I could see that, but I think the general “wasteland survival” genre has enough interest that it’s on their radar, especially if they’re working from a fresh slate rather than trying to make Dark Sun work for their current standards.
Though I feel like Eberron can already cover a lot of what “urban fantasy” does, iirc.
I could see that, but I think the general “wasteland survival” genre has enough interest that it’s on their radar.
Survival games don't really require a full fledged setting, they tend to be small enough in scope that you can just run them in some backwater. Also, if Wizards thought survival games interested people, they probably wouldn't have published a bunch of spells and abilities that trivialize survival.
it should had consolidate all monsters from 5e hardcover books. one book for them all. but nope. like the nicely made 2024 PHB that failed with half the subclasses cut for no freaken reason. the 3 2024 books could been so much better but their greed showits. guess we will have to wait until 5e 2036
There is a reason and that's if you include everything the books become huge. This increases printing costs which increases retail pricing. And the more expensive something is, the fewer people can buy it. Plus they just become unwieldy in terms of game table use and even personal reading and perusing.
Additionally, it's really tough creating 500+ pages that are meant to be regularly used - opened, left open, tossed around, etc. - that are durable and hold up for reasonable amounts of time. Again, you're looking at increased production costs if you want to up the quality of the physical book.
Now, there's an argument to be made for the consumer that they could've offered digital-only versions of the PHB and MM which included more/all of the 2014 ruleset subclasses and monsters. That's not entirely unreasonable. But the time needed for converting that many items was likely prohibitive, especially given the extensive playtesting and survey efforts WOTC did for the core subclasses and monsters - and they are, after all, a for-profit company. Holding a few things back for further pubs (and more money spent by gamers) isn't an unexpected or wholly awful move.
500 monsters is already conceivably more than an average DM will use. And some monsters are specifically in one setting or another, so they can re-sell the settings with specialized monsters like Velociraptors as "Clawfoot Raptor" in the upcoming Eberron sourcebook.
The MM is more than large enough for your average DM to have sufficient variety already.
Lmao, so basicaly the same book, 95% are the same monsters. WotC just pulled Overwatch 2, maybe even worse. How are you people eating this?
Of course its 95% the same. Its a new edition, updated to match the 2024 ruleset / philosophy and to correct past irregularities (namely monsters not matching their CR).
You may as well say that the 2024 Player's Handbook is 95% the same because it has all the same classes!
This what a new edition means - updated and improved (theoretically, at least).
Of course, if you're happy with the 2014 Player's Handbook / Monster Manual / Whatever then there is no need to buy the new books if you don't want to (though I feel if you're using the 2024 Players Handbook then 2014 monsters will probably feel even more unbalanced since things have changed).
My guess if they’re doing a new setting is something like a “Dark Sun 2.0” that leans closer to Fallout than Road Warrior. Stark landscape, more thoroughly isolated settlements, some scary factions, but also some fairly stable and inoffensive societies and not so much scarcity and deprivation that 90% of the populace looks like war refugees.
"Dark Sun, but more Fallout than Mad Max" frankly sounds awesome. Isolated and naive yet idealistic "vault dwellers" would be a very interesting shot in the arm for that setting.
There is a reason and that's if you include everything the books become huge. This increases printing costs which increases retail pricing. And the more expensive something is, the fewer people can buy it. Plus they just become unwieldy in terms of game table use and even personal reading and perusing.
Additionally, it's really tough creating 500+ pages that are meant to be regularly used - opened, left open, tossed around, etc. - that are durable and hold up for reasonable amounts of time. Again, you're looking at increased production costs if you want to up the quality of the physical book.
Now, there's an argument to be made for the consumer that they could've offered digital-only versions of the PHB and MM which included more/all of the 2014 ruleset subclasses and monsters. That's not entirely unreasonable. But the time needed for converting that many items was likely prohibitive, especially given the extensive playtesting and survey efforts WOTC did for the core subclasses and monsters - and they are, after all, a for-profit company. Holding a few things back for further pubs (and more money spent by gamers) isn't an unexpected or wholly awful move.
There is a reason and that's if you include everything the books become huge. This increases printing costs which increases retail pricing. And the more expensive something is, the fewer people can buy it. Plus they just become unwieldy in terms of game table use and even personal reading and perusing.
Additionally, it's really tough creating 500+ pages that are meant to be regularly used - opened, left open, tossed around, etc. - that are durable and hold up for reasonable amounts of time. Again, you're looking at increased production costs if you want to up the quality of the physical book.
Now, there's an argument to be made for the consumer that they could've offered digital-only versions of the PHB and MM which included more/all of the 2014 ruleset subclasses and monsters. That's not entirely unreasonable. But the time needed for converting that many items was likely prohibitive, especially given the extensive playtesting and survey efforts WOTC did for the core subclasses and monsters - and they are, after all, a for-profit company. Holding a few things back for further pubs (and more money spent by gamers) isn't an unexpected or wholly awful move.
Instead they'll just make you buy 3 of them.
If you want one book and want it to be cheap, just print out the Free Rules (or SRD / Basic PDF once those are updated.)
There is a reason and that's if you include everything the books become huge. This increases printing costs which increases retail pricing. And the more expensive something is, the fewer people can buy it. Plus they just become unwieldy in terms of game table use and even personal reading and perusing.
Additionally, it's really tough creating 500+ pages that are meant to be regularly used - opened, left open, tossed around, etc. - that are durable and hold up for reasonable amounts of time. Again, you're looking at increased production costs if you want to up the quality of the physical book.
Now, there's an argument to be made for the consumer that they could've offered digital-only versions of the PHB and MM which included more/all of the 2014 ruleset subclasses and monsters. That's not entirely unreasonable. But the time needed for converting that many items was likely prohibitive, especially given the extensive playtesting and survey efforts WOTC did for the core subclasses and monsters - and they are, after all, a for-profit company. Holding a few things back for further pubs (and more money spent by gamers) isn't an unexpected or wholly awful move.
Instead they'll just make you buy 3 of them.
Or since, it takes no time and effort, you can easily just use your old books and upgrade the monsters, or homebrew your own. Easy, no time investment at all.
no, the PHB 2024 should had the other subclasses. then the PHB 2024 would been PREFECT. but nope.
base on your logic, new people that join and buy PHB 2024 would then be FORCED to buy PHB 2014 for the MISSING subclasses. oh, that is so logical Mr. Spock.
no, the PHB 2024 should had the other subclasses. then the PHB 2024 would been PREFECT. but nope.
base on your logic, new people that join and buy PHB 2024 would then be FORCED to buy PHB 2014 for the MISSING subclasses. oh, that is so logical Mr. Spock.
6 updated subclasses are coming out with the Forgotten Realms setting book. If you want to use them on D&D Beyond, you will be "forced" to buy them.
The updated Artificer class (and 3 updated subclasses) are coming out with the Eberron setting book in August. If you want to use them on D&D Beyond, you will be "forced" to buy them.
This is how it works. They put time and effort in, and we pay for it if we want it. You are free to continue using the 2014 rulebooks that you own. If you wish to have the things that they've spent time and money developing, you will have to pay for it.
Welcome to how the world works. Is this your first edition change? I'm up to six now.
IT'S MONSTER MANUAL RELEASE DAY. I will be unpinning this preview thread and setting it loose into the forum thread ether. If you don't have your copy yet, I seriously hope you enjoy it once it releases (which will be soon).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Your Friendly Neighborhood Community Manager (she/her) You can call me LT. :)
CM Hat On| CM Hat Off Generally active from 9am - 6pm CDT [GMT-5]. Thank you for your patience if you message me outside of those hours!
I've spent some time today with the actual book - and with the 2014 MM alongside it.
While much of the art is indeed very good (and in many cases an improvement over the 2014 art), my overwhelming reaction is disappointment.
It seems very clear to me that the primary driver in this update was simplification. Not improvement, not thoughtful reimagining or revising. But just simplifying. As a result, my impression on doing a dozen or so side-by-side comparisons is that the 2025 monsters have been mostly nerfed - the complete opposite of what we expected, given the overall trend in the 2024 rules to increase PC power levels.
While it's true many monsters have been granted a few more hit points (admittedly some, like the lich, were properly bumped up many hit points), I saw many instances of the monsters otherwise being depowered. One huge subtraction - which I'm sure has been talked about here - is the deletion of any creature having resistance or immunity against nonmagical weapon damage. There seems to be no good reason for this other than to reduce the number of words in the stat block. Fiends, fey, and undead should have this feature - not just because of game tradition but because it helps 1) make them more challenging opponents and 2) mechanically reinforces their eldritch/otherworldly nature.
I saw multiple instances of a creature's attack damage having been reduced (either by number of die, size of die, or both). And of course, many creatures have far fewer innate spells to cast (and many of the remaining ones are useless in a combat situation).
Removing drow and orcs from the MM is just stupid. Yes, I understand the reasons. I disagree with them vehemently. And the "conversion" table provided is all but useless, robbing the original creatures of flavor and specificity.
And I will harp once more on the "strict" ordering of monsters via alpha by name. It's just bad, bad design. NPCs should have their own section. Dragons, demons, devils, etc. Putting glabrezu in G robs of it context and comparison with other demons, which is often crucial for DMs (new or experienced). And while you have to flip back and forth for all the dragons (formerly organized under dragon by color and metal), for some reason slaadi are all grouped together, despite their being named, like dragons, by color.
Also repeating myself: this overhaul is even more disappointing when compared to the excellent (and to me, invaluable) monster collection FLEE, MORTALS! That WOTC had that book to look at and get inspired by and yet went in the opposite direction is inexplicable to me. (Yes, I realize that F,M! also reduces actual spell lists for monsters; however, in most cases, it's replaced with effective and fun traits and attacks that don't leave the DM feeling bored or restricted. I still disagree with reducing liches to having a handful of actual spells to cast, but that's a discussion for another post.)
I remain pretty positive on the 2024 rules themselves, as laid out in the 2024 PHB. I think it's improvement over the 2014 rules set. But the 2025 MM is, for me, just a letdown in design and creativity. WOTC seems to have prized simplicity and a clean layout over design improvements.
(Personally, I vastly prefer the parchment-y design for monster stat blocks over the newer one, but that's just me.)
If WotC would respect the works and even update to 5e/ D&D One art standards ( like the new dragons ) lost/ forgotten dragons from say Dragon Magazine... hmm 65 by Richard Alan Lloyd and later issues. THAT would be truly a tremendus joy!
Can you do that WotC?? At least Gem dragons? Can anyone with contacts with WotC or even Michael Witwer confirm that smidge of info? A yes or no would suffice.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I could see that, but I think the general “wasteland survival” genre has enough interest that it’s on their radar, especially if they’re working from a fresh slate rather than trying to make Dark Sun work for their current standards.
Though I feel like Eberron can already cover a lot of what “urban fantasy” does, iirc.
Lmao, so basicaly the same book, 95% are the same monsters. WotC just pulled Overwatch 2, maybe even worse. How are you people eating this?
Survival games don't really require a full fledged setting, they tend to be small enough in scope that you can just run them in some backwater. Also, if Wizards thought survival games interested people, they probably wouldn't have published a bunch of spells and abilities that trivialize survival.
Was the Dungeons and Dragons Monster Manual not supposed to have Dungeons and Dragons Monsters? Huh?
First time with a new edition huh?
The same claim could be made since 2nd Edition.
it should had consolidate all monsters from 5e hardcover books. one book for them all. but nope. like the nicely made 2024 PHB that failed with half the subclasses cut for no freaken reason. the 3 2024 books could been so much better but their greed showits. guess we will have to wait until 5e 2036
There is a reason and that's if you include everything the books become huge. This increases printing costs which increases retail pricing. And the more expensive something is, the fewer people can buy it. Plus they just become unwieldy in terms of game table use and even personal reading and perusing.
Additionally, it's really tough creating 500+ pages that are meant to be regularly used - opened, left open, tossed around, etc. - that are durable and hold up for reasonable amounts of time. Again, you're looking at increased production costs if you want to up the quality of the physical book.
Now, there's an argument to be made for the consumer that they could've offered digital-only versions of the PHB and MM which included more/all of the 2014 ruleset subclasses and monsters. That's not entirely unreasonable. But the time needed for converting that many items was likely prohibitive, especially given the extensive playtesting and survey efforts WOTC did for the core subclasses and monsters - and they are, after all, a for-profit company. Holding a few things back for further pubs (and more money spent by gamers) isn't an unexpected or wholly awful move.
500 monsters is already conceivably more than an average DM will use. And some monsters are specifically in one setting or another, so they can re-sell the settings with specialized monsters like Velociraptors as "Clawfoot Raptor" in the upcoming Eberron sourcebook.
The MM is more than large enough for your average DM to have sufficient variety already.
Of course its 95% the same. Its a new edition, updated to match the 2024 ruleset / philosophy and to correct past irregularities (namely monsters not matching their CR).
You may as well say that the 2024 Player's Handbook is 95% the same because it has all the same classes!
This what a new edition means - updated and improved (theoretically, at least).
Of course, if you're happy with the 2014 Player's Handbook / Monster Manual / Whatever then there is no need to buy the new books if you don't want to (though I feel if you're using the 2024 Players Handbook then 2014 monsters will probably feel even more unbalanced since things have changed).
"Dark Sun, but more Fallout than Mad Max" frankly sounds awesome. Isolated and naive yet idealistic "vault dwellers" would be a very interesting shot in the arm for that setting.
Instead they'll just make you buy 3 of them.
Having multiple monster books is something that's been a thing since first edition. Doesn't bother me.
If you want one book and want it to be cheap, just print out the Free Rules (or SRD / Basic PDF once those are updated.)
Or since, it takes no time and effort, you can easily just use your old books and upgrade the monsters, or homebrew your own. Easy, no time investment at all.
no, the PHB 2024 should had the other subclasses. then the PHB 2024 would been PREFECT. but nope.
base on your logic, new people that join and buy PHB 2024 would then be FORCED to buy PHB 2014 for the MISSING subclasses. oh, that is so logical Mr. Spock.
6 updated subclasses are coming out with the Forgotten Realms setting book. If you want to use them on D&D Beyond, you will be "forced" to buy them.
The updated Artificer class (and 3 updated subclasses) are coming out with the Eberron setting book in August. If you want to use them on D&D Beyond, you will be "forced" to buy them.
This is how it works. They put time and effort in, and we pay for it if we want it. You are free to continue using the 2014 rulebooks that you own. If you wish to have the things that they've spent time and money developing, you will have to pay for it.
Welcome to how the world works. Is this your first edition change? I'm up to six now.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
D&D Staff-emerges from the void-
IT'S MONSTER MANUAL RELEASE DAY. I will be unpinning this preview thread and setting it loose into the forum thread ether. If you don't have your copy yet, I seriously hope you enjoy it once it releases (which will be soon).
Your Friendly Neighborhood Community Manager (she/her)
You can call me LT. :)
CM Hat On | CM Hat Off
Generally active from 9am - 6pm CDT [GMT-5].
Thank you for your patience if you message me outside of those hours!
Useful Links: Site Rules & Guidelines | D&D Educator Resources | Change Your Nickname | Submit a Support Ticket
Mine has literally just been delivered. It’s so pretty!
I've spent some time today with the actual book - and with the 2014 MM alongside it.
While much of the art is indeed very good (and in many cases an improvement over the 2014 art), my overwhelming reaction is disappointment.
It seems very clear to me that the primary driver in this update was simplification. Not improvement, not thoughtful reimagining or revising. But just simplifying. As a result, my impression on doing a dozen or so side-by-side comparisons is that the 2025 monsters have been mostly nerfed - the complete opposite of what we expected, given the overall trend in the 2024 rules to increase PC power levels.
While it's true many monsters have been granted a few more hit points (admittedly some, like the lich, were properly bumped up many hit points), I saw many instances of the monsters otherwise being depowered. One huge subtraction - which I'm sure has been talked about here - is the deletion of any creature having resistance or immunity against nonmagical weapon damage. There seems to be no good reason for this other than to reduce the number of words in the stat block. Fiends, fey, and undead should have this feature - not just because of game tradition but because it helps 1) make them more challenging opponents and 2) mechanically reinforces their eldritch/otherworldly nature.
I saw multiple instances of a creature's attack damage having been reduced (either by number of die, size of die, or both). And of course, many creatures have far fewer innate spells to cast (and many of the remaining ones are useless in a combat situation).
Removing drow and orcs from the MM is just stupid. Yes, I understand the reasons. I disagree with them vehemently. And the "conversion" table provided is all but useless, robbing the original creatures of flavor and specificity.
And I will harp once more on the "strict" ordering of monsters via alpha by name. It's just bad, bad design. NPCs should have their own section. Dragons, demons, devils, etc. Putting glabrezu in G robs of it context and comparison with other demons, which is often crucial for DMs (new or experienced). And while you have to flip back and forth for all the dragons (formerly organized under dragon by color and metal), for some reason slaadi are all grouped together, despite their being named, like dragons, by color.
Also repeating myself: this overhaul is even more disappointing when compared to the excellent (and to me, invaluable) monster collection FLEE, MORTALS! That WOTC had that book to look at and get inspired by and yet went in the opposite direction is inexplicable to me. (Yes, I realize that F,M! also reduces actual spell lists for monsters; however, in most cases, it's replaced with effective and fun traits and attacks that don't leave the DM feeling bored or restricted. I still disagree with reducing liches to having a handful of actual spells to cast, but that's a discussion for another post.)
I remain pretty positive on the 2024 rules themselves, as laid out in the 2024 PHB. I think it's improvement over the 2014 rules set. But the 2025 MM is, for me, just a letdown in design and creativity. WOTC seems to have prized simplicity and a clean layout over design improvements.
(Personally, I vastly prefer the parchment-y design for monster stat blocks over the newer one, but that's just me.)
ANY gem dragons in the book?
Or will they YET again be left out in the upcoming, later this year:
https://www.amazon.com/Dungeons-Dragons-Book-Michael-Witwer/dp/0593969316
If WotC would respect the works and even update to 5e/ D&D One art standards ( like the new dragons ) lost/ forgotten dragons from say Dragon Magazine... hmm 65 by Richard Alan Lloyd and later issues. THAT would be truly a tremendus joy!
Can you do that WotC?? At least Gem dragons? Can anyone with contacts with WotC or even Michael Witwer confirm that smidge of info? A yes or no would suffice.