One of my few gripes with the new Monster Manual is the lack of a page showing how to tweak an NPC stat block for each humanoid species, like was in the 2014 DMG.

I believe it was in the DMG under Create a Creature. It loosely describes how to alter an existing monster

I would just love to know how AC is calculated for them, or really any AC in the new manual. They completely removed where they stated where it is natural armor or not in the new monster manual. Cultist Hierophant is either completely wrong or somehow using mage armor while wearing actual armor, Archmage gets +2 to AC for some unknown reason, Spy Master has 19 AC yet gear does not list armor at all, I am assuming the berserkers have the barbarian unarmored defense trait just implied but its not actually written so who knows. Like is there any way to figure out if those with no specific armor in the gear section is supposed to be natural AC? Makes modifying them a pain, especially the Archmage who I cannot figure out if he is just full of errors or is supposed to magically have weird AC and an Initiative that doesn't actually add up. 

But Gith and tenku are humanoids and not even monstrous humanoids like bugbears, orcs, centaurs or lizardfolk. There is nothing monstrous about them. except maybe for the terrible social attitudes of the gith... totally the racist militarists.

I love me some evil cultists. Pirates and bandits as well. Oh and throw some guards in there as well. I think my favorite hench men are......storm troopers. Nnnoooo the robots from the animated clone wars. 

Cultists though......I can't think of some great cultist henchmen off the top of my head. 

@BoernetheButcher I would say that about Githyanki, not really about the Zerai.

Quote from theron >>

I would just love to know how AC is calculated for them, or really any AC in the new manual. They completely removed where they stated where it is natural armor or not in the new monster manual. Cultist Hierophant is either completely wrong or somehow using mage armor while wearing actual armor, Archmage gets +2 to AC for some unknown reason, Spy Master has 19 AC yet gear does not list armor at all, I am assuming the berserkers have the barbarian unarmored defense trait just implied but its not actually written so who knows. Like is there any way to figure out if those with no specific armor in the gear section is supposed to be natural AC? Makes modifying them a pain, especially the Archmage who I cannot figure out if he is just full of errors or is supposed to magically have weird AC and an Initiative that doesn't actually add up. 

 I agree, the AC calculations are wonky and completely off if we use player rules. I have to assume they are no longer doing that and are using stats that fit the more general vibe and flavor of the monster.

Archmage has a 17 which is not too overly high, but still high enough for a CR 12 spellcaster. Spy Master has a very high AC because it fits the theme of a int-based monster that has acquired intelligence about how the party attacks and their tactics. It's easy to flavor the Spy Master, who has spent countless hours studying the PCs.

My assumption is they are starting with the monster creation guidelines in the 2014 DMG, and then making adjustments.

CR 12 Monster (Archmage) should have an AC 17.
CR 8 Monster (Berserker) AC 16
The spy master should have an AC of 17 to start with, but themes/flavor bring it up to 19

A performer legend uses their talent to manipulate the emotions of the people around them, imposing the Charmed or Frightened conditions on targets and shredding their minds with Psychic damage. (I certainly have heard songs that did the same.)

Me too. Mainly Taylor Swift

As a Dungeon Master, you can't prepare a unique stat block...

That's just the thing. We can't anymore. We can only take one that already exists and call it something else. Hardly unique. Please give us the means to build our own monsters/NPC statblocks like the 2014 monster manual did.

Quote from grave_mind >>

Quote from theron >>

I would just love to know how AC is calculated for them, or really any AC in the new manual. They completely removed where they stated where it is natural armor or not in the new monster manual. Cultist Hierophant is either completely wrong or somehow using mage armor while wearing actual armor, Archmage gets +2 to AC for some unknown reason, Spy Master has 19 AC yet gear does not list armor at all, I am assuming the berserkers have the barbarian unarmored defense trait just implied but its not actually written so who knows. Like is there any way to figure out if those with no specific armor in the gear section is supposed to be natural AC? Makes modifying them a pain, especially the Archmage who I cannot figure out if he is just full of errors or is supposed to magically have weird AC and an Initiative that doesn't actually add up. 

 I agree, the AC calculations are wonky and completely off if we use player rules. I have to assume they are no longer doing that and are using stats that fit the more general vibe and flavor of the monster.

Archmage has a 17 which is not too overly high, but still high enough for a CR 12 spellcaster. Spy Master has a very high AC because it fits the theme of a int-based monster that has acquired intelligence about how the party attacks and their tactics. It's easy to flavor the Spy Master, who has spent countless hours studying the PCs.

My assumption is they are starting with the monster creation guidelines in the 2014 DMG, and then making adjustments.

CR 12 Monster (Archmage) should have an AC 17.
CR 8 Monster (Berserker) AC 16
The spy master should have an AC of 17 to start with, but themes/flavor bring it up to 19

 My issue is that if monsters no longer follow any of the same rules, even humanoid monsters, then how does that effect friendly NPCs? Do those insanely high natural AC stack with other effects, like could a PC cast Mage Armor on the friendly spymaster to make it AC 22 since they don't wear armor? Like somehow archmage using mage armor works differently from PCs using the spell, but I have no idea why or how. So if they are just going with whatever number they like, why include mage armor at all? Is all monster AC now natural armor unless otherwise stated, meaning that even if stripped of all gear the spy master somehow just has an AC better than Plate? I have players that often take prisoners as they try not to kill every enemy they meet, so they frequently remove gear and weapons to safely capture, but how am I as a DM supposed to know how the AC works if it works on some imaginary system that the designers haven't given to us in the DMG. Archmage has AC 17 while supposedly using mage armor, but it doesn't add up at all. 

If they were consistent, it wouldn't bother me as much, but Questing Knight specifically states plate armor in Gear, so the fact that Death Knight doesn't to me means that the Death Knight now has Natural AC 20. Or even just Heat Metal, since they don't specify what is natural versus armor anymore. Like sure, logically the Death Knight should probably be plate armor and shield, but he is just a magic undead same as Lich so maybe the writers intended it to be natural AC 20 so no Heat Metal. Cultist Hierophant has AC 16 because of breast plate which is less than if they just used mage armor (Which they have and are supposedly using.....).

I think the worst one I had regarding this new way of doing humanoid NPCs to not follow player rules was having to tell a brand-new player, that at no point in their career would their character ever actually match their backstory mentor, who was part of the storyline. The character wanted to be a powerful mage like their mentor and thought that would include the arcane burst. Had to tell them that their character will literally never be able to do that attack, and honestly even at level 20 no cantrip can match a CR6 mage basic attack, and that unlike the mentor their character had a ton of rules and stuff to follow. Also was hard trying to explain why exactly the bandit deceiver's dagger was completely useless to the PC but did a ton of damage when the bandit used it. My players were excited thinking it was a magic item, and eventually I just made it one because the party was out here trying get the Mentor to cast legend lore and identify on the damn thing. Even my experienced players thought it had to be magic, since the dagger did 2d4 piercing they figured the poison was a bandit feature but the increased slashing was so unique compared to anything in 2014 that they assumed I had given them a magic item. Similar issue came up with a friendly NPC who was a caravan guard alongside the PCs, minor unnamed character so of course the party had to ask me his entire life story. Decided to make him a Guard Captain since the party was so attached, and when they knew combat was coming wanted him to take the flametongue longsword to help in the fight. Had to just break immersion and just out of character tell them that his non-magical basic longsword did the same damage as a flametongue basically, as did his non-magical javelin, so it was useless.

I ran into another issue where my party wanted to interrogate a mage, but realized they couldn't do that safely at all. Mage no longer follows player rules, so even disarmed, no arcane focus, 1 HP, and in silence, the mage can still deal full damage and there is no way to prevent him from being a threat or imprison them. I just gave up following rules as written at that point and said that the arcane burst requires components and verbal because it became a nightmare otherwise. Unless I the DM rule that he is willing to surrender, the PCs have no choice but to kill since he cannot be safely imprisoned or interrogated unless in anti-magic field which is 8th level spell rules as written. Makes for some really weird interactions as well, since I am now trying to figure out how any NPC mage can be imprisoned unless every jail has a super powerful antimagic field jail cell somehow. It just feels like NPCs and PCs are no longer the same species at all and just function on a fundamentally different system, which is really challenging when having them as allies.

Quote from TCS_Cork >>

As a Dungeon Master, you can't prepare a unique stat block...

That's just the thing. We can't anymore. We can only take one that already exists and call it something else. Hardly unique. Please give us the means to build our own monsters/NPC statblocks like the 2014 monster manual did.

 This was a hilarious statement to me, since basically every enemy my party faces that is worth remembering was completely homebrewed, using the 10 pages the old DMG gave us. Sure the chart was hilariously power crept but just use the stats for 3-5 CR higher than what you need, and you were usually fine. 

I will say I love that we are getting more humanoid NPC stat blocks especially at higher CR, I just wish they would have explained things and given us the damned homebrew section. I am also curious as to how exactly these new status effects work narratively, like how are you charmed for 6 seconds? Funniest one is noble prodigy who charms for 1 round on every single attack with no save, so all I can picture is a masochist getting hit over and over and loving the pain but not willing to admit it, while also not wanting to attack the person hurting them. Just narratively the picture is so absurd its hilarious. Or even worse the assassin that somehow only poisons you for 6 seconds how the hell do you narrate that? I get what they are going for, but at least for the assassin just say they have disadvantage, because a 6 second poison is just absurd. I get the gameplay and mechanical aspects, but dear god if we ever needed that old fashioned long form description of abilities, we need it for these because I have no idea how to roleplay that.

Cultists and Performers, the ULTIMATE tag-team of evil!

Why not performer cultists, like Rakdos members?

Is this a formal elimination of Ravnica as a DND setting, since performers & cultists are divorced?

Might need to update the M:TG books.

And i mean the Githyanki.

Quote from MaedraDawnkeeper >>

Why not performer cultists, like Rakdos members?

Is this a formal elimination of Ravnica as a DND setting, since performers & cultists are divorced?

Might need to update the M:TG books.

Oh no. I was thinking about Ravnica being my next setting... You could Homebrew it though, There's nothing stopping you from having cultists with a high dex and some performer features, or vice versa. I think this is just a simplification of the rules that has been made more concise and readable for new DMs and Players. There is really nothing stopping you from making a bunch of Rakdos cultists, but I doubt WotC is going to make a new D&D book just to suit your needs as a DM, just like how we don't have a good sci-fi D&D adventure, even though the DMG talks about them like they have all of the rules they need for one. I think all you need to do is a little homebrewing, or, if the Ravnica guidebook has anything on Rakdos cultists, just update it to 1D&D rules, isn't there a page about that in the 2024 DMG or MM, and there most certainly was a YouTube video on it, so you could just look there. Also please don't get rid of the War of the Spark Magic book, it's on my reading list.

Quote from Akra2358 >>

Quote from MaedraDawnkeeper >>

Why not performer cultists, like Rakdos members?

Is this a formal elimination of Ravnica as a DND setting, since performers & cultists are divorced?

Might need to update the M:TG books.

Oh no. I was thinking about Ravnica being my next setting... You could Homebrew it though, There's nothing stopping you from having cultists with a high dex and some performer features, or vice versa. I think this is just a simplification of the rules that has been made more concise and readable for new DMs and Players. There is really nothing stopping you from making a bunch of Rakdos cultists, but I doubt WotC is going to make a new D&D book just to suit your needs as a DM, just like how we don't have a good sci-fi D&D adventure, even though the DMG talks about them like they have all of the rules they need for one. I think all you need to do is a little homebrewing, or, if the Ravnica guidebook has anything on Rakdos cultists, just update it to 1D&D rules, isn't there a page about that in the 2024 DMG or MM, and there most certainly was a YouTube video on it, so you could just look there. Also please don't get rid of the War of the Spark Magic book, it's on my reading list.

Yeah no page at all in the new books about how to update old stat blocks. It really shouldn't be that hard to do without the books, all you do is just mesh the rakdos cultist with the new performer. Nothing in the books will actually give advice on how to do it or how to update old stat blocks though, which seems to be the most common complaint I have seen. And no it is not a formal elimination of Ravnica, these new cultists and performers are just generic templates that are universal, settings like ravnica or even eberron are sure to have their own unique things. These books are just giving you generic templates to use as trash mobs for the most part. 

Quote from BoernetheButcher >>

But Gith and tenku are humanoids and not even monstrous humanoids like bugbears, orcs, centaurs or lizardfolk. There is nothing monstrous about them. except maybe for the terrible social attitudes of the gith... totally the racist militarists.

 Actually, a lot of former humanoids have been retyped. Gith are aberrations. Goblinoids are fey,  Aarakocra are elementals, etc. They’ve done several videos on it. 

Quote from Osgood >>

Quote from BoernetheButcher >>

But Gith and tenku are humanoids and not even monstrous humanoids like bugbears, orcs, centaurs or lizardfolk. There is nothing monstrous about them. except maybe for the terrible social attitudes of the gith... totally the racist militarists.

 Actually, a lot of former humanoids have been retyped. Gith are aberrations. Goblinoids are fey,  Aarakocra are elementals, etc. They’ve done several videos on it. 

Yeah, that is going to cause some very weird interactions, I think. Not bad in any way, just weird. Makes spells like hold person or dominate person a lot less useful depending on your campaign, since goblins are a common low-level enemy and are now no longer affected. I am also not sure how that will work for player races, because this change drastically effects things like forbiddance or god forbid players now realize they can use planar binding on their own teammates. It will certainly make things interesting because now if I use banishment on my party, I may have just killed off a character if they are playing one of those retyped races unless they have a way back. On the other hand, it means that banishment just became way more useful for the party to just get rid of enemies they don't feel like dealing with, since way more enemies will be sent to a new plane as they got retyped. I'm hoping they release clarification of some of the other races, like an official statement on if Kobold will now be dragons, will tabaxi and the like now be Fey or maybe even Beasts since Animal Lords prove that you can have fully sentient Beasts? Really hoping they release something on that in the near future.

No Dragon-Cultist?

I feel like DnD in 2024 is slightly better for players but can be a total mess for DMs.