Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Joshua Randall" data-source="post: 9543755" data-attributes="member: 7737">An interesting question: if a game is of the sort that does not have a giant roster of monsters (so, not D&amp;D nor similar) -- but rather, builds the monsters on general principles --How &quot;complete&quot; do you think the &quot;single book&quot; needs to be vis a vis its monster catalogue?For example:<ul>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Gumshoe does have a small rosters of monsters / cultists / thugs / etc., but far from a giant &quot;monster manual&quot;. It has a kinda sorta framework for building monsters: assign General attribute points, pick a Hit Threshold, model damage.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Shadow of the Demon Lord, the product line, will happily sell you numerous supplements with monsters in them. However, the core book contains a small roster of monsters, along with a framework for building your own. (And a lot of them are just going to be: take a base creature, advance it by character levels, choose spells.)</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Apocalypse World, the original book (not all the offshoots), has a few examples of &quot;monsters&quot;, and some general advice on how to set up opposition for the PCs. Of course, this game is far less concerned with exact stats that something like D&amp;D or SOTDL or even Gumshoe....</li>
</ul>[Edited to add]: I ended up creating a new thread to discuss this, so as not to derail this one any further. So future people if you read this far but not farther, <a href="https://www.enworld.org/threads/monster-catalogue-vs-monster-creation-rules-vs-why-not-both.709351" target="_blank">go over here</a> for the &quot;monster catalogue&quot; discussion!</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Joshua Randall, post: 9543755, member: 7737"] An interesting question: if a game is of the sort that does [I]not[/I] have a giant roster of monsters (so, not D&D nor similar) -- but rather, builds the monsters on general principles -- How "complete" do you think the "single book" needs to be [I]vis a vis[/I] its monster catalogue? For example: [LIST] [*][B]Gumshoe [/B]does have a small rosters of monsters / cultists / thugs / etc., but far from a giant "monster manual". It has a kinda sorta framework for building monsters: assign General attribute points, pick a Hit Threshold, model damage. [*][B]Shadow of the Demon Lord[/B], the product line, will happily sell you numerous supplements with monsters in them. However, the core book contains a small roster of monsters, along with a framework for building your own. (And a lot of them are just going to be: take a base creature, advance it by character levels, choose spells.) [*][B]Apocalypse World[/B], the original book (not all the offshoots), has a few examples of "monsters", and some general advice on how to set up opposition for the PCs. Of course, this game is far less concerned with exact stats that something like D&D or SOTDL or even Gumshoe.... [/LIST] [B][I][Edited to add][/I][/B]: I ended up creating a new thread to discuss this, so as not to derail this one any further. So future people if you read this far but not farther, [URL='https://www.enworld.org/threads/monster-catalogue-vs-monster-creation-rules-vs-why-not-both.709351']go over here[/URL] for the "monster catalogue" discussion! [/QUOTE]

Verification