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

The only thing I would add is that either way Orcs are "humanoid" because literally just look up that damn word AUGHHH
That's right! As are goblins, and mind flayers, and specters, and barbed devils, and suits of animated armor, and apes, and green hags, and azers, and zombies, and needle blights, and liches, and iron golems, and frost giants, and djinn, and dretches, and (OK, I'm going to stop now), which all have "characteristics (such as bipedalism) resembling those of a human", or "appearance and qualities of a human", or an "appearance or character resembling a human". It's obvious that there are way too many non-Humanoids in D&D!
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Just noting here that the 2014 MM also didn't include stat blocks for elves (or dwarves, halflings, gnomes, etc.), other than the more "monstrous" versions like drow, duergar, or svirfneblin. Not including orcs, now that they're in the PHB, is just being consistent.
Drow were in the PH and the MM. Not including statblocks for other species in any book is a choice, not being consistent.
 

Solo monsters have literally never worked well in any edition of D&D though, I would assert. It's just more obvious now - and frankly a lot more players play well tactically now and make smart decisions, as a combination of aging and more experience of tactical games.

I felt 4e solo monsters worked well. They were generally designed well to do so.

It was a disappointment to not have that good design in 5e, though it is easy enough to add in on your own (hp multiplied by number of pcs, area attacks instead of single target ones, resist stun lock type situations, throw in a reaction type thing).
 

I felt 4e solo monsters worked well.
Like, I was going to say this, but then remembered one time when the party fought a Dracolich, and managed to keep the thing stun-locked or otherwise unable to act for the entire what, 2-3 rounds it took for them to demolish it (despite it having some defences against this).

I know I saw more interesting fights involving a solo monster vs the party in 4E than any other edition, but that was true generally - all the fights in 4E were more interesting for us.
 

I felt 4e solo monsters worked well. They were generally designed well to do so.
In my experience they felt so much like big bags of HP. Maybe this wasn't a problem with all of them, but most of combat against solos was just a long slog until the inevitable conclusion.
 

I feel like in an awful lot of those, a solo unbuffed Mind Flayer absolutely would get chunked/wrecked in a single round, just depending on initiative. You seem to be assuming that it would get initiative and get its Mind Blast off. Like in 3.XE, that's definitely all it comes down to (well, that an if the entire party is casters reliant on spells for damage/CC that's also a problem, but unlikely). It gets that off and hits multiple PCs? Then it's quite likely 1-3 PCs are completely out of the action for the entire fight and there's nothing that can be done about it, which improves the odds considerably. If the PCs are spread out, probably it's only one that it can get, it gets chunked. If the PCs win initiative, and focus on making it sure it can't do anything (and likely spread out too), it's going to get chunked.
Sure, I can agree on that. I think the element of threat is more evident, even in the examples you give (but yeah, who wins initiative and doesn't roll poorly helps a lot). But I've had very little success even when the mind flayer wins initiative in 5E to contrast.
 

Just noting here that the 2014 MM also didn't include stat blocks for elves (or dwarves, halflings, gnomes, etc.), other than the more "monstrous" versions like drow, duergar, or svirfneblin. Not including orcs, now that they're in the PHB, is just being consistent.
Fortunately the 2014 DMG did include good rules for GMs to make NPC statblocks, with customization rules by race. So while it would have been nice to have a quick stat block or two in the 2014 MM, in fact the DMG provided all the rules needed, a good design that somehow did not make the cut in the 2024 DMG.
 

I've been using the 2024 DMG encounter guidelines with 2024 monsters for both my 2014 game and my 2024 game. In both cases, I have found the numbers to work a lot better.

1. Legendary monsters are, IMO, much improved, but in quite a few instances, not enough. Solo monsters still lack the amount of durability and power to go toe to toe with a full adventuring party. I do think they are easier to run.
2. This isn't 100% true. I'd say about 10% of monsters still have attacks that force a saving throw. Additionally, there are quite a few attacks that have been turned into saving throws, like a vampire's bite. This evens things out a bit. AC is still king.
3. The art IS fantastic, though I am not much of a fan of most of the devils. The Hezrou is probably one of my favorite now.
4. Interesting new mechanics? They are very rare. I don't really mind it.
5. Species-free NPC's are fine. I have never been interested in orcs and goblins as a creature type, and much prefer them without species. I personally don't need them. I have found it easier to personalize NPC's by their personality or appearance.

Overall, I am really, really digging the new MM. It has most of the design I really wanted, and I am loving the power increase overall.
 

These are good points; maybe the 5.5 MM was balanced against a new set of players, and that's why it seems easy to us old-timers? And that's fine, too! It might have been helpful to have a little aside that was like "hey folks, if your group has been around the block, -2 per tier from all CRs" or something, but you can't make a product that completely satisfies BOTH inexperienced AND experienced users, and it's much more important to get the new players' experiences right.
Actually my issues with the 2025 MM are different.....and definitely not on balance. I have caved in to my group and been running it for a few weeks now, and have noticed the monsters have more punch (at least partially due to some of the OPs points on design), and while not all monsters are necessarily better, on average they are providing the group more challenge, which is good.
 

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?
Like Reptilian in 3e's Reptilian subtype. Kobolds back then were Humanoids with the Reptilian subtype. They weren't Humanoids with the Kobold subtype. The word became something of an oddity because there weren't any other words like it. Aarakocara, for instance, weren't Humanoids with an Avian subtype.

Of course, Aarakocra now are elementals simply because they're from the Elemental Plane of Air. :p Humanoid (Elemental)? ;)
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top