"Wizard hat off" question, so to speak: with there being so much lore out there already, both from previous editions and the surrounding media (books, video games, what have you), would new/updated lore change how you build your adventures or would it just present a possible different lens/point of view for said adventure building?
I ask because my personal default would just be to seek out what's already out there, but I'm also gonna make the assumption that if one is looking for new lore, then you're already aware of what's out there and it's not what you're looking for.
What are you talking about when you mean lore?
I find that what people generally mean by lore is "the stuff that isn't the Statblock". I'm not into history lessons and that is fine in the Wiki if I really want to do a deep delve. However, I'd want everything I need to make the monster come alive in my games. Personalities, mannerisms, mentalities, tactics, social structure and so forth. I find that hard to do when dealing with a large range of different types of enemies. Statblocks are pretty easy and the reason why I'm paying WotC to make the Statblocks for me (let's face it, most are just rehashes with slight modifications, I can do that quite easily if I wanted) is because I don't have the time and energy for dragging the relevant information to make the world feeling engaging and deep like that.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
"Wizard hat off" question, so to speak: with there being so much lore out there already, both from previous editions and the surrounding media (books, video games, what have you), would new/updated lore change how you build your adventures or would it just present a possible different lens/point of view for said adventure building?
I ask because my personal default would just be to seek out what's already out there, but I'm also gonna make the assumption that if one is looking for new lore, then you're already aware of what's out there and it's not what you're looking for.
Honestly a good question. Hadn't really thought of that perspective.
For me I think it would also depend on the lore used if I'd shift some current understandings. But on the flip side I also can like different ideas at the same time. Like with gnolls I love the fiendish idea. I also like the basic Eberron concept of moral diversity amongst gnolls. And so odds are that if WotC made more lore even for those that had them I'd probably find stuff that was inspiring. For example my initial thoughts on goblins being changed to fey is hesitant, but if there's a lore change it might inspire me to get an idea for a fey-goblin quest even if I use humanoid goblins elsewhere.
I'm also coming from a perspective where I didn't really know much about D&D lore. I played two sessions of LMoP back in like 2014/2015 and then it wasn't until 2022 that I started playing with a friend group. (I actually made this account to help build my first character since the LMoP was me taking over a character for someone that got busy.) So my forays into 'new lore' haven't been fueled by knowing what's already there and looking for something else, but getting that first look. In my experience the wikis I've seen get way too dense or lore-tangled. (One question answered and then 5 more opened because you have know idea what the side-tangents are about.) Forum threads can be useful but also hit-and-miss.
Once I started actually reading MM lore I've found it pretty useful for idea-generation. It offers a nice baseline of "This monster's lore snippet is cool (such as aboleths). I want to know more."
So not entirely sure how I'd respond to new/changed lore. Odds are there'd be a give-and-take. Some things would probably be misses for me. Whereas other things would be cool ideas that would get me enthused about something.
Part of it is the principle that the core 3 are supposed to provide a solid foundation for building fleshed out characters, settings, and encounters. The new PHB is particularly lacking in that regard, and the myth of “setting agnosticism” as a productive starting point doesn’t fill me with confidence that the new MM is going to fare much better, though I admit I haven’t taken the time to look at most of the teasers that are now out there. Regardless of what I personally already own or have access to, I recognize that for the game to remain successful in the future content such as lore needs to be immediately accessible, not handwaved with “go figure it out for yourself” or “buy some more products”. I’m not expecting anything like the chapters of detail we got in VGtM or MToF, but I would prefer they reiterated the same degree of detail we got in the ‘14 MM rather than not providing that basic standard of content to future players who- understandably- believe that the core 3 should provide enough information to run a coherent campaign. And, to further address the point of how sufficient “it’s already on the internet” is, by that logic a vast amount of space was wasted in the new DMG offering detailed guidance on the various facets of being a DM when there’s already a plethora of guides and videos on that subject out on the inter-webs. And yet the in-depth DM guidance was a popular feature. The reason for that is one of the reasons people prefer a certain depth of lore be maintained in other revisions.
IMHO descriptions, lore, and background aren't rules, but they boost the book's quality, your imagination and give players context, especially those starting out with D&D.
Species have traits tied to the history surrounding them, and this goes for monsters or any other creature in D&D. Classes make more sense when there's an explanation about your combat style, the source of your magic, or why you're better at certain skills than others
Even the alignments and purposes of gods have reasons behind them.
"Wizard hat off" question, so to speak: with there being so much lore out there already, both from previous editions and the surrounding media (books, video games, what have you), would new/updated lore change how you build your adventures or would it just present a possible different lens/point of view for said adventure building?
I ask because my personal default would just be to seek out what's already out there, but I'm also gonna make the assumption that if one is looking for new lore, then you're already aware of what's out there and it's not what you're looking for.
What are you talking about when you mean lore?
I find that what people generally mean by lore is "the stuff that isn't the Statblock". I'm not into history lessons and that is fine in the Wiki if I really want to do a deep delve. However, I'd want everything I need to make the monster come alive in my games. Personalities, mannerisms, mentalities, tactics, social structure and so forth. I find that hard to do when dealing with a large range of different types of enemies. Statblocks are pretty easy and the reason why I'm paying WotC to make the Statblocks for me (let's face it, most are just rehashes with slight modifications, I can do that quite easily if I wanted) is because I don't have the time and energy for dragging the relevant information to make the world feeling engaging and deep like that.
Your post was the one that prompted my question, but I went back and saw that I was reading it incorrectly. Still, some very good responses to my question from everyone!
I concur a lot with what you're looking for in a monster; those characteristics are suuuuper critical to making a world feel like it lives outside of contact with the players.
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 find that what people generally mean by lore is "the stuff that isn't the Statblock". I'm not into history lessons and that is fine in the Wiki if I really want to do a deep delve. However, I'd want everything I need to make the monster come alive in my games. Personalities, mannerisms, mentalities, tactics, social structure and so forth. I find that hard to do when dealing with a large range of different types of enemies. Statblocks are pretty easy and the reason why I'm paying WotC to make the Statblocks for me (let's face it, most are just rehashes with slight modifications, I can do that quite easily if I wanted) is because I don't have the time and energy for dragging the relevant information to make the world feeling engaging and deep like that.
Yes, this is the "lore" I'm referring to when I say we need lore for monsters IN the MM. Suggesting that people can just look elsewhere for it since it's all been published before is not a good practice for a hobby that wants to grow in my opinion. As The_Ace_of_Rogues stated above, the core 3 books are supposed to be enough to let someone new to the game create a fun campaign. If the majority of the monsters are just a collection of stats and advice on how to use them in combat that to me is not nearly enough for new players.
I could see the argument for not including this critical information for imagination sparking from a pure (and many would say greedy) business standpoint if WotC's intention was to come out with compelling and somewhat broad monster lore books in the future to sell more products. But with the publishing schedule so light it certainly seems likely this isn't going to be done unless it's something very narrow like the dragon and giant-themed supplements we have seen in the last few years.
I've been buying DnD products for a long time. Can I look up monster lore elsewhere? Sure. Do I have the time or desire to do this for the basic information Linklite outlined? Absolutely not. When I buy WotC products I want the material to be usable as-is, not to be a rough outline that gives you some bare bones information but requires you to look elsewhere for the details that let DnD be a fantasy escape rather than a combat montage. I think the people who are saying, "We don't need this information, it's already out there, go find it," are not considering inexperienced players and DMs. Or, in my case, DMs who don't have as much memorized as I wish I did.
Is there any chance the Monster Manual will ever include all of the monsters from monster compendiums that have been produced over the years? Personally, I'm getting tired of having to "homebrew" monsters that were created 20-30 years ago.
4th edition had a full-up database of all published monsters (from their online compendium). It had 5,300 entries. Other editions of D&D are harder to track because they were never published in that way, but it's likely that other editions had more. It's simply not feasible to convert them all to 5th edition and publish them in a sensibly sized book.
"Wizard hat off" question, so to speak: with there being so much lore out there already, both from previous editions and the surrounding media (books, video games, what have you), would new/updated lore change how you build your adventures or would it just present a possible different lens/point of view for said adventure building?
I ask because my personal default would just be to seek out what's already out there, but I'm also gonna make the assumption that if one is looking for new lore, then you're already aware of what's out there and it's not what you're looking for.
As someone that's still relatively new to DnD, the first book I got was volos guide to monster, which got me hooked due to all the info/lore it provided within. Due to that I find a lot of the books released after that to be lacking - at least the ones I have purchased since. In saying that, have stumbled across some of the old 3.5e books and they are beautiful, wish some got updated.
If all or even the majority of lore is outsourced or left in previous editions of DnD, then a lot of it will be lost as time goes on and new players arrive. If there's also no new lore added then believe DnD will start feeling vary empty overall. Don't forget about your new players while trying to appease the wishes of some older players.
Also I'm personally starting to wonder if it's mainly the people that homebrew or wish to sell their own DnD content that don't want to see lore in DnD books.. just a thought
My perspective might be a bit different because I only run prewritten adventures usually set in third party created worlds but if you're putting lore in the main Monster Manual whose lore do you put? Forgotten Realms? Eberron? Because the Gnolls running around my Drakkenheim campaign are very different from the ones in those settings, just as they're different from each other. I think it then raises the question of whether D&D has or needs an "official" setting and whether lore is universal or just something the 50% of the audience who homebrew worlds will ignore as not right for their worlds
Let’s say Forgotten Realms because it’s the most “classic fantasy” setting. As I said, this idea of “setting agnosticism” is a nice fairy tale, but if you actually want the core 3 to be an effective starting point for new players coming to the game then saying “here’s the rules, you’re on your own unless you give us more money” for all the rest isn’t a good starting point. It’s much easier for people to ignore text they don’t want to use than write an entire setting with a diversified array of types of monsters with their own quirks and behaviors from scratch.
... if you actually want the core 3 to be an effective starting point for new players coming to the game then saying “here’s the rules, you’re on your own unless you give us more money” for all the rest isn’t a good starting point.
Especially when you're already charging for three books just to get started.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
First post has been updated with this week's videos!
Also if you have an aversion to spiders you may want to avoid the last five or so minutes of the Monstrosities one. You can check out when they start talking about driders.
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!
Also if you have an aversion to spiders you may want to avoid the last five or so minutes of the Monstrosities one. You can check out when they start talking about driders.
There are two kinds of D&D players in those world.
Those who hate spiders and will avoid them like the plague.
And those who hate spiders and will put them into their games so they can kill and burn every last one of the terrible fiends! DIE, SPIDER, DIE!
As a GM, I want my books to be as practical as possible. For me, they are tools first, and read for pleasure a distant second. When I am running a game, I already either know the lore beforehand due to preparation, or I am going to pull stuff out my butt as I go; I am not going to waste time reading about lore in the MM in the middle of the game. Additionally, while I am not like old-old, I am in my 30s now so I am not young either, and I do not want to strain my back carrying around extra pages that I am not going to actively use in my games. I sort of tried to use the MM one time, but I quickly realized how much space it would take up on the table and how unwieldy it was, so I just left it in the bag and used my smartphone as usual and supplement it with monster cards instead.
In my opinion, MM needs a format overhaul. As a GM tool, MM being in a book format just is not good. MM being in card format is the best since you can easily clip them to the GM screen or shove it in the adventure book and use them to bookmark encounters if you are running a premade campaign. Alternatively and/or additionally, a binder with loose leaf pages is a nice middle ground between monster cards and a book. It is not as compact as cards, but you can store more information on each page like a book, but you can still take each individual page out for reference like a card so you do not have to flip through the entire book.
On the flip side, I guess if we have better physical GM tools, I would not be as opposed to having lore inside MM. While we do have monster cards, they are only available for the early monster books, so if I have to go physical, then I do not really have a choice since the book is the only option.
As a GM, I want my books to be as practical as possible. For me, they are tools first, and read for pleasure a distant second. When I am running a game, I already either know the lore beforehand due to preparation, or I am going to pull stuff out my butt as I go; I am not going to waste time reading about lore in the MM in the middle of the game. Additionally, while I am not like old-old, I am in my 30s now so I am not young either, and I do not want to strain my back carrying around extra pages that I am not going to actively use in my games. I sort of tried to use the MM one time, but I quickly realized how much space it would take up on the table and how unwieldy it was, so I just left it in the bag and used my smartphone as usual and supplement it with monster cards instead.
In my opinion, MM needs a format overhaul. As a GM tool, MM being in a book format just is not good. MM being in card format is the best since you can easily clip them to the GM screen or shove it in the adventure book and use them to bookmark encounters if you are running a premade campaign. Alternatively and/or additionally, a binder with loose leaf pages is a nice middle ground between monster cards and a book. It is not as compact as cards, but you can store more information on each page like a book, but you can still take each individual page out for reference like a card so you do not have to flip through the entire book.
On the flip side, I guess if we have better physical GM tools, I would not be as opposed to having lore inside MM. While we do have monster cards, they are only available for the early monster books, so if I have to go physical, then I do not really have a choice since the book is the only option.
Tome of Summoning leaned into card format 100% and I actually dig it.
What are you talking about when you mean lore?
I find that what people generally mean by lore is "the stuff that isn't the Statblock". I'm not into history lessons and that is fine in the Wiki if I really want to do a deep delve. However, I'd want everything I need to make the monster come alive in my games. Personalities, mannerisms, mentalities, tactics, social structure and so forth. I find that hard to do when dealing with a large range of different types of enemies. Statblocks are pretty easy and the reason why I'm paying WotC to make the Statblocks for me (let's face it, most are just rehashes with slight modifications, I can do that quite easily if I wanted) is because I don't have the time and energy for dragging the relevant information to make the world feeling engaging and deep like that.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Honestly a good question. Hadn't really thought of that perspective.
For me I think it would also depend on the lore used if I'd shift some current understandings. But on the flip side I also can like different ideas at the same time. Like with gnolls I love the fiendish idea. I also like the basic Eberron concept of moral diversity amongst gnolls. And so odds are that if WotC made more lore even for those that had them I'd probably find stuff that was inspiring. For example my initial thoughts on goblins being changed to fey is hesitant, but if there's a lore change it might inspire me to get an idea for a fey-goblin quest even if I use humanoid goblins elsewhere.
I'm also coming from a perspective where I didn't really know much about D&D lore. I played two sessions of LMoP back in like 2014/2015 and then it wasn't until 2022 that I started playing with a friend group. (I actually made this account to help build my first character since the LMoP was me taking over a character for someone that got busy.) So my forays into 'new lore' haven't been fueled by knowing what's already there and looking for something else, but getting that first look. In my experience the wikis I've seen get way too dense or lore-tangled. (One question answered and then 5 more opened because you have know idea what the side-tangents are about.) Forum threads can be useful but also hit-and-miss.
Once I started actually reading MM lore I've found it pretty useful for idea-generation. It offers a nice baseline of "This monster's lore snippet is cool (such as aboleths). I want to know more."
So not entirely sure how I'd respond to new/changed lore. Odds are there'd be a give-and-take. Some things would probably be misses for me. Whereas other things would be cool ideas that would get me enthused about something.
This is a signature. It was a simple signature. But it has been upgraded.
Belolonandalogalo, Sunny | Draíocht, Kholias | Eggo Lass, 100 Dungeons
Talorin Tebedi, Vecna: Eve | Cherry, Stormwreck | Chipper, Strahd
We Are Modron
Get rickrolled here. Awesome music here. Track 48, 3/23/25, Birth of an Age
Part of it is the principle that the core 3 are supposed to provide a solid foundation for building fleshed out characters, settings, and encounters. The new PHB is particularly lacking in that regard, and the myth of “setting agnosticism” as a productive starting point doesn’t fill me with confidence that the new MM is going to fare much better, though I admit I haven’t taken the time to look at most of the teasers that are now out there. Regardless of what I personally already own or have access to, I recognize that for the game to remain successful in the future content such as lore needs to be immediately accessible, not handwaved with “go figure it out for yourself” or “buy some more products”. I’m not expecting anything like the chapters of detail we got in VGtM or MToF, but I would prefer they reiterated the same degree of detail we got in the ‘14 MM rather than not providing that basic standard of content to future players who- understandably- believe that the core 3 should provide enough information to run a coherent campaign. And, to further address the point of how sufficient “it’s already on the internet” is, by that logic a vast amount of space was wasted in the new DMG offering detailed guidance on the various facets of being a DM when there’s already a plethora of guides and videos on that subject out on the inter-webs. And yet the in-depth DM guidance was a popular feature. The reason for that is one of the reasons people prefer a certain depth of lore be maintained in other revisions.
IMHO descriptions, lore, and background aren't rules, but they boost the book's quality, your imagination and give players context, especially those starting out with D&D.
Species have traits tied to the history surrounding them, and this goes for monsters or any other creature in D&D. Classes make more sense when there's an explanation about your combat style, the source of your magic, or why you're better at certain skills than others
Even the alignments and purposes of gods have reasons behind them.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
D&D StaffYour post was the one that prompted my question, but I went back and saw that I was reading it incorrectly. Still, some very good responses to my question from everyone!
I concur a lot with what you're looking for in a monster; those characteristics are suuuuper critical to making a world feel like it lives outside of contact with the players.
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
Yes, this is the "lore" I'm referring to when I say we need lore for monsters IN the MM. Suggesting that people can just look elsewhere for it since it's all been published before is not a good practice for a hobby that wants to grow in my opinion. As The_Ace_of_Rogues stated above, the core 3 books are supposed to be enough to let someone new to the game create a fun campaign. If the majority of the monsters are just a collection of stats and advice on how to use them in combat that to me is not nearly enough for new players.
I could see the argument for not including this critical information for imagination sparking from a pure (and many would say greedy) business standpoint if WotC's intention was to come out with compelling and somewhat broad monster lore books in the future to sell more products. But with the publishing schedule so light it certainly seems likely this isn't going to be done unless it's something very narrow like the dragon and giant-themed supplements we have seen in the last few years.
I've been buying DnD products for a long time. Can I look up monster lore elsewhere? Sure. Do I have the time or desire to do this for the basic information Linklite outlined? Absolutely not. When I buy WotC products I want the material to be usable as-is, not to be a rough outline that gives you some bare bones information but requires you to look elsewhere for the details that let DnD be a fantasy escape rather than a combat montage. I think the people who are saying, "We don't need this information, it's already out there, go find it," are not considering inexperienced players and DMs. Or, in my case, DMs who don't have as much memorized as I wish I did.
4th edition had a full-up database of all published monsters (from their online compendium). It had 5,300 entries. Other editions of D&D are harder to track because they were never published in that way, but it's likely that other editions had more. It's simply not feasible to convert them all to 5th edition and publish them in a sensibly sized book.
As someone that's still relatively new to DnD, the first book I got was volos guide to monster, which got me hooked due to all the info/lore it provided within. Due to that I find a lot of the books released after that to be lacking - at least the ones I have purchased since. In saying that, have stumbled across some of the old 3.5e books and they are beautiful, wish some got updated.
If all or even the majority of lore is outsourced or left in previous editions of DnD, then a lot of it will be lost as time goes on and new players arrive. If there's also no new lore added then believe DnD will start feeling vary empty overall. Don't forget about your new players while trying to appease the wishes of some older players.
Also I'm personally starting to wonder if it's mainly the people that homebrew or wish to sell their own DnD content that don't want to see lore in DnD books.. just a thought
My perspective might be a bit different because I only run prewritten adventures usually set in third party created worlds but if you're putting lore in the main Monster Manual whose lore do you put? Forgotten Realms? Eberron? Because the Gnolls running around my Drakkenheim campaign are very different from the ones in those settings, just as they're different from each other. I think it then raises the question of whether D&D has or needs an "official" setting and whether lore is universal or just something the 50% of the audience who homebrew worlds will ignore as not right for their worlds
Let’s say Forgotten Realms because it’s the most “classic fantasy” setting. As I said, this idea of “setting agnosticism” is a nice fairy tale, but if you actually want the core 3 to be an effective starting point for new players coming to the game then saying “here’s the rules, you’re on your own unless you give us more money” for all the rest isn’t a good starting point. It’s much easier for people to ignore text they don’t want to use than write an entire setting with a diversified array of types of monsters with their own quirks and behaviors from scratch.
Especially when you're already charging for three books just to get started.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
D&D StaffFirst post has been updated with this week's videos!
Also if you have an aversion to spiders you may want to avoid the last five or so minutes of the Monstrosities one. You can check out when they start talking about driders.
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
There are two kinds of D&D players in those world.
Those who hate spiders and will avoid them like the plague.
And those who hate spiders and will put them into their games so they can kill and burn every last one of the terrible fiends! DIE, SPIDER, DIE!
This is a signature. It was a simple signature. But it has been upgraded.
Belolonandalogalo, Sunny | Draíocht, Kholias | Eggo Lass, 100 Dungeons
Talorin Tebedi, Vecna: Eve | Cherry, Stormwreck | Chipper, Strahd
We Are Modron
Get rickrolled here. Awesome music here. Track 48, 3/23/25, Birth of an Age
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
D&D StaffSpiders don't bother me as long as I know where they are; they are very beneficial friends!
It's the ones that sneak up on me that must suffer D:<
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
Oh, have I got a magic spear for you: https://bg3.wiki/wiki/Vision_of_the_Absolute
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
D&D StaffI have played through BG3 SO MANY TIMES and I've NEVER put this spear together
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
As a GM, I want my books to be as practical as possible. For me, they are tools first, and read for pleasure a distant second. When I am running a game, I already either know the lore beforehand due to preparation, or I am going to pull stuff out my butt as I go; I am not going to waste time reading about lore in the MM in the middle of the game. Additionally, while I am not like old-old, I am in my 30s now so I am not young either, and I do not want to strain my back carrying around extra pages that I am not going to actively use in my games. I sort of tried to use the MM one time, but I quickly realized how much space it would take up on the table and how unwieldy it was, so I just left it in the bag and used my smartphone as usual and supplement it with monster cards instead.
In my opinion, MM needs a format overhaul. As a GM tool, MM being in a book format just is not good. MM being in card format is the best since you can easily clip them to the GM screen or shove it in the adventure book and use them to bookmark encounters if you are running a premade campaign. Alternatively and/or additionally, a binder with loose leaf pages is a nice middle ground between monster cards and a book. It is not as compact as cards, but you can store more information on each page like a book, but you can still take each individual page out for reference like a card so you do not have to flip through the entire book.
On the flip side, I guess if we have better physical GM tools, I would not be as opposed to having lore inside MM. While we do have monster cards, they are only available for the early monster books, so if I have to go physical, then I do not really have a choice since the book is the only option.
Check Licenses and Resync Entitlements: < https://www.dndbeyond.com/account/licenses >
Running the Game by Matt Colville; Introduction: < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-YZvLUXcR8 >
D&D with High School Students by Bill Allen; Season 1 Episode 1: < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52NJTUDokyk&t >
I'm mostly eager for the art. Though hope there some monsters for cr 1-3 cuz seems only talking bout 10+
There's not a lot to show off until you're getting into tier 3. Plus that's the ones that are considered to need more tuning for effective play.
Tome of Summoning leaned into card format 100% and I actually dig it.
DM mostly, Player occasionally | Session 0 form | He/Him/They/Them
EXTENDED SIGNATURE!
Doctor/Published Scholar/Science and Healthcare Advocate/Critter/Trekkie/Gandalf with a Glock
Try DDB free: Free Rules (2024), premade PCs, adventures, one shots, encounters, SC, homebrew, more
Answers: physical books, purchases, and subbing.
Check out my life-changing