D&D 5E Monster Manual Expanded II Second Edition News and Updates


log in or register to remove this ad


Nixlord

DM's Guild Author
Publisher
So they would not be included in a hypothetical Monster Manual Expanded 4?

Hi Rabulias, I just want to clarify my earlier response. The stat blocks definitely won't be part of Monster Manual Expanded IV.

But depending on the success of the Patreon, I might entertain a print-on-demand version once I've accumulated enough entries and have it released on DrivethruRPG (with high-tier'ed patrons only needing to pay the printing and shipping fees).

Also, I may reuse some art pieces. I mean, that was the point of my Patreon, to be able to have more art commissioned for my DM's Guild products. But I will always try to have the Patreon and MME art versions slightly different.
 

Nixlord

DM's Guild Author
Publisher
Here's one more of the last few art pieces coming to the final update of Monster Manual Expanded Second Edition, the bewitching Satyr Trickster!

And if you haven't done so yet, please check out the new Dragonix's Deadly Denizens at https://www.patreon.com/dm_dragonix!

Satyr Trickster.png
 





Micah Sweet

Legend
Since you said you are updating your books to WotC's new monster format, does that mean you'll be removing a lot of spells from spellcasting monsters and otherwise simplifying your statblocks like they did? I feel a lot of nuance and worldbuilding was removed when they did that, and would be sorry to see it go from your excellent books.
 

Nixlord

DM's Guild Author
Publisher
Since you said you are updating your books to WotC's new monster format, does that mean you'll be removing a lot of spells from spellcasting monsters and otherwise simplifying your statblocks like they did? I feel a lot of nuance and worldbuilding was removed when they did that, and would be sorry to see it go from your excellent books.

I already did. As an old-school DM myself, I am not a fan of the changes they made with spellcasting. However, I do understand why they did it. This was a business and marketing decision that I couldn't ignore. I have to follow the latest styles and standards they set. I still did my best though to make the spell-like abilities and spellcasting list palatable to old-school DMs (more spells, more fun/enjoyable spell-like abilities).

I still made the old MME version available though for those who prefer it.
 

Scottius

Explorer
Since you said you are updating your books to WotC's new monster format, does that mean you'll be removing a lot of spells from spellcasting monsters and otherwise simplifying your statblocks like they did? I feel a lot of nuance and worldbuilding was removed when they did that, and would be sorry to see it go from your excellent books.
I agree regarding WOTC's decision s with monster changes. They already removed far too many spell casting capabilities from monsters compared to previous editions. I'm glad I have my POD copies of the Monster Manual Expanded books even if I do plan on repurchasing the new versions to support Nixlord's excellent work.
 


Micah Sweet

Legend
I already did. As an old-school DM myself, I am not a fan of the changes they made with spellcasting. However, I do understand why they did it. This was a business and marketing decision that I couldn't ignore. I have to follow the latest styles and standards they set. I still did my best though to make the spell-like abilities and spellcasting list palatable to old-school DMs (more spells, more fun/enjoyable spell-like abilities).

I still made the old MME version available though for those who prefer it.
I understand your position. It’s the main reason why I don't like WotC's changes, as they kinda force 3PP to follow suit or fall behind, and I like a lot of 3PP much more than I like WotC.
 


Micah Sweet

Legend
I prefer the change and am glad this will fallow the new style. Makes things easier.
You and I clearly stand on opposite sides of this issue. I don't think I've seen a change discussion recently you haven't come in to support. For my part, I obviously dislike most of it. In this case, WotC's bad (to me) ideas are, due to their prominence as the IP holder, spilling over to force people who make things I do like to follow them.
 

You and I clearly stand on opposite sides of this issue. I don't think I've seen a change discussion recently you haven't come in to support. For my part, I obviously dislike most of it. In this case, WotC's bad (to me) ideas are, due to their prominence as the IP holder, spilling over to force people who make things I do like to follow them.
I like change.
 


For its own sake? No evaluation necessary? Newer is NOT always better.
Yes I like change for it’s own sake. I always like having more options, and if I don’t prefer the new one, I can always just use the old or do my own spin.

Edit: should add this is for games, change for changes sake is not something I prefer in my own life.
 

Thommy H-H

Explorer
It's so cool that we get to read the exact same argument in every thread of this forum. Big, big fan of seeing the same handful of people post the same back and forth over and over, even when it's barely related to the topic at hand.
 

Micah Sweet

Legend
It's so cool that we get to read the exact same argument in every thread of this forum. Big, big fan of seeing the same handful of people post the same back and forth over and over, even when it's barely related to the topic at hand.
I feel we have to hold WotC at least partially to blame here. This is what they've decided to do, and given us to talk about.
 

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top