D&D Next's Monsters versus Pathfinder's

It's kind of horrific, in a way. Here we are with the cover of the D&D Next Monster Manual, and wow, the heavy use of black continues. Are you sure we're not playing World of Darkness here?

Let's talk monsters and from what we see, how these covers tell the story of them in the D&D Next game. For comparison, we'll bring in the other 600-page gorilla into the room and check out the Pathfinder bestiaries as well. We have lightning, gleaming blades out of horror movies, an iconic monster proudly displayed (nice job), and someone fleeing for their life there in horror.

Every inch of this cover is filled with something, it's typical of the "busy" covers of Pathfinder and also comic books. I feel sorry for artists that like the use of negative space or even blank space. The Pathfinder covers typically use a method of foreground (bold elements), middle ground (faded), and background (highly faded), which looks something like the following image. With the three-layer approach, you still get definite large shapes to piece together into images. Most all the D&D Next books are exclusively foreground heavy images (DMG is an exception, but it is still foreground heavy). It's an interesting choice stylistically, heavy black with busy flattened images almost like black shapes from a Noir film.

The tone and message feels different too. In Pathfinder, it looks to be saying a "these are creatures that want to kick your butt" sort of thing. In D&D Next, it says "you will be running for your lives". I hope the game lives up to this and we get generally scary and tough creatures. In 4th Edition, a lot of the creatures felt like chess-game pieces rather than actually frightening beasts and true "monsters". You know, to be a monster, you kind of have to live up to that word. Pathfinder's look scary too, although it is more of a comic-book scary rather than something out of a horror movie. They both have that "imposing" thing going on, with Pathfinder winning on brutality and D&D Next winning on horror.

Yes, I brought up 4th Edition, and here we have WWE Orcus on the cover. It's sad 4th Edition could never get monsters "right" they had to be revised something like three times during the game's history (MM1, revised some in MM2 and 3, and completely redone in the Essentials books). It's a problem of making these things so stat and ability-card heavy. If they play like "magic cards" people are going to find cheats and rules exploits, and it will be hard to ever balance them or get them working or feeling right. Overall, they felt like "magic cards" and not "monsters" to me, and you would sit there wondering why an unmovable 20th level plant creature would have a reflex saving throw so high he would dodge any incoming attack.

It can't move for crying out loud, how did it dodge my attack?

How do I like my monsters? Well, DarkgarX likes his to be tactically challenging, and actually prefers the 4th Edition "playing piece" monsters. He would say "it plays like a game, and it is fun" and leave it at that. In Pathfinder and most editions of D&D, monsters are kinda what they are, some are horribly unbalanced (but have weaknesses), and they fight as hard as their often lengthy stat blocks let them. It takes a lot of time and experience setting up enocouters in other versions of D&D to get them to be a "good fight" but sometimes you really don't want a "good fight".

I still like the 10 Hit Die dragon sleeping in the middle of the room with the band of 1st level characters sneaking around it to steal its treasure. If that dragon wakes up, they'll be running for their lives, and also having the time of their lives as well. It's the "sheer terror" thing the D&D Next cover hints at, and I appreciate that. If it doesn't play out that way in the game, and we are concerned about things like "encounter balance" and "adventure fairness" it will quickly melt away. 4th Edition felt that way, every encounter was a chess match, and they for the most part were meant to be beaten.

I like the scary and horrible old-school monsters, with a nod towards D&D3 and Pathfinder's. I do not like "encounter balance" for the most part, the scenarios and adventures I write are realistic, and it's up to the players to figure out how they want to tackle them. Are they strong enough to fight? Do they avoid fighting them? Is there a way to divide and conquer? Is there magic available that gives us an edge? Monsters are the core of a "difficult problem" that the characters need to figure out how to solve given limited resources - just like any other trick, trap, or challenge in a dungeon or adventure setting.

It remains to be seen what path D&D Next take, and how the art and imagery "sell" the experience versus how it actually comes out on the table.