D&D Monster Manual (2025)

D&D (2024) D&D Monster Manual (2025)


log in or register to remove this ad

Well, they are in the Temple of Elemental Evil Adventure they dropped a couple months ago, so probably. Helps flesh out the Elemental Creature Type.
For clarity, they are mentioned in Scions of Elemental Evil, but they don't seem to have stat blocks. Ulsedra Vox, Para-elemental Queen uses the stats of the fire elemental/cultist fanatic and her minions use a slightly modified ogre stat block (their damage type changes and they gain resistance to fire/acid/cold depending on whether they are ash/ooze/ice/magma minions).
 

The removal of the Monster creation rules from the core books continues a trend, that I noticed with the whole of 5e:

The removal of tools and support for homebrewing.

Because WotC would totally prefer if you buy any small monster you need from them, instead of making your owns.
With good Monster Creation Rules, you don't need more Monster books.
 

The removal of the Monster creation rules from the core books continues a trend, that I noticed with the whole of 5e:

The removal of tools and support for homebrewing.

Because WotC would totally prefer if you buy any small monster you need from them, instead of making your owns.
With good Monster Creation Rules, you don't need more Monster books.
That's a bit of a stretch. What other tools or support have they removed for homebrewing. Considering the MASSIVE amount of homebrew available every single day on things like Reddit, I'm going to need just a bit more evidence than this to support claims that WotC doesn't like homebrewing.

From my perspective, I imagine that what most likely happened is they discovered that very few people actually use the monster creation rules in the 2014 DMG and removed it because, frankly, outside of a very small handful of people, no one will actually notice that they are gone.

But, yeah, what other support for homebrewing have they removed?
 


That's a bit of a stretch. What other tools or support have they removed for homebrewing. Considering the MASSIVE amount of homebrew available every single day on things like Reddit, I'm going to need just a bit more evidence than this to support claims that WotC doesn't like homebrewing.

From my perspective, I imagine that what most likely happened is they discovered that very few people actually use the monster creation rules in the 2014 DMG and removed it because, frankly, outside of a very small handful of people, no one will actually notice that they are gone.

But, yeah, what other support for homebrewing have they removed?
I suspect that is the case as well: outside of the more diehard fans who liked getting under the hood, the rules weren't streamlined or intuitive enough to let DMs just make a monster.

But on the other hand, I think the biggest pattern I did see is a lot less "get under the hood and tinker" support. Especially in the DMG. Less variant rules, less support for complicated rule creation (species or subclasses) etc. The areas they do focus on giving you tools for (adventure design, world-building, smaller rules like backgrounds and spells) still keep the game hemmed in at the borders. Ie: build an adventure or campaign using the tools we've given you vs make your own tools.

I suspect there are a couple of reasons why this is.. First, I suspect it is to reinforce a specific style of play (broad as it may be) as the D&D style and ceding other styles to 3pp games (which after 20 years and an unsuccessful attempt to roll back the OGL, they realize are never going away). In that regard, it feels a bit like 4e; focus on what they feel is the core game experience and cater to that. Second, I think that they realize anyone looking for an alternative to D&D has or will find it! So there is less need for D&D to provide its own kitbashing tools. Lastly, I think they are acknowledging that most DMs aren't actually good game designers, despite what they think. The casual players and DMs will be content using the prefab stuff with some minor edits and reflavoring, while the more hardcore and gifted well move into the realm of design and need/use far more sophisticated tools than the DMG could provide anyway.

I suspect there are a few other elements as well (it helps sell supplements and is easier to support using digital tools if there are finite limits) but I don't think those are the big reason for the shift. I just think it's an acknowledgement that D&D is a game and not a toolbox. It doesn't have to be able to support a variety of different things, it just needs to support the core D&D experience and variations there of.

And while some people may lament this narrowing of D&D's focus, I like to think of it as a gift to the 3pp community. They are ceding ground to other games to fill niches that D&D doesn't. Look at 5e Middle Earth, a game built on 5e assumptions but so radically different that you could never make it using D&D core books no matter how good the DM toolbox was.
 

I suspect that is the case as well: outside of the more diehard fans who liked getting under the hood, the rules weren't streamlined or intuitive enough to let DMs just make a monster.

But on the other hand, I think the biggest pattern I did see is a lot less "get under the hood and tinker" support. Especially in the DMG. Less variant rules, less support for complicated rule creation (species or subclasses) etc. The areas they do focus on giving you tools for (adventure design, world-building, smaller rules like backgrounds and spells) still keep the game hemmed in at the borders. Ie: build an adventure or campaign using the tools we've given you vs make your own tools.

I suspect there are a couple of reasons why this is.. First, I suspect it is to reinforce a specific style of play (broad as it may be) as the D&D style and ceding other styles to 3pp games (which after 20 years and an unsuccessful attempt to roll back the OGL, they realize are never going away). In that regard, it feels a bit like 4e; focus on what they feel is the core game experience and cater to that. Second, I think that they realize anyone looking for an alternative to D&D has or will find it! So there is less need for D&D to provide its own kitbashing tools. Lastly, I think they are acknowledging that most DMs aren't actually good game designers, despite what they think. The casual players and DMs will be content using the prefab stuff with some minor edits and reflavoring, while the more hardcore and gifted well move into the realm of design and need/use far more sophisticated tools than the DMG could provide anyway.

I suspect there are a few other elements as well (it helps sell supplements and is easier to support using digital tools if there are finite limits) but I don't think those are the big reason for the shift. I just think it's an acknowledgement that D&D is a game and not a toolbox. It doesn't have to be able to support a variety of different things, it just needs to support the core D&D experience and variations there of.

And while some people may lament this narrowing of D&D's focus, I like to think of it as a gift to the 3pp community. They are ceding ground to other games to fill niches that D&D doesn't. Look at 5e Middle Earth, a game built on 5e assumptions but so radically different that you could never make it using D&D core books no matter how good the DM toolbox was.
It is an excellent reason to drop WotC and move on to more varied and creative D&D-style gaming supported by companies not so married to broad appeal and simplistic design.

I guess those of us who want more can be thankful to 5.5 for encouraging us to move on.
 

It is an excellent reason to drop WotC and move on to more varied and creative D&D-style gaming supported by companies not so married to broad appeal and simplistic design.

I guess those of us who want more can be thankful to 5.5 for encouraging us to move on.
You know, I WANT to agree with you. But the fact you can't help but mock people who DO like D&D's current design makes the goodbye less of an "au reviour" and more a "don't let the door hit ya where the good lord split ya"
 


You know, I WANT to agree with you. But the fact you can't help but mock people who DO like D&D's current design makes the goodbye less of an "au reviour" and more a "don't let the door hit ya where the good lord split ya"
Is that your goodbye to me, or my goodbye to others? And your paraphrasing of me is far more crude than anything I wrote or will write, so glass houses and all that.

I could have worded that more kindly, and I apologize. The meaning behind the words I 100% stand behind, however.
 

Trending content

Remove ads

Top