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.
[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.
How would you like your pizza sliced, 8 or 12 slices?
12,it's more than 8!!!
Let me introduce to you the way orcs were distinguished in other editions
AD&D: orcs fill the '1 HD' slot, between the "1-1 HD' slot for goblins and the '1+1 HD' slot for hobgoblins. They were otherwise largely indistinguishable. If you wanted higher level and more distinctive orcs, you built them as PCs.
D&D 3e: they provide a prefab "orc warrior", which is just adding the orc template to a level 1 Warrior (NPC class). If you wanted higher level and more distinctive orcs, you built them as PCs.
D&D 4e: orcs had 7 monster manual entries. On the other hand, humans had 6, so they just had a different philosophy. However, the DM or adventure creator was more or less forced to homebrew if they wanted higher level adversaries (creating new monsters was pretty easy in 4e, so pretty much every adventure contained a handful of custom new critters).
D&D 5e (2014): orcs had 3 MM entries, If you wanted higher level and more distinctive orcs, you used the DMG rules to add 'orc' to an NPC template, or you used the monster creation rules.
D&D 5e (2024): Those three MM entries are gone; you're expected to apply 'orc' to an NPC template, though unlike 2014, the rules don't tell you how to do so.
Wait so you prefer the 2014 one that had less monster stat blocks and less npc's and less options for orcs, and drow and the rest?
For the food analogy it is like we went from the 15" pizza to the 20" pizza and we are upset because they cut the 20" into squares and somehow everyone believes that makes the 20" smaller and it doesn't. It is still more.
But it literally DOESN'T have more monster diversity. More stat blocks means more diversity. More NPC stat blocks means more diversity and more options NPC's ARE MONSTERS otherwise they wouldn't be in the monster manual. More stat blocks literally means more options. Your analogy is just false and doesn't fit what is being provided nor does your complaint.
I will take the extra 150 monsters, the ability to actually have the encounters be balanced to the difficulty they say on the tin if I use the encounter building rules in the DMG, which is WAY easier for a new player or GM to run, and more than just dragons, demons and the tarrasque as options for high level play to allow for a more diverse options for my players to face at all levels. Just because you are used to it does not mean it is new player friendly. That is just a false statement.
But they are playing at lower levels (which many of the lower CR monsters have had their damage reduced making low level deaths less likely) you can actually follow the encounter building rules and get what's expected which new players, no matter what level they play at, will benefit from. Not to mention there are STILL more options at lower levels with things like the goblin minion, the sphinx of wonder and many many more. Outlier builds in damage have been toned down making things more predictable and less likely to derail things. It is easier to have veteran players and new players at the same table without the new players feeling like they aren't contributing as much because of how they "built". 2024 is better for both new players AND veterans alike. Providing veterans with more options and new players with less "trap options" and new DM's with actual advice on how to run the game that is reliable and will actually work as intended and as it says it does for both veteran and new players. Just because you are more familiar with the 2014 MM does not mean it is better for newer players. Just because you are a veteran with 2014 and know how to work around its bad encounter builder does not mean it has better encounter building it doesn't. Just because YOU are more familiar with 2014 does not make it more new user friendly, it isn't. I had this same argument with someone who thought 3.5 was easier or more new player friendly than 5e, it isn't.
When you say you prefer 2014, I get confused because you are saying I prefer less options for play and a bunch of tools that don't work or do as advertised.
Immersion is going to happen in any TTRPG regardless of the system. The DMG has hints for that. This MM has titles + art work that better portrays the monsters to give hints as to what they are. If you want a specific setting get a source book, that isn't new to TTRPG's hell that isn't new to D&D, strix haven, dragon lance just as examples. The players and the DM create the immersion as much or as little as they want and there is nothing in the new books that inherently reduces someone's immersion in comparison to the 2014. That is why they added so much art because a picture is worth a thousand words and people are going to be immersed more by a picture than an extra paragraph.
The math is an important part of the game. It is the GAME part of the game, if you just want lore just read a book. New players need the math and the system to work they don't need 4 paragraphs of lore when 1 will do.
Right and the immersion is going to be there regardless. The 2024 books didn't reduce new player immersion. It will reduce new player frustration. Frustration and confusion ends games and makes people not play anymore. Immersion comes from an inspired story. More art, better tips for the DM, and more monsters to get inspired by leads to BETTER immersion. less confusion or math issues means less removal from immersion.
For new and less creative DM's the lore(that has been removed from the MM 2014 vs 2024) is substantial for those new to the game, the more experienced players (DM's) are seemingly blind to this.
I remember being a new DM -- not in this edition, but the concept is the same. I absolutely did not care about the lore, I was just looking for something cool for my PCs to beat up. I only started caring about lore after I had considerable experience and started trying to come up with adventures with an actual interesting plot, at which point I would look through lore... and generally need to throw out half of it because I wanted to use a given monster in a particular way and the lore contradicted my desires so it had to go.
For new and less creative DM's the lore(that has been removed from the MM 2014 vs 2024) is substantial for those new to the game, the more experienced players (DM's) are seemingly blind to this.
I remember being a new DM -- not in this edition, but the concept is the same. I absolutely did not care about the lore, I was just looking for something cool for my PCs to beat up. I only started caring about lore after I had considerable experience and started trying to come up with adventures with an actual interesting plot, at which point I would look through lore... and generally need to throw out half of it because I wanted to use a given monster in a particular way and the lore contradicted my desires so it had to go.
This. Completely this. For every DM, the world they run is their world. This is true whether they are using a setting book, running something completely original, or any combination thereof.
The lore, etc, are there for those who find those ideas cool to build on but are not and should not be considered in any way binding. Nor are they especially necessary, simply because that world is that DM's world, not the lore writer's world, no matter how much it might be influenced by or inspired by any 'official' lore.
I am reading the DMG right now. It has setting ideas, it has hook ideas, it has ideas for lore and ways to build your own if you wish. The lore isn't removed the fat is just trimmed down so that new DM's aren't SHACKLED by the lore. There are more monsters to be inspired by, more settings to be inspired by and the lore that is there helps inform a new player or new DM how to use it. You are an experienced player and sound like an experienced DM. I can say from when I first started 1 I didn't care about the lore and 2 I WISH I had the 2024 DMG and the 2024 MM when I started out. It would have saved A LOT of head ache and a lot of frustration with my monster encounters being all over the place. Social encounters, exploration, skill checks and skill challenges were easy to understand and balance. Lore was easy to make, immersion was easy to understand, but getting the balance right and making the BBEG feel like a threat was a pain in the rear and was a lot of trial and error before I got it. The 2024 books will be easier to use for MOST new players and MOST new DM's. I would almost be willing to bet that you are probably more experienced in DnD than I am. The new 2024 books aren't gate keeping new players or DM's it is much more inviting than the 2014 was. I am really glad that chapter 1 of the DMG is the basics and chapter 2 is running the game now compared to 2014 which was lets start with building an entire multiverse.
Locking this thread as it's just turning into giant reply chains and circular discussion.
Reminding again:
There are no individual stat blocks for each and every type of humanoid version of Bandit, Cultist so on. Instead we have this instruction in 'How to Use a Monster':
Versatile Groups. Nonplayer characters now appear alongside other monsters and can represent individuals of any Humanoid species.
And in Monster conversions they have guidelines on which statblock to use for the 2014 specific humanoid ones such as:
You use the generic statblock and can give traits representing a species if you like, such as dark vision or a species trait. Our new video also goes into this.
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!
[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.
Let me introduce to you the way orcs were distinguished in other editions
Disagreeing with design decisions is not 'undercooked'. It's just a matter of taste.
[Reply chain]
Wait so you prefer the 2014 one that had less monster stat blocks and less npc's and less options for orcs, and drow and the rest?
For the food analogy it is like we went from the 15" pizza to the 20" pizza and we are upset because they cut the 20" into squares and somehow everyone believes that makes the 20" smaller and it doesn't. It is still more.
[Redacted, reply chain]
But it literally DOESN'T have more monster diversity. More stat blocks means more diversity. More NPC stat blocks means more diversity and more options NPC's ARE MONSTERS otherwise they wouldn't be in the monster manual. More stat blocks literally means more options. Your analogy is just false and doesn't fit what is being provided nor does your complaint.
[Redacted, reply chain]
I will take the extra 150 monsters, the ability to actually have the encounters be balanced to the difficulty they say on the tin if I use the encounter building rules in the DMG, which is WAY easier for a new player or GM to run, and more than just dragons, demons and the tarrasque as options for high level play to allow for a more diverse options for my players to face at all levels. Just because you are used to it does not mean it is new player friendly. That is just a false statement.
[Redacted, reply chain]
But they are playing at lower levels (which many of the lower CR monsters have had their damage reduced making low level deaths less likely) you can actually follow the encounter building rules and get what's expected which new players, no matter what level they play at, will benefit from. Not to mention there are STILL more options at lower levels with things like the goblin minion, the sphinx of wonder and many many more. Outlier builds in damage have been toned down making things more predictable and less likely to derail things. It is easier to have veteran players and new players at the same table without the new players feeling like they aren't contributing as much because of how they "built". 2024 is better for both new players AND veterans alike. Providing veterans with more options and new players with less "trap options" and new DM's with actual advice on how to run the game that is reliable and will actually work as intended and as it says it does for both veteran and new players. Just because you are more familiar with the 2014 MM does not mean it is better for newer players. Just because you are a veteran with 2014 and know how to work around its bad encounter builder does not mean it has better encounter building it doesn't. Just because YOU are more familiar with 2014 does not make it more new user friendly, it isn't. I had this same argument with someone who thought 3.5 was easier or more new player friendly than 5e, it isn't.
When you say you prefer 2014, I get confused because you are saying I prefer less options for play and a bunch of tools that don't work or do as advertised.
[Redacted, reply chain]
Immersion is going to happen in any TTRPG regardless of the system. The DMG has hints for that. This MM has titles + art work that better portrays the monsters to give hints as to what they are. If you want a specific setting get a source book, that isn't new to TTRPG's hell that isn't new to D&D, strix haven, dragon lance just as examples. The players and the DM create the immersion as much or as little as they want and there is nothing in the new books that inherently reduces someone's immersion in comparison to the 2014. That is why they added so much art because a picture is worth a thousand words and people are going to be immersed more by a picture than an extra paragraph.
The math is an important part of the game. It is the GAME part of the game, if you just want lore just read a book. New players need the math and the system to work they don't need 4 paragraphs of lore when 1 will do.
[Redacted, reply chain]
Right and the immersion is going to be there regardless. The 2024 books didn't reduce new player immersion. It will reduce new player frustration. Frustration and confusion ends games and makes people not play anymore. Immersion comes from an inspired story. More art, better tips for the DM, and more monsters to get inspired by leads to BETTER immersion. less confusion or math issues means less removal from immersion.
I remember being a new DM -- not in this edition, but the concept is the same. I absolutely did not care about the lore, I was just looking for something cool for my PCs to beat up. I only started caring about lore after I had considerable experience and started trying to come up with adventures with an actual interesting plot, at which point I would look through lore... and generally need to throw out half of it because I wanted to use a given monster in a particular way and the lore contradicted my desires so it had to go.
This. Completely this. For every DM, the world they run is their world. This is true whether they are using a setting book, running something completely original, or any combination thereof.
The lore, etc, are there for those who find those ideas cool to build on but are not and should not be considered in any way binding. Nor are they especially necessary, simply because that world is that DM's world, not the lore writer's world, no matter how much it might be influenced by or inspired by any 'official' lore.
[Redacted, Reply chain]
I am reading the DMG right now. It has setting ideas, it has hook ideas, it has ideas for lore and ways to build your own if you wish. The lore isn't removed the fat is just trimmed down so that new DM's aren't SHACKLED by the lore. There are more monsters to be inspired by, more settings to be inspired by and the lore that is there helps inform a new player or new DM how to use it. You are an experienced player and sound like an experienced DM. I can say from when I first started 1 I didn't care about the lore and 2 I WISH I had the 2024 DMG and the 2024 MM when I started out. It would have saved A LOT of head ache and a lot of frustration with my monster encounters being all over the place. Social encounters, exploration, skill checks and skill challenges were easy to understand and balance. Lore was easy to make, immersion was easy to understand, but getting the balance right and making the BBEG feel like a threat was a pain in the rear and was a lot of trial and error before I got it. The 2024 books will be easier to use for MOST new players and MOST new DM's. I would almost be willing to bet that you are probably more experienced in DnD than I am. The new 2024 books aren't gate keeping new players or DM's it is much more inviting than the 2014 was. I am really glad that chapter 1 of the DMG is the basics and chapter 2 is running the game now compared to 2014 which was lets start with building an entire multiverse.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
ModeratorLocking this thread as it's just turning into giant reply chains and circular discussion.
Reminding again:
There are no individual stat blocks for each and every type of humanoid version of Bandit, Cultist so on. Instead we have this instruction in 'How to Use a Monster':
And in Monster conversions they have guidelines on which statblock to use for the 2014 specific humanoid ones such as:
and
You use the generic statblock and can give traits representing a species if you like, such as dark vision or a species trait.
Our new video also goes into this.
D&D Beyond ToS || D&D Beyond Support