Monsters: Fluff Versus Game Mechanics

[Hussar]

I'm currently going back to my old B/E books and rereading them. There's almost NO monster fluff in those books. A monster takes up maybe two paragraphs, including any funky mechanics.

To me, that's just about right. Gimme more monsters. If you cannot sum up your hook for your monster in about twenty words or less, it's not worth it to me.

 

[Hunter In Darkness]

I myself would like to see more of 2e style. I like the ecology and such in my books. That's all the info you ever needed to understand a monster and why it would be some where.

I really dislike the 4 sentences of fluff and then stats. May get flamed here but that's video game like in a bad way. Monsters are not just respawneing xp machines but a living part of a game world.

So yeah I want fluff and lots of it

 

[Drkfathr1]

I think there needs to be a tad more fluff, just to provide a bit more structure/basis for some monsters and why/how they do what they do.

For example, look at the entry for the Ghoul in the 4E MM. They immobilize. One of their chief tactics is to immobilize as many foes as possible.

But what exactly is the nature of that immobilization? Is it a poison? A toxin? A necrotic effect? There's no description of exactly what causes the immobilization.

Now, if you've played previous edition of D&D, you know that it was a necrotic effect...the chill of the grave...the minor sapping of your vital energy...etc, etc. But if you've never played D&D and are unfamiliar with previous incarnations of the game, how exactly does the Ghoul's immobilization work? In what context does it do what it does.

That's what's missing from the Monsters of 4E.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I'm ultimately very utilitarian when it comes to my gaming stuff. I'm not entirely intrigued to have detailed habitat/society/ecology notes on every beast, but I also don't just use monsters as combat speedbumps, so I will need more than just a statblock and a paragraph about how they like to eat things and kill folk because they're always hungry/evil/unhappy with their marriage/generally unpleasant.

Monsters, to me, aren't just things to fight, so I need information on what they are, what they like to do, and how they like to live (and how they make adventurer's lives difficult). I need enough info so that I can describe what they're doing when they're not on-stage, and so that I can give the PC's a range of challenges.

I don't need superfluous fluffy detail, really, but I do need more than stats.

 

[Nikosandros]

I don't need superfluous fluffy detail, really, but I do need more than stats.

Exactly, if you look at, for example, the demons in the MM the only information you have about their shapes is from the illustrations. There is zero description, not even information on whether the creature is a biped, a quadruped or something else entirely.

 

[Shemeska]

2e style all the way.

I started with 3e, but there's a reason I went back to all the older 2e material for inspiration (almost exclusively till 3e started putting out equally inspirational material like Fiendish Codex I, Lords of Madness, etc).

That said, I think the amount of flavor text that appears alongside monsters in the current Paizo APs sets a very nice mix of giving people mechanical crunch, and description and ecology details without reaching the extent of 2e material that would turn some people off. Having written a few of these, they've been a joy to work on, and really give some character and depth to a monster, rather than it being a walking statblock with nothing to really catch the attention.

 

[FireLance]

I think that a good balance between too much fluff (which may stifle creativity on the part of DMs) and too little fluff (which may not be inspiring enough) would be to tie the fluff directly to the mechanics. In some cases, it might have broader implications for a creature's habits and society, e.g. a kobold's bonus to defences against traps. The entry could suggest a line of description which the DM can use when the creature activates its ability, e.g. what happens when a gnoll gets two or more allies adjacent to an enemy and can use its pack attack ability. This also serves to hint to the PCs how they can counter or avoid it.

 

[jdrakeh]

I'm currently going back to my old B/E books and rereading them. There's almost NO monster fluff in those books. A monster takes up maybe two paragraphs, including any funky mechanics.

Of course, it's also worth noting that monsters in those same books are defined by approximately two lines of game mechanics. And not even two whole lines, as many of those books had a two-column page layout.

 

[chaotix42]

I enjoy the fluff in monster-specific books, but when I buy something like the MM I'm in it mainly for the crunch. The amount of background info in the new MM2 is just about right for me, but I would like short descriptions of each monster. Since almost every monster gets a picture I'm not really worried about it though!

 

[Invisible Stalker]

1e style simplicity is enough for me