D&D General The Revised Monster Manual was released 1 year ago today! How have you liked facing down and using the new monsters?

[djotaku]

The ToV MM is superior in every way. It bugs me because it was the MM previews that made me give 2024 a shot, but in the end they did not do anything to make the vast majority of D&D monsters interesting to run or fight. They may be "better balanced for their CRs" but they are still boring bags of HP.

Between the time I ordered my D&D 2024 books than their actual delivery I moved over to Tales of the Valiant. I agree, like you, that Kobold Press has better monster design overall. They get REALLY creative in the MV 2 and their Tome of Beast books are awesome, too.

So, to the OP's original question - I love the new MM over the old one. The art is awesome and finding monsters is way easier. But I've barely used it since it came out.

 

[Retreater]

I got my set of all three core books on June 29, 2025 - using store credit at my local game store. I've flipped through them once.
I haven't found them especially interesting or worth revisiting over the 2014 books.

 

[plecostomus]

My players thanked me for a "relaxing" CR4 Banshee fight after they fought a CR3 Wight just beforehand so I feel like I don't know anything.

I like the updated Giant Scorpion, which exists to kill arrogant Level 3 adventurers with its tail. How dare you look down on a bug!

 

[saviirkad]

I can't speak on it in practice because my only use for D&D monsters since the book released was to compete against a lvl 18+ party that I had empowered well beyond what the usual CR 30 creature can oppose. I used a lot of 3PP content that were designed around adding exceptional challenges, or modified the statblocks so much that they weren't representative of their base statblocks at all.

On paper, I do like it quite a bit more than the 2014 MM. I do lament the reduced lore, but that's really my only complaint.

I'll still also be using 3PP sources to supplement it too. I really like the monster books that Kobold Press put out. I don't really think they make good replacements of the MM, not even the ToV MMs, but as supplements I've not seen any better.

 

[billd91]

I think the 2024 Monster Manual is a bit of a mixed bag, leaning toward overall improvement. Some monsters are definitely better, some (like the lycanthropes) definitely worse. Some are a lateral change that is still kind of weird (like the goblinoids now being fey and thus immune to hold person). I definitely like many of the legendary action changes though a think a reduction in the ability to move via legendary actions means boss monsters are more likely to be boxed in by more numerous PCs.

I find the organizational changes frustrating at times. I preferred my groupings of demons, devils, dragons, elementals, etc rather than looking them up by their individual types because it was then easier to compare them and have introductions common to the creature type (of which there are multiple pages in the 2014 MM). There's also the inconsistency in the application of the organization - for example, dragons all get sorted under their color (Black Dragon under Black, Red Dragon under Red), but the Slaadi aren't - they'll all still under Slaadi. Similar with Mephits.

 

[Warnavick]

... Some are a lateral change that is still kind of weird (like the goblinoids now being fey and thus immune to hold person)...

I believe that's just those particular goblins in the monster manual. I think they are supposed to represent a primordial or home plane version, but any other goblinoid will just use a regular humanoid statblock like Bandit or Guard. At least as a base template before you change it to be more goblin.

 

[OB1]

is that due to the monsters or the new encounter rules?

The monsters, as we have primarily been playing Infinate Staircase and Rime of the Frostmaiden, and are using the encounters straight out of the book but with the 2024 versions of the mosters.