D&D 5E Explain: Mordenkainen's Monsters of the Multiverse

[MechaTarrasque]

5e is still "rulings over rules" so pick whatever makes you happy. If you feel the need to make things consistent with 5.5, then everything is proficiency bonus, so everything is from 2 to 9, which is a good spell range.

 

[JEB]

@Leatherhead is doing a very detailed, creature-by-creature breakdown of the changes to monsters here: D&D 5E - Let’s Read Mordenkainen Presents: Monsters of the Multiverse.

And there's a breakdown of the changes to every race in this Reddit post.

 

[Sulicius]

As far as I have seen, a spell-like ability replacing a spell is quite rare. Usually it is reserved for a humanoid spellcaster as one ability or spell that is iconic for it, like raising undead as a necromancer.

What is the most pleasant about the new stat blocks, is that many abilities that once took an action are now part of the multiattack or a bonus action. This means that many monsters can do their suboptimal signature move while ALSO making an attack. This makes monsters more fun and flexible to play.

Many effects that were very situational have been made baseline, such as additional damage on attacks when made at advantage. This makes monsters less swingy in different situations, which means a DM like me can rely on it’s strength compared to its CR more.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

An Oath of the Ancients paladin with an aura granting resistance to spell damage won't affect this, though it would for Chromatic Orb. A Globe of Invulnerability, or monster-like equivilents like the Rakshasa's Limited Magic Immunity, don't stop it as written. Heck, there's not even anything that says a resistance to magic would help, though a DM could make a ruling.

Magic Resistance would help. It says it's a magical ability.

 

[Demetrios1453]

Let's remove players getting knocked out then. That can happen to anyone, not just a caster when facing another caster with a particular resource.

The spirit of the game has that sometimes your attack will miss, you spell will be countered, you will not be close enough to hit them with your axe, you will be Held, Restrained, in a pit, against a creature with fire resistance to your flame blade, or otherwise need to work around.

And yet, the game survived, and thrived, with its first two editions having no means of magical counterspelling, and its third edition by only counterspelling if you cast the exact same spell as the one being cast at the same time. Are you saying that the game existed its first 25 - 30 years without having its own spirit of the game?

 

[UngainlyTitan]

Any mild change of any sort will get some up in arms...

It is not just that, speculation in advance of the facts will put forth versions of the mechanics based on hearsay and that gets entrenched and adds to the controversy.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

What are those rule changes and updates?

There is a style guide that summarises the changes to monster stat blocks. I did have a quick look but I couldn't lay my hands on it. It's quite extensive.

 

[pukunui]

Magic Resistance would help. It says it's a magical ability.

Except that they've been very deliberately rewording that trait to affect spells only. I feel they should rename it to "Spell Resistance" to make it clearer.

 

[Shiroiken]

That makes more sense. I got the impression from earlier descriptions that they, say, converted Magic Missile to an inmate ability without defining whether it was still a spell (but just given quick reference stats so you didn't have to page flip).

To give an example, a caster might have the ability "Bolt of Fire" that is mechanically identical to the cantrip Firebolt. Given the similarity, many wondered if it's supposed to be the spell. Others (such as myself) argue that it should be, despite the official position. In addition to Counterspell, which is contentious, there are other player abilities that become nerfed as a result of these no longer being spells.

The other issue that some have with the change to casters is that you can't customize them anymore. If I wanted to use an ice themed Mage, I could switch out some of the spells known for other spells of the same level. If I had a particular setup that would take advantage of Evards Black Tentacles, too bad for me, since all I have is Fireball. Sadly, this problem would be super easy to solve by simply keeping the text "X is a Nth level caster using Y as spellcasting ability."

 

[Reynard]

To give an example, a caster might have the ability "Bolt of Fire" that is mechanically identical to the cantrip Firebolt. Given the similarity, many wondered if it's supposed to be the spell. Others (such as myself) argue that it should be, despite the official position. In addition to Counterspell, which is contentious, there are other player abilities that become nerfed as a result of these no longer being spells.

The other issue that some have with the change to casters is that you can't customize them anymore. If I wanted to use an ice themed Mage, I could switch out some of the spells known for other spells of the same level. If I had a particular setup that would take advantage of Evards Black Tentacles, too bad for me, since all I have is Fireball. Sadly, this problem would be super easy to solve by simply keeping the text "X is a Nth level caster using Y as spellcasting ability."

That people don't like the change is not the same thing as it being confusing or poorly designed.

And I can't figure out why the thing in the book is going to stop you from doing whatever you want in your game, in any case.