Monster Manual: What details?

[JoeGKushner]

One of the things I hope that the 5th ed Monster Manual does is bring back physical descriptons. The Monster Manual for 4th edition is one of the worst offenders in not providing any written details on the monsters. Sure, we have the art but once you show a picture to a player, they'll always know what the monster is.

Indeed, Ravenloft and other products often spoke of 'showing' the details of the monster and not simply naming them.

For a book written by numerous creative types, the Monster Manual is terrible with gems like the following; This restless apparition lurks in the shadows thirsting for souls. Those it slays become free-willed wraiths as hateful as their creator.

Under the lore we get a little potential of what could be description but... not really.

Ogres don't do too bad. Aggressive, strong, and dull-witted, ogres are the quintessential big, dumb brutes. Mind you, we don't know if they ahve fangs, pointed ears, or purple skin, but...

I'm not saying every mosnters needs a three paragraph description but when talking about monsters, especially in a game where there are generic size descriptors, having some real details might come in handy here.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Even outside of Ravenloft, descriptions make monsters come alive. It's bizarre that any publisher wouldn't make it mandatory to at least have a sentence of two of physical descriptions -- which are always useful, as opposed to the occasional utility of knowing a monster is the offspring of two other monsters who have a drunken hook-up during a midsummer bachanal.

 

[Jeff Carlsen]

I was descriptions, ecology, history, motivations. I want at least a two page spread on every monster, and I'm fully willing to sacrifice variety to get it. If anyone here is familiar with the Iron Kingdoms Monsternomicon, you'll know what I'm thinking.

 

[Klaus]

One of the things I hope that the 5th ed Monster Manual does is bring back physical descriptons. The Monster Manual for 4th edition is one of the worst offenders in not providing any written details on the monsters. Sure, we have the art but once you show a picture to a player, they'll always know what the monster is.

Indeed, Ravenloft and other products often spoke of 'showing' the details of the monster and not simply naming them.

For a book written by numerous creative types, the Monster Manual is terrible with gems like the following; This restless apparition lurks in the shadows thirsting for souls. Those it slays become free-willed wraiths as hateful as their creator.

Under the lore we get a little potential of what could be description but... not really.

Ogres don't do too bad. Aggressive, strong, and dull-witted, ogres are the quintessential big, dumb brutes. Mind you, we don't know if they ahve fangs, pointed ears, or purple skin, but...

I'm not saying every mosnters needs a three paragraph description but when talking about monsters, especially in a game where there are generic size descriptors, having some real details might come in handy here.

To be honest, if you lived in a world where orcs are a common creature, you'd recognize an orc by looking at it.

But I agree that descriptions should be included. The problem is that it isn't rare for the final appearance of a creature to be done in the art stage, which often leads to contradictions between the text and the art (read Orcus' description in the MM1, or the goblins').

 

[JoeGKushner]

To be honest, if you lived in a world where orcs are a common creature, you'd recognize an orc by looking at it.

But I agree that descriptions should be included. The problem is that it isn't rare for the final appearance of a creature to be done in the art stage, which often leads to contradictions between the text and the art (read Orcus' description in the MM1, or the goblins').

Ha! No offense to the artists here, but when the descritpion and art don't match, somethng needs to change. I remember when they gave the mezzodaemon four arms because of some mix up and was like, "that was completely unnecessary."

 

[boredgremlin]

I was descriptions, ecology, history, motivations. I want at least a two page spread on every monster, and I'm fully willing to sacrifice variety to get it. If anyone here is familiar with the Iron Kingdoms Monsternomicon, you'll know what I'm thinking.

One of the best MM's ever. couldnt agree more.

The scarred lands monster books put a lot of flavor into their creatures too.

 

[Stormonu]

Actually, I don't want detailed physical descriptions. It's much easier to then modify the creature's appearance in different pieces of artwork or use your own words to describe how it looks. After all, a picture's worth a thousand words.

For example, if you look at Spelljammer beholders, there are many variations on their appearance, and they war against each other over these "mutations" from true beholdership.

 

[JoeGKushner]

Actually, I don't want detailed physical descriptions. It's much easier to then modify the creature's appearance in different pieces of artwork or use your own words to describe how it looks. After all, a picture's worth a thousand words.

For example, if you look at Spelljammer beholders, there are many variations on their appearance, and they war against each other over these "mutations" from true beholdership.

While this is true, for new GMs especially, having a concrete place to start is vital. The game, in my opinion, has never done enough to train people how to speak, improvise, provide descriptions, etc... I'm not saying that there have NEVER been products that do these things, but they often come later, like in Ravenloft for talking about description or in the various blue book DMR series. Having a core start to talk about what the monsters look like provides a quick life line.

On other venues, I'm hearing a lot of love for the Hackmaster Hacklopedia of Beasts or something of that nature. Unfortunately, one of the things I'm hearing is PDF cost is way out there!

 

[mach1.9pants]

http://www.kenzerco.com/free_files/owlbeast.pdf

Check that out, it is the best monster book ever released, maybe the highest qualtiy of crunch and fluff I have ever seen

But, as I said on RPGNet, the Nentir vale level of info would be good.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Definitely a fan of monster descriptions.