The Immortals Handbook

[CRGreathouse]

I'll post the Monster List sometime later today.

One question though. Do people prefer primarily common or esoteric names for their monsters.

eg. Demon would be a common name while Tanar'ri would be an esoteric name.

eg. Hagunemnon would be an esoteric name while Protean would be a common name.

I always prefer common names.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hey guys thanks for the replies.

Yes, it does make sense - and I like it, too.

I was only following what seems like 3rd edition convention.

Personally I would have liked to have all the names esoteric first, but we can see in the Monster Manual that Angel, Demon, and Devil are prefered. Also with Baatezu, Slaad, Tanar'ri and Yugoloth absent from the OGL I'd be in a bit of fix trying to keep the subtypes esoteric.

I think everyone liked my Slaad alternative (Brood) last time I mentioned it. With Brood being to Slaad what Demon is to Tanar'ri of course. Only one Brood/Slaad in this Bestiary, but potentially half a dozen penciled in for next time...although any such list is proprietry at this stage.

I always prefer common names.

Personally I like both, thats why I have included both where applicable (obviously Dragons, Golems and so forth don't have esoteric names).

However, do you see the logic in putting the esoteric names first for individual monsters?


By the way I'll also be adding the Monsters by Type (and Subtype) a little later as well as just the alphabetical list.

 

[CRGreathouse]

Personally I like both, thats why I have included both where applicable (obviously Dragons, Golems and so forth don't have esoteric names).

However, do you see the logic in putting the esoteric names first for individual monsters?

I like to have esoteric names, but I don't like them in the name entries. I like them in the descriptions.

I suppose I see some form of logic in using esoteric names to alphebetize the individual monsters, but I don't have to like it.

 

[Zoatebix]

I think I'm going to chime in with CRGreathouse - common, or even descriptive, names are much more useful - easier to read and reference - than esoteric names. I'd rather see the esoteria in the descriptive text or after a comma in the monster's name.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi guys!

Okay, I tell you what have a look the list (which should be online now) and let me know what you think (about both the naming convention and the monsters themselves).

Incidently, there are two still not on the list (because I am still deciding the final names), and about half a dozen monsters don't have common names yet (likewise because I am still deciding what suits them best).

I'll add the 'By Type' list tomorrow, its late and I have been a bit tired today.

Finally (only a small note), I found the character sheet for Thrin so the Magic Items list is there, although all the special abilities for the unique items must be on another sheet so I'll update that ASAP.

 

[CRGreathouse]

Okay, I tell you what have a look the list (which should be online now) and let me know what you think (about both the naming convention and the monsters themselves).

Incidently, there are two still not on the list (because I am still deciding the final names), and about half a dozen monsters don't have common names yet (likewise because I am still deciding what suits them best).

The monsters look interesting. I'm particularly curious about the Intelligibles and the mechanics you chose for the Quintessence (Elemental). Are you going to put a CR list up, or should we just wait for the PDF?

Is the CR range "20-2000" using your CR system, or the WotC system?

I see 6 creatures I know I won't use (inappropriate for my setting; pity because some look neat), as well as at least 5 more that go by the same name as a creature I already have IMC (and will have to ignore yours, replace the existing creature with your version, or rename your version). This still leaves a pretty good %age, assuming they're as good as you say they are.

 

[Angel Tarragon]

I know I'll be purchasing the book in print. I wasn't considering buying any of the PDFs, but if I only purchase one PDF it will definetly be the Bestiary! I'm really looking forward to at least a bestiary teaser. The names of these critters and templates has got me pumped. I can't wait!

 

[Anabstercorian]

I Want To Buy Your Product From You

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hey CRGreathouse mate!

The monsters look interesting.

Thanks. Obviously the names alone don't really do them justice, I think the best aspects are the abilities. I noticed in the ELH there were only about a dozen new abilities we had never seen before spread amongst the monsters (with the Phane getting a handful). But I made a conscious effort to have unique ideas for every monster entry.

I'm particularly curious about the Intelligibles and the mechanics you chose for the Quintessence (Elemental).

Are you going to put a CR list up, or should we just wait for the PDF?

I'll put a CR list up slightly before the release.

Is the CR range "20-2000" using your CR system, or the WotC system?

Using WotCs system...I didn't really want to scare people by starting the list at (a revised) CR 31.

I see 6 creatures I know I won't use (inappropriate for my setting; pity because some look neat),

Which ones? The Angels?

as well as at least 5 more that go by the same name as a creature I already have IMC (and will have to ignore yours, replace the existing creature with your version, or rename your version).

I presume these would be the likes of Asmodeus and the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse?

I sort of wanted to have something familiar in there to give people a guideline.

This still leaves a pretty good %age, assuming they're as good as you say they are.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hey Guys!

I know I'll be purchasing the book in print. I wasn't considering buying any of the PDFs, but if I only purchase one PDF it will definetly be the Bestiary! I'm really looking forward to at least a bestiary teaser. The names of these critters and templates has got me pumped. I can't wait!

I Want To Buy Your Product From You.

I appreciate the love guys.