D&D (2024) Why No Monster Creation Rules in D&D 2024?

[Imaro]

Unless there's a poll with actual numbers, please don't assume that most people just happen to agree with your opinion on this. I've seen plenty of folks here you do see it as a problem.

You asked a question and I gave my answer. Some assumption in this discussion is necessary....plenty of folks here is still a drop of water in an ocean compared to the actual number of D&D players. You are claiming it's a problem so it is on you to present evidence that it actually is.

 

[Micah Sweet]

You asked a question and I gave my answer. Some assumption in this discussion is necessary....plenty of folks here is still a drop of water in an ocean compared to the actual number of D&D players. You are claiming it's a problem so it is on you to present evidence that it actually is.

You said its a miniscule number of posters in this thread, which conflicts with the statement to which I just responded.

 

[Imaro]

You said its a miniscule number of posters in this thread, which conflicts with the statement to which I just responded.

Lol...OK who are the plenty of folks you've seen taking your position...

 

[Sword of Spirit]

The fact that a tool is rarely used or rarely even needed is only one factor in determining whether it should be made available.

Another factor is how necessary such a tool is when those situations do come up.

Not proving necessary tools for a task means the task can't be performed. With current D&D math, tools are required to create novel monsters that fit the math. Not providing them means novel monsters can't be created. Deciding not to provide them means deciding novel monsters will not be made.

Is that a good decision for the D&D publishers to be making?

Now, a good compromise would be releasing a tool outside the DMG. I'm not opposed to digital tools, but I'd prefer (instead or also) a written tool where I could see everything it's doing and not have to extract it from a possibly opaque digital implementation.

Truth, but 1) I'm impressed if one of the 500+ monsters isn't at least similar to your idea, and 2) since there are so many reskinning options, making your monster from scratch is very likely reinventing the wheel, anyway.

Got an idea for what I could have reskinned to create my yuki-on-na? (Post #6)

EDIT: I want to clarify that while my opposition to WotC decisions is based on principle, it is also a practical matter. I created the yuki-on-na conversion because I need it for an adventure I'm making. I used it in the post because the timing aligned. If this were 2030 and I only had the 2024 materials, I would have been out of luck.

 

[Quickleaf]

I am curious if the designers have said, in blog posts or videos or whatever, why precisely they decided to not include full monster design rules in the 2024 DMG or MM? (And no, the DMG "rules" presented are not what I am talking about.)

Is it because they are going to appear somewhere else later? Or is there no actual system behind it all? Or is there a system but the team doesn't think DMs can handle it?

If there is no word from the designers or WotC as a whole, what do you think the reason is?

There is absolutely a system – lots of references Jeremy Crawford made to spreadsheets/maths used internally in interviews. I've posted them before, don't have time to look them up again.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Lol...OK who are the plenty of folks you've seen taking your position...

Fair enough. I don't see how it matters either way.

 

[GMMichael]

Got an idea for what I could have reskinned to create my yuki-on-na? (Post #6)

Mashup the basilisk and green hag and you might be in the ballpark. You'll forgive me for not having encyclopedic knowledge of any monster manuals after 2002 or so. Based on the quick CR 3 lookups I did, the yuki' looks a bit overpowered (for what it's worth).

 

[Reynard]

There is absolutely a system – lots of references Jeremy Crawford made to spreadsheets/maths used internally in interviews. I've posted them before, don't have time to look them up again.

That's almost worse. If it exists, why not give it to us?

 

[dave2008]

That's almost worse. If it exists, why not give it to us?

They attempted to in the 2014 DMG, but it wasn't perfect. Why they didn't try to improve on it, IDK. I personally am now thinking the are trying to make it a DDB exclusive thing.

 

[Quickleaf]

That's almost worse. If it exists, why not give it to us?

I don’t know either. I’m sure other folks have ideas about why WotC chooses not to be transparent with their monster design/math process.

I can offer one insight…from something Goblin something blog… interview with Jeremy where he describes their internal process of translating conditions into representative damage with “milestone spells.” Example was ghoul’s paralyzing is like Hold Person, which is 2nd level spell, which their reference milestone spell for 2nd level is Scorching Ray, so they added effective damage 2d6x3 (21) to ghoul when calculating its CR.

It’s an approach. It’s not without flaws.