D&D (2024) Check Out The 2025 Monster Manual Alternate Cover!

Originally previewed on Dexterto, here is the alternative cover for 2025's new Monster Manual, featuring a mind flayer! The alternate cover for the Dungeon Master's Guide featured the super goddess Lolth, and the Player's Handbook was a gold dragon drinking tea with an adventuring party.

The alternate covers were made by artists Wylie Beckert and Olena Richards.

 

[Vincent55]

I'm playing the game where they published a Player's Handbook in 2014 and next thing you know wham you turn around and they're publishing another one in 2024.

with many revised versions throughout, but yes only one "published book "The issue was overall they have had many revised and new editions to a game that fidgets with mechanics or wording and does nothing as to add to the overall game. To be honest, the original game plays just fine and the further you get from the basic one the worse you get with overpowered god-like characters that have more in common with superheroes and video games. but i am taking to a wall so what ever

 

[Vincent55]

What...what game are you talking about? We were talking about 5E D&D...?

the entire game not just one version, never mind .

 

[Charlaquin]

Strange… I got a notification that someone quoted me in this thread, but I don’t see any posts with quotes from me, and the 10th page of the thread exists for me but has no posts on it (at time of writing; presumably this post will show up on the 10th page). Did someone just quote and then immediately block me?

EDIT: Yep, looks like it.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

Strange… I got a notification that someone quoted me in this thread, but I don’t see any posts with quotes from me, and the 10th page of the thread exists for me but has no posts on it (at time of writing; presumably this post will show up on the 10th page). Did someone just quote and then immediately block me?

EDIT: Yep, looks like it.

There is also someone ignoring me, cause a bunch of context is missing for me too.

 

[mamba]

I think (for the most part) that the result is a little bit of power-creep, but only because they (AFAICT and hopefully) took a bunch of lackluster features that are unpopular (usually because they aren't, or at least are seen as, not very good) and gave them a bump-polish.

Which, IMO, is awesome because I'd love to look at a list of features and have to actually think about what I want to take, instead of discounting like half of them because they look like crap.

I agree, the options should be about equal in power, otherwise they are not really options but traps

Some stuff needed a bump.

probably, just like some other stuff needed a nerf, my concern is more than the overall power level creeps up, not that individual options get tweaked

And a bump is a lot more fun than bringing everything down. It evens out if you bump monsters too, which it looks like they're doing.

if you start bumping monsters to compensate for the power creep of the classes, how compatible are you really with 5e? There is not really much room here if you want the old classes to still be viable and the adventures to stay as they are and not need adjustments

 

[Chaosmancer]

with many revised versions throughout, but yes only one "published book "The issue was overall they have had many revised and new editions to a game that fidgets with mechanics or wording and does nothing as to add to the overall game. To be honest, the original game plays just fine and the further you get from the basic one the worse you get with overpowered god-like characters that have more in common with superheroes and video games. but i am taking to a wall so what ever

So you bought all the versions of the game until 4e, and have declared that if someone is getting started with DnD they can buy these new books then "in a year get them again and again and again." ... all because there have been five massive revisions of the game over the last fifty years...

Sure, I guess you can buy DnD "again and again and again" if you buy a new game every decade, but when most people use that phrasing, they are talking about releasing new versions of the game every single year, which DnD has never once done.

Also, wasn't 2e the edition with "immortals" that allowed for you to become gods? Like, literal planet creating gods? And 3.X had the CR 90 Great Wyrm Time Dragon as an enemy you were supposed to be able to fight, and continued to allow people to become gods.... then 4e the strongest you could get was Demigod. And now in 5e you can't even get that strong? So it seems a little strange to accuse 5e of having the worst over-powered god characters, when in comparison to 2e and 3.5 it is so tame.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I agree, the options should be about equal in power, otherwise they are not really options but traps

Right.

probably, just like some other stuff needed a nerf, my concern is more than the overall power level creeps up, not that individual options get tweaked

Yeah, agreed.

if you start bumping monsters to compensate for the power creep of the classes, how compatible are you really with 5e?

Pretty darn compatible. I mean, we're looking at a range of 1-10 (with 1 being a crap character and 10 being an uber-munch) turning to a range of (hopefully something like) 4-8. Sure, the average becomes a 6 instead of 5.5, which is more powerful, but it's still well within the range of what we had before. That's the hope, anyhow.

The idea would be, that the monsters ALSO go from a range of 1-10 to a range of 4-8 (or what have you) - within the parameters, but "feel" a little better on average, which (again, if done right) should just make them more exciting to fight.

There is not really much room here if you want the old classes to still be viable and the adventures to stay as they are and still be viable

IDK, the game has survived as it is while being not-all-that-balanced. I think it's balance issues can be often overinflated. You really notice when someone is at a 1 or a 10 (on my above scale) but not much when someone is at a 6 and another at an 8 (or what have you).

The funny think about balance in D&D - when you have it (like in 4e) any little deviation can make a big difference at the table. When you don't, it's actually (IME) less obvious, not more.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

the entire game not just one version, never mind .

I don't think people are trying to argue with you - they're trying to understand what you're saying. You appear to have said that there was a recent PHB and an upcoming new one, which has rightly confused people. If that's not what you meant, I'm with the others - what DID you mean? Honestly curious - not trying to "trap" you or anything. It's just not clear.

 

[mamba]

IDK, the game has survived as it is while being not-all-that-balanced. I think it's balance issues can be often overinflated. You really notice when someone is at a 1 or a 10 (on my above scale) but not much when someone is at a 6 and another at an 8 (or what have you).

agreed, but if 2014 were a range of 1-10 with an average of 6 and 2024 were 5-13 with an average of 9, you would notice.

If it goes from a 1-10 with an average of 5.5 to 4-8 with an average of 6, that would be an improvement. They would have fixed the outliers while keeping power level mostly the same

 

[FitzTheRuke]

agreed, but if 2014 were a range of 1-10 with an average of 6 and 2024 were 5-13 with an average of 9, you would notice.

Sure. I don't think that's close to their goal, though. (Whether they succeed on their goal, whatever it is exactly, is, of course, TBD). I think I'm right that the goal is probably to bring the bottom up by more than they bring the top down, which again, is power creep, but IMO "the good kind".

If it goes from a 1-10 with an average of 5.5 to 4-8 with an average of 6, that would be an improvement. They would have fixed the outliers while keeping power level mostly the same

Here's hopin'!