D&D (2024) Monster Manual Organisation

[Yaarel]

Or just let the PCs gain an advantage.

Yeah, it really doesnt matter for balance, and only serves to make some battles more tactically fun.

 

[evilbob]

Argh!

Yes, yes, 1000 times yes!

I had literally this same experience: my first attempt to use the book was to look up dragons, to see how they were different. Huh. Not here. Flipped around... And I had literally the same thought! The game is called Dungeons and Dragons, they have to be in here... Unless they're in the DMG somewhere? Oh wait. Did they put them under the color???

And I completely agree with the sentiment of this thread: if you're going to put them under "blue," ok, fine, whatever. I don't like it but I can get used to it. But then other creatures ARE grouped??? It's the inconsistency that makes it so aggravating!

And while the indexes are awesome and a massive improvement, I agree that if I am using an index to find something, the basic organization of the book has ...well, I won't say failed, but it has left a lot to be desired.

 

[Older Beholder]

I must say, having seen the book now, I quite like dragons being arranged by colour. It means that we get full page dragon art interspersed at irregular intervals throughout the book, breaking it up and making flipping through the book more enjoyable (at least to me)

 

[Parmandur]

I must say, having seen the book now, I quite like dragons being arranged by colour. It means that we get full page dragon art interspersed at irregular intervals throughout the book, breaking it up and making flipping through the book more enjoyable (at least to me)

Yeah, taken concretely as flipping through the book, rather than trying to figure out the abstract scheme, it flows very well.

 

[Stormonu]

Yes, yes, 1000 times yes!

I had literally this same experience: my first attempt to use the book was to look up dragons, to see how they were different. Huh. Not here. Flipped around... And I had literally the same thought! The game is called Dungeons and Dragons, they have to be in here... Unless they're in the DMG somewhere? Oh wait. Did they put them under the color???

And I completely agree with the sentiment of this thread: if you're going to put them under "blue," ok, fine, whatever. I don't like it but I can get used to it. But then other creatures ARE grouped??? It's the inconsistency that makes it so aggravating!

And while the indexes are awesome and a massive improvement, I agree that if I am using an index to find something, the basic organization of the book has ...well, I won't say failed, but it has left a lot to be desired.

At least they didn't put them under Chromatic Dragon - that would have been a real nightmare!

Still doesn't top 4E putting the Tarrasque under "Abomination" though ...

 

[kayakingpoodle]

To me the new MM was clearly written for DDB, not for print. Is this as forbidding as it appears, only time will tell. Why are their no page numbers in the index? Whiskey Tango Foxtrot! Or did I miss something, I only have acess to the digital, I have flipped through a physical copy, but didn't see page numbers in the index but I not given much time to evaluate the book at the time.

 

[Sulicius]

I did know that the dragons would be grouped by color only, but I have had no problem finding monsters so far. It took 10 minutes to get used to it.

It's different. We'll figure it out.

 

[Echohawk]

To me the new MM was clearly written for DDB, not for print. Is this as forbidding as it appears, only time will tell. Why are their no page numbers in the index? Whiskey Tango Foxtrot! Or did I miss something, I only have acess to the digital, I have flipped through a physical copy, but didn't see page numbers in the index but I not given much time to evaluate the book at the time.

Do you mean this index?

 

[kayakingpoodle]

Do you mean this index?
View attachment 400281

I stand corrected, as I said I only had very limited acess to a physical copy, and the digital on DDB is a different animal. Thanks for the information!

 

[Afroconan]

I stand corrected, as I said I only had very limited acess to a physical copy, and the digital on DDB is a different animal. Thanks for the information!

I think you're confusing the index with the monster lists, which group monsters by different categories yet it doesn't point to a page number which feels kinda lazy to me.