Other options include a tool for leveling an uneven table, a door jam, or perhaps even a drink coaster. Not worth the paper it's printed on.
I'm using my 2024 MM to add to my normal dollar cost averaging investments for the month by not buying it. the MM 2024 was the only 6E book I was going to buy without researching first, but a little itch in my head told me, WotC is going to screw up the book, and make the older books much more useful. And it was right. Hasbro is continuing to use the Disney Star Wars route of writing right now, the culture was never where they were advertising, the same thing going for WotC when they to continue using the same rules for 5E, where's the incentive - less monsters, broken spells, weird writing style? WotC didn't even think to change hold person or charm person.
I get better monsters from AI with proper phrasing than that don't break commonly used spell for 50 years using AI. Tweak here or there, and you are good. Go back to 1E I swear the developers designed monsters for the 1E MM by rolling dice and figuring out how to put the combinations together. You can even have it generate token art as well at the same time depending on the AI model you are using. Just run each step separately and look at the monsters, you'll have something usable and unique. Add a CR to it if you want to limit the CR to your current campaign.
Step 1: Create a list of 100 Greek monsters called [Greek Monsters] Step 2: Create list of 100 cryptid monsters from all human history [Cryptid Monsters]
Step 3: Create a D&D 5E stat block and D&D 3.5E style description of 3 monsters rolled randomly with a combination from the [Greek Monsters] and [Cryptid Monsters]
Keen Smell: The Wendigo Cyclops has advantage on Wisdom (Perception) checks that rely on smell.
Hungry for Flesh: When the Wendigo Cyclops reduces a creature to 0 hit points, it regains hit points equal to the creature's hit point maximum.
Aura of Fear: Any creature that starts its turn within 10 feet of the Wendigo Cyclops must succeed on a DC 15 Wisdom saving throw or be frightened until the start of its next turn.
Actions:
Multiattack: The Wendigo Cyclops makes two attacks: one with its Greatclub and one with its bite.
Greatclub: Melee Weapon Attack: +9 to hit, reach 10 ft., one target. Hit: 18 (2d8 + 6) bludgeoning damage.
Bite: Melee Weapon Attack: +9 to hit, reach 5 ft., one target. Hit: 15 (2d6 + 6) piercing damage.
Chilling Howl (Recharge 5-6): The Wendigo Cyclops releases a terrifying howl. All creatures within 30 feet must succeed on a DC 16 Constitution saving throw or take 21 (6d6) cold damage and be paralyzed for 1 minute. A creature can repeat the saving throw at the end of its turns, ending the effect on itself on a success.
3.5E Style Description: A twisted blend of the Wendigo’s insatiable hunger for human flesh and the ancient power of the Cyclops, this creature has become a terrifying predator of the north. Standing at nearly 15 feet tall, with a single, glaring eye, the Wendigo Cyclops stalks the frozen wilderness, leaving a trail of frozen corpses in its wake. Its howl is said to freeze the blood of those who hear it, and its bite can tear through even the toughest armor.
If the book doesn't have staple D&D foes like Orcs and Drow, then it's a monster manual not worth owning.
It does; you just take any existing NPC and say "that's an orc" or "that's a drow". And, as has already been noted, the setting specific stuff like a Drow Matron under the culture fomented by Lolth or an Eye of Gruumsh will appear in the sourcebook for the Forgotten Realms, as they reflect the particular cultures of a setting.
Sounds lazy and boring, especially when you could instead just have a variety of different orc and drow type opponents. As we've enjoyed for most of the history of D&D.
Oh yes, if the 30 extra pages compared to the '14 MM tell us anything, it's that they just decided to be lazy and cut back on the amount of monster blocks we got. It's not like you can't still use the '14 if you have it; heck, they haven't even taken the '14 core 3 off the market. No one is being deprived here just because they didn't serve a few specific dishes you wanted on this extensive buffet.
Also, who's "we"? I find the specialized NPCs and the setting specific culture writing interesting, but I've been quite content with non species-coded specialized NPCs in encounters as well. If they're that essential to your experience, well and good; you've got several different options on how you can implement them, with more on the way. You can appeal to tradition if you like, but frankly I doubt the majority of players find having orc specific stat blocks in the MM to be particularly essential.
If the book doesn't have staple D&D foes like Orcs and Drow, then it's a monster manual not worth owning.
It does; you just take any existing NPC and say "that's an orc" or "that's a drow". And, as has already been noted, the setting specific stuff like a Drow Matron under the culture fomented by Lolth or an Eye of Gruumsh will appear in the sourcebook for the Forgotten Realms, as they reflect the particular cultures of a setting.
Sounds lazy and boring, especially when you could instead just have a variety of different orc and drow type opponents. As we've enjoyed for most of the history of D&D.
Oh yes, if the 30 extra pages compared to the '14 MM tell us anything, it's that they just decided to be lazy and cut back on the amount of monster blocks we got. It's not like you can't still use the '14 if you have it; heck, they haven't even taken the '14 core 3 off the market. No one is being deprived here just because they didn't serve a few specific dishes you wanted on this extensive buffet.
Also, who's "we"? I find the specialized NPCs and the setting specific culture writing interesting, but I've been quite content with non species-coded specialized NPCs in encounters as well. If they're that essential to your experience, well and good; you've got several different options on how you can implement them, with more on the way. You can appeal to tradition if you like, but frankly I doubt the majority of players find having orc specific stat blocks in the MM to be particularly essential.
Oh I'm the exact opposite, I like racial stats for the various races of the game. The idea of reusing the exact same stat and WotC removing racials and special units is the MM with extra steps. I mean if some developers with a unique world views don't want the monsters broken out, racial monsters, heavens putting humanoid and evil where it belongs for monsters used for over 50 years, well compromise and build out the monsters with the name and their abilities, and drop the lore. The concept now is go to the index and try to use their generic human, which its just a wash really. It's a real pain when running Western March using 6E rules, what should be a Drow or Orc for instance doesn't really exist for the encounter and its an incentive not to buy the 2024 MM, which I really wanted to buy but now, no. The argument to use the 5E rules, it doesn't work, they changed the effect CR for the monsters from 5E to 6E and they didn't even give the rules for the new conversion to 6E. I get where you are coming from, but it just fails for what would have been a lot of consumers. You'd think with Hasbro's economic outlook they'd have released a book that applies to a broad audience, this is more of a niche product that doesn't fit the realignment of the Overton window to the medium again. It's a 2020 type of book, not 2025, this design is dead as disco.
Other options for the new Monster Manual include a tool for leveling an uneven table, a door jam, or perhaps even a drink coaster. Not worth the paper it's printed on.
If the book doesn't have staple D&D foes like Orcs and Drow, then it's a monster manual not worth owning.
It does; you just take any existing NPC and say "that's an orc" or "that's a drow". And, as has already been noted, the setting specific stuff like a Drow Matron under the culture fomented by Lolth or an Eye of Gruumsh will appear in the sourcebook for the Forgotten Realms, as they reflect the particular cultures of a setting.
Sounds lazy and boring, especially when you could instead just have a variety of different orc and drow type opponents. As we've enjoyed for most of the history of D&D.
Oh yes, if the 30 extra pages compared to the '14 MM tell us anything, it's that they just decided to be lazy and cut back on the amount of monster blocks we got. It's not like you can't still use the '14 if you have it; heck, they haven't even taken the '14 core 3 off the market. No one is being deprived here just because they didn't serve a few specific dishes you wanted on this extensive buffet.
Also, who's "we"? I find the specialized NPCs and the setting specific culture writing interesting, but I've been quite content with non species-coded specialized NPCs in encounters as well. If they're that essential to your experience, well and good; you've got several different options on how you can implement them, with more on the way. You can appeal to tradition if you like, but frankly I doubt the majority of players find having orc specific stat blocks in the MM to be particularly essential.
"We" is all of the long term D&D players who dislike the direction the game is being taken in. You're welcome to your opinion, as are "we."
If the book doesn't have staple D&D foes like Orcs and Drow, then it's a monster manual not worth owning.
It does; you just take any existing NPC and say "that's an orc" or "that's a drow". And, as has already been noted, the setting specific stuff like a Drow Matron under the culture fomented by Lolth or an Eye of Gruumsh will appear in the sourcebook for the Forgotten Realms, as they reflect the particular cultures of a setting.
Sounds lazy and boring, especially when you could instead just have a variety of different orc and drow type opponents. As we've enjoyed for most of the history of D&D.
Oh yes, if the 30 extra pages compared to the '14 MM tell us anything, it's that they just decided to be lazy and cut back on the amount of monster blocks we got. It's not like you can't still use the '14 if you have it; heck, they haven't even taken the '14 core 3 off the market. No one is being deprived here just because they didn't serve a few specific dishes you wanted on this extensive buffet.
Also, who's "we"? I find the specialized NPCs and the setting specific culture writing interesting, but I've been quite content with non species-coded specialized NPCs in encounters as well. If they're that essential to your experience, well and good; you've got several different options on how you can implement them, with more on the way. You can appeal to tradition if you like, but frankly I doubt the majority of players find having orc specific stat blocks in the MM to be particularly essential.
I find it essential as a DM in determining how much of a “humans are the equivalent of roaches and need to be treated as such” attitude when using orcs and other humanoid type creatures simply because they might very well consider other humanoid creatures as monsters.
Plain jane stats are for the weak, I want the bad guys to be able to remind the heroes that not everyone can save the world, no matter who they are.
Otherwise, that BBEG wouldn’t be called a Big Bad-A** Evil Gorgnard for nothing. You can bet I want stats and lore that makes players go: “Well, today is a good day to die after all, … “ , to really hate that BBEG so much that the players are willing to drive their characters to the brink of oblivion to defeat it, or severely weaken it for others to have a fighting chance.
2024 MM, and the entire 2024 D&D rules set is as bland as tofu on a rice cake with water as the drink. It shows they don’t have a problem with dip-feeding content and are more likely to keep pushing sub-standard material for the foreseeable future.
But, if you’re happy with bland, good luck. I have to definitely disagree about the majority of players and DM/GM’s wanting a variety of different stats for various different Races/Species, otherwise it’s just the S.S.D.D. And that leads to stagnation and to falling interest in the game and the fantasy of such, and that will eventually lead to the inevitable collapse of the game.
In total, 2024 is just another 4e washout that will be a lesson WotC and Hasbro want to learn the hard way. The 2024 Monster Manual is an overpriced art book that IMHO, isn’t worth the time or money to deal with.
" Darkvision doesn’t work in Magical darkness, and if something is magical, Never Trust it acts the same way as a non-magical version of that same thing!”- Discotech Mage over a cup of joe.
Oh I'm the exact opposite, I like racial stats for the various races of the game. The idea of reusing the exact same stat and WotC removing racials and special units is the MM with extra steps. I mean if some developers with a unique world views don't want the monsters broken out, racial monsters, heavens putting humanoid and evil where it belongs for monsters used for over 50 years, well compromise and build out the monsters with the name and their abilities, and drop the lore. The concept now is go to the index and try to use their generic human, which its just a wash really. It's a real pain when running Western March using 6E rules, what should be a Drow or Orc for instance doesn't really exist for the encounter and its an incentive not to buy the 2024 MM, which I really wanted to buy but now, no. The argument to use the 5E rules, it doesn't work, they changed the effect CR for the monsters from 5E to 6E and they didn't even give the rules for the new conversion to 6E. I get where you are coming from, but it just fails for what would have been a lot of consumers. You'd think with Hasbro's economic outlook they'd have released a book that applies to a broad audience, this is more of a niche product that doesn't fit the realignment of the Overton window to the medium again. It's a 2020 type of book, not 2025, this design is dead as disco.
Well let me ask. What do you want your orc or your drow to do as a part of the encounter? If you are making a whole orc society, that is a LOT easier to do with 30 or so NPC stat blocks than it is with 3 or 4 "orc" stat blocks, and same with drow. If it is just a one off encounter on the road why can't you use a noble, or a cultist, or a tough and just call that an orc. Why can't you add dark vision to one of those stat blocks and call it a drow? Trying to figure out how this fails narratively. This book will be a lot easier to bring a lot of newer players in and grow the community further.
This book has more monsters in it than any other book they have ever released. These monsters have had their power increased, which even if you were just using 2014 characters, was needed to properly challenge the players according to the 2014 dmg math. I am confused by the complaints of the "direction of the game" when the main direction has been, more options and a rebalancing that brings bursting outliers down and overall power up. A rebalancing that focuses on hitting more and status effects that are more consistent for your party to deal with. For me all of those things massively increase the fun of the game because everything is a little less swingy and I am more able to provide the proper challenges to my players. As a player, my creativity in game will mean more now than the creativity I had just while building the character as there is less work arounds and auto wins against the monsters with the right spell combination.
I find it essential as a DM in determining how much of a “humans are the equivalent of roaches and need to be treated as such” attitude when using orcs and other humanoid type creatures simply because they might very well consider other humanoid creatures as monsters.
Plain jane stats are for the weak, I want the bad guys to be able to remind the heroes that not everyone can save the world, no matter who they are.
Otherwise, that BBEG wouldn’t be called a Big Bad-A** Evil Gorgnard for nothing. You can bet I want stats and lore that makes players go: “Well, today is a good day to die after all, … “ , to really hate that BBEG so much that the players are willing to drive their characters to the brink of oblivion to defeat it, or severely weaken it for others to have a fighting chance.
2024 MM, and the entire 2024 D&D rules set is as bland as tofu on a rice cake with water as the drink. It shows they don’t have a problem with dip-feeding content and are more likely to keep pushing sub-standard material for the foreseeable future.
But, if you’re happy with bland, good luck. I have to definitely disagree about the majority of players and DM/GM’s wanting a variety of different stats for various different Races/Species, otherwise it’s just the S.S.D.D. And that leads to stagnation and to falling interest in the game and the fantasy of such, and that will eventually lead to the inevitable collapse of the game.
In total, 2024 is just another 4e washout that will be a lesson WotC and Hasbro want to learn the hard way. The 2024 Monster Manual is an overpriced art book that IMHO, isn’t worth the time or money to deal with.
Wait so a book that has the monsters having more health, more damage, and having more abilities and status effects that land much more consistently across the board is weak and plain compared to the 2014 MM? I am now really confused by your complaint.
Otherwise, that BBEG wouldn’t be called a Big Bad-A** Evil Gorgnard for nothing. You can bet I want stats and lore that makes players go: “Well, today is a good day to die after all, … “ , to really hate that BBEG so much that the players are willing to drive their characters to the brink of oblivion to defeat it, or severely weaken it for others to have a fighting chance.
Um... it's not like the lore in the 2014 MM accomplished that. It's up to the adventure creator and the DM to make the BBEG's evil plan seem diabolical.
Me as a newbie DM, i feel Like it gets harder and harder to dm with the new Books. Sure my imagination is Good but having official stats for some things they left out would help alot.
Me as a newbie DM, i feel Like it gets harder and harder to dm with the new Books. Sure my imagination is Good but having official stats for some things they left out would help alot.
As someone that runs a bi-weekly workshop through my brick & mortar FLGS for Game Masters -- Here is a piece of free advice for "Newbie DM":
Do not let yourself get trapped by thinking "Official Stats" are the way it is supposed to be. The statblocks offered in any source book; whether it is the Monster Manual by WotC or a compendium of monsters from another publisher -- should be treated as a foundation.
An example I like to use is the Commoner Statblock. A Commoner is nothing more than a generic blank slate for any NPC regardless of species or background but it gives you a solid starting point. Average stats of 10's with no additional modifiers; AC of 10; a very basic 1d4 attack (a club in this case which can and should represent the equivalence of an Improvised Weapon); no additional skill proficiencies. As RAW (Read as Written); it is incredibly boring and a background -- which can be used fine when PC (Player Characters) aren't directly interacting with them -- but shouldn't be used for every single NPC in your game that fits the role of a commoner.
Not everyone is going to be " Human"; so species have an impact on the statblock, whether it is from different sences, innate magical aptitude, or better aptitude at being skillful. Second, everyone is diverse -- while 10's are meant to represent the most common aptitude -- not every person is an exact carbon copy of each other. You should have diversity, by giving this commoner or that common a 12/13 in a stat or two on a whim. You can easily balance it out by giving an inverse to a different stat or two with an 8/9.
To further iterate my example:
Sven the Male Human Commoner spends his days idly daydreaming of life as an adventure but he is lazy. So he doesn't often pursue physical activity but he loves to read. So you give him an 8 in Strength but a 12 in Intelligence. He's still a commoner.
Terri the Female Orc Commoner is an apprentice for a local tool smith. Due to an accident at the forge in which she got hit in the head with a brick of iron -- her master considers her a little slower on the uptake -- but he keeps her employed because of her physical prowess at swinging a forge hammer. You give her a 12/13 in Strength but then give her a 8/9 in Wisdom. She is still a commoner.
While it is great to be familiar with stat blocks; there is nothing "Official" about any of them, as there are a lot of different publishers out there like Kobold Press, DM Lair, etc. The stat blocks present in the Monster Manual should simply be a foundation in which you as a Dungeon Master tweak and change to add flavor and diversity to your game.
Wait so a book that has the monsters having more health, more damage, and having more abilities and status effects that land much more consistently across the board is weak and plain compared to the 2014 MM? I am now really confused by your complaint.
As someone who is familiar with the concepts of building and tweaking monsters in D&D for an extended time, all that was done was to shift the power-creep of 2024 into forcing the monsters to need more abilities and status effects in order to compensate for the unbalanced and poorly designed PC creation system that in 2024 focused on PvP style gaming then actual Role-Playing of individuals that are on an adventure to prevent some plot. So in effect when they boosted the abilities of the monsters, they had to compensate the imbalances by altering other monster stats by lowering certain monster elements in order to prevent an unknown DM/GM from completely destroying a party.
The reason for confusion can only be contributed to the fact that newer players and GM’s are unwilling to actually do the work of configuring their settings based on player PC configuration and are dependent and expecting on the designers to do the work for them. By placing certain creatures into a generic one-size fits all box, and then expecting those creatures to act and perform as PC characters by way of GM fiat is the only way the designers could make the weaker monsters feel more dangerous. It’s the same design philosophy that was used in 4e. While some think that D&D isn’t a game of player vs GM, the developers seem to think it is by taking the creatures that can potentially be the most dangerous and turning them into NPC GM Player Characters that are nothing more than Politically Correct white-washed versions of humanity.
Not every human or humanoid like creature or monster is going to have the same moral compass or values that others have, and it is the lore and history that is being replaced with a generic “best-fit” version that gives zero context for why the lore and history are the way it was. And by the way, people have been taking the lore of a great number of monsters and using that as a means of creating adventures that entail how that “evil” history is what it is. Just as heroes are born to be great, so to must there be an opposing force to make those people who are special just that, otherwise those heroes are no better than the “evil” they seek to prevent it from harming others.
2024 is the 4e revision that many people have been wishing for, and sadly 2024 D&D and all to be created forthwith will be the same bland, broken, and lackluster content and material that has been produced since 2019. Once again, Politically Corrected NPC’s are the result of just plain laziness on the part of the design and development community and the willingness to only listen to a minority of the community that had a problem with “evil” humanoid creatures, monsters, or NPC’s.
The design and development team should be ashamed of what they have allowed, and created in the new edition of D&D, and the community will be the ones who will ultimately decide that D&D is no longer the game it used to be, and will seek out other systems that will fill that need.
The 2024/25Monster Manual is the most pathetic version of the compendium of monsters in the universe of D&D that has ever been written, but that is IMHO a not so great mark of a edition that will last very long, because WotC game development is like an Ai chatbot, garbage in, garbage out. And the last 6 years the garbage has become worst.
" Darkvision doesn’t work in Magical darkness, and if something is magical, Never Trust it acts the same way as a non-magical version of that same thing!”- Discotech Mage over a cup of joe.
If the book doesn't have staple D&D foes like Orcs and Drow, then it's a monster manual not worth owning.
It does; you just take any existing NPC and say "that's an orc" or "that's a drow". And, as has already been noted, the setting specific stuff like a Drow Matron under the culture fomented by Lolth or an Eye of Gruumsh will appear in the sourcebook for the Forgotten Realms, as they reflect the particular cultures of a setting.
Sounds lazy and boring, especially when you could instead just have a variety of different orc and drow type opponents. As we've enjoyed for most of the history of D&D.
Did you not read his second sentence? We ARE getting "a variety of different orc and drow type opponents." And you don't even have to wait, there's a bunch in MPMM.
Me as a newbie DM, i feel Like it gets harder and harder to dm with the new Books. Sure my imagination is Good but having official stats for some things they left out would help alot.
By placing certain creatures into a generic one-size fits all box, and then expecting those creatures to act and perform as PC characters by way of GM fiat is the only way the designers could make the weaker monsters feel more dangerous. It’s the same design philosophy that was used in 4e.
Apparently you're just using 4e as a way to criticize anything you don't like and didn't actually play 4e, "add a species template to a generic creature" is a 3e paradigm, not 4e. In 4e "Orc" had seven different statblocks just in the monster manual, along with a block of "and here's lore about orcs, and here's what players would know about orcs with various different knowledge checks, and here are some suggested encounters made up of a mix of orc types.
I'm genuinely surprised by the number of people who've apparently never had a fight against a human, dwarf, elf, gnome or tiefling in the last 10 years. At least I assume they haven't since the 2014 MM had no specific stat blocks for them.
Npc stat blocks are still monster stat blocks they dont run on the same rules and player characters they run on the same rules as monsters. They can still be evil. And if you want to talk "human like creature". Goblins have more stat blocks, gnolls, centaurs, arakockra, lizard men.... so on and so forth. How does having more stat blocks mean less to you? Logically it doesn't make sense.[Redacted] PC's aren't designed for pvp either. Why else would skills be so much more emphasised on pretty much every class. None of your complaints match the product we are getting. [Redacted]
I'm genuinely surprised by the number of people who've apparently never had a fight against a human, dwarf, elf, gnome or tiefling in the last 10 years. At least I assume they haven't since the 2014 MM had no specific stat blocks for them.
Realistically -- one wasn't needed and really still isn't.
Any species non-specific humanoid statblock can easily be adjusted or tweaked with Species information without having a drastic impact beyond the addition of resistances (Fire for Tiefling; Poison for Dwarf; Sleep & Charm for Elf; etc), additional senses (Darkvision; Superior Darkvision), and Innate Magic (Speak with Animals for Gnomes; Dancing Lights for Drow; Fire Bolt for High Elves; etc).
I think its more that people want something to complain about and despite getting a more comprehensive Monster Manual in one hardbound book as opposed to mulyiples (Fiendish Folio 1 & 2; Monster Manual 1 & 2); it seems people are more upset that the development team behind the 2024 Modern didn't do all of the work and left it more in the hands of GM's to figure out what works best.
People tend to forget that Dungeons & Dragons is merely a base engine; and that its nothing more than a foundation for Dungeon Masters and Players to build upon with Table Rules and their own additional design.
I like to think of it more as..
"Here we, the developers, have designed a basic framework so that you, the GM & Players, can use to make a game you want to play".
But to answer your statement; it is rare that my players ever just fight 'Human'; 'Acolyte'; 'Bandit'; 'Cultist' etc. Usually if my players are fighting a group of bandits, one or two might be 'Human', but the rest are a mix of different species .
[Redacted] Nearly everything from 2014 is marked with a Legacy tag. You can just as easily not use any of the free 2024 content simply by toggling an option during character creation; and ensuring you are only selecting stuff with the Legacy Tag.
The statement still stands for everyone that is seeming to complain about the 2024 5th Edition. Unearthed Arcana has been running a lot of this and anyone can opt to give feedback during that; but nevermind that -- no one is being forced to play 2024 5th Edition. No one is being forced to use Beyond either; there are other recognized VTT and websites that off earlier editions and source books.
So far -- all I see are people complaining because Dungeons & Dragons went through an edition change and its no different then when people hated on 3.0 or 3.5 or 4e.
It's pretty difficult to "not realize" when nearly everything from 2014 is marked with a Legacy tag. You can just as easily not use any of the free 2024 content simply by toggling an option during character creation; and ensuring you are only selecting stuff with the Legacy Tag
The statement still stands for everyone that is seeming to complain about the 2024 5th Edition. Unearthed Arcana has been running a lot of this and anyone can opt to give feedback during that; but nevermind that -- no one is being forced to play 2024 5th Edition. No one is being forced to use Beyond either; there are other recognized VTT and websites that off earlier editions and source books.
So far -- all I see are people complaining because Dungeons & Dragons went through an edition change and its no different then when people hated on 3.0 or 3.5 or 4e.
Ahhh, but this is not an edition change, if it were a lot of this discourse would be moot! Since it is categorically not an edition change (per wotc) we are stuck with the problem of how to move forward vs. how to keep the status quote for those that do not wish to adopt the new rules. Many have spent over a thousand dollars buying into this system only to be cast aside while being told your viewpoint is irrelevant and to just suck it up! only because we are not ready to move to the newest system. Yeah this definitely seems to be a platform to buy into, lol.
[Redacted] Again, no one is telling you that the 2014 rules are no longer valid. If that is what you want to play and only go up as far as Tasha's; then it is your choice. No one is putting shackles on your wrists and demanding that you dump that "over a thousand dollars" in the trash and ONLY use the content from 2024.
At this point, I think it would be better for the Forum mods to close this thread because its become a cycle of individuals just making it about their own personal problems and ignoring anything that doesn't fit their view about a game.
What are you talking about? The 40 "stereotypes" refers to the 40 NPC stat blocks that can be any species. That is 40 orcs, 40 elves, 40 humans so on and so forth. That the new 2024 MM allows. I was asking if instead of having 40 different stat blocks that could be any of the humanoid races if you prefered if they had just made 4 generic stat blocks for each, which would have boiled down to a mage, a captain a minion and a regular for each species which I find even more generic and less interesting, but if you think they would be more interesting that way i guess more power to you. But I dont want to limit my orcs, or elves, or tieflings to just 3 or 4 stat blocks when I have like 40 of them depening on how I want to build my orc societies.
I'm using my 2024 MM to add to my normal dollar cost averaging investments for the month by not buying it. the MM 2024 was the only 6E book I was going to buy without researching first, but a little itch in my head told me, WotC is going to screw up the book, and make the older books much more useful. And it was right. Hasbro is continuing to use the Disney Star Wars route of writing right now, the culture was never where they were advertising, the same thing going for WotC when they to continue using the same rules for 5E, where's the incentive - less monsters, broken spells, weird writing style? WotC didn't even think to change hold person or charm person.
I get better monsters from AI with proper phrasing than that don't break commonly used spell for 50 years using AI. Tweak here or there, and you are good. Go back to 1E I swear the developers designed monsters for the 1E MM by rolling dice and figuring out how to put the combinations together. You can even have it generate token art as well at the same time depending on the AI model you are using. Just run each step separately and look at the monsters, you'll have something usable and unique. Add a CR to it if you want to limit the CR to your current campaign.
Step 1: Create a list of 100 Greek monsters called [Greek Monsters]
Step 2: Create list of 100 cryptid monsters from all human history [Cryptid Monsters]
Step 3: Create a D&D 5E stat block and D&D 3.5E style description of 3 monsters rolled randomly with a combination from the [Greek Monsters] and [Cryptid Monsters]
1. Wendigo Cyclops
Type: Large Undead, Chaotic Evil
D&D 5E Stat Block:
Traits:
Actions:
3.5E Style Description:
A twisted blend of the Wendigo’s insatiable hunger for human flesh and the ancient power of the Cyclops, this creature has become a terrifying predator of the north. Standing at nearly 15 feet tall, with a single, glaring eye, the Wendigo Cyclops stalks the frozen wilderness, leaving a trail of frozen corpses in its wake. Its howl is said to freeze the blood of those who hear it, and its bite can tear through even the toughest armor.
Oh yes, if the 30 extra pages compared to the '14 MM tell us anything, it's that they just decided to be lazy and cut back on the amount of monster blocks we got. It's not like you can't still use the '14 if you have it; heck, they haven't even taken the '14 core 3 off the market. No one is being deprived here just because they didn't serve a few specific dishes you wanted on this extensive buffet.
Also, who's "we"? I find the specialized NPCs and the setting specific culture writing interesting, but I've been quite content with non species-coded specialized NPCs in encounters as well. If they're that essential to your experience, well and good; you've got several different options on how you can implement them, with more on the way. You can appeal to tradition if you like, but frankly I doubt the majority of players find having orc specific stat blocks in the MM to be particularly essential.
Oh I'm the exact opposite, I like racial stats for the various races of the game. The idea of reusing the exact same stat and WotC removing racials and special units is the MM with extra steps. I mean if some developers with a unique world views don't want the monsters broken out, racial monsters, heavens putting humanoid and evil where it belongs for monsters used for over 50 years, well compromise and build out the monsters with the name and their abilities, and drop the lore. The concept now is go to the index and try to use their generic human, which its just a wash really. It's a real pain when running Western March using 6E rules, what should be a Drow or Orc for instance doesn't really exist for the encounter and its an incentive not to buy the 2024 MM, which I really wanted to buy but now, no. The argument to use the 5E rules, it doesn't work, they changed the effect CR for the monsters from 5E to 6E and they didn't even give the rules for the new conversion to 6E. I get where you are coming from, but it just fails for what would have been a lot of consumers. You'd think with Hasbro's economic outlook they'd have released a book that applies to a broad audience, this is more of a niche product that doesn't fit the realignment of the Overton window to the medium again. It's a 2020 type of book, not 2025, this design is dead as disco.
Other options for the new Monster Manual include a tool for leveling an uneven table, a door jam, or perhaps even a drink coaster. Not worth the paper it's printed on.
"We" is all of the long term D&D players who dislike the direction the game is being taken in. You're welcome to your opinion, as are "we."
I find it essential as a DM in determining how much of a “humans are the equivalent of roaches and need to be treated as such” attitude when using orcs and other humanoid type creatures simply because they might very well consider other humanoid creatures as monsters.
Plain jane stats are for the weak, I want the bad guys to be able to remind the heroes that not everyone can save the world, no matter who they are.
Otherwise, that BBEG wouldn’t be called a Big Bad-A** Evil Gorgnard for nothing. You can bet I want stats and lore that makes players go: “Well, today is a good day to die after all, … “ , to really hate that BBEG so much that the players are willing to drive their characters to the brink of oblivion to defeat it, or severely weaken it for others to have a fighting chance.
2024 MM, and the entire 2024 D&D rules set is as bland as tofu on a rice cake with water as the drink. It shows they don’t have a problem with dip-feeding content and are more likely to keep pushing sub-standard material for the foreseeable future.
But, if you’re happy with bland, good luck. I have to definitely disagree about the majority of players and DM/GM’s wanting a variety of different stats for various different Races/Species, otherwise it’s just the S.S.D.D. And that leads to stagnation and to falling interest in the game and the fantasy of such, and that will eventually lead to the inevitable collapse of the game.
In total, 2024 is just another 4e washout that will be a lesson WotC and Hasbro want to learn the hard way. The 2024 Monster Manual is an overpriced art book that IMHO, isn’t worth the time or money to deal with.
" Darkvision doesn’t work in Magical darkness, and if something is magical, Never Trust it acts the same way as a non-magical version of that same thing!”- Discotech Mage over a cup of joe.
Well let me ask. What do you want your orc or your drow to do as a part of the encounter? If you are making a whole orc society, that is a LOT easier to do with 30 or so NPC stat blocks than it is with 3 or 4 "orc" stat blocks, and same with drow. If it is just a one off encounter on the road why can't you use a noble, or a cultist, or a tough and just call that an orc. Why can't you add dark vision to one of those stat blocks and call it a drow? Trying to figure out how this fails narratively. This book will be a lot easier to bring a lot of newer players in and grow the community further.
This book has more monsters in it than any other book they have ever released. These monsters have had their power increased, which even if you were just using 2014 characters, was needed to properly challenge the players according to the 2014 dmg math. I am confused by the complaints of the "direction of the game" when the main direction has been, more options and a rebalancing that brings bursting outliers down and overall power up. A rebalancing that focuses on hitting more and status effects that are more consistent for your party to deal with. For me all of those things massively increase the fun of the game because everything is a little less swingy and I am more able to provide the proper challenges to my players. As a player, my creativity in game will mean more now than the creativity I had just while building the character as there is less work arounds and auto wins against the monsters with the right spell combination.
Wait so a book that has the monsters having more health, more damage, and having more abilities and status effects that land much more consistently across the board is weak and plain compared to the 2014 MM? I am now really confused by your complaint.
Um... it's not like the lore in the 2014 MM accomplished that. It's up to the adventure creator and the DM to make the BBEG's evil plan seem diabolical.
Me as a newbie DM, i feel Like it gets harder and harder to dm with the new Books. Sure my imagination is Good but having official stats for some things they left out would help alot.
As someone that runs a bi-weekly workshop through my brick & mortar FLGS for Game Masters -- Here is a piece of free advice for "Newbie DM":
Do not let yourself get trapped by thinking "Official Stats" are the way it is supposed to be. The statblocks offered in any source book; whether it is the Monster Manual by WotC or a compendium of monsters from another publisher -- should be treated as a foundation.
An example I like to use is the Commoner Statblock. A Commoner is nothing more than a generic blank slate for any NPC regardless of species or background but it gives you a solid starting point. Average stats of 10's with no additional modifiers; AC of 10; a very basic 1d4 attack (a club in this case which can and should represent the equivalence of an Improvised Weapon); no additional skill proficiencies. As RAW (Read as Written); it is incredibly boring and a background -- which can be used fine when PC (Player Characters) aren't directly interacting with them -- but shouldn't be used for every single NPC in your game that fits the role of a commoner.
Not everyone is going to be " Human"; so species have an impact on the statblock, whether it is from different sences, innate magical aptitude, or better aptitude at being skillful. Second, everyone is diverse -- while 10's are meant to represent the most common aptitude -- not every person is an exact carbon copy of each other. You should have diversity, by giving this commoner or that common a 12/13 in a stat or two on a whim. You can easily balance it out by giving an inverse to a different stat or two with an 8/9.
To further iterate my example:
Sven the Male Human Commoner spends his days idly daydreaming of life as an adventure but he is lazy. So he doesn't often pursue physical activity but he loves to read. So you give him an 8 in Strength but a 12 in Intelligence. He's still a commoner.
Terri the Female Orc Commoner is an apprentice for a local tool smith. Due to an accident at the forge in which she got hit in the head with a brick of iron -- her master considers her a little slower on the uptake -- but he keeps her employed because of her physical prowess at swinging a forge hammer. You give her a 12/13 in Strength but then give her a 8/9 in Wisdom. She is still a commoner.
While it is great to be familiar with stat blocks; there is nothing "Official" about any of them, as there are a lot of different publishers out there like Kobold Press, DM Lair, etc. The stat blocks present in the Monster Manual should simply be a foundation in which you as a Dungeon Master tweak and change to add flavor and diversity to your game.
They/Them/It/Its
Swing a Stick at a Slime and See!
As someone who is familiar with the concepts of building and tweaking monsters in D&D for an extended time, all that was done was to shift the power-creep of 2024 into forcing the monsters to need more abilities and status effects in order to compensate for the unbalanced and poorly designed PC creation system that in 2024 focused on PvP style gaming then actual Role-Playing of individuals that are on an adventure to prevent some plot.
So in effect when they boosted the abilities of the monsters, they had to compensate the imbalances by altering other monster stats by lowering certain monster elements in order to prevent an unknown DM/GM from completely destroying a party.
The reason for confusion can only be contributed to the fact that newer players and GM’s are unwilling to actually do the work of configuring their settings based on player PC configuration and are dependent and expecting on the designers to do the work for them.
By placing certain creatures into a generic one-size fits all box, and then expecting those creatures to act and perform as PC characters by way of GM fiat is the only way the designers could make the weaker monsters feel more dangerous. It’s the same design philosophy that was used in 4e.
While some think that D&D isn’t a game of player vs GM, the developers seem to think it is by taking the creatures that can potentially be the most dangerous and turning them into NPC GM Player Characters that are nothing more than Politically Correct white-washed versions of humanity.
Not every human or humanoid like creature or monster is going to have the same moral compass or values that others have, and it is the lore and history that is being replaced with a generic “best-fit” version that gives zero context for why the lore and history are the way it was.
And by the way, people have been taking the lore of a great number of monsters and using that as a means of creating adventures that entail how that “evil” history is what it is. Just as heroes are born to be great, so to must there be an opposing force to make those people who are special just that, otherwise those heroes are no better than the “evil” they seek to prevent it from harming others.
2024 is the 4e revision that many people have been wishing for, and sadly 2024 D&D and all to be created forthwith will be the same bland, broken, and lackluster content and material that has been produced since 2019.
Once again, Politically Corrected NPC’s are the result of just plain laziness on the part of the design and development community and the willingness to only listen to a minority of the community that had a problem with “evil” humanoid creatures, monsters, or NPC’s.
The design and development team should be ashamed of what they have allowed, and created in the new edition of D&D, and the community will be the ones who will ultimately decide that D&D is no longer the game it used to be, and will seek out other systems that will fill that need.
The 2024/25Monster Manual is the most pathetic version of the compendium of monsters in the universe of D&D that has ever been written, but that is IMHO a not so great mark of a edition that will last very long, because WotC game development is like an Ai chatbot, garbage in, garbage out. And the last 6 years the garbage has become worst.
" Darkvision doesn’t work in Magical darkness, and if something is magical, Never Trust it acts the same way as a non-magical version of that same thing!”- Discotech Mage over a cup of joe.
Did you not read his second sentence? We ARE getting "a variety of different orc and drow type opponents." And you don't even have to wait, there's a bunch in MPMM.
"Things they left out" like what?
Apparently you're just using 4e as a way to criticize anything you don't like and didn't actually play 4e, "add a species template to a generic creature" is a 3e paradigm, not 4e. In 4e "Orc" had seven different statblocks just in the monster manual, along with a block of "and here's lore about orcs, and here's what players would know about orcs with various different knowledge checks, and here are some suggested encounters made up of a mix of orc types.
I'm genuinely surprised by the number of people who've apparently never had a fight against a human, dwarf, elf, gnome or tiefling in the last 10 years. At least I assume they haven't since the 2014 MM had no specific stat blocks for them.
[Redacted, reply chain]
Npc stat blocks are still monster stat blocks they dont run on the same rules and player characters they run on the same rules as monsters. They can still be evil. And if you want to talk "human like creature". Goblins have more stat blocks, gnolls, centaurs, arakockra, lizard men.... so on and so forth. How does having more stat blocks mean less to you? Logically it doesn't make sense.[Redacted] PC's aren't designed for pvp either. Why else would skills be so much more emphasised on pretty much every class. None of your complaints match the product we are getting. [Redacted]
Realistically -- one wasn't needed and really still isn't.
Any species non-specific humanoid statblock can easily be adjusted or tweaked with Species information without having a drastic impact beyond the addition of resistances (Fire for Tiefling; Poison for Dwarf; Sleep & Charm for Elf; etc), additional senses (Darkvision; Superior Darkvision), and Innate Magic (Speak with Animals for Gnomes; Dancing Lights for Drow; Fire Bolt for High Elves; etc).
I think its more that people want something to complain about and despite getting a more comprehensive Monster Manual in one hardbound book as opposed to mulyiples (Fiendish Folio 1 & 2; Monster Manual 1 & 2); it seems people are more upset that the development team behind the 2024 Modern didn't do all of the work and left it more in the hands of GM's to figure out what works best.
People tend to forget that Dungeons & Dragons is merely a base engine; and that its nothing more than a foundation for Dungeon Masters and Players to build upon with Table Rules and their own additional design.
I like to think of it more as..
"Here we, the developers, have designed a basic framework so that you, the GM & Players, can use to make a game you want to play".
But to answer your statement; it is rare that my players ever just fight 'Human'; 'Acolyte'; 'Bandit'; 'Cultist' etc. Usually if my players are fighting a group of bandits, one or two might be 'Human', but the rest are a mix of different species .
They/Them/It/Its
Swing a Stick at a Slime and See!
[Redacted] Nearly everything from 2014 is marked with a Legacy tag. You can just as easily not use any of the free 2024 content simply by toggling an option during character creation; and ensuring you are only selecting stuff with the Legacy Tag.
The statement still stands for everyone that is seeming to complain about the 2024 5th Edition. Unearthed Arcana has been running a lot of this and anyone can opt to give feedback during that; but nevermind that -- no one is being forced to play 2024 5th Edition. No one is being forced to use Beyond either; there are other recognized VTT and websites that off earlier editions and source books.
So far -- all I see are people complaining because Dungeons & Dragons went through an edition change and its no different then when people hated on 3.0 or 3.5 or 4e.
They/Them/It/Its
Swing a Stick at a Slime and See!
Ahhh, but this is not an edition change, if it were a lot of this discourse would be moot! Since it is categorically not an edition change (per wotc) we are stuck with the problem of how to move forward vs. how to keep the status quote for those that do not wish to adopt the new rules. Many have spent over a thousand dollars buying into this system only to be cast aside while being told your viewpoint is irrelevant and to just suck it up! only because we are not ready to move to the newest system. Yeah this definitely seems to be a platform to buy into, lol.
[Redacted]
Again, no one is telling you that the 2014 rules are no longer valid. If that is what you want to play and only go up as far as Tasha's; then it is your choice. No one is putting shackles on your wrists and demanding that you dump that "over a thousand dollars" in the trash and ONLY use the content from 2024.
At this point, I think it would be better for the Forum mods to close this thread because its become a cycle of individuals just making it about their own personal problems and ignoring anything that doesn't fit their view about a game.
They/Them/It/Its
Swing a Stick at a Slime and See!
[Redacted]
What are you talking about? The 40 "stereotypes" refers to the 40 NPC stat blocks that can be any species. That is 40 orcs, 40 elves, 40 humans so on and so forth. That the new 2024 MM allows. I was asking if instead of having 40 different stat blocks that could be any of the humanoid races if you prefered if they had just made 4 generic stat blocks for each, which would have boiled down to a mage, a captain a minion and a regular for each species which I find even more generic and less interesting, but if you think they would be more interesting that way i guess more power to you. But I dont want to limit my orcs, or elves, or tieflings to just 3 or 4 stat blocks when I have like 40 of them depening on how I want to build my orc societies.