Without knowing what a hill giant looked like having the description " an unusually squat and ugly hill giant" doesn't tell you anything either. The point is if you have a description of the monster AND the stats, why do you need the MM? There is enough released to use the creatures but still require the sale of a Monster Manual. Given that WotC's involvement is to advance the sales of their "core books" I don't think this is unreasonable. It may not be ideal (aren't they part of Hasbro?) but it is more than generous enough.
Oh yes I also misspoke, I meant to say that I've never had a description of an already released monster in a module. Bob "The man who does not read good books has no advantage over the man who can't read them." Mark Twain From: Doug Meerschaert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] LaPierre, Bob wrote: > This is an interesting debate but... I've been playing for a long damn > time and in all that time I've NEVER had a description of a monster in > a MODULE. Every module since the appearance of "Advanced" has said > what the monster is and what their hit points are and what they will > do if attacked/talked to/bribed. When I wanted to give my players a > description I brought out my MM. The only descriptions of monsters > were of unique individuals and these were within the context of the > monster (IE: an unusually squat and ugly hill giant). Unless you are > doing a guide to "XXX", when would you need to use descriptions or > societal forms? > Because not having descriptions is *not* a good thing. "unusually squat and ugly Hill Giant" is a fairly easy one, and is a description in itself. "Grill" is not, and I would expect either a picutre or a few words of description ("bestial" or something like that) when they're used in a module. DM _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
<<application/ms-tnef>>
