. . . maybe because the picture in the monster compendium for your game of choice looked dumb, or you didn't like their ability suite, or they were too powerful/weak, you don't use psionics, etc.  

Mine all seem to come from the Fiend Folio: I will never populate a campaign I run with Xvarts, because that picture just looks SO stupid. . . a giant head with legs growing out of it.  Please.  besides, there are so many other humanoid tribal races, did we really need one more?  Also, the picture of the Tiger Fly (giant wasp with a man's badly drawn head) will prevent them from ever being used in a dungeon of mine.  And the whole idea behind a CIFAL (a large group of bugs developing sentience and forming into a humanoid monster) just rubs me the wrong way.  

What, if any, creatures would you never put into one of your adventures?  And why?

The fiend Folio stuff is all from a series of D&D articles from very early White Dwarf before it sucked.

The Cifal is an interesting one as it is a nod to a Spider Man villain called Swarm. Creatures like it have appeared in horror novels too. But yeah, FF had alot of oddities. Blame the UK!

Creatures never used. Otyugs, never liked them. Boring Beetles and Rot Grubs as not keen on instakill critters.

For 5e, the new piercer looks stupid and have reverted it and a few other monsters back to something less moronic. Currently been replacing Half-Dragons with Dragonborn as the HD entry seems almost redundant. Why wasnt it merged into the Dragonborn?

I've run a couple of Fiend Folio only campaigns. The Xvarts are nasty bastards, but in general the FF is best used 2 ways - as the only MM for the campaign, or you pick very specific beasts that fit in your campaign and you build a campaign MM from the various MMs you own.

There isn't a monster I would not use...but it has to make sense for the world I am creating. THAT more than anything determines the monster choices.

Drow.



Unless I were to run D1-2 and D3.

i dont know about specific monster but i would never have the party encounter anything with levels in elemental warrior

fuck that prestige class with a rusty adamantium 10 foot pole

I finf the D&D devils and demons to be awfully ununspiring and dull.

I mean, really: a balrog? Donkey Kong? Frog man? Guh...

Quote from: Spinachcat;822738There isn't a monster I would not use...but it has to make sense for the world I am creating. THAT more than anything determines the monster choices.

That's my thinking on it. Nothing gets ruled out off the top... just on a per-setting basis.
None of the D&D-related games I've run lately have had dragons (though there've been rumours) and my (non-D&D) setting has mostly custom made creatures.

I tend to avoid 'gotcha' monsters such as those bugs that live in doors and crawl into the ears of Thieves trying to use Hear Noise ability - ear seekers?

Quote from: S'mon;822820I tend to avoid 'gotcha' monsters such as those bugs that live in doors and crawl into the ears of Thieves trying to use Hear Noise ability - ear seekers?

I only once used them but crossed them with the brain controlling worms from Wrath of Khan. I handed a secret note to the player which said something like: "a worm is in your brain, controlling you: convince the other characters to go into room X where Mother is and you'll get bonus XP".

It was fun.

Edit: this is motherfucking post 666!!! I'm pleased.

i prefer fiendish possession to vermin controlled

Quote from: IggytheBorg;822693. . . maybe because the picture in the monster compendium for your game of choice looked dumb

I didn't use the aboleth in 3e because of the picture, but I want to use it in 5e because of the picture.

unless they used a different picture for 3.5 i dont see a problem with it

We always avoid psionics, so any creatures that used a good bit of that are out for us.

Someone's gotta say it.

Flumphs.

I was waitin' for that one.