You will see a word next to Monstrosity. (Titan) That is the kkeyword they were talking about. You can now have a proper kaiju fight. BTW the winner will always be
Multiattack. The blob makes two Pseudopod attacks and uses Engulf. It can replace one attack with a use of Restraining Glob.
Engulf. The blob moves up to its Speed and can move through the spaces of Huge or smaller creatures and objects. Strength Saving Throw: DC 23, each creature or object whose space the blob enters for the first time during this move. Failure: The target is engulfed. While engulfed, a target has Total Cover against attacks and other effects outside the blob, and when the blob moves, the engulfed target moves with it. A nonmagical object is destroyed after spending 1 minute engulfed.
While engulfed, a creature takes 21 (6d6) Force damage at the start of each of its turns, is suffocating, has the Restrained condition, and repeats the save at the end of each of its turns. An engulfed creature that is reduced to 0 Hit Points dissolves into ash, which is ejected into the Astral Sea.
Success: The target escapes and enters the nearest unoccupied space.
But with that insanity what makes the Tarresque a 30? it was easy to kill in 2014...
Reflective Carapace. If the tarrasque is targeted by a Magic Missile spell or a spell that requires a ranged attack roll, roll 1d6. On a 1–5, the tarrasque is unaffected. On a 6, the tarrasque is unaffected and reflects the spell, turning the caster into the target.
Thunderous Bellow (Recharge 5–6). Constitution Saving Throw: DC 27, each creature and each object that isn’t being worn or carried in a 150-foot Cone. Failure: 78 (12d12) Thunder damage, and the target has the Deafened and Frightened conditions until the end of its next turn. Success: Half damage only.
Bonus Actions
Swallow.Strength Saving Throw: DC 27, one Large or smaller creature Grappled by the tarrasque (it can have up to six creatures swallowed at a time). Failure: The target is swallowed, and the Grappled condition ends. A swallowed creature has the Blinded and Restrained conditions and can’t teleport, it has Total Cover against attacks and other effects outside the tarrasque, and it takes 56 (16d6) Acid damage at the start of each of the tarrasque’s turns.
If the tarrasque takes 60 damage or more on a single turn from a creature inside it, the tarrasque must succeed on a DC 20 Constitution saving throw at the end of that turn or regurgitate all swallowed creatures, each of which falls in a space within 10 feet of the tarrasque and has the Prone condition. If the tarrasque dies, any swallowed creature no longer has the Restrained condition and can escape from the corpse using 20 feet of movement, exiting Prone.
Legendary Actions
Legendary Action Uses: 3. Immediately after another creature’s turn, the tarrasque can expend a use to take one of the following actions. The tarrasque regains all expended uses at the start of each of its turns.
Onslaught. The tarrasque moves up to half its Speed, and it makes one Claw or Tail attack.
World-Shaking Movement. The tarrasque moves up to its Speed. At the end of this movement, the tarrasque creates an instantaneous shock wave in a 60-foot Emanation originating from itself. Creatures in that area lose Concentration and, if Medium or smaller, have the Prone condition. The tarrasque can’t take this action again until the start of its next turn.
note there are other abilities that are OP with our big Kiaju but like Godzillia he's the king of the monsters.
The problem with the Tarrasque is that the intuitive way to use it as a Godzilla type threat, visible from miles away.... but it's not actually durable enough for that role, because it's very hard to fit a suitable threat level within bounded accuracy (it's not impossible, but you have to cheat pretty extensively).
You will see a word next to Monstrosity. (Titan) That is the kkeyword they were talking about. You can now have a proper kaiju fight. BTW the winner will always be
Multiattack. The blob makes two Pseudopod attacks and uses Engulf. It can replace one attack with a use of Restraining Glob.
Engulf. The blob moves up to its Speed and can move through the spaces of Huge or smaller creatures and objects. Strength Saving Throw: DC 23, each creature or object whose space the blob enters for the first time during this move. Failure: The target is engulfed. While engulfed, a target has Total Cover against attacks and other effects outside the blob, and when the blob moves, the engulfed target moves with it. A nonmagical object is destroyed after spending 1 minute engulfed.
While engulfed, a creature takes 21 (6d6) Force damage at the start of each of its turns, is suffocating, has the Restrained condition, and repeats the save at the end of each of its turns. An engulfed creature that is reduced to 0 Hit Points dissolves into ash, which is ejected into the Astral Sea.
Success: The target escapes and enters the nearest unoccupied space.
But with that insanity what makes the Tarresque a 30? it was easy to kill in 2014...
Reflective Carapace. If the tarrasque is targeted by a Magic Missile spell or a spell that requires a ranged attack roll, roll 1d6. On a 1–5, the tarrasque is unaffected. On a 6, the tarrasque is unaffected and reflects the spell, turning the caster into the target.
Thunderous Bellow (Recharge 5–6). Constitution Saving Throw: DC 27, each creature and each object that isn’t being worn or carried in a 150-foot Cone. Failure: 78 (12d12) Thunder damage, and the target has the Deafened and Frightened conditions until the end of its next turn. Success: Half damage only.
Bonus Actions
Swallow.Strength Saving Throw: DC 27, one Large or smaller creature Grappled by the tarrasque (it can have up to six creatures swallowed at a time). Failure: The target is swallowed, and the Grappled condition ends. A swallowed creature has the Blinded and Restrained conditions and can’t teleport, it has Total Cover against attacks and other effects outside the tarrasque, and it takes 56 (16d6) Acid damage at the start of each of the tarrasque’s turns.
If the tarrasque takes 60 damage or more on a single turn from a creature inside it, the tarrasque must succeed on a DC 20 Constitution saving throw at the end of that turn or regurgitate all swallowed creatures, each of which falls in a space within 10 feet of the tarrasque and has the Prone condition. If the tarrasque dies, any swallowed creature no longer has the Restrained condition and can escape from the corpse using 20 feet of movement, exiting Prone.
Legendary Actions
Legendary Action Uses: 3. Immediately after another creature’s turn, the tarrasque can expend a use to take one of the following actions. The tarrasque regains all expended uses at the start of each of its turns.
Onslaught. The tarrasque moves up to half its Speed, and it makes one Claw or Tail attack.
World-Shaking Movement. The tarrasque moves up to its Speed. At the end of this movement, the tarrasque creates an instantaneous shock wave in a 60-foot Emanation originating from itself. Creatures in that area lose Concentration and, if Medium or smaller, have the Prone condition. The tarrasque can’t take this action again until the start of its next turn.
note there are other abilities that are OP with our big Kiaju but like Godzillia he's the king of the monsters.
Sk fly 61 ft away and he is nothing still
if you run a big monster out in the open where someone can fly out of range, you are doing it wrong. A DM should always limit the player mobility with environmental challenges, and include other low level flying threats if your players go for the cheese.
Never allow the player to choose the battle zone, you're the DM you know what your players can and can not do, got an aarakocra Sorlock with 300ft ranged Eldritch Blasts... have a few Demilichs flying esscort, do it in the underdark with only 20foot clearance for the Tarrasque, have a flock of 20 Cockatrice Regents running with the Tarrasque.
lots of ways to nerf the players in ways where they can't easily adapt while the DM controls the cards. No need to cheat the rules, just play the set up in a way the players have to adjust on the fly, challenge yourself as a DM to kill the Barbarian using monsters as written while using the enviroment to your advantage. Of course let the players know, hard challenge mode has been unlocked. You still want the players to have fun after all.
Gawds below I can make any monster challenging against any party, by just playing set up the game in advance.
I can't wait for a Dungeon Crawl in tight spaces with traps and obstacles, only to find a cult to an lost deity who summon a Blob of Annihilation, while the party is fighting in a tight space the Cultists are trying to stop the Party while they toss innocent victims into the blob as sacrifice. Challenge Save the innocents, Kill the BoA and Cultist, survive without being turned to ash in the astral plane.
So I will be 100% honest, I kinda jumped on this and made assumptions based on what was said. "We also, in the monster Manuel have created apex version of certain creature types that didn't have an apex version. Some of our creature types such as giants, dragons and fiends have had high CR monsters that are Iconic, examples of those creature types, we also have the Tarrasque as the Apex of Monstrosities." The only monster they directly call an Apex is the Tarrasque, before making note they plan on bringing in more apex monsters such as the the hag, vampire, Colosus, and blob of annihilation.
I made a bad assumption they were saying the tarrasque is Apex, and as such cr 30 is what Apex is. Thats my fault, however I still feel their attempt on makign more apex monsters falls short when multiple of them cant even make it to a Cr past cr 25. Heck, in all of dnd 14 and now 24, theres no cr29. A literally missing cr, they decided not to add with an apex. Seems silly.
So I will be 100% honest, I kinda jumped on this and made assumptions based on what was said. "We also, in the monster Manuel have created apex version of certain creature types that didn't have an apex version. Some of our creature types such as giants, dragons and fiends have had high CR monsters that are Iconic, examples of those creature types, we also have the Tarrasque as the Apex of Monstrosities." The only monster they directly call an Apex is the Tarrasque, before making note they plan on bringing in more apex monsters such as the the hag, vampire, Colosus, and blob of annihilation.
I made a bad assumption they were saying the tarrasque is Apex, and as such cr 30 is what Apex is. Thats my fault, however I still feel their attempt on makign more apex monsters falls short when multiple of them cant even make it to a Cr past cr 25. Heck, in all of dnd 14 and now 24, theres no cr29. A literally missing cr, they decided not to add with an apex. Seems silly.
that's totally cool, and thank you for the correction and the answer.
I think there is a reason for that, though -- that dearth of creatures above CR 25. And that reason is that an Average party of 20th level won't face them within the way the Encounter Design approach works.
The way that encounters are supposed to be designed is basically based on an Average (average stats, average hit points, average damage, average AC) Party of Four Player Characters. You then Choose an Encounter Difficulty, and consult a table in the DMG.
In 2024, the highest value (high Difficulty, 20th level) is 22,000 per PC.
In 2014, that is a Deadly, 20th Level encounter for 12,700 per PC.
This figure is multiplied by the number of party members -- 4, in the design case.
This gives us a budget (which the total of all monsters in the encounter is not allowed to go over).
For 2024, that budget is 88,000, and
For 2014, that budget is 50,800.
A single CR 25 creature has an XP cost of 75,000.
That's for both 2014 and 2024 versions, btw -- the table is the same.
This means that
in 2014, the highest practical CR in general use is CR 23,
whereas in 2024, it is CR 25.
So, in an odd turn of events, CR 25 is about the maximum effective CR that should be in regular use, assuming the basic standards for the determination of CR -- anything higher than CR 25 is basically a circumstance where death is pretty much a given (the encounter is going to be more difficult than High) , the PCs are utterly outmatched (even at 20th level), and whatever other little concepts you want to apply.
IOW: They followed their own rules for Encounter and Creature design.
So given that, my immediate question becomes not "where is the cr 29", but rather "why do they have a CR 30?". The obvious answer to that question is that some folks are all about optimization, and an average is a theoretical construct that cannot account for all possible variations along the full potentiality.
If 26 plus is outside the reach of the "standard average party", then the standard average party isn't going to encounter anything above CR 25. In order to make most of the monsters available and useful, the monsters are going to be mostly within the upper design limit of CR 25.
This does mean that the creation of monsters for those higher CRs -- 26 to 30 -- is left in the hands of the DMs and 3rd parties, and for future high level adventures that WotC puts out.
If you have a party of 5 PCs, then your budget is able to reach higher -- and for someone like me, where I have 7 or 9 players in my active games, I have a maximum of 198,000 -- so I can easily put them up against a Tarrasque, even though it is still a High Difficulty encounter for them. But not my party of 7, who fall just a couple thousand XP short.
They still determine the overall CR on the basis of an Average party of Four, though -- they just adjusted that average according to the new party average for the AC, HP, DPR, etc averages. (and, yes, they did -- the math is in there, and is why a 2014 Dire Wolf has more HP than a 2024 one).
Which is a lot of stuff, but the point is this explains why there is one CR 25, two Cr 24, and then the lone CR 30 at the top. They are, basically, going to be the least encountered creatures , and really possible only at the peak of the Tiers.
A Tier 4 party is generally only going to be dealing with a CR 17 creature or better because a 17th Level Low Difficulty Encounter has a budget of 18000 for a party of four -- and that's the bottom. The DM is expected to know their PCs and how much better they are than average, and so needs to scale up from there if the Party is more capable, and scale down if less capable.
Now factor in the whole deal about the Action Economy -- a single creature generally needs to be either pretty damned immune to everything, or be able to match a number of attacks that could theoretically be in the area of a dozen from that party of four, with an average DPR. If you want it to last three rounds, then it needs to have the ability to endure three rounds of average DPR in HP, and if you want it to hold out longer, it needs to have more.
Which most creatures save the top two cannot do. though, really, I haven't looked at the CR 25, so its a guess.,
So there should be minions -- and minions have to come out of that same XP budget, pushing the highest potential CR down further. And we are still talking about a High Difficulty Encounter -- and this, again, was something they talked about in those videos and marketing -- most of the time, the end fight won't be a 1 v 4, with the BBEG alone and outnumbered. It will be a 4 v 4 -- and if the BBEG is really high CR, then the helpers (all those lower CR versions of things they also added in) will need to track with that, so the general shift is going to reduce the overall CR of the Bad Guy in favor of encouraging folks to create encounters with more creatures as their final fights.
Now, the funny part: I decided I wanted to have a more effective CR determination for me, and I wanted it to have a tighter relationship with PC level, so I dove into all the design stuff. And that's why I know all of this. My overall shift has a couple different design goals (pacing, quirks about the setting, and so forth) added on to the core, but the core still exists.
And I bumped my "average party" numbers up by 1.5 for each level. FOr AC, HP, Saves, Attacks per round, Proficiency bonus, Attack Bonus, and DPR. I have a total of 60 CRs (one each for Low, Medium, and High Difficulty, by level). I have to calculate the XP per PC value of the Highest CR creature for this from the maximum possible value.
How to do that is interesting, and where I am right now. I am doing my average party with a number of 8 in the party (my average number of PCs), and so I calculate backwards to the .individual value from the Tarrasque (which, I believe, is part of why it is there) which places my High Difficulty Encounter maximum budget per player at 19,375. I personally find that low, so I now have to tweak the CR 30 value to be 176,000 XP for a CR 30 -- so that my general numbers fall in line with the 2024 value of 22,000.
This will have the effect of making my encounters much, much harder, overall, as my budget will be slightly higher against the average, but I will be able to say that my 20th level "OP" characters can truly find a CR 30 fight to be the most difficult one possible -- but it will be possible, within my encounter design.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities .-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-. An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more. Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
So, in an odd turn of events, CR 25 is about the maximum effective CR that should be in regular use, assuming the basic standards for the determination of CR -- anything higher than CR 25 is basically a circumstance where death is pretty much a given (the encounter is going to be more difficult than High) , the PCs are utterly outmatched (even at 20th level), and whatever other little concepts you want to apply.
Which wasn't true in 2014 and does not appear changed in 2024.The 2024 encounter budgets are not harder for single monsters than in 2014 -- for a party of 4 at level 20
In 2014, the Deadly encounter budget was 50,800 xp or more, the limit is the daily budget of 160,000 (guess what, CR 30 fits)
In 2024, the High encounter budget is 88,000 xp or less.
The big difference is that multi-monster encounters are much more dangerous.
In 2014 filling your daily budget with 4 monsters is 4x CR 18 (80,000 base, 160,000 adjusted), with 8 monsters it's 5x CR 11, 3x CR 12 (61,200 base, 153,000 adjusted)
In 2024 filling your high encounter budget with 4 monsters is 4x CR 19 (88,000), with 8 monsters it's 5x CR 13, 3x CR 14 (84,500).
Also In 2014 you had to take into account any encounter where the Enemy to PC creature ratio was 3:1 or higher , or vise versa, that could potentially cause the Encounter budget to increase or decrease depending on numbers. ( any encounter where multiple same-type creatures, especially those with specific actions or abilities that have the potential to drastically swing the flow of combat, are present may very well cause the Encounter to become more difficult than initially anticipated. )
As for the budget differences between 2014 and 2024, they dropped the ‘14 easy column, and boosted the high table based on changes to PC Epic Boons. [ fyi, 2024 it would take a minimum of 7 Lv20 chars for a Tarrasque to keep it high/deadly encounter, and 12 Lv20 Pc’s to barely make it a medium high enough encounter. ] and the understanding that for Dire Wolves, the function of a hit also results in automatic prone condition and the fact that they changed the total hit-die count from 5d10 to 3d10 also means they reduced the maximum potential for growth and ability to adjust the creature to higher than normal PC ability by insuring that PC deaths aren’t potentially automatic. Having a group of creatures that can possibly kill a 5th level player by constantly knocking them into a disadvantageous position while maintaining the “high” ground position with advantage, and the potential for a TPK becomes a greater reality. ( so dropping the average Hp of the creature is a means of controlling the potential, but also means the CR of the creature might be still off based on DM and party composition.)
In effect, the designers have forced DM/GMs to keep a close eye on their ability to maintain the “fun” and agency of players while allowing the DM/GM to manage any OP builds. ( which most 2024 characters have built in by design. )
One step forward, one step back, and we are right back where we started. Except now eggshells are involved.
That’s why some find the changes unnecessary and unpalatable, more headaches than needed just for the convenience of faster play.
Now that I have my physical copy, I think it needs pointing out that arranging the entries strictly alphabetically really sucks.
If I want to look up Incubus/Sucubus (same creature btw, it decides at the end of a long rest which form to take), yet the Incubus and Sucubus pages are 150 pages apart ("I" for Incubus, "S" for Sucubus). Want to look up demons? Don't look in "D" for demon, look at "M" for Marilith, "G" for Glabrezu and Goristro, etc. Want to look up Hags? You'd better know the name of each type, because you'll only find one under "H".
WTF - it's almost as if some of the devs have never actually tried looking things up in a real, paper book before.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Playing D&D since 1982
Have played every version of the game since Basic (Red Box Set), except that abomination sometimes called 4e.
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities .-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-. An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more. Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
The dmg is supposed to be a reference tool. It's practically unusable during play because the creatures that should be together are hundreds of pages apart and it requires you to remember the name of the monster.
At least with the old one you Don't have to go seach the entire book for a dragon or a devil.
The new layout works best if you are using a premade adventure and need to find a creature. It doesn't work so well if you are trying to make your own adventure and need to select the creatures.
The other side of the argument is that the 2014 Monster Manual relied on you to be very aware of what type of creature each monster was. Yes it was easier to find certain demons if you didn’t know their names but if you wanted a werewolf you had to know that they were filed under L for lycanthrope or that a black pudding was under O for ooze. That’s totally inaccessible for new DMs who don’t have years of experience
Encyclopedias aren't layed out the way you suggest. If you look up Hummingbird in an encyclopedia you will find that there are over 300 species of hummingbird, and you will find info on the most common ones in the Humminbird entry. If it is a good encyclopedia, you will even get a list of all 320 species in that entry. - that's not how the monster manual is now laid out.
If you look up "dog" in an encyclopedia you will find a list of MANY breeds along with information on each one (I just did to test my theory, btw, and yes I used an actual book not the internet) - that's not how the monster manual is now laid out.
Every Monster Manual previously published for D&D has known the value of grouping certain creatures. BTW Yuan-ti are still grouped, as are a few other creatures, yet they ungrouped most others. It has always made sense to keep all the demons together, the devils together, the dragons together, the hags together, beholder-kin together, fungi together, etc.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Playing D&D since 1982
Have played every version of the game since Basic (Red Box Set), except that abomination sometimes called 4e.
The other side of the argument is that the 2014 Monster Manual relied on you to be very aware of what type of creature each monster was. Yes it was easier to find certain demons if you didn’t know their names but if you wanted a werewolf you had to know that they were filed under L for lycanthrope or that a black pudding was under O for ooze. That’s totally inaccessible for new DMs who don’t have years of experience
They could also an index at the back that groups monsters together, if the book itself is organized by pure alpha
Like, books have been around for a few years now. We have solutions for this kind of thing
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
The other side of the argument is that the 2014 Monster Manual relied on you to be very aware of what type of creature each monster was. Yes it was easier to find certain demons if you didn’t know their names but if you wanted a werewolf you had to know that they were filed under L for lycanthrope or that a black pudding was under O for ooze. That’s totally inaccessible for new DMs who don’t have years of experience
They could also an index at the back that groups monsters together, if the book itself is organized by pure alpha
Like, books have been around for a few years now. We have solutions for this kind of thing
There is an appendix. It doesn't give page numbers but it does group them together.
Still a lot of page turning to decide which demons you want to use and even worse during an encounter if you are trying to use the monster manual.
There is an appendix. It doesn't give page numbers but it does group them together.
That's... baffling
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
There is an appendix. It doesn't give page numbers but it does group them together.
The lack of page numbers is stupid, but the reality is that I've never used a physical monster manual where I didn't need to do a lot of page flipping and insert a bunch of bookmarks, no matter how it was organized.
The thing is, if I know what a Barghest is, I probably know that Werewolves are Lycanthropes. Even if I didn't, at least in 2014e there was a nice index with page numbers if I'm looking for an specific creature.
The way 2014e was laid out, if I decided I wanted a shapechanger, I could browse the shapechangers section and get inspiration. The way it's laid out in 2024e, I can browse...creatures beginning with the same letter, I guess?
I went digital so this isn't a big deal for me, but I don't think it was a good move. It would have been better to keep the original setup. Or arrange it by CR or something if they wanted to change it up - something that makes it convenient to browse when you're looking for inspiration rather than fulfilling someone's OCD complex.
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.
I think one way to get both alphabetical and type together would've been some naming convention changes.
For example instead of Air Elemental, Earth Elemental, Fire Elemental, Water Elemental doing Elemental of Air, Elemental of Earth, Elemental of Fire, Elemental of Water.
Obviously that's not the easiest with all monster types. It would be weird to have a monster called Devil Bearded Devil for example. But one possibility.
For me I haven't used a physical MM so I can't speak to that. Though when reading through the MM here on DDB I do like that if I go to Demons/Devils I can get that overview of them all. It does help me to get some inspiration. and also allows a natural grouping for the "this text applies to all of these" with those creatures.
The thing is, if I know what a Barghest is, I probably know that Werewolves are Lycanthropes.
Not the best of examples -- werebear, wereboar, wererat, weretiger, and werewolf sort next to each other anyway, and a barghest isn't a lycanthrope and wouldn't be next to them anyway (shapechanger wasn't a category -- lycanthrope was a category).
If I'm looking through a list of monsters for inspiration, alphabetical order isn't the best, but I also don't want them grouped by type, I want them grouped by habitat or theme -- monsters you might find in a haunted forest, monsters you might find in a volcano, etc. I did find 'devil' and 'demon' useful categories, because they're a common theme that are likely to show up together, but on the other hand.. a gelatinous cube is an ooze? And then there's all the things that aren't grouped together -- ghost, shadow, specter, and wraith are at least as similar as a lot of categories, and there's the nonsense of poltergeist being listed as a subheading under specter.
The 2024 monster manual was supposed to come out in 2024, right? that's why it was called the 2024 monster manual. I'm sort of surprised that it's coming out in 2025.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Sk fly 61 ft away and he is nothing still
The problem with the Tarrasque is that the intuitive way to use it as a Godzilla type threat, visible from miles away.... but it's not actually durable enough for that role, because it's very hard to fit a suitable threat level within bounded accuracy (it's not impossible, but you have to cheat pretty extensively).
if you run a big monster out in the open where someone can fly out of range, you are doing it wrong. A DM should always limit the player mobility with environmental challenges, and include other low level flying threats if your players go for the cheese.
Never allow the player to choose the battle zone, you're the DM you know what your players can and can not do, got an aarakocra Sorlock with 300ft ranged Eldritch Blasts... have a few Demilichs flying esscort, do it in the underdark with only 20foot clearance for the Tarrasque, have a flock of 20 Cockatrice Regents running with the Tarrasque.
lots of ways to nerf the players in ways where they can't easily adapt while the DM controls the cards. No need to cheat the rules, just play the set up in a way the players have to adjust on the fly, challenge yourself as a DM to kill the Barbarian using monsters as written while using the enviroment to your advantage. Of course let the players know, hard challenge mode has been unlocked. You still want the players to have fun after all.
Gawds below I can make any monster challenging against any party, by just playing set up the game in advance.
I can't wait for a Dungeon Crawl in tight spaces with traps and obstacles, only to find a cult to an lost deity who summon a Blob of Annihilation, while the party is fighting in a tight space the Cultists are trying to stop the Party while they toss innocent victims into the blob as sacrifice. Challenge Save the innocents, Kill the BoA and Cultist, survive without being turned to ash in the astral plane.
So I will be 100% honest, I kinda jumped on this and made assumptions based on what was said. "We also, in the monster Manuel have created apex version of certain creature types that didn't have an apex version. Some of our creature types such as giants, dragons and fiends have had high CR monsters that are Iconic, examples of those creature types, we also have the Tarrasque as the Apex of Monstrosities." The only monster they directly call an Apex is the Tarrasque, before making note they plan on bringing in more apex monsters such as the the hag, vampire, Colosus, and blob of annihilation.
I made a bad assumption they were saying the tarrasque is Apex, and as such cr 30 is what Apex is. Thats my fault, however I still feel their attempt on makign more apex monsters falls short when multiple of them cant even make it to a Cr past cr 25. Heck, in all of dnd 14 and now 24, theres no cr29. A literally missing cr, they decided not to add with an apex. Seems silly.
that's totally cool, and thank you for the correction and the answer.
I think there is a reason for that, though -- that dearth of creatures above CR 25. And that reason is that an Average party of 20th level won't face them within the way the Encounter Design approach works.
The way that encounters are supposed to be designed is basically based on an Average (average stats, average hit points, average damage, average AC) Party of Four Player Characters. You then Choose an Encounter Difficulty, and consult a table in the DMG.
This gives us a budget (which the total of all monsters in the encounter is not allowed to go over).
That's for both 2014 and 2024 versions, btw -- the table is the same.
This means that
So, in an odd turn of events, CR 25 is about the maximum effective CR that should be in regular use, assuming the basic standards for the determination of CR -- anything higher than CR 25 is basically a circumstance where death is pretty much a given (the encounter is going to be more difficult than High) , the PCs are utterly outmatched (even at 20th level), and whatever other little concepts you want to apply.
IOW: They followed their own rules for Encounter and Creature design.
So given that, my immediate question becomes not "where is the cr 29", but rather "why do they have a CR 30?". The obvious answer to that question is that some folks are all about optimization, and an average is a theoretical construct that cannot account for all possible variations along the full potentiality.
If 26 plus is outside the reach of the "standard average party", then the standard average party isn't going to encounter anything above CR 25. In order to make most of the monsters available and useful, the monsters are going to be mostly within the upper design limit of CR 25.
This does mean that the creation of monsters for those higher CRs -- 26 to 30 -- is left in the hands of the DMs and 3rd parties, and for future high level adventures that WotC puts out.
If you have a party of 5 PCs, then your budget is able to reach higher -- and for someone like me, where I have 7 or 9 players in my active games, I have a maximum of 198,000 -- so I can easily put them up against a Tarrasque, even though it is still a High Difficulty encounter for them. But not my party of 7, who fall just a couple thousand XP short.
They still determine the overall CR on the basis of an Average party of Four, though -- they just adjusted that average according to the new party average for the AC, HP, DPR, etc averages. (and, yes, they did -- the math is in there, and is why a 2014 Dire Wolf has more HP than a 2024 one).
Which is a lot of stuff, but the point is this explains why there is one CR 25, two Cr 24, and then the lone CR 30 at the top. They are, basically, going to be the least encountered creatures , and really possible only at the peak of the Tiers.
A Tier 4 party is generally only going to be dealing with a CR 17 creature or better because a 17th Level Low Difficulty Encounter has a budget of 18000 for a party of four -- and that's the bottom. The DM is expected to know their PCs and how much better they are than average, and so needs to scale up from there if the Party is more capable, and scale down if less capable.
Now factor in the whole deal about the Action Economy -- a single creature generally needs to be either pretty damned immune to everything, or be able to match a number of attacks that could theoretically be in the area of a dozen from that party of four, with an average DPR. If you want it to last three rounds, then it needs to have the ability to endure three rounds of average DPR in HP, and if you want it to hold out longer, it needs to have more.
Which most creatures save the top two cannot do. though, really, I haven't looked at the CR 25, so its a guess.,
So there should be minions -- and minions have to come out of that same XP budget, pushing the highest potential CR down further. And we are still talking about a High Difficulty Encounter -- and this, again, was something they talked about in those videos and marketing -- most of the time, the end fight won't be a 1 v 4, with the BBEG alone and outnumbered. It will be a 4 v 4 -- and if the BBEG is really high CR, then the helpers (all those lower CR versions of things they also added in) will need to track with that, so the general shift is going to reduce the overall CR of the Bad Guy in favor of encouraging folks to create encounters with more creatures as their final fights.
Now, the funny part: I decided I wanted to have a more effective CR determination for me, and I wanted it to have a tighter relationship with PC level, so I dove into all the design stuff. And that's why I know all of this. My overall shift has a couple different design goals (pacing, quirks about the setting, and so forth) added on to the core, but the core still exists.
And I bumped my "average party" numbers up by 1.5 for each level. FOr AC, HP, Saves, Attacks per round, Proficiency bonus, Attack Bonus, and DPR. I have a total of 60 CRs (one each for Low, Medium, and High Difficulty, by level). I have to calculate the XP per PC value of the Highest CR creature for this from the maximum possible value.
How to do that is interesting, and where I am right now. I am doing my average party with a number of 8 in the party (my average number of PCs), and so I calculate backwards to the .individual value from the Tarrasque (which, I believe, is part of why it is there) which places my High Difficulty Encounter maximum budget per player at 19,375. I personally find that low, so I now have to tweak the CR 30 value to be 176,000 XP for a CR 30 -- so that my general numbers fall in line with the 2024 value of 22,000.
This will have the effect of making my encounters much, much harder, overall, as my budget will be slightly higher against the average, but I will be able to say that my 20th level "OP" characters can truly find a CR 30 fight to be the most difficult one possible -- but it will be possible, within my encounter design.
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities
.-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-.
An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more.
Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
Which wasn't true in 2014 and does not appear changed in 2024.The 2024 encounter budgets are not harder for single monsters than in 2014 -- for a party of 4 at level 20
The big difference is that multi-monster encounters are much more dangerous.
Also In 2014 you had to take into account any encounter where the Enemy to PC creature ratio was 3:1 or higher , or vise versa, that could potentially cause the Encounter budget to increase or decrease depending on numbers. ( any encounter where multiple same-type creatures, especially those with specific actions or abilities that have the potential to drastically swing the flow of combat, are present may very well cause the Encounter to become more difficult than initially anticipated. )
As for the budget differences between 2014 and 2024, they dropped the ‘14 easy column, and boosted the high table based on changes to PC Epic Boons. [ fyi, 2024 it would take a minimum of 7 Lv20 chars for a Tarrasque to keep it high/deadly encounter, and 12 Lv20 Pc’s to barely make it a medium high enough encounter. ]
and the understanding that for Dire Wolves, the function of a hit also results in automatic prone condition and the fact that they changed the total hit-die count from 5d10 to 3d10 also means they reduced the maximum potential for growth and ability to adjust the creature to higher than normal PC ability by insuring that PC deaths aren’t potentially automatic. Having a group of creatures that can possibly kill a 5th level player by constantly knocking them into a disadvantageous position while maintaining the “high” ground position with advantage, and the potential for a TPK becomes a greater reality. ( so dropping the average Hp of the creature is a means of controlling the potential, but also means the CR of the creature might be still off based on DM and party composition.)
In effect, the designers have forced DM/GMs to keep a close eye on their ability to maintain the “fun” and agency of players while allowing the DM/GM to manage any OP builds. ( which most 2024 characters have built in by design. )
One step forward, one step back, and we are right back where we started. Except now eggshells are involved.
That’s why some find the changes unnecessary and unpalatable, more headaches than needed just for the convenience of faster play.
Now that I have my physical copy, I think it needs pointing out that arranging the entries strictly alphabetically really sucks.
If I want to look up Incubus/Sucubus (same creature btw, it decides at the end of a long rest which form to take), yet the Incubus and Sucubus pages are 150 pages apart ("I" for Incubus, "S" for Sucubus). Want to look up demons? Don't look in "D" for demon, look at "M" for Marilith, "G" for Glabrezu and Goristro, etc. Want to look up Hags? You'd better know the name of each type, because you'll only find one under "H".
WTF - it's almost as if some of the devs have never actually tried looking things up in a real, paper book before.
Playing D&D since 1982
Have played every version of the game since Basic (Red Box Set), except that abomination sometimes called 4e.
Have you used a print encyclopedia before?
Or a dictionary?
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities
.-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-.
An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more.
Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
The dmg is supposed to be a reference tool. It's practically unusable during play because the creatures that should be together are hundreds of pages apart and it requires you to remember the name of the monster.
At least with the old one you Don't have to go seach the entire book for a dragon or a devil.
The new layout works best if you are using a premade adventure and need to find a creature. It doesn't work so well if you are trying to make your own adventure and need to select the creatures.
The other side of the argument is that the 2014 Monster Manual relied on you to be very aware of what type of creature each monster was. Yes it was easier to find certain demons if you didn’t know their names but if you wanted a werewolf you had to know that they were filed under L for lycanthrope or that a black pudding was under O for ooze. That’s totally inaccessible for new DMs who don’t have years of experience
Encyclopedias aren't layed out the way you suggest. If you look up Hummingbird in an encyclopedia you will find that there are over 300 species of hummingbird, and you will find info on the most common ones in the Humminbird entry. If it is a good encyclopedia, you will even get a list of all 320 species in that entry. - that's not how the monster manual is now laid out.
If you look up "dog" in an encyclopedia you will find a list of MANY breeds along with information on each one (I just did to test my theory, btw, and yes I used an actual book not the internet) - that's not how the monster manual is now laid out.
Every Monster Manual previously published for D&D has known the value of grouping certain creatures. BTW Yuan-ti are still grouped, as are a few other creatures, yet they ungrouped most others. It has always made sense to keep all the demons together, the devils together, the dragons together, the hags together, beholder-kin together, fungi together, etc.
Playing D&D since 1982
Have played every version of the game since Basic (Red Box Set), except that abomination sometimes called 4e.
They could also an index at the back that groups monsters together, if the book itself is organized by pure alpha
Like, books have been around for a few years now. We have solutions for this kind of thing
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
There is an appendix. It doesn't give page numbers but it does group them together.
Still a lot of page turning to decide which demons you want to use and even worse during an encounter if you are trying to use the monster manual.
That's... baffling
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
The lack of page numbers is stupid, but the reality is that I've never used a physical monster manual where I didn't need to do a lot of page flipping and insert a bunch of bookmarks, no matter how it was organized.
The thing is, if I know what a Barghest is, I probably know that Werewolves are Lycanthropes. Even if I didn't, at least in 2014e there was a nice index with page numbers if I'm looking for an specific creature.
The way 2014e was laid out, if I decided I wanted a shapechanger, I could browse the shapechangers section and get inspiration. The way it's laid out in 2024e, I can browse...creatures beginning with the same letter, I guess?
I went digital so this isn't a big deal for me, but I don't think it was a good move. It would have been better to keep the original setup. Or arrange it by CR or something if they wanted to change it up - something that makes it convenient to browse when you're looking for inspiration rather than fulfilling someone's OCD complex.
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.
I think one way to get both alphabetical and type together would've been some naming convention changes.
For example instead of Air Elemental, Earth Elemental, Fire Elemental, Water Elemental doing Elemental of Air, Elemental of Earth, Elemental of Fire, Elemental of Water.
Obviously that's not the easiest with all monster types. It would be weird to have a monster called Devil Bearded Devil for example. But one possibility.
For me I haven't used a physical MM so I can't speak to that. Though when reading through the MM here on DDB I do like that if I go to Demons/Devils I can get that overview of them all. It does help me to get some inspiration. and also allows a natural grouping for the "this text applies to all of these" with those creatures.
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 47, 3/3/25, Goodbye to You
Not the best of examples -- werebear, wereboar, wererat, weretiger, and werewolf sort next to each other anyway, and a barghest isn't a lycanthrope and wouldn't be next to them anyway (shapechanger wasn't a category -- lycanthrope was a category).
If I'm looking through a list of monsters for inspiration, alphabetical order isn't the best, but I also don't want them grouped by type, I want them grouped by habitat or theme -- monsters you might find in a haunted forest, monsters you might find in a volcano, etc. I did find 'devil' and 'demon' useful categories, because they're a common theme that are likely to show up together, but on the other hand.. a gelatinous cube is an ooze? And then there's all the things that aren't grouped together -- ghost, shadow, specter, and wraith are at least as similar as a lot of categories, and there's the nonsense of poltergeist being listed as a subheading under specter.
The 2024 monster manual was supposed to come out in 20
24, right? that's why it was called the 2024 monster manual. I'm sort of surprised that it's coming out in 2025.