Are Orcs in the Monster Manual? No and Yes.

The culture war surrounding orcs in Dungeons & Dragons continues with the release of the 2025 Monster Manual. Review copies of the Monster Manual are out in the wild, with many sites, EN World included, are giving their thoughts about the final core rulebook for the revised Fifth Edition ruleset. But while most commentators are discussing whether or not the monsters in the new Monster Manual hit harder than their 2014 equivalent, a growing number of commentators (mostly on Elon Musk's Twitter, but other places as well) are decrying the abolishment of orcs in the new rulebook.

Several months ago, would-be culture warriors complained about the depiction of orcs in the new Player's Handbook. Instead of depicting orcs as bloodthirsty marauders or creatures of evils, orcs (or more specifically, playable orcs) were depicted as a traveling species given endurance, determination, and the ability by their god Gruumsh to see in the darkness to help them "wander great plains, vast caverns, and churning seas." Keep in mind that one of the core facets of Dungeons & Dragons is that every game is defined by its players rather than an official canon, but some people were upset or annoyed about the shift in how a fictional species of humanoids were portrayed in two paragraphs of text and a piece of art in a 250+ page rulebook.

With the pending release of the Monster Manual, the orc is back in the spotlight once again. This time, it's because orcs no longer have statblocks in the Monster Manual. While the 2014 Monster Manual had a section detailing orc culture and three statblocks for various kinds of orcs, all specific mention of orcs have indeed been removed from the Monster Manual. The orcs are not the only creature to receive this treatment - drow are no longer in the Monster Manual, nor are duergar.

However, much of this is due to a deliberate design choice, meant not to sanitize Dungeons & Dragons from evil sentient species, but rather to add some versatility to a DM's toolbox. Orcs (and drow) are now covered under the expanded set of generic NPC statblocks in the Monster Manual. Instead of players being limited to only three Orc-specific statblocks (the Orc, the Orc War Chief and the Orc Eye of Gruumsh), DMs can use any of the 45 Humanoid statblocks in the book. Campaigns can now feature orc assassins, orc cultists, orc gladiators, or orc warriors instead of leaning on a handful of stats that lean into specific D&D lore.

Personally, I generally like that the D&D design ethos is leaning away from highly specific statblocks to more generalized ones. Why wouldn't an orc be an assassin or a pirate? Why should orcs (or any other species chosen to be adversaries in a D&D campaign) be limited to a handful of low CR statblocks? The design shift allows DMs more versatility, not less.

However, I do think that the D&D design team would do well to eventually provide some modularity to these generic statblocks, allowing DMs to "overlay" certain species-specific abilities over these NPC statblocks. Abilities like darkvision for orcs or the ability to cast darkness for drow or a fiendish rebuke for tieflings would be an easy way to separate the generic human assassin from the orc without impacting a statblock's CR.

As for the wider controversy surrounding orcs in D&D, the game and its lore is evolving over time, just as it has over the past 50 years. There's still a place for evil orcs, but they no longer need to be universally (or multiversally) evil within the context of the game. The idea that D&D's rulebooks must depict anything but the rules themselves a specific way is antithetical to the mutability of Dungeons & Dragons, which is supposed to be one of the game's biggest strengths.

 

[Bedrockgames]

There are these things, called "allegory" and "metaphor". Fantasy is full of them.

I think for most people orcs didn't represent anything real beyond something threatening to humanity or civilization though. Maybe they drew on real world culture to add flavor but I never saw them as stand ins for anyone. I saw them as just monsters.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

But the game mechanics though? An AC, attack roll, damage, saves, darkvision, a two-handed weapon, some javelins, a +2 in Intimidation, and you can Dash as a Bonus action. That's it. That's your "Orc". Pretty much no different than any other monster in the book. And certainly not worth all the hand-wringing that this statblock doesn't appear in the 5E24 MM in my opinion.

I largely agree with you.

But where is the duergar enlarge ability? Where is darkvision?

Those tables existed in the 2014 MM. In the 2014 MM in the NPC section we were told to customize NPCs by adding species abilities.

One page and two or three sentences. In the NPC section. That all could have been so easy.
I am very surprised how thise things did not carry over to 5.24.

You and I know how to modify stat blocks. But it was sooo enphasized that 5.24 is for beginners. With extra text how to do things. And I like that. And then they leave out such basic advice.

In the DMG they talked about leading by examples. So why does the MM not have one or two stat blocks that show how to customize a monster. Why is there no drow warrior (scout + elf(drow lineage) abilities + loth sting poison from the DMG).

Or in the conversion table: drow = scout + PHB abilites

It was such an easy to make thing and they fumbled it...

 

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

I agree. I'm disappointed that they didn't include table for customizing the NPCs. However, I'll end up making my own.

There is already one in the 2014 DMG

 

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

I largely agree with you.

But where is the duergar enlarge ability? Where is darkvision?

Those tables existed in the 2014 MM. In the 2014 MM in the NPC section we were told to customize NPCs by adding species abilities.

One page and two or three sentences. In the NPC section. That all could have been so easy.
I am very surprised how thise things did not carry over to 5.24.

You and I know how to modify stat blocks. But it was sooo enphasized that 5.24 is for beginners. With extra text how to do things. And I like that. And then they leave out such basic advice.

In the DMG they talked about leading by examples. So why does the MM not have one or two stat blocks that show how to customize a monster. Why is there no drow warrior (scout + elf(drow lineage) abilities + loth sting poison from the DMG).

Or in the conversion table: drow = scout + PHB abilites

It was such an easy to make thing and they fumbled it...

They could have simply removed the ability mods from the 2014 table in the DMG and pasted into the NPC/Humanoids section and that would be pretty good

 

[CreamCloud0]

Well, I might as well bang my drum again because why not? Speaking personally... once again I find myself reiterating the thing I say all the time... which is that the game mechanics do a horrible job of distinguishing characterization... and everyone would be a lot happier if they just relied on their own use of narrative and flavor to create uniqueness instead.

What does the Orc have in the 5E14 Monster Manual that is supposedly uniquely 'Orc'?

Aggressive. As a bonus action, the ore can move up to its speed toward a hostile creature that it can see.

That's it. Yep... what makes an Orc and Orc is that its one special "species game mechanic" is pretty much exactly the same as a Rogue and a Monk. All three make a Bonus action Dash. Which means that a Gnome Monk is mechanically pretty much the same as an Orc-- they both can move faster that most other people. Heck, they both even have Darkvision (if someone wanted to make the claim that that's the second thing that makes an Orc and Orc.) So where exactly is the uniqueness of the Orc creature coming from?

Because obviously, a Gnome Monk and an Orc are different, right? So why would we think that? Well... I'm willing to bet it's because how the DM plays the Orc during the narrative part of game that will be the actual thing that makes the creature distinguishable from any other creature in the game, not the statblock. The DM won't embody and play a Gnome Monk the same way they would represent the Orc in the narrative world of the game even though they both can Dash with a Bonus action. They will both be played exceedingly differently. Which is how it has always been and always will be.

But the game mechanics though? An AC, attack roll, damage, saves, darkvision, a two-handed weapon, some javelins, a +2 in Intimidation, and you can Dash as a Bonus action. That's it. That's your "Orc". Pretty much no different than any other monster in the book. And certainly not worth all the hand-wringing that this statblock doesn't appear in the 5E24 MM in my opinion.

i'll give my own usual response to this kind of argument, that the existing mechanics do a poor job at being a representation of the thing they're trying to simulate is no excuse for scrapping mechanical representation entirely, we don't say 'just give up then' we say 'try again', and hope we get better mechanics on the next attempt.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I largely agree with you.

But where is the duergar enlarge ability? Where is darkvision?

Those tables existed in the 2014 MM. In the 2014 MM in the NPC section we were told to customize NPCs by adding species abilities.

One page and two or three sentences. In the NPC section. That all could have been so easy.
I am very surprised how thise things did not carry over to 5.24.

You and I know how to modify stat blocks. But it was sooo enphasized that 5.24 is for beginners. With extra text how to do things. And I like that. And then they leave out such basic advice.

In the DMG they talked about leading by examples. So why does the MM not have one or two stat blocks that show how to customize a monster. Why is there no drow warrior (scout + elf(drow lineage) abilities + loth sting poison from the DMG).

Or in the conversion table: drow = scout + PHB abilities

It was such an easy to make thing and they fumbled it...

Well, I don't think your duergar example is a necessarily good one because the 5E14 MM NPC section says that to modify the NPCs you can add 'racial traits' to them, which are found in the PHB (and in which the duergar does not appear.) And even if you look in the 5E14 DMG in the NPC Stat Blocks section in the 'Create a Monster' chapter, the chart of 'NPC Features' does not include the duergar either. The only place where the 'Enlarge' feature is mentioned relative to the duergar is the Monster Features chart previous to that and all that does is mention how it affects its Challenge Rating. So there's no place in the 5E14 game to guide someone in creating a duergar NPC specifically. A person would just have to put 2 and 2 together and figured it out themselves (not that that's such a big ask.)

But be that as it may... even if we were to assume the 5E14 DMGs 'NPC Features' chart should have appeared in 5E24 somewhere (over and beyond the info in the 5E24 DMG's 'Create A Creature' section)... I for one don't even think the features that actually appear in that table are all that great or distinguishing that it would be so important to call those out to beginning players. Like if a new DM used a handful of NPC statblocks and called them halflings but didn't reduce their speed down to 25' that it would be some sort of huge deal. But true enough that's just my opinion on the importance (or lack thereof) of these minor features, and I acknowledge that other people feel like highlighting a change in Move speed, a range of darkvision, or gaining Advantage on attacks when next to an ally is very important to them to distinguish creatures from each other, or that it's a huge deal if new players aren't given specific instruction on how to do it (assuming they'd be incapable of figuring it out how to do it themselves.)

 

[Yaarel]

I think you could get away with a "commoner" statblock and a little list of skills and tool proficiencies for guidance.

But that does obviate the need for that simple 1 page chart that gives you how to modify any given NPC statblock for the 20 or so most common species -- just like was in the 2014 game.

That might work.

The identity of a "Humanoid" statblock seems moreorless identical to a "background". Thus tools, skills, language, even feat, even factions.

Maybe actually give the statblock a background from the Players Handbook.


Heh, for some reason, the term "commoner" bothers me. To use such a term sounds elitist.

In my campaigns, there is no real difference between player characters and other characters, except the player characters are prodigies. They can gain levels (translatable into CR) extremely quickly. What might take a nonplayer character decades to adapt to experiences, a player character can hypothetically achieve in less than year.

 

[Alzrius]

In my campaigns, there is no real difference between player characters and other characters, except the player characters are prodigies. They can gain levels (translatable into CR) extremely quickly. What might take a nonplayer character decades to adapt to experiences, a player character can hypothetically achieve in less than year.

Is that your campaign, or is that all campaigns? Because I have it on good authority that it's surprisingly hard to create an incompetent ass-clown in D&D.

It Is Surprisingly Hard To Create An Incompetent Ass-Clown In Dungeons & Dragons

The great escapist fantasy of Dungeons & Dragons is that you are not a salaryperson shoveling handfuls of gummy bears into your mouth and rolling 20-sided dice. Rather, you are a singularly important hero with a singular capacity to disarm some impending plot bomb. It’s a time-tried formula, one...

kotaku.com

 

[John R Davis]

Please tell me hobgoblins are still horrid. Let me have it that gnolls are the CE you can 100% punch in the face and hobgoblins are the LE equivalent

 

[Micah Sweet]

That might work.

The identity of a "Humanoid" statblock seems moreorless identical to a "background". Thus tools, skills, language, even feat, even factions.

Maybe actually give the statblock a background from the Players Handbook.


Heh, for some reason, the term "commoner" bothers me. To use such a term sounds elitist.

In my campaigns, there is no real difference between player characters and other characters, except the player characters are prodigies. They can gain levels (translatable into CR) extremely quickly. What might take a nonplayer character decades to adapt to experiences, a player character can hypothetically achieve in less than year.

For me the only difference is that NPCs often don't adventure (or don't adventure any more) and adventuring levels you far faster than otherwise. Beyond that, no difference.