Sacred cow monsters

[Nightfall]

Well there are animals PCs do fight. Dinosaurs for example.

The occasional dire wolf summoned by an evil druid/ranger.

Plus what about magical beasts that aren't truly magical (like great owls) but are above animal intelligence? Are they going in there too?

 

[Nyaricus]

Well there are animals PCs do fight. Dinosaurs for example.

The occasional dire wolf summoned by an evil druid/ranger.

Plus what about magical beasts that aren't truly magical (like great owls) but are above animal intelligence? Are they going in there too?

It's a hard call; likely the dniosaurs would (they are RL animals), Dire animals, well, they should be a template anyway, so that would be in there as well (since it would be used for making tougher versions of animals and all).

Magical Beats, like Great Owls, should be int he MM. They are in the same catergory as Manticores and all the rest, after all.

cheers,
--N

 

[Nightfall]

Templates for Dire animals do exist...but considering how badly they botched it (not the template, the way they created dire animals) hard to make them consistent.

Yeah but it could be argued that Giant Owls and others are just "magic animals" and thus could be shunted into the animal book.

 

[Nyaricus]

Templates for Dire animals do exist...but considering how badly they botched it (not the template, the way they created dire animals) hard to make them consistent.

Yeah but it could be argued that Giant Owls and others are just "magic animals" and thus could be shunted into the animal book.

I know and I know. This is all my opinion, of course. But the Ealges from LotR, Odins talking ravesn, et al, deserve to be in the MM, not an acessory (if things were to go me way, of course )

cheers,
--N

 

[Nightfall]

Ny,

if things were to go you're way, I'd convince you to tell WotC to get Scarred Lands.

 

[Nyeshet]

What monsters would you be upset over if they weren't present in the 4E Dungeons & Dragons Monster Manual?

The Dragons, of course! Or perhaps you meant something else . . . ?

 

[Nightfall]

Nye,

Well what about fiends? I mean they are kind of necessary. Next to fighting dragons, fiends are fun. Undead too!

 

[Nyeshet]

Good point, but really I was playing with the idea of a dungeons and DRAGONS monster manual leaving out any mention of dragons! That would truly be odd!

But, yes, in addition to dragons we need at least the more basic fiends, magical beasts, fae, etc - although I disagree with them on what creatures should be considered fae, I admit (goblins, for instance). Giants and monstrous humanoids as well, of course.

Undead - as with constructs - IMHO, should be templates. You have vampiric humans, elven skeletons, dwarven ghouls, gnome ghosts, halfling mummies, etc - not just 'ghouls' or 'zombies'. Similarly, I tend to feel that while some constructs can work as creatures, many should be templates instead. But that is just my view.

As for aberrations - I tend to think there should be a few lists in the back of the MM. When an aberration is needed, the GM should roll a time or two on each list to see how many appendages it has, how it moves, what its SPAs and Su abilities are, etc. They are supposed to be aberrants, after all. Once there is enough of a creature for it to be considered a race, it is no longer aberrant IMO. Rather like joke about a thousand people wearing the same style clothes and speaking as one, saying "We are all unique individuals!" It simply is no longer the case!

 

[BigFreekinGoblinoid]

umber hulk
roper
shambling mound
dryad
common dragons
purple worm
illithid
beholder
basilisk
medusa
rust monster
aboleth
common outsiders
skeleton
zombie
common giants
chimera
ogre
troll
vampire
mummy
rot grub
will o wisp
core elementals
orc
goblin
bugbear
troglodyte
lizardmen
cockatrice
mimic
cloaker
shade
giant insects
owlbear
common animals
giant
kobold
nymph
hag
common golems
common genies
elf
dwarf
merpeople
koa toa
saughagin
roc
kraken
griffen
pegasus
unicorn
sphinx
imp
quasit
pixie
yuan ti
manticore

I'm sure i missed a few staples here

more templates for sure !

 

[Sejs]

"Meep meep merp...hey there, sexy...yes, you, with the tail and the cute little horns...come over here for a little kiss..."

"Yark..grrrryip Mmm, look at the cute tail on you. I bet you can make traps all night long. Let me feel those strong gnome-killer hands you've got there, big boy."

Ah, but they have a base form of a human woman (or man, now that I think of it...they are not always female).

It would be cool to reimagine them as having a base form that is either horrifyingly bizarre or totally neutral, but everyone viewing them sees them as their sexual ideal. So someone may see the succubus as the standard hot vixen chick, but I'd look at the same creature at the same time and see it as Jaston Statham.

I'm more partial to the third route - in their native form, they're disturbingly sexy, throughly demonic hermaphrodites.

They're sex demons. They should take your comfort zone and stomp all over it.