Player's Owning the Monster Manual?

[arwink]

My various groups contain at least two to three guys who also DM, two people who have all three sourcebooks, one person who flats with a DM and one guy who just looks into the books when he feels the need.

I don't think I've ever felt the need to stop players from looking in the books. I also tend to just tell them what a monster is if it's common enough.

I have started altering a monsters appearance or brewing my own to keep them on their toes, however.

 

[Crothian]

I can't stop people from buying or lookijng at the books, but I don't think they need them at the table. Last campaign our Summoner just had the stats of the creatures he could summon printed out, so even he didn't need the MM at the table. I perfer there being as few books at the table as possible.

 

[Bendris Noulg]

As a DM, I prefer my Players not have knowledge of the MM, although DMs becoming Players makes this unrealistic. However, I use enough from multiple sources, and make numerous changes and tweaks, that it shouldn't be a problem should an experienced DM join my table.

Now as a Player, I actually bought my DM two monster books (Minions & Monsternomicon) just so there would be monsters in the campaign that I wasn't familiar with (I'm a 22+ year gamer, the DM is a 6 year gamer and a 1st Time DM).

I must say, I do enjoy the surprises that I get.

 

[robaustin]

Our rule is that players do not have access to the MM without special permission from the DM during a game session.

As a Cleric - and able to summon creatures, I made up index cards of the creatures I ordinarily summon (with stats and such on it). When I summon one I hand it to the DM, this way he has the info right there and I don't have to let him know I'm digging into the MM.

In general though I don't have an issue with players having access to it outside the game. It's impossible to expect them to not look at it.

--*Rob

 

[Arnwyn]

In our group, the players may not even *touch* the MMs, much less look through it at any time. When a PC summons a creature, he chooses from the list in the PHB. Simple as that. He may not see what stats are "better" - he will learn that simply through experience. When the creature appears, the DM rolls for that monster (the player chooses the monster's basic actions - attack, defend, dig, block, etc) and the monster does the required action to the best of it's ability, using whatever means necessary. That a player "needs" all the stats for a summoned monster is bunk - it all depends on the group's playing style.

So, would I appreciate monster stas (good-aligned or otherwise) in a "player's book"? No. So, I wouldn't buy such a book.

 

[WizarDru]

In my games, I have one DM, so automatically I expect him to know something about some of the monsters we face. Further, since (between several games) we have multiple high level casters (divine, arcane and Psi), there is a great deal of access to summoning spells and planar allies.

I'll be honest, I don't have time to figure out how many hit dice and which feats a summoned Elder Fire Elemental has, and then keep reminding the PC of it's abilities, or control it as a summoned NPC the whole time. I trust my players not to get silly with it. If I want to confuse them, or knock them out of their metagame mode, I follow Piratecat and Monte Cook's examples, and scratch off the serial numbers or apply a template. When you don't know what a creature is capable of, it becomes much scarier. But at the same time, I want seasoned adventurers to feel somewhat capable about battling some monsters.

Case in point: Saturday night we had a game. The first fight was with a half-dragon/dire bear and a CR20 half dragon kobold fighter. The big battle from the previous session had been with several classed Efreeti and half fire-elemental Paragon Beholder. Two games previous to that, the players had encountered a set of 'black snow' wolves...similar to winter wolves, but different enough to make them worry. The Mass Haste that got spent in that battle would not have been used, had they known the quantity of their foes. 3E has made a major difference in monsters, for me, since they've become a toolkit, and not just stats written in stone.

 

[Derulbaskul]

I'm a big fan of templates and classed (and variant) monsters so I have no problems with the players reading the MMs. That way they're even more surprised....

 

[Crothian]

That a player "needs" all the stats for a summoned monster is bunk - it all depends on the group's playing style.

So, would I appreciate monster stas (good-aligned or otherwise) in a "player's book"? No. So, I wouldn't buy such a book.

I wouldn't say bunk. I've been in games where the PCs needed the MM because the DM had too much to do and taking over all the summoned monsters would have really slowed down the game. It shouldn't always be done but there are sopme common circumstances where it should be done.

As for buying a book that has some monsters in it, I really think that's a little overboard. There are many reasons to buy a book or to not buy a book, but monsters in a so called players book is one of the more out there I've heard.

 

[JeffB]

In my review of the Avatar's Handbook, I pointed out that I didn't like having so many monsters in a player book. Chris and JeffB pointed out that since these creatures were part of the Avatar's arsenal through summoning, that they needed to be in there..

HUH? must be another JeffB

 

[The Grumpy Celt]

Milquetoast Fascism

An attempt by a game master to prevent his or her players from buying any books — be it the Monster Manual or Penthouse Letters Collected Vol. VIII — is nothing short of milquetoast fascism.

The relationship players have with a game master is not the relationship of soldiers and their commanding officer, it is not the relationship of actors and a play director and it is not the relationship of employees and an employer. In these cases, the commanding officer, the play director and the employer all have authority over the lives of the soldiers, the actors and the employees that is more legitimate than that held by a game master over the players.

Even so, the commanding officer, the play director and the employer have exceptionally limited moral and ethical authority to demand that the soldiers, the actors and the employees abstain from something. A commanding officer would be exceeding his authority if he told his soldiers to not read an official army handbook. A play director would be rightfully questioned if he told his actors not to read the original version of they play they are performing but only to consult his version. The employer would face a potential lawsuit if she told her employees not to read some manual that would increase their skills.

Yet, frequently game master demand that their players — who do not owe the game masters the same kind of obedience owed to a commanding officer, a play director or an employer — do not buy the Dungeon Masters Guide or the Monster Manual, among other works.

It is nothing less than an expression of weak willed tyranny and milquetoast fascism on the part of the game master to make such a demand. Unable to force their real lives into lockstep order, they attempt to do so in a world that exists mostly in their heads. The largest challenge to making their narcissistic dream worlds sufficiently ordered is the players. Players who are free-willed, who pursue their own goals and often — as a group — can out think and out maneuver a game master’s attempts to dictate plot and the actions of the player’s own characters.

So these game masters make ludicrous demands, such as players must not buy or read the Dungeon Masters Guide or the Monster Manual and sometimes even novels (from which the game master is stealing ideas, characters and/or plot) and even the Player’s Handbook. These are tools in the hands of the players so that they can justifiably question the authority of what the game master is doing.

There is nothing tyrants loathe more than being questioned – particularly when those questions have legitimacy.

A better relationship is one where there is give and take between the players and the game master, where there is mutual respect. A game master who demands the players never own or read copies of anything is untrustworthy and not worth gaming with, as they will make the fun and joy in the game wither and dry up. This is because any game master that make such a demand – a demand that grossly exceeds their actual moral and ethical authority – is not remotely interested in working with the players for everyone’s enjoyment.

They are solely interested in being the absolute master of their petty little mind-world.