Dungeons & Dragons Monster Manual: Roleplaying Game Core Rules, 4th Edition

I've already reviewed the core rules book set and it recieved my and my players mark of approval. The game plays great. So now I've decided to look at each book individually and judge them. I was surprised to log onto amazon and see that this edition of the MM has garnered only a two star rating. The only reason i can see for this is the fact that so many people are rating the book badly because they haven't even attempted to play with the new 4th edition rules. People tend to hate change as they did when 3rd edition came out. In other words despite my skepticism when the edition was announced i played it and loved the new ruleset. Is it 3.5? nope and it shouldn't be its a new edition afterall. 3.5 is still there for everyone to play and Paizo publishing will still put out new stuff for it for awhile at least. That being said, what do i think of the Monster Manual for the newest edition? It works great. Its not as bare bones as most of the reviewers on here will lead you to believe. However, it doesn't feature the extensive writeups of the previous edition. Although most of those said writeups had a few paragraphs of background info then abilities and tactics for the monsters made up the rest. This is a new format and you can still get just as much info out of it and it is easier to read. Now does it go into complete depth on every entry about the species origin and societies? It has DC for knowledge checks to learn the important details of each species so I would say yes sorta. Its a Monsters manual not a book on species afterall. It has enough info to use the monsters effectively in your game and roleplay them effectively. Each entry also has several different types as well as encounter groups you can drop into your campaign. In other words the Monster Manual does just what its supposed to do. It gives the dm monsters to use in their campaigns and makes it easier for them to do so. So I ask, Why all the hate for 4th edition. Sheesh, give it a shot guys don't blast it without playing it.

My only real complaint is the section on using monster races as characters. Not enough rules or info here to make them viable races. Some of their monster powers are overpowered compared to other racial abilities and there are no racial feats listed so its really a haphazard attempt to add more pc races. However, with a little tweaking they are still usable.

I wrote an extremely lengthy review for the Players Handbook, so I will try to avoid that here. I just want to comment on a lot of the reviews I have seen for this book (yes bad reviewer I know, I will try to make this up to you gentle-reader in the next paragraph). Basing your ENTIRE review on the fact that the book is not the same as the previous version of the book IS NOT A REVIEW. That is like saying that the modern version of a car looks different than a previous version, and therefore it must suck. Yes it is okay to have opinions, and yes if you like 3rd Edition better you can point that out. But saying monster blah is not the same as the same monster in a previous version, and thus it sucks, is dumb. You are not reviewing a product based on it's own merit. Now I'm guilty of this as well, see my review I wrote almost a decade ago about GURPS Mage the Ascension where I basically argue the same thing. But seriously people, don't come here and complain that the game is different and thus bad. Read it, argue your point, and give me some examples. Why is it bad that the "angels" are elemental creatures not tied to good anymore? Why is it bad that the metallic dragons are not in the Monster Manual. When you argue that change is bad, you sound like a withered old guy, standing on a street corner, shaking his cane at the sky damning the modern world because things were so much better back in the day. You know what people who are driving by that guy on the corner think of him? They think he is crazy, foolish, stupid, or all of the above. Don't be that guy!

Now back to to the regularly scheduled review.

The Good
I have never been a fan of Monster books to be honest. While having one or two is nice, at some point it just gets a little pointless. But Dungeons and Dragons Fourth Edition (D&D4E) is brand spankin new so you gotta start somewhere. As a book the Monster Manual does it's job, and almost does it well. You get stats for creatures that your party can fight at level 1, and stats for a big bad boss your party can fight at level 30. Yes some of the monster fluff has changed from the previous edition, and some of the classic monsters are missing such as metallic dragons. The focus of the new monster manual seems to be giving you creatures that the party has a high chance of fighting. Which means that the classic Metallic Dragons, which are "good" and far more inclined to talk to a party than eat them, are not there. Because seriously, how fun could sitting around having tea with a dragon be. "I rolled 28 on my diplomacy check, did I make my tea to the dragons liking?" "Yes he seemed very happy, good application of Earl Gray and cream." This is because the new D&D assumes that the party will be heroic, and slaying good dragons and creatures is not on your parties list of things to do. What more is there to say, I haven't actually played a game of D&D from level 1 to 30 so I have only used a small portion of this book thus far. But from what I read, good stuff so far, I like it.

The Bad
There are some creatures that are missing that I really cannot fathom. Like they have wolves, bear, and hyena, but where are my Lions and Tigers? Seriously Hyena beat out the great cats? Also where are the giant bugs? I was personally a huge fan of the 3rd Edition monster manual for the last two chapters of the book. Lots of normal animals and then giant bugs. Maybe I just like creepy crawlies, but I have found my players have a far greater reaction to a giant beetle or ant attacking them, than some fantastic creature. I wish that the Monster Manual had a little more room for less fantastic threats.

Also the most innovative thing in 3rd edition monster wise is missing from the Monster Manual. Namely template creatures. In 3rd Edition you could do crazy things like think to yourself what if a dragon and a wolf had a date and made little baby dragon-wolf things. It was a lot of fun, and could add a little fluff to a creature. Now they have some rules for templates in the 4th Edition Dungeon Masters guide. But there are no rules for adding a little demonic, angelic, dragon, or any other taint to a creature in either book. Considering the new rules for experience you think they could add this in, and say "making a creature half-dragon adds 500xp to the creature." However, with a little work, and what is in the Dungeon Masters guide, I can probably cobble something together. So it's not a huge loss.

Yes I know "the bad" is complaining about what was in the previous edition and not in the current one. But honestly that is all I can think off that I wish I had. Also I hope I shared why I think this is brings the product down a little bit, instead of saying "1 star, no tigers and giant ants, it is the suxor."

Overall

Overall it does what a monster book is supposed to do. It gives you critters your adventurers can blow up from when they are wee level 1's, to mighty level 30's. While the book is focused on more fantastic threats, a good party will likely face. Overall I cannot complain, the slight short comings I saw will either be resolved with future releases, or are things I can add on my own.

Ok, so I'm reviewing the Monster Manual book more than the way the creatures work. They're just a bunch of worthless stat blocks, so they work just fine, but that's what they are: working stat blocks.

First, let me say that I don't like the artwork. In old monster manuals, there were a lot of monsters that you might fight just because you were at odds with them, or you might not even fight them at all. They could be allies. Take giants for example, the art was of some giant people that looked pretty cool, and some pre-made 3.5 campaigns included them as allies. But in this book, they look ridiculously evil. In fact, everything looks evil. It just looks like they filled the book with things to fight, not think about, which I think it less imaginative and therefore more boring. Even the treant is evil.


MORE IMPORTANTLY...There is no flavor.

Take the Shambling Mound.

In version three, it has Four Paragraphs of description. In version four it has 1 sentence. A single sentence. And then listen to the description of its ability.


This is a direct quote of version 4:

"The shambling mound makes two basic attacks. If both attacks hit the same Medium or smaller target, the shambling mound makes a secondary attack against the target. Secondary Attack: +12 vs. Fortitude; the target is pulled into the shambling mound's space and restrained (save ends). While the target is restrained, no creature has line of sight or line of effect to it. At the start of the shambling mound's turn each round, the enveloped target takes 10 damage and the shambling mound regains 10 hit points. The shambling mound can envelop up to 2 creatures at a time. When the target makes its save, it reappears in a square of its choice adjacent to the shambling mound."

It's so dull. It just gives you all the tactical information to play out the game. It's just rules without anything interesting or imaginative. Monsters have lost tons of cool abilities like swallow whole that require some really imaginative thinking. And Lycanthropes just give you a disease. I feel like 4th edition reduces everything to statistics. The game takes place on a board in stead of in your imagination.


I just can't believe that the Monster Manual took all the fun out of monsters. They all seem evil, and there's pretty much no description of them anymore. I just used to have so much fun learning about monsters and their abilities. It's just sort of sad to see them reduced to mere enemies as opposed to interested creatures with backstories and cool characteristics.

I suppose the book doesn't deserve a 1, but I miss the way things used to be. It's a perfectly acceptable book that does everything it needs to, but it doesn't delve further into things like before, and that's what I thought D&D was about.

Ok guys, I just got finished reading most of the reviews on the MM, and are you people who give it 5 stars serious. Lets see what the left out of the first MM from 3.0: Celestials, Metalic Dragons, and much more important creatures. Oh, and did I mention the lazy photoshoped artwork. Oh, and that angels are no longer alligned, that they can even serve evil gods, uh, hello, is anyone in there, that is what demons and devils are for guys, angels are the good guys, plus in this book did anyone else notice that they looked strangely like the comic book incarnation of ArchAngel after Apocolips got ahold of him in X-Men. Metal Wings is what im talking about. This book and this game is an afront to my sences, and if I could, I would give it a zero stars. Thanks Hasbro, and P.S., please try and find some other way to syphon money out of me.

Just a flat book of stats for the new board game they've created. No ecology, no culture, no real details except how they fight. Nothing that really helps with ROLE PLAYING. ANNNNNNND...... my FAVORITE part.... they rehashed art from all the previous editions for at least 40% of the book!! How dog gone lazy is that? The emperor has no clothes folks!!!! OPEN YOUR EYES!!!