What did Wizards learn from Essentials?

[Dausuul]

Just checking - was the Monstrous Compendium different from the 2e Monstrous Manual?

The Monstrous Compendium was the aforementioned three-ring binder deal. Volume 1 was a big three-ring binder with a bunch of pages, and then you bought expansions that were just loose leaves with holes punched. After people complained that this format sucked royally, TSR produced the Monstrous Manual, a more traditional hardcover. I haven't actually seen the 2E MM, so I don't know how the content was different (if at all) from the MC.

I do recall that the Monstrous Compendium, for all its physical shortcomings, was absolutely fascinating reading. I eagerly awaited each new expansion, bought it as soon as I possibly could, and read the whole thing cover to cover (well, first page to last page). This was probably a contributing factor in the rapid disintegration of my MC.

 

[Number48]

I would love to see a new Compendium format, but done right. One monster per page, either single or double sided, reinforced holes and a binder that didn't actually suck. At least, the binder I got in mine the clasps never quite met right.

The format had a good idea behind it. If you're using goblins, stirges, spiders and liches for this adventure, you can just set those pages into a folder for easy access. No need to flip through the book or copy everything down.

I suppose the WotC take on this would be, instead of a binder, cards with a picture on one side and stats on the other. Strangely, I could actually get behind this. The hardcover for the complete description, but use cards in-game for quick access to the crunch.

 

[Dausuul]

I would love to see a new Compendium format, but done right. One monster per page, either single or double sided, reinforced holes and a binder that didn't actually suck. At least, the binder I got in mine the clasps never quite met right.

I would want some serious reinforcement on those holes, not just little sticky plastic rings, and a heavy-duty binder that could take a lot of abuse. I suspect the cost of producing this would drive it out of most people's price range, though.

What I'd like would be a print-on-demand deal where you pick X number of monsters, and they get printed, bound in a book, and shipped to you. I would be all about that, even at a somewhat higher price point. I recall someone mentioning something like this, but can't remember if it was someone from Wizards or just random ENWorld speculation.

 

[Remathilis]

Things in 4e but not 2e: Color image.

Incorrect: Monstrous Manual (1993)

4e hasn't even got THAT on 2e!

 

[Hassassin]

http://www.dotd.com/mm/owlbear.gif

Incorrect: Monstrous Manual (1993)

4e hasn't even got THAT on 2e!

As I wrote, I used Monstrous Compendium 1 for the comparison. I'm not sure if MM has all the other things I mentioned or not.

 

[Remathilis]

Just checking - was the Monstrous Compendium different from the 2e Monstrous Manual?

The Monstrous Compendium, as others said, was a three-ring binder which was supposed to hold 1 page per monster info. You bought monster backs (for various settings) to filter into it. It had all the downfalls of a three-ring binder, including bulk and page-tearing.

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Monstrous-Compendium-Advanced-Dungeons-Dragons/dp/B000LPSPXI/ref=sr_1_25?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1328559166&sr=1-25]Amazon.com: Monstrous Compendium Volume One (Advanced Dungeons & Dragons): Books[/ame]

The Monstrous Manual was taking all the monsters in MC 1 and 2, as well as select monsters from the various appendixes, and putting them in one hardbound tome. From 1993 on, it was THE Monster Manual. It also expanded some sections, combined redundant ones (like lumping all birds together), and added new, full-color art.

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Monstrous-Manual-Fantasy-Roleplaying-Accessory/dp/1560766190]Amazon.com: Monstrous Manual (AD&D 2nd Ed Fantasy Roleplaying Accessory, 2140) (9781560766193): Doug Stewart: Books[/ame]

The latter book ranks up there with the 1e DMG as one of the best RPG books of all time. Get one, no matter you edition preference. You won't be disappointed.

 

[Remathilis]

As I wrote, I used Monstrous Compendium 1 for the comparison. I'm not sure if MM has all the other things I mentioned or not.

As far as I know, the MM was just a re-formatted MC, with color art and a permabound spine. All the text is the same, except for some errata and expansion (esp in the dragon area).

 

[Sadras]

Unfortunately, the Monstrous Compendium had one other thing not matched by any MM created since--namely, the practice of giving you a bunch of unbound pages with holes in them and expecting you to keep them in three-ring binders. Epic. Publishing. Fail.
.

Sorry you're absolutely right. Thats what happens when you answer from work and dont have the books in front of you.... I mean the 2E Monstrous Manual.
Wouldnt want the return of the three-ring binders either....

 

[Sadras]

double post sry

 

[Sadras]

It's kind of unclear from your reply -- have you read the 4e MV (and the MV: Nentir Vale) being discussed?

No I have not - the poster i replied to mentioned in addition to the MV the 4E MM of which I have all three - and I have been disappointed with those. The MM is actually the book I'm most interested in when a new edition comes out as I always compare it back to the 2E Monstrous Manual for fluff. Character design (PHB) and DMG or always gonna be things which you allow and disallow as DM, but its the MM where things relatively remain the same for prep work. Sure you tweak here and there, but you dont change the entire system and those changes you can do on the fly.

Dont get me wrong I love the stat blocks of 4E - its just that the 4E MM are light on the fluff. I even purchased the Essentials Monster Vault, which I was happier with, prob cause I also got tokens and a great adventure module Cairn of the Winter King which we are currently running...

So, is the MV:Nentir Vale better than the 4EMM? and why?