Previews for May and Beyond is up
- Thread starter Olaf the Stout
- Start date
ivocaliban
Explorer
Anyone know the precise release date for the Complete Champion?
It's the only item in the preview I intend on purchasing.
It's the only item in the preview I intend on purchasing.
EyeontheMountain
First Post
I heard the 15th also. And the 8th for Wilderness Tiles.
Those are my two babies till August. I might even get two of the wilderness tiels. i ahve one each of the first three sets
But then I will probably stop buying them, unless WOTC is smart enough to print different sizes of times. I would love some 3x3 or 9x9 tiles. or 2x3 and such. 2x4 is not always the room size, WOTC!!!! I mean three sets and only ONE 1x4 tile. Sheesh.
Those are my two babies till August. I might even get two of the wilderness tiels. i ahve one each of the first three sets
But then I will probably stop buying them, unless WOTC is smart enough to print different sizes of times. I would love some 3x3 or 9x9 tiles. or 2x3 and such. 2x4 is not always the room size, WOTC!!!! I mean three sets and only ONE 1x4 tile. Sheesh.
Mr.Black said:
In response to the criticisms that monsters with class levels are boring, we did things a bit different in MM V. You have new hobgoblins, but they aren't necessarily hobgoblins with nothing but levels in a class. I don't have the book in front of me, but in a few cases we tried to design them more as new monsters than as NPCs. The humanoids that have class levels generally have new feats or other rules modifications to make them more than monster + class levels.
The hope is that we get the best of both worlds. DMs who want to pick up and use humanoid tribes can use the monsters as is. DMs who want new monsters get humanoids that have newly designed special abilities and feats that you can't get in other books.
Perun
Mushroom
mearls said:
I'm curious, what made you put classed monsters in a MM inthe first place? Why not stick to the traditional MM stuff (like, say, new monsters), and then make a Rogue's Gallery type of book based around creatures with class levels? MMIV was, apparently, rather poorly received (about the only time I opened it was to see what new forms my druid could wild shape into), so why does MMV follow the same (or nearly the same) format?
Thanks in advance.
Regards.
Last edited:
Perun said:
There's a few reasons to try it in the first place, and a couple more to keep doing it. The most important factor is that, while there were critics on message boards, plenty of other people liked their inclusion. AFAIK, we didn't see signs anywhere else (customer surveys, sales) that indicated that the book was poorly received.
The first and most important reason is that most DMs use humanoids as a big part of their adventures. It makes sense for us to support the most popular monsters in the game in a way that makes DMing easier.
There's also a question of the appropriate way to present a humanoid monster. If a creature is meant to be modified with class levels and abilities, it makes more sense to present it that way. For instance, a new humanoid race should probably come with three stat blocks to make it playable out of the box. It's the same reasoning behind giving a sample creature with each template.
Finally, it remains to be seen if objections to the humanoids in MM IV were driven by the specific design behind them, their proliferation, or some other factor. The approach has enough fans that it's worth tinkering with. The approach has enough potential benefits that it's worth pursuing.
Frankly, I think Monster Manual formats are something we'll continue to tinker with. I don't think any of the Monster Manuals (and Fiend Folio) have been more than qualified successes. A lot of monsters never see play, simply don't fit into the game, don't do anything interesting, or just lack a compelling hook. Monster design is something that needs improvement from all angles (presentation, format, story, mechanics), and it's something we think of alot.
I think it would be really interesting to do a survey where everyone goes through MM I - IV, along with Fiend Folio, and marked down every monster they used in a home brew adventure. I did that myself, and I was really surprised at the results. The number is a lot lower, and a lot more focused on a small range of monsters (humanoids, constructs, outsiders) than I had anticipated.
FWIW, I don't think there are as many entries given over to existing monsters in this book as the previous one. We might like the idea, and we see people who do like it, but we aren't ignoring complaints! At this point, we think (and hope!) there's a baby in that bathwater. If there isn't, out it goes.
Feedback is a little tricky, because it generally only comes from the most dedicated and high level gamers. I wouldn't be surprised if the humanoid entries are much more popular with beginning DMs and casual gamers. We listen to feedback, but we also have to take into account all D&D players, not one group to the exclusion of others.
charlesatan
Explorer
I'm more of neutral in my stance when it comes to classed monsters -- doesn't appeal to me but I can see the situations wherein it helps (helps time-constrained GMs get monsters, etc.). I can also see where it helps in terms of actual layout of the page (so that each monster entry exactly occupies one or two pages).
Personally I liked MMIV and perhaps the biggest improvement there for me is putting the new stat block into practice. A couple of the MMIV complaints I think stems from the fact that MM1 monsters were being reprinted with class levels and people just weren't expecting that (perhaps something to be sneaked into the Digital Initiative rather than the MM books?).
Personally I liked MMIV and perhaps the biggest improvement there for me is putting the new stat block into practice. A couple of the MMIV complaints I think stems from the fact that MM1 monsters were being reprinted with class levels and people just weren't expecting that (perhaps something to be sneaked into the Digital Initiative rather than the MM books?).
