D&D 5E (2024) Monster Manual Organisation

[Chaltab]

I feel like there's a finite amount of good organization per edition of the core rulebooks and one of them has to get the short end of the stick. In 2014 it was the DMG. This time it's apparently the Monster Manual.

 

[Clint_L]

I normally just search monsters through DDB, and there you have options: strictly alphabetical, search by category, source book, CR rating, type, etc., and/or any combination of those things you like. Mostly, I just search for them by typing the first few letters while I'm using the Encounter Builder, anyway.

However, the MM is the one book I like to just sit through and read, with the physical copy. And I have to agree that the current, neither fish nor fowl, method of organization is random and confusing, and generally annoying. I am flummoxed that they spent a ton of thought and effort on this specific problem, and came up with this answer.

 

[beta-ray]

At least there is an index of stat blocks near the front so you don't have to flip to the section.

 

[Lazybones]

I can kind of see the logic of splitting up the demons and devils--after all, if a new DM sees a reference to a "vrock" in an adventure, how are they supposed to know it's a demon? In the 2014 MM you'd have to go to the index, since the monsters within each category aren't mentioned in the table of contents. But I can also see the down side of getting rid of the overview content for things like yugoloths, and the inconsistency in how groupings are handled can also create confusion. I wonder if future supplements like the Forgotten Realms books and other campaign/adventure books will have more of the lore that was missing in this book.

 

[Sacrosanct]

I was thinking about this today, and I think I know why it bothers me. As an old school player, I'm used to some creatures being group together (demons, giants, dragons) and some not (undead, oozes). But even back then, I think the organization was better, because the monsters that are grouped together are the ones where you'd want more than one of that group in an encounter or setting.

That is, If I'm doing an giant based adventures, I want different giant statblocks near each other for easier reference. Or if I'm doing demons or devils, I'm pretty sure I'm having multiple kinds all in the same adventure. I can't recall doing an ooze-based adventure where I wanted all of them close to each other.

 

[Yaarel]

The OP is a fair critique. We can see there are conflicting dilemmas about how to organize the entries.


Personally I would like to see the following entries. Like a scientific name, there is an effort to be consistent. The name of the creature is "Dragon Copper", where "Dragon" is functioning adjectively. Of course there are other ways to organize Dragons, but this would, by far, be easiest from me to find things. For Humanoid, I would rather look for this entry than "Professional".


Dragon Black
Dragon Blue
Dragon Brass
Dragon Bronze
Dragon Copper
Dragon Faerie
Dragon Gold
Dragon Green
Dragon Red
Dragon Silver
Dragon Shadow
Dragon White

Elemental Air
Elemental Earth
Elemental Fire
Elemental Water

Fungal Gas Spore
Fungal Necrohulk
Fungal Shrieker
Fungal Violet

Genie Dao
Genie Djinn
Genie Efreeti
Genie Marid

Humanoid Assassin
Humanoid Bandit
Humanoid Bandit Captain
Humanoid Bandit Crimelord
Humanoid Bandit Deceiver
Humanoid Berserker
Humanoid Berserker Commander
Humanoid Commoner
Humanoid Cultist
Humanoid Cultist Aberrant
Humanoid Cultist Deather
Humanoid Cultist Elementist
Humanoid Cultist Fanatic
Humanoid Cultist Fiender
Humanoid Cultist Hierophant
Humanoid Druid
Humanoid Gladiator
Humanoid Guard
Humanoid Guard Captain
Humanoid Knight
Humanoid Knight Quester
Humanoid Mage
Humanoid Mage Apprentice
Humanoid Mage Archon
Humanoid Noble
Humanoid Noble Prodigy
Humanoid Performer
Humanoid Performer Legend
Humanoid Performer Maestro
Humanoid Pirate
Humanoid Pirate Admiral
Humanoid Pirate Captain
Humanoid Priest
Humanoid Priest Acolyte
Humanoid Priest Archon
Humanoid Scout
Humanoid Scout Captain
Humanoid Spy
Humanoid Spy Master
Humanoid Tough
Humanoid Tough Boss
Humanoid Vampire Familiar
Humanoid Warrior Commander
Humanoid Warrior Infantry
Humanoid Warrior Veteran

Mephit Magma
Mephit Mud
Mephit Smoke
Mephit Steam


And so on, you get the idea.

 

[Amphytrion]

This organization choice is so absurd that I’m at a loss at how it was made. What would possess WotC to do this?

The only option I can see is that WotC were thinking first and foremost of DMs buying premade adventures rather than DMs creating their own, but even then, I think it helps very little.

Yes, beforehand, if a new DM found a vrock in a premade adventure, he’d have to look at the index in the back. I think that’s acceptable and much better than any DM having to flip between all demons throughout the entire book to create a single demon encounter.

Countless hours and 3 different UAs spent meddling with 1d4 extra damage in one subclass or another, when that time could have been much better used sourcing feedback for the Monster Manual.

 

[Distracted DM]

I can kind of see the logic of splitting up the demons and devils--after all, if a new DM sees a reference to a "vrock" in an adventure, how are they supposed to know it's a demon?

I sort of get it, but there's almost always context... and if this is the case, why this mix and match of the sorting order? If it's gonna be "Vrock is under V," then "Gold Dragon" should be under G.

 

[dave2008]

Do you want a horror story?
Go look up the Blue Slaad in the new Monster Manual (2025).

Where do you look? If you're like me - an old school D&D player - you look under Slaad. (Or Salad, because we still make that joke and it's still funny!)

And that's where it is. Great.

Now you look up the Blue Dragon. So, you turn to Dragon and... huh. No dragons. It's a game called Dungeons & Dragons and it doesn't have dragons!

Once you've finished hyperventilating, you look under "B" for Blue and... there's the Blue Dragons and all its variants.

Cultists are grouped together.

• Cultist
• Cultist Fanatic
• Cultist Hierophant
• Aberrant Cultist
• Death Cultist
• Elemental Cultist
• Fiend Cultist

Yugoloths are spread throughout the book, much like demons and devils. And, as a result, have no text explaining what a yugoloth, demon or devil is.

Back to the Blue Dragon. Here are the entries:

• Blue Dragon Wyrmling
• Young Blue Dragon
• Adult Blue Dragon
• Ancient Blue Dragon

And here are the Faerie Dragons:

• Faerie Dragon Adult
• Faerie Dragon Youth

That's a little inconsistent.

And then there's the renaming of monsters. We now have the "Animated Rug of Smothering". I'm not a fan, but at least they all go together under "Animated Objects".

Animated Objects

• Animated Armor
• Animated Broom
• Animated Flying Sword
• Animated Rug of Smothering

Oh, look they've done something similar for Fungi!

Fungi

• Gas Spore Fungus
• Shrieker Fungus
• Violet Fungus
• Violet Fungus Necrohulk

Sigh. I can see what they're trying for, but this is entirely the opposite of what they've down with the dragons. Why are they grouping fungi together in the first place? Is there special Fungal lore or mechanical similarities we need to know?

"Deadly Spores and Predatory Polyps
Habitat: Underdark; Treasure: None
The dank, sunless Underdark is a fertile breeding ground for weird and dangerous fungi."

Nope, that's the entire text they have in the general Fungi section.

At least the Slaadi get a nice section explaining what they are. (Something the Yugoloths really wanted).

One of the troubles that the Arcanaloth has is that - if you're not familiar with D&D lore - you don't realise that it is a Yugoloth. So, I understand entirely the motivation behind putting it in alphabetical order. But then the book is completely inconsistent in how it handles everything else. You're meant to realise that "Fungus" is the key word for the fungi to say it's in a section together, while "Blue Dragon" is the keyword for the Young Blue Dragon (and not Dragon), but Blue Slaad is a Slaad not a Blue...

Elementals? Oh they're separated into "Air", "Earth", "Fire", "Water" not grouped together under Elemental.

Animals are all together in an appendix. (Though some aren't actually beasts, they're celestial or monstrosities and just look like animals). I sort of expected NPCs to have an appendix as well, but no - they're in the main text of the book, lurking.

If they'd gone full alphabetical, I could at least understand it. It's this half-hearted confusing mess that really irritates me. Especially when useful group information disappears because they decided that monsters needed to be ungrouped.

Argh!

Yep, it is one of my major disappointments with the MM. The organization doesn't really make sense (grouping some things and not others) and it has two other issues that bother me:

1. No group lore (as you noted). No lore on demons, devils, dragons, etc. This disappointing to me and something I miss.
2. IMO. #1 leads to cluttering of statblocks. Information that could be in the group lore entry got moved to stat blocks needlessly. Every demon, devil, and yugoloth has a stat block entry about how they reform in their native plane if they are killed somewhere else. That is information that isn't needed in a stat block! Those 3 lines of text should be provided once in a lore section, not copied over and over in each stat block! That, to me, is a waste of space.

 

[SpellObjectEnthusiast]

It's why I've decided to nickname this 2024 release The Lore is Lava edition.

The only way to accommodate the lore of every D&D setting at once is to give no lore at all.