D&D (2024) I have a Monster Manual. AMA!

[Yaarel]

They covered that in the Monstrosity video, and apparently there is a definition in the book: basically any case of natural beings who have been modified or combined without falling into one of the other categories.

I missed the Monstrosity video. Will look for it.

But it is difficult to not qualify for one of the other categories.

I still dont see what a Monstrosity is.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

That's what I was thinking when I saw the conversion chart honsestly. I didn't know how much HP the Tough had (still don't know the exact number) but I used the 5e Thug a lot so I know it has 32 average HP compared to the average 15 the standard Orc had.

More than doubling the base HP of Orc encounters from the 2014 rules is probably going to cause some low level parties undue grief.

Yes, an earlier question asked about the Thug and Tough (they are the same). So yeah, Orc Toughs are going to be tough compared to the old Orc.

 

[Parmandur]

I missed the Monstrosity video. Will look for it.

But it is difficult to not qualify for one of the other categories.

I still dont see what a Monstrosity is.

Take the Owlbear: it is a magical fusion of two unrelated kinds of being. Hence not a natural Beast, but not a "Fey" or something else either. Same with a griffin or a chimera

It is, admittedly, sort of the grabbing of leftover Monsters...but based on the video and what we know is in the category, significantly more coherent than 2014 was.

 

[Yaarel]

@Parmandur

Wait, but you did say, the Monstrosity is formerly "natural", meaning it is native to the Material Plane?

If so, where "Fey" covers anything in the Feywild, the "Material" planars have a more detailed breakdown:

Ooze, Plant, Beast, Humanoid, plus Monstrosity all counting as types in the "Material Plane" could make some sense.

Even if found in an other plane, they might still maintain a connection to the Material Plane.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

So what about Orcs that live in swamps, such as in Eberron...? Making all of the pretty same Humanoids a little more different seems like a pretty clear goal here.

The Orcs and Lizardfolk of Eberron are very different from each other, even if most of them live in “swamps.” Q’barra is the Wild West, but as a swampy jungle, with some Lizardfolk serving a trapped Demon Overlord. The Shadow Marches is more of a tribal backwater, and the Shadow Marches’ Orcs have more ties with outside forces (the other nations, the Dragonmarked Houses, the Druids, etc). And there are other Orcs in the setting that don’t live in the swamp, like the Ghaash’kala of the Demon Wastes and the Orcs of the Ironroot Mountains. And all of these are different from the standard presentation of them in base D&D.

 

[KYRON45]

Wait people use mayonnaise instead of butter or margarine for Grilled Cheese?!?! That's weird, never heard of that before.

Oh it’s delicious.

 

[Yaarel]

Take the Owlbear: it is a magical fusion of two unrelated kinds of being. Hence not a natural Beast, but not a "Fey" or something else either. Same with a griffin or a chimera

It is, admittedly, sort of the grabbing of leftover Monsters...but based on the video and what we know is in the category, significantly more coherent than 2014 was.

That is sort of like a Duckbill Platypus. It is an odd animal "fusion" but still a natural Beast.

If we found reallife skeletons of a species of snake with wings, it would still be a Beast.

If a bear or a lion evolved feathers (Owlbear, Griffon), it would still be a natural animal.

 

[Scribe]

Azer were already Elementals in 2014. Merfolk I kind of expected to be Fey, that’s probably how I’ll represent them in my games to separate them from the Tritons, who are already tied to the Elemental Plane of Water. Aarakocra kind of makes sense, given their connection to the Elemental Plane of Air, but I agree that Lizardfolk being Elementals is weird, even if they come up with some lore justification for it.

I think it's worth mention, I don't have issues with species/elemental alignments, I do it in my own vanity setting/game.

I just don't think calling these various monsters Elementals with a capital E, is the most logical take.

 

[Parmandur]

@Parmandur

Wait, but you did say, the Monstrosity is formerly "natural", meaning it is native to the Material Plane?

If so, where "Fey" covers anything in the Feywild, the "Material" planars have a more detailed breakdown:

Ooze, Plant, Beast, Humanoid, plus Monstrosity all counting as types in the "Material Plane" could make some sense.

Even if found in an other plane, they might still maintain a connection to the Material Plane.

Yeah, Monstrosities seem to have an air of "a Wizard must have done it" while lacking a particular extra-Planar component. Aa a counterexample, Sphinxes were Monstrosities, but are now moved to Celestials (which fits their origins).

One of the points Crawford makes in the Monstrosity video is that Monstrosities actually are mainly what people usually mean by "Monster" in non-game parlance.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Do all creatures seem to have initiative boost?

The few samples I saw all seemed to have high initiative.

No, most are DEX, but a few have inexplicable bonuses (and a few appear to be "proficient" in INIT).

I dont know what a "Monstrosity" is.

I agree that I don't think that the "Monstrosity" - "Beast" separation is one worth having, but it's pretty clear: Beasts are real-life Animals, whether giant or prehistoric or whatever, and "Monstrosities" are mythical creations - hybrids and magical creatures. Owlbear is still a Monstrosity, for what it's worth.