D&D 5E Zooming In On Monsters of the Multiverse [UPDATED!]

Earlier, WotC announced Mordenkainen Presents Monsters of the Multiverse, a new D&D compilation of monster material from previous products updated to a new format. These screen grabs are as good as I could get them. They're not terribly clear, but you can make more out than in the original images.

The screenshots show the original entry in Volo's Guide to Monsters next to the new entry in Mordenkainen Presents Monsters of the Multiverse.


Screen Shot 2021-09-27 at 12.29.19 AM.png


Screen Shot 2021-09-27 at 12.30.30 AM.png

Screen Shot 2021-09-27 at 12.31.47 AM.png




UPDATE -- a cleaned up version of the War Priest has appeared on imgur.

1nFCAVj.png
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

Russ Morrissey

Russ Morrissey

OB1

Jedi Master
So it seems that this statblock is being used in The Wild Beyond The Witchlight. I don't want to read it in depth, picked it up for my eldest kid to run for me and others, but I can't find anything that says that the combat-magic-as-abilities can be affected by Counterspell anymore.

Like I said I don't want to delve too deeply into the book, but has Counterspell become of limited utility for PCs and basically a spell that it primarily meant to be used against the characters? Or is there some sort of disclamer "all of these should be considered spells, determine level via method X" somewhere?
IF WBtW is the template there will be plenty of opportunity to Counterspell. The monster statblocks either call out Spellcasting as the action or Ranged Spell Attack in the description of the action.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


OB1

Jedi Master
For Spellcasting action, it's like this, so I would rule that the spell is cast at it's normal level.
The ***** casts one of the following spells, requiring no spell components and using Wisdom as the spellcasting ability (spell save DC 13):
At will: commune with nature (as an action), meld into stone, stone shape
1/day: Otto’s irresistible dance

For the Ranged Spell Attack action, if it mentions a specific spell (like polymorph) I'd rule it uses the spells normal level. If it doesn't, I'd rule it's 3rd or below.
 

Azzy

KMF DM
For Spellcasting action, it's like this, so I would rule that the spell is cast at it's normal level.
The ***** casts one of the following spells, requiring no spell components and using Wisdom as the spellcasting ability (spell save DC 13):
At will: commune with nature (as an action), meld into stone, stone shape
1/day: Otto’s irresistible dance

For the Ranged Spell Attack action, if it mentions a specific spell (like polymorph) I'd rule it uses the spells normal level. If it doesn't, I'd rule it's 3rd or below.
Completely off-topic, but I was amused. My first thought at seeing "*****" in your post was that it was a censored naughty word. Though I quickly realized that it wasn't the case, I still had a bit of fun coming up with ideas for what "*****" is a replacement for. 😁
 

What do you mean if we ever get the subclass?

If a subclass option becomes available in a new book was there never anyone in the world who was of that subclass before? And now if there suddenly are people who are taking that for the first time, how does that happen?

In a world where NPCs are only ever created with PC rules I don't see how new options could be introduced without completing rewriting the campaign world.

Not all races, but there are certainly some races that could be PC races which don't have rules for them yet. We've gotten many new races as PC options since 5e came out and yet those were all available to be NPCs before they were options.

Was that unfair?
if a concept is only ever an npc but is a cool idea to play one then I want it to be a subclass you follow but this does not mean we would ever get it.

depends on the setting.

I never said that I want something that gives the illusion for relevant bits like a mirror match boss fight, not every npc made with player systems I do not want hypercomplex for no reason.

name them as I can't think of any off the top of my head.

it is not quite the right word but was the closest word.
 

ad_hoc

(he/they)
if a concept is only ever an npc but is a cool idea to play one then I want it to be a subclass you follow but this does not mean we would ever get it.

But aren't you arguing that there can never be a 'cool idea' for an NPC not using PC rules because you are restricting them to PC rules only?

name them as I can't think of any off the top of my head.

Genasi, Aasimar, Firbolg, Goblin, Goliath, Triton, Lizardfolk, etc. etc.
 

But aren't you arguing that there can never be a 'cool idea' for an NPC not using PC rules because you are restricting them to PC rules only?



Genasi, Aasimar, Firbolg, Goblin, Goliath, Triton, Lizardfolk, etc. etc.
I never said using pc rule I said a diet pc how difficult is it to see I do not mean 3e madness?


but those do have rules for them.
 

ad_hoc

(he/they)
I never said using pc rule I said a diet pc how difficult is it to see I do not mean 3e madness?

I have been having trouble understanding you but now I have completely lost you.


but those do have rules for them.

Did they exist in your game world before they had PC rules? They weren't in the PHB. And if they were in the world isn't that unfair that players couldn't play as them?
 

I have been having trouble understanding you but now I have completely lost you.




Did they exist in your game world before they had PC rules? They weren't in the PHB. And if they were in the world isn't that unfair that players couldn't play as them?
I am suggesting stat blocks that when played by a dm feel like your fighting a PC but are really stripped down and far more simple to operate does this translate now?

no, but I would cut elves, dwarves and halfling as I find them overdone. they get added later so it is fine along as I get them I am good.
 

ad_hoc

(he/they)
I am suggesting stat blocks that when played by a dm feel like your fighting a PC but are really stripped down and far more simple to operate does this translate now?

no, but I would cut elves, dwarves and halfling as I find them overdone. they get added later so it is fine along as I get them I am good.

Is that not exactly what is being presented in the updated books?
 


pukunui

Legend
We already have NPCs that can do things the PCs can’t. Look at the champion from Volo’s, for instance. They can do an extra 2d6 damage if they have more than half their hit points.

My Friday group made an alliance with one last night. When I pointed out this feature, one of my players said “I want that ability!”

It immediately made me think of this thread and the complaints about giving NPC spellcasters abilities the PCs can’t have.
 

I don’t think the Demon Lord and Archdevil statblocks will be removed, and I don’t get why people think they would. They are a big part of the multiverse after all.
 

I don’t think the Demon Lord and Archdevil statblocks will be removed, and I don’t get why people think they would. They are a big part of the multiverse after all.
They're not "monsters" as such, but individuals.

Removing them makes room for more general monsters that DMs will have more use for, monsters that have only appeared in adventures and not general monster books...

If we are getting a Planescape product in the near future, putting them there instead makes a lot of sense.


That's not to say they won't be there, but I would much rather see them moved over to a Planescape product and make room for more general creatures in this product.
 


They’re not creatures you could encounter anywhere in the multiverse. They don’t, for example, exist in Ravnica.
Neither does the Astral Dreadnaught on the cover.
Fiends are common to the D&D multiverse and the Lords among them especially. They are also very useful in games as big major villains.
I am pretty sure they won’t be removed, but they might have redone stat locks.
 

Charlaquin

Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)
Neither does the Astral Dreadnaught on the cover.
Fiends are common to the D&D multiverse and the Lords among them especially. They are also very useful in games as big major villains.
I am pretty sure they won’t be removed, but they might have redone stat locks.
We’ll see, I guess, but I got the impression they were aiming for setting-agnostic monsters, which the demon princes and archdevils are not.
 



Urriak Uruk

Gaming is fun, and fun is for everyone
No the Demon lords and Archdevils are pretty setting agnostic. More so then a lot of monsters.

I'm in agreement with others that the book is unlikely to include names characters. The original Monster Manual doesn't really, and this seems very much like a book meant for folks who want "Core Rules." Meaning, no named characters or anything setting-specific.
 

Visit Our Sponsor

Level Up!

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top