D&D 5E 2024 Monster Manual has better lore than 2014 Monster Manual

[Reynard]

Isn't the MM typically the 2nd best selling book after the PHB?

I don't know, but that sounds reasonable. I was just suggesting that "Monster Manual Expanded" is only a niche DMsGuild product because WotC chooses not to make one themselves.

 

[Voadam]

Note sure where you are getting your information, but the 2024 DMG lore glossary says this:

View attachment 399981​

And this is what the 2024 MM says:
View attachment 399980

Thanks for posting the MM and DMG sections.

I am getting my sources from the post I was directly responding to and the threads on the Greyhawk lore in the 24 DMG. I don't have direct access to either of the 24 MM or DMG lore (I only have the 24 PH and the 14 MM and DMG). So the posts I had seen said the cambions changed from offspring of humans and demonic parents to mortals corrupted by demonic forces with a d6 origins chart so it sounded like Iuz's origins as an old style cambion no longer fit.

I knew Iuz was a god in 24 Greyhawk and the ruler of his own kingdom but not whether they specified his parentage.

Looking over that d6 chart none of them match up to parentage, nor do the general cambion description parts match directly the way they used to in older descriptions so it is ambiguous whether that is just his notorious parentage and something else turned him into a cambion or that was what made him a cambion or whether it was a combination. I would not have called pre 24 Iuz a former mortal as his potential pre demigod status would have still been from being a demonic cambion due to his parentage.

Not sure I would classify the half demon son of a demon lord as a mortal until extra demonic stuff happens, it is sort of a fuzzy line there whether they would be classified as a mortal out of the gate or not. In AD&D they were cambions in the demon/tanari section of the monster books, in 3e they were half demons of type outsider and not humanoids.

Hellboy comes to mind as well.

 

[dave2008]

Thanks for posting the MM and DMG sections.

I am getting my sources from the post I was directly responding to and the threads on the Greyhawk lore in the 24 DMG. I don't have direct access to either of the 24 MM or DMG lore (I only have the 24 PH and the 14 MM and DMG). So the posts I had seen said the cambions changed from offspring of humans and demonic parents to mortals corrupted by demonic forces with a d6 origins chart so it sounded like Iuz's origins as an old style cambion no longer fit.

I knew Iuz was a god in 24 Greyhawk and the ruler of his own kingdom but not whether they specified his parentage.

Looking over that d6 chart none of them match up to parentage, nor do the general cambion description parts match directly the way they used to in older descriptions so it is ambiguous whether that is just his notorious parentage and something else turned him into a cambion or that was what made him a cambion or whether it was a combination. I would not have called pre 24 Iuz a former mortal as his potential pre demigod status would have still been from being a demonic cambion due to his parentage.

Not sure I would classify the half demon son of a demon lord as a mortal until extra demonic stuff happens, it is sort of a fuzzy line there whether they would be classified as a mortal out of the gate or not. In AD&D they were cambions in the demon/tanari section of the monster books, in 3e they were half demons of type outsider and not humanoids.

Hellboy comes to mind as well.

I think they left it a bit ambiguous intentionally

 

[Parmandur]

Isn't the MM typically the 2nd best selling book after the PHB?

Nope, oddly enough, the MM is consistently the 3rd biggest seller after the PHB and then the DMG.

 

[Voadam]

I think they left it a bit ambiguous intentionally

The sources I have from 1e to 3e never really covered how Iuz the Old became a demigod either with a mostly mysterious past. 5e is weird in calling him both a demigod and full god and then making distinctions about demigods not granting spells but listing him as a full spell-granting god on their god charts.

 

[Older Beholder]

I don't know, but that sounds reasonable. I was just suggesting that "Monster Manual Expanded" is only a niche DMsGuild product because WotC chooses not to make one themselves.

They have put out expanded monster manuals (as I think others have pointed out):

Volos guide to monsters
Mordenkainen's tome of foes
Fizbans Treasury of Dragons
Bigby's....

And yeah, they sold really well.

 

[Reynard]

They have put out expanded monster manuals (as I think others have pointed out):

Volos guide to monsters
Mordenkainen's tome of foes
Fizbans Treasury of Dragons
Bigby's....

And yeah, they sold really well.

Only Fizban's and Bigby's somewhat resemble what i am talking about. i am specifically talking about WotC deciding to do a crunchy MM that makes monsters more complex and versatile and fun to run.

 

[Corinnguard]

Only Fizban's and Bigby's somewhat resemble what i am talking about. i am specifically talking about WotC deciding to do a crunchy MM that makes monsters more complex and versatile and fun to run.

I doubt that WoTC is going to make another crunchy MM any time soon. There is, however, Level Up's Monstrous Menagerie. Same monsters as WoTC's MM, but a lot more complex, versatile and fun to throw at your players.

 

[Older Beholder]

Only Fizban's and Bigby's somewhat resemble what i am talking about. i am specifically talking about WotC deciding to do a crunchy MM that makes monsters more complex and versatile and fun to run.

My bad, I thought you were talking about lore.

 

[mamba]

They’ve stripped it out of the MM to keep that book setting neutral. Setting specific lore will be in the individual setting books.

there are plenty of generic monsters that do not need / have specific setting lore, and the other part of this is how many setting books we will get (and how much lore those will have)