Jesus Christ, why the huge nerf? Their coven spells are absolute garbage. No point in being in a coven, they're better off being melee combatants. 

I'm 100% using the old stat block, this block sucks. 

I will be giving them the old coven list. The current list feels lackluster.

I guess they wanted hags to be more of a Tier 1 foe...? It's the only way I can see the logic behind significantly weakening these iconic fey adversaries.

Revenant is correct. Coven magic was given non-combat spells because previously covens were too dangerous for low level play while the monsters themselves were too weak for high level play. The new coven magic feature allows hag covens to be antagonists for low level characters.

A monster's value is not simply how much damage it can deal in combat (by all means, change that if you have a good reason to do so). DMs can challenge characters in any number of ways. The hag likely enjoys the service of a number of lesser creatures that DMs can use against characters. Further, three CR 2 monsters pose a challenge even for level four groups–the top level of tier 1 play.

Don't feel like monsters are better or worse depending on how much damage they deal. How threatening a monster is to players is limited only by a DM's imagination. I'll also note that most DMs overestimate their ability to tune monsters, and refraining from making drastic changes to stat blocks means less triage during a game when you find that your players are in over their heads, especially at lower levels.

Quote from TheOtherRyan >>

Revenant is correct. Coven magic was given non-combat spells because previously covens were too dangerous for low level play while the monsters themselves were too weak for high level play. The new coven magic feature allows hag covens to be antagonists for low level characters.

A monster's value is not simply how much damage it can deal in combat (by all means, change that if you have a good reason to do so). DMs can challenge characters in any number of ways. The hag likely enjoys the service of a number of lesser creatures that DMs can use against characters. Further, three CR 2 monsters pose a challenge even for level four groups–the top level of tier 1 play.

Don't feel like monsters are better or worse depending on how much damage they deal. How threatening a monster is to players is limited only by a DM's imagination. I'll also note that most DMs overestimate their ability to tune monsters, and refraining from making drastic changes to stat blocks means less triage during a game when you find that your players are in over their heads, especially at lower levels.

I don't know about you, but I am constantly in positions where I make changes and the players overcome what I thought was hard. They are also used to my combats where they very well know they can die and punches aren't pulled. 

But also, while I agree that X damage doesn't = Threat Level, in this context we're talking about 3 spell casters losing the ability to cast Lightning Bolt for Unseen Servant...? That dramatically changes what Hags are in DnD. They're no longer high level casters that can be a real threat (with the old list, they're a threat to at least 7th level parties) and now they're nothing. Just another melee combatant.

Quote from Odande >>

 

Quote from TheOtherRyan >>

Revenant is correct. Coven magic was given non-combat spells because previously covens were too dangerous for low level play while the monsters themselves were too weak for high level play. The new coven magic feature allows hag covens to be antagonists for low level characters.

A monster's value is not simply how much damage it can deal in combat (by all means, change that if you have a good reason to do so). DMs can challenge characters in any number of ways. The hag likely enjoys the service of a number of lesser creatures that DMs can use against characters. Further, three CR 2 monsters pose a challenge even for level four groups–the top level of tier 1 play.

Don't feel like monsters are better or worse depending on how much damage they deal. How threatening a monster is to players is limited only by a DM's imagination. I'll also note that most DMs overestimate their ability to tune monsters, and refraining from making drastic changes to stat blocks means less triage during a game when you find that your players are in over their heads, especially at lower levels.

 

I don't know about you, but I am constantly in positions where I make changes and the players overcome what I thought was hard. They are also used to my combats where they very well know they can die and punches aren't pulled. 

But also, while I agree that X damage doesn't = Threat Level, in this context we're talking about 3 spell casters losing the ability to cast Lightning Bolt for Unseen Servant...? That dramatically changes what Hags are in DnD. They're no longer high level casters that can be a real threat (with the old list, they're a threat to at least 7th level parties) and now they're nothing. Just another melee combatant.

I couldn't disagree more. Describing hags as "[N]othing. Just another melee combatant" ignores the stat block of each creature entirely, and the ability to cast lightning bolt is not even remotely "what Hags are in DnD." Ask anyone to describe Hags, and you won't get "Oh, they're the monsters that can cast lightning bolt." You'll get "they're witches," "they're evil," "they eat children," or some similar description. It's preposterous to say that a monster is defined by a single spell they could previously cast (in a coven). In fact, the Hag's new spellcasting options are much more in line with the role hags play in D&D lore. They make deals, provide advice, possess uncanny knowledge, and do generally evil things. Their new coven spellcasting options reinforce that role, not subvert it.

Returning to the issue of "just another melee combatant." That's egregiously false. Death Glare, Illusory Appearance, and Vile Appearance plainly demonstrate as much. The brass tacks is that Revenant was correct. This change makes sense both thematically and mechanically. Hag covens are no longer too great a threat to present to low level players, making hags both available to much larger audience and more manageable for DMs.

Why oh why are the different types of Hags listed under S for Sea, G for Green etc? Surely H for Hag would be so much better.

Slaadi are listed as one entry with several variants, yet Dragons are listed under the first letter of their colour, not D for Dragon.

This inconsistent organisation of the Monster Manual is just foolishness.

Am I missing something or is the Hag missing a way to reveal its true form? Disguise Self lasts 24 hours and doesn't have concentration, can the hag end the spell on itself rules-as-written?

Any spell can be dispelled at any time with no action required in the 2024 rules: 

While a time-span spell that you cast is ongoing, you can dismiss it (no action required) if you don’t have the Incapacitated condition.

Quote from TheOtherRyan >>

Quote from Odande >>

 

Quote from TheOtherRyan >>

Revenant is correct. Coven magic was given non-combat spells because previously covens were too dangerous for low level play while the monsters themselves were too weak for high level play. The new coven magic feature allows hag covens to be antagonists for low level characters.

A monster's value is not simply how much damage it can deal in combat (by all means, change that if you have a good reason to do so). DMs can challenge characters in any number of ways. The hag likely enjoys the service of a number of lesser creatures that DMs can use against characters. Further, three CR 2 monsters pose a challenge even for level four groups–the top level of tier 1 play.

Don't feel like monsters are better or worse depending on how much damage they deal. How threatening a monster is to players is limited only by a DM's imagination. I'll also note that most DMs overestimate their ability to tune monsters, and refraining from making drastic changes to stat blocks means less triage during a game when you find that your players are in over their heads, especially at lower levels.

 

I don't know about you, but I am constantly in positions where I make changes and the players overcome what I thought was hard. They are also used to my combats where they very well know they can die and punches aren't pulled. 

But also, while I agree that X damage doesn't = Threat Level, in this context we're talking about 3 spell casters losing the ability to cast Lightning Bolt for Unseen Servant...? That dramatically changes what Hags are in DnD. They're no longer high level casters that can be a real threat (with the old list, they're a threat to at least 7th level parties) and now they're nothing. Just another melee combatant.

I couldn't disagree more. Describing hags as "[N]othing. Just another melee combatant" ignores the stat block of each creature entirely, and the ability to cast lightning bolt is not even remotely "what Hags are in DnD." Ask anyone to describe Hags, and you won't get "Oh, they're the monsters that can cast lightning bolt." You'll get "they're witches," "they're evil," "they eat children," or some similar description. It's preposterous to say that a monster is defined by a single spell they could previously cast (in a coven). In fact, the Hag's new spellcasting options are much more in line with the role hags play in D&D lore. They make deals, provide advice, possess uncanny knowledge, and do generally evil things. Their new coven spellcasting options reinforce that role, not subvert it.

Returning to the issue of "just another melee combatant." That's egregiously false. Death Glare, Illusory Appearance, and Vile Appearance plainly demonstrate as much. The brass tacks is that Revenant was correct. This change makes sense both thematically and mechanically. Hag covens are no longer too great a threat to present to low level players, making hags both available to much larger audience and more manageable for DMs.

So u guys are bots working for WOTC because you said the exact same thing on Green Hag? It's okay, you can admit the changes suck, unless the writers have a Fireball spell aimed at your loved ones..

   Seriously tho, the defense of these stat blocks basically boils down to " Umm, well the flavor's still there so the loss of all offensive, stealth, control & escape abilities doesn't change the essence of what a hag is and if you don't want them to just be weak melee fighters you're the dm just change things."

 Yeah..as the DM I can change things. I could alter the stat block OR I could just use the OLD one because its BETTER. Which I will :)

I'm going to be frank if you look at it they changed oh most nothing the only thing that got a nerf was coven magic and even then in the old rules and still today depending on your hags you should just mix and match replace or add spells so I don't really care for that change (I never really use hags in covens because 3 of the same enemy in my opinion is boring). Is this better than the old one idk I like it more especially the art. The base sea hag is still hear the only difference is that Illusory Appearance just uses Disguise Self and lets be honest lads the old stat block could have been written that way they are literally the same. And then Death Glare was nerfed to be more fair so instead of a save or suck the Hag actually has to get most of you party (assuming your more than 20 hp at level's 2-3) to 20 Hp it's just a very weak Power-Word-Kill.

plus since is this free just use this one or the old one as you sea fit (sea what I did there?). Honestly I might just fuse them and call it a day.