|
(which is why Sebastian stands ready to reboot in the near future - 4e baby, 4e.)Nooooo! Then we'll all have to by the same books all over again updated for the new edition. At least 3 and 3.5 are close enough to fudge.
Seriously, I'd be much more interested in the type-focused books. "The Giant Grimoire" or "the Fey Folio" or "the Tome of the Elements" all sound quite promising to me. I've purchased FF and MMII, but use them very little--I was mostly interested in the 10-15% of the material in them that was somehow classic D&D or had mythical roots, but I haven't even used everything in the 3.5 MM yet, so I don't feel like I need a huge additional collection of random monsters that don't seem to have a clear place in my campaign world. I'd be more interested in some real development of themes, with a few well-developed sites I could use in adventures, some ecology, some culture, and so forth.
100%ly agreed!
Changing from 2nd to 3rd edition was already a hard choice for me. So much campaign material (FR) that needed conversions now when still to be used in my 3rd edition campaign.By now I own considerably more 3rd edition books than 2nd edition ones. This is definitely my last edition I purchase.
Which leads to MM IV. I own the other MMs, I own Necromancer Games' Tome of Horrors series, and the Creature Collection books.
I guess I am one of those DMs who want to "embed" monsters into their campaign (opposed to those DMs, who prefer scores of new challenges for their players and don't worry that much about the ecology of monsters). For that reason I felt torn by most monster books I read lately: a few very good variations on existing material (have a look at ToH III - some nice orc racial variants). On the other hand those monsters that just don't seem to make sense - a short description of what they do and how they attack, that's it.
Maybe you just need two kinds of monster books: "Hack & Slash Compendiums" and campaign related monster manuals...
Already before MM IV I posted messages to several message boards (WotC monster forum, Candlekeep) asking which of the MM I - III monsters were "official" to the FR, which of them would be encountered where, which of them were rare, which of them maybe more common (recent "immigrants").
Sure, you can make this up on your own, but if I spend 30$$ on a MM, I would like to get more information on how these monsters live, what their motives are, what their relations to other races are, and preferably for each of these monsters: where to find them, and what their role in one of the official WotC settings is.
As by now even in MM III only part of the monsters received such an intensive treatment.
Greetings,
Günther
As far as the "dragonspawn" go, the bluespawn godslayer didn't seem that bad, though the name still reminds me of a Yu-Gi-Oh card gone terribly wrong.
Over at Candlekeep, Eric Boyd mentioned that Dragons of Faerun will have an in campaign explanation for the Spawn of Tiamat, so I'm looking forward to that.
I liked the Avatar of Elemental evil, I liked the concept of the face stealing undead, but hated their names, and I liked the dwarf ancestors, but I had a hard time with the fact that the sample encounter uses corrupted dwarf ancestors right out of the box. I would think a sample encounter would use a new monster as it is usually intended to be used?
.
By now I own considerably more 3rd edition books than 2nd edition ones. This is definitely my last edition I purchase.
That's what I said when 2nd edition came out.....I hope they give us at least another ten years of 3.5 before 4th edition comes out.
I liked the three hole punch format of 2nd edition monster manuals, because I could take out all the creatures I don't use in my campaign world. I doubt they'll repeat it, but it was nice.
I dunno. I kinda like the "spawn" naming scheme. You can use how idiotic it sounds to your advantage:
"GADZOOKS! An Orangespawn Ironblighter! Druid to the front!"
See what I did there? By referring to it by color and main action, it implies I have a childlike familiarity with the creature, which implies I had heard of it from fairy tales! Pre-roleplayed metagame knowledge! Total hax!
Or say you're at the Royal Banquent, standing in front of the Dessert Buffet, roll a spot check and...
"GADZOOKS! Redspawn Jigglejumpers!" (to the DM) "I draw my spoon and charge the leader!" (then the mage says) "I cast Fear!" (the DM rolls a die and says) "The Jell-O begins quivering uncontrollably." (then the rogue says) "Wait, are Redspawns cherry, strawberry, or raspberry?" (then the cleric says) "Or Fruit Punch" (to which the rogue replies) "No, Fruit Punch is only for Redspawn Sugarswill." (which disappoints the Cleric).
I dunno. I kinda like the "spawn" naming scheme. You can use how idiotic it sounds to your advantage:
"GADZOOKS! An Orangespawn Ironblighter! Druid to the front!"
See what I did there? By referring to it by color and main action, it implies I have a childlike familiarity with the creature, which implies I had heard of it from fairy tales! Pre-roleplayed metagame knowledge! Total hax!
Or say you're at the Royal Banquent, standing in front of the Dessert Buffet, roll a spot check and...
"GADZOOKS! Redspawn Jigglejumpers!" (to the DM) "I draw my spoon and charge the leader!" (then the mage says) "I cast Fear!" (the DM rolls a die and says) "The Jell-O begins quivering uncontrollably." (then the rogue says) "Wait, are Redspawns cherry, strawberry, or raspberry?" (then the cleric says) "Or Fruit Punch" (to which the rogue replies) "No, Fruit Punch is only for Redspawn Sugarswill." (which disappoints the Cleric).
Alright, you just decimated all of my name despairaging attempts with that post. I bow to your superior riduculing talents.
[Giants - The Vertically Challenged Tome
Fey - ....sorry, can't think of a good joke that wouldn't offend someone.
Wouldn't a book on giants be 'The Vertically Enhanced Tome'?
Fey - The Seelie and Unseelie Courts
I've resisted so far, but it calls to me. Caaaalls my naaaaame.... Must. Not. Run. To. FLGS. *nails hand to table* Problem solved!Bought it.
Wil save vs. monster books waaaaaaaaaay too high for me.
Must...have...monsters...
I've resisted its call...so far. My gaming money went to Fiendish Codex I and getting all but maybe four back issues of Dragon and Dungeon mags since I started collecting.
On the other hand, my (home) office wall is covered in the glorious Greyhawk and Forgotten Realms 4-part maps. :D Sweet cartographic bliss.
|
I'll give it a very critical look before purchasing it.
From what i've seen in the table of contents and the art gallery, there isn't much in there that i'd find interesting.
But who knows...:)
I bought 'Fiendish Codex' without a second thought and right now i'll drive to my FLGS to get 'Secrets Of Xen'drik'.
I think the addition of more detail to the MM IV is a good thing, I'd buy it if it weren't for the fact that my local hobby shop (the only one I know of that sells DnD sourcebooks) has a lousy selection. Seriously, there are like 10 books in the store at any one time and half of them are duplicates. I was lucky to not have to wait a year for the Fiendish Codex I.
Curse you Antics (name of store)! Curse you!
The Spawn of Tiamat seem interesting, but the naming scheme is horrible I must agree.
The idea of a book on fey is interesting, since I am a big fan of Feytouched and Half-Fey (I have a copy of the old Savage Progressions articles from the website saved to my hard drive). That and the fact that I typically use Fey to represent the forces of chaos rather than Slaad. Chaos is variation and change, so why in the nine hells are there so few Slaad and all of them are the same? I'm pretty sure chaos can do better than "giant greedy toad" everytime it creates a new outsider.
-Tome, real life Anarchist and Chaoist.
That's what I said when 2nd edition came out.....I hope they give us at least another ten years of 3.5 before 4th edition comes out.
Use a different economic model and we won't have to reboot. But any way I've already argued this concept before and I suspect everyone is sick of hearing my take on it.
I liked the three hole punch format of 2nd edition monster manuals, because I could take out all the creatures I don't use in my campaign world. I doubt they'll repeat it, but it was nice.
I liked this system a lot except for the fact that there was a different monster on the other side. This meant that your really could not easily make a custom designed Monster Manual for a campaign. Which was a real bummer because being able to pick out all the monsters that would be used in a campaign (or maybe just a large adventure) before starting it was a great idea in theory.
That said with 3.5 etc. It actually makes more sense. Big stat block and picture on one side. All the writing on the other. The increase in the size of statblocks starts making it reasonable to devote 2 pages (a front and a back) to each monster.
|
Oh. Derr, duuh,...
I haven't read enough to formulate a conclusive opinion yet.
The pictures are lovely.
So far, just skimming, and trying to get used to the new stat block presentation.
Must confess, I'm not a huge fan of the new stat block, but I'm sure I'll get used to it. My main concern is whether there is a lot of filler or if it is worthwhile stuff (like the orcs, githyanki and so on).
|
I thought the statted monsters were just filler.
Drow ninja, drow scout, drow fighter/wizard, drow cleric.
Nothing too over-the-top to me, frankly. I didn't really scrutinize them much, just the drow.
There seemed to me to be a good bit of other new stuff.
But, I don't have Red Hand of Doom or any of the Miniatures stuff, so I don't know how repetitive it will seem to those people.
But the drow didn't excite me immensely.
Well, as I said on the ENWorld boards... ;)
Picked myself up a copy and for the most part, I like it. The whole "Spawn of Tiamat" thing feels like it should be a stand-alone book -- if you gave them their own book, put maps and scenarios in it and called it a megamodule, I suspect many of the haters would be lovers instead.
Nature is certainly red in tooth and claw in this book; there's a plethora of pissed-off plants and a flood of foul-tempered fey. (What am I, Stan Lee all of a sudden?) The Verdant Prince in particular just happens to be perfect for a scenario idea I've been working, how handy!
There are also a few "WTF?" sorts of critters in the book; the Zern in particular don't seem to do anything that beholders and mind flayers couldn't do just as well, other than being a monstrous humanoid. They definitely have that "inserted with the hope of becoming a new big thing" feel; ditto the Windblades, who seem to be to Githyanki as Raptorians are to Elves.
(Note: I will restrain the impulse here to rant about making the Raptorians a new race, when the Winged Folk or the Avariel already exist and could fill that niche perfectly well ... as it isn't really germaine to MMIV. But I'll let myself go on the subject sometime!)
For those who want oldschool and/or "classic fantasy" goodness, there are plenty of candidates to fit the bill. The Avatars of Elemental Evil are a nice callback to an old standard; the Dwarf Ancestor immediately makes one wonder why there wasn't one of these things tromping around in Moria; and the Joystealer, Wizened Elder, and aforementioned Verdant Prince immediately suggest Herne the Hunter or old Irish folktales.
So yeah, you could say I like it.
-The Gneech
I like the Tiamat spawn, actually.
Just the "color"spawn "adjective"ator scheme is
a wee cheesy.
ROFLMAO! I may have to see if I can come up with a Colorspawn Adjectivator name generator!
"GADZOOKS! Redspawn Jigglejumpers!" (to the DM) "I draw my spoon and charge the leader!" (then the mage says) "I cast Fear!" (the DM rolls a die and says) "The Jell-O begins quivering uncontrollably." (then the rogue says) "Wait, are Redspawns cherry, strawberry, or raspberry?" (then the cleric says) "Or Fruit Punch" (to which the rogue replies) "No, Fruit Punch is only for Redspawn Sugarswill." (which disappoints the Cleric).
Alright, that does it. I'm going to make a conscious effort to work gadzooks into my daily speech from now on. That little scenelet is one of the most amusing things I've read all day. Your Redspawn Jigglejumpers could definitely beat the snot out of my Paisleyspawn Cottonbutchers and BurntSiennaSpawn Muckwallowers.
|
|
I like the direction that the MM4 is going for a couple reasons. One: I have a MM (3.5) and Dungeon adventure modules that supply my needs for monster stats 95% of the time. The rest of the time I can extrapolate by adding classes and templates or just HD and feats. For these reasons I do not yet own a MM2 or MM3. It just hasn't been necessary.
That being said, I probably WILL get the MM4 if it isn't too radically altered from the sample info. This is because monster ecology and lairs are an important part of many encounters I run (or at least come up as questions from my players) and it would speed up gameplay to have a few basic monsters with "leveled-up" stats bookmarked.
Nice work Wizards/DnD R&D. You're keeping a happy fan of twenty years, and I'm only 25!
edit: For monster name generators, I recommend www.seventhsanctum.com
Seventh Sanctum is fantabulous for name generators. One of my favorite sites for that sorta thing.
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
Alright, that does it. I'm going to make a conscious effort to work gadzooks into my daily speech from now on.A noble effort that I think we should all partake in, along with egad, eureka, and gee whiz.
I've always liked "Well I'll be hornswaggled" myself.
I was running a marvel super heroes campaign back in high school, and my group was getting unruly. I told them that the next thing they said, their characters would say in the game.
And of course, one smart ass player has to say the above.
The citizens of Townsville were very confused by the hero's unusual statement.
I suppose "odds bodkins" is just too much, tho.
-TG
Odds fish! Sink me!
When people ask me how I'm doing, I usually say "Groovy!" (Since I'm a young whippersnapper, it usually throws them, especially if they grew up in the 60s & 70s. :D )
You want to get a big fat geek on, swear like Conan:
"Crom and Mitra! This burger meat is rotten, or I'm a Shemite!"
Well if you're going to go there, why not say "Llie n'vanima ar' lle atara lanneina!" which is (according to some) elven for "You're ugly and your mother dresses you funny!"?
-The Gneech
I'm not sold on the space that they used for the NPC/Monsters with class levels. If they had been more generally spaced out, and more generally useful, I might have liked them better (are there really that many fiendish and/or half-fiend gnolls haning out with regular gnoll tribes?).
Still not thrilled with the Spawn of Tiamat after looking at them either . . . especially since so many of them aren't dragons!?! Hm . . . blessing from a dragon goddess, born to true dragons . . . offspring is a monstrous humanoid . . .
On the other hand, I liked the clockwork monsters, as well as all of the new evil fey . . . I love evil fey. And elementals.
But some of the "in Faerun" notes were a bit off.
Still not thrilled with the Spawn of Tiamat after looking at them either . . . especially since so many of them aren't dragons!?! Hm . . . blessing from a dragon goddess, born to true dragons . . . offspring is a monstrous humanoid . . .
I was wondering about this my self... but if you notice, they all have "dragonblood" which technically makes them dragons as far as what sort of things affect them and fills the requirement of 'dragon' for feats and prestige classes and such...
Also, at the beginning of the entry for the Spawn of Tiamat, it directly compares the Spawn to the dragonborn from Races of the Dragon. The dragonborn are humanoids that have transformed into 'draconic' humanoids... so are the Spawn.
As for the book overall, I'm definitely pleased. Sure there are a few entries here and there that could have been left out, but the good stuff wouldn't stand out as much if the bad sutff wasn't at least represented ;)
When the DMG II came out and they had the new stat block I was appalled... I was used to looking at the same basic format for the past 13 years! But after I looked through MM IV and read over the introduction that explains the new format and just the other night I read an article on the WotC website explaining their reasoning for the new format (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/dd/20060707a)
I now see that it is a better format. I will find out how much more efficient it is supposed to be this weekend when I start The Red Hand of Doom adventure.
Finally, if I could say only one thing about MM IV it would be that it blows MM II out of the water! I dont' know what it is about MM II, but I don't like it and it doesn't seem to be able to stand next to the other MMs...
I was considering parchasing it until I had a chance to peruse it. Compare it to the volume of monsters you get out of the MM, MM 2, MM3, and Fiend Folio and it stinks. When I purchase a monster book, that's what I want. Not sample maps, a bunch of variations on the same monsters. And orcs, gnolls, and ogres?! Why on earth would you put a bunch of these in there? I can easily come up with new variations of these old hat creatures on my own with all of the templates and other concepts already out there.
In the end, WotC decided it was time to put out another big book and suck up money from us consumers that will buy anytyhing with a WotC label on it. Of all the monsters they presented, I think I might use maybe 1/4 of them. That to me isn't worth around $40 bucks.
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
I was considering parchasing it until I had a chance to peruse it. Compare it to the volume of monsters you get out of the MM, MM 2, MM3, and Fiend Folio and it stinks. When I purchase a monster book, that's what I want. Not sample maps, a bunch of variations on the same monsters. And orcs, gnolls, and ogres?! Why on earth would you put a bunch of these in there? I can easily come up with new variations of these old hat creatures on my own with all of the templates and other concepts already out there.
In the end, WotC decided it was time to put out another big book and suck up money from us consumers that will buy anytyhing with a WotC label on it. Of all the monsters they presented, I think I might use maybe 1/4 of them. That to me isn't worth around $40 bucks.
I disgaree. I find the book to be very useful. I don't want more monsters. I want more quality in the existing monsters. That's the debate that started at the beginning of this thread - that different people find different value in this monster book.
Finally, if I could say only one thing about MM IV it would be that it blows MM II out of the water! I dont' know what it is about MM II, but I don't like it and it doesn't seem to be able to stand next to the other MMs...
Dude MMII had yak folk in it!
GGG
Proud host of Sima Lim, NE male yak folk sorcerer 7
I disgaree. I find the book to be very useful. I don't want more monsters. I want more quality in the existing monsters. That's the debate that started at the beginning of this thread - that different people find different value in this monster book.I was considering parchasing it until I had a chance to peruse it. Compare it to the volume of monsters you get out of the MM, MM 2, MM3, and Fiend Folio and it stinks. When I purchase a monster book, that's what I want. Not sample maps, a bunch of variations on the same monsters. And orcs, gnolls, and ogres?! Why on earth would you put a bunch of these in there? I can easily come up with new variations of these old hat creatures on my own with all of the templates and other concepts already out there.
In the end, WotC decided it was time to put out another big book and suck up money from us consumers that will buy anytyhing with a WotC label on it. Of all the monsters they presented, I think I might use maybe 1/4 of them. That to me isn't worth around $40 bucks.
That's yours and everybody else's prerogative, though your statement about not wanting more monsters sounds very odd considering that it's probably the common expectation for a "new" Monster Manual. A lot of the takes on the existing monsters could just as easily have appeared on the WotC web site as they have in the past. And it's FREE!
The maps are awesome quality. Don't get me wrong. But IMO they don't belong in any of the Monster Manuals. They could just as easily be put in one of the Locations booklets that they're pumping out.Basically, I'm disappointed that so much space was used for things other than new monsters or revisions to some of the old 1E/2E monsters. Enjoy it if you like it. To each his own.
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
Enjoy it if you like it. To each his own.
I agree, which is why I didn't think the comment about WotC just putting out crap was appropriate. I like the book, and so do many other people on this thread. It's cool if you don't like it, but please don't make it sound like the book is worthless in general because it's not your thing.
When I looked at it up close and personal, I was more impressed by it than I was just from looking at the ToC online. It still didn't jump to the top of the line (I haven't gotten the Fiendish Codex yet, and that definately will be purchased before this one), but it didn't make the list of D&D books I could care less about getting (the most notable of which are Magic of Incarnum and Races of the Dragon).
|
|
I was just curious: WRT the 3-4 statted monsters of each of the rehashed subtypes, do you feel that that offers much utility?
I mean, I think it would be a little more useful in that respect if there was a table a la the DMG's npc's by class and level for the monsters in question. I mean unless your encounter Specifically calls for an "X" level gnoll ranger, you as dungeonmaster are still in the position of having to do some tweaking.
But, it was my one book for the month to buy, especially since there doesn't seem to be a book I want to buy any time in the immediate future.
I'd like to get the Ptolus book, and I would if I was in my single professional free-and-easy days. I might save up for it.
You know what I liked that I would have liked to have seen with regards to already published monsters appearing again . . . mobs . . . goblin mobs, orc mobs, etc. I know you can stat them up yourself, but for some reason, I would like to have this information summed up in one place.
I know . . . I'm nuts.
I agree, which is why I didn't think the comment about WotC just putting out crap was appropriate. I like the book, and so do many other people on this thread. It's cool if you don't like it, but please don't make it sound like the book is worthless in general because it's not your thing.
Enjoy it if you like it. To each his own.
Well, I definitely didn't call it "crap", but I did say it wasn't worth the money. And it's obviously my opinion, which is pretty much the majority of what we come here to air, right? From what I've read here, there's a good deal of sceptism about it floating around besides my own.
Now, if you like it, which you've already said you did, then great. I found a few things in there that I thought were extremely cool, but after leafing through every page and giving it a really good look, I decided to invest my money in something I'd get more use out of. (Maybe one of my players will buy it and let me borrow it so I can use the creatures that I did like.)
Weren't there mobs in Heavy Metal?
I hope there aren't any Lindseyspawn Lohanivators in the next MM.
There . . . we have successfully cross polinated everything, I think.
EDIT: At least I didn't say America sucks or something :P