D&D General Why are there Good Monsters in the Monster Manual?

[BookTenTiger]

If someone wants to fight an angel, I want to know how that fights going to go.

Can we please stop with the calls to remove content?

You are definitely reading more into this than I intended. I am literally curious about why there are good monsters in the Monster Manual.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Let's not bring that conversation into this thread.

Well, it does beg the question of where those statblocks are going to go in this brave new world some people are so excited about.

 

[BookTenTiger]

Well, it does beg the question of where those statblocks are going to go in this brave new world some people are so excited about.

Hey Micah, can we leave out the clutching of pearls? That's twice now that you've made posts as if this were a call to action instead of an honest inquiry.

I'm a stay at home dad who really enjoys the hobby and doesn't have much time to play, and on my walks with my infant son I think about this stuff and am interested in discussing it. Please don't turn this thread into a debate.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Hey Micah, can we leave out the clutching of pearls? That's twice now that you've made posts as if this were a call to action instead of an honest inquiry.

I'm a stay at home dad who really enjoys the hobby and doesn't have much time to play, and on my walks with my infant son I think about this stuff and am interested in discussing it. Please don't turn this thread into a

I'm sorry. Worldbuilding is so ingrained in my perspective that I had a hard time believing that it was an honest question. I apologize.

 

[Vaalingrade]

If you've read any of the fiction, from Planescape to Dragonlance, you know that most things that call themselves Good in D&D are dangerous menaces with bowels that need dissening.

 

[BookTenTiger]

I'm sorry. Worldbuilding is so ingrained in my perspective that I had a hard time believing that it was an honest question. I apologize.

In the future, you can always ask about my intentions rather than assuming. I appreciate the apology.

 

[Nefermandias]

I may be an outlier, but I've found the one-size-statblock-fits-all approach of the Monster Manuals to be... more limited than my personal tastes.

For example, yeah I have used a deva and a metallic dragon in combat scenarios, but more often I've used them in tense negotiations. That's one of the elements I feel is missing – holistically thinking about how is this monster intended to be used at the table, and then orienting the presentation of its entry in the Monster Manual towards that intended design.

For example: Kobolds use traps, right? So why not include traps in its MM entry? Maybe expand it to 2-pages, or replace the "winged kobold" (can't that just be a sidebar "it can fly 30 ft"?) with a random table referencing traps in the DMG, or even just include one sample trap that's particularly kobold-ish, or maybe include trap design notes for the DM to the effect of "kobold traps often trigger on tripwires strung at human waist-level or via pressure plates that only activate when 50 lbs are placed onto and then removed from the plate."

Maybe the couatl entry gets a couple of riddles that require the player to reframe a situation through an ethical lens or otherwise practice selfless thinking?

Maybe the deva has a skill challenge or bulletpoint list of negotiation/quest ideas to the effect of "prevent a deva from falling / redeem a fallen deva"?

Because I definitely use good-aligned monsters, just not usually as combat adversaries.

WoTC, please hire this guy!

 

[The Myopic Sniper]

I always mentally put the word "typically" in front of the alignment line for creatures in the monster manual. A Gold Dragon corrupted by greed or an Angel in revolt against their planar cohorts makes for great memorable villains.

 

[Argyle King]

Why are there Good Monsters in the Monster Manual?

I was thinking about how much space the Metallic Dragons take. All those Celestials. It's a lot of tree pulp used to stat out monsters most groups aren't going to fight.

So I was wondering: why are they there?

I can think of two ideas:

1) Verisimilitude.

The world of D&D is made up of monsters with stats and lore. There are Bad Dragons, and they exist because they have stats and lore. For Good Dragons to exist, they need stats and lore.

2) As Allies / Enemies of Evil

I suppose these Good Monster stats could be used when fighting alongside the adventurers, or as foes for evil groups. But these seem like edge cases.


So help me understand. Why are there Good Monsters in the Monster Manual? Were they always there? Do you use the stats, or just the lore?

Not all PCs are good.

Even if they are, being good doesn't mean lack of conflict.

For example, most people would likely consider Spiderman and Dr. Strange to be on the side of "good." However, they have a fight in the most recent movie due to a disagreement over the best way to handle a situation.

In the case of something like a dragon (which has a longer lifespan) they may have a view of "good" which looks at a longer picture and be willing to let someone endure hardship now for a perceived bigger benefit later. The PCs might not be on board with letting the current problem (whatever that may be) go to suit some ideal situation which may (or may not) occur 100 years from now.

 

[GreyLord]

Because Lawful Neutral, Lawful Evil, Neutral Evil, Chaotic Evil, and Chaotic Neutral are still alignments players can choose to play?

From their point of evil, the Good aligned monsters are evil.

And if you speak in absolutes...well...then those Metallic Dragons may be the most evil of them all in that sense!!!