D&D (2024) Man I hate the organization of the 2024 Monster Manual

[Umbran]

Or, you go back to playing the older games (with a few house-rules stolen from the newer one, like how the OSR games work)

Please consider how much this looks like partisan threadcrapping.
Then, consider not making this a habit. Thanks.

 

[Clint_L]

At the risk of inviting people to beat this dead horse some more, the idea is that orcs, elves, and other such playable humanoid species are represented by the generic "profession" stat blocks (the mages, commoners, warriors, druids, priests, cultists, performers, etc).

I am aware. I still think there should be a couple representatives of each of the major species in the MM.

 

[Yaarel]

Something that was suggested to me that I thought was crazy, was to organize it by creature type. While it seems nuts, I feel like it would actually work really well. You could break it up by chapter, with an introduction going into the description of each type. It would help the OP's situation a bit, since you'd have all fiends together, but they'd have to dig through both demons and devils to find what they want.

Organizing by creature type is how I would do it. Then all the Humanoids are together, the Dragons are together, even the Constructs including Golems are in one place.

 

[pukunui]

I am aware. I still think there should be a couple representatives of each of the major species in the MM.

One reason is that they don't want the playable humanoid species to be monocultural in the generic form of the game. They will be including those in the campaign setting books - so like the classic Drow Priestess of Lolth will be in the upcoming FR book as a representative of the Menzoberranzan drow culture.

 

[MichaelSomething]

I did that with the original Bugbears & Borderlands, and a lot of feedback is they wanted it back to what they are used to. Which makes sense, I suppose. If you're familiar with where to find something, even if it's organized better later, it's harder to break that programming. Like grocery stores. I know exactly where to find stuff because I've been there hundreds of times. But when they changed it, even though the organization made more sense, it was harder.

Workflow

xkcd.com

 

[Tonguez]

One reason is that they don't want the playable humanoid species to be monocultural in the generic form of the game. They will be including those in the campaign setting books - so like the classic Drow Priestess of Lolth will be in the upcoming FR book as a representative of the Menzoberranzan drow culture.

What I'd have liked to see is species feats or templates that could be applied on top of the NPC stat blocks in order to capture some flavour in the generic mishmash

 

[pukunui]

What I'd have liked to to see species feats or templates that could be applied on top of the NPC stat blocks in order to capture some flavour in the generic mishmash

Yes, that would have been nice - similar to what they did in the 2014 DMG.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

My guess is they hoped most DMs wouldn't care how the MM was laid out because they'll be using D&D Beyond (or some other digital tool that renders book layout irrelevant).

I could not agree less with this. I think they just legit thought this way was better. I will tell as a Beyond user having it laid out this way is not easier cause we also have to use the book layouts.

 

[pukunui]

I could not agree less with this. I think they just legit thought this way was better. I will tell as a Beyond user having it laid out this way is not easier cause we also have to use the book layouts

Not when you're using the DDB monster database or the encounter builder or Maps or ...

 

[Bae'zel]

Yeah it's an odd omission that they didn't include page numbers in all of the indices at the back.

However, the entire book IS alphabetically organized, so if you look up "Glabezru" under "Devils" (or whatever), you then just flip to the Gs.

Or, as I'm going to do, take a fine-tipped sharpie and write the page numbers myself.