I love that there won't be rule book bloat. I do however have one request, a book of monsters from the previous 3.5 and 4e editions of the adventures.
I'd be happy if some were part of the annuals or if the annual had some back of the envelope on they fly type of conversion for these critters.
Monsters should be setting specific. When you think of generic AD&D what
do you think of? For me, it conjures up Githyanki, Drow, colorful Dragons,
Demons/Devils with a defined Plane, Slime/Mold/Oozes, Orcs, Demi-humans,
Beholders, Mind Flayers, & so on. Basically the whole staple of a select group
of monsters, that every Player and DM would already own a copy of for AD&D.
The monsters encountered with just the base rule books would then be
rigidly defined generics that anyone interested in the game, which would
then be called "Canon" DCC RPG, would come to always expect when
running a DCC RPG game. You take away those generic monsters, you
take away a large section of content that is ingrained in every person that
bought Monster Manual & now has to discard that...so why would they even
play AD&D at that point, if it didn't have the staple creatures? So then what
you have are "Canon Wars" that hardcore Players would expect from Judges.
Just like if you expanded the rule books, you would get "Edition Wars" &
splintered groups, so it goes with canon material. Expanding anything from
the core is a slippery slope that can damage the novelty of sticking with
that classic OD&D feel, where everything was new & fresh at the time the
first RPG was created.
So I think they should avoid generic monster manuals. GURPS did the same
thing & now I can see why. People generated custom manuals online for
GURPS but that won't upset the canonistas because they won't go into
a GURPS game expecting to choose to play the Drow Elf Race or battle
Beholders or Intellect Devourers (using the D&D analogy). It will be
whatever the GM decided it will be based on the setting or game-style
brought up at the start of the game.
Therefore, the best place to introduce a monster manual would be in a
structured Campaign Setting. So if GG or a third party creates a campaign
setting, then include the monster manual with that. That will prevent
the core rules from being painted into a specific corner & keep the
canonistas tied to the campaign setting in use. With campaign settings
you can have specific canon, multiple editions (usually moving forward
in the setting's history or introducing new elements), and/or annual
damaging the core.
Anyway, just a few thoughts I thought I'd pass on, good or bad.