Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 5776095" data-attributes="member: 2067">Man, Monte is going to probably regret that one word. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue    :p"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" />FWIW, my vote is on him meaning the monster that drops from ceilings and not the monster role. This is for a few reasons. For one, monster role is entirely DM-facing, not player facing. If Monte's character were to fight a "lurker-as-in-monster-role" Monte probably wouldn't call it that. He'd call it a "Ythrak Stealthmonger" or whatever, since that's the ACTUAL monster he fought.Second, check out the module. Check out the theme of reunification. That little G+ update tells old 1e fans that this new edition includes everything you need to play that old module, including that old monster (which isn't a good monster according to the 4e paradigm, since it's more of a "gotcha monster" -- AKA a trap, but I digress). Those G+ updates are about the designers saying "These are the raw elements of D&D that we are experiencing with the new system -- the new game has trolls, and runs modules, and has lurkers, and also has paladins and dwarves?"In other news, monster role itself doesn't so much bother me as a statistical organizational tool, since it is essential DM-facing, and meaningful only in the context of generating the numbers. It was only ever the beginning to monster definition, never the end.</blockquote>

Verification