Five Takeaways From the 2025 Monster Manual

The 2025 Monster Manual is the missing puzzle piece for Dungeons & Dragons' recent Fifth Edition revisions, with reworked monsters that hit harder and make combat more exciting at every level. Released in February, the new Monster Manual drives home many of the design choices made in other parts of D&D's core rulebooks. Building off of a decade's worth of lessons about how DMs use statblocks and how players tend to handle combat, the Monster Manual features creatures with streamlined abilities meant to speed up combat without sacrificing the "fun" of fighting in the game. Plus, the book includes a ton of gorgeous new artwork that depicts D&D's iconic monsters at their most threatening. Here are five of my biggest takeaways from the new Monster Manual.

1) Revamped Legendary Actions, With More Power Than Before.

arch hag hed.jpg


One of the big goals of the new Monster Manual was to redesign monsters to have them punch harder but simultaneously make them easier to run. This design ethos can be seen in many revamped monster statblocks, especially at higher Challenge Ratings. Lair actions are now incorporated into the statblock, with monsters typically gaining access to an additional Legendary Resistance and Legendary Action while in their lair. Additionally, many of the Legendary Actions are much more powerful than their 5E equivalents, with creatures usually gaining more dangerous options.

For instance, all of the dragons have lost their functionally worthless "Detect" action and instead have access to new spellcasting options or more powerful attacks. The Adult Blue Dragon, as an example, can cast Shatter as a Legendary Action or it can cast Invisibility on itself and then move up to half its speed. While not as strong as the dragon's standard actions, the Adult Blue Dragon can now do a lot more over the course of a round then simply deal moderate amounts of damage and soak up hits from opponents.

2) Either Attack Rolls or Saving Throws, Not Both

otyugh.jpg


Another major streamlining within rulesets is that monster attacks with effects are either triggered with a failed saving throw OR a successful attack roll. This should significantly speed up combat by reducing the number of rolls made during a game. As an example, the Bearded Devil's 2014 statblock included a Beard attack that damaged on a successful hit and forced its target to make a Constitution saving throw or be Poisoned. In the 2025 Monster Manual, the Bearded Devil's Beard attack deals damage and automatically inflicts the Poisoned condition on a successful attack.

There's two major consequences to this. The first is that only one dice roll is needed to determine the success or failure of a certain attack or ability. The second is that a creature is more often able to threaten player characters at their intended level. By having a creature's full attack trigger based on a single success instead two successes (or I suppose a success combined with a separate creature's failure), it radically changes the dynamics of many D&D combats.

3) Yes, The Art Is Fantastic

cultists.jpg


Keeping with another theme of the 2024/2025 Core Rulebooks, the artwork in the new Monster Manual is frankly fantastic. There are a lot of D&D players, myself included, who love to look through the Monster Manual and other bestiaries primarily for the art and lore. Those players should be more than happy with this new book, which contains artwork for every single monster in the book. What's more, much of the artwork shows the monsters in action. The Chasme, for example, looks much more threatening in the 2025 Monster Manual, with art showing the demon hunched over an adventurer with its probiscus covered in blood. Compare that imagery to the 2014 Monster Manual, which just has the chasme standing in profile.

One comment made to me by Jeremy Crawford was that Wizards had found that monsters without art tended to be used less often, so I'm expecting the trend of more art to continue in future books.

4) A Handful of Interesting New Mechanics

arch hag hed.jpg


While not found widely in the new Monster Manual, there are a handful of new (or at least very uncommon) mechanics. The Empyrean, for instance, has a Sacred Weapon attack that deals damage and Stuns its target. However, the target can choose to bypass the Stunned condition by taking additional damage. Meanwhile, the Arch Hag has multiple abilities that curse their opponent, taking away their ability to use Reactions or spells with verbal components. Additionally, the hag has a bonus action that deals automatic damage to anyone cursed by the witch.

Finding new mechanics in the Monster Manual is rare, but they represent some interesting innovation that hopefully will be incorporated with future statblocks. Not every creature needs stacking abilities, or "pick your poison" choices, but I love these and want to see them more often in the future.

5) Species-Free NPCs

pirates.jpg


Over the past few weeks, Wizards has revealed several monsters with new creature classification types. Goblins, aarakocra, lizardfolk, kobolds, and kenku are all now classified as non-humanoids. It's interesting that non-humanoid species often have multiple statblocks with unique abilities, but that the humanoid statblocks are meant to include elves, dwarves, orcs, humans, and more. I'm assuming (given that Eberron: Forge of the Artificer is bringing back the Warforged) that D&D won't remove non-humanoid species as playable species, but it feels like there's a deliberate push to make all humanoids interchangeable, at least when it comes to these NPC stats.

It's a shame that Wizards seems to have done away with templates in the new Monster Manual because they'd be useful for transforming a generic guard or scout into a Drow guard or a Dragonborn scout. I don't think these would be hard to homebrew if necessary, but I do feel like this is one of the bigger misses in the Monster Manual. Hopefully, we'll see more specialization in the future, and the Monster Manual opted to focus on monsters instead of highly specific statblocks.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Christian Hoffer

Christian Hoffer


log in or register to remove this ad

In Skerples's magnificent book The Monster Overhaul, he has something really insightful to say about orcs. Quoting, but edited:

Option 1: Orcs are inherently and immutably Evil. They are made, not born. A Good Orc is as impossible as a square circle.
Option 2: Orcs are people, with all that implies. They make war for the same reasons people make war; treasure, glory, necessity, boredom, etc.
You cannot mix the two options. Either Orcs are people or they aren’t.
I think that's brilliant, and very true. The only thing I would add is that either way Orcs are "humanoid" because literally just look up that damn word AUGHHH
 

They got into that mud as soon as they started treating goblins and gnolls differently than orcs. They rolled in it, and I suspect now they are going to find themselves dealing with the consequences. A coherent explanation won't satisfy the most radical critics on either side. Leaving well enough alone and letting people decide for themselves would have probably offended fewer people.
Thats their preferred way.

WOTC wishes that they could convert every species to a non-humaniod type.

They just didn't think they could get away with making orcs giants and drow fey.
 


One other aspect of Biological Essentialism that D&D has not moved away from is the separation of traits a species was born with and those they learned from growing up within a given culture. But that's another topic to be discussed elsewhere, I think
D&D removed the mental traits and now have species be more based on physical and mago-physical traits.

2024 species are more inherently magical than almost any D&D edition or clone.
 

Especially since pretty much every non-OSR "D&D-like" currently on the market has managed it, from A5E to PF2E.
Exactly. A5e's separation of race/species into heritage and culture added a new level of customization to the character creation process. Before A5e, if you wanted to a play a human raised within a dwarven culture, you could role-play that element. However, you gained none of the benefits from being raised by dwarves. You didn't gain any of their skill, armor or weapon proficiencies. You just had those from being a human (the bonus feat and a bonus skill proficiency). How did that happen? :p
With A5e, you can play a human who was raised in one of three A5e's dwarven cultures and gain their cultural traits instead to make a more interesting character.
 


1) Revamped Legendary Actions, With More Power Than Before.

2) Either Attack Rolls or Saving Throws, Not Both

3) Yes, The Art Is Fantastic

4) A Handful of Interesting New Mechanics

5) Species-Free NPCs
1 - CRs are still too low for 5.5 characters, IMO. Maybe they balanced everything against having zero magic items or something but ALL the CRs are still too low, especially at high levels, to the point that even the helpful hack of the "lazy benchmark" has exceptions to its exceptions. CRs were always "ballpark estimates" but now they feel like wild guesses. Just means more prep (or more improv) for the GM.
2 - Speeding up combat for the GM = good IMO. Happy to trade small details for speed, like the previous big change of 1d6 being "4" damage and move on. Then again, fights still take too long for as little dramatic tension as they create - which is connected to many facets other than the MM.
3 - 100% agreed.
4 - Hadn't noticed those yet, thanks for the tip!
5 - So every "guard" is generic now and their species doesn't matter? Makes sense, given that player characters' species is also almost entirely flavor now. There's really nothing you need to know about a species for a "guard" encounter. Skill bonuses, cantrips, even advantage on saving throws: you can add a little spice in there if you want (the ELF guard noticed you but the others didn't!) but in the course of an encounter most of that reduces down to noise or GM prep time, and reducing those for speed = good IMO. (Even the fact that only three PHB species don't have darkvision probably won't come up most of the time - unless that's how you run your game.)

The main problem I have with the 5.5 MM is the lack of grouping of some creatures but not others. There are threads about this, though.
 

CR has never been as straightforward as that. I have no idea why they chose to do it this way, but CR has always been something that requires byzantine calculation, with no obvious correlation to PC power.

But Mike Shea (Sly Flourish) does have a relatively simple guideline that you can memorize:

So in your case, to really challenge 3 lvl 5 PCs, you would need a total CR of 7. And if that's from a single monster, it's also on the cusp of being deadly.

(Edit: for example, a classic CR 7 monster would be the Mind Flayer. And yeah, a single one of those would on average wipe the floor with that party.)
Has not been my experience. A Mind Flayer with several lower CR minions might pose a threat, but a single mind flayer against 3 level 5 PCs (caveat: my group knows what it is doing)? Nah, that's a dead mind flayer.
 

continuing to argue this like it means something real and scientific is a waste of time. Type is a in game term. Complaining that lizard men or whatever aren't humanoid is like complaining that "sorcerer" literally means "a wizard" in the dictionary definition.
D&D has a long history of using known words in odd ways. Where else is a kobold a lizard/dragon or dog man other than D&D?
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top