WotC does surveys periodically, and they sometimes ask about preferred setting. They rarely release details of the surveys, but when they have, the 60% number noted by AEDorsay is about what they say, as I remember it. (If you want to dispute my memory, that’s fair.) I did a quick search, and found the page where they’d put the information has been taken down. This being the internet, it probably lives on somewhere, if folks are that invested in knowing the details. They haven’t done one in a few years though. In hindsight, it seems likely that the last round of them (again, going off of memory) was while they were in the early stages of the ‘24 revisions and trying to sort out a plan for what to develop and what not bother with.
Oh yes, because if there's one thing we know about large corporations producing disposable income products it's that they have absolutely no reason to invest in effective market research of how consumers are using their existing products. If you don't care to acknowledge the number, fine you do whatever, but let's not pretend that market research is not an extensive field of study where companies have a vested interest in getting accurate results.
Oh yes, because if there's one thing we know about large corporations producing disposable income products it's that they have absolutely no reason to invest in effective market research of how consumers are using their existing products. If you don't care to acknowledge the number, fine you do whatever, but let's not pretend that market research is not an extensive field of study where companies have a vested interest in getting accurate results.
Without knowing where the number comes from and being able to evaluate how and why it was arrived at, it is hearsay and essentially useless in this discussion other than consensus and confirmation bias.
4. The move towards setting agnostic information means that players will get a bunch of statblocks... but often times very little information about the social structure, history or aspirations of a given monster. As a result GM's who are more narrative focused over mechanical focused may very well have a harder time getting inspiration from the materials provided.
1) The aspirations are there. Ogres raid vulnerable communities. Sphinxes guard the secrets of the multiverse. Barbed Devils scour the planes for treasure. Fomorians want to spread their curse. And so on. That's more than enough to help you decide whether to use a given monster or not.
2) Why would "social structure and history" be in setting agnostic material? Those are setting-specific by definition.
So 60% of who knows what from a survey designed to find out what, from a group of people that represent what?
The 60% is a number that has little to no use in this discussion other than consensus and confirmation bias.
That is certainly an opinion.
However, when discussing the “why did they leave the lore out of the descriptions”, it certainly has use in the discussion in relation to the possible reason: it is what the majority of their user base indicates.
As to why it makes sense to leave the lore out, the same thing applies.
It isn’t an argument, either: it is a statement of what is a probable reason, and one supported by their own statements and actions (including that they just posted a position for a worldbuilding role).
As I said to the other person, I don’t care if you believe me. I don’t care if you change your mind or not. I am not arguing with you, I am pointing out different points. One can do that without arguing. A disagreement is not inherently an argument — arguments generally exist to change another persons’ mind. Not being able to have your mind changed and disagreeing, and not caring to change someone’s mind while disagreeing are still just disagreements.
I have followed the popularity of published worlds since the mid 80’s. It is one of those things that I find fascinating. So, whenever data has been released by the companies that have owned the game, I have paid attention. I could tell you how they differ from the results of assorted academic studies (where the results are even worse for published worlds) and more, but that isn’t the point of the thread nor germane.
If you want to look it up, go for it. It not, don’t. No skin off my nose either way -- it isn’t secret hidden information that only i have access to, I have no need to prove anything to you, and the basis of my disagreement is the idea that it is unwise to include the lore.
I like the new MM -- I bought it as a physical book, which is more than I can say for the 2014 version, which I did not buy because it was too packed with annoying lore i already had to spend hours removing and rewriting from the PHB so that things would work with my setting.
and the reason i liked it was that it is much easier to use — and, for the most part, is going to save me a ton of time when it comes to designing encounters and setting up adventures and random encounters. Because it doesn't have lore that has to be stripped out.
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
Oh yes, because if there's one thing we know about large corporations producing disposable income products it's that they have absolutely no reason to invest in effective market research of how consumers are using their existing products. If you don't care to acknowledge the number, fine you do whatever, but let's not pretend that market research is not an extensive field of study where companies have a vested interest in getting accurate results.
Without knowing where the number comes from and being able to evaluate how and why it was arrived at, it is hearsay and essentially useless in this discussion other than consensus and confirmation bias.
Just saying "consensus and confirmation bias" doesn't automatically make your argument strong. WotC announced the results of their market study. We can attempt to come up with some nonsensical Machiavellian reason for them to lie about the results, we can come up with excuses to disregard the data because it doesn't fit our personal narratives, or we can accept that maybe, just maybe, the people who have a vested interest in getting accurate market data hired people who know what they're doing to construct and carry out the survey, and as such it's the most accurate data we're likely to have.
4. The move towards setting agnostic information means that players will get a bunch of statblocks... but often times very little information about the social structure, history or aspirations of a given monster. As a result GM's who are more narrative focused over mechanical focused may very well have a harder time getting inspiration from the materials provided.
1) The aspirations are there. Ogres raid vulnerable communities. Sphinxes guard the secrets of the multiverse. Barbed Devils scour the planes for treasure. Fomorians want to spread their curse. And so on. That's more than enough to help you decide whether to use a given monster or not.
2) Why would "social structure and history" be in setting agnostic material? Those are setting-specific by definition.
5e-"Infernal collectors, barbed devils fanatically protect troves of treasure and scour the planes of existence for additions to their hoards. Also known as hamatulas among the ranks of the Nine Hells, these devils bedeck their barbed hides with their most prized possessions and trophies taken from those who failed to steal from them. When threatened, barbed devils strike with their thorny limbs and hurl infernal flame.
Barbed devils often serve as guards and accountants for ice devil generals, pit fiend warlords, archdevils, and similarly powerful villains. In return, barbed devils gain protection for their own collections. Many barbed devils also maintain networks of imps that search the planes for treasures of interest or usefully greedy mortals.
Barbed devils rarely collect anything as prosaic as coins and gems. Rather, they pride themselves on having the multiverse’s greatest collection of one kind of thing—typically items of rare pedigree or emblems of power. Barbed devils refuse to steal what they covet; instead they strike bargains to claim both treasure and mortal souls."
5.5e-"Creatures of unbridled greed and desire, barbed devils act as guards to the more powerful denizens of the Nine Hells and their vaults. Resembling a tall humanoid covered in sharp barbs, spines, and hooks, a barbed devil has gleaming eyes that are ever watchful for objects and creatures it might claim for itself. These fiends welcome any chance to fight when victory promises reward.
Barbed devils are known for an alertness that makes them difficult to surprise, and they attend to their duties without boredom or distraction. They use their sharp claws as weapons or hurl balls of flame at foes that try to flee them."
Looking to use one in a game, without knowing about them the 5e description is magnitudes better and comes far closer to the simplified description you used.
How is someone with out knowledge of Barbed devils supposed to take away they "scour the planes for treasure" frome the 5.5e description?
Looking to use one in a game, without knowing about them the 5e description is magnitudes better and comes far closer to the simplified description you used.
How is someone with out knowledge of Barbed devils supposed to take away they "scour the planes for treasure" frome the 5.5e description?
Literally the first sentence: "Infernal collectors, barbed devils fanatically protect troves of treasure and scour the planes of existence for additions to their hoards."
And yes, the 2014 description is a lot more bloated to get the same point across. That's a bad thing. I'd rather have that unnecessary text repurposed for more monsters and better art, which is exactly what they did.
You call it bloat, many myself do not see it as such, maybe after a few years it becomes bloat?
New DM'S buying this book are far worse off than if they bought the 5e, so are their players when you are relying on the new books to get started.
One should have one's eyes checked and update a prescription every year.
"Bloat" would be describing something in more words than necessary. Much like most of my responses; I am verbose.
New DM's buying the new MM are much better off than those buying the 2014 MM -- they not only get better designed monsters with less horseshit lore, they get more effectively designed and easier to run monsters that retain their effective risk level regardless of the approach the new DM uses to run them.
This means their players are getting a better overall play experience regardless of inexperience of their DM, and the game offers greater enjoyment as a result.
But, opinions vary, and it is normal during an edition change for folks to find any manner of argument to argue against the change that is leaving them behind.
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
You call it bloat, many myself do not see it as such, maybe after a few years it becomes bloat?
New DM'S buying this book are far worse off than if they bought the 5e, so are their players when you are relying on the new books to get started.
One should have one's eyes checked and update a prescription every year.
"Bloat" would be describing something in more words than necessary. Much like most of my responses; I am verbose.
New DM's buying the new MM are much better off than those buying the 2014 MM -- they not only get better designed monsters with less horseshit lore, they get more effectively designed and easier to run monsters that retain their effective risk level regardless of the approach the new DM uses to run them.
This means their players are getting a better overall play experience regardless of inexperience of their DM, and the game offers greater enjoyment as a result.
But, opinions vary, and it is normal during an edition change for folks to find any manner of argument to argue against the change that is leaving them behind.
How inclusive for the new players. Who gets to lable the lore?
Looking to use one in a game, without knowing about them the 5e description is magnitudes better and comes far closer to the simplified description you used.
How is someone with out knowledge of Barbed devils supposed to take away they "scour the planes for treasure" frome the 5.5e description?
well, if they aren't using a published world, however the hell they want.
My setting has none of the planes. So, that entire concept is useless. It has dimensions, though -- and the Dimension of Hell is a place where barbed devils serve as the enforcers for the more powerful beings. They are not seeking treasure at all -- they aren't even about greed. They serve the role of being the servants of more powerful devils, the collectors of the corrupted, the ones that drag them into the dimension to be eaten and feasted a upon.
One high ranking devil says they are the best butchers -- they know the best way to fillet and maximize the best cuts.
Oh, I'm sorry, does that not sound right to you?
How useful is that lore to you now?
How useful is it to a new player in my games?
How useful is it to a new player in 60% of games, when they don't use the same setting lore?
They might use the cosmological lore, but that's not a given (and hasn't been asked about to my knowledge), and can be assumed as easily as not. Now, even by just keeping that little bit in there, they create a potential for conflict in different games if the players assume that the world they are adventuring uses the same basic standards of a published world, even though it is not.
But without that information, they aren't distracted by what the monster is supposed to be/do, and the DM can more easily and more readily reveal that to them, making the game more fun. because a lot of folks forget that Everything In The Book is a Suggestion and an Example. THe more lore you add, he less it comes across as a suggestion and example, and more like a fixed and "proper" way to do things.
Now, that's my regular campaigns. In my Dungeon Crawl, they love to collect odd things like the hearts of the brave, the largest number of things -- they are devils of greed and obsession, and by itself, tht tell me tons about how they think. So they will gather, will hoard, and if I am going to use one, what they hoard is important because it determines the size of the space and the amount of whatever it is they have collected.
Since they are residents of the Plane of Hell (an afterlife), and they are not there at the time they are encountered in a dungeon, well, that means they are doing so across the planes, does it not?
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
You call it bloat, many myself do not see it as such, maybe after a few years it becomes bloat?
New DM'S buying this book are far worse off than if they bought the 5e, so are their players when you are relying on the new books to get started.
One should have one's eyes checked and update a prescription every year.
"Bloat" would be describing something in more words than necessary. Much like most of my responses; I am verbose.
New DM's buying the new MM are much better off than those buying the 2014 MM -- they not only get better designed monsters with less horseshit lore, they get more effectively designed and easier to run monsters that retain their effective risk level regardless of the approach the new DM uses to run them.
This means their players are getting a better overall play experience regardless of inexperience of their DM, and the game offers greater enjoyment as a result.
But, opinions vary, and it is normal during an edition change for folks to find any manner of argument to argue against the change that is leaving them behind.
How inclusive for the new players. Who gets to lable the lore?
The DM, of course.
It is their setting, after all. Even if they use a published setting (1st or 3rd party).
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
Looking to use one in a game, without knowing about them the 5e description is magnitudes better and comes far closer to the simplified description you used.
How is someone with out knowledge of Barbed devils supposed to take away they "scour the planes for treasure" frome the 5.5e description?
well, if they aren't using a published world, however the hell they want.
My setting has none of the planes. So, that entire concept is useless. It has dimensions, though -- and the Dimension of Hell is a place where barbed devils serve as the enforcers for the more powerful beings. They are not seeking treasure at all -- they aren't even about greed. They serve the role of being the servants of more powerful devils, the collectors of the corrupted, the ones that drag them into the dimension to be eaten and feasted a upon.
One high ranking devil says they are the best butchers -- they know the best way to fillet and maximize the best cuts.
Oh, I'm sorry, does that not sound right to you?
How useful is that lore to you now?
How useful is it to a new player in my games?
How useful is it to a new player in 60% of games, when they don't use the same setting lore?
They might use the cosmological lore, but that's not a given (and hasn't been asked about to my knowledge), and can be assumed as easily as not. Now, even by just keeping that little bit in there, they create a potential for conflict in different games if the players assume that the world they are adventuring uses the same basic standards of a published world, even though it is not.
But without that information, they aren't distracted by what the monster is supposed to be/do, and the DM can more easily and more readily reveal that to them, making the game more fun. because a lot of folks forget that Everything In The Book is a Suggestion and an Example. THe more lore you add, he less it comes across as a suggestion and example, and more like a fixed and "proper" way to do things.
Now, that's my regular campaigns. In my Dungeon Crawl, they love to collect odd things like the hearts of the brave, the largest number of things -- they are devils of greed and obsession, and by itself, tht tell me tons about how they think. So they will gather, will hoard, and if I am going to use one, what they hoard is important because it determines the size of the space and the amount of whatever it is they have collected.
Since they are residents of the Plane of Hell (an afterlife), and they are not there at the time they are encountered in a dungeon, well, that means they are doing so across the planes, does it not?
Who asked about your homebrew? Do you think a group new to D&D is gonna be homebrewing and buying the core books?
I buy the books to play the published game, how dare I not have the creative abilities the older more experienced people here do. Having both sets of books, at my level the 14 books are far easier for me to use. It is quite un welcoming to have the backhanded name calling and put downs from people that can't accept that some people play with the published stuff and have a different set of views and expectations and don't like what they have done with the new stuff. I am done talking with you as I am tired of being talked down to and ridiculed by you. Enjoy your homebrew, and the warm welcome.
Do you think a group new to D&D is gonna be homebrewing and buying the core books?
Yes. Frequently and often.
Gatekeep much?
Not at all.
I buy the books to play the published game...
Having both sets of books, at my level the 14 books are far easier for me to use.
... from people that can't accept that some people play with the published stuff and have a different set of views and expectations and don't like what they have done with the new stuff.
A lot of people buy the books to play the game as published. If the 2014 books are easier for you to use, then use them -- the familiar is always easier. There is nothing wrong with doing so. I don't recall anyone saying that no one plays with the established stuff. Just that they are not in the larger number of people who play the game.
The thread asks if people don't like the new MM -- people are sharing their feelings about that.
You noted that without knowing about them (barbed devils) the lore makes them better.
I offered my homebrew setting as a counter to that assertion -- it does not make them better in such a circumstance. I asked questions in relation to it. I then discussed other circumstances.
None of which changes anything about you enjoying using the books and the information as they are presented, and is entirely about the way that the presumption that it is worse is entirely subjective and not applicable to all circumstances.
WotC cannot (and should not) bend to all circumstances, but they can and have bent towards the folks according to their needs. The core books reflect that for 2024 -- and the upcoming Forgotten Realms books and Eberron book will reflect that as well. The core books have no lore because lore is not setting neutral. The new books will be crammed with lore, because they are about those settings.
D&D is about bringing the imagination of the people playing it to life -- always has been. So there are always going to be a ton of people who homebrew their own everything. Creating your own world is a core feature -- and a major draw for new people, who want to play in the world of Arcane or do pokemon or Dragonball or Jojo or Frieren or Gladiator or even (imma say iit) Krull into their rooms for a night about a table.
That is not better than playing it by the stuff they have written as a company, and it is not worse than do so. It is just different.
And WotC wants to do things for both those types of people -- hence the absence of lore in the core books and the presence of it in the supplementary books.
And they even put extra effort in so that you could, mostly, use the old books along side the newer ones.
I still tell folks to use both DMGs -- especially the brand new DMs who want to do worldbuilding. They run the game from 2024 rules, but the use the 2014 DMG because it has better info about world building from scratch, has more options, and some tools that are missing from the 2024 DMG. Here and on other social media platforms.
I only became interested to the game in 1979 because I saw that I could build my own worlds.
If I couldn't, I wouldn't play it.
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
How is someone with out knowledge of Barbed devils supposed to take away they "scour the planes for treasure" frome the 5.5e description?
You know, I've been playing D&D for decades and that little detail has never been relevant (it's a CR 5 monster, it's gonna have CR 5 treasure; if greed is actually an important plot point, an adventure can point it out there). However... go look at the illustration for the barbed devil in 2014 vs 2024. The 2014 version is a weird spiky thing against a white background. The 2024 version is a weird spiky thing against a backdrop of a mound of treasure.
Oh yes, because if there's one thing we know about large corporations producing disposable income products it's that they have absolutely no reason to invest in effective market research of how consumers are using their existing products. If you don't care to acknowledge the number, fine you do whatever, but let's not pretend that market research is not an extensive field of study where companies have a vested interest in getting accurate results.
Without knowing where the number comes from and being able to evaluate how and why it was arrived at, it is hearsay and essentially useless in this discussion other than consensus and confirmation bias.
Just saying "consensus and confirmation bias" doesn't automatically make your argument strong. WotC announced the results of their market study. We can attempt to come up with some nonsensical Machiavellian reason for them to lie about the results, we can come up with excuses to disregard the data because it doesn't fit our personal narratives, or we can accept that maybe, just maybe, the people who have a vested interest in getting accurate market data hired people who know what they're doing to construct and carry out the survey, and as such it's the most accurate data we're likely to have.
Without the source it is just conjecture, throwing numbers in an argument without the source (especially when they side with the argument being pushed) is super sketchy especially when asked to provide them and the answer is go find them yourself. Super greasy.
Who asked about your homebrew? Do you think a group new to D&D is gonna be homebrewing and buying the core books?
I buy the books to play the published game, how dare I not have the creative abilities the older more experienced people here do. Having both sets of books, at my level the 14 books are far easier for me to use. It is quite un welcoming to have the backhanded name calling and put downs from people that can't accept that some people play with the published stuff and have a different set of views and expectations and don't like what they have done with the new stuff. I am done talking with you as I am tired of being talked down to and ridiculed by you. Enjoy your homebrew, and the warm welcome.
Gatekeep much?
Pretty sure it is not gatekeeping to insist that there has to be 'One True Lore' or else you are somehow shutting out the uncreative. Insisting that if we are not all told the 'right way monsters should act' might technically mean our freedom to conform to that is being taken away, but that would be like saying "Saying no to gatekeeping is taking away our freedom to gatekeep"
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
WotC does surveys periodically, and they sometimes ask about preferred setting. They rarely release details of the surveys, but when they have, the 60% number noted by AEDorsay is about what they say, as I remember it. (If you want to dispute my memory, that’s fair.) I did a quick search, and found the page where they’d put the information has been taken down. This being the internet, it probably lives on somewhere, if folks are that invested in knowing the details.
They haven’t done one in a few years though. In hindsight, it seems likely that the last round of them (again, going off of memory) was while they were in the early stages of the ‘24 revisions and trying to sort out a plan for what to develop and what not bother with.
So 60% of who knows what from a survey designed to find out what, from a group of people that represent what?
The 60% is a number that has little to no use in this discussion other than consensus and confirmation bias.
Oh yes, because if there's one thing we know about large corporations producing disposable income products it's that they have absolutely no reason to invest in effective market research of how consumers are using their existing products. If you don't care to acknowledge the number, fine you do whatever, but let's not pretend that market research is not an extensive field of study where companies have a vested interest in getting accurate results.
Without knowing where the number comes from and being able to evaluate how and why it was arrived at, it is hearsay and essentially useless in this discussion other than consensus and confirmation bias.
1) The aspirations are there. Ogres raid vulnerable communities. Sphinxes guard the secrets of the multiverse. Barbed Devils scour the planes for treasure. Fomorians want to spread their curse. And so on. That's more than enough to help you decide whether to use a given monster or not.
2) Why would "social structure and history" be in setting agnostic material? Those are setting-specific by definition.
That is certainly an opinion.
However, when discussing the “why did they leave the lore out of the descriptions”, it certainly has use in the discussion in relation to the possible reason: it is what the majority of their user base indicates.
As to why it makes sense to leave the lore out, the same thing applies.
It isn’t an argument, either: it is a statement of what is a probable reason, and one supported by their own statements and actions (including that they just posted a position for a worldbuilding role).
As I said to the other person, I don’t care if you believe me. I don’t care if you change your mind or not. I am not arguing with you, I am pointing out different points. One can do that without arguing. A disagreement is not inherently an argument — arguments generally exist to change another persons’ mind. Not being able to have your mind changed and disagreeing, and not caring to change someone’s mind while disagreeing are still just disagreements.
I have followed the popularity of published worlds since the mid 80’s. It is one of those things that I find fascinating. So, whenever data has been released by the companies that have owned the game, I have paid attention. I could tell you how they differ from the results of assorted academic studies (where the results are even worse for published worlds) and more, but that isn’t the point of the thread nor germane.
If you want to look it up, go for it. It not, don’t. No skin off my nose either way -- it isn’t secret hidden information that only i have access to, I have no need to prove anything to you, and the basis of my disagreement is the idea that it is unwise to include the lore.
I like the new MM -- I bought it as a physical book, which is more than I can say for the 2014 version, which I did not buy because it was too packed with annoying lore i already had to spend hours removing and rewriting from the PHB so that things would work with my setting.
and the reason i liked it was that it is much easier to use — and, for the most part, is going to save me a ton of time when it comes to designing encounters and setting up adventures and random encounters. Because it doesn't have lore that has to be stripped out.
Edit: typos
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
Just saying "consensus and confirmation bias" doesn't automatically make your argument strong. WotC announced the results of their market study. We can attempt to come up with some nonsensical Machiavellian reason for them to lie about the results, we can come up with excuses to disregard the data because it doesn't fit our personal narratives, or we can accept that maybe, just maybe, the people who have a vested interest in getting accurate market data hired people who know what they're doing to construct and carry out the survey, and as such it's the most accurate data we're likely to have.
The 5.5 MM vs the 5e MM Barbed devil descriptions
5e-"Infernal collectors, barbed devils fanatically protect troves of treasure and scour the planes of existence for additions to their hoards. Also known as hamatulas among the ranks of the Nine Hells, these devils bedeck their barbed hides with their most prized possessions and trophies taken from those who failed to steal from them. When threatened, barbed devils strike with their thorny limbs and hurl infernal flame.
Barbed devils often serve as guards and accountants for ice devil generals, pit fiend warlords, archdevils, and similarly powerful villains. In return, barbed devils gain protection for their own collections. Many barbed devils also maintain networks of imps that search the planes for treasures of interest or usefully greedy mortals.
Barbed devils rarely collect anything as prosaic as coins and gems. Rather, they pride themselves on having the multiverse’s greatest collection of one kind of thing—typically items of rare pedigree or emblems of power. Barbed devils refuse to steal what they covet; instead they strike bargains to claim both treasure and mortal souls."
5.5e-"Creatures of unbridled greed and desire, barbed devils act as guards to the more powerful denizens of the Nine Hells and their vaults. Resembling a tall humanoid covered in sharp barbs, spines, and hooks, a barbed devil has gleaming eyes that are ever watchful for objects and creatures it might claim for itself. These fiends welcome any chance to fight when victory promises reward.
Barbed devils are known for an alertness that makes them difficult to surprise, and they attend to their duties without boredom or distraction. They use their sharp claws as weapons or hurl balls of flame at foes that try to flee them."
Looking to use one in a game, without knowing about them the 5e description is magnitudes better and comes far closer to the simplified description you used.
How is someone with out knowledge of Barbed devils supposed to take away they "scour the planes for treasure" frome the 5.5e description?
https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/dnd/mm-2024/monsters-b#BarbedDevil
Literally the first sentence: "Infernal collectors, barbed devils fanatically protect troves of treasure and scour the planes of existence for additions to their hoards."
And yes, the 2014 description is a lot more bloated to get the same point across. That's a bad thing. I'd rather have that unnecessary text repurposed for more monsters and better art, which is exactly what they did.
Guess I need new glasses.
You call it bloat, many myself do not see it as such, maybe after a few years it becomes bloat?
New DM'S buying this book are far worse off than if they bought the 5e, so are their players when you are relying on the new books to get started.
One should have one's eyes checked and update a prescription every year.
"Bloat" would be describing something in more words than necessary. Much like most of my responses; I am verbose.
New DM's buying the new MM are much better off than those buying the 2014 MM -- they not only get better designed monsters with less horseshit lore, they get more effectively designed and easier to run monsters that retain their effective risk level regardless of the approach the new DM uses to run them.
This means their players are getting a better overall play experience regardless of inexperience of their DM, and the game offers greater enjoyment as a result.
But, opinions vary, and it is normal during an edition change for folks to find any manner of argument to argue against the change that is leaving them behind.
Edit: blank space
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
How inclusive for the new players. Who gets to lable the lore?
well, if they aren't using a published world, however the hell they want.
My setting has none of the planes. So, that entire concept is useless. It has dimensions, though -- and the Dimension of Hell is a place where barbed devils serve as the enforcers for the more powerful beings. They are not seeking treasure at all -- they aren't even about greed. They serve the role of being the servants of more powerful devils, the collectors of the corrupted, the ones that drag them into the dimension to be eaten and feasted a upon.
One high ranking devil says they are the best butchers -- they know the best way to fillet and maximize the best cuts.
Oh, I'm sorry, does that not sound right to you?
They might use the cosmological lore, but that's not a given (and hasn't been asked about to my knowledge), and can be assumed as easily as not. Now, even by just keeping that little bit in there, they create a potential for conflict in different games if the players assume that the world they are adventuring uses the same basic standards of a published world, even though it is not.
But without that information, they aren't distracted by what the monster is supposed to be/do, and the DM can more easily and more readily reveal that to them, making the game more fun. because a lot of folks forget that Everything In The Book is a Suggestion and an Example. THe more lore you add, he less it comes across as a suggestion and example, and more like a fixed and "proper" way to do things.
Now, that's my regular campaigns. In my Dungeon Crawl, they love to collect odd things like the hearts of the brave, the largest number of things -- they are devils of greed and obsession, and by itself, tht tell me tons about how they think. So they will gather, will hoard, and if I am going to use one, what they hoard is important because it determines the size of the space and the amount of whatever it is they have collected.
Since they are residents of the Plane of Hell (an afterlife), and they are not there at the time they are encountered in a dungeon, well, that means they are doing so across the planes, does it not?
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 DM, of course.
It is their setting, after all. Even if they use a published setting (1st or 3rd party).
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
I just wana say without the new MM I would of never thought of a farmer Medusa who raises flocks of cockatrices
Who asked about your homebrew? Do you think a group new to D&D is gonna be homebrewing and buying the core books?
I buy the books to play the published game, how dare I not have the creative abilities the older more experienced people here do. Having both sets of books, at my level the 14 books are far easier for me to use. It is quite un welcoming to have the backhanded name calling and put downs from people that can't accept that some people play with the published stuff and have a different set of views and expectations and don't like what they have done with the new stuff. I am done talking with you as I am tired of being talked down to and ridiculed by you. Enjoy your homebrew, and the warm welcome.
Gatekeep much?
no one.
Yes. Frequently and often.
Not at all.
A lot of people buy the books to play the game as published. If the 2014 books are easier for you to use, then use them -- the familiar is always easier. There is nothing wrong with doing so. I don't recall anyone saying that no one plays with the established stuff. Just that they are not in the larger number of people who play the game.
The thread asks if people don't like the new MM -- people are sharing their feelings about that.
You noted that without knowing about them (barbed devils) the lore makes them better.
I offered my homebrew setting as a counter to that assertion -- it does not make them better in such a circumstance. I asked questions in relation to it. I then discussed other circumstances.
None of which changes anything about you enjoying using the books and the information as they are presented, and is entirely about the way that the presumption that it is worse is entirely subjective and not applicable to all circumstances.
WotC cannot (and should not) bend to all circumstances, but they can and have bent towards the folks according to their needs. The core books reflect that for 2024 -- and the upcoming Forgotten Realms books and Eberron book will reflect that as well. The core books have no lore because lore is not setting neutral. The new books will be crammed with lore, because they are about those settings.
D&D is about bringing the imagination of the people playing it to life -- always has been. So there are always going to be a ton of people who homebrew their own everything. Creating your own world is a core feature -- and a major draw for new people, who want to play in the world of Arcane or do pokemon or Dragonball or Jojo or Frieren or Gladiator or even (imma say iit) Krull into their rooms for a night about a table.
That is not better than playing it by the stuff they have written as a company, and it is not worse than do so. It is just different.
And WotC wants to do things for both those types of people -- hence the absence of lore in the core books and the presence of it in the supplementary books.
And they even put extra effort in so that you could, mostly, use the old books along side the newer ones.
I still tell folks to use both DMGs -- especially the brand new DMs who want to do worldbuilding. They run the game from 2024 rules, but the use the 2014 DMG because it has better info about world building from scratch, has more options, and some tools that are missing from the 2024 DMG. Here and on other social media platforms.
I only became interested to the game in 1979 because I saw that I could build my own worlds.
If I couldn't, I wouldn't play it.
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
You know, I've been playing D&D for decades and that little detail has never been relevant (it's a CR 5 monster, it's gonna have CR 5 treasure; if greed is actually an important plot point, an adventure can point it out there). However... go look at the illustration for the barbed devil in 2014 vs 2024. The 2014 version is a weird spiky thing against a white background. The 2024 version is a weird spiky thing against a backdrop of a mound of treasure.
Without the source it is just conjecture, throwing numbers in an argument without the source (especially when they side with the argument being pushed) is super sketchy especially when asked to provide them and the answer is go find them yourself. Super greasy.
CENSORSHIP IS THE TOOL OF COWARDS and WANNA BE TYRANTS.
Pretty sure it is not gatekeeping to insist that there has to be 'One True Lore' or else you are somehow shutting out the uncreative. Insisting that if we are not all told the 'right way monsters should act' might technically mean our freedom to conform to that is being taken away, but that would be like saying "Saying no to gatekeeping is taking away our freedom to gatekeep"