What I love about 4e monsters is there are all these variants of the same base type of monster. eg Goblins. There are Cutters, Warriors, Sharpshooters, Hexers etc. All different roles that play differently. Just like an actual Goblin tribe, there would be members of said tribe that have different roles to fulfill. It makes the living world much easier to create and more believable when you have all these variants of monsters. Instead of just a stock standard Goblin or Orc etc.
While it might not be the most stylish core monster manual, I do think the 4e monster manual is certainly the most usable! The monster manual doesn't assume you, as the DM, will have to do all the work to make a tribe of goblins with different weapons, and abilities. It just gives them to you. I think the later monster manuals were even better, especially the deep dive monster books like Open Grave. It started rock solid, and only got better as time went on.
Just got a paper copy of Open Grave from Nobleknight through Graybeard’s link & it looks pretty sweet. It was just an add on so I could get free shipping but I’m glad I picked it up!
I think this sums up a lot of 4E's presentation perfectly. Some say it's too dry and data-driven, but to me I love that the info is just so CLEAR and easy to read and use.
The 4e Monster Manual was the to design monsters to complementary encounters. Previously, monsters were always uniform. Now the monsters were different, even when they were the "same" monster. I'm glad DnD took this direction. Encounters were simple but complex, and made for multiple monsters doing slightly different things. The lore, and lore checks, were also top notch. Each monster's lore was concise enough for DMs to read and rich enough to expand upon. Not to mention, each monster had defining art to accompany it (two things I didn't like about 3e was the MM art and descriptions). Suffice to say, 4e and Star Wars Saga changed the way I run encounters for all games. My favorite MM is the classic AD&D Fiend Folio for very different reasons. Reading that felt like you were reading a book of forgotten lore, especially with the art style (a style that has reappeared in the new DnDish game Shadowdark which I'm currently enjoying)
Love to see 4E getting respect in 2023. You do a really good job explaining why 4E did a lot of things great and or at least in a way interesting compared to other editions. Personally the dedicated “flip-through” sections last a little too long for me, I can admire the pages while you talk about them. Probably a good sign that I wish the video had MORE of you talking though :)
I've always been a lore person, so I've kept and used my previous editions of books, like the 4E MM's and crib the tactics or flavour from them. You can always assign the "close enough" values to stat them, or eyeball the adv/disadv to each encounter.
I'll never forgive Mike Mearls from throwing into the trash 2 years of 4e monsters with the Monster Manual 3 update, and then failing to update all the monsters -_-
1e monster manuel didn't have a Challenge Rating either. If the DM followed the encounter size by rolling dice for number appearing. It was often a very dangerous hostile encounter.
So that one video I saw about the DMG2 from you wasn't a fluke, you're actually going through 4th Edition content over a decade after they released? Color me shocked. And also entirely interested! Yes!
I remember first reading through this Monster Manual when I got it, after I'd been a player in 3rd edition, and I found myself somewhat disappointed and unnerved specifically by the Elementals, how they weren't just plain Earth/Fire/Water/Air elementals, but instead we got mixes. Now though? I love it. After some time away from it, and coming back to check it out, I've come to love 4th Edition.
My comment in the video was "There are no saving throws like we are used to..." My wording of that is a little clumsy, but I was referring to the fact that saving throws in 4e are not the same as saves that we have in other editions. Thanks for the feedback.
What I love about 4e monsters is there are all these variants of the same base type of monster. eg Goblins. There are Cutters, Warriors, Sharpshooters, Hexers etc. All different roles that play differently. Just like an actual Goblin tribe, there would be members of said tribe that have different roles to fulfill. It makes the living world much easier to create and more believable when you have all these variants of monsters. Instead of just a stock standard Goblin or Orc etc.
It absolutely IS the best one. The most visually well laid out, the most well-organized, and the most functional at the table.
While it might not be the most stylish core monster manual, I do think the 4e monster manual is certainly the most usable! The monster manual doesn't assume you, as the DM, will have to do all the work to make a tribe of goblins with different weapons, and abilities. It just gives them to you. I think the later monster manuals were even better, especially the deep dive monster books like Open Grave. It started rock solid, and only got better as time went on.
Just got a paper copy of Open Grave from Nobleknight through Graybeard’s link & it looks pretty sweet. It was just an add on so I could get free shipping but I’m glad I picked it up!
Thank you for your support. I picked up Open Grave a few weeks ago and will be doing a page-through in the future.
I think this sums up a lot of 4E's presentation perfectly. Some say it's too dry and data-driven, but to me I love that the info is just so CLEAR and easy to read and use.
The 4e Monster Manual was the to design monsters to complementary encounters. Previously, monsters were always uniform. Now the monsters were different, even when they were the "same" monster. I'm glad DnD took this direction. Encounters were simple but complex, and made for multiple monsters doing slightly different things. The lore, and lore checks, were also top notch. Each monster's lore was concise enough for DMs to read and rich enough to expand upon. Not to mention, each monster had defining art to accompany it (two things I didn't like about 3e was the MM art and descriptions). Suffice to say, 4e and Star Wars Saga changed the way I run encounters for all games.
My favorite MM is the classic AD&D Fiend Folio for very different reasons. Reading that felt like you were reading a book of forgotten lore, especially with the art style (a style that has reappeared in the new DnDish game Shadowdark which I'm currently enjoying)
Love to see 4E getting respect in 2023.
You do a really good job explaining why 4E did a lot of things great and or at least in a way interesting compared to other editions.
Personally the dedicated “flip-through” sections last a little too long for me, I can admire the pages while you talk about them.
Probably a good sign that I wish the video had MORE of you talking though :)
The encounter groups were the absolute best. I was very disappointed when MM3 did not have them.
Thanks Greybeard!
I've always been a lore person, so I've kept and used my previous editions of books, like the 4E MM's and crib the tactics or flavour from them. You can always assign the "close enough" values to stat them, or eyeball the adv/disadv to each encounter.
I'll never forgive Mike Mearls from throwing into the trash 2 years of 4e monsters with the Monster Manual 3 update, and then failing to update all the monsters -_-
Please do a video on monster roles. It's one of the best parts of 4e encounter planning that got lost :(
🙂 Way ahead of you... ua-cam.com/video/MtnsJv882wE/v-deo.htmlsi=HuO74NNnZX50FcX7
Thanks
1e monster manuel didn't have a Challenge Rating either. If the DM followed the encounter size by rolling dice for number appearing. It was often a very dangerous hostile encounter.
So that one video I saw about the DMG2 from you wasn't a fluke, you're actually going through 4th Edition content over a decade after they released?
Color me shocked.
And also entirely interested! Yes!
I remember first reading through this Monster Manual when I got it, after I'd been a player in 3rd edition, and I found myself somewhat disappointed and unnerved specifically by the Elementals, how they weren't just plain Earth/Fire/Water/Air elementals, but instead we got mixes.
Now though? I love it. After some time away from it, and coming back to check it out, I've come to love 4th Edition.
My friend group at the time hated 4e, so they switched to pathfinder... I never got to play because didn't know anyone to play with...
I can sympathize. By the time I got into D&D, 4e was already on the way out and it was near impossible to find a group.
If only they had more time to do another few editing passes to fix things like the Foulspawn.
You’re correct that you targeted defences but I assume you didn’t mean 4e had *no* saving throws? Because it definitely does lol
Pretty sure he meant to say that saving throws don't work like they do in 5e.
My comment in the video was "There are no saving throws like we are used to..." My wording of that is a little clumsy, but I was referring to the fact that saving throws in 4e are not the same as saves that we have in other editions.
Thanks for the feedback.