D&D 3.x The 4E Monster Manual -- what 3.5 monsters need the axe?

[carmachu]

None. Dont kill any. More monsters is always a good thing.

 

[Korgoth]

Sounds like you're using the non-psionic version. I'd never use that. Mind Flayers without psionics is like dragons without breath weapons. I'll never understand why they even bothered to put them into MM1.

Mind flayers were invented before psionics.

EDIT: Actually, they evidently weren't.

 

[Pants]

Mind flayers were invented before psionics.

Were Mind Flayers in OD&D? Or, for that matter, were psionics in OD&D?

I certainly know that Mind Flayers possessed psionic abilities in the 1e MM. Maybe not psionic abilities as they appeared in later iterations of the game, but psionic abilities nonetheless.

 

[AFGNCAAP]

I think some creatures should be dropped, others should be reinvented/redefined, and others more-or-less kept as is.

For example, I think the really wacky ones like xorns, yrthak, tojanidas, & the like should go. Never used them, never been a fan of them.

I also think that some monster types should be merged into 1 creature, and each type of monster would be a different breed or more powerful version of the same thing. Ghouls/ghasts/wights, ghosts/wraiths/shadows/spectres, mephits/genies/elemental residents, sahuagin/locathah/kuo-toa, winter wolves/worgs/dire wolves, kobolds/troglodytes, etc.

Many of the aberrations like mind flayers, beholders, aboleths, rust monsters, & the like seem too alien to me. Actually, I think they'd work best as aliens or alien descendants trapped on a backwater world. Mind flayers, beholders, and aboleths could be some of the races from the crashed ship, giths and skum could be the result of alien experimentation on humans, rust monsters could be the "rats" brought along on the crashed ship, etc.

Other monsters can stay, but redefined. Ogre mage should become oni or merely ogre-ish devils (perhaps even an ogre-ish version of tieflings). Hobgoblins should be the result of orc/goblin mixes; bugbears the result of orc/goblin/ogre mixes. Kobolds should be lesser or "hatchling" troglodytes (i.e., the kobolds that survive grow into trogs). etc. ....

 

[Korgoth]

Were Mind Flayers in OD&D? Or, for that matter, were psionics in OD&D?

I certainly know that Mind Flayers possessed psionic abilities in the 1e MM. Maybe not psionic abilities as they appeared in later iterations of the game, but psionic abilities nonetheless.

In the alternate universe I was discussing, Mind Flayers appeared before OD&D Supplement III: Eldritch Wizardry, which is where psionics were introduced. However, that alternate universe is not the real one.

In the real universe, Mind Flayers and psionics were introduced into OD&D at the same time, in S3: EW.

In other words, never mind!

 

[Hussar]

Hey, I like darkmantles. Much, much better than piercers. Flight, darkness, decent grappling and constrict? These things are death on toast for parties up to about 4th level.

Ok, maybe it's because I used WAY too many of them in the World's Largest Dungeon, but, properly run darkmantles are LOADS of fun.

 

[pawsplay]

What's up with wanting to merge worgs, dire wolves, and winter wolves? Winter wolves breathe forst... do worgs have icy breath? No, they do not. Likewise, worgs are evil. Dire wolves are simply big. If you want villainous wolves, worgs are the thing. But if you simply want to put some savage humanoids on wolf mounts, dire wolves are better.

 

[AllisterH]

What's up with wanting to merge worgs, dire wolves, and winter wolves? Winter wolves breathe forst... do worgs have icy breath? No, they do not. Likewise, worgs are evil. Dire wolves are simply big. If you want villainous wolves, worgs are the thing. But if you simply want to put some savage humanoids on wolf mounts, dire wolves are better.

Sure, but do we really NEED 4 entries for Wolf, Dire Wolf, Worg and Winter Wolf? The only difference between the four is that they are different sizes. Tactics on how the creatures fight and how to fight them is pretty much the same EXCEPT for the Winter Wolf's breath attack.

Really, given your example above, why can't you use dire wolves as villainous?

Definitely believe all 4 can be collapsed into one entry (including winter wolf) with a system to make them bigger/stronger for the appropriate party.

 

[pawsplay]

What a peculiar response. In combat, mind flayers just mind blast, that's about it (granted, there are those DM's who abuse the charm ability in battle by blatantly ignoring the +5 Will save bonus). They are terrible grapplers; with low grapple checks and weak damage. It's a tactic solely intended for pulling the brain out of a stunned victim's head.

I must be doing something wrong, because I've used mind flayers in my campaign twice now, and in both cases, they were quite effective and certainly did not use mind blast every round. Their damage is not "weak" considering they have four primary attacks; that's pretty good damage for their CR. And they are dangerous; my party's paladin came within a few initiative points of having his brain sucked while conscious.

If you give them a couple of monk levels, their grappling abilities can increase substantially, and they become dangerous in other ways, as well. Tumbling attack to attack the party spellcaster, grapple using Improved Grapple and Improved Grab, is pretty mean.

I would say mind flayers are, if anything, overly dangerous in melee and grappling situations for their CR.

Of course, advancing in a character class is rather beside the point, since a monster is at that point just doing what a human could be doing.

... if they had four natural primary weapons, improved grab, and the ability to kill someone instantly by pinning them.

Well, it handily meets the definition--firing worthless, weak-damage, low-DC poisoned arrows from range, and relying on the gaze attack up-close--so I"m not sure what your disconnect is there.

Hm, CR 7. Assuming a level 7 opponent with a good Fortitude save... +5 base, say +2 from Con, +1 resistance from something... that's +8. They have better than a one in four chance for each hit of taking 1d6 Str damage. Per hit. Of course, that's their poison. I don't see a poison listed for their arrows. Oops?

Anyway. If you don't get close, they're fair archers. If you do, and you will, you risk petrication, and if you somehow get up on them, they're poisonous. Classic damned if you do, damned if you don't kind of monster. At Cr7, they look pretty good, and they are easy to advance.

 

[pawsplay]

Sure, but do we really NEED 4 entries for Wolf, Dire Wolf, Worg and Winter Wolf? The only difference between the four is that they are different sizes. Tactics on how the creatures fight and how to fight them is pretty much the same EXCEPT for the Winter Wolf's breath attack.

Really, given your example above, why can't you use dire wolves as villainous?

Because they're D-U-M-B, which is also what makes them suitable as mounts or animal allies.

Definitely believe all 4 can be collapsed into one entry (including winter wolf) with a system to make them bigger/stronger for the appropriate party.

I don't, unless that system is a series of templates or lenses, which amounts to recreating the monsters, but having less useful presentation in stat blocks. While they have a similar bite attack, they are different sizes, have different cultures, different allies, different appearances, different ecologies, different everything. I think "evil, intelligent, ice-breathing wolf" is quite a bit different than "big, aggressive wolf."