Monster Manual V?

[The Vorpal Tribble]

Well, apparently another MM is already in the works to be revealed this July...




Sure are dishing these things out like there is no tomorrow. However, the more I read about them the less interested I become.

#1. This line makes my blood begin to boil:

This 224-page D&D supplement presents a fully illustrated horde of new monsters, as well as ready-to-play variations of previously existing monsters.

Y'know what, make a book devoted to this stuff. Otherwise don't fill our already rapidly dwindling monster manuals with stuff the DM can bloody well do on his own. Oh, wait, with the new monster format that makes it rather difficult? Oh well, more money for Wizards...

#2. Yeah, already mentioned it, but the books are growing smaller and smaller, and more of the content is becoming unneccessary. I want monsters, not an orc with an example of every class known to man and beast.

[jjpickar]

Well it does save time giving the orcs the class. Still as long as people buy the stuff the trends will continue.

[Matthew]

I think Vorpal Tribble's point is that a separate type of book might be more suitable for such things, rather than a Monster Manual.

[Fax Celestis]

I'll still probably get my hands on it regardless. I rather enjoyed the MM-IV.

[Jade_Tarem]

I kinda liked MM-IV too... And there weren't that many playable monsters, on account of most of them having very high HD.

[The Vorpal Tribble]

I haven't yet gotten my hands on a MM IV, but just the new monster style is enough to put me off of it... you guys are actually the first folks I've heard yet to give it a positive review.

[Khantalas]

I'm with Vorpal on that the new format is less than useful, but MM IV wasn't a bad book. It was just... hard to use properly, IMHO.

[Behold_the_Void]

I'm not likely to purchase any Monster Manuals beyond what I have (I and II). I looked through III and it was some of the weirdest collection of things I've ever seen.

Personally, I'm just waiting for Vorpal Tribble to release HIS Monster Manual

[SpiderBrigade]

So what is it about the new monster format that is so terrible? I don't do the massive amounts of monster customization that you do, VT, so it doesn't jump out at me. Or is a lot of it simply the fact that it's a big change from the old style?

[Zherog]

The new format is actually quite useful, once you get used to it. The information in the stat block is organized into groups of data that you need at certain times.

1) The first piece of data has the creatures' name, alignment, languages spoken, and senses - Spot and Listen checks, vision type, etc. This is the stuff you need right at the very, very beginning of the encounter.

2) The next section includes the defensive information - AC, hit points, saves, resistances, and so on.

3) The third section has the offensive info - attack info, damage, any "tricks" that can be done combat, equipment that could be used in combat, and so on.

4) Finally, the rest is "bookkeeping" information - ability scores, feats, skills.

As for MM5 having pre-statted creatures and such: please note that MM4 has the same thing.

[Jack Mann]

Fewer actual monsters in favor of simple alterations to existing monsters (such as the drow in MM IV... who have PC classes! Dun Dun Dunnnnnnn!) I mean, there's some cool stuff in MM IV, but I think we can build our own NPCs.

[Dervag]

If Wizards is going to print new books, then they should have new content, not rehashing of old content. The fighter class is not new. Orcs are not new. Therefore, orc fighters are not new. If the DM wants orc fighters, they can easily create orc fighters without needing a specific entry in the Monster Manual for them. Whereas if the DM wants a totally new kind of dreaded jungle monster that comes complete with a plausible and consistent set of abilities, they cannot easily create those without a Monster Manual. So Monster Manuals should contain more dreaded jungle monsters and fewer orc fighters.

[Fizban]

I liked a few things in the MMIV, maybe 6-8 monsters total. Once you get rid of the spiders, NPC blocks, and spawn of tiamat, there's hardly anything left.

In addition to shrinking (looking back at the MMII and Fiend Folio, I kept thinking there were other books I forgot about, there were so many monsters to remember, now you're done before you start), the monster manuals are becoming more and more about the campaign settings. MMIII was full of Ebberon stuff, but it was good stuff. MMIV was full of the OMG spawn of tiamat and random spiders!, along with NPC filler stats. This is both good and bad. On one hand, you get the setting specific monsters in the same book, and you don't have to buy a separate setting monster book. On the other hand, you don't get as many original monsters. It seems that WoTC is running out of spontaneous original ideas though, and is putting all they've got into the settings, so we're not likely to see a pure MM any time soon.

Old monsters with class levels: besides the fact that any DM worth the title can do this himself, what I really don't like is that they make assumptions about the campaign. Some campaigns count even level 10 as extremely high, some consider 15 to be common. The NPC's wizards is filliing up the MM's with are not only pointless, they assume that every world has the same level balance, and this bugs me.

As for the new stat blocks: I do like some things about them, but really, speed is something you need to know at the start of the encounter. Don't stick it in the middle of the block where you can't see it. (I can never find a creature's speed in the new format, can't you tell?)

[Fax Celestis]

And for the counteroffensive: Preexisting stat blocks are extraordinarily useful for us DMs who have both inventive players and little free time.

[Thomas]

I dislike the new format, simply because I have to copy all the stats I want to use into a .rtf file, and my format works best with the original MM format - the entries are in the same order.

But MM4 wasn't a bad book, as such. Not great, and the ready-to-play variations seem like unnecessary filler, but it's not bad overall.

[Logos7]

I rather Enjoyed the Book Actually,

And as far as the rehashing of Old Content Goes, Sometimes you need someone to show you the way, not that you can't do it on your own ,but that you wont until you see that hey Half Yanti Barbarians are preety kewl in their own right.

of course I both approve of the new Format , and enjoy new idea's , Drow Ninja's as apposed to Orc fighters for example

I also don't own 2 and 3 so my tolerance for the MM is perhaps a bit higher than would be otherwise expected.

What i'd like to see is a class appendix at the end, and lots of wierdo class.race combo's Dwarvish Shadowmancers, Elvish Samurai, Gnomish Barbarians/Scouts/Frenzied Berserkeres of Legend!

L

[AtomicKitKat]

Is there any way we can sign like an online petition for them to NOT put in the rehashed crap? -_-

[BrokenButterfly]

I really had nothing against the rehashed retro monsters. I'm more likely to put gnolls into a campaign than yugoloths, so why not see examples of the race so that the PCs don't come up against swarms of warriors or fighters?

I was much more interested in the greater levels of detail given to the monsters, so you knew more about them, rather than just being stat-jockeys with one or two weird abilities?

Hated the Spawns though, I like detail and all, but give it a break, not everybody is going to run some sort of Tiamat invasion!

Got MM 1-4 and the FF, so I will get this too.

Last point, I like the new stat block a lot, although it can be annoying scanning it in the middle of a session trying to find out how many languages an aranea speaks, to see whether the PCs can even talk to her!

[Arlanthe]

Wizards has turned into stink ink. I don't like this direction. I would prefer more work on fleshing out a bunch of campaign worlds.

[Zherog]

Is there any way we can sign like an online petition for them to NOT put in the rehashed crap? -_-

You can send them e-mail to Customer Service, or call their customer service telephone number.

Be aware, though, that you're in a vocal minority. WotC's market research shows people want it - that's why they put it in MM4; it was successful, so they're doing it again in MM5.

[jono]

My main criticism of monster manual iv was the constant reference to non-core classes. Yes I'd imagine that a ninja of some description would be interesting. It's just a shame that I can't play it without shelling out another £15 on a copy of complete adventurer.

There was some really good stuff in there. (I liked the new undead and the spawn of tiamat especially). There was also some complete crud. The worst example I think was the new Varags, where the authors casually demolished pretty much every single rule regarding ECL, Level adjustment, and character advancement just so they could make them player characters.

Alas! It's also the only monster manual I own, seeing as my local gaming outlet is rather lacking!

[AtomicKitKat]

I really had nothing against the rehashed retro monsters. I'm more likely to put gnolls into a campaign than yugoloths, so why not see examples of the race so that the PCs don't come up against swarms of warriors or fighters?

That's more a problem with an unimaginative DM than an inflexible monster. Creative DMs should be and are capable of coming up with crazy combinations on their own.

I'm aware that I could contact them directly, but it looks better when they're sent a link to a page with a few hundred names protesting recycled material.

[Woot Spitum]

Sadly, as long as the demand for new, readily statted monsters is high, WoTC will keep cranking out rushed, thrown together monster manuals. If you really hate the new monsters though, there's always the Swords and Sorcery creature collections.

[ken-do-nim]

Sadly, as long as the demand for new, readily statted monsters is high, WoTC will keep cranking out rushed, thrown together monster manuals. If you really hate the new monsters though, there's always the Swords and Sorcery creature collections.

The Tome of Horrors series is great. The Red Jester is probably my single favorite monster in 3.5. I actually own a deck of many things, cut out from a Dragon magazine article long ago, and throwing random cards at the players ... priceless.

[Leush]

Sadly, as long as the demand for new, readily statted monsters is high, WoTC will keep cranking out rushed, thrown together monster manuals.

SNIP

As long as you have enough ranks in bluff you can create demand on a whim. Demand doesn't exist because people want to have lot of examples of rehashed poo (although to be fair, with the increasing numbers of people playing d&d the numbers of people wanting poo will increase accordingly as some of them will want poo of their own accord). By that logic they will continue to spew poo forever, but it's no excuse to acknowledge its existence.

Any new monster manual is completely and utterly pointless. In fact I think any new published material is completely pointless. With the SRD and the vast numbers of good homebrewed monsters (the from the playground compendium is a very good example of that) anyone with half a brain can create a near infinite number of combinations. Okay, most people will actually want to get things like phb and dmg and the original mm, but ya know, anything beyond that is just an expensive homebrew and I don't need WOTC to tell me what is worthy of being placed in an imaginary place and what isn't.

[Sahegian]

I like new books even if there isn't that much of use in them. It would be completely unamerican for WotC to put out useful books at a reasonable price and not try to sell us nearly useless crap that we don't need. That is part of the fun. Aside from the DMG and PHB, I don't think I've ever used more than 10% of the stuff in any other book.

[Jack Mann]

I understand that pre-generated NPCs can be useful. I get that. But I'd rather have more room for new monsters.

I do like having more information on the new monsters, mind. That part of MMIV was good. A praiseworthy goal. Better information from knowledge checks. I like that! But I don't need some pregenerated NPCs to fill out pages. I'd rather have more new material. I can make my own drow ninjas.

[Fax Celestis]

I understand that pre-generated NPCs can be useful. I get that. But I'd rather have more room for new monsters.

I do like having more information on the new monsters, mind. That part of MMIV was good. A praiseworthy goal. Better information from knowledge checks. I like that! But I don't need some pregenerated NPCs to fill out pages. I'd rather have more new material. I can make my own drow ninjas.

Agreed. Hell, I'd be happy with a book of pregenerated NPCs and locations seperate from a book of monsters.

[jono]

I understand that pre-generated NPCs can be useful. I get that. But I'd rather have more room for new monsters.

I do like having more information on the new monsters, mind. That part of MMIV was good. A praiseworthy goal. Better information from knowledge checks. I like that! But I don't need some pregenerated NPCs to fill out pages. I'd rather have more new material. I can make my own drow ninjas.

The job of the monster manuals should be to provide rules and stats for creatures and races that you might wish to incorperate into a campaign, however you wish to go about it. It should not be filling up space by creating new variants of existing monsters, and self-publicising their other works. Further, any back-story and motivation included should be purely subjective and notional, rather than trying to tie each monster to a specific setting or role.

The spawn of tiamat in MM IV I though were an excellent idea. However, was there really any need to lock them into one back story? If you ignore the whole dragonfall war you could easily incorporate them in a campaign as a substitute for the more traditional fodder races, such as orcs and gnolls. Perhaps they're magical experiments gone wrong? Maybe they've always existed as dangerous tribes that live in the mountains. Perhaps they're the head of a malevolent empire. There are so many possibilities that are effectively blotted out because the guys at wizards decided to niché their new monsters into their questionably concieved dragonfall war!

[Fax Celestis]

The spawn of tiamat in MM IV I though were an excellent idea. However, was there really any need to lock them into one back story? If you ignore the whole dragonfall war you could easily incorporate them in a campaign as a substitute for the more traditional fodder races, such as orcs and gnolls. Perhaps they're magical experiments gone wrong? Maybe they've always existed as dangerous tribes that live in the mountains. Perhaps they're the head of a malevolent empire. There are so many possibilities that are effectively blotted out because the guys at wizards decided to niché their new monsters into their questionably concieved dragonfall war!

I'd personalyl like to play an evil campaign where all the characters were dragonspawn.