D&D General 2024 Monster Creation

[Minigiant]

if the seller wants me to buy something, they better think like the customer and offer me what I am looking for instead of thinking about what new stuff they made without thinking of its value to me that they would like me to buy anyway

Sometimes the customer asks for something they won't like once they get it. Or won't like the form.

This I say as person whose job is sales, the D&D customer base is a terrible one.

One part of The community wants something that is completely contradictory to something that another part of the community wants. And if you provide both both sides with complain about the price or delivery speed due to needed to provide two or three versions the same thing.

The amount of things that I've heard in the last couple of days about not being into DMG if it was in the DMG I can easily see that book costing $30 more and people complaining about it.

 

[Sacrosanct]

debatable, did not like the UA version at all

I haven't compared the two in detail yet, but others have (like Ginny D) and the DMG rules have some significant differences than UA. I guess they tossed out a bunch of stuff in the UA.

Re: monster creation, I don't think it would have added too many pages. For example, this site is just the equivalent of one or two pages and has all the info you need for 2014. It would have been nice to have a chart like this.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Seems likely that it will be in the MM. Who knows, though?

See to me it seems unlikely to be in the MM, since they have a section in the DMG called "Making a Creature". Would be a little odd for them to do it again elsewhere in the same set of books.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

See to me it seems unlikely to be in the MM, since they have a section in the DMG called "Making a Creature". Would be a little odd for them to do it again elsewhere in the same set of books.

Are you kidding? There's a LOT of sections in a LOT of their books on the same subjects with the same headings.

It wouldn't be odd at all.

They might not do it, though. But what is MOST likely, IMO, is that rather than having a "Creating a Monster" section in the MM, they'll have a "This is how a Monster is Made" (or "Parts of a Monster") section that will do a good enough job of showing how it comes together that we can use it to make our own.

Again, We'll See.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I think the issue is that due to the math being off, a quick monster guide would only produce boring blobby HP sponges.

And a comprehensive guide to create different styles of monsters would take up half a chapter to explain clearly.

You know what they could have done? They could have included in the DMG exactly what they did include, but also mention that more detailed monster creation rules are available in the MM. Since this will be the first time that will be the case in D&D (if they in fact do that), it would be at the very least a courtesy to let folks know what the New Game Order entails.

 

[Remathilis]

See to me it seems unlikely to be in the MM, since they have a section in the DMG called "Making a Creature". Would be a little odd for them to do it again elsewhere in the same set of books.

The suggestions do not address anything that would alter the creature's math. They specifically call out minor alterations. I have a feeling that major alterations that change creature math (and thus Challenge) will be in the MM along with the tables needed to adjust.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Think like the seller not the customer.

I will do that the instant I want to sell something, and not one moment before.

 

[Hexmage-EN]

I hope they moved it to the MM so they could give the math additional time to cook.

This is my guess, too. Monster design has arguably been the aspect of 5E that has changed the most. We've went from having monsters with almost no bonus actions or other tricks to having a good bit, legendary actions got modified to potentially include mythic actions before then switching to it all just being reactions, spellcasting has gone from using the same spells as PCs to having unique abilities to going even harder in the first direction by replacing the succubus and golem's magical abilities with explicit spellcasting, etc.

I suspect releasing the new Monster Manual significantly later than the other two books was to give them more time to really figure out what their new approach is. No sense putting in how to create monsters in the DMG if the rules are likely to change. Plus it just kind of makes sense to move those rules to the Monster Manual, anyway.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Are you kidding? There's a LOT of sections in a LOT of their books on the same subjects with the same headings.

It wouldn't be odd at all.

They might not do it, though. But what is MOST likely, IMO, is that rather than having a "Creating a Monster" section in the MM, they'll have a "This is how a Monster is Made" (or "Parts of a Monster") section that will do a good enough job of showing how it comes together that we can use it to make our own.

Again, We'll See.

Then why have they not said such rules are (or will be) in the MM? Why do we have to speculate about it? It's a yes or no question they know the answer to right now.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Plus it just kind of makes sense to move those rules to the Monster Manual, anyway.

So they've been doing it wrong in your opinion for the last 50 years?