Dndclassics has a D&D Rules Compendium (4e) up thos week. Since I really know very little about the rules of that system, I am contemplating it. Anyone know if it's a good way to learn the mechanics of that system?
Its basically a resource book of the system rules minus charge and explanations. How much its worth reading depends on how interested you are in 4e. If you're simply curious, you could probably find a used PG for pretty cheap and its a much better introduction.
Quote from: TristramEvans;705419Its basically a resource book of the system rules minus charge and explanations. How much its worth reading depends on how interested you are in 4e. If you're simply curious, you could probably find a used PG for pretty cheap and its a much better introduction.
Yeah agreed. The Rules Comp is useful as a reference at the game table. As an intro to the game, you'll have much better returns with the PG, or Heroes of the Fallen Lands if you want to stick to Essentials and get to the Compendium afterwards.
Quote from: Benoist;705449Yeah agreed. The Rules Comp is useful as a reference at the game table. As an intro to the game, you'll have much better returns with the PG, or Heroes of the Fallen Lands if you want to stick to Essentials and get to the Compendium afterwards.
I'd personally recommend the PG in preference but that's because I dislike Essentials as too limited.
Though may I take it that the Rules Compendium is compatible with both the PG and Essentials?
As I understand it, there's more than one PHB for 4e. So... which one would be better?
Quote from: mcbobbo;705591As I understand it, there's more than one PHB for 4e. So... which one would be better?
The actual rules for play are contained in PHB1 or the first essentials book (Heroes of the Fallen Lands? Something like that). Titles aside, PHB 2 and 3 are really splatbooks with new classes/races; they don't have the core rules in them
The Rules Compendium is meant as a tabletop aid- in theory you could learn the rules form it but it'd pretty awkward (if I remember correctly a lot of it is laid out alphabetically or in similar "Reference" style). You couldn't play with just it anyway- I don't think it has rules for classes or races.
EDIT: Oh, and to actually answer your question (oops) they're supposed to be compatible with each other (what differences do exist are the sort of minor crap that only forum people care about). Heroes of the Fallen Lands is the "newer" version that's more up-to-date but frankly the layout of the essentials books is... not great. PHB1 is laid out in a much more appealing fashion but a decent number of the rules have been erratad. So... six up, half a dozen down (I'd get whichever is cheaper)
The very first PHB is easily the strongest book of 4e...if you want to learn the game and only can get 1 book, that's a great choice.
My vote goes to the first Player's Handbook. That's the best intro.
I am a D&D 4e fan and my suggestion is to either buy the Gamma World boxed set or 13th Age - both are much better iterations of the 4e concepts.
The first PHB for 4e is a good book, and superior to the various Essentials options. Make sure you read the DMG too.
Quote from: Spinachcat;705662I am a D&D 4e fan and my suggestion is to either buy the Gamma World boxed set or 13th Age - both are much better iterations of the 4e concepts.
Agreed. I think both are far superior.
The one exception is if you really like over engineered crunch, 4e has that.
But 4e gamma world and 13th age feel to me like cleaned up rules lite 4e dnd. Much better for me anyway.
For just concepts of play I say 4E PHB 1. Of course the only way to get the "current" 4E rules is via DDI. Their printed books become full of erratta sometimes even before they hit the shelves.
Its to be expected when you release a pen and paper rpg with the attitude of publish now patch later.
Quote from: Exploderwizard;705737For just concepts of play I say 4E PHB 1. Of course the only way to get the "current" 4E rules is via DDI. Their printed books become full of erratta sometimes even before they hit the shelves.
Its to be expected when you release a pen and paper rpg with the attitude of publish now patch later.
I played 4e for 3 years with the un-errated PHB1 and other books.
Though the errata is a long list, what actually needed to be errataed is much less then most d20 RPGs IME. The two shouldn't be confused.
I feel like I misunderstood something. So PHB1 has all the rules for the core classes, adjudication, skills, whatnot and the others are splat?
I was under the impression that one book was martial and one casting, or some other whatnot.
Quote from: mcbobbo;705770I feel like I misunderstood something. So PHB1 has all the rules for the core classes, adjudication, skills, whatnot and the others are splat?
I was under the impression that one book was martial and one casting, or some other whatnot.
I purchased the 1st PHB when it was released. It was what you'd expect in a D&D PHB. The couple issued after that were added classes & races from what I remember. They weren't stand alone I believe.
Quote from: mcbobbo;705770I feel like I misunderstood something. So PHB1 has all the rules for the core classes, adjudication, skills, whatnot and the others are splat?
I was under the impression that one book was martial and one casting, or some other whatnot.
I am not certain, but I thought they put out a complete rulebook with essentials.
Quote from: mcbobbo;705770I feel like I misunderstood something. So PHB1 has all the rules for the core classes, adjudication, skills, whatnot and the others are splat?
I was under the impression that one book was martial and one casting, or some other whatnot.
Yes. PHB Has 8 races and 8 classes (4 martial, 2 arcane and 2 divine). Its very much like the PHB for any other edition of D&D in terms of coverage (it even includes magic items which is traditionally reserved for the DMG).
The PHB2 is pretty much the same. The 8 classes it adds were 4 primal (new), 2 arcane and 2 divine (bringing it up to 4 for each Power source).
The PHB3 adds 4 psionic, 1 Arcane and 1 Divine class, as well as some new mechanics (skill powers and hybrid classes)
There is also a series of Power books that expanded the base 4 classes per Power source (roughly doubling the options).
Quote from: Bill;705773I am not certain, but I thought they put out a complete rulebook with essentials.
No. Essentials books are less complete than the core book on a book by book basis. The Compendium has all the rules needed to be referred to at the table, but it lacks all PC and monster information.
The Heroes of the F Word books have everything you need to play as a player, but not as a DM. You could probably play with one of those books, much like you could a PHB.
The DM's Kit is 95% a replication of the Compendium with some additional content. This was frustrating as if you wanted to run Essentials 4e, you should actually skip the Compendium, which sounds like the most essential book.
Quote from: Skywalker;705779No. Essentials books are less complete than the core book on a book by book basis. The Compendium has all the rules needed to be referred to at the table, but it lacks all PC and monster information.
The Heroes of the F Word books have everything you need to play as a player, but not as a DM. You could probably play with one of those books, much like you could a PHB.
The DM's Kit is 95% a replication of the Compendium with some additional content. This was frustrating as if you wanted to run Essentials 4e, you should actually skip the Compendium, which sounds like the most essential book.
Sounds pretty borked; book wise.
Funny thing is that when I run 4E I don't really seem to need the rulebook.
Quote from: Bill;705797Sounds pretty borked; book wise.
Funny thing is that when I run 4E I don't really seem to need the rulebook.
Essentials is a mess as it was juggling way too many balls. I much prefer the standard corebook run up to Essentials, though I will admit that the later monster books were an improvement.
But you are right about referencing at the table, and it is the main reason why the Compendium is a nice book as it contains nearly any referencing required. The Compendium is just not good as (nor intended to be) a complete ruleset.
Quote from: mcbobbo;705416Dndclassics has a D&D Rules Compendium (4e) up thos week. Since I really know very little about the rules of that system, I am contemplating it. Anyone know if it's a good way to learn the mechanics of that system?
Stay away from that crap. You know better!
Quote from: mcbobbo;705770I feel like I misunderstood something. So PHB1 has all the rules for the core classes, adjudication, skills, whatnot and the others are splat?
I was under the impression that one book was martial and one casting, or some other whatnot.
Essentially, yes. PHB1 has the actual rules (combat, movement, etc) along with a number of classes and races.
PHBs 2/3, names aside, contain races/classes/magic items and some random 'expansion' rules (backgrounds, a new way of multiclassing, etc). You
cannot play the game based exclusively on either of them; they don't, for example, have combat rules in them.
Get the Premium Edition Silver 4E PHB, GMG & MM, they have the errata and misprints taken care of in them for the Hardcovers, look around sometimes you can get them cheap. Essentials your best off with 1) Heroes of the Fallen Lands, 2) Heroes of the Forgotten Kingdoms, 3) The Monster Vault and 4) the Dungeon Masters Kit (not required but great for the extras in the box) or get the Compendium, either for the Treasure/Rewards in them but the DM book has Magic items.
Essentials is easier for character creation, little less drawn out but compatible with the full version if you mix the two. There are major differences between Monster Manual vs. the Monster Vault, especially with HP's, the MM original has higher HP counts, than does the Monster Vault and some stat differences. Otherwise not all that different, they both play the same.
I don't play anymore, it's all gathering dust now. Looking to sell it all off, I just went back to playing AD&D.
Quote from: flyingcircus;705835Get the Premium Edition Silver 4E PHB, GMG & MM, they have the errata and misprints taken care of in them for the Hardcovers, look around sometimes you can get them cheap.
The Premium PHB has the most essential errata in it (Stealth, in particular) but the Premium DMG doesn't (Skill Challenge DCs, in particular).
FWIW, the PHB2 and DMG2 include all of the most essential errata also for the PHB and DMG.
Whatever you do stay away from the Essentials Red Box. It's Crippleware at its worst.
Quote from: TristramEvans;705877Whatever you do stay away from the Essentials Red Box. It's Crippleware at its worst.
This! Totally agree, don't get the 4E Red Box as your entrance to 4E. I bought it for nostalgia and we were playing 4E at the time... it is a lame intro for anyone that has ever played any RPG.
I like Essentials, I thought it was more streamlined than the 4E original books. After running a high level campaign with 4E v1 I wanted to slam my head into a wall. We spent hours for each combat with 6 PCs.
I vote "Heroes of the Fallen Lands" first and DMG.
But definitely.... The Monster Vault and Nentir Vale Monster Vault were IMHO far superior to the first 3(?) 4E monster manuals (I only have 2).
Quote from: Spinachcat;705662I am a D&D 4e fan and my suggestion is to either buy the Gamma World boxed set or 13th Age - both are much better iterations of the 4e concepts.
Interesting, why do you say that? Given even I think PHB1 was a great intro book to 4e. Even though I think 4e is crap. Personally I hope I can use 5e either as a rules lite 3e/FantasyCraft or a 2e with 3e custumization. Achieve this and I am in.:)
Quote from: Marleycat;705939Interesting, why do you say that?
Presumably as they both are refinements of 4e's system.
Quote from: Skywalker;705944Presumably as they both are refinements of 4e's system.
I assume so but in what way? Gridless? More flexibility in the ADEU system? Or the magic system itself? Or does it quit trying to make everyone run said scheme?
Quote from: TristramEvans;705877Whatever you do stay away from the Essentials Red Box. It's Crippleware at its worst.
Just toss out all the crap inside, and you get a really nice sturdy box (much nicer than the old red box) and a set of dice for $20.00. Put your original D&D materials inside and you are good to go. :)
Oh agreed on Gamma World D&D 4e! That game is terrific.
Quote from: Marleycat;705950I assume so but in what way? Gridless? More flexibility in the ADEU system? Or the magic system itself? Or does it quit trying to make everyone run said scheme?
I like the 4e gamma world and 13tha age betetr than 4e dnd because:
I prefer rules lite; both are 'simpler' and go from level 1 to 10, not 1 to 30.
Easier to go gridless if you want.
Less books to aqquire and you don't need DDI (Kinda need it for 4e dnd)
The magic system in 13th age feels closer to oldschool dnd than 4e does.
Its not all sunshine and roses though.
!3th age keeps those godawful healing surges.
Gamma world has a bit too much 'gonzo'
But I still like both better than 4e dnd.
Quote from: tanstaafl48;705642The actual rules for play are contained in PHB1 or the first essentials book (Heroes of the Fallen Lands? Something like that). Titles aside, PHB 2 and 3 are really splatbooks with new classes/races; they don't have the core rules in them
PHB 2 is core. WOTC intentionally split core concepts between PHB 1 and PHB 2. Which is why we got the Barbarian, Bard, Sorcerer, and Druid int he PHB 2. Not to mention the Gnome as a race.
I know lots of groups tried to play "core only" for 4e, but that "core only" always seemed to include the PHB 2 in addition to PHB 1. For the reasons that so much was held back until PHB 2.
So I like the lists being tossed out, but some of them are way too long.
I am not trying to run the game. I just want to grok it. I agree that crippleware is bad, because I don't want to come to understand something that doesn't apply to the vast majority of 4e games.
Why recommend the MM, for example? Is there rules content in there?
Quote from: Mistwell;706036PHB 2 is core.
Other than new races/classes, what Core RULES were in PHB2 that weren't in the PHB?
Quote from: mcbobbo;706067I am not trying to run the game. I just want to grok it. I agree that crippleware is bad, because I don't want to come to understand something that doesn't apply to the vast majority of 4e games.
As said above, PHB1 is all you need.
I would also recommend the DMG1 as it is much more of an integral reference for the DM in 4e than previous editions. But only do so, if the PHB1 interests you enough to read it.
Quote from: Mistwell;706036PHB 2 is core. WOTC intentionally split core concepts between PHB 1 and PHB 2. Which is why we got the Barbarian, Bard, Sorcerer, and Druid int he PHB 2. Not to mention the Gnome as a race.
This is really a matter of opinion. IMO the PHB1 for 4e was as replayable as written as any other PHB for a previous edition of D&D. For example, I don't consider Barbarian, Bard, or Sorcerer to be core to D&D (but then again I come from B/X and 1e roots).
Quote from: Arduin;706069Other than new races/classes, what Core RULES were in PHB2 that weren't in the PHB?
For a book mostly composed of races and classes, I am not sure "other than" is a good standard. But yeah, it's those things.
If he just wants to read how the game in general works, either PHB 1, or one of the two Essentials player books. That's all you need.
Quote from: Skywalker;706123This is really a matter of opinion. IMO the PHB1 for 4e was as replayable as written as any other PHB for a previous edition of D&D. For example, I don't consider Barbarian, Bard, or Sorcerer to be core to D&D (but then again I come from B/X and 1e roots).
What about Druids and gnomes and half-orcs?
Quote from: Mistwell;706145What about Druids and gnomes and half-orcs?
There absence was notable but it didn't make the PHB for 4e incomplete or less playable than any previous edition of D&D from the one book (or the PHB2 a "core" book) IMO. Again that might be because I played many editions of D&D, so I am used to different race and class choices in each version of D&D.
If one of the 4 ever-present classes* or races had been absent, or if there had been a marked drop in the number of race/class options, then it might be a different story. But neither was the case with the PHB.
*Yeah, yeah, thieves weren't in OD&D :)
Quote from: Marleycat;705939Interesting, why do you say that?
As Skywalker said, they are both refinements of 4e. Gamma World keeps the grid combat so you get lots of tactical fun, but the game is deadlier and chargen is faster. Weapon damage is higher so combat is faster as well. Player empowerment in chargen to "reskin" the various powers results in fascinating, albeit gonzo characters.
But on the gonzo, that's all about the GM and player definition of the setting. You can do Squidchicken with Lazer Eyeballs or not. A GM at our FLGS Game Day runs a Fallout/Mad Max-ish GW where the PCs are not bizarro mutants and you have to "humanize" your concept of your powers. And that's easier with some powers than others.
13th Age takes the fantasy superhero aspect of 4e and amps it up to Exalted, but replaces the awkward challenge system with a much more free form, more narrative concept that we saw during the 4e playtests.
Additionally, 13th Age appears to made combat faster via eliminating the grid and increasing PC damage and PC "to hit" chances with their escalation die. Also, 13th Age apparently has done a better job of making sure that each of the classes has its own playstyle.
So while the PHB 1e from 4e would do a great job teaching the core of 4e, I don't believe that it delivers a game experience as good as GW or 13th Age. Akin to how I feel that True20 delivers a better D20 experience than 3.5.
If you're looking to get a feel for the system, OP, the Compendium isn't ideal as a tutorial text. But it's a great resource for detailed treatments of individual rules. I would note that the 3.5 edition of the rules compendium is a similarly excellent overview of the mechanics of that system.
If you just want to get a quick sense of how to play the game, skip the big books and grab the keep on the shadowfell rules. They are extremely compact. They are available free of charge from wizards. They don't include character creation, but if you just want to understand the mechanics that doesn't make any difference. And you can see what a terrible adventure wizards began the line with, and what a huge impact that had on the reputation of the product.
Quote from: Mistwell;706143For a book mostly composed of races and classes, I am not sure "other than" is a good standard. But yeah, it's those things.
If he just wants to read how the game in general works, either PHB 1, or one of the two Essentials player books. That's all you need.
That was the point. Books that are just new races & classes are "splat books". When they labeled it "PHB 2" it was a inaccurate title (done to boost sales no doubt). PHB's, by long established custom, contain the CORE rules of an RPG that the players need to know.
Quote from: Arduin;706397That was the point. Books that are just new races & classes are "splat books". When they labeled it "PHB 2" it was a inaccurate title (done to boost sales no doubt). PHB's, by long established custom, contain the CORE rules of an RPG that the players need to know.
And in my opinion, there are races and classes which are the core rules. I do not think "how do you determine if you hit something with your sword" to be the only kind of core rule. The races and classes are not just optional modules attached to the game, they are a core part of the game, and defining elements of what makes D&D, D&D.
Certain specific races and classes are, in my opinion, key core components of the game. You can play the game without them, but then you can play the game without ever trying to hit something with your sword. Ability to play the game without a particular rule isn't the criteria for determining whether or not it is core - it's how often people tend to use those rules in typical games I think that is more relevant. And given that criteria, I think some of the races and classes in PHB 2 are definitely core.
Indeed, you wouldn't even need the monster manual provided you use monster creation rules in a DMG. And you don't much "need" the DMG for 4e, as almost all rules for playing are in the PHB. And yet, the MM and DMG are counted as "core". That's silly to me - the PHB2 contained core things for the game.
Quote from: Mistwell;706438And in my opinion, there are races and classes which are the core rules.
Not really relevant. The company (WotC) decided that they weren't. Thus, they left them out of the PHB and put them as an OPTION for the GM in a splat book...
Quote from: Arduin;706442Not really relevant. The company (WotC) decided that they weren't. Thus, they left them out of the PHB and put them as an OPTION for the GM in a splat book...
Though Mistwell's entitled to his opinion as to what's core to the D&D experience, he is wrongfully conflating the absence of a rule for hitting something with the absence of a couple of race/class options (of many) to give his opinion more weight.
In any case, we seem to be drifting from what the OP asked. And we seem to agree that the PHB is the way to go for the OP, even with the absence of gnomes.
Quote from: Arduin;706442Not really relevant. The company (WotC) decided that they weren't. Thus, they left them out of the PHB and put them as an OPTION for the GM in a splat book...
They didn't do any such thing. They did not call them an option. They called them out as core quite specifically. You're the guy claiming if it's not in the first PHB then it's not core and is optional, not WOTC. They did the opposite of what you're saying they did, and intentionally split the core between the two books.
Here is a picture of the book. See what it says at the bottom?
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_TQnzgXCADuc/TL3MfLrtlvI/AAAAAAAAATQ/lA1JvtywQGQ/s1600/4E+PHB+2.jpeg)
Quote from: Skywalker;706451Though Mistwell's entitled to his opinion as to what's core to the D&D experience, he is wrongfully conflating the absence of a rule for hitting something with the absence of a couple of race/class options (of many) to give his opinion more weight.
You know, simply asserting that is the case without supporting your assertion isn't meaningful. It's the equivalent of you saying "nuh uh!".
Mistwell's actually right here: WotC was very explicit in its idea that all the PHs and DMGs and MMs were core. Didn't they have a slogan to the extent of "Everything is Core", too?
I guess that idea came up with the whole thing about the character builder and DDI making all the content equal online or some such. Of course the idea didn't fly, but still, it very much was a "thing" in 4e.
That's where I got the idea, then. :)
But is it true? Doesn't sound like it.
Aside from what's said on the cover, what's the merit to the phb2 being core? Does it have rules content?
The later 'core' books really do contain what many older (OK, 3E) players would see as necessary bits of the game: druids, bards, fighters who can use two weapons, monks. Or if you want metallic dragons as well as chromatic, they're in (I think) MM II rather than MM I. The later books more or less really are as 'core' as the earlier ones, though filler is spread through them all fairly evenly.
Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;706475The later 'core' books really do contain what many older (OK, 3E) players would see as necessary bits of the game: druids, bards, fighters who can use two weapons, monks. Or if you want metallic dragons as well as chromatic, they're in (I think) MM II rather than MM I. The later books more or less really are as 'core' as the earlier ones, though filler is spread through them all fairly evenly.
I'm having trouble understanding. Take the dragon color thing. Could you not take a Red, change its alignment and call it a Gold?
Take the druid. Is the cleric material not sufficient to play one, if you had to?
Still trying to scope it out.
Though each reply like yours reinforces my decision to skip 4e. :)
Too damn many books!
Quote from: Mistwell;706466They didn't do any such thing.
Yes, it was de facto as they weren't in the PHB WITH the rules for the players to play. EVERYONE would purchase the PHB as it had the CORE game mechanic rules. NOT everyone would purchase the splatbook (aka PHB2) as it DIDN'T have the core game rules.
Quote from: mcbobbo;706487I'm having trouble understanding. Take the dragon color thing. Could you not take a Red, change its alignment and call it a Gold?
Take the druid. Is the cleric material not sufficient to play one, if you had to?
Still trying to scope it out.
Though each reply like yours reinforces my decision to skip 4e. :)
Too damn many books!
You can reskin classes or monsters to a degree but may get a few things that don't fit like particular skills or powers, so you might need to be a bit fast and loose with the rules if you're doing that. The 4E druid is I think more wildshape-based, instead of having the focus on healing and radiant damage. but in the initial bunch of WOTC articles they suggested reskinning rangers as monks (basically using TWF as flurry of blows), using wizard for psion and a few things like that, so it is possible to an degree.
Quote from: mcbobbo;706471But is it true? Doesn't sound like it.
As said, the PHB1 gave as many options as any previous PHB for D&D and can be used by itself for years. It is the book you are looking for if you want to get a good feel of 4e from one book.
There are a few races, classes, monsters, and magic items that appeared in previous editions that were moved to later supplements due to the chnages in the structure of 4e. These are in the minority though and each case another option is given in its place. FWIW most of the omissions are from 2e and 3e, and they were less notable to older D&D players IME, especially B/X or BECMI players.
How important these options are to you for a complete D&D experience is a personal judgement. And this isn't exclusive to 4e as every iteration of D&D changes how they use the space in the core 3 book set. I would advise against believing that the later supplements are necessary simply because WotC calls them 'Core'.
Quote from: Mistwell;706466Here is a picture of the book. See what it says at the bottom?
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_TQnzgXCADuc/TL3MfLrtlvI/AAAAAAAAATQ/lA1JvtywQGQ/s1600/4E+PHB+2.jpeg)
That reads to me as "Please give us more money, you saps"
Another 4e derivative that is worth a read to get an idea of what 4e was trying achieve without 4e's 'likely to offend' single minded focus is Heroes Against Darkness (http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product/107559/Heroes-Against-Darkness). It's a free retroclone that manages to take several aspects which 4e excelled in (the good tactical play, balance, and ease of use for the GM) but applies it to a more recognisable old school experience.
I would drop the freefrom guidelines for skills altogeter, and it also needs the 4e ritual system grafted onto it, or something similar for non-combat magic. But it's worth checking out. And it's free.
Quote from: mcbobbo;706471That's where I got the idea, then. :)
But is it true? Doesn't sound like it.
Aside from what's said on the cover, what's the merit to the phb2 being core? Does it have rules content?
I believe your initial question was what you would need to (mostly) understand 4E, correct?
In that particular context you do not need PHB2 or 3 (they're not core in that sense). They will not significantly enhance your understanding of the game. They may contain classes or race that some people consider necessary to play the game but the only rules they contain are the 4E equivalent of optional or house rules.
To put it as directly as possible, you could not play 4E with just PHB2 or 3. You can play it with just PHB1, even if by some definitions you'd be missing "core" classes or races.
Quote from: mcbobbo;706487I'm having trouble understanding. Take the dragon color thing. Could you not take a Red, change its alignment and call it a Gold?
Take the druid. Is the cleric material not sufficient to play one, if you had to?
Still trying to scope it out.
Though each reply like yours reinforces my decision to skip 4e. :)
Too damn many books!
Tweaking monsters that way is very easy and natural to many gm's. (Like me)
Others prefer to have every type of dragon and class fully detailed.
Fyi as a person very familiar with 4e, I don't really recommend it as a game system.
I just use it for a group that likes it.
Alternatively, you can check out the free D&D 4e Starter set also on dndclassics. It is a pretty concise set of rules (came out in 2009 or so IIRC, so it is not the be all end all of the rule set).
Also of note with 4e, use the monsters from the Monster Vault 1&2, MM 3, and the Dark Sun monster book. It seems the monsters in the MM 1&2 were broken mathematically.
Cheers
Quote from: Teazia;707035It seems the monsters in the MM 1&2 were broken mathematically.
Mathematically broken, no. Mathematically dull, yes. There was a fix for these issues in the DMG2, which the later monster books adopted.