Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 5238979" data-attributes="member: 42582">I see this said a lot, but I can't say I've especially noticed it.Thinking through some entries off the top of my head: the MM has a history of the Abyss (demon entry), it tells me that Lolth was the god of fate before she went to the Abyss (spider entry), it gives me a semi-ecology for the Feywild and Shadowfell (various beasts like hounds and panthers), it tells me quite a bit about various humanoids and their gods, etc. Plus each entry has a list of encounters which suggests further gameworld facts about alliances, domestication of animals, etc.Some entries, like elementals, are fairly sparse, but I'm not sure I want a lot of lore about elementals - they're conjured creatures made up of elemental forces, and there's not a lot more I need to know (when I use them I'll work out who summoned them).Now I never GMed 2nd ed and don't know the monster entries from that edition very well. But when I compare the lore in 4e it doesn't compare adveresely to the 1st ed AD&D Monster Manuals, which (with a few exceptions like Demons, Devils and Sahuagin) are pretty sparse on lore. And when I compare it to other mainstream fantasy games, like RM or HARP, it's fine. Even RQ doesn't have much detail in it's monster entries - that's all in the Glorantha worldbook (much like 4e has Underdark, Plane Above and similar worldbooks).</blockquote>