Dungeon Fantasy Monsters 2 and Dungeon Fantasy Roleplaying Game Reprint

[Tom H.]

Originally Posted by Rasputin

Among the artwork in the original Monsters were . . .

Speaking of the art or lack of it in Monsters, I always had a question for Kromm or those in the know.

Why weren't the existing monster illustrations from the GURPS Dungeon Fantasy line included in the DFRPG Monsters book?

My speculation ran the gamut from hesitation to mix black-and-white work with color, to page count limits, to licensing restrictions (weird considering it was all in-house.)

Does anyone have a better answer?

[Rasputin]

Originally Posted by Tom H.

Why weren't the existing monster illustrations from the GURPS Dungeon Fantasy line included in the DFRPG Monsters book?

Or more from Cardboard Heroes. (Some of the monsters I listed earlier are specifically because they have Cardboard Heroes.) Is there a big need for consistency in the artwork to increase sales?

[b-dog]

As far as mythical monsters vs made up ones I will side with mythical monsters because they can be used in pseudo historical games and dark fantasy games like monster hunters. Made up monster seem too “gamey” and do not fit as well into a pseudo medieval setting.

As far as spell lists for monsters like liches and demon lords and such I would much prefer them to have a few cool powers like fire blast or cold blast to a huge spell list. A lich should have a few go to spell powers for combat that are quick and easy to use for DMs. The same with demon lords, djinn and ifrit and so on. For me a huge spell list is almost useless in combat.

[Humabout]

I have to say original monsters are cool only after mythical ones have been covered. Ultimately, all of the monsters need to feel like they belong together in the sort of pseudo-medieval world where someone feels like they might stumble upon Felltower, the Keep on the Borderland, or Waterdeep if they wander long enough.

Making weird original monsters that don't have any real place in Genericlond (located just west of Clichea), breaks too hard from this and leaves nothing to seat the milieu within such a game. And honestly, purposely making weird monsters just to avoid That Guy is gamist, at best. D&D has had to deal with That Guy for decades and isn't any worse for the wear.

So I'm not against interesting new monsters, but I really don't want to see more than 50% new ones in any book until the old ones are exhausted. And even 50% is pushing it.

[Refplace]

Originally Posted by Humabout

I have to say original monsters are cool only after mythical ones have been covered. Ultimately, all of the monsters need to feel like they belong together in the sort of pseudo-medieval world where someone feels like they might stumble upon Felltower, the Keep on the Borderland, or Waterdeep if they wander long enough.


So I'm not against interesting new monsters, but I really don't want to see more than 50% new ones in any book until the old ones are exhausted. And even 50% is pushing it.

I prefer monsters that work together also, but you can do that with original ones too.

[Humabout]

Originally Posted by Refplace

I prefer monsters that work together also, but you can do that with original ones too.

And? I didn't say "only publish conversions from D&D".

[Refplace]

Originally Posted by Humabout

And? I didn't say "only publish conversions from D&D".

No you didnt, just that original ones should be after mythical ones. I was pointing out an author could invent several originals that fit together.

[evileeyore]

Originally Posted by philreed

Yes, the team will post any/all errata notes to the site.

Campaign has been closed for awhile now. Any hint on when the errata will be published?

[Turhan's Bey Company]

Originally Posted by evileeyore

Campaign has been closed for awhile now. Any hint on when the errata will be published?

When it's ready, I imagine. While I do not have any inside knowledge, it's usually the case for publishers that any errata reported need to go through a process to confirm that the proposed erratum is valid and to prepare the corrected version. In the case of an electronic product like Warehouse 23 PDFs, I imagine this involves sending the book through layout again to fix the problems and make sure that they look good and that correcting the issue hasn't created new ones.

In short, it's always harder than it looks on the outside.

[evileeyore]

Originally Posted by Turhan's Bey Company

When it's ready, I imagine.

While I appreciate your take, I was asking Phil explicitly because he has said this: "Any errata notes will be posted in the future, after the campaign has closed."

The campaign closed three months ago... I figure three months of waiting is pretty patient, and that asking after this amount time is perfectly acceptable.

The reprints are at the factory being printed and the Backer Surveys are closing in two days. I've already gotten my Monsters 2 pdf... so my assumption (which may be wrong) is that DFRPG pdf backers have gotten the reprints.

If that's not the case, and the reprint backers are still waiting, then I could see holding off with the errata listing.


If it is otherwise... then I'm asking in case the errata has simply been forgotten.