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

[jasper]

Didn't they promise monster creation rules in one of their videos? if so, again the talking heads of Wotc are lying to us.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Wow. They actually cut out the monster-creation rules entirely? That's...impressive. Not in a good way, but still.

 

[Selas]

Didn't they promise monster creation rules in one of their videos? if so, again the talking heads of Wotc are lying to us.

They did, but the fact that they were not present in the DMG and the MM--along their comments--seems to point out to either they're still fleshing them out for player use, or likely something to include for an updated XGE/TCE book

Keep in mind, the focus of the 2024 revision was streamlining ease of use for new players/DMs, and this was one of their marketing points

 

[Sword of Spirit]

In context, it's worth noting that the 4e version in DMG1 took

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).

Yeah, you're right. She's CR 4 rather than 3. I hadn't eaten for a while when I was finishing that up, and my brain was feeling it.

 

[Hussar]

What useful material? An overly long explanation of how to run an adventure?

Again, you are asking for something that virtually no one actually wanted and then refusing to accept explanations for why you aren't getting what you want. I'm not really sure how much more evidence you need. No one was asking for this. Virtually no one ever used the rules. No one was ever clamoring for extended or updated monster creation rules.

People WERE clamoring for more lore. For extended lore. For WotC to pour it on with lore. Which is exactly what we got.

Why are you shocked here?

 

[Umbran]

Fair enough, all I can say is that reasoning does nothing to earn my respect or my money.

Mod Note:

Yes, but we knew that already, didn't we?

At this point you are getting reported across multiple threads for your growing habit of content-free negativity. While it is fair to not like WotC products, spending the time to dump on them in every single thread is not constructive for anyone else.

EN World needs to be more than a place for you to leave steaming piles of dislike. If you aren't up to that, you probably want to start avoiding the D&D forum - go talk about A5E, or some other games you actually like, please.

 

[Reynard]

Again, you are asking for something that virtually no one actually wanted and then refusing to accept explanations for why you aren't getting what you want. I'm not really sure how much more evidence you need. No one was asking for this. Virtually no one ever used the rules. No one was ever clamoring for extended or updated monster creation rules.

People WERE clamoring for more lore. For extended lore. For WotC to pour it on with lore. Which is exactly what we got.

Why are you shocked here?

You keep making this assertion with no evidence despite other people also lamenting its loss.

It is okay that you don't care, but asserting "no one cares" isn't convincing.

 

[Hussar]

You keep making this assertion with no evidence despite other people also lamenting its loss.

It is okay that you don't care, but asserting "no one cares" isn't convincing.

I'm not saying "no one cares". I AM saying, not enough people care. There is a difference. Again, it's fairly easy. You post a link to a thread lamenting the lack of better monster creation rules from the past ten years and I'll post 3 lamenting the lack of lore. Which do you think would run out first?

Look, I get not liking not getting something you want in 5e. Good grief, I'm still waiting for a freaking Warlord. But, guess what? Join the club. The plurality has spoken, and, well, you got the short end of the stick this time.

 

[Maxperson]

I also said I wish I had the rules. Both things can be true. I like ice cream, I don't need ice cream. And ... now that I write this I'm kind of sad there is no ice cream in the house.

On an related note, did we ever have such rules before 5E? Something other than "copy an existing monster and tweak"?

It isn't about what you or I need, though. 5.5e, especially the DMG, was supposedly written for new DMs. Not experienced ones who don't need rules for monster creation. Monster creation rules would be invaluable for new DMs.

 

[Hussar]

It isn't about what you or I need, though. 5.5e, especially the DMG, was supposedly written for new DMs. Not experienced ones who don't need rules for monster creation. Monster creation rules would be invaluable for new DMs.

Why?

Most new DM's aren't going to be creating monsters. They certainly aren't going to be wading through ten pages and twenty steps to do so. Not when you've got a spiffy new Monster Manual right there to use. So, in what way are monster creation rules "invaluable" for new DM's?

And, if these rules are "invaluable" why is this the first time anyone's actually talked about them? Why haven't we been hearing endlessly about the need for these invaluable rules?

Funnily enough, we managed just fine through B/E, 1e, and 2e without monster creation rules. The 3e rules were incredibly dense and complex and even the professionals couldn't use them correctly. There were endless threads discussing how bespoke monsters in both Dungeon and various modules were created wrong. That was one of the primary motivations for simplifying the rules in 4e. But, 4e made the rules too transparent, and people don't want that. So, we got the 5e rules, very few of which actually match up with actual monsters, meaning that the rules in the DMG were baroque, overcomplicated, and most of the time, gave faulty results.

So, in what way are these rules "invaluable"?