Hey, it's a long one, replying to a lot.
herrozerro said:
this comes off and just offensive and ignorant. I play a 4e game and all of those things are a big part of my game.
It's not my intent to offend, but I think it's pretty safe to say at this point that the noncombat aspects of 4e did not work this well for many players, or they wouldn't be talking about the "three pillars" and raving about exploration and interaction in 5e. If they worked for you, that's superawesometimes, but they didn't work for a lot of people, and I don't think that's a controversial statement at this point.
Stornomu said:
I want my MM loaded up with monsters, not encounters.
I don't know what you plan on using monsters in, if not encounters. If you like to tinker with them yourself, that's superawesometimes, but a database of monster stats seems to me more appropriate to an online compendium than a physical book you will read through. It goes back to that "
Consume, Engage, Cherish" discussion. I need to be Engaged first and foremost. And it's impossible to engage without a context for the information you're seeing. Raw numbers aren't engaging.
Klaus said:
You need dragons to include other stuff so they can be villains? Can't the villain just do what you need, dragon or not?
"Do what you need!" is the single most useless piece of advice I ever received as a DM. It seems obvious to me that DMs should always do what they need. It's in the job description, practically. "DM's control the game." Ergo, they can do what they want or need to make the game go.
What do I need to do? What is cool about this monster? What encounters and plotlines can I use it in? What does it do when adventurers aren't showing up to ruin it's day? How do I react to what the PC's do to it?
I don't know what I need it to do before I use it in a game. What I need at that moment I DO use it is for the game to tell me what it does. I don't need reassurance that I can do whatever I want. I need empowerment.
4e didn't give me that empowerment with its dragons. Except in combat. 3e, in contrast, did. It was only a little bit of space to note that blue dragons can dehydrate water and create illusions, but that empowers me to create an interesting and compelling multifaceted threat in a way that 5 different ways to shoot lightning in my party's face does not. It is mechanically more interesting over the course of an entire adventure, rather than just at the big fight.
fenriswolf456 said:
Which is exactly what I want in a monster manual entry. I don't want possible suggestions or examples of context, because 9 times out of 10 I won't use it that way anyway.
Sounds like you want the compendium. Which is an awesome and indispensable tool, but not something I'd want WotC to print out, slap between two hardcovers, scatter with some art and charge me $40 for. Books are no longer the best medium for a directory of things. You're going to need to Engage me to get me to bother with it.
fenriswolf456 said:
The problem with this is where do you stop? Just the solos? Maybe some elites? But what if I really like orcs, and want more details and maybe an example warcamp.
You can at least start with giving me dungeons and dragons in a game called
Dungeons & Dragons.
The thing is, when you start doing things like detailing an orc warcamp, or a dragon lair, you also detail things like, say, the animals that live nearby, the traps that they use, the leaders that they have, the variants that occur, and you have something that any DM, new or old, can plunk down in front of her party
tonight and use, without any major prep required.
And each individual bit can still be broken out and tossed into a compendium for those who want to prepare their own dragon lair.
Major difference being, with enough context, I no longer have to do it all myself. I export the boring work of detailing an orc camp out to the Monster Manual, and I can spend more time worrying about where I'd put that orc camp in my world.
FWIW, some 2e monsters, and many 1e monsters (especially humanoids) had this kind of built into their monster descriptions. Check out the orc description in the 2e MM: aside from a map, it gives me all I need to plunk orcs down anywhere in my world. An orc statblock is a fairly boring thing in and of itself (looks like most other humanoid statblocks). An orc camp is a useful thing, though.
I also think the "quantity over quality" approach to MM's is distinctly unnecessary from a publishing standpoint. After just a few books, the market reaches a saturation point where moar monsters doesn't add much to the game. Statistically, if you use 5 different statblocks in every combat for 10 combats per level over 10 levels (roughly the amount of time people spend playing a campaign according to Mearls), you use only 500 unique stat blocks (with even distribution over those 10 levels no less). That's less than two monster manuals, let alone tricks like reskinning, modding, templating, and ability swapping.
Thirdly, if you provide DMs with a way to usefully generate their own statblocks (a very useful addition from 4e), you don't NEED to give them squat. You will have all the statblocks you ever need right there in front of you. If you run out or feel like changing things up or want a particular thing, you can make it.
Given ALL of this, and more, I really think the idea of a MM as an alphabetical directory of statblocks is really kind of quixotic. At the very least, you could present it like some sort of medieval bestiary, full of rumor and hearsay and in-world color. But even that isn't as useful as a text brimming with a smaller number of creatures ready with all the necessary bits and fobs to slap into your game right now.
And then you can sell me another one in a few months.
And then you can sell me compendium access so that I can make my own.
And then you have all my money, and you win.
fenriswolf456 said:
How can it not be expected for the DM to fill in the blanks? It's their job.
It's not my job as a DM to sit alone in my bedroom and carefully hand-craft an entire night's adventure from a few statblocks and my own chutzpah.
It's my job as a DM to run an active D&D game, and that means filling in the blanks for me, or at least giving me something like MadLibs so I can fill them in on the spot with a random die roll or something.
DMing, to me, is about playing the game, not preparing to play the game.