Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ariosto" data-source="post: 5044719" data-attributes="member: 80487">I think the original, prime reason for making "goblin", "kobold", "hobgoblin", etc., distinct species was so that players could gain and use information identifying different threat levels. Dave Sutherland depicted kobolds as scaly, gnolls (originally a reference to Dunsany's mysteriously malevolent Gnoles) as hyena-like, orcs as porcine and so on. They came to have their own, D&D-specific details (overturned a bit in 4e, with green goblins and whatnot).There was a time when I played with Holmes Basic's 3rd-level limit -- and its pretty comprehensive monster list. It didn't take a whole tribe of giants or flock of dragons to pose a huge threat; The Giant or The Dragon was quite enough! Also, Pegasus and Medusa could remain individuals in a scheme not focused on sheer quantity of standard-issue "stuff" but on unique careers of adventure. There were only something like 70 listed magic items, and of course the spell lists were not very copious, so it was pretty natural to introduce things players could not just look up in a handbook.</blockquote>