D&D 5E A Compilation of all the Race Changes in Monsters of the Multiverse

Over on Reddit, user KingJackel went through the video leak which came out a few days ago and manually compiled a list of all the changes to races in the book. The changes are quite extensive, with only the fairy and harengon remaining unchanged. The book contains 33 races in total, compiled and updated from previous Dungeons & Dragons books.

D&D 5E - List of All 33 Races in Mordenkainen's Monsters of the Multiverse

Mordenkainen Presents Monsters of the Multiverse contains 33 races compiled from previous Dungeons & Dragons books. Aarackocra Assimar Bugbear Centaur Changeling Deep Gnome Duergar Eladrin Fairy Firbolg Genasi, Air Genasi, Earth Genasi, Fire Gennasi, Water Githyanki Githzerai Goblin Goliath...

www.enworld.org

D&D 5E - Full List of Monsters in Mordenkainen Presents Monsters of the Multiverse

Mordenkainen Presents Monsters of the Multiverse contains revamped stat blocks for 260 monsters previously published in previous Dungeons & Dragons 5E books. The list was compiled by YouTuber Bob Worldbuilder based on some blurry screenshots originally shared by Nerd Immersion (see the video...

www.enworld.org

 

[Sacrosanct]

BTW, if it matters, she didn't say you were on a limited budget. The point is that you don't speak for the older player base. You are feeling alienated. Many of us are not.

As someone pushing 50: Get off my lawn, and take that Stixhaven book with you! But leave the multiverse book please…

 

[Hussar]

Ooo, sexy.

Just as another point about not including spells in the stat blocks - what about upcasting?

For example, a Night Hag has innate spells - Magic Missile at while and Plane Shift 2/day (among others).

Can I upcast my Magic Missile as a 7th level spell and lose once use of Plane Shift? Can I ONLY upcast as a 7th level spell?

Funny thing - I have Primeval Thule, which was launched for 5e in 2013. In Primeval Thule, the Black Circle Wizards do have standard spell casting, but, their primary combat effects are NPC only effects that are only found in this one type of NPC.

So, I mean, the notion that this is something WotC just pulled out of a hat and not something that has been in the air for almost a decade is just not true. All you have to do is look at stuff from Kobold Press and see how far from the idea that monsters must work like PC's has drifted.

 

[Leatherhead]

It seems to me there are two different arguments here being talked past each other here.

The argument that NPC powers should count as spells because that enables counterplay with the anti-spell toolset that PCs have.

And,

The argument that NPCs and PCs should not follow the same rules due to asymmetrical game design. VS them using the same rules for parity and easy translation of mechanics between the two groups.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

That spell was granted to the corrupt sorcerer by the demon Bagglial in exchange for 101 innocents cut down in the midst of blasphemy. Or whatever. The point is there is no reason why every magical thing in the world should be available to the PCs. The laws of magic produced the spells in the PHB, but they are merely a sliver of the sum total of magical knowledge discovered through the eons by wizards, warlocks, priests and sorcerers long dead or mad or both.

I don’t like that, mostly because it feels designed to make the world ineffable, in a way that…makes the stagecraft too obvious for my tastes.

It also contradicts the stories of certain PCs. I’m not saying all thing a need to be learnable, or that the Wizard must be able to figure how all things work. I’m just saying that making all NPCs run so differently from PCs that the Wizard can’t learn any of the evil wizard’s spells does a couple things.

1. It contradicts the story of the Wizard, that they have studied magic and thus gained power. That necessarily implies that magic can be studied.

2. Makes the world and the PCs feel separate from eachother, which I passionately dislike. There should be people who look like the PCs, and who can do many of the same things, and who are trained in the same traditions, because otherwise the PCs are weird aliens in a world they only pretend to be a part of.

To me, having NPCs reference many of the same things the PCs do is absolutely vital to understanding PCs as part of the world.

Which is also why I hate the decision to retcon the PHB race write ups as somehow not reflecting what most members of that race are like. PCs should not be a different kind of creature from the rest of their people. If Legolas has a wholly different set of strengths from elves in general, even elves of Mirkwood, is he even actually an elf?

Short rests? If a class is based on short rests and all these races are based on Pb, then why do short rests for that one player? What’s the benefit? It’s like 3.5, it looks compatible on paper, in practice I imagine it’s going to be a lot of little fiddly things that add up.

Hit dice, features which require a short rest such as the cooking feat, and because the team is…a team?

But also…short and long rest based classes exist in the PHB. What you describe literally isn’t a new aspect of the game.

 

[teitan]

It seems to me there are two different arguments here being talked past each other here.

The argument that NPC powers should count as spells because that enables counterplay with the anti-spell toolset that PCs have.

And,

The argument that NPCs and PCs should not follow the same rules due to asymmetrical game design. VS them using the same rules for parity and easy translation of mechanics between the two groups.

You missed the 3rd... why such a big change before the release of the revised rules? A preview of changes is one thing, this is something more akin to a preview like The Tome of Swords in 3.5 but not as easy to just ignore.

 

[teitan]

I don’t like that, mostly because it feels designed to make the world ineffable, in a way that…makes the stagecraft too obvious for my tastes.

It also contradicts the stories of certain PCs. I’m not saying all thing a need to be learnable, or that the Wizard must be able to figure how all things work. I’m just saying that making all NPCs run so differently from PCs that the Wizard can’t learn any of the evil wizard’s spells does a couple things.

1. It contradicts the story of the Wizard, that they have studied magic and thus gained power. That necessarily implies that magic can be studied.

2. Makes the world and the PCs feel separate from eachother, which I passionately dislike. There should be people who look like the PCs, and who can do many of the same things, and who are trained in the same traditions, because otherwise the PCs are weird aliens in a world they only pretend to be a part of.

To me, having NPCs reference many of the same things the PCs do is absolutely vital to understanding PCs as part of the world.

Which is also why I hate the decision to retcon the PHB race write ups as somehow not reflecting what most members of that race are like. PCs should not be a different kind of creature from the rest of their people. If Legolas has a wholly different set of strengths from elves in general, even elves of Mirkwood, is he even actually an elf?

Hit dice, features which require a short rest such as the cooking feat, and because the team is…a team?

But also…short and long rest based classes exist in the PHB. What you describe literally isn’t a new aspect of the game.

Let's see how decoupled it becomes first though. Also, I don't know a lot of groups that really look at cooking. Then there are groups who, yes, don't use feats because they are an optional rule. I know people keep forgetting this but they are, they aren't a core rule. I don't use them. I used them for Theros but in general I don't use them. So... a new rule that relies on the use of an optional rule to keep certain classes and "builds" viable is poor game design and/or poorly thought out.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Let's see how decoupled it becomes first though.

So…a hypothetical problem. Okay.

 

[teitan]

So…a hypothetical problem. Okay.

NO, read my revised post.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Let's see how decoupled it becomes first though. Also, I don't know a lot of groups that really look at cooking. Then there are groups who, yes, don't use feats because they are an optional rule. I know people keep forgetting this but they are, they aren't a core rule. I don't use them. I used them for Theros but in general I don't use them. So... a new rule that relies on the use of an optional rule to keep certain classes and "builds" viable is poor game design and/or poorly thought out.

I think that is a bold statement. The actual change is minor.
If you look at previewed monster stat blocks, it still tells us advantage vs spells and magical effects.
Probably they made the change for PC races without thinkining too much about it and now all they have to do is add a (spell lvl x tag) behind NPC abilities to fix the issue.
For now, the fix is: if it looks like a spell, treat it as one.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Let's see how decoupled it becomes first though. Also, I don't know a lot of groups that really look at cooking. Then there are groups who, yes, don't use feats because they are an optional rule. I know people keep forgetting this but they are, they aren't a core rule. I don't use them. I used them for Theros but in general I don't use them. So... a new rule that relies on the use of an optional rule to keep certain classes and "builds" viable is poor game design and/or poorly thought out.

You…gotta know thatthe feat was an example, and is hardly the only “during a short rest you can” or “this takes 10 minutes which can be done as part of a short rest” ability.

so, the idea of “a new rule that relies on the use of an optional rule to keep certain classes and ‘builds’ viable” is entirely a thing you’ve invented, with absolutely no bearing of any kind of the reality of the game.