D&D (2024) 2024 MM - Winners and Losers

[Remathilis]

The Duergar and Svirfneblin are kind of Setting specific, and making the MM less Setting specific seems to have been a goal. The FR books seem to be positioned as "Classic D&D" booster packs as much as they are for FR fans. Now they can pair other Settings with tge MM with less baggage.

Lizardfolk...were scaly Orcs, so didn't have much distinct going on, so it doesn't seem they lost much by transitioning to NPCs. I expect an Inner Planes Setting is in the works, so more Lizardfolk flavor there seems probable

So a module mentions two duergar in an encounter. The encounter points the DM to the MM. The 2024 MM says "use the spy stat block" but it doesn't describe what a duergar is. No lore, no art, no stats to modify it (like it's famous invisibility and enlargement). They were, for all Intent and purpose, removed from the MM. Same with deep gnomes. And lizardfolk, while mentioned and at least pictured, don't provide any species traits to spice the block up with unless you own MotM. Thus, just using 2024 books so far, there is no way to run the three as anything other than the generic unmodified statblock as a placeholder.

 

[Parmandur]

So a module mentions two duergar in an encounter. The encounter points the DM to the MM. The 2024 MM says "use the spy stat block" but it doesn't describe what a duergar is. No lore, no art, no stats to modify it (like it's famous invisibility and enlargement). They were, for all Intent and purpose, removed from the MM. Same with deep gnomes. And lizardfolk, while mentioned and at least pictured, don't provide any species traits to spice the block up with unless you own MotM. Thus, just using 2024 books so far, there is no way to run the three as anything other than the generic unmodified statblock as a placeholder.

If you are using Out of the Abyss or Icewind Dale, those Adventures do provide a lot of context on Duergar.

 

[Stalker0]

@Alzrius corrected me and it seems perhaps keeping it as is may be the best thing

tbh I had no idea about the Jewish implication when I made my OP, I simply thought they were removing phlactery because it was a difficult word, not for any cultural reasons.

So I think we can just table that one and move on to other winner/loser monsters.

 

[Clint_L]

Lich is a massive winner.

100% disagree. If there is one creature that demands a massive spell list, and all the opportunities for DM cleverness that comes with, it's the lich.

And don't get me started (again) on what they did to Vecna.

 

[Tonguez]

As a Jewish person, I've pointed out on these boards before that this isn't really the case, because "phylactery" isn't a term that we use. Rather, we call them "teffilin," and calling them "phylacteries" is a conflation that's near-totally made by gentiles.

In that regard, liches using phylacteries is actually an improvement, because it helps to attach the term to something else, letting the erroneous "phylacteries are teffilin" idea wither on the vine. Which is to say, it was absolutely a hill worth dying on. Unfortunately, that didn't happen, and so another opportunity to help out a marginalized community was missed.

I agree, the Jewish item is a teffillin and afaik phylactery is only used once in the bible, and there its in a derogatory sense of 'religious ostentation'.

Phylactery is a greek word for an Amulet or object to safely store an amulet and really outside DnD liches when is it ever used In modern times?

 

[pukunui]

They should have just called it a “horcrux”. Everyone knows what that is!

 

[Sulicius]

100% disagree. If there is one creature that demands a massive spell list, and all the opportunities for DM cleverness that comes with, it's the lich.

And don't get me started (again) on what they did to Vecna.

I get that, for immersion sake, the Lich should have a big list of spells. After all, they have the motivation and the time to learn all of them.

But a stat block at the table? I much rather have this. PC’s just have too many abilities and power to push through and nuke a lich. The old one expected to survive three turns when a paladin at that level could burst it down in 1. Better to make a stat block everyone can get a good fight out of one.

Yes, we’re losing some texture, some interesting bits. That is a shame. I just think about how many concentration spells were on a lich’s spell list, and how few I could get a use out of before they were burst down.

Maybe I am just bad at the game, but monsters that had big spell lists never gave me a good experience at the table.

 

[Parmandur]

They should have just called it a “horcrux”. Everyone knows what that is!

If they could legally, I am sure they would.

 

[Parmandur]

I get that, for immersion sake, the Lich should have a big list of spells. After all, they have the motivation and the time to learn all of them.

But a stat block at the table? I much rather have this. PC’s just have too many abilities and power to push through and nuke a lich. The old one expected to survive three turns when a paladin at that level could burst it down in 1. Better to make a stat block everyone can get a good fight out of one.

Yes, we’re losing some texture, some interesting bits. That is a shame. I just think about how many concentration spells were on a lich’s spell list, and how few I could get a use out of before they were burst down.

Maybe I am just bad at the game, but monsters that had big spell lists never gave me a good experience at the table.

Yeah, Crawford was pretty clear that was tge goal with sowllcaster stat blocks: not provide a full simulation of everything a given character can do in the world, but provide a table ready game with a laid out battle plan.

 

[the Jester]

The Duergar and Svirfneblin are kind of Setting specific

They really aren't. They've been around since 1e and have appeared in multiple settings in pretty much every edition.

The FR books seem to be positioned as "Classic D&D" booster packs as much as they are for FR fans.

I'm not interested in setting books for the most part. Putting setting-agnostic monsters in a setting book as a hook to get me to buy it just makes me resentful. It's a terrible idea; WotC would be better off making a Monster Manual 2 instead.