D&D 5E D&D Beyond: Monsters of the Multiverse Will Not Replace Existing Monsters

D&D Beyond has said that Monsters of the Multiverse will not replace existing monsters already purchased by users.

While they have indicated that existing content will not be overwritten, they were unable to share any details on how the new monster stat blocks will be implemented - suggestions might include duplicate entries, or some kind of toggle. This also includes racial traits, which won't replace old material -- the contents of the book will be treated as new content.

While DDB is taking it's lead from WotC on what to do, apparently WotC asked them to take charge of communicating this all to users.

 

[Micah Sweet]

None of which even approaches new edition territory.

Nothing needs to change that would make it not 5e. Your "needed changes" are just things you don't prefer.

Don't tell me what I'd be better off doing.

The Essentials classes did not include a class named Fighter, it had two classes whose names weren't the least bit confusing. Slayer and Knight are not confusing.

Also I didn't say that essentials took anything away, so what on Earth are you even replying to?

What part of "rules incompatibility" is confusing you?

The old stat blocks aren't incorrect.

This is one of the silliest statements I've ever seen on these forums. It literally isn't even new vs old. You can have a Harengon and a PHB Wood Elf and a MMoTM Bugbear, some of whom use PHB subclasses with no variants and some of whom use Tasha's subclasses with variant rules turned on, all at the same table.

The only potential contradiction is in errata, which has been the case for several years.

I agree that none of the changes are huge by themselves. What they are doing, however, is making many, many small changes to a lot of game elements, and reprinting whole books to highlight these changes. How many can you make before it seems like a new edition, or at least a 3.0 to 3.5 situation? I know why they didn't, but I would have preferred them to have marketed this as 5.5 or 6e. It would have been cleaner. They could have included that modern values setting i think they should make.

 

[Micah Sweet]

are you lock? no one can tell you what you can't do? Come on this is a discussion don't get so uptight.

Love the LOST reference!

 

[Paul Farquhar]

The new (half) edition comes in in 2024. Look at this as a preview.

 

[Micah Sweet]

For people mentioning PHB+1, the main group that was made for, Adventurers League, no longer uses it. And some of my final decision will be based on what they do with the changes because AL play is more likely for me than a private group. But they will have to decide something on this. Maybe an AL 2.0 that has it's first season in 2024 with the updated core books. Seeing what their official decision is on this book being legal or not, or when it will become legal, for AL play will say a lot.

AL will almost certainly require the newest version of everything, at least by May when the stand-alone book is available. Part of their purpose is marketing, and they are going to want people to buy and use their new product.

 

[SkidAce]

There are A LOT of abilities that are clearly magical, clearly a lot like spells, and that aren't technically spells in the Monster Manual. So, how is this different? How does this present a new, unique, issue?

For creatures, it doesn't.

For actual spellcasting spellcasters, they are casting spells, so counterable, etc.

 

[SkidAce]

I think the concern is that these types of abilities are attached to statblocks of NPCs that are supposed to be actual "wizards" or "clerics" or whatever. That is to say, they're close to certain PC classes in concept, so when their NPC abilities deviate significantly from the PC abilities of similar classes, it raises questions.

Quoted for truth!

 

[Chaosmancer]

I think the concern is that these types of abilities are attached to statblocks of NPCs that are supposed to be actual "wizards" or "clerics" or whatever. That is to say, they're close to certain PC classes in concept, so when their NPC abilities deviate significantly from the PC abilities of similar classes, it raises questions.

Throwing an @SkidAce as well

Again, this has happened before with nary an eyeblink. Abilities that PCs can't use?

Hobgoblin Devastators from Volo's are Evocation wizards. Show me an evocation wizard that can use "Arcane Advantage" to deal and extra 2d6 sneak attack damage with a spell.

Claw of Luthic is a cleric... who gets to make four attacks when at half health, no cleric I know can do more than two attacks, with a special ability. Hand of Yurtrus has the "Touch of the White Hand" a melee WEAPON attack that does 2d8 NECROTIC damage. It isn't even a spell according to the statblock.



Casting unconterable "spells" as a PC casting class?

Yuan-ti Nightmare Speaker is a warlock who gets Invoke Nightmare, which isn't a spell but acts a lot like Phantasmal Killer. They also get Death Fangs, allowing them to smite at 3d10 twice per day.

Mind whisperer is also a Warlock with Smite, and by the way, these aren't the Eldritch Smites that warlocks got in Xanathar's, because they don't take spell slots, they are just twice per day, in addition to their spells.

Pit Master gets the smite and a Sleep spell based on a Con save, no HP limit. And the Smite for 3d10

So, again, how are these new abilities somehow different? We've had enemy NPC wizards, clerics, and Warlocks using abilities that PCs cannot access for years. Using magic that isn't spells, and would therefore be immune to counterspell. This is nothing NEW they are just expanding it.

 

[J.Quondam]

Throwing an @SkidAce as well

Again, this has happened before with nary an eyeblink. Abilities that PCs can't use?

Hobgoblin Devastators from Volo's are Evocation wizards. Show me an evocation wizard that can use "Arcane Advantage" to deal and extra 2d6 sneak attack damage with a spell.

Claw of Luthic is a cleric... who gets to make four attacks when at half health, no cleric I know can do more than two attacks, with a special ability. Hand of Yurtrus has the "Touch of the White Hand" a melee WEAPON attack that does 2d8 NECROTIC damage. It isn't even a spell according to the statblock.



Casting unconterable "spells" as a PC casting class?

Yuan-ti Nightmare Speaker is a warlock who gets Invoke Nightmare, which isn't a spell but acts a lot like Phantasmal Killer. They also get Death Fangs, allowing them to smite at 3d10 twice per day.

Mind whisperer is also a Warlock with Smite, and by the way, these aren't the Eldritch Smites that warlocks got in Xanathar's, because they don't take spell slots, they are just twice per day, in addition to their spells.

Pit Master gets the smite and a Sleep spell based on a Con save, no HP limit. And the Smite for 3d10

So, again, how are these new abilities somehow different? We've had enemy NPC wizards, clerics, and Warlocks using abilities that PCs cannot access for years. Using magic that isn't spells, and would therefore be immune to counterspell. This is nothing NEW they are just expanding it.

I mean, cool. I'm just explaining the issue as I understand it. I personally have almost no skin in this particular game.

 

[Enevhar Aldarion]

Unless someone else already addressed this and I just missed it, for DDB and FG and probably Roll20 too, owning content from the old books and buying content from the new book will give you access to both versions. If you own just the old ones or just the new one, you only get access to that version. But for all the people who do not own content from the two old books, will the sale of content from them be discontinued when the new book releases in May? Since the new book replaces the two old ones for official rules, will the ability to buy the old ones disappear too? And I would assume that the physical versions of the old books will go out of print as well? Has anyone seen anything official on this?

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I agree that none of the changes are huge by themselves. What they are doing, however, is making many, many small changes to a lot of game elements, and reprinting whole books to highlight these changes.

Are they? Again, the upcoming books have optional variants, not replacements. Adding new stuff that can be used alongside existing material is not a change.

How many can you make before it seems like a new edition, or at least a 3.0 to 3.5 situation?

So, open the errata document, and triple it in size, and have it change how parts of the system function.

I know why they didn't, but I would have preferred them to have marketed this as 5.5 or 6e. It would have been cleaner. They could have included that modern values setting i think they should make.

The earliest that will happen is a time when 5e isn't selling well. Even then, as long as they are making lots of money from the IP, they've little reason to mess with the possibility of a split fanbase like we saw with previous editions.