Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mirrorrorrim" data-source="post: 9687306" data-attributes="member: 7040132">I believe the 2024 books are intended to be the new baseline for the future, with the intent to bring new players into the fold now that D&D is blowing up in pop culture. With that need in mind, alphabetical by name is the best way to organize the book, so in the middle of a game when it is most time-sensitive, you can flip straight to the monster during a game session. I did have to get used to Fiends and Dragons not being grouped together, and for all Humanoids to belong to "Jobs", but it has grown on me.Designing encounters ahead of time is not as time-sensitive, and if you don't know what monster you want yet, using the Monster Lists is very helpful. I think they chose the best lists to help with encounter design, whether by Challenge Rating, Habitat, Creature Type or Group. I also understand wishing the page numbers were on the Lists as well, but after further consideration, it feels like it would make the lists messy, and you can already flip to the alphabetical name once you find what you are looking for, or just get the page number from the Index in the front if you don't want to flip.As for other book organization options, organizing by Creature Types or Planar Cosmology is not as universal as one might think. Not all DMs care about official canon for those things. As we've seen in other threads, some people hate some of the Creature Type changes, (like Goblins are Fey and Elves are not?), and would be so annoyed if they had to think to go to a "Fey" Chapter to find Goblins. Organizing by Plane would also not work, as not everyone uses the Great Wheel Cosmology, or uses the Feywild or Shadowfell in the way as depicted in the books.Just my 2cp.(edited for spelling and clarity)</blockquote>

Verification