D&D 5E A Compilation of all the Race Changes in Monsters of the Multiverse

Over on Reddit, user KingJackel went through the video leak which came out a few days ago and manually compiled a list of all the changes to races in the book. The changes are quite extensive, with only the fairy and harengon remaining unchanged. The book contains 33 races in total, compiled and updated from previous Dungeons & Dragons books.

D&D 5E - List of All 33 Races in Mordenkainen's Monsters of the Multiverse

Mordenkainen Presents Monsters of the Multiverse contains 33 races compiled from previous Dungeons & Dragons books. Aarackocra Assimar Bugbear Centaur Changeling Deep Gnome Duergar Eladrin Fairy Firbolg Genasi, Air Genasi, Earth Genasi, Fire Gennasi, Water Githyanki Githzerai Goblin Goliath...

www.enworld.org

D&D 5E - Full List of Monsters in Mordenkainen Presents Monsters of the Multiverse

Mordenkainen Presents Monsters of the Multiverse contains revamped stat blocks for 260 monsters previously published in previous Dungeons & Dragons 5E books. The list was compiled by YouTuber Bob Worldbuilder based on some blurry screenshots originally shared by Nerd Immersion (see the video...

www.enworld.org

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Mod Note:

Can we dial the snark back a notch or two in here? Thanks.

 

[Aldarc]

Jeremy Crawford from the Gizomdo article

I feel that this is revising history. If they didn't like it why did they design in that way? They focused race on specific classes overly much in early 4e and then later in the edition they introduced flexibility. Then in 5e they made the deliberate decision to double down on class based focus. Races being directed toward certain class was obviously a longstanding design intention.

Possibly because 5e was initially created in accordance with the design philosophy of "we're sorry about 4e" rather than what the designers actually liked, wanted, or thought best.

I'm assuming a mix of tradition and a change of design in the past 7.5ish years of D&D 5e's history. They said "for quite some time", not "for ever since this edition started". And even if it was "we didn't like this from the start" the answer "but they were rolling things back from the 4e changes that were largely unpopular, and wanted to keep whatever they thought people would like from traditional D&D to be safe" is still a viable one.

Yeah, I think that 5e has enough self-sustainability from newcomers with little to no care about the Edition Wars that they can begin progressing the game closer to how the designers and their new core audience see best fit.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Have you heard the news about water? Apparently it is moist; some, and I'm being cautious here, because I don't want to overstress the level of certainty, some may even go so far as to call it "wet".

And once you've taken that on board, I have some additional news about the colour of the sky.

Oh. Now you are getting personal, because your argument are based on thin air.

As I said. Use the ignore button if you don't like my posts.

Edit: sorry. Replied to the post before reading the mod note. This will be my last one about that.

 

[Remathilis]

Possibly because 5e was initially created in accordance with the design philosophy of "we're sorry about 4e" rather than what the designers actually liked, wanted, or thought best.

I know We Don't Talk About Mearls, but he pretty much spelled out the design philosophy of D&D Next during the playtest era. The basic design philosophy was that 4e had moved too far from the design philosophy of earlier editions and they wanted to create a D&D that was a modern emulation of the classic feel. They specifically said they wanted it to feel as rules light as Basic, but with a lot of AD&D innovation and d20 refinement.

They tried a couple different methods of ASI during the playtest. At one point, it was based on race (dwarf gave +1 Con) and class (cleric gave +2 Wis). I'm pretty sure there was one packet that race gave no bonuses at all, or if so, it was just a +1. Ultimately, they settled on the +2/+1 (with exceptions) method to look similar to 4e's fixed plus choice of floating method in Essentials (with the float determined by subrace) or the double fixed of pre-Essential 4e. It was certainly a big change from 3e's method of weighing physical scores higher than mental, leading to the half-orcs double penalty for a strength bump.

 

[Shardstone]

Jeremy Crawford from the Gizomdo article



I feel that this is revising history. If they didn't like it why did they design in that way? They focused race on specific classes overly much in early 4e and then later in the edition they introduced flexibility. Then in 5e they made the deliberate decision to double down on class based focus. Races being directed toward certain class was obviously a longstanding design intention.

They designed it that way because the playtesters made them design it that way. But the playtesters are now but a fish in a much bigger pond, and WotC no longer cares about the archaic, nonsensical, and traditional ways of designing D&D. They realized they don't need to cripple the game to appease people who don't buy their books anymore anyhow.

 

[Micah Sweet]

They designed it that way because the playtesters made them design it that way. But the playtesters are now but a fish in a much bigger pond, and WotC no longer cares about the archaic, nonsensical, and traditional ways of designing D&D. They realized they don't need to cripple the game to appease people who don't buy their books anymore anyhow.

That's a little harsh. I admit I was overstating to say that they always wanted to do things the new way. But who says the game has been "crippled" for the last 6-7 years? That is very personal opinion. Also, there are plenty of long-time gamers who still buy their books even if they don't agree with current design philosophies.

Also, do you think its a coincidence that they decided to change their tune at the same time as social media started going after them? Just my opinion, but that seems pretty far-fetched to me.

 

[Remathilis]

That's a little harsh. I admit I was overstating to say that they always wanted to do things the new way. But who says the game has been "crippled" for the last 6-7 years? That is very personal opinion. Also, there are plenty of long-time gamers who still buy their books even if they don't agree with current design philosophies.

Also, do you think its a coincidence that they decided to change their tune at the same time as social media started going after them? Just my opinion, but that seems pretty far-fetched to me.

Clearly 5e was a mistake and WotC should have doubled down on 4e.

 

[Aldarc]

Also, do you think its a coincidence that they decided to change their tune at the same time as social media started going after them? Just my opinion, but that seems pretty far-fetched to me.

Having followed WotC for years now, I'm unclear how their tune has changed, though you clearly would have us all believe that it aligns with the meta-narrative of your grand conspiracy. Let's be clear here: being free enough to sing your tune isn't the same as changing your tune.

Clearly 5e was a mistake and WotC should have doubled down on 4e.

I'm not sure how comments like these are helping matters any, especially as I don't think that they actually reflect or satirize anything that has been put forth by anyone in this thread. So what's the point of this snark?

 

[Micah Sweet]

Having followed WotC for years now, I'm unclear how their tune has changed, though you clearly would have us all believe that it aligns with the meta-narrative of your grand conspiracy. Let's be clear here: being free enough to sing your tune isn't the same as changing your tune.


I'm not sure how comments like these are helping matters any, especially as I don't think that they actually reflect or satirize anything that has been put forth by anyone in this thread. So what's the point of this snark?

What's happening here, at least for my part, is that I prefer the way 5e was designed until 2020, when to my mind a gear change clearly began to be made. 5e in 2014 is what became super-popular after all, so it's hard to believe the designers were making it under duress. And bad-mouthing the fans of 5e Classic, whether it be by fans of New 5e or the designers themselves, is uncalled for.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

What's happening here, at least for my part, is that I prefer the way 5e was designed until 2020, when to my mind a gear change clearly began to be made. 5e in 2014 is what became super-popular after all, so it's hard to believe the designers were making it under duress. And bad-mouthing the fans of 5e Classic, whether it be by fans of New 5e or the designers themselves, is uncalled for.

We have advanced from edition warring to mid-edition warring!