D&D 3.5 - A Little Too Early: Monsters Manual

The current D&D being a work in progress, while certain tweaks to the system shortly came about in the same year as 3.5 came out, others wouldn't surface until several years later. One example is the change to the Monsters Manual.

Perhaps the biggest change that affected the Monsters Manual in 3.5 was the way damage reduction was handled. We no longer had the x/silver, x/+1, x/+2, etc. scale of damage reduction, but instead got a more flavorful damage reductiom such as x/cold iron, x/magic, x/evil, etc. Did it need to be that way? No. But here is an example of how theme and flavor can affect rules, and I think this was a step in a good direction on the designer's part. Because honestly, when I'm fighting a werewolf, while it's easier for me as a player to simply pack a +5 weapon, it's more intriguing to be able to wound it thanks to carrying a silver weapon instead of my generic magical weapon.

The other change by the time 3.5 came out were the monster subtypes. Three in particular stand out: extraplanar, shapechanger, and swarm. The first two clarified certain monster groups. Is it a magical beast or an outsider? The extraplanar subtype makes it possible for a creature to be both. Shapechanger, on the other hand, gives more flexibility. I mean just because something shapeshifts doesn't automatically mean it's a shapechanger. Moving it to a subtype, in my opinion, was similarly a good judgment call. Swarms, on the other hand, made new creatures viable as swarms operated differently from most creatures. And while most will see that this was again a needless complication, swarms have existed since the Bible, and is part of the fantasy flavor. Of course most of these changes were actualized pre-3.5, as can be seen in the Fiend Folio which came out shortly before the revised corebooks came out.

It might seem I'm happy with the 3.5 Monsters Manual but there have been changes made last year that are only taking into effect right now. The Polymorph rules, for example, has been linked to the Monsters Manual(s) and rightly so. It's the only spell, after all, that gets more powerful with each release of a monster book. Also, a lot of creatures utilize the Polymorph rules in one way or another. Which isn't surprising why errata was issued, modifying terms like Change Shape and how they affect the monsters in question. Does it solve the problem? I honestly don't know. I've coped with the Polymorph problem before and I don't see how this change vastly improves from the past. The only positive change I see from the recent clarification is that the ability of monsters to shapeshift is independent from the Polymorph spell. No need to fix a spell just because a monster needs clarification and vice versa. And while that might seem like a lot of good to some, it doesn't really fix the problem (especially when the Polymorph spell is slowly being phased out, which I'll discuss in the future).

Of course the new positive change I'm seeing in the Monsters Manual are the way the monster entries are being presented. The new stat block, while longer than the old stat block, is infinitely easier to use and solves a lot of problems such as forgetting you have Dodge or that you can use Power Attack.The interface is better for both GMs and players. Speaking of interface, the other good news about the new stat block is that it works for both monsters and NPCs. My problem with the previous interface is that you had one stat block for entries in the Monster Manual, and another for NPCs. So when I'm making NPCs based on the Monsters Manual, there's some tweaking to do. However, that's not the case now as it's standarized, and easier to use to boot.

There's been movement earlier in 3.5 of NPC and monster transparency. It's something as simple as the first needing 3 levels in order to get a feat, while the latter needed 4. Thankfully, that rule was abolished in 3.5 and both simply need 3 levels in order to be granted a feat. Not everything's solved though. CR vs level has been an ongoing battle and while I understand the importance to differentiate the two (the former a GM's tool while the latter the player's), it nonetheless leads to complications that hasn't been solved. For example, if a monster has more than 20 hit dice, theoretically it should be epic-level and you calculating base attack the epic-level way. But that's not the case and most simply calculate base attack based on the normal way. Which is actually fine until you start making monster NPCs and the lines get blurred.

Anyway, as a reward, here's my version of the NPC/Monster template. Activated as a standard action, at will, you can copy/paste it into your favorite word processor:

Name CR  XX

Race Class

AL size creature type (subtype)

Init +0; Senses darkvision X ft.; Listen +X, Spot +X

Languages

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

AC X, touch X, flat-footed X

hp X (X HD); DR

Immune

Resist ; SR

Fort +X, Ref +X, Will +X

Weakness

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Speed X ft. (x squares)

Melee weapon +X (1d8+1)

Ranged

Base Atk +X; Grp +X

Atk Options

Special Actions

Combat Gear

Class Spells Prepared (CL X)

2nd (x/day)—cure moderate wounds, hold person (DC 14),

invisibilityD

1st  (x/day)—bless, command (DC 13), cure light wounds, inflict

light woundsD (DC 13)

0 (x/day)—cure minor wounds (2), detect magic, resistance

D: Domain spell. Domains: Destruction, Trickery

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Abilities Str XX, Dex XX, Con XX, Int XX, Wis XX, Cha XX

SQ

Feats Feat, Feat

Skills Skill +X, Skill +X, Skill +X, Skill +X

Possessions

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hook