No Frequency for Monsters?! (just noticed!)

[taliesin15]

OK, OK, I've only been playing the 3.0 and 3.5 systems for a few years, but I've just noticed this is one thing missing (or am I wrong?) from the Monster Descriptions that I believe was the *first* thing mentioned in the Monster descriptions in 1st edition AD&D--whether a Monster was Common, Uncommon, Rare or Very Rare...

Does this bother anyone else? It seems a bit odd to me that a new DM might look at the description and think (just to take monsters under the letter G) that Giants, Ghouls and Gargoyles are just as numerous as Goblins, Gnolls and Gnomes (actually I think Gnomes were "Rare" in the original Monster Manual)

A couple of side issues here--this possibly explains away my astonishment with the fact that there are so many more Very Rare monsters represented in Miniatures than really proportionally exist in standard fantasy worlds (given the caveat that anything goes in fantasy RPGs)

Another thing it might explain is the bizarre skill Craft: Dungeoneering, where presumably some crusty old wizard teaches 0 level characters the ins and outs of Girallons, Gibbering Mouthers, and Genies--really, do we need jaded first level characters coming to a Dungeon for the first time uttering existential cris de couer "oh how boring, a standard DC 10 arrow trap, what a cliche" or "by the gods, my life is so empty! Another Flumph?"--if there's no sense of discovery, no encounter with mystery, isn't this kind of taking away the wonder of the game?

(course I myself tend to build monsters and traps that are unique, and sprinkle lightly)

 

[Crothian]

Doesn't bother me. DMs are free to make anything as rare or common as they like.

 

[MerricB]

Does this bother anyone else? It seems a bit odd to me that a new DM might look at the description and think (just to take monsters under the letter G) that Giants, Ghouls and Gargoyles are just as numerous as Goblins, Gnolls and Gnomes (actually I think Gnomes were "Rare" in the original Monster Manual)

It really doesn't bother me. What were those values used for anyway?

A couple of side issues here--this possibly explains away my astonishment with the fact that there are so many more Very Rare monsters represented in Miniatures than really proportionally exist in standard fantasy worlds (given the caveat that anything goes in fantasy RPGs)

Like Orcs. (Probably the most common miniature).

Another thing it might explain is the bizarre skill Craft: Dungeoneering, where presumably some crusty old wizard teaches 0 level characters the ins and outs of Girallons, Gibbering Mouthers, and Genies--really, do we need jaded first level characters coming to a Dungeon for the first time uttering existential cris de couer "oh how boring, a standard DC 10 arrow trap, what a cliche" or "by the gods, my life is so empty! Another Flumph?"--if there's no sense of discovery, no encounter with mystery, isn't this kind of taking away the wonder of the game?

Err... what are you talking about?

A new player isn't going to know any of that. If they're smart enough to have Knowledge in the right area (there's about five different areas that apply to monsters), and roll *really well*, then they might know something...

Cheers!

 

[taliesin15]

It really doesn't bother me. What were those values used for anyway?

for populating dungeons, wilderness areas, and, when applicable, urban areas.

Like Orcs. (Probably the most common miniature).

as it should be! But how many times are you going use an Invisible Stalker?

A new player isn't going to know any of that. If they're smart enough to have Knowledge in the right area (there's about five different areas that apply to monsters), and roll *really well*, then they might know something...

thankfully, there are new players out there who aren't already jaded--its just something that creeps in an destroys the wonder of the game--as to Craft: Dungeoneering, isn't that just the silliest idea ever for a skill to learn? Unless one is running some sort of jokey comic book style game, maybe akin to Order of the Stick

 

[Echohawk]

as it should be! But how many times are you going use an Invisible Stalker?

In my experience, it is usually a bad idea to ask "who ever uses [insert monster], anyway?" (or a similar question) as a means of demonstrating a point. With a game as diverse as D&D, the chances are that there will be someone, somewhere, who has put [insert monster] to good use. The chances are also pretty good that that person will read your post and immediately post a personal counter-example...

For instance...

One of the NPC opponents in my longest running campaign had an invisible stalker sidekick. So that was one of the creatures that came up all the time, and I'd have make very good use of an invisible stalker mini.

The same holds true for all monsters/minis. Someone, somewhere has run an exciting encounter using dozens of wrackspawn. Someone, somewhere has used the tojanida for a thrilling aquatic encounter...

 

[Psion]

OK, OK, I've only been playing the 3.0 and 3.5 systems for a few years, but I've just noticed this is one thing missing (or am I wrong?) from the Monster Descriptions that I believe was the *first* thing mentioned in the Monster descriptions in 1st edition AD&D--whether a Monster was Common, Uncommon, Rare or Very Rare...

Does this bother anyone else?

I don't particularly miss it, no. I'll determine such things for myself when world-building. When it comes down to specific encounters, I often find that what the "frequency weighted" table roll tells me is the exact opposite of what I find interesting and I'd rather hand-place creatures that I think make the game interesting. AFAIAC, the PCs are PCs because extraordinary things happen to them.

Another thing it might explain is the bizarre skill Craft: Dungeoneering, where presumably some crusty old wizard teaches 0 level characters the ins and outs of Girallons, Gibbering Mouthers, and Genies--really, do we need jaded first level characters coming to a Dungeon for the first time uttering existential cris de couer "oh how boring, a standard DC 10 arrow trap, what a cliche" or "by the gods, my life is so empty! Another Flumph?"--if there's no sense of discovery, no encounter with mystery, isn't this kind of taking away the wonder of the game?

Okay... so would you mock Tolkien in a similar manner when he has Gandalf and Gimli relate the dangers that lurk in the Mines of Moria? I'm seeing that the mockery is coming from you (honestly, what knowledge check result is going to express itself in metagame terms like "DC 10"?), and is not implicit in the skill itself, which is a perfectly reasonable skill that would logically exist in any setting where people's lives rely on knowing what horrors lurk below.

 

[Garnfellow]

Plot convenience has always been the biggest factor in monster appearance in modules and campaigns. The very nature of adventuring means that PCs are ironically stumbling across rare, super rare, and super-duper rare monsters all the time. In light of this, the frequency line was never all that helpful. I've used invisible stalkers at least 5 or 6 times over the last 24 years, but a halfling NPC? Maybe once.

 

[pawsplay]

I know of a Knowledge (dungeoneering), but no such Craft skill.

 

[Glyfair]

OK, OK, I've only been playing the 3.0 and 3.5 systems for a few years, but I've just noticed this is one thing missing (or am I wrong?) from the Monster Descriptions that I believe was the *first* thing mentioned in the Monster descriptions in 1st edition AD&D--whether a Monster was Common, Uncommon, Rare or Very Rare...

It's part of the 3E paradigm of giving options to DM, rather than artificially limiting them, I believe. Instead of putting down a frequency and telling DMs that has common a monster is, they give DMs the option to make them as common as they choose.

Look at the published campaign worlds. In the Forgotten Realms is seems that drow are more common than the very rare they are supposed to be in the earlier MM. In Eberron orcs are less common than in standard worlds, hobgoblins and goblins more common. In Dark Sun, thri-kreen are more common than standard. In Planescape outsiders are much more common than in Greyhawk.

 

[Nifft]

Only Cloakers, Destrachan and Yrthak have inherent any "frequency" to speak of.

Wait, put the hong stick down! Ow! Ow ow ow!

-- N