Evil Drow Statblocks to Return in Forgotten Realms Rulebooks Later This Year

Drow-specific NPC statblocks will be included in the upcoming Forgotten Realms Adventurer's Guide set for release later this year. Over the past several weeks, much hullabaloo has been made over the Monster Manual, specifically that the D&D design team replaced specific drow and orc statblocks with generic NPC statblocks that can be used for any kind of humanoids. In a video released today, D&D lead designer Jeremy Crawford confirmed that more specific statblocks tied to specific humanoid sects or characters would return in future rulebooks, with evil drow given as an example.

"Also for anyone who's eager to see more species-tailored humanoid statblocks, people are going to see more of that in our setting books," Crawford said. "You're going to see that in our Forgotten Realms products, for example. The malevolent drow of Menzoberranzan are an important part of that setting and so they get their own statblocks. This is really true of all the creatures in the Monster Manual. This is your massive starting toy box of monsters that are usable anywhere in the multiverse. The bestiaries in our setting products, that's where we can provide you versions of things tailored to the cultures and histories of our different worlds."

 

[Parmandur]

As far as i know D&D multiverse has been used since the start of 5e, probably before too.

It was used in the 1e core books, lol.

 

[Dire Bare]

I don't have, and will probably never have the 5.5e books. Makes it hard to look at from time to time or otherwise.

The dragonborn distinction isn't enough to be a subrace. Look at the elven(or any other) subraces in the 5e PHB for what it takes. You need different abilities. Not the same ability with a different energy type.

Well, in the 2024 rules, the idea of "subrace" or "subspecies" is kinda sorta quietly gone.

Some species have options, some more than others, but they aren't presented as subspecies. Then again, I'm not sure that word or concept really shows up in 2014 D&D either.

I was hoping we'd get a system that would allow for the classic PC character types, perhaps one that made a more explicit separation of species from culture . . . I'm a big fan of Arcanist Press' "Ancestry & Culture" series that does this. Elf is a species, wood elf is a culture.

Gamifying culture has landmines, so I can see why WotC chose not to go this way, but . . . like @SlyFlourish, I feel they kinda sidestepped the problem rather than dealing with it directly. Oh well, progress made, just not as much as I would have liked to see.

 

[Distracted DM]

I posted a quote from Gygax on 1985 above. Does that mean Marvel stole it from D&D?

DC has been using it from at least the 80s when Crisis on Infinite Earths happened. Nothing about multiverses are new in the geek circles, they just weren't used in larger public media because people were assumed to be too stupid to understand the concept. (A theory that has some weight to it, based on general audience reactions).

I think they are referring to the term multiverse specifically, not just alternate universes.

It was used in the 1e core books, lol.

Michael Moorcock via Elric/Eternal Champions was the first to publish/popularize the "Multiverse" term with its modern meaning (it was used in the 19th century but meant something completely different).

 

[Dire Bare]

No, but a lot of people make off-the-cuff reactions without actually knowing what the books say about the topic. Its hearsay, innuendo, and assumptions and then make sweeping generalizations about it based on what they think is happening rather than what actually is.

Hey man, that's how we do things now in the post-truth era. Catch up with the times!

 

[Remathilis]

Well, in the 2024 rules, the idea of "subrace" or "subspecies" is kinda sorta quietly gone.

Some species have options, some more than others, but they aren't presented as subspecies. Then again, I'm not sure that word or concept really shows up in 2014 D&D either.

I was hoping we'd get a system that would allow for the classic PC character types, perhaps one that made a more explicit separation of species from culture . . . I'm a big fan of Arcanist Press' "Ancestry & Culture" series that does this. Elf is a species, wood elf is a culture.

Gamifying culture has landmines, so I can see why WotC chose not to go this way, but . . . like @SlyFlourish, I feel they kinda sidestepped the problem rather than dealing with it directly. Oh well, progress made, just not as much as I would have liked to see.

I think I would have preferred different old subtypes to just be different species like they were in MotM rather than try to cram them into different boxes (goliaths and dragonborns have ancestries, elves and gnomes have lineages, tieflings have legacies, aasimars have revelations).

 

[Kobold Avenger]

I think I would have preferred different old subtypes to just be different species like they were in MotM rather than try to cram them into different boxes (goliaths and dragonborns have ancestries, elves and gnomes have lineages, tieflings have legacies, aasimars have revelations).

And I would make things more convoluted for subtypes, coming up with another word each time...

Genasi have... Affinities!

Even if it's the same things as what Goliaths, Dragonborn, Elves, Tieflings and Aasimar have.

 

[Demetrios1453]

Pretty sure Gygax got multiverse from Moorcock.

With some help from Zelazny, presumably.

 

[Dire Bare]

I think I would have preferred different old subtypes to just be different species like they were in MotM rather than try to cram them into different boxes (goliaths and dragonborns have ancestries, elves and gnomes have lineages, tieflings have legacies, aasimars have revelations).

I liked that in MotM also, even if on a case-by-case basis I didn't always care for specific choices.

And I would make things more convoluted for subtypes, coming up with another word each time...

Genasi have... Affinities!

Even if it's the same things as what Goliaths, Dragonborn, Elves, Tieflings and Aasimar have.

But that's the thing, the subtypes for each species aren't always based on the same thing. So it makes sense that different player options might have different kinds of subtype choices.

Being a black dragonborn is based on what type of dragon you have in your ancestry.

Being a wood elf is based on the culture you were raised in, not so much your wood elf "genetics". Although the lore on this varies by edition, and even by books within editions.

Being a fire genasi is due to your connection to the elemental plane of fire . . . which you could have acquired in any number of ways other than simply having an efreeti for a daddy.

 

[LazarusKane]

Hey man, that's how we do things now in the post-truth era. Catch up with the times!

Or counter it with believing in the best of people: They want to participate in the discussion, they try to be respectful (and fail sometimes, being snarky), they want to react and argue strictly rational (and react "hotheaded" because it touches something that is important to them), etc..
And if their information (seem to be) based on "hearsay, innuendo, and assumptions" then help them in being a information source for the correct facts.

 

[Oofta]

Pretty sure Gygax got multiverse from Moorcock.

With some help from Zelazny, presumably.

While it doesn't really matter, the question I would have would be when did they start using "multiverse"? After a quick search, I see that DC comic books started using the idea of different versions of earth back in the 40s and of course we had Crisis on Infinite Earths in 1985. But did they use the term multiverse? Did Moorcock or Zelazny? I mean I remember reading Aasimov (Heinlen? Both?) that talked about multiple versions of reality. Some variation of the idea of an alternative world is probably as old as humanity.

In any case I don't think the multiverse concept is really about marketing in the sense of hanging onto MCU coattails, the term has been used for at least 40 years in the context of D&D. It's more to explain having some gods and lore common to multiple campaign settings. Along with, of course, giving them a way to say "Tired of world X? Have your PCs bop over to world Y that we just published a book for!"