tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5377543525075660166.post1668711252518767543..comments2024-03-26T22:17:42.458-04:00Comments on Semper Initiativus Unum: The Uniqueness of ThingsWayne Rossihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11347401495298367324noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5377543525075660166.post-22594481297819351762010-09-09T00:10:22.012-04:002010-09-09T00:10:22.012-04:00I'm a big fan of custom monsters, re-skins, an...I'm a big fan of custom monsters, re-skins, and so on. In a true "horror fantasy" or "weird fantasy" or S&S campaign, using nothing but "unique monsters" is probably a good way of genre modeling. But I'm pretty much only modeling the "D&D adventure gaming" genre these days with some light flavor from the above genres. So I use a lot of the old standbys, albeit with my own flavor text and relation to the rest of the setting.<br /><br />My reasons:<br /><br />#1, standard monsters provide players with some metric for gauging challenges. Yes, it's metagaming, but in a version of the game without CRs and the like, or a setting without assumed scaling, it helps to give players some information with which to make intelligent decisions about potential encounters.<br /><br />#2, if every creature is the Uniquest of the Boogens, it seems like the uniqueness would blend together after a while - "Oh no, it's Some Crap the DM Made Up, iteration #347" and so on. The Referee's Specials stand out more in my mind if they're, well, Specials.<br /><br />#3, standard monsters have saturated the gaming community to the point that they're shorthand for certain concepts, and the Ref can either use them in that capacity or subvert the preconceptions for his own diabolical ends rather than every single encounter being a fascinating journey of discovery and/or exposition.Scotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00155926145150934199noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5377543525075660166.post-7331448968611727872010-09-08T20:01:11.245-04:002010-09-08T20:01:11.245-04:00This is one area where I actually love the OSR. T...This is one area where I actually love the OSR. The 3.x era had lots of options, and options, on the surface, look like a vast improvement. "Monsters have ability scores? Great! And levels? Cool! Now score/level drains will work on them! Now the DM can vary each individual goblin we fight!" It works great on paper.<br /><br />In practice, it's like you said--statting an encounter took longer than the encounter itself. A bit of off-the-cuff work might be better. "These orcs are larger than normal orcs so they get a +1 to hit/damage. These goblins use poisoned weapons. Those ogres turn to stone when they die." You don't need a feat for that, it's just DM fiat. Maybe up the XP by a few points just to balance it out. You don't need to be exact.<br /><br />As for magic items, I thought Dark Sun had a good idea with fruit that acted as potions (i.e. fruit of invisibility, fruit of healing, etc.).Dave Cesaranohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01454928720043301400noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5377543525075660166.post-72116395856201572332010-09-08T19:13:45.177-04:002010-09-08T19:13:45.177-04:00This is a topic near and dear to my heart, Wayne. ...This is a topic near and dear to my heart, Wayne. CARCOSA does indeed eliminate most of the "standard" D&D monsters and magic items. My current project eliminates them all. Of course, not everyone will like that. Here are just a couple of my observations regarding the topic:<br /><br />1. By keeping monsters and magic items unique, the DM helps keep the game feeling like it felt when we were new to it. Remember when all the "standard" monsters and magic items were mysterious and unpredictable? But with time, they became the "same ol', same ol'". Encountering a brand-new monster (much moreso than encountering your 48th troll) feels like encountering your first troll.<br /><br />2. For my tastes, the best place for "standard" D&D monsters and magic items is in an explicitly Gygaxian D&D game. I have cheapo copies of the 1974 D&D rules and of Supplement I: GREYHAWK standing by for whenever we get the desire to play Gygaxian style. I thus think of "standard" D&D monsters and magic items as "Gygaxian".Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5377543525075660166.post-23810392348309271432010-09-08T18:31:55.421-04:002010-09-08T18:31:55.421-04:00To say it's D&D with no orcs, and no sword...<i>To say it's D&D with no orcs, and no swords + 1, may be true but it's a somehow diminished D&D.</i><br /><br>I absolutely agree.<br /><br />This is an excellent topic. I may have to post my own thoughts on this at some point.James Maliszewskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5377543525075660166.post-17234509019228639922010-09-08T18:22:25.737-04:002010-09-08T18:22:25.737-04:00I didn't think you were for eliminating the st...I didn't think you were for eliminating the standards, Jeff - I think this was aimed more at the general attitude that your post and project on relics was a partial reflection of. This has more to do with LotFP, and on consideration Carcosa, than with what you've written about.Wayne Rossihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11347401495298367324noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5377543525075660166.post-35098902076750980922010-09-08T18:09:31.385-04:002010-09-08T18:09:31.385-04:00I'm not for eliminating the standards. I stil...I'm not for eliminating the standards. I still use goblins and +1 swords and gold pieces. What I'm for is 1) Better, wiser use of the ol' standby stuff and 2) more good options.Jeff Rientshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17493878980535235896noreply@blogger.com