D&D (2024) 2025's Ancient Green Dragon Stat Block From The New Monster Manual

The new ancient green dragon from the 2025 Monster Manual was previewed at Gen Con.

​

 

[Stalker0]

Booo alignment is listed as "lawful evil" rather than "typically lawful evil."

I assumed from MotM that the word "typically" was the standard going forward (e.g. a Green Abisai is "typically lawful evil" despite being a devil.

This doesn't affect me as I don't use alignments anyway, but it feels like a step backwards for the game.

might be a more general passage under alignments. something like "all alignments noted are common, but there are exceptions"... yadda yadda

 

[MonsterEnvy]

Booo alignment is listed as "lawful evil" rather than "typically lawful evil."

I assumed from MotM that the word "typically" was the standard going forward (e.g. a Green Abisai is "typically lawful evil" despite being a devil.

This doesn't affect me as I don't use alignments anyway, but it feels like a step backwards for the game.

There was a big text is not final disclaimer when the slide was shown off at Gencon. So it's possible that will be added in later.

 

[Zaukrie]

Booo alignment is listed as "lawful evil" rather than "typically lawful evil."

I assumed from MotM that the word "typically" was the standard going forward (e.g. a Green Abisai is "typically lawful evil" despite being a devil.

This doesn't affect me as I don't use alignments anyway, but it feels like a step backwards for the game.

everything is typical. It was a wasted word.

 

[dave2008]

Now personally I am a big fan of reducing the attack forms. Because the new form they gave us is a 15th foot reach with damage and poison, to me what does having it be a tail vs a bite at that point really get you?

You can flavor it however you want in terms of how the dragon's actually attacking, but the key its a simple attack with great reach that gets the job done. I don't see a reason to maintain 3 attack forms for flavor reasons.

While I generally agree with you. The advantage of separate claw, bite, tall, wing attacks is you can give them different reaches and traits. And, IMO, a dragon should be usable as a solo creature. So if it is a bit more complex that is OK, because as a DM you are focusing on just one creature.

 

[Stalker0]

While I generally agree with you. The advantage of separate claw, bite, tall, wing attacks is you can give them different reaches and traits. And, IMO, a dragon should be usable as a solo creature. So if it is a bit more complex that is OK, because as a DM you are focusing on just one creature.

In theory yes, in practice though it rarely worked out that way. Looking at the old ancient green. The bite had the best reach and the poison, the claw and tail were literally just damage. the only difference was bludge vs pierce vs slash....and lets be honest that distinction comes up so incredibly rarely its barely worth discussing.

The new dragon gets the best reach and the poison on all of its attacks. It gets the best of all of the old attacks in a MUCH simplier package.

when I'm using a boss monster I want to spend brain power remembering to use their spells well and not forgetting their reactions, not in looking up which attack had 10 vs 15 reach or if I had already used the bite attack this round, etc

 

[mamba]

OK, one more observation and then I need to do some work! This may not be the final layout, but I noticed the page number is 156. The ancient green in the 2014 MM is on page 93. That is a lot more pages before you get to the green dragon - I wonder what is filling them up!

different order in which the monsters appear I guess, i.e. Green Dragon under G, not Dragon, Green under D

 

[dave2008]

In theory yes, in practice though it rarely worked out that way. Looking at the old ancient green. The bite had the best reach and the poison, the claw and tail were literally just damage. the only difference was bludge vs pierce vs slash....and lets be honest that distinction comes up so incredibly rarely its barely worth discussing.

The new dragon gets the best reach and the poison on all of its attacks. It gets the best of all of the old attacks in a MUCH simplier package.

when I'm using a boss monster I want to spend brain power remembering to use their spells well and not forgetting their reactions, not in looking up which attack had 10 vs 15 reach or if I had already used the bite attack this round, etc

I disagree, I don't want to worry about spells at all. I want everything I can use to be, as much as possible in the stat block.

Now I agree how it was implemented previously was not good. But I allow claws to push or knock prone, bites to grapple, and tails to stun or daze. Those tactical options get lost with a single "rend" attack.

 

[dave2008]

different order in which the monsters appear I guess, i.e. Green Dragon under G, not Dragon, Green under D

Yes, that was suggested by someone else and it disappoints me.

 

[Vael]

I dunno, I think I like breaking up the massive blocks of Demons and Dragons that were in previous MMs.

 

[Stalker0]

Now I agree how it was implemented previously was not good. But I allow claws to push or knock prone, bites to grapple, and tails to stun or daze. Those tactical options get lost with a single "rend" attack.

On a more physical dragon I can agree with you. But I thnk the point of the green is....its really less about its damaging attacks and more on its mind whammies. Its not knocking heads....its whispering promises. And its quite good at that, it can dole out 4 (2 target) charms a round! I just did the math, if you take a cleric with max wisdom and a +5 prof (aka +10 to the save), and you give it advantage on all of the saves....but you include it in every one of your charms a round (because it can be your 2nd target), you still charm it 68% of the time. And that's the best save in the party, a meer +5 has basically a 3% chance to remain uncharmed

This isn't a grappling, proning dragon, its a "charming" dragon. Now I would hope like your physical red might get some more tactical options with its attacks