Will we see more third party products to add depth to monsters outside combat?

[nutluck]

Necromancer games has already stated they will be doing this. They are already working on a PHB to add in stuff 4e has left out or that they think is needed to recapture the same feel they was going for with 3e and they have stated that if stuff is missing from the MM they will do their own version to add stuff in. Such as they already said they will make devils and demons back to the way they was ect.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

This made me wonder, will we see third party publishers trying to fill the gap by writing appropriate non-combat abilities for monsters in the Monster Manual, such as appropriate rituals or other abilities that each type of monster should have at their command?

Given that Paizo is about to come out with a 100 percent fluff monster fluffifying book (which looks awesome), I'd say The Big Book of Evil Mastermind Rituals seems likely to come from several quarters.

I'd imagine we'll also see a new ritual in every other adventure.

 

[Xyl]

An "off-screen" monster can do anything that you, the DM, decide it should be able to do. I can see the benefit of books that go into deeper detail about the ecology and society of various monsters, and talk about their non-combat abilities. I don't think those abilities should be given specific mechanics in canon; let the DM treat them however is best for the game.

I'll be rather surprised if the DMG1 doesn't talk about how handle monsters out of combat, including suggestions on when to have them do things that aren't in their statblock.

 

[AncientSpirits]

This is a very important point. The rules exist for the most part to enable the players to interact with the world the Dungeon Master is presenting. There's zero point in having rules created simply to let the DM sit behind his screen and....
Cheers,
Cam

Non-combat abilities are useful to know when the creature is planning etc. regarding the PCs before / after combat. Out-of-combat abilities help flesh out what the monster is doing when, say, it knows the PCs are on is trail but haven't caught up with it yet, or when it notes the PCs are making a deal with its other foes... or myriad other interesting things. What if the pit fiend wants to repeatedly ambush the PCs to weaken them first using magical traps in addition its to minions? What if it wants to create an illusion to throw the PCs off track? (Both of these actions fit devils as deceives and tempters). Does the pit fiend make a wizard-slave do all this? Maybe so. Maybe the pit fiend isn't supposed to be able to do anything except fight in one combat. But as a DM, I'd like to know what its resources are and look forward to sidebars or other books to help flesh out this.

So I'm not denying a PC-centric universe, but the current stat leaves me wondering how it will interact with PCs when they aren't standing right in front of it.

On a side note, I'm personally really looking forward to trying out 4.0. But I am still open to questions and concerns. I don't consider myself a fanatical, kill-all-doubters worshiper of 4.0.

 

[Xyl]

Non-combat abilities are useful to know when the creature is planning etc. regarding the PCs before / after combat. Out-of-combat abilities help flesh out what the monster is doing when, say, it knows the PCs are on is trail but haven't caught up with it yet, or when it notes the PCs are making a deal with its other foes... or myriad other interesting things. What if the pit fiend wants to repeatedly ambush the PCs to weaken them first using magical traps in addition its to minions? What if it wants to create an illusion to throw the PCs off track?

The pit fiend can do any of these things if you, the DM, think that it would fit the concept and would be good for the game. Nobody has come down from on high and said "Yea, this is the Pit Fiend statblock, and ye shall only use those abilities I have set forth in it."

It's your campaign. Pit Fiends in your campaign can do whatever you want Pit Fiends in your campaign to be able to do.

 

[Destil]

I expect to see it in the DMG / Monster Manual. In fact we can see that it's already there with the mention of Wish in the knowledge check. There's no rules information that supports that, but it's there. Most likely there's a nice big section in either the DMG or MM about using rule 0 to give monsters access to 'plot relevant' rituals, given that rituals are largely non-combat magic. No need to clutter up any stat blocks with them.

 

[Jack99]

Given that Paizo is about to come out with a 100 percent fluff monster fluffifying book (which looks awesome), I'd say The Big Book of Evil Mastermind Rituals seems likely to come from several quarters.

I'd imagine we'll also see a new ritual in every other adventure.

Yeah, but that's not really a 4e book last I checked, or what?

 

[Xyl]

Most likely there's a nice big section in either the DMG or MM about using rule 0 to give monsters access to 'plot relevant' rituals, given that rituals are largely non-combat magic. No need to clutter up any stat blocks with them.

In fact, I just found this quote on the 4e info page...

Not all monsters that used to teleport at will do so in 4e. But there's no reason that archdevils or demon princes couldn't use teleportation rituals themselves to "beam up" minions to places they need to go. Those rituals may be expensive and tedious, so it might not be routine for demons to bamf into the middle of the town square--but it could happen if the DM needs it to.

It seems pretty clear that the DM will be able to give monsters whatever rituals are convenient for the plot.

 

[Cbas_10]

After reading the pit fiend entry I have mixed feelings about it. On the one hand, it does seem easier to use in combat and like it might feel more "special" and unique in combat as compared to other monsters of the same level. But it does seem rather 2 dimensional with no abilities for use outside combat given that it is supposed to be a mastermind villain behind massive evil plots of corruption and deception. It is hinted that it can grant a wish every 99 years, but that hardly seems sufficient to compensate.

This made me wonder, will we see third party publishers trying to fill the gap by writing appropriate non-combat abilities for monsters in the Monster Manual, such as appropriate rituals or other abilities that each type of monster should have at their command? DM's could simply make these up, of course, but DM's can make up anything. The point of D&D products is to save DM's time by doing the DM's work for him, or by improving the DM's work by suggesting creative ideas that the DM might not have thought of on his own.

I totally agree! Except for the fact that you had mixed feelings about the Pit Fiend entry. I really hope the Monster Manual has more information than they leaked to us here. It felt like I was reading a D&D Minis statcard; not an entry for an exciting, scary, monumental antagonist that can wield vast domains of evil otherworldly creatures.

Basic stats and a small handful of predetermined attack routines? Sweet Snorefest!

I don't want every possible detail of every monster laid out for me....but...I simply don't have time to homebrew creatures' non-combat aspects AND write my storylines. Plotseeds, legends, and examples. THAT is what belongs in a monster manual along with the stats. Dry stats and a couple of paragraphs are just a minis Stat Card.

 

[Nymrohd]

But why do you have to homebrew the non combat aspects? Why can they not just simply happen? People do a dozen things in any campaign outside combat that we never have rules for.