6 thoughts on “Say you’re using a setting supplement.”

  1. By listing them altogether, but perhaps having them highligted in regional colors, it makes the supplement useful if you want to pull them out of context and use in other campagins, or if some nasty druid/shapechanger should change into them while in a different region.

  2. If monsters are only limited to a single region, then regionally. If there is any cross-over then alphabetically. (Cross referencing between regions would be non-optimal.).

  3. I like them listed by region. Makes it easier to choose a monster on the fly. Experienced DMs may know what monsters tend to be encountered in which regions. But it’d help anyone unfamiliar with a particular monster.

    Alphabetically, you have to know what  you’re looking for. And it helps if you’re following a published or converted adventure that calls for specific monsters. But an alphabetical list of monsters in the index or even the table of contents would accomplish this just as easy. The same could be true for placing a regional table in a book where they’re alphabetical, I guess.

    I just feel that between the two, a regional structure with an alphabetical index would be better for DW’s style of “winging it”.

Comments are closed.