D&D 5E Zooming In On Monsters of the Multiverse [UPDATED!]

Earlier, WotC announced Mordenkainen Presents Monsters of the Multiverse, a new D&D compilation of monster material from previous products updated to a new format. These screen grabs are as good as I could get them. They're not terribly clear, but you can make more out than in the original images.

The screenshots show the original entry in Volo's Guide to Monsters next to the new entry in Mordenkainen Presents Monsters of the Multiverse.

"The Future of D&D" (New Core Books in 2024!)

The online D&D Celebration event, which has been running all weekend, comes to a close with The Future of D&D, a panel featuring WotC's Ray Winninger, Liz Schuh, Chris Perkins, and Jeremy Crawford, hosted by Elle Osili-Wood. D&D is exploring the multiverse Revisiting classic settings. 1st of...

www.enworld.org

---

UPDATE -- a cleaned up version of the War Priest has appeared on imgur.

 

[Rabulias]

I also do not like the shift away from creature type organization of the monsters. Glaberzu is a single named Type III Demon, not the whole range dagnabbit!

While I share your opinion about not grouping monsters like demons together, the Glabrezu has (since AD&D 1st edition at least) been an alternate name for Type III demons. Only for Type IV, V, and VI demons were the names given in the Monster Manual the names of unique individual demons. Later editions have co-opted the given unique names for those last three types to represent those classes of demons.

 

[Weiley31]

It sounds like most or all of the book is going to be old content repurposed. It's fine to change how they design monsters, because 5e needs it, but I really wish that they would have done it with entirely new monsters. I hate paying for the same content multiple times, so I probably will not buy this book.

It's pretty much Tome of Foes combined with Volo's Guide with a majority of the non-PHB player races in it as well.

 

[Rogerd1]

To be honest there are far too many types of outsiders as it is. Not required.

They should take a leaf from Modern Age: Threefold which got its head screwed on tight.

Aions: Beyond the gods.
Gods, and the various types.
Servants: Angels, demon etc
Chimera: Mythical, or cryptid being.

 

[qstor]

I miss the genasi subraces, not only the classic four, but the para-genasies, the Athasians and the Abyssals.

I see a great potential for the mechanatrix, and I imagine the high-elves/eladrin from 4th Ed like 3.5 "celadrin" (elves with eladrin ancestors).

I suspects Hasbro wants to "open space" to later to add possible intercompany crossovers.

So we are going to get stats for Snake Eyes in the book?

 

[J.Quondam]

I don't see what the issue is with the Spellcaster change. They are still "spells" even if they were changed to an ability. Cacophony is still "Shatter" just refluffed and modified a bit. You can still give players "Cacophony" but it would be Shatter with a refluffed name.

For me, at least, the main issue is that the new names don't make it obvious what their analogous spell is. Someone less familiar with the rules will not know that Cacophony = Shatter. For newer GMs (and those like me with bad memories!), it's not necessarily clear how to swap out one spell-ish ability with another of similar power.

Just call it what it is, OR at least give me a big table somewhere with customizations.

 

[darjr]

I wonder what happens with dndbeyond stat blocks... If we do bot buy the new book, dowe keep the old ones, the new ones or both?

They have been good about updating content to the latest version. So I’d say you’ll get the latest even if you don’t buy the new monster book.

 

[Zehnseiter]

Isn't this the way 4E set up its monsters?

Yes. But 5E is now old enough that old timers begin to forget and newcomers don't know. So they can start to reimplement things of 4E that worked very well. And there are quite a number of parts that did but got drowned out in the edition warring.

And monsters especially the ones in the later monster manuals worked very well. I still have the 4E Monster Vault with me when I play 5E for very good reasons.

 

[Zaukrie]

For me, at least, the main issue is that the new names don't make it obvious what their analogous spell is. Someone less familiar with the rules will not know that Cacophony = Shatter. For newer GMs (and those like me with bad memories!), it's not necessarily clear how to swap out one spell-ish ability with another of similar power.

Just call it what it is, OR at least give me a big table somewhere with customizations.

Why? They've clearly re-skinned a spell, just like they advise us to do. It is actually a great example of how to do it.

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

So we are going to get stats for Snake Eyes in the book?

I guess he will appear in the RPG published by Renegade Game Studio.

 

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

I wonder what happens with dndbeyond stat blocks... If we do bot buy the new book, dowe keep the old ones, the new ones or both?

Yes, I’m sure my DM will be interested about that. I know that have already updated existing stat blocks by adding the proficiency bonus to the stat block