2025 Monster Manual Will Contain Over 85 New Monsters

Next year's new Monster Manual will include over 85 new monsters, a sizable increase over what was previously believed. In a D&D Beyond post made to celebrate the year end, Wizards of the Coast confirmed that the 2025 Monster Manual would contain 85 "brand new monsters." Considering that the new Monster Manual includes approximately 500 monsters, it's not a surprise that there are a significant amount of new monster statblocks, but this is further confirmation that nearly 20% of the statblocks will be brand new. A description of the Monster Manual also confirms that there will be over 300 new images in the book.

Many of these new statblocks will be to add either high CR or low CR variants of existing popular monsters, so that they can be used in a wider variety of scenarios. For instance, vampires will have several low CR variants (representing freshly turned vampires) along with a high CR vampire nightbringer. Also present in the game are arch-hags and a blob of annihilation, which are classified as titan-level creatures representing different kinds of monster types.

The new Monster Manual will be released on February 18th, 2025.

 

[Demetrios1453]

I agree with @dave2008 here. Not every encounter should have unusual stuff, and should otherwise leave the tactics to just the movement on the map. Sometimes, a game just needs simple monsters and simple encounters. Save the interesting stuff (most of the time) for the more important, plot-relevant creatures. It might be shocking to some here, but a lot of DMs and a lot of groups actually enjoy that sort of play.

 

[Reynard]

Sometimes, a game just needs simple monsters and simple encounters.

For what? To what end? If it is for "story" purposes, you can still have that encounter but don't need it to be a full bore by-initiatives grind fest. Just run a Quick Encounter a la SWADE (I'm sure the 2024 DMG has guidelines for such encounters, right)?

 

[Reynard]

Everybody needs different things. I need simple stat blocks to run quickly and easily. That allows me to DM them creatively and to the tactical detail I need. The rules of the game, including improvisational rules in the DMG, are enough for me to fill in any blanks and make tactically interesting encounters. I not don't need detailed stat blocks to make an interesting encounter. I need the stat block to get out of the way.

Now for the 10-25% of monsters that are special, then sure. Give them thematic reactions and interesting actions and bonus actions. Any more than that is a burden to me.

That being said, I completely respect that you want something different. Ideally a monster book gives you both.

I agree with you in a way: I have a sheet or two of "standard" reactions, bonus actions and "sudden" actions I use for mooks to make them more interesting in combat. I try and mix them up and apply them thematically, but it doesn't take much effort on my part to implement them since I built the list (some developed, some adapted, and some stolen).

 

[Demetrios1453]

For what? To what end? If it is for "story" purposes, you can still have that encounter but don't need it to be a full bore by-initiatives grind fest. Just run a Quick Encounter a la SWADE (I'm sure the 2024 DMG has guidelines for such encounters, right)?

Some players simply like to swing their swords and shoot their fireballs and watch monsters go down. To such players, it isn't "a full bore by-initiatives grind fest" - it's actually the reason they play the game. They don't want continual challenges (some challenges yes, continual challenges no); they just want the power fantasy of seeing swathes of their foes fall before them. And they enjoy rolling the dice to see it happen.

You're describing combat as a means to an end; they see combat as one of he desired ends itself.

 

[Reynard]

Some players simply like to swing their swords and shoot their fireballs and watch monsters go down. To such players, it isn't "a full bore by-initiatives grind fest" - it's actually the reason they play the game. They don't want continual challenges (some challenges yes, continual challenges no); they just want the power fantasy of seeing swathes of their foes fall before them. And they enjoy rolling the dice to see it happen.

You're describing combat as a means to an end; they see combat as one of he desired ends itself.

Fair enough. I guess I just don't quite grasp why you would want that, and then want it to be boring.

 

[dave2008]

Fair enough. I guess I just don't quite grasp why you would want that, and then want it to be boring.

What is boring is subjective.

 

[Chaltab]

Some players want Dark Souls, some want Dynasty Warriors

 

[W'rkncacnter]

Some players want Dark Souls, some want Dynasty Warriors

and some players want a mix of each

 

[Reynard]

Given the amount of table time combat eats, I am legitimately confused why anyone would want to.spend it on rote combats.

 

[Chaltab]

Given the amount of table time combat eats, I am legitimately confused why anyone would want to.spend it on rote combats.

I mean I'm kind of in the same boat on that. Generally speaking I just put a bunch of weak, simple monsters or 4E-style minions in between the party and the strong monsters fully expecting them to get nuked by the Zeal Cleric so they can have some fun tearing through the weak enemies without the entire combat feeling like a waste of time.

...so as usual my solution to the flaws of 5E tend to come from 4E.