Thoughts about the Monster Manual 3.5

[Gez]

An index of that would be nice, but not the entries themselves.

I would rather not play geek trivia with myself trying to remember what type of creature one I am interested in happens to be so I can find it quickly.

It's usually quite obvious, though. However, the reason I was saying this was because I tend to use monster books as source of inspiration. I'm like "mmh, I want to use a undead, which one would be the most appropriate" or "they'll meet the fae queen, what will there be in the court".

I like to have "similar" creatures grouped together close so that I can compare between them quickly (like it has been made for celestials, demons, devils and dragons). But I never feel the need to compare yuan-ti to yrthaks and zombies.

Usually, there is an index of monsters by name (with names of monsters by type and subtype just beside) in the first page.

 

[KDLadage]

Personally, I'm all for templates for intelligent undead. That just makes sense.

It doesn't for non-intelligent undead, though. They can't retain any level-like abilities. Any template you made for a skeleton, for example, would have to include "remove all existing class levels" and advancement and use only the basic racial stats. Eh, whatever. At that point, it's not really worth the effort, IMHO.

Now, I could see the argument (as above for the skeletal warrior) that a skeleton (or zombie, etc.) should be an intelligent undead or that all undead should be intelligent. I don't particularly agree, but it wouldn't ruin the game for me or anything like that.

The fact of the matter, though, is that the current "vision" of skeleton, etc. is that they aren't intelligent. To include the idea of intelligent skeletons is not a supporting point to your case for making them a template. It _could_ be, but first you need to make your case for changing the way skeletons are envisioned in the D&D system (intelligent v. unintelligent).

So, I'll grant you that any intelligent undead should be made into a template (at least I can't think of an exception). I do not, however, agree that non-intelligent undead should be -- there just isn't a benefit to it.

I see your point, and to an extent I agree with it. However, just to keep things into the skeletal mode...

If I raise and animate the skeleton of a dead rat, or a dog, or a man, or a minotaur or a dragon, or a titan or what have you -- should all of these have the same basic stats?

If your answer is yes, then we can stop here -- you believe there is no need for a template.

If your answer is no, then we can stop here -- you have just stated that the skeleton needs to be stated as a template.

 

[Gez]

Again, no argument. Although, I would say ghosts are based more on the soul than the mind; although a phantasmal floating being of pure will could go either way; depends upon your cosmology I suppose.

I've extrapolated this from the D&D cosmology:
Living beings are made of body, mind and soul.
Body is quite straightforward.
Mind is the sum of knowledge, the "acquired" part of someone's personality.
Soul is the innate part.

Petitioners are merely souls, and they lose knowledge of previous existence and all class levels.

Of course, the fact that intelligent undeads are mindless even if they remember their former life just complicate things.



Mercule: Nightshades comes from Mystara, where they were basically constructs made by the Immortals of Entropy (entropy = negative energy, destructive force, undeath). One simple way to categorize them as undead is to consider they are made with necromantic magic from several souls used as raw material. Somewhat like the caller in darkness from the Psionics Handbook.

 

[coyote6]

I see your point, and to an extent I agree with it. However, just to keep things into the skeletal mode...

If I raise and animate the skeleton of a dead rat, or a dog, or a man, or a minotaur or a dragon, or a titan or what have you -- should all of these have the same basic stats?

Hmm, seems like a poor choice of samples for comparison -- those are all different sizes, and are thus all different creatures by the current rules. So why would you need new templates, when the current rules cover it?

A better set of examples would be creatures of the same size, but radically different configuration: should the animated skeleton of a horse have the same stats as the animated skeleton of an ettin, a displacer beast, or a girallon?

BTW, y'all do know that pretty much every undead type under the MM sun* has been transformed into a template already? Most of them are in Savage Species; a number also appeared in Dragon a while ago; I think the unintelligent skeleton & zombie templates have only been in d20 Modern, the WotC website, and maybe that Dragon article; and the bone and corpse (IIR the names correctly; the intelligent skeleton & zombie templates) are in BoVD or MM2.

Myself, I like having the templates available, but I also like having the pre-made "base" critters around, for simplicity.

*Well, maybe not most; no nightshades or mohrgs or bodaks, IIRC. But ghouls, wraiths, wights, etc.

 

[Mercule]

If I raise and animate the skeleton of a dead rat, or a dog, or a man, or a minotaur or a dragon, or a titan or what have you -- should all of these have the same basic stats?

I could easily see the argument for a template. It makes things more "realistic" or whatever.

I just don't think there would be a significant difference in the stats of a skeletal dog vs. a skeletal dwarf. Sure, the dog would bite and the dwarf would claw, but that's just a job for DM description.

One of the things that I've come to accept and actually like about D&D is that it is a large grain system in most respects. If the stats work, let it be. Just give a flowery description. IMHO, really good DMs will be doing this anyway and not-so-good DMs wouldn't be significantly aided by templating the skeleton.

 

[MerakSpielman]

But the dwarven skelly should have stonecunning! Not considering that are you? Templates are needed!

 

[shilsen]

For those interested in more undead templates, shadows, spectres and wraiths have been templated in Savage Species.

 

[KDLadage]

If that is the case; I may have to break down and purchase Savage Species...

 

[MerakSpielman]

And the BoVD has templates for skelitons and zombies that retain class abilities, racial abilities, etc...

 

[ced1106]

I'd like to see a skeleton template!

Mebbe the problem is that D&D doesn't distinguish levels gained through experience and training vs. natural hit dice. Certainly human skeletons should pretty much be similar, but what if the GM has a Necromancer who's created an undead dragon?

I need a mummy template for my MageKnight Mummy Draconis figure...


Cedric.
aka. Washu! ^O^