D&D (2024) Monster Manual 2025 Stat Block Compilation

This thread contains a compilation of the Monster Manual 2025 stat blocks which have been previewed publicly so far.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

Probably the violinist, who is an elf.

Well I mean there is supposed to be multiple performer Statblocks from memory.

 

[Chaltab]

Well I mean there is supposed to be multiple performer Starbucks from memory.

Are they bringing overpriced coffee to your local dungeon?

 

[MonsterEnvy]

Are they bringing overpriced coffee to your local dungeon?

Auto correct sucks sometimes.

 

[Charlaquin]

Maybe. It would be more economical to have a "commoner" statblock and then a little chart with professions and the skills those folks likely have.

That would probably be a more efficient way to do it from a page space standpoint, but it would probably be less user-friendly, since if you want stats for any professional you’d need to modify a stat block instead of having one ready to go. Again, barely an inconvenience for experienced DMs, but might be a significant annoyance for a newbie.

I mean, are newbies going to be slaughtering performers in the street? What is the purpose of a statblock other than to put the creature or NPC in a fight?

Probably not, but they might want performer bystanders and/or allies.

 

[Reynard]

Well I mean there is supposed to be multiple performer Starbucks from memory.

 

[dave2008]

One thing I'm iffy on about the Arch-Hag is that 333 average HP seems pretty low. My level 12 party can tear through that much HP in a couple rounds.

It is pretty high HP for a CR 21 (under the 2014 rules at least) and the hag has some respectable resistances and immunities.

Depending out the number of PCs in your group this is not that far off from a Hard encounter. 6 level 12 PCs have a 28,200 XP budget, so the Hag is right in that range with 33,000 XP

 

[dave2008]

I have been doing a deep dive into BSG lately, I forgot how good that show was.

 

[Reynard]

I have been doing a deep dive into BSG lately, I forgot how good that show was.

Nerd confession: I LOVED that show, but I have never seen the last half of the last season. I was so scared that it would end poorly (as in poorly made) that I could not bring myself to watch it. I opted to instead remember the "good times."

 

[dave2008]

Nerd confession: I LOVED that show, but I have never seen the last half of the last season. I was so scared that it would end poorly (as in poorly made) that I could not bring myself to watch it. I opted to instead remember the "good times."

I may be in a similar situation. I've been watching youtube clips of classic battles and deep dives into ship design. But it made me wonder, did I finish the series? It doesn't help that I watched the original series too and, despite being quite different, I conflate the two sometimes. I know it got a bit weird there at the end, but I can't remember if I finished it out or not. I need to go back and watch it again I think.

 

[abirdcall]

I've found WotC's published 5e adventures to be fairly difficult, and deadly in some cases (Icespire Peak, I'm looking at you). For my homebrew campaigns, I usually have five or six players who are good optimizers, so I'm used to having to beef things up well past the guidelines in the books. I recently finished up a campaign where the group ended at 17th level, and I don't think I used a single "stock" MM creature over the last 20 sessions, except for the occasional random encounter. In another game I inserted the stone giants' canyon from Storm King's Thunder into an existing storyline. The group was again 6 PCs that were a few levels higher than the recommended level, so I ended up doubling the number of giants in all of the encounters, and turning the human barbarians into bugbears. It turned out to be a fairly challenging adventure.

I guess I just assumed that most DMs tweak the difficulty of their encounters based on what their players can do, but I can understand why beginning DMs might have more difficulty if they only stick to what's in the published material. This was one of the things I liked about the 2024 DMG, which had more guidance in this area, as well as more explicit "permission" for DMs to change things as needed to make a fun and challenging game.

My rule of thumb is that 6 PCs are twice as strong as 4 PCs.

One of the many reasons I don't play with that many.

The 2014 DMG had some guidance about the multiplication effect but not sure about 2024.