D&D 5E New Organization of Mordenkainen's Monsters of the Multiverse- but not really

[Scars Unseen]

That's true, but I think the odds of an in-game, heat-of-the-moment "I can't find this monster" are probably highest when you see it listed in an adventure, in bold, with no page reference. If you're doing your prep you have all the time you need to find what you're looking for. If the group grinds to a halt for 20 minutes while you look for the monster, that's not good.

I think QR codes for stat blocks and a phone app would fix that problem pretty handily.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Clearly the correct way to organize a Monster Manual is in a three ring binder format with one monster per page so that every DM can organize them however they want! /sarcasm

There are so many ways to organize a book like this. I just want decent indexes and then I don't have to care about organization. Give me an alphabetical index, an index by CR, and an index by creature type. A creature type -> CR -> alphabetical index would be quite nice, as would a CR -> creature type -> alphabetical. Creature type so that when I'm looking for inspiration for particular types for an adventure I can just look there, CR so that I have a rough idea of the basic range of difficulty I'm looking for.

I actually liked the Monstrous Compendium, but I understand exactly how crazy I am.

 

[Cadence]

Just got my copy.

It's really odd to me how the various PC analogs are scattered around and their power levels.

The Wizards are great organizationally being all together, but why do the different schools range from 8d8 hp, DC 13, CR 3 to 22d8 hp, DC 15, CR 9)?

For the others, why are some by class name (Bard) and others not (Archer, Archdruid, Champion, Martial Arts Adept, and Master Thief?). Some of it annoyed me in the back of the MM, but having to look for them all over might be great for running a module, but is the worst for building one.

My kingdom (or at least $49.99) for a Tome of NPCs giving a sample of them at different levels arranged by class.

 

[Scars Unseen]

I actually liked the Monstrous Compendium, but I understand exactly how crazy I am.

Hey, I'll strap on that straight jacket right along with you. Someone mentioned 2 page write-ups as being a solution to the alphabetizing issue that would be a waste of paper, but honestly, I'd be 100% for returning to small releases of well detailed monsters in loose leaf format, and you're telling me the solution to one of its two main problems is make them more detailed? Yes and thank you.

 

[Lyxen]

My kingdom (or at least $49.99) for a Tome of NPCs giving a sample of them at different levels arranged by class.

It's not exactly by class (maybe slightly more by occupation since we are talking NPCs who are not necessarily adventurers), but I did something of the kind way back then after finding the same kind of holes in 5e. I wanted to update it, but found out taht it was sufficient for my campaigns. Here it is, on DMs Guild, and the good news is that it is way cheaper than your budget.