Player's Owning the Monster Manual?

[JoeGKushner]

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. I countered with the logic behind that means that every player needs to own the DMG then for when they cast summoning spells.

What's the general opinion on this? In my opinion, players should not have access to the MM when play starts. Either the GM determines what's summoned and runs it, or the player copies down the information ahead of time and has it ready to go when the game starts. I don't want players flipping through the MM trying to maximize what they summon or looking through the book when they should be paying attention. That's my take. I'm not looking for someone to try and change my mind, just other people's opinions.

 

[Nightfall]

Read my Solars as PC post to gauge my opinon on that one Joe.

Solar PCs

 

[JoeGKushner]

It sounds fun Nightfall but were the Solars summoning things or something? I'm looking forward to the new Monster Manual which is going for a more player friendly look, but after character creation, for example, I dont' expect the PC to have the book in his lap looking over, say the racial traits for an ogre or a half-dragon template.

 

[WayneLigon]

I don't mind them having access to it at all; they get to choose what's summoned at the time, so why not? They should have all that info ready to go, though.

 

[Janos Antero]

I allow them to have copies of any monster they'll be using, and have the book on their person if they so desire. But woe betide the player checking monster stats on something they're currently fighting, that's a BIG taboo move.

Summoning comes up often enough I tend to go leniently on players using the MM as a resource though, it's needed often enough, because I usually have too much going on to worry about every time they summon strange little monsters to do their bidding.

 

[nsruf]

I could hardly be against my players owning the MM, since two of them also DM (one more often then I do). But getting it out during a session to look up the critters they are facing is definitely bad form.

As for summoning spells, they may look up monster stats during the session so they can play their summoned creatures themselves. But holding up combat by trying to decide which one to summon is again a no-no (and will at least cost them their turn).

 

[Nightfall]

It sounds fun Nightfall but were the Solars summoning things or something? I'm looking forward to the new Monster Manual which is going for a more player friendly look, but after character creation, for example, I dont' expect the PC to have the book in his lap looking over, say the racial traits for an ogre or a half-dragon template.

Well it was kind of fun. But yeah they use Monster Summoning XI to summon a bunch of Djinni to stop an asssassination. For the most part it was Holy Word and Power Work Kill, (for Raphael). Azazel was the hands on specialist with his normal epic level scythe.

 

[Pramas]

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. I countered with the logic behind that means that every player needs to own the MM then for when they cast summoning spells.

I wasn't going to belabor the point in the review comments, but since you started this thread...

In my mind, there's a big difference between the content of the Avatar's Handbook and the Monster Manual. Most of what's in the MM is evil critters the party may fight. I can see how a GM might not want the players accesssing that info at the table. "Oh, we're facing an iron golem, let's look it up!" Perfectly resonable to object to that kind of thing.

All of the creatures in the Avatar's Handbook, however, are celestials or other denizens of the Upper Planes (there's one neutral constuct, everything else is good-aligned). To be an avatar you must be of good alignment, so it is unlikely in the extreme that you'll be facing off against the creatures presented in the book. They are there precisely because the avatar can summon them and take on angelic form. If you are a player, you need the info and why not put it in one book?

Now a GM running a game with evil PCs could use the Avatar's Handbook like the MM, but no one will be playing an Avatar in an evil party anyway, so there'd be no need for a player to have the book at the table.

And FYI, I conceived this book as a way to do a book on celestials that people would actually have a reason to purchase. Most GMs don't need a bunch of good-aligned monsters for their campaign. The idea was give them purpose ("Now you can summon angels to smite the unholy!").

 

[Nightfall]

Or in my case, be Angels to smite evil.

 

[JoeGKushner]

Re: Re: Player's Owning the Monster Manual?

They are there precisely because the avatar can summon them and take on angelic form. If you are a player, you need the info and why not put it in one book?

It's not the fact that they're in the book I didn't like. It's the fact that there are so many of them that it didn't leave room for more spells, any PrCs and any magic items.

Remember, I gave it a 4 out of 5. Like the book, just wanted more player focus.

As far as not using it as a MM as a GM... well, Green Ronin's got the Drow book out now, Assassins, Secret College of Necromancy, and upcoming, Unholy Warriors, notto mention the official 'evil' support ala Book of Vile Darkness, and other d20 publishers. I can see using it as a MM in many situations.

Besides, the GM should have stats for this stuff too. In my opinion, there's so much focus on evil that we have very few references to how strong the forces of good are. The old Role Aids boxed set Sentinels covered this material in excellent detail too.