In 5E14, it was established that monsters could use the attacks in their Multiattack in any order. I'm starting to wonder whether that policy has changed in 5E24.
In the carrion crawler stat block, Multiattack is defined thus: "The carrion crawler uses Paralyzing Tentacles and makes one Bite attack." That's not in alphabetical order, nor is it in attack/ability order, as these things traditionally have been. Compare the behir: "The behir makes one Bite attack and uses Constrict." These are in alphabetical order. And in attack/ability order. The reversal of those on the carrion crawler suggests that the order is intentional.
If true, this is a very big deal. The optimal sequence for the behir, for instance, is to use Constrict before Bite. If the Multiattack order is prescriptive, then it's locked into a particular attack pattern that's suboptimal. The same goes for the displacer beast, whose Multiattack action consists of "one Rend attack and one Tentacle attack"—the traditional stat block order, optimal if the displacer beast is already adjacent to its target but not if it's approaching and wants to make a Tentacle attack while it's still 10 feet away, before moving into the target's reach.
If the order of actions in a Multiattack is no longer up to DM discretion, as it was in 5E14, that's the sort of thing that needs to be stated explicitly. I can't find anything that says whether it is or it isn't.
I think it's pretty safe to assume that if they intended to make a change like that, they would have explicitly stated it somewhere. Or, they would have worded it in a way that actually explicitly specifies the order (e.g. "The carrion crawler uses Paralyzing Tentacles and then makes one Bite attack") which the new version doesn't.
I *would* have assumed that, but the peculiar reversal of the carrion crawler's actions in the Multiattack raises questions in my copy editing–trained mind. Combine that with the abundant evidence that one of the target audiences of this edition revision was computer programmers working on D&D games and VTTs, and I start to suspect that DMs are expected to execute the Multiattack "code" exactly as it's written, left to right. (Note other Multiattacks that explicitly state that actions can be taken "in any combination.")
I *would* have assumed that, but the peculiar reversal of the carrion crawler's actions in the Multiattack raises questions in my copy editing–trained mind.
You're overthinking it. If they meant to specify the order, they would have said it outright, not hoped everyone would notice the thing you did, and conclude what you concluded.
Combine that with the abundant evidence that one of the target audiences of this edition revision was computer programmers working on D&D games and VTTs, and I start to suspect that DMs are expected to execute the Multiattack "code" exactly as it's written, left to right.
There's no evidence of any such thing. The books are aimed at people playing D&D, not hypothetical developers, who will probably fix the order in-game no matter what the book says.
(Note other Multiattacks that explicitly state that actions can be taken "in any combination.")
That's creatures that can, for instance, stab twice, zap twice, stab then zap, or zap then stab.
Again, you're overthinking. If they mean to communicate things like that, they would, and indeed must, specify it explicitly.
There is no rule stating that Multiattack options need to be executed in order.
The order they are listed could be coincidental, it could be a suggestion or it could be something more.
The DM (and only the DM) is responsible for how NPCs and monsters function in their game. Whether a monster chooses to take some or all of their stat block actions or if the DM modifies some or all of these options is entirely up to the DM. As a result, the order of listing of Multiattack options in the stat block is irrelevant since the DM decides any and all actions taken by the NPC. There is nothing that requires the DM to play any NPC or monster in any specific way. The stat blocks in the MM are not "rules" like are found in the PHB that constrain player actions within the context of game play.
NOTHING constrains how the DM chooses to run their game. They could use house rules that modify how player characters or NPCs interact with the game world. However, the stat blocks are not rules.
The rules specifically state that the DM can freely modify the stat blocks
"Use the approaches and examples in the following sections to build custom creatures for your game."
Most of the suggestions in this section are aimed at making changes without changing the CR too much. However, the bottom line is that the DM can have any monster do anything they want if they think it will make their game more fun and interesting.
As a result, the order of options in Multiattack is irrelevant except perhaps as a suggestion since the rules literally support the DM doing whatever they like and making changes to monsters as they see fit.
In 5E14, it was established that monsters could use the attacks in their Multiattack in any order. I'm starting to wonder whether that policy has changed in 5E24.
In the carrion crawler stat block, Multiattack is defined thus: "The carrion crawler uses Paralyzing Tentacles and makes one Bite attack." That's not in alphabetical order, nor is it in attack/ability order, as these things traditionally have been. Compare the behir: "The behir makes one Bite attack and uses Constrict." These are in alphabetical order. And in attack/ability order. The reversal of those on the carrion crawler suggests that the order is intentional.
If true, this is a very big deal. The optimal sequence for the behir, for instance, is to use Constrict before Bite. If the Multiattack order is prescriptive, then it's locked into a particular attack pattern that's suboptimal. The same goes for the displacer beast, whose Multiattack action consists of "one Rend attack and one Tentacle attack"—the traditional stat block order, optimal if the displacer beast is already adjacent to its target but not if it's approaching and wants to make a Tentacle attack while it's still 10 feet away, before moving into the target's reach.
If the order of actions in a Multiattack is no longer up to DM discretion, as it was in 5E14, that's the sort of thing that needs to be stated explicitly. I can't find anything that says whether it is or it isn't.
Author of The Monsters Know What They're Doing: Combat Tactics for Dungeon Masters, MOAR! Monsters Know What They're Doing, How to Defend Your Lair and Making Enemies: Monster Design Inspiration for Tabletop Roleplaying Games.
I think it's pretty safe to assume that if they intended to make a change like that, they would have explicitly stated it somewhere. Or, they would have worded it in a way that actually explicitly specifies the order (e.g. "The carrion crawler uses Paralyzing Tentacles and then makes one Bite attack") which the new version doesn't.
pronouns: he/she/they
I *would* have assumed that, but the peculiar reversal of the carrion crawler's actions in the Multiattack raises questions in my copy editing–trained mind. Combine that with the abundant evidence that one of the target audiences of this edition revision was computer programmers working on D&D games and VTTs, and I start to suspect that DMs are expected to execute the Multiattack "code" exactly as it's written, left to right. (Note other Multiattacks that explicitly state that actions can be taken "in any combination.")
Author of The Monsters Know What They're Doing: Combat Tactics for Dungeon Masters, MOAR! Monsters Know What They're Doing, How to Defend Your Lair and Making Enemies: Monster Design Inspiration for Tabletop Roleplaying Games.
You're overthinking it. If they meant to specify the order, they would have said it outright, not hoped everyone would notice the thing you did, and conclude what you concluded.
There's no evidence of any such thing. The books are aimed at people playing D&D, not hypothetical developers, who will probably fix the order in-game no matter what the book says.
That's creatures that can, for instance, stab twice, zap twice, stab then zap, or zap then stab.
Again, you're overthinking. If they mean to communicate things like that, they would, and indeed must, specify it explicitly.
There is no rule stating that Multiattack options need to be executed in order.
The order they are listed could be coincidental, it could be a suggestion or it could be something more.
The DM (and only the DM) is responsible for how NPCs and monsters function in their game. Whether a monster chooses to take some or all of their stat block actions or if the DM modifies some or all of these options is entirely up to the DM. As a result, the order of listing of Multiattack options in the stat block is irrelevant since the DM decides any and all actions taken by the NPC. There is nothing that requires the DM to play any NPC or monster in any specific way. The stat blocks in the MM are not "rules" like are found in the PHB that constrain player actions within the context of game play.
NOTHING constrains how the DM chooses to run their game. They could use house rules that modify how player characters or NPCs interact with the game world. However, the stat blocks are not rules.
The rules specifically state that the DM can freely modify the stat blocks
"you may use these monsters—along with the rules for monster customization and encounter building in the Dungeon Master’s Guide—to build your own adventures."
"Use the approaches and examples in the following sections to build custom creatures for your game."
Most of the suggestions in this section are aimed at making changes without changing the CR too much. However, the bottom line is that the DM can have any monster do anything they want if they think it will make their game more fun and interesting.
As a result, the order of options in Multiattack is irrelevant except perhaps as a suggestion since the rules literally support the DM doing whatever they like and making changes to monsters as they see fit.