D&D 5E Explain: Mordenkainen's Monsters of the Multiverse

[Parmandur]

So I just (on a whim thanks to this thread*) grabbed a copy of Fizban's and I noticed that the spellcasting monsters have "spell attack" actions. I can see how that might cause some confusion for counterspell. Is that the first place it showed up? Why not just call it a "magical ranged attack" and avoid the confusion? Maybe counterspell is an uncommon practice even among the designers so they didn't think of it. I assume this is the same as they are listed in Mordenkainen's?


*(it's really because I love dragons as main antagonists)

Fizban's and MotM use the same format, as do the Monsters in Ravenloft, Witchlight, and Strixhaven. Netherdeep, too, for that matter: unsure about Candlekeep off the top of my head.

 

[Reynard]

Fizban's and MotM use the same format, as do the Monsters in Ravenloft, Witchlight, and Strixhaven. Netherdeep, too, for that matter: unsure about Candlekeep off the top of my head.

I followed the link upthread to the Mordenkainen's book pages and they are a little fuzzy but it looks like they do not sat "Ranged Spell Attack" and instead just give them a prose description. Does anyone have Mordenkainen's? Can we confirm? That "spell attack" bit seems important for the discussion at hand (though admittedly not especially important in the grand scheme).

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I followed the link upthread to the Mordenkainen's book pages and they are a little fuzzy but it looks like they do not sat "Ranged Spell Attack" and instead just give them a prose description. Does anyone have Mordenkainen's? Can we confirm? That "spell attack" bit seems important for the discussion at hand (though admittedly not especially important in the grand scheme).

there is a thread where someone is going through alphabetically the changes, you should ask there.

 

[Remathilis]

Fizban's and MotM use the same format, as do the Monsters in Ravenloft, Witchlight, and Strixhaven. Netherdeep, too, for that matter: unsure about Candlekeep off the top of my head.

Candlekeep is a bit of a hybrid (or perhaps a changeover). They experimented with putting "spells" into the stat-block directly (such as firebolt or eldritch blast) but abandoned the practice quickly in favor of "spell like" attacks (arcane bolt, etc.) They did remove the spell-slots in favor of spell-uses per day though.

 

[Parmandur]

Candlekeep is a bit of a hybrid (or perhaps a changeover). They experimented with putting "spells" into the stat-block directly (such as firebolt or eldritch blast) but abandoned the practice quickly in favor of "spell like" attacks (arcane bolt, etc.) They did remove the spell-slots in favor of spell-uses per day though.

Interesting.

So, between the newer books moving towards this formula, and Monsters of the Multiverse including many of the Monsters from the first half of 5E Publicstion schedule...if they do an updated Monster Manual, most of the Monsters in 5E would be converted.

 

[Remathilis]

Interesting.

So, between the newer books moving towards this formula, and Monsters of the Multiverse including many of the Monsters from the first half of 5E Publicstion schedule...if they do an updated Monster Manual, most of the Monsters in 5E would be converted.

At best, you'd be losing a lot of the module-specific monsters from prior to Tasha's and the Ravnica, Eberron, and Theros-specific ones until some of them got updated somewhere. But even then, they'd be usable, just a little more convoluted to run.

 

[Parmandur]

At best, you'd be losing a lot of the module-specific monsters from prior to Tasha's and the Ravnica, Eberron, and Theros-specific ones until some of them got updated somewhere. But even then, they'd be usable, just a little more convoluted to run.

Yes, one might even say...completely compatible.

I'm starting to wonder if the 2024 "revisited" Setting will be a new Eberron product, say a Sandbox Adventure in Xen'drik with lot of local color and a large bestiary updating the Monsters of the Setting, and new versions of Warforged and Deagonmsrks to fit the new Race & Background Feat Tree regimes...and maybe Dominaria next year for the Magic 30th Anniversary.

 

[Remathilis]

Yes, one might even say...completely compatible.

I'm starting to wonder if the 2024 "revisited" Setting will be a new Eberron product, say a Sandbox Adventure in Xen'drik with lot of local color and a large bestiary updating the Monsters of the Setting, and new versions of Warforged and Deagonmsrks to fit the new Race & Background Feat Tree regimes...and maybe Dominaria next year for the Magic 30th Anniversary.

I initially assumed the revised setting would be Faerun/Forgotten Realms, but a Xen'drik book/backdoor revision of the Eberron races and Marks seems far more probable and convenient.

 

[Parmandur]

I initially assumed the revised setting would be Faerun/Forgotten Realms, but a Xen'drik book/backdoor revision of the Eberron races and Marks seems far more probable and convenient.

I was thinking Greyhawk for the 50th D&D Anniversary, but irlt is also the 20th anniversary for Eberron...

 

[James Gasik]

I just looked at a creature with Magic Resistance in Monsters of the Multiverse. It says it has "advantage on saving throws against spells and other magical effects."

The creature version, yes, but if you look at what the Yuan-Ti have now, it specifically say spells. So monsters can still get advantage on whatever the DM says is "magic", but players are limited to spells only.