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

[Scottius]

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.

 

[Nixlord]

FYI, there's a Monster Sale right now.

 

[Micah Sweet]

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.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

I prefer the change and am glad this will fallow the new style. Makes things easier.

 

[Micah Sweet]

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.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

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.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I like change.

For its own sake? No evaluation necessary? Newer is NOT always better.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

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]

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]

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.