Monster Manual IV thoughts?

[DM_Jeff]

Like It

Count me in for liking MM 4 a bunch. Very easy to use in the thick of DM-notes combat. Great read for ideas and encounters. Really great art. And having creatures statted up with classes and prestige classes = time saver. I'm there.

-DM Jeff

 

[Mercule]

Well, I went and looked at it over lunch. I doubt I'll buy it, but it's better than I expected.

First, the format. I don't think it's ideal, but it does look like it'd be a real help in GMing. I approve of WotC trying new things in this area, though I wish they'd keep some format -- any format -- for more than one book.

Now that I've seen all the Spawn, I have to say that they're about what I expected. Which is to say, they suck. There were one or two that would make me feel like a complete tool to use. And the backstory is lame to the point of causing physical pain.

One thing I will say about the Spawn is that they would probably be really, really fun to use in the DDM game. Which is an excellent reason to not put them in a Monster Manual. That's exactly the sort of mini-centric thought that is driving me bonkers with 3.5E.

While the maps were well-drawn, they didn't really seem appropriate to a critter book. I expect one-off maps to be in something like Dungeon, not a "permanent" resource.

My attitude on the pregen NPCs is similar. Plus, they took up too many pages. In flipping through the book, it seemed like I was in "orc" forever. The lizardmen didn't seem real great, either. Surprisingly, the gnolls were interesting. And, of course, the less said about drow, the better. Overall, I'd rather they hadn't included them.

There were quite a few really good monsters, though. The Deathdrinker demon looks very cool. It's probably the one critter I most want to use.

The additional fey looked worthwhile, too, though I didn't spend too much time reviewing them. They would definitely help with setting up a Seelie/Unseelie realm/war/etc.

The Tomb Spider was a big surprise. I fully expected to hate it (like I did with all the other bugs in the book). Instead, I found it to be an interesting entry that I could see using.

There were, of course, some real dogs, but there are in pretty much any monster book.

I think the biggest weakness of MM4 is that it didn't know what it wanted to be. New monsters, pregen NPCs, maps, or a themed (Spawn) book. It didn't really do any of those well, mostly because of space. It could have been a really excellent "Monster Manual", but that part of it is too small for the money.

 

[sjmiller]

I just got MMIV and I was a bit disappointed, what is your opinion?

Okay, I have to ask: what about it disappointed you? Can you give specifics? What could have been done to make it a better book? Does it make you less inclined to buy MMV if it is written?

 

[TheAuldGrump]

If the book had been titled 'Monster Encounters' or some such I would not have been disappointed with it. It is actaully a fairly decent book of encounters. It does however fail in regards to being what the other Monster Manuals (and Fiend Folio for that matter) have been.

Too much space used up for monsters with class levels, not enough 'new' monsters. Too many 'hey look, it's a half spider half dragon! pretty cool, huh?' monsters. (And no, the half spider/half dragon was not 'cool' at all. Dumb, dumb, monster.)

I actually hope that this one flops, so WotC does not repeat this mistake. If it had been marketed as a book of encounters I would not be nearly so vindictive.

The Auld Grump

 

[the black knight]

The worst book of the 3e/3.5 series. Hands down a waste of time and money. Thank the lord I didn't have to pay for it.

Sadly I did waste valuable minutes actually looking through it.

 

[Glyfair]

Now that I've seen all the Spawn, I have to say that they're about what I expected. Which is to say, they suck. There were one or two that would make me feel like a complete tool to use. And the backstory is lame to the point of causing physical pain.

One thing I will say about the Spawn is that they would probably be really, really fun to use in the DDM game. Which is an excellent reason to not put them in a Monster Manual. That's exactly the sort of mini-centric thought that is driving me bonkers with 3.5E.

Out of curiosity, what exactly about a monster makes you feel like tool using it, but being really, really fun to use in the DDM game?

 

[Ogrork the Mighty]

To be perfectly honest, I bought MM IV and flipped through it for 30 seconds.

And that's it.

It might be good, bad or indifferent. I really don't know. All I can say for sure is that right now it is less interesting to me than Hordes of the Abyss, which I got at the same time.

I'm reading Hordes of the Abyss now.

Too funny. That's exactly the same situation as I'm in!

My first impression was "meh," and my second impression didn't improve that much. Not enough new monsters, IMO. I do like some of the format changes but maybe they just went a little overboard.

But even Hordes of the Abyss doesn't "wow" me. It just seems like a lot of re-treaded ground from the Book of Vile Darkness.

 

[DragonLancer]

The lack of any monsters from past editions saddens me.

Pick up the Tome of Horrors if you are after those.

 

[Deadguy]

To me Monster Manual IV is the first Monster manual to grow up and adapt the format to the 3rd edition rules. Time was when you needed a different challenge you created a new monster. That created the format for the MMs past...

Now we have templates, classes, advancement and stat modification, all of which can tweak monsters without arbitrarily creating a new monster. There's still a niche for new monsters. But we also need to make better use of the monsters that already exist. And that's what MM IV caters to, in addition to the new monsters.

Is MM IV perfect? No, the design needs some more tweaking. But I am glad that WotC has woken up to the value of providing a fuller toolbox for time-pressed DMs (one of the commonest complaints it seems). The content of a Monster manual is not a sacred cow people!

 

[BryonD]

But I am glad that WotC has woken up to the value of providing a fuller toolbox for time-pressed DMs (one of the commonest complaints it seems).

Explain to me again how offering a single CR option per class/race is a "fuller toolbox".
To me it seems a nice shiny new toolbox with a few items scattered in the bottom and a glaring lack of filling content.

The content of a Monster manual is not a sacred cow people!

Neither is the content of Spell Compendium. But putting a bunch of feats in one would be a bad idea.