D&D Monster Manual (2025)

D&D (2024) D&D Monster Manual (2025)

The stone golem: Again, not a huge fan of adding abilities that have never been there. And in this case, adding a ranged attack means it's harder for pcs to make meaningful tactical choices to make an encounter easier to manage.

That said, there's a right way to do it. This isn't quite on the mark for me.

In my opinion, the thing to do when adding a ranged attack to a melee brute is to make it less effective than its melee attacks. One point less on its attack bonus is a good start, but it shouldn't do more damage than its slam attack- it should do less. I get that they're trying to alleviate the issue of kiting, but how often should you encounter a stone golem in a huge open field where you can just keep backing up away from it? Also, that's why it has the ability to cast slow in the first place.

If I was redesigning the stone golem with an eye toward giving it a ranged attack, I'd probably go with some sort of ranged rock spitting ability- maybe even a cone. Something with an attack bonus of around +6 or +7 (assuming its melee bonus was still +10), and with an average damage of around 16-18 points. Maybe slightly less but with multiple targets. And probably with a shorter range.

Man, I feel like a stodgy old fogy who is all critical all the time in this thread. But I really feel like they're reducing the impact of tactical choices for pcs. Again, "I remember this one adventure..." time.... I remember a 1e adventure I ran where low-level pcs had to deal with a stone golem by evading it, keeping their distance, and cleverly leading it around its lair while one pc accomplished their actual goal instead of fighting it. That's just not possible when it can do ranged attacks at 90'. I like encounters where you have to think outside the box.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


To be clear- I am fine with variants of monsters having non-traditional abilities. A "stone golem forcecaster" with that stat block would be fine. Hell, I have dozens of variants of monsters that break their traditional molds in a lot of ways. But I prefer to have older versions, especially those where the tactics you use can really effect the outcome, still be valid as well.
 

The stone golem: Again, not a huge fan of adding abilities that have never been there. And in this case, adding a ranged attack means it's harder for pcs to make meaningful tactical choices to make an encounter easier to manage.

That said, there's a right way to do it. This isn't quite on the mark for me.

In my opinion, the thing to do when adding a ranged attack to a melee brute is to make it less effective than its melee attacks. One point less on its attack bonus is a good start, but it shouldn't do more damage than its slam attack- it should do less. I get that they're trying to alleviate the issue of kiting, but how often should you encounter a stone golem in a huge open field where you can just keep backing up away from it? Also, that's why it has the ability to cast slow in the first place.

If I was redesigning the stone golem with an eye toward giving it a ranged attack, I'd probably go with some sort of ranged rock spitting ability- maybe even a cone. Something with an attack bonus of around +6 or +7 (assuming its melee bonus was still +10), and with an average damage of around 16-18 points. Maybe slightly less but with multiple targets. And probably with a shorter range.

Man, I feel like a stodgy old fogy who is all critical all the time in this thread. But I really feel like they're reducing the impact of tactical choices for pcs. Again, "I remember this one adventure..." time.... I remember a 1e adventure I ran where low-level pcs had to deal with a stone golem by evading it, keeping their distance, and cleverly leading it around its lair while one pc accomplished their actual goal instead of fighting it. That's just not possible when it can do ranged attacks at 90'. I like encounters where you have to think outside the box.
I think, in general, the revised stone golem is an upgrade. However, though I welcome adding a ranged attack, a force bolt is the wrong way to do it IMO too.
 

what if your campaign had seen major events played out where using charm person on that monster was a major plot point?
then you keep them as humanoids, no one is forcing you to treat them as fey.

With ‘edition’ changes you will always have to roll with it, what if you had a major plot point with a 4e Warlord and now you are switching to 5e… I don’t think that means changes to the game are so restricted that these things cannot change
 


What I find most interesting in these previews is the subtle changes, like the golem's Immutable form. I didn't even realize "shape-shift" was a rule now. It will allow me to simplify some statblocks. It is these little changes I find most interesting and a reason I'm waiting to "publish" any new monsters until I have the new MM in my hands!
 


It’s turning them back into what they where pre-Tolkien, and still are in the parts of culture that escaped the influence.
Yeah, I’ve been a big fan since they announced this change about 3 years ago. It adds a lot of intrigue and tragedy to their backstory.
That seems to be the main change in all of these stat blocks, simplification (at the cost of flavor) and some tweaks. To a degree that helps hitting the CR more accurately / predictably and it certainly makes the creature easier to run, I do not like the removal of flavor though, starting with having a generic Rend vs Bite & Claw attacks
I always hated how a ton of monsters in the 2014 PHB had bite, claw, tail, and other melee attacks that did similar amounts of damage just of different damage types (bludgeoning, piercing, slashing). Dragons were especially bad in this regard. Either merge them into a single Rend attack or give additional effects to the different attacks (grapple, prone, push, etc).
 

then you keep them as humanoids, no one is forcing you to treat them as fey.

With ‘edition’ changes you will always have to roll with it, what if you had a major plot point with a 4e Warlord and now you are switching to 5e… I don’t think that means changes to the game are so restricted that these things cannot change
What kind of impact does changing a monsters classification have?
What changes now that a goblin is considered fey?

I accept my ignorance on the matter.
 

Remove ads

Top