D&D (2024) Monster Manual 2025 Stat Block Compilation

This thread contains a compilation of the Monster Manual 2025 stat blocks which have been previewed publicly so far.

SPOILER_kok65dwq8xfd1.png
GT7MzGtXoAAD2kd.jpeg
rBXogkJ.png
 

log in or register to remove this ad


log in or register to remove this ad


Oh, certainly. We've done stuff like this for 5E. We even added the Vitality/Wounds system from d20 SW.

It is just not "D&D" to people when you make these sorts of changes.

Edit: FWIW it is what is going on with our current project, which is not supposed to be "D&D".
Yeah. The bar for what is D&D and what not is not so high. 4e has suffered from that. 4e essentials might have been better received if it came before 4e.

I think it is actually worth a try. It is not hard to convert.

I guess if you are not proficient in armor, you don't get proficiency bonus to your defense score. I also think barbarian unarmkred defense use con as DR. And monks add wis to defense?

Shield spell adds to defense? Mage armor is DR?
 

I think it is actually worth a try. It is not hard to convert.

I guess if you are not proficient in armor, you don't get proficiency bonus to your defense score. I also think barbarian unarmkred defense use con as DR. And monks add wis to defense?

Shield spell adds to defense? Mage armor is DR?
If you want to discuss it further, I suggest starting a new thread since I don't want to derail this one even more. I'll keep an eye out for it if you do. Most of the stuff you posted upthread was stuff we did as well (or close to it).
 



Does not help for narration. If you want that, better use AC as damage reduction and have a defense score.
DR is a mess.

To me it would be easy to say dragons or beasts or high fighters could add their proficiency mod or Con mod to AC if unarmored or as a replacement for Dex to AC.
 

Of course you can change it. That is the point.
Someone said, it does not matter how we get to AC. Because it is a made up number and noonce cares.

That is not my experience: players do care if numbers and descrived visual are matching.

Hammer: bludgeoning damage expected.

High AC: some kind of heavier armor expected.

So when I have an enemy that attacks me with a hammer and deals piercing damage and wears cloth, people are rightfully expecting change self on the enemy. Or at least an illusion on the hammer, IF there is no other explanation.

It could be a barbarian with a claw hammer. In that case I should have described the enemy better. In some way that the players can deduce it.

Many real world war hammers could do piercing as well as bludgeoning damage because they had a spike on the back side. But how often does the difference between bludgeoning, piercing and slashing really matter? I can't remember the last time I had to clarify other than that it wasn't some kind of elemental damage such as fire.
 

Many real world war hammers could do piercing as well as bludgeoning damage because they had a spike on the back side. But how often does the difference between bludgeoning, piercing and slashing really matter? I can't remember the last time I had to clarify other than that it wasn't some kind of elemental damage such as fire.
Yes. Of course. If you descrobe the hammer woth one spike on one side thatvis possible. But not my example.
 


Remove ads

Remove ads

Top