D&D (2024) Monster manual Fey video up

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

I like most of the changes they’ve talked about and previewed, but I admit that I’m confused about the “monster version is fey/aberration/other creature type, playable option is humanoid” change. We already have playable options for non-humanoid species and they said they’re making more. Why do they feel the need to have this mechanical dissonance between the player option and monster version? And I’m not one of those simulationists that constantly complains about verisimilitude. I generally disagree with those people and prefer what makes the game better. For instance, I prefer the Monsters of the Multiverse’s approach to spells and spell-like abilities more than the original 5e approach, because now I don’t have to look up as many spells as before.

When they had Gith be Aberrations in Planescape I immediately thought they would do an errata on MPMotM and change the player option to Aberration. But, apparently nope. Playable Gith are less alien than their monster counterpart and you/your family has lived on the Material Plane for decades if not generations. Which to me completely gets rid of the appeal of playing a Gith. Isn’t the appeal of being a Gith leaning into that alien background and fantastical life experience (see Lae’zel from BG3)? Without that extraplanar background Gith might as well be another type of elf. Also, a big part of Githyanki lore is that they have to be raised on the Material Plane because time doesn’t pass in the Astral, so with the suggestion of “maybe your Gith has lived most of their life on the Material Plane, that’s why they’re Humanoid” is weird. All Githyanki spend the majority of their early life on the Material Plane. Do they all start out as Humanoid and become Aberrations later because of Astral magic? But they also said Gith were aberrations now because of the Mind Flayer’s eugenics and genetic modification.

I just do not understand the point of this dissonance. We have plenty non-humanoid player options, even for weird creature types like Oozes (Plasmoids) and Constructs (Autognomes). They also turned both player and monster options for Thri-Kreen into Monstrosities in Spelljammer and are keeping that change, so not all weird playable races have this dissonance for whatever reason. There are also other playable species that probably should be shifted into other creature types (Dragonborn to Dragons, Aasimar to Celestials, Tieflings to Fiends, Goliaths to Giants, etc).

Man, I wish they’d kept the Dual Creature Type rule from the Ravenloft UA. It could easily fix most of the problems I have with this.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Agreed. Can't respect it at all. This is in line with the npc spellcasters that have damaging abilities that are not spells for NPCs only. It always detracts from the fantasy when the source material doesn't follow its own rules

Funny... I always find having game rules to follow at all detracts from the fantasy.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I like most of the changes they’ve talked about and previewed, but I admit that I’m confused about the “monster version is fey/aberration/other creature type, playable option is humanoid” change. We already have playable options for non-humanoid species and they said they’re making more. Why do they feel the need to have this mechanical dissonance between the player option and monster version? And I’m not one of those simulationists that constantly complains about verisimilitude. I generally disagree with those people and prefer what makes the game better. For instance, I prefer the Monsters of the Multiverse’s approach to spells and spell-like abilities more than the original 5e approach, because now I don’t have to look up as many spells as before.

When they had Gith be Aberrations in Planescape I immediately thought they would do an errata on MPMotM and change the player option to Aberration. But, apparently nope. Playable Gith are less alien than their monster counterpart and you/your family has lived on the Material Plane for decades if not generations. Which to me completely gets rid of the appeal of playing a Gith. Isn’t the appeal of being a Gith leaning into that alien background and fantastical life experience (see Lae’zel from BG3)?

But probably quite a bit harder to play and to integrate in a given adventure for an average or new Player/DM.

So having that alien PCs should be an opt in, not an opt out.

 

[SkidAce]

View attachment 394016
The bullywug art is charming!

I use bullywugs to represent Everquest's Frogloks.

Likely thats where Everquest took them from anyway.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

But probably quite a bit harder to play and to integrate in a given adventure for an average or new Player/DM.

So having that alien PCs should be an opt in, not an opt out.

Which is why the “exotic playable species” are typically in secondary, non-core books like Spelljammer and Monsters of the Multiverse.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Agreed. Can't respect it at all.

Ok

This is in line with the npc spellcasters that have damaging abilities that are not spells for NPCs only.

I think they at least partially backtracked on that. And I am happy for that.

It always detracts from the fantasy when the source material doesn't follow its own rules

Problem is that NPCs and PCs don't work on the same rule set except since 2008. And I am torn. One one hand I did like the 3e way of having NPCs follow the exact rules as the players, but on the other hand, it was way too much work and the results not always good.

I think to make a symmetrical game work would mean nerfing PC damage output significantly. And one knows how players react to nerfs (look at the early onednd playtests... nearly everything that was looking light a slight nerf was downvoted...).

 

[SkidAce]

People need to watch what Jeremy said rather than relying on interpretation.

They said PC goblins come from a type of goblin that lost its fey connection over time. It's a type of goblin that is different from the monster manual goblin the same way psi-goblins from Phandelver are different. The MM goblin no longer represents the One True Goblin, only a specific type of them.

Your PC goblin is humanoid. Its parents were humanoids. Its community has humanoid goblins. Those are represented by NPC stat blocks, not MM goblins.

So the goblins that lair in the wastelands can be humanoid goblins? I.e. a specific species that have lost their connection to the Fey over time.

 

[dave2008]

Me right now:
View attachment 394024

They also said PCs are designed differently and that just because something has a monster entry as a Fey doesn't men the PC version can't be Humanoid.

So it seems even fiendish gnolls could have Humanoid cousins.

 

[Remathilis]

So the goblins that lair in the wastelands can be humanoid goblins? I.e. a specific species that have lost their connection to the Fey over time.

Sure! By being humanoids they would be treated like any other species (no specific group alignment, uses NPC stat blocks) but absolutely that works.

 

[dave2008]

Agreed. Can't respect it at all. This is in line with the npc spellcasters that have damaging abilities that are not spells for NPCs only. It always detracts from the fantasy when the source material doesn't follow its own rules

It was never part of the "rules" that all spells are in the PHB. Is it really surprising that some people or creatures of spells not commonly available to PCs?