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.

 

[Wolfpack48]

Alt covers all the way here.

 

[mamba]

Sure. I don't think that's close to their goal, though.

the 5-13? No, it isn’t, I just used it to show what I consider to be the bad kind of power creep

Here's hopin'!

yep, that certainly is what I am looking for

 

[MNblockhead]

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

Eh, characters are rapidly over-powered in the 2014 rules per my tastes. You either lean into it, homebrew the heck out of it (which works better if you are home brewing your own adventures as well), or play a different game system.

 

[Vincent55]

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.

"2e the edition with "immortals" that allowed for you to become gods?" no it was not i suggest going back and reading the books as it would take far too long to explain it here. And I am not just saying the books but the revisions made as well second edition had players options and other powers books which opened the warlock class and hexblade which at one time were separate classes. #rd was out for a blink and then put out a 3.5 and again revised with essentials and such. $th was its own thing and failed so the started over with 5th. But they had to tamper with stuff with the overuse of advantage and such which is a new toy and used way too much and is honestly a terrible mechanic as it just makes it even more random. The 5th had revisions in many books after the main one put out Tasha and others further revising the basics of the language and other things leading up to the "new improved books" which they again decided to tamper with and alter the game. Anyway, this game has gone so far off the basic rails it is not even recognisable as D&D it is more of a superhero game than anything.

 

[Chaosmancer]

"2e the edition with "immortals" that allowed for you to become gods?" no it was not i suggest going back and reading the books as it would take far too long to explain it here.

Doesn't seem to be that long to me. The Immortal set, written by Frank Mentzer and released in 1986 was for characters who "had transcended levels" and had power points and ranks, along with the ability to "literally [able to] cast any magic spell in addition to new combat abilities." and well as "their ability to construct their own personal "home planes"."

Not sure how you want to redefine that as not becoming a god, especially since the set included lore that: "once there were only three Immortals, who discovered the multiverse, and decided to give it order and purpose."

And I am not just saying the books but the revisions made as well second edition had players options and other powers books which opened the warlock class and hexblade which at one time were separate classes. #rd was out for a blink and then put out a 3.5 and again revised with essentials and such. $th was its own thing and failed so the started over with 5th.

Yes, TSR famously printed a lot of books. "They printed a lot of splat books to expand options" is very different from "you have to buy a new game every year" If you take every major revision of DnD that you are trying to lay out, that is 11 major revisions over 50 years.

A game you have to buy year after year would have fifty versions in that time. So your statement is still a massive overselling of what actually happened.

But they had to tamper with stuff with the overuse of advantage and such which is a new toy and used way too much and is honestly a terrible mechanic as it just makes it even more random. The 5th had revisions in many books after the main one put out Tasha and others further revising the basics of the language and other things leading up to the "new improved books" which they again decided to tamper with and alter the game.

Your first sentence is a run-on and doesn't even make sense, let alone not having any backing. But sure, 5e then Tasha's SIX YEARS later and now a revision four years after that. I mean, shock and horror that they update the rules every so often. Should be like 2e where they made Holmes Basic, B/X Basic, B/X Expert, BECMI Basic, BECMI Expert, BECMI Companion, BECMI Master, BECMI Immortal, and THEN the Rules Cyclopedia. You know, back when DnD was DnD and they didn't just change the game and make it nearly unrecognizable, like this quote: "Lawrence Schick,..., felt that "Play using the Immortals rules is so different from low-level D&D as to be almost another game entirely.""

Anyway, this game has gone so far off the basic rails it is not even recognisable as D&D it is more of a superhero game than anything.

Oh yeah, completely unlike the old version of the game where you could make your own plane of existence and cast every spell possible. I mean, Wizards got... um... something! They can't do any of that and way less powerful, but they are just like superheroes! Unlike those 3rd edition characters who were so grounded they could run on clouds and fling mountains at each other. No barbarians get to rolls slightly higher skill checks! They can even read and negotiate with nobles!

Again, kind of weird that for all people's declarations that 5e is the most over-the-top version of the game... it may be one of the WEAKEST peaks in DnD.

 

[Vincent55]

your not worth the time bye

 

[Vincent55]

Doesn't seem to be that long to me. The Immortal set, written by Frank Mentzer and released in 1986 was for characters who "had transcended levels" and had power points and ranks, along with the ability to "literally [able to] cast any magic spell in addition to new combat abilities." and well as "their ability to construct their own personal "home planes"."

Not sure how you want to redefine that as not becoming a god, especially since the set included lore that: "once there were only three Immortals, who discovered the multiverse, and decided to give it order and purpose."



Yes, TSR famously printed a lot of books. "They printed a lot of splat books to expand options" is very different from "you have to buy a new game every year" If you take every major revision of DnD that you are trying to lay out, that is 11 major revisions over 50 years.

A game you have to buy year after year would have fifty versions in that time. So your statement is still a massive overselling of what actually happened.



Your first sentence is a run-on and doesn't even make sense, let alone not having any backing. But sure, 5e then Tasha's SIX YEARS later and now a revision four years after that. I mean, shock and horror that they update the rules every so often. Should be like 2e where they made Holmes Basic, B/X Basic, B/X Expert, BECMI Basic, BECMI Expert, BECMI Companion, BECMI Master, BECMI Immortal, and THEN the Rules Cyclopedia. You know, back when DnD was DnD and they didn't just change the game and make it nearly unrecognizable, like this quote: "Lawrence Schick,..., felt that "Play using the Immortals rules is so different from low-level D&D as to be almost another game entirely.""



Oh yeah, completely unlike the old version of the game where you could make your own plane of existence and cast every spell possible. I mean, Wizards got... um... something! They can't do any of that and way less powerful, but they are just like superheroes! Unlike those 3rd edition characters who were so grounded they could run on clouds and fling mountains at each other. No barbarians get to rolls slightly higher skill checks! They can even read and negotiate with nobles!

Again, kind of weird that for all people's declarations that 5e is the most over-the-top version of the game... it may be one of the WEAKEST peaks in DnD.

your not worth the effort

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

your not worth the effort

Mod Note:

Using your account’s blocking feature is fine. It’s there for a reason. Announcing you’re using it is considered bad form- it’s rude & antagonistic.

When using it in the future, don’t be a jerk about it, thanks.

 

[Queer Venger]

can I just say...


Shut Up & take my $$$



Now please show us the art for the slipcover.

 

[Hatmatter]

Doesn't seem to be that long to me. The Immortal set, written by Frank Mentzer and released in 1986 was for characters who "had transcended levels" and had power points and ranks, along with the ability to "literally [able to] cast any magic spell in addition to new combat abilities." and well as "their ability to construct their own personal "home planes"."

Not sure how you want to redefine that as not becoming a god, especially since the set included lore that: "once there were only three Immortals, who discovered the multiverse, and decided to give it order and purpose."



Yes, TSR famously printed a lot of books. "They printed a lot of splat books to expand options" is very different from "you have to buy a new game every year" If you take every major revision of DnD that you are trying to lay out, that is 11 major revisions over 50 years.

A game you have to buy year after year would have fifty versions in that time. So your statement is still a massive overselling of what actually happened.



Your first sentence is a run-on and doesn't even make sense, let alone not having any backing. But sure, 5e then Tasha's SIX YEARS later and now a revision four years after that. I mean, shock and horror that they update the rules every so often. Should be like 2e where they made Holmes Basic, B/X Basic, B/X Expert, BECMI Basic, BECMI Expert, BECMI Companion, BECMI Master, BECMI Immortal, and THEN the Rules Cyclopedia. You know, back when DnD was DnD and they didn't just change the game and make it nearly unrecognizable, like this quote: "Lawrence Schick,..., felt that "Play using the Immortals rules is so different from low-level D&D as to be almost another game entirely.""



Oh yeah, completely unlike the old version of the game where you could make your own plane of existence and cast every spell possible. I mean, Wizards got... um... something! They can't do any of that and way less powerful, but they are just like superheroes! Unlike those 3rd edition characters who were so grounded they could run on clouds and fling mountains at each other. No barbarians get to rolls slightly higher skill checks! They can even read and negotiate with nobles!

Again, kind of weird that for all people's declarations that 5e is the most over-the-top version of the game... it may be one of the WEAKEST peaks in DnD.

Well, Chaosmancer, since you only received a "your [sic] not worth the effort" as a response, I thought I would at least add a note saying that I thought this was a very considered response and you brought up excellent support from the history of D&D. Furthermore, I enjoyed reading this post and I am thankful you took the time to compose it....thanks!