DISCLAIMER: This thread is not meant for bashing the work done by the people over at Wizards of the Coast. This is simply my opinion of the book's content, which will focus mainly on the new character options. If anybody wishes to use this thread to discuss, in a civil manner, the updated monsters, then that is absolutely encouraged. However, I personally care more about the character options since that is what will impact the experiences of both myself and my players the most in the long run of us playing the game.
(Please Note: I'm going to use the words Race/Racial and Species interchangeably. I mean the same thing when using either, so hopefully this helps people from getting confused.)
Okay, I've been looking through the content in the newest release and feel... conflicted.
On one hand, I'm happy for the updates to the many racial options that are present, as well as the bringing of races from disparate sources into a single book for the convenience of people both getting into the game or who don't want to figure out what the heck the Tortle Package is and why it's worth their money.
On the other hand, I can't help but feel like there wasn't a whole lot of effort put into the racial updates, at least with regards to actually providing information about the options present. The updates are mechanically meaningful and I am in love with a lot of these changes. However, the fact that this book fails to expand on existing lore to justify the softer impressions of certain species that it intends to impart is troubling and frustrating, especially with regards to species that were previously portrayed as more evil or monstrous such as Duergar and Goblinoids respectively.
Rather than actually providing tips on how you might want run these races in existing settings or how you might customize them for your own homebrewed setting, it just hands you one to four paragraphs of flavor text that tells you little to nothing about what is typical of that species and/or how you might be able to work with or go against the norms of that species's culture. I understand that accounting for every possible circumstance in every setting is impossible, but offering more than just the following, quoted text would have been far preferable:
The first goliaths lived on the highest mountain peaks—far above the tree line, where the air is thin and frigid winds howl. Distantly related to giants and infused with the supernatural essence of their ancestors’ mountainous home, goliaths stand between 7 and 8 feet tall and have a wide array of skin tones resembling different types of stone.
Mordenkainen Presents: Monsters of the Multiverse, pg. 21
Now, to be clear, that is absolutely me picking out the most aggregious example in the entire book. However, if Wizards actually wanted to tone back or expand the representations of specific races, especially Goblinoids who have been portrayed as wholly evil since D&D Basic in 1977, they had every opportunity to do so in this book. Instead, they tell us that they are originally from the Feywild and were once a part of the Unseelie Court; which isn't even said outright, but rather is only mentioned in the description of Goblins by saying that they once served the Queen of Air and Darkness, a figure who is largely irrelevant to 5th Edition's lore and events.
Rather, the lore for each of these species is left out to dry in the books they came from, which are now no longer available for purchase here on D&D Beyond. I can't be sure why there has been such a lack of lore for many of the recent species options that have come out after the release of Mythic Odysseys of Theros. That book is a wonderful example of how lore for new racial options can be presented without casting them as either good or evil, presenting them with all of their flaws and with details about the norms of their societies. In almost every release since, species options have lacked explicit lore about them in almost all releases outside of general falvor text that gives a very basic and lackluster idea of what that race is like. I am, of course, excluding the Lineage options from Van Richten's Guide to Ravenloft, however this is because those options are intended to be used on top of an already existing species option in some form or fashion.
To be frank, I'm making this thread simply because I am disappointed by the lack of new or interesting information being provided in this book and want to put my opinion and review out here for people to see before they buy. In all honesty, I will say that the book is worth the $30 it takes to buy here on D&D Beyond, at the very least for the mechanical improvements to the character options within it. However, I can't, in good conscience, recommend spending much more than that on it in any other form. A lot of what is contained here is information that already exists in other supplements in better and more detailed form. At least with Volo's Guide to Monsters, you had a framework that you could use to build on or subvert the tropes around a particular species. In Monsters of the Multiverse, all you get is a mechanical upgrade to previously existing racial options and some minorly reworked statblocks that, as far as I have seen, function almost exactly the same as they did in their initial release format.
If you're buying this book without having already owned Volo's Guide to Monsters and/or Mordenkainen's Tome of Foes, I highly recommend you seek out some other format of those books so that you can have the lore and information contained within them about many of the species that are detailed here. I especially recommend Mordenkainen's Tome of Foes for the highly extensive lore that it provides about the Blood War, the Elves and Drow, and the Dwarves and Duergar. It is extremely enlightening and provides a massive window into the state of the D&D multiverse and the histories of both of those species, as well as the intricacies of their cultures. It explains the painful nuance of the conflict between the Elves and Drow, one driven not by pointless hatred of each other caused by their own actions but by divine spite between the deities who created them. It explains the tragedy of the Duergar and provides ample reason for why they are so often seen as evil and insane. It even provides a trove of lore for Halflings and Gnomes, including the Deep Gnomes who got an update in this new book. It is a worthy read, in spite of being absolutely massive.
The fact that not even the Compendium Content for Mordenkainen's Tome of Foes or Volo's Guide to Monsters will be available for purchase here on D&D Beyond is very disheartening, as it means that this lore is essentially being erased for people who might newly come to the platform. I don't understand why these books are being discontinued in their entirety when they are immensely valuable tools for Dungeon Masters who want to build complex and powerful tales around the tragedies of the Elves and Dwarves, or who want to explore the true depth of the cultures of races that are traditionally considered monstrous such as Lizardfolk or Kobolds.
Additionally, I can't be certain of if the version of Mordenkainen Presents: Monsters of the Multiverse made available today will be the same as the one that releases on book shelves or on digital retailers such as Amazon and the DM's Guild. If it is the same, then I can't help but be annoyed that this is the path that is being taken with new species options by Wizards of the Coast. In trying to soften the representations of these traditionally evil and monstrous races, the nuance of their histories is being sacrificed. I mean seriously, who can tell me that they already new that Kobolds as a species are most commonly asexual or that Goblins refer to all kinds of magic as "booyagh" with no distinction between spell schools or casting methods.
I understand that there are many people who don't want races to be generically good or evil just because that's how they were made, especially because of the real life implications of that line of thinking. And I agree with them. A race shouldn't be unswervingly good or evil. But that doesn't mean that helpful and significant details about the cultures of a species has to be lost in the crossfire. Like in real life, members of a single species will have near-infinite variation in attitude and capability, which will be highly influenced by the nature of the society in which they live. Without knowing what the culture of a species is like, it becomes a lot harder to make a character who is interesting or meaningful because we don't know that the likely circumstances of that character's life may have been or have a frame of reference from which we can make our characters different from the rest of their kind.
Sorry if I went off on a rant there at the end. I'm a bit of a lore fiend and, at least to an extent, I don't want to have to do lore work for all of these new options myself. I've already got way too much lore work on my plate as is. However, if you skipped to the end of that massive post hoping for a TL;DR, you're in luck.
TL;DR: My personal opinion of Mordenkainen Presents: Monsters of the Multiverse is that it is a fine enough supplement with regards to the mechanical upgrades made to the species that it contains, especially those that were sorely in need of them. However, the lack of new information about any of the presented species is disheartening and makes me genuinely annoyed. This is especially true in cases such as Goblinoids where Wizards of the Coast is attempting to soften the portrayal of certain species and make it more possible for them to not be seen as monsters since there is a lack of actual "fabric" to help connect these new interpretations with previous ones and justify their existence in lore. With regards to changes in the way the monsters contained in this book are presented, my opinion is very underdeveloped as I have not read through the 250+ statblocks in the book and have no intention of doing so any time soon.
Does anybody agree with me even a little bit on any of this, or am I just blowing steam over nothing? I'm genuinely curious and wouldn't be making this post if I wasn't. And if you don't agree with me, feel free to tell me why. I'm happy to discuss viewpoints on this topic, especially since Wizards of the Coast now owns D&D Beyond and is likely able to see the things we post on the forums more easily.
I don't have a problem with most of MotM The more I've read of it, actually, the less I like it - I didn't realise the issue with legacy critters not being available for those who hadn't already purchases Volo's or Mord's, because I already have them. I think that's an irritating thing, though I strongly suspect it's WotC and not DDB that has made that decision.
I have to admit widening my eyes when I saw hobgoblins as "Typically Lawful Neutral." I was like...what? I've always seen hobgoblins are basically uruk-hai from LotR, hardly the picture of "neutral." The idea of them being helpful and friendly is just anathema to me - I see them as highly-disciplined, highly-motivated, and highly-trained soldiers. Ruthless, remorseless, and vicious. I simply can't picture ex-fey, friendly hobgoblins being recruited en-masse by Azarr Kul in "Red Hand of Doom" or the like.
The other thing that bugs me about MotM is the changes to spellcasting monsters. The idea of getting rid of spell slots for an NPC wizard, for example, might arguably streamline combat, but at the cost of really nerfing the DM running the critter. Two days ago, in my CoS campaign that I'm DMing, I was able to seriously threaten my players' party with a 6th-level spellcaster who hit them with a fireball. The players were terrified the caster was going to hit them with another one - and he could have, it's just that he was trying to escape - but if I was using the MotM rules, he would only have been able to throw fireball 1/day. Yes, I know I can change them around, but the point is that it's harder to figure out what a 6th-level wizard-equivalent should get if I'm customising the NPC. So as a DM, I'm left with either running the NPC as-is and having a spellcaster that's far more spell-limited than the equivalent PC (not to mention that there's not even any mention of the NPC's spellcasting level or class anymore); trying to balance what spells should be 1/day or 2/day, etc.; or having to recreate the NPC from scratch. All of these negate the benefit of having a quick critter ready for an unexpected encounter.
So the evoker wizard, for example: the "combat wombat" of spellcasters, gets mage armor twice per day (what? Why? It lasts eight freakin' hours!), but doesn't have counterspell?? And gets to do 12d10 + 9 force damage (which practically nothing is resistant to) every frakkin' round! But only has 4 cantrips and 4 spells to choose from. And because there is nothing on the wizard's actual level or a list of spell slots, it makes it much harder to customise the NPC, especially on the fly.
I am just really glad I still have access to the legacy versions of the monsters/NPCs. I definitely won't be getting the hard copy version of MotM, though. :(
To be as concise as possible: I feel that Monsters of the Multiverse was portrayed in all the adverts leading up to now as new and interesting updates to old creatures, which would help pave the way for conducting campaigns in settings other than the Forgotten Realms; and that promise was not delivered on. If I had known the book was going to contain so little by way of new content, I would have abstained from purchasing. A few new monsters, new versions of a few races, the rest is copy+paste from previous published material with a few modifications to statblocks.
Not DDB's fault, just another letdown from WotC's end; kind of like the physical copies of Tasha's that fell apart the first time they were opened.
I'm not thrilled with the choice to break up the demons, devils, and yugoloths and just stick them in the book alphabetically based on their individual names.
Rebalancing the PC race options was nice, though. Finally fixed most of the old ones.
I'm not thrilled with the choice to break up the demons, devils, and yugoloths and just stick them in the book alphabetically based on their individual names.
It’s driving me nuts. The same way that the races are not grouped in the character builder is driving me nuts too. The new Genasi are all over the place, the Sea Elf is down in the “S”es instead of next to the other elves…. It’s so disorganized I wish I hadn’t bought the damned thing.
Oh wow! Never heard about the Tasha's thing, but I absolutely agree with your view of the new book. There was an implicit promise that was far from delivered on. I personally was expecting there to be a bunch of new races that hadn't been in any books before. Instead we got reworks of a bunch of elf subraces that didn't need the rework since they were already pretty strong to begin with. In fact, Eladrin now have less detail since the seasonal Personality Traits and Flaws aren't there.
Also, the species options from MtG stuff are here, which is nice, but they don't change anything or expand on lore. In fact Centaurs and Satyrs have among the shortest racial descriptions in the book alongside Goliaths.
They barely even copy+pasted because they didn't include any of the lore that was there for these character options from their original outings. All they did was duplicate the features and do a bit of light tuning.
I'm getting too worked up over this. But still, what you pointed out is irking me now too. They portrayed this in marketing as an important book that'd portray a ton of races in setting-agnostic ways and then barely delivered on that promise, if at all.
It’s driving me nuts. The same way that the races are not grouped in the character builder is driving me nuts too. The new Genasi are all over the place, the Sea Elf is down in the “S”es instead of next to the other elves…. It’s so disorganized I wish I hadn’t bought the damned thing.
Ah geez is it really? I'm dreading going into the character builder now. I hope they fix that ASAP.
I doubt they’ll ever “fix” it. Welcome to WotC’s DDB. 😭
Oh wow! Never heard about the Tasha's thing, but I absolutely agree with your view of the new book. There was an implicit promise that was far from delivered on. I personally was expecting there to be a bunch of new races that hadn't been in any books before.
No, they were up front that this was not going to contain any new races. But they did imply that they were actually to write new lore in this book, which they most assuredly did not do.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
It’s driving me nuts. The same way that the races are not grouped in the character builder is driving me nuts too. The new Genasi are all over the place, the Sea Elf is down in the “S”es instead of next to the other elves…. It’s so disorganized I wish I hadn’t bought the damned thing.
Ah geez is it really? I'm dreading going into the character builder now. I hope they fix that ASAP.
I doubt they’ll ever “fix” it. Welcome to WotC’s DDB. 😭
I've been here a while. They ended up with weird stuff like this the last time they made a bunch of additions the the character builder. They'll probably have it sorted soon.
It’s driving me nuts. The same way that the races are not grouped in the character builder is driving me nuts too. The new Genasi are all over the place, the Sea Elf is down in the “S”es instead of next to the other elves…. It’s so disorganized I wish I hadn’t bought the damned thing.
Ah geez is it really? I'm dreading going into the character builder now. I hope they fix that ASAP.
I doubt they’ll ever “fix” it. Welcome to WotC’s DDB. 😭
I've been here a while. They ended up with weird stuff like this the last time they made a bunch of additions the the character builder. They'll probably have it sorted soon.
Does anybody agree with me even a little bit on any of this, or am I just blowing steam over nothing? I'm genuinely curious and wouldn't be making this post if I wasn't. And if you don't agree with me, feel free to tell me why. I'm happy to discuss viewpoints on this topic, especially since Wizards of the Coast now owns D&D Beyond and is likely able to see the things we post on the forums more easily.
You perfectly expressed my opinion right now, much better than I could have. I compared the Illithid section of volo and the entries in Multiverse and was underwhelmed lore wise. And volo wasnt extraordinary in terms of lore compared to older editions books (like all 5e books frankly). About the races, i am sympathetic to the changes because the goblins and orcs in my campaign are already NOT d&d goblinoids or evil ...etc and I never cared for Faerun, YET I dont understand why they erase in one stroke Faerun and its evil goblinoids since it's a multiverse.
So, what I see about the removal of volo and tome and this book is one of those or a mixture of them:
They are entering a transition phase to 6e. They intend to have settings specific books which contains lore. They intend to release a book to explain the multiverse and how to connect the official settings and yours. They have the datas and people dont buy setting books any more, except the exandria ones. They are in fact owned by a red dragon who doesnt use its 19 int but just want more gold and more gold, and they are pushed to release more books than they can handle because gold.
They are in fact owned by a red dragon who doesnt use its 19 int but just want more gold and more gold, and they are pushed to release more books than they can handle because gold.
My two biggest problems with the new rules and the way they affect dnd beyond and the character builder are as follows
1. If race centric ability score increases are no longer a thing and you get to choose a plus 2 and plus 1 then what's the point of the custom origin feature from Tasha's? that lets you do the same thing?
2. I hate the way the "legacy" rules races are displayed separately from the new ones, it makes it so much more annoying to look at
I was not keen on the idea of this book to begin with. Mostly because I had originally thought it was just more races, which I am in the minority of believing we do not need anymore. I would rather have more classes or sub-classes than anymore races. I was convinced that it was just updates to things, so I got the book. And I can not say how disappointed I am in it. I am all for being inclusive but it is our differences that make us unique. I am just not a fan of this at all. I am curious about the legacy race thing if people who have a DM subscription that have the two old books and do content sharing, will the other players then have access to them? Does anyone know?
This book was honestly not worth the money or the hype, they nerfed everything. Aasimars no longer get an Angelic Guide, their radiant consumption is based off of your prof modifier now, which makes it from a nice steady source of damage, to a tickle no matter what level you are.
I was not keen on the idea of this book to begin with. Mostly because I had originally thought it was just more races, which I am in the minority of believing we do not need anymore. I would rather have more classes or sub-classes than anymore races. I was convinced that it was just updates to things, so I got the book. And I can not say how disappointed I am in it. I am all for being inclusive but it is our differences that make us unique. I am just not a fan of this at all. I am curious about the legacy race thing if people who have a DM subscription that have the two old books and do content sharing, will the other players then have access to them? Does anyone know?
If you already owned the older books (like I do) then yes, you have access to both sets of races. My players, who benefit from my sharing content also have access to both sets of races too.
DISCLAIMER: This thread is not meant for bashing the work done by the people over at Wizards of the Coast. This is simply my opinion of the book's content, which will focus mainly on the new character options. If anybody wishes to use this thread to discuss, in a civil manner, the updated monsters, then that is absolutely encouraged. However, I personally care more about the character options since that is what will impact the experiences of both myself and my players the most in the long run of us playing the game.
(Please Note: I'm going to use the words Race/Racial and Species interchangeably. I mean the same thing when using either, so hopefully this helps people from getting confused.)
Okay, I've been looking through the content in the newest release and feel... conflicted.
On one hand, I'm happy for the updates to the many racial options that are present, as well as the bringing of races from disparate sources into a single book for the convenience of people both getting into the game or who don't want to figure out what the heck the Tortle Package is and why it's worth their money.
On the other hand, I can't help but feel like there wasn't a whole lot of effort put into the racial updates, at least with regards to actually providing information about the options present. The updates are mechanically meaningful and I am in love with a lot of these changes. However, the fact that this book fails to expand on existing lore to justify the softer impressions of certain species that it intends to impart is troubling and frustrating, especially with regards to species that were previously portrayed as more evil or monstrous such as Duergar and Goblinoids respectively.
Rather than actually providing tips on how you might want run these races in existing settings or how you might customize them for your own homebrewed setting, it just hands you one to four paragraphs of flavor text that tells you little to nothing about what is typical of that species and/or how you might be able to work with or go against the norms of that species's culture. I understand that accounting for every possible circumstance in every setting is impossible, but offering more than just the following, quoted text would have been far preferable:
Now, to be clear, that is absolutely me picking out the most aggregious example in the entire book. However, if Wizards actually wanted to tone back or expand the representations of specific races, especially Goblinoids who have been portrayed as wholly evil since D&D Basic in 1977, they had every opportunity to do so in this book. Instead, they tell us that they are originally from the Feywild and were once a part of the Unseelie Court; which isn't even said outright, but rather is only mentioned in the description of Goblins by saying that they once served the Queen of Air and Darkness, a figure who is largely irrelevant to 5th Edition's lore and events.
Rather, the lore for each of these species is left out to dry in the books they came from, which are now no longer available for purchase here on D&D Beyond. I can't be sure why there has been such a lack of lore for many of the recent species options that have come out after the release of Mythic Odysseys of Theros. That book is a wonderful example of how lore for new racial options can be presented without casting them as either good or evil, presenting them with all of their flaws and with details about the norms of their societies. In almost every release since, species options have lacked explicit lore about them in almost all releases outside of general falvor text that gives a very basic and lackluster idea of what that race is like. I am, of course, excluding the Lineage options from Van Richten's Guide to Ravenloft, however this is because those options are intended to be used on top of an already existing species option in some form or fashion.
To be frank, I'm making this thread simply because I am disappointed by the lack of new or interesting information being provided in this book and want to put my opinion and review out here for people to see before they buy. In all honesty, I will say that the book is worth the $30 it takes to buy here on D&D Beyond, at the very least for the mechanical improvements to the character options within it. However, I can't, in good conscience, recommend spending much more than that on it in any other form. A lot of what is contained here is information that already exists in other supplements in better and more detailed form. At least with Volo's Guide to Monsters, you had a framework that you could use to build on or subvert the tropes around a particular species. In Monsters of the Multiverse, all you get is a mechanical upgrade to previously existing racial options and some minorly reworked statblocks that, as far as I have seen, function almost exactly the same as they did in their initial release format.
If you're buying this book without having already owned Volo's Guide to Monsters and/or Mordenkainen's Tome of Foes, I highly recommend you seek out some other format of those books so that you can have the lore and information contained within them about many of the species that are detailed here. I especially recommend Mordenkainen's Tome of Foes for the highly extensive lore that it provides about the Blood War, the Elves and Drow, and the Dwarves and Duergar. It is extremely enlightening and provides a massive window into the state of the D&D multiverse and the histories of both of those species, as well as the intricacies of their cultures. It explains the painful nuance of the conflict between the Elves and Drow, one driven not by pointless hatred of each other caused by their own actions but by divine spite between the deities who created them. It explains the tragedy of the Duergar and provides ample reason for why they are so often seen as evil and insane. It even provides a trove of lore for Halflings and Gnomes, including the Deep Gnomes who got an update in this new book. It is a worthy read, in spite of being absolutely massive.
The fact that not even the Compendium Content for Mordenkainen's Tome of Foes or Volo's Guide to Monsters will be available for purchase here on D&D Beyond is very disheartening, as it means that this lore is essentially being erased for people who might newly come to the platform. I don't understand why these books are being discontinued in their entirety when they are immensely valuable tools for Dungeon Masters who want to build complex and powerful tales around the tragedies of the Elves and Dwarves, or who want to explore the true depth of the cultures of races that are traditionally considered monstrous such as Lizardfolk or Kobolds.
Additionally, I can't be certain of if the version of Mordenkainen Presents: Monsters of the Multiverse made available today will be the same as the one that releases on book shelves or on digital retailers such as Amazon and the DM's Guild. If it is the same, then I can't help but be annoyed that this is the path that is being taken with new species options by Wizards of the Coast. In trying to soften the representations of these traditionally evil and monstrous races, the nuance of their histories is being sacrificed. I mean seriously, who can tell me that they already new that Kobolds as a species are most commonly asexual or that Goblins refer to all kinds of magic as "booyagh" with no distinction between spell schools or casting methods.
I understand that there are many people who don't want races to be generically good or evil just because that's how they were made, especially because of the real life implications of that line of thinking. And I agree with them. A race shouldn't be unswervingly good or evil. But that doesn't mean that helpful and significant details about the cultures of a species has to be lost in the crossfire. Like in real life, members of a single species will have near-infinite variation in attitude and capability, which will be highly influenced by the nature of the society in which they live. Without knowing what the culture of a species is like, it becomes a lot harder to make a character who is interesting or meaningful because we don't know that the likely circumstances of that character's life may have been or have a frame of reference from which we can make our characters different from the rest of their kind.
Sorry if I went off on a rant there at the end. I'm a bit of a lore fiend and, at least to an extent, I don't want to have to do lore work for all of these new options myself. I've already got way too much lore work on my plate as is. However, if you skipped to the end of that massive post hoping for a TL;DR, you're in luck.
TL;DR: My personal opinion of Mordenkainen Presents: Monsters of the Multiverse is that it is a fine enough supplement with regards to the mechanical upgrades made to the species that it contains, especially those that were sorely in need of them. However, the lack of new information about any of the presented species is disheartening and makes me genuinely annoyed. This is especially true in cases such as Goblinoids where Wizards of the Coast is attempting to soften the portrayal of certain species and make it more possible for them to not be seen as monsters since there is a lack of actual "fabric" to help connect these new interpretations with previous ones and justify their existence in lore. With regards to changes in the way the monsters contained in this book are presented, my opinion is very underdeveloped as I have not read through the 250+ statblocks in the book and have no intention of doing so any time soon.
Does anybody agree with me even a little bit on any of this, or am I just blowing steam over nothing? I'm genuinely curious and wouldn't be making this post if I wasn't. And if you don't agree with me, feel free to tell me why. I'm happy to discuss viewpoints on this topic, especially since Wizards of the Coast now owns D&D Beyond and is likely able to see the things we post on the forums more easily.
I don't have a problem with most of MotMThe more I've read of it, actually, the less I like it - I didn't realise the issue with legacy critters not being available for those who hadn't already purchases Volo's or Mord's, because I already have them. I think that's an irritating thing, though I strongly suspect it's WotC and not DDB that has made that decision.I have to admit widening my eyes when I saw hobgoblins as "Typically Lawful Neutral." I was like...what? I've always seen hobgoblins are basically uruk-hai from LotR, hardly the picture of "neutral." The idea of them being helpful and friendly is just anathema to me - I see them as highly-disciplined, highly-motivated, and highly-trained soldiers. Ruthless, remorseless, and vicious. I simply can't picture ex-fey, friendly hobgoblins being recruited en-masse by Azarr Kul in "Red Hand of Doom" or the like.
The other thing that bugs me about MotM is the changes to spellcasting monsters. The idea of getting rid of spell slots for an NPC wizard, for example, might arguably streamline combat, but at the cost of really nerfing the DM running the critter. Two days ago, in my CoS campaign that I'm DMing, I was able to seriously threaten my players' party with a 6th-level spellcaster who hit them with a fireball. The players were terrified the caster was going to hit them with another one - and he could have, it's just that he was trying to escape - but if I was using the MotM rules, he would only have been able to throw fireball 1/day. Yes, I know I can change them around, but the point is that it's harder to figure out what a 6th-level wizard-equivalent should get if I'm customising the NPC. So as a DM, I'm left with either running the NPC as-is and having a spellcaster that's far more spell-limited than the equivalent PC (not to mention that there's not even any mention of the NPC's spellcasting level or class anymore); trying to balance what spells should be 1/day or 2/day, etc.; or having to recreate the NPC from scratch. All of these negate the benefit of having a quick critter ready for an unexpected encounter.
So the evoker wizard, for example: the "combat wombat" of spellcasters, gets mage armor twice per day (what? Why? It lasts eight freakin' hours!), but doesn't have counterspell?? And gets to do 12d10 + 9 force damage (which practically nothing is resistant to) every frakkin' round! But only has 4 cantrips and 4 spells to choose from. And because there is nothing on the wizard's actual level or a list of spell slots, it makes it much harder to customise the NPC, especially on the fly.
I am just really glad I still have access to the legacy versions of the monsters/NPCs. I definitely won't be getting the hard copy version of MotM, though. :(
To be as concise as possible: I feel that Monsters of the Multiverse was portrayed in all the adverts leading up to now as new and interesting updates to old creatures, which would help pave the way for conducting campaigns in settings other than the Forgotten Realms; and that promise was not delivered on. If I had known the book was going to contain so little by way of new content, I would have abstained from purchasing. A few new monsters, new versions of a few races, the rest is copy+paste from previous published material with a few modifications to statblocks.
Not DDB's fault, just another letdown from WotC's end; kind of like the physical copies of Tasha's that fell apart the first time they were opened.
Ongoing Projects: The Mimic Book of Mimics :: SHARK WEEK
Completed Projects: The Trick-or-Treat Table
My Homebrews: Races :: Classes :: Spells :: Items :: Monsters
I'm not thrilled with the choice to break up the demons, devils, and yugoloths and just stick them in the book alphabetically based on their individual names.
Rebalancing the PC race options was nice, though. Finally fixed most of the old ones.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
It’s driving me nuts. The same way that the races are not grouped in the character builder is driving me nuts too. The new Genasi are all over the place, the Sea Elf is down in the “S”es instead of next to the other elves…. It’s so disorganized I wish I hadn’t bought the damned thing.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Oh wow! Never heard about the Tasha's thing, but I absolutely agree with your view of the new book. There was an implicit promise that was far from delivered on. I personally was expecting there to be a bunch of new races that hadn't been in any books before. Instead we got reworks of a bunch of elf subraces that didn't need the rework since they were already pretty strong to begin with. In fact, Eladrin now have less detail since the seasonal Personality Traits and Flaws aren't there.
Also, the species options from MtG stuff are here, which is nice, but they don't change anything or expand on lore. In fact Centaurs and Satyrs have among the shortest racial descriptions in the book alongside Goliaths.
They barely even copy+pasted because they didn't include any of the lore that was there for these character options from their original outings. All they did was duplicate the features and do a bit of light tuning.
I'm getting too worked up over this. But still, what you pointed out is irking me now too. They portrayed this in marketing as an important book that'd portray a ton of races in setting-agnostic ways and then barely delivered on that promise, if at all.
I doubt they’ll ever “fix” it. Welcome to WotC’s DDB. 😭
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
No, they were up front that this was not going to contain any new races. But they did imply that they were actually to write new lore in this book, which they most assuredly did not do.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
I've been here a while. They ended up with weird stuff like this the last time they made a bunch of additions the the character builder. They'll probably have it sorted soon.
I’m not gonna hold my breath.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Yeah, they'll get it sorted out right after they implement the Supernatural Gifts from Mythic Odysseys of Theros, right?
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Why did they not include the Grung as a fantastical race? 😩
Or the Locathah.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
They weren’t as popular as the Tortles.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
You perfectly expressed my opinion right now, much better than I could have.
I compared the Illithid section of volo and the entries in Multiverse and was underwhelmed lore wise. And volo wasnt extraordinary in terms of lore compared to older editions books (like all 5e books frankly).
About the races, i am sympathetic to the changes because the goblins and orcs in my campaign are already NOT d&d goblinoids or evil ...etc and I never cared for Faerun, YET I dont understand why they erase in one stroke Faerun and its evil goblinoids since it's a multiverse.
So, what I see about the removal of volo and tome and this book is one of those or a mixture of them:
They are entering a transition phase to 6e.
They intend to have settings specific books which contains lore.
They intend to release a book to explain the multiverse and how to connect the official settings and yours.
They have the datas and people dont buy setting books any more, except the exandria ones.
They are in fact owned by a red dragon who doesnt use its 19 int but just want more gold and more gold, and they are pushed to release more books than they can handle because gold.
That one.👆
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
My two biggest problems with the new rules and the way they affect dnd beyond and the character builder are as follows
1. If race centric ability score increases are no longer a thing and you get to choose a plus 2 and plus 1 then what's the point of the custom origin feature from Tasha's? that lets you do the same thing?
2. I hate the way the "legacy" rules races are displayed separately from the new ones, it makes it so much more annoying to look at
I was not keen on the idea of this book to begin with. Mostly because I had originally thought it was just more races, which I am in the minority of believing we do not need anymore. I would rather have more classes or sub-classes than anymore races. I was convinced that it was just updates to things, so I got the book. And I can not say how disappointed I am in it. I am all for being inclusive but it is our differences that make us unique. I am just not a fan of this at all. I am curious about the legacy race thing if people who have a DM subscription that have the two old books and do content sharing, will the other players then have access to them? Does anyone know?
This book was honestly not worth the money or the hype, they nerfed everything. Aasimars no longer get an Angelic Guide, their radiant consumption is based off of your prof modifier now, which makes it from a nice steady source of damage, to a tickle no matter what level you are.
If you already owned the older books (like I do) then yes, you have access to both sets of races. My players, who benefit from my sharing content also have access to both sets of races too.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting