just "judging a book by its cover". There are too many guaranteed negatives for my tastes.

I don't want MM monsters with class levels tacked on in a monster book. I feel for the DMs that don't have the time or enjoy doing this themselves, but I think it is far better served as a separate book as others have mentioned. Having an orc barbarian from level 1-20 would be far more useful, I would imagine, than just including "orc barbarian 4". If your characters aren't around 4th-level, this guy is going to be of limited usefulness.

I dislike much of the new format. I love the addition of the ecology, the strategy and tactics can be nice, but I dislike having the treasure pregenerated for the same reasons as the monsters as class levels...I'd rather do it myself. This is less space-wasting, so isn't quite as big as an issue for me, but still adds up to my sum negative reaction. The lore is hit-or-miss for me as well. I like the concept, but the results seem to vary too wildly. Some of the higher DC lore seems more obvious (or less useful) than the lower DC results.

The preview creatures I have seen thus far don't really thrill me. The dragonspawn are just too generic, and too much like draconians, which I already have in the Dragonlance CS. The wizened elder just seems like a treant-lite.

I agree with the comments that githyanki and yuan-ti should've used psionics. 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).

And while many will probably applaud them for not including a bunch of creatures updated from older editions of the game, and for gathering up creatures from Dragon and Dungeon, I don't. I don't need a book full of new creatures, when there are plenty of interesting existing creatures that could use an update to 3.5 or a bit of polish with the expanded ecology section. I wish they'd go back to the "mixed bag" approach of the MM2 and Fiend Folio, which have a good mix of updated, reprinted, and new creatures.

I won't rule out getting it somewhere down the line, as I'm a sucker for monsters and it's hard to know that there are demons and yugoloths out there not in my collection. But since ENWorld feedback seems to be generally perceived as "grumbling fanboys" not indicative of the average customer, my only option is to vote with my gaming dollar.

 

[Sammael]

3) Let me mentally smack with a rolled up copy of the Weekly World News, leaving an imprint of Bat Boy in smeared ink on the nose of whoever decided to use the Marshal class out of the Minis Handbook on a creature in the MMIV. Bad! No treat for you! Keep DDM seperate from actual D&D, thank you very much.

The Marshal has nothing to do whatsoever with miniatures. He fills the same character niche as the bard (buffing/diplomacy). Out of 10 DDM sets so far, we've only seen two or three miniatures with the Marshal class.

 

[Mercule]

Don't tell me none of you havn't thought that there's a likely psionic monster handbook around the corner somewhere.

Hadn't thought it, but I would (likely) buy it. This is true even (especially?) if it included prestatted psi-classed critters. An organization of psions is the BBEG, IMC.

Actually, that tells me that my issue with the NPCs in MM4 isn't that I don't like pre-statted NPCs, but that I don't like drow, gnolls, and yuan-ti (true for all).

 

[Psion]

But come on, Wotc still has some milking of 3.5 to do. Don't tell me none of you havn't thought that there's a likely psionic monster handbook around the corner somewhere.

That seems an unlikely silver lining to me. That seems a lot more focussed product that it sounds like WotC would take a chance on.

 

[BryonD]

I think pre-statted humanoids are a great idea. Would be even better if they were in the original MM next to their main entries. And the easier the material is to pick up and play, the better in my opinion. Having some pre-built material doesn't stop you from using the tools provided to make other things for your game.

I'm very comfortable with pre-statted humanoids. It is the two half done books idea that bugs me.

In another thread it was pointed out that the Ogre Barbarian in the MM is precedent for this. I disagree that what amounts to a sidebar for a creature introduced in that book is precedent for spending a large portion of a new monster book on pre-existing monsters. But there is a bigger point in my mind.

I had forgotten that the Ogre barbarian was even there.
Why? Because an isolated example of an ogre barbarian 4 does not provide much overall value. I found it much more useful as an example of what WotC had in mind for advancing and gearing up characters. I don't find it useful as a stat-block for use in game because it is to specific.

I use classed creatures all the time. But the MM does not provide the specific cases that I need so I don't even think of it as a resource for that. Thus, even if I DID happen to want an ogre Barbarian 4 I'd be unlikely to recall that there is one there for me.

Now if I had a book with Ogre barbarians of every level 1 through 10, or just even levels or even every 3rd, then THAT would be a great resource in my mind. When I needed a creature with classes I'd go there first and see how close I could get and go from there.
THAT sounds like a great product.

It's like saying no one should publish campaign settings or adventure modules because any DM can do that.

I don't see anyone saying you shouldn't do it.
I do see people saying that a Monster Manual with them in it does not live up to their expectations. Like I said before, if Spell Compendium had been 1/2 feats, that would have been a disappointment.
On the one hand it is not arguable that the space dedicated to these class examples could have been used for other new monsters. So there is a certain negative built in right there.
Now add in that the classes monsters require me to build my game around them or gain no value from them and I don't see any way to not find that also a negative.
It is like an anti-synergy.

If you like the classed characters then wouldn't you like a book with a wide variety of them?
I certainly would.

 

[MarkAHart]

I personally loved the new format, the layout, everything about this monster book. I like the new approach, and I can already see a ton of time-saving uses for it.

 

[DungeonmasterCal]

I like the new statblocks a lot, but that's really all I have to say about it except I'm VERY glad I got it for 39% off the cover price. This is the first WotC book I've bought in awhile I'm disappointed in.