Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
52 of 59 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
A re-imagined cast of characters, June 9, 2008
Like all previous editions of the Monster Manual - this book contains the list of creatures and their statistics that DMs need to create opponents for their players.
Before 3rd edition, this was all this book tried to do. While a 2nd edition DM could choose to buy the Fiend Folio instead of the Monster Manual, the 3rd edition (and 3.5) DM did not have this option. 3.0/3.5 added monster-specific rules that truly turned the Monster Manual into a core rulebook.
Monster feats, exotic attacks, Templates, and rules for PC monsters - all were natural extensions of the monster concept: You have monsters - and now you want to alter them for your specific needs. In my opinion, this was a good thing.
The 4th edition Manual follows this model - although there are some differences worth mentioning.
First - the easy stuff:
The laundry list of monsters includes the bulk of classic D&D bad guys: Orcs, Unicorns, & Worgs (Oh my!). A straight book-to-book comparison will reveal many differences in this edition's inventory (e.g. 4th ed. has only chromatic Dragons).
Many will be surprised by which creatures got included - but it's worth remembering that every edition of D&D has had multiple versions of the Monster Manual (3.5 was up to volume 5). If your favorite bad guy didn't make the cut - they're not gone - they'll just be in a future product.
The creature entries seem abbreviated at first. Much as in 3.0/3.5 you will not see wordy paragraphs about a creature's back-story or preferred environment. As a DM, when I need a creature I need their stats, not their life story. Wordy write-ups take up space that could be filled by more monsters. Besides, adding thematic information like back stories is *my* job.
Big changes in creature powers will come as a jolt. Negative levels are gone. 3rd edition negative levels seemed like a good idea - but were more hassle than they were worth. They had a high maintenance tail (keep track of your minuses AND then track a save the following day - for each negative level), and they threatened the primary goal of all players: level advancement. Good riddance.
Undead now drain healing reserves - something that that is depleting (in keeping with the "drain life energy" motif of undead) and does not have a long term maintenance issue. When you are hit, you lose a reserve. Zero maintenance. This is good.
Vampires - actually Vampire Lords - still create spawns but now ignore garlic, running water, and wooden stakes and have detailed rules for how they must rest. Jettisoning garlic may bother some players - but traits like that work better in novels than they do in RPGs (Bram Stoker never had to deal with PCs wearing plate mail festooned with garlic cloves).
Werewolves don't spawn lycanthropy - they infect you a disease that makes you berserk. This change is likely due to the same calculation of maintenance hassle vs. gaming value. The first time you face werewolves - lycanthropy is a fun risk. When you face an army of lycanthropes, the disease adds more logistics than drama.
There are a lot of monster abilities that will translate into the new rules in ways that surprise and confound. With 4th edition changing the DNA of spells and powers - this was unavoidable and does not pose any barrier to DMs adjusting the power of their chosen monster up or down.
The rules for customizing monsters is where I would be most critical of this volume.
The back of the book contains a subset of monsters that can be used for NPCs or PCs. This is essential, since 3.0/3.5 opened the doors for PCs to be whatever they want. The rules provided for playing a PC orc (for example) seem very light. There are a host of issues that playing monsters brought up in 3.5 - and I don't expect 4th edition to be any different. This section looked a lot like an add on (and that's fine if it is), but if DMs should expect an expanded set of rules covering this - it'd be nice if the book came out and said it.
3.5's Monster Manual had "[this monster] as a PC" entries within the monster's description which I feel is a superior model. I want to be an orc, I pick up my Monster Manual and find the listing for - Orc. Putting them in the appendix helps the player who wants to see the full menu of choices - but you could do that with an index and still put all of a monster's data in one place. I'm a big believer in one stop shopping - and having the rules for a specific task stored in multiple places just slows things down.
Scaling monsters/Adding templates.
Adding class levels and templates to 3.5 monsters ensured that no monster had to be boring (three words: Vampire Kobold Sorcerer) and from all appearances this will carry forward in 4th edition. These rules in 4th edition are in the DMG and I would question this.
If the Monster Manual is truly a core book (the core set of monsters + monster rules) why not have all the template/advancement/ monster specific abilities rules in that volume?
I can see that having these rules in a central book like the DMG is appealing - but when the rules for monsters evolve, we are more likely to get another Monster Manual than we are an updated DMG. The rules in the DMG are may be adequate, but they look rather thin. I would expect more rules and clarifications to be a virtual certainty. Plus, there's the appeal of having all my monster rules in one book.
The changes in the 4th edition Monster Manual are extensions of the changes to the core rules - so it's hard to have stand-alone praise or criticism of it. For the most part, it remains what it always was: a menu of monsters that is essential for DMs.
|
|
|
4 of 4 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Like the new monster design, but..., August 9, 2008
the book is by far the weakest of the three core books.
The good:
The new mechanics focus on the "screen time" devoted to each monster and keeps things simpler. Most entries provide knowledge check info with DCs and useful info. Book is colorful and includes lots of creatures and variations
The bad:
Other than the DC check knowledge, background info on the creatures is really sparse. In some cases variations in a entry don't even have a phsyical description of how they are different. Templates would be better served in here than in the DMG (though that's a minor quibble).
Overall, still well worth the money if you are going to run a game.
|
|
|
3 of 3 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Solid material... Just not classical DnD anymore., December 5, 2008
4th edition is bound to be regarded as the love-child of collectible card games and online RPGs. And no book displays this feeling any stronger than its 4th edition Monster's Manual. I've been playing dnd since 2nd edition came out and did a lot of DMing during 3rd edition. In those times you would create a monster in a way very similar to a PC: You would choose your monster's race, give it a class and choose its feats and spells before you were done. The whole system was incredibly powerful to the point of being overwhelming. 4th edition changed all of this. Monsters now are presented "as-is", no tweaking necessary. You can't trace how many levels it has or what feat choices it took. It is basically a non-adaptable stat block. This, of course has its upsides. In 3rd, for example, between feats, spells and abilities, a normal adult dragon would have around 30 different options during combat. In 4th? Even the most powerful has about 7. And most of them are pretty linear. Of course, you can't level it up to scale the encounter to your group's level or even choose to give it different abilities (some monster templates are presented though) but it does make it a lot easier just to put one out of the book and into the battlefield. In the end, it seems monsters and enemy NPCs work in ways very different from normal PCs. They have a lot less options, a lot less depth and no way to scale. However they do look a lot user-friendlier, with a simpler, cleaner stat-block and easier to understand powers.
Bottom line, the question comes down to the Player's Handbook. If DM and players like this novel approach to dnd then the Monster's Manual follows suit and delivers a good, solid work for the busy DM. If the whole cRPG / CCG look doesn't strike your fancy, I seriously think this book won't convert you.
|
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|
by Jeremy Crawford
by Bruce Cordell
by Wizards RPG Team
by Logan Bonner
