So Much Art From the 2025 Monster Manual

Here's some preview art from the 2025 Monster Manual, courtesy of Wizards of the Coast's "Everything You Need to Know Video" on the new book.

A classic Faceless Stalker:

A demon of some kind:

Arch-Hags:

Some kobolds:

A Nalfeshnee, perhaps?

A revenant:

Blue dracolich:

Death Knight:

Death tyrant:

Chimera:

Githyanki (with the central warrior recreating a classic pose):

A mummy lord:

A marrow:

A balrog balor:

Mimics:

While I'm tempted to say a tressym, this actually might be a new sphinx design:

Bone fiend:

Sladd:

Rust monster:

Platinum(?) dragon:

Bronze dragon:

Hezrou, perhaps?

Fire giant, not Karlach:

Cloud giants:

Zombies:

Red dragon:

Hags (including a male hag):

Dryads (including a male dryad):

Horned devil:

Incubus and succubus:

Vampires:

Vampire:

Colossus:

Spirit naga:

Copper dragon:

White dragon:

Blue dragon:

Gold dragon:

Black dragon:

 

[Echohawk]

Looking at a lot of these images, I realize that there are LOT of D&D monsters that have mostly passed me by.

AD&D 2nd Edition had 4353 monsters with distinct stat blocks, 3.X Edition had 4291, 4th Edition 5315 and 5th Edition currently has 2890. You could be forgiven if you missed a few.

 

[Hussar]

AD&D 2nd Edition had 4353 monsters with distinct stat blocks, 3.X Edition had 4291, 4th Edition 5315 and 5th Edition currently has 2890. You could be forgiven if you missed a few.

Fair enough I suppose. But, there's a bunch of critters that are pretty distinctly D&D that I haven't or have barely used. Beholders are something I hadn't used until very recently for example. The only reason I've ever used githyanki is because they were in Phandelver: Shattered Obelisk.

Then again, I'm a big sucker for monster books, so, it's not like I'm short of options.

 

[Azzy]

If you'll forgive the self-promotion, I covered the lamia in some detail in the Monster ENCyclopedia series on this very site.

I love your articles, you do great research.

 

[Tonguez]

If you'll forgive the self-promotion, I covered the lamia in some detail in the Monster ENCyclopedia series on this very site.

You've more than earned the right to selfpromotion when it comes to the Monster ENcyclopedia

 

[Tonguez]

Heh. It's kinda funny. People got very bent out of shape by the 4e version of the Lamia because it was like a swarm of scarabs. Totally new monster with the Lamia name. At the time, I actually had to be reminded that the Lamia existed since, in like all the time I've played or DM'd D&D, I'd never seen one used or even mentioned. It was one of those monsters that just completely passed me by.

Looking at a lot of these images, I realize that there are LOT of D&D monsters that have mostly passed me by.

My obsession with Lamia came from watching Harryhausen movies and reading Conan. The 7ths Voyage of Sinbad (1958) features a woman transformed into a snake-woman and Clash of the Titans (1980) has the snake bodied Medusa. Then theres the Lair of the White Worm (1988) adaption of Bram Stokers story. Then in 1989 the Arcade fighting game Hippodrome came out - one of its playable opponents was a Lamia noble who would constrict and devour defeated opponents

I've used serpent Lamia (and their immortal Queen Nakasha) alot

 

[MNblockhead]

The problem is, no one is ever content with just saying they don't like something and moving on. No. Instead we have page after page of people trying to "prove" that they don't like something because of some sort of concrete reason.

I dunno. I don't really understand the impulse to come in and widdle in other people's cornflakes. I just don't get it. It's been decades now of people endlessly telling me how WotC art is crap. Like I said, I just don't get it. If I don't like something, I just don't talk about it. What's the point in telling people in an art preview thread how much you hate the art? ((Not you, specifically, just the generic "you".)) I mean, I don't like Planescape. I don't. I never have. But, I also don't feel the need to jump into every Planescape thread and tell everyone how Planescape is crap. I just don't understand I guess.

I want to talk about the stuff I like. Not really interested in talking about stuff I don't like.

I get it. I've certainly have been bummed out by the constant negativity in discussions about something I like and am even excited about. There are a lot of threads I avoid and I've occasionally taken a break from forums during particularly contentious periods. But unless folks are breaking the rules of the forum they are entitled to share their dislike of things I like. All you can really do is scroll past stuff you don't want to engage in, block people you don't want to engage with, or start a plus (+) thread.

 

[MNblockhead]

Found this on a youtube video called Dungeon Dudes. Apparently, the (originally from Planescape) Animal Lords are making a return to D&D in this book, as CR20 Celestials! Depicted are the Cat and Wolf Lords, but the stat blocks have three variants of the creature (Forager, Hunter and Sage) that can be applied to any type of animal's Animal Lord.
View attachment 392046


So it gets more black because it breathes fire and walks on fire?
You know... FIRE... The thing Red Dragons are famously IMMUNE to?
I think this shows how little logic there was behind these redesigns...

Not burned. Just accumulated soot. The sooty reds are just down on their luck and don't have a clan of worshipful kobolds to apply Rutland's Hearth and Dragon Scale conditioning cleaner to them regularly.

 

[BB Shockwave]

A behir and a Beholder. Not new art was from the PHB

I saw that image and was so happy thinking "Wow, a Beholder with a beard fighting a magic item using Behir, that is awesome!"
Imagine my disappointment when I learned it was just polymorphed people. I would have preferred them to be smart magic item using spellcasting monsters. I mean, there used to be such a thing as a Beholder Mage, though they had to put their central eye out to cast spells...

And here I thought the new art for the red dragon made them look jacked. Dang bro, this guy doesn’t live in the gym, he is the gym!

I am now kinda sad Wizkids did not wait until now to make the Tarrasque mini, this looks better than the original 5E art. I think it is the 2014 Godzilla effect -making the eyes smaller and the legs thicker conveys it better how gigantic this thing is.

 

[Faolyn]

You weren't the only one. The D&D movie creators must have thought so too, since the rust monsters in the movie are also little bugs. It's possible these are just meant to be juvenile ones, but I quite like them this size. I also like the way they look here and don't really understand why WotC has redesigned them to have shiny gold carapaces.

Maybe they were inspired by golden tortoise beetles.

On a related note, I would personally like to see the return of 4e's iron dragon.

Bring back all of the ferrous dragons, I say!

 

[Faolyn]

I just prefer this style of skull-like face for the black dragon:
View attachment 391900

(And yes, I'm aware of the irony of me complaining previously about more spiky bits when it looks like the black dragon now has fewer spiky bits! C'est la vie!)

I've always just wondered how it was supposed to get food into its mouth with those horns in the way!