D&D General Drow & Orcs Removed from the Monster Manual

[TheSword]

Yes I can add darkvison without changing challenge rating. I should not have to. It's a basic element of a basic core monster from prior 2024 adventures. If I add the Aggressive trait from 2014 to the 2024 stat block, does that change the CR? There is no guidance in that chapter of the DMG for that kind of alteration. Similarly, if I add Adrenaline Rush from the 2024 PHB or Relentless Endurance also from the 2024 PHB (or both) what does that do to the CR?

This isn't theoretically. This is 100% going to come up for THOUSANDS of DMs over time as they use pretty much any adventure published before 2025.


None of which are similar to the Orc traits in either the 2014 MM or the 2024 PHB for orc, other than darkvision and languages.


Right now move on to the other unique traits of Orcs.

This is a real issue and I truly don't get why people are acting like this isn't going to be a roadblock. They converted so many tiny details to cover backwards compatibility, but this one is a glaring omission. And it sure seems obvious they literally didn't want to deal, rather than forgot it. Which isn't acceptable: there should be guidelines on core friggen races and monsters which have been in the game since the earliest days and which are still depicted numerous times in this very edition. Someone at WOTC should have dealt with this before going to publication.

Why is it a roadblock?
It is a couple of creatures that have full write ups in the PHB. Did we honestly need a stat block just to add dark vision to an NPC?

Any one who is DMing for the first time read the PHB first.

 

[Alzrius]

But the conversion entries do not have darkvision.

And sure I can add it. But I shouldn't have to add it. Much like every other part of the MM entry, it's supposed to include the basics of that thing. And it simply doesn't for orc and drow. A basic thing is clearly missing.

Right, and that's what the people saying "this isn't a problem because I can fix it" seem to be missing. There's a reason why the self-contradictory nature of that response has been nicknamed the Oberoni fallacy for years now.

 

[Bae'zel]

So I’ve been very forgiving of WotC here, but I’ve found my first annoyance.

Recreating classic Drow. The ammount of page-flipping through all three core books is a little intense. Once done, I'll be set for life but...

Example: in the DMG there is a suitable poison for Drow hand crossbows which works perfectly, and the PHB has all the abillities needed for Drow as a species... but putting it all together and modifying the stat block appropriately, with the right gear (eg hand crossbows)... Luckily I completely ignore CR but for those who DO care about that... shudder.

Maybe we should start a thread here dedicated to posting custom stat blocks for humanoids?

 

[Bae'zel]

Right, and that's what the people saying "this isn't a problem because I can fix it" seem to be missing. There's a reason why the self-contradictory nature of that response has been nicknamed the Oberoni fallacy for years now.

The cynic in me says that this is part of the plan: the Forgotten Realms sourcebook this Fall will included everything needed for Lolth-sworn Drow, I'll wager.

 

[Reynard]

I will be curious to see if when the inevitable first adventures post the new MM say things like "orc veteran" for stats, if the various automated systems -- Beyond, Fantasy Grounds, Roll 20 -- include those species elements in the usable statblock, or if they default to just linking the unmodified veteran statblock.

 

[TiQuinn]

Maybe we should start a thread here dedicated to posting custom stat blocks for humanoids?

At the end of the day, how different is that from an existing 5e MM or MotM stat block? Is the juice worth the squeeze?

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

I will be curious to see if when the inevitable first adventures post the new MM say things like "orc veteran" for stats, if the various automated systems -- Beyond, Fantasy Grounds, Roll 20 -- include those species elements in the usable statblock, or if they default to just linking the unmodified veteran statblock.

I don’t know about other platforms, but D&D Beyond typically turned templates into full stat blocks.

 

[Reynard]

I don’t know about other platforms, but D&D Beyond typically turned templates into full stat blocks.

Like what? Does 5E even have templates? I can't think of any off the top of my head.

 

[Bae'zel]

At the end of the day, how different is that from an existing 5e MM or MotM stat block? Is the juice worth the squeeze?

Fair enough! I just reviewed the 2014 MM and yeah, everyone you need is there.

Again, I'm first in line to defend WotC, but I have to admit that this is a bit weird. How is a "Drow" equivalent a "Priest acolyte" or whatever? It doesn't match at all.

I mean, YES there were a few Lolth sworn clerics in the Drizzt books, but they were elite, not regular chumps like the classic "Drow" stat block was meant to represent.

I do admit some confusion now that I have the actual book in my hands. Luckily, I can fix this stuff for my own use, no problem. But still...

 

[Remathilis]

Like what? Does 5E even have templates? I can't think of any off the top of my head.

Very few. Half-dragon, dracolich and shadow dragons being the three off the top of my head.

There were also a lot of "variant" monsters like satyrs with pipes or Erinyes with ropes that got turned into full creatures or integrated into the base monster.