JEB
Legend
Yes, I am in fact sure that 2014 me tried to reverse engineer the principles in the table.Are you sure? There is nothing to reverse engineer in that table, are you thinking about the Monster Features table instead?

Yes, I am in fact sure that 2014 me tried to reverse engineer the principles in the table.Are you sure? There is nothing to reverse engineer in that table, are you thinking about the Monster Features table instead?
Yeah, we are still definitely speculating and missing something: honestly, the last real significant "mystery" of the 2024 rules, other than the details of some stat blocks.Are you sure? There is nothing to reverse engineer in that table, are you thinking about the Monster Features table instead?
To be clear they made comments in one of the videos that NPCs in the MM have been redesigned in the 2024 MM to be any species of Humanoid. @Parmandur and I have speculated that the statement may relate to the table in the 2014 DMG, but personally am not sure how yet.
EDIT: correction that statement was on Beyond:
"The stat blocks of monsters with the Humanoid creature type have been redesigned to represent any Humanoid species. Now, these stat blocks include distinct mechanics aligned with a certain role or profession. So, whether you're introducing your player characters to a charismatic drow performer or a questing goliath knight, you can find inspiration for your NPCs."
Karl David Brown did actually reverse engineer WotC stuff on thst front, very much worth checking out:Yes, I am in fact sure that 2014 me tried to reverse engineer the principles in the table.I compared the monster statblocks to the recommended adjustments and features, etc.
The ASI part I would not expect, but they have references throughout 5E to Race-modified NPC stat blocks pointing to the MM, and we k own there is a co version guide in this new MM to handle exactly those references. So a table of "Dwarven NPCs have Tremorsense and more HP" seems very plausible.It's possible, I suppose, but I still suspect that level of prescribed, species-specific reworking is out in 2024. More just an A = B situation, with a sidebar about how you are welcome to customize further (but carefully not implying it's the default). Again, more like the smaller section in the 2014 MM. But we'll see soon, I suppose!
I think we are using that word differently then. There is nothing to reverse engineer in that table. I mean there is no math involved, it is just a list of changes that don't effect anything. It doesn't tell you how that effects CR at all. So if you are comparing it to the Monster Features table then I would simply call that engineering what those changes mean for CR, not reverse engineering. But maybe that is just me!Yes, I am in fact sure that 2014 me tried to reverse engineer the principles in the table.I compared the monster statblocks to the recommended adjustments and features, etc.
That could be; however, I can't understand how that relates to this statement:Yeah, we are still definitely speculating and missing something: honestly, the last real significant "mystery" of the 2024 rules, other than the details of some stat blocks.
Thing is, published 5E Advebtures call for Race-modified NPCs all the time, and it is a strict design goal that the MM provides an equivalent for all 2024 MM references in published books, so they have some way to account for Dwarven Vererans and Halfling Archmahws and other such existing references in the corpus.
Basically, I expect the "dwarven" and "halfling" parts of such to become ribbons by default in 2024, with the expectation that DMs should just use the Veteran or Archmage statblock without modification. With a sidebar suggesting species traits among further customizations, if a DM wants that level of detail. But as you said, we're all speculating at this point - and we only have a few weeks to find out!Yeah, we are still definitely speculating and missing something: honestly, the last real significant "mystery" of the 2024 rules, other than the details of some stat blocks.
Thing is, published 5E Advebtures call for Race-modified NPCs all the time, and it is a strict design goal that the MM provides an equivalent for all 2024 MM references in published books, so they have some way to account for Dwarven Vererans and Halfling Archmahws and other such existing references in the corpus.
I was reverse engineering the NPC traits table for the purposes of converting other monsters into potential PC/NPC species. But projects like the one @Parmandur linked have done way better on that score!I think we are using that word differently then. There is nothing to reverse engineer in that table. I mean there is no math involved, it is just a list of changes that don't effect anything. It doesn't tell you how that effects CR at all. So if you are comparing it to the Monster Features table then I would simply call that engineering what those changes mean for CR, not reverse engineering. But maybe that is just me!
I still wouldn't call that reverse engineering, from my understanding of the word. However, that is largely irrelevant, I understand what your saying.I was reverse engineering the NPC traits table for the purposes of converting other monsters into potential PC/NPC species. But projects like the one @Parmandur linked have done way better on that score!
Oh, that part seems relatively clear to me: let's take the Orc, since we know that's definitely covered by this (I would suspect drow, Deep Gnoems, and Duergar at least, too, maybe Lozardfolk or Troglodytes...):That could be; however, I can't understand how that relates to this statement:
The stat blocks of monsters with the Humanoid creature type have been redesigned to represent any Humanoid species
This sounds like stat blocks to me and not a table or template. However, I am likely just reading to much into vague wording by the Beyond author.