D&D (2024) D&D Monster Manual (2025)

[grimmgoose]

I like what I'm seeing, mechanics-wise.

I still think the statblock format is weird, but maybe I'm just used to the old version. I still find it silly that there is a "MOD" and a "SAVE" and presumably a list of skills in some monsters. I think it could be immensely cleaned up to just give the monster the stat necessary.

The idea that a monster could have a different number for a Stealth Check, and a Dex Saving Throw feels very silly to me. Just say DEX: 22 +6, and have +6 be the number for anything Dex related (or, better yet, just use the modifier and ditch the score!)

 

[mamba]

How about doubling healing, increasing many spells' damage, massively boosting monks, significantly increasing the abilities of other martials, completely rewriting a bunch of magic items, and changing the stats of many or all the monsters, including in ways that completely change how they play?

obviously a stronger case, that is why they call it a revision rather than an errata after all, but ultimately no, still sufficiently compatible that I have no problem with calling it the same version.

Given the changes I can really argue it either way, since I have no problem with either, WotC’s decision settles it for me

 

[Micah Sweet]

sure, it’s largely compatible with 2014 though, you can run the same adventures, use the same monsters, and that is really enough to say you are compatible.

I wish they had changed more, not less. All the good changes from the UA they did ultimately not dare make, instead we got these low hanging fruits that amount to almost nothing mixed in with a slight move in a direction do not like… If at least the changes would compensate for having to put up with the direction then maybe I would have some interest

I wish they had changed more too, and slapped a "New Edition!" Sticker on it in the process. Then they could have actually made the D&D the designers wanted to make.

 

[Micah Sweet]

obviously a stronger case, that is why they call it a revision rather than an errata after all, but ultimately no, still sufficiently compatible that I have no problem with calling it the same version.

Given the changes I can really argue it either way, since I have no problem with either, WotC’s decision settles it for me

A game is more than just the core math. 4e and and the contemporary Gamma World at the time use the same core math and were published by the same company. Are they the same game?

 

[dave2008]

No, but IMO remarkably like 1e-2e and 3e-3.5.

I didn't participate in the 3e-3.5e so I can't compare; but that was also specifically not a new edition.

Ie-2e was, IMO, mostly a TSR cash grab. They were not different editions. I stopped buying 2e stuff because I didn't like the graphic design and art, but also because it didn't seem to change much. I didn't need the new books. However, I did buy a lot of the 2e Monstrous Compendium and used the 2e monsters in my 1e game just fine. In fact, many of them area identical. It was not a new edition either (again, compared to 2e-3e-3e-4e-5e) IMO.

 

[dave2008]

There are plenty of ways to be better than the 2014 version. Level Up's Monstrous Menagerie, for one.

Sure, the 2024 MM appears to be better too. Heck almost all the WotC books after the 2014 MM have better monster design.

Look, I am not a huge fan of all the changes WotC is making in there monster designs. That is OK. I have never seen a monster book that does exactly what I want. For me, nothing will ever beat my own custom monsters and I actually like it that way. However, I do like that we have a variety of different monster designs from many different providers. And from what I have seen so far, I am very interested in where WotC is going with there monster design, even if I don't copy it with my own designs. The more ideas the better IMO.

 

[dave2008]

Far from the only change, and you know it.

Question, because I know you've told me but I have forgotten, why does it matter to you so much that WotC calls it an edition change? Also, for you, what makes it an edition change?

For me:
Any edition change (in D&D) needs incompatible. I can't play them together in the same campaign. I can't use monsters from one with other or adventures from one with the other. If I can play at the same table, in the same campaign, with any combination of 2014 books and 2024 books, and any book in between, then it is the same edition. I know I can do that with 5e because we have done it. So for me, it is not an edition change in any meaningful way.

 

[mamba]

A game is more than just the core math. 4e and and the contemporary Gamma World at the time use the same core math and were published by the same company. Are they the same game?

no idea, do not know either well enough, sounds like one is fantasy and the other sci-fi. That obviously is not a difference between 2014 and 2024.

I gave you my answer and at this point it is unlikely to change since the data won’t. It’s enough of a change to justify it but not enough of one to require it. I can go either way on it and do not care which of the two it is, so I might as well call it what WotC calls it, a revision

 

[abirdcall]

Question, because I know you've told me but I have forgotten, why does it matter to you so much that WotC calls it an edition change? Also, for you, what makes it an edition change?

For me:
Any edition change (in D&D) needs incompatible. I can't play them together in the same campaign. I can't use monsters from one with other or adventures from one with the other. If I can play at the same table, in the same campaign, with any combination of 2014 books and 2024 books, and any book in between, then it is the same edition. I know I can do that with 5e because we have done it. So for me, it is not an edition change in any meaningful way.

100%.

What is the difference between the 2024 update and a book full of optional rules? To me the main difference is aesthetics and usability.

The are is updated and there is more of it. The books are easier to read. Instead of having a separate book of alternate rules they have printed them alongside the rules they are not changing. And, they are doing it as a 3 book big event.

Functionally, there is not a lot of difference than Xanathar's and Monsters of the Multiverse.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Question, because I know you've told me but I have forgotten, why does it matter to you so much that WotC calls it an edition change? Also, for you, what makes it an edition change?

For me:
Any edition change (in D&D) needs incompatible. I can't play them together in the same campaign. I can't use monsters from one with other or adventures from one with the other. If I can play at the same table, in the same campaign, with any combination of 2014 books and 2024 books, and any book in between, then it is the same edition. I know I can do that with 5e because we have done it. So for me, it is not an edition change in any meaningful way.

It matters to me because it affects 3pp products, who have a strong financial incentive to do what WotC does and go where they go, whether they think its a good idea creatively or not, and I like 3pp. Having 5.5 actually be labeled a separate edition would IMO lessen that force. 3pp I liked is already trying to sell me on "changing over".