and it seems to be directly connected with Monsters of the Multiverse.
I've been trying to generate lists of devils, demons and yugoloths, using the following filters:
Fiend type
Source: Monster Manual or Monsters of the Multiverse
Tag: devil (or demon or yugoloth)
The only monsters that are displaying are those from the Monster Manual. Those from Monsters of the Multiverse aren't displaying.
If I search on the name of a specific monster (say, "merrenoloth") without the tag filter, the monster comes up, and the line indicates that it has the devil/demon/yugoloth tag. However, if I add the tag filter again, I get no results.
If I change Monsters of the Multiverse to, say, Mordenkainen's Tome of Foes, the legacy versions of the monsters display the way they're supposed to.
This is going to be confusing, but stick with me and hopefully things will make a little more sense.
Back when D&D Beyond first launched (before it was owned by Wizards of the Coast, before it was owned by Fandom even, but owned by Curse) the database, and by extension search features, were much more limited and there was much more of a focus on getting stuff done right now rather than the right way. To quote the founder of DDB, Adam Bradford, it was the time of "move fast and break stuff". One limitation of this early era was what data could be displayed in a stat block and how that data could be searched. To get around some of these limitations, D&D Beyond implemented tags, which you see all over the place. For example a lot of spells have tags such as "buff" or "healing" and monsters used tags for various things.
First point of confusion: D&D officially uses tags too, but to mean a different thing. A tag in D&D is something like 'demon' or 'human' or 'wizard'
Fast forward X years and after several revisions of the database and stat blocks. There's now full support for monster tags (as D&D uses them, see above). However, D&D Beyond has their own legacy tag system and having two search fields with the same name is a bad idea. So what is implemented is the Monster Sub-Type, which is functionally the same as tags as described in the monster manual and this article
So now we have the unquestionably confusing set up where what D&D calls tags, D&D Beyond calls Monster Sub-Type and what D&D Beyond calls tags is something that does not appear in the rules.
This means if you search for Type: Fiend, Book: Monster of the Multiverse, Monster Tag: Demon, you get zero results, but if you search Type: Fiend, Book: Monsters of the Multiverse, Monster Sub-Type: demon you get two pages of results.
and it seems to be directly connected with Monsters of the Multiverse.
I've been trying to generate lists of devils, demons and yugoloths, using the following filters:
The only monsters that are displaying are those from the Monster Manual. Those from Monsters of the Multiverse aren't displaying.
If I search on the name of a specific monster (say, "merrenoloth") without the tag filter, the monster comes up, and the line indicates that it has the devil/demon/yugoloth tag. However, if I add the tag filter again, I get no results.
If I change Monsters of the Multiverse to, say, Mordenkainen's Tome of Foes, the legacy versions of the monsters display the way they're supposed to.
Author of The Monsters Know What They're Doing: Combat Tactics for Dungeon Masters, MOAR! Monsters Know What They're Doing, How to Defend Your Lair and Making Enemies: Monster Design Inspiration for Tabletop Roleplaying Games.
Don't use 'Monster Tag', use 'Monster Sub-Types'
This is going to be confusing, but stick with me and hopefully things will make a little more sense.
Back when D&D Beyond first launched (before it was owned by Wizards of the Coast, before it was owned by Fandom even, but owned by Curse) the database, and by extension search features, were much more limited and there was much more of a focus on getting stuff done right now rather than the right way. To quote the founder of DDB, Adam Bradford, it was the time of "move fast and break stuff". One limitation of this early era was what data could be displayed in a stat block and how that data could be searched. To get around some of these limitations, D&D Beyond implemented tags, which you see all over the place. For example a lot of spells have tags such as "buff" or "healing" and monsters used tags for various things.
First point of confusion: D&D officially uses tags too, but to mean a different thing. A tag in D&D is something like 'demon' or 'human' or 'wizard'
Fast forward X years and after several revisions of the database and stat blocks. There's now full support for monster tags (as D&D uses them, see above). However, D&D Beyond has their own legacy tag system and having two search fields with the same name is a bad idea. So what is implemented is the Monster Sub-Type, which is functionally the same as tags as described in the monster manual and this article
So now we have the unquestionably confusing set up where what D&D calls tags, D&D Beyond calls Monster Sub-Type and what D&D Beyond calls tags is something that does not appear in the rules.
This means if you search for Type: Fiend, Book: Monster of the Multiverse, Monster Tag: Demon, you get zero results, but if you search Type: Fiend, Book: Monsters of the Multiverse, Monster Sub-Type: demon you get two pages of results.
Hope this clarifies things
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
It does. Thanks. I've been using DDB since the Curse days, so it never occurred to me to stop using tags.
Author of The Monsters Know What They're Doing: Combat Tactics for Dungeon Masters, MOAR! Monsters Know What They're Doing, How to Defend Your Lair and Making Enemies: Monster Design Inspiration for Tabletop Roleplaying Games.