My shill-meter is usually extra sensitive, but you add so much value to the hobby in general that I have zero issue with you talking about these projects that you worked on. Thanks for the disclaimer regardless.
I always appreciate your transparency on what you have worked on and how. I enjoy your view points even when I disagree with a specific point. You are always clear you are presenting your take on things and I learn from them. Thank you for all your insight and input into our hobby.
Looks like a fun group of baddies. The appendix creatures also cool. I like to add these Kobold creatures to my game to keep the long-time D&D players guessing!!!
I prefer when monsters have some attacks/abilities that are more effective than others. This adds a layer of tactics where characters can try to force their foe into a circumstance where they are stuck with the less effective action or have to do something desperate. It adds to the stakes and dynamics of play.
They do seem to be putting a lot of rollable tables in for monster traits In the new MM which is right up your alley, excited to see how useful they are.
Whoa, that Hag section from LevelUp 5e looks amazing! That looks like it could make it so easy to integrate monsters into an adventure or build an adventure around them. I can understand why Wizards is cutting on word count so they can fit more stat blocks and art (obvious selling points), but it's definitely a shame that the narrative and context surrounding them is taking a hit and getting sidelined to the DM to figure out more. Also, signed up for the newsletter. Love the idea of a single-sheet adventure generator, single-sheet 5e, and single-sheet map reference! I plan to run a lot of one-shots in the coming months. Return of the Lazy Dungeon Master has a lot of great stuff, but this might be just what I need.
I still think Quantum Ogre isn't great. Why give players 2 paths if both paths lead to the same encounter? Just use one path in that case. I only do two paths if one leads to starting the encounter in a different way, like a side entrance meaning you encounter a different group of enemies first.
My hunch about how they will save space in the Monster Manual is that whenever the monster has variants, one of the variants will have the lore information and the other variants will have much smaller blocks. Also, the variants will all be in the same art, so that saves space. While I appreciate seeing the monsters in action or in the environment, I think we might not get white background images to use as tokens, sadly
The Fudge section was very interesting. The advice basically is, bend towards fun, but allow the scales to balance back to default. It's more of an intuition built with experience about how and when to basically change things in the world that don't remove agency. It could also be called improvisation - for the betterment of the game, the pacing or narrative, etc. I use hit point reduction as a dial a lot, and i don't feel like i'm fudging anything. I'm doing the right thing given the context, and combat is already very long in 5e.
I run a table with 3 players. So I always have monsters at 3 set Initiatives, even when I do a single Boss monster. This how I do it and it's works like a dream. Multi Monster Encounter: 20 - 15 - Monster group 1 10 - Monster group 2 5 - Monster group 3 1 - Boss Encounter: 20 - Boss Action 15 - 10- Boss Turn 5 - 1- Lair Action (I use Lair actions and Boss Actions or [Villian Actions] from MCDM's Flee Mortals instead of Legendary actions) Then, the players get added in with their rolls, and off we go!
I run something very similar with set initiatives! It's so streamlined and simple and then I can immediately focus on grabbing my players' initiatives.
What I would like to “see next” is a book with more subclasses, species, backgrounds, feats, and (for the DM) variant rules (such as those in the 2014 DMG)
31:31 I would be surprised if WotC added Spell Descriptions to the monsters just for word count reasons, but also they want us using DDB where they include hover hyperlinks for spells. I will often not roll initiative for the monsters and just divide the players initiative counts in a way that will make the combat interesting for all of us.
31:20 that also seems to be approach they are taking in the new Monster Manual 2025. Look at the Mage statblock they previewed for example - it has counterspell and shield in the Reactions block, you don't need to dig through the spell list to find it.
Thanks for those adventure generator pages! I've been on the newsletter for years but I never realised, must have lost it in the deep recesses of my inbox
I started that thread on fudging, and I used the following definition where dice are involved: any time DURING PLAY you choose to roll a die in order to determine some element in play (whether an attack roll or random treasure generation or NPC personality traits) and you decide to do something else after the roll, that's fudging. Note that this does not put a value judgement on fudging -- just a definition. What is more interesting, though, is discussing fudging outside of die rolls.
Kendo get's no credit. Yay Kendo! Dice Roller: I need primary Dice or Diffo color Dice so I hace a With Fear or Rage or whatever that thing is for Daggerheart. For Nimble, there should be a primary die and the ability to do stacking advantage dice that will drop the worst two or best two or three dice for the Stacking Advantages. Thanks for doing what you do for the community!
i am sooooo eager to start playtesting with the newest monsters, as well as the traps and environmental hazards, toward estimating the total challenge per encounter
My issue with the Quantum Ogre is that it has become a meme and people want to look for it to call out, which means a lot of assumptions and false positives. When ending my first 5e campaign I built this big dungeon that had two different paths with different encounters and one of the players made a joking accusation that it was a Quantum Ogre and either path would have ended up the same...and like...why is that the assumption or need to be brought up?
Re Quantum ogre- One idea ive been playing around with is using basic stats from FoF to set up a easy medium hard encounter with medium/ hard often using a hazard/ monument but not assigning creatures to these stats until play /deciding what the momentum/hazard is. Then have a small list of traits from different kinds of creatures that are in the adventure. Similar to secrets and clues. That ways if my pc decide to take a right hand turn and go after the bandits instead of the cultists and depending on pacing i can just put out the bandit tokens attach the appropriate traits and choose a difficulty. Allows for heaps of flexibility as any creature can be the easy/medium/hard encounter all a need to do is add the trait and some flavour descriptions.
I'm glad you brought up fudging without touching the dice. It seems to me that changing die rolls is a quarrelsome topic, but other forms of fudging seem to be more acceptable (or aren't even seen as fudging to begin with). Maybe you're comfortable with changing the dice, maybe you're not, but you don't mind turning failures into 'success at a cost', or you don't mind dropping monsters to 1 hit point mid-fight. At the end of the day you can use whatever method you're comfortable with to unkink the game during play and keep things flowing. That's really the goal.
As long as the players get to feel what they do matters. As a DM I feel like I have to keep encounters running for 3 or 4 rounds but as a player I feel cool if I blast through an encounter in 1 or 2 rounds cos I used a good tactic or rolled a big critt. As a DM I'm wary that I'm not just blanding out an encounter by dragging it out just because of my sense of pacing (Spelling)
My general feeling about fudging is that if it makes the game more fun for the players, I’m willing to do it. If it results in a less fun game or stays neutral, then I’m not. I’ve always been amused by how put out people get about the quantum ogre because at the end of the day, if your players don’t know, then it has no negative impact on their enjoyment of the game, and it was funny you gave an example with players who did know and it still didn’t seem to affect it much at all.
Free5e sounds like it's basically a retro-clone. People familiar with the OSR community will understand the concept immediately -- it'll be an OSRIC for 5e. Sounds like a fantastic idea honestly, I look forward to learning more and supporting the project.
I ran Kragmaw Castle very recently and I really didn't want Gundren to get killed by King Groll. I let the plyers roll with advantage to stop King Groll, I set the DC based on a die roll and it wasn't looking good so I figured the most I feel comfortable fudging dice is when I give a player inspiration because I want them to succeed in a given moment. So I gave myself one last roll to see if I could bend fate but it wasn't enough so we all had to agree that that was Gundren's fate. A payer later asked me how I felt about retconning his turn so he could use hold person instead of what he chose first time round. I decided it really was too late by that point. We'll see how the PCs react to their somewhat failed mission. They're all dwarves so it was kinda important to them that they save Gundren.
The dice fall where they may. I roll in the open to allow for the appearance of threat at all times. The fudge for me happens by opponent behavior within an encounter. Not every creature is going to fight to the death using tactics that put Alexander the Great to shame. The fudging examples stated aren't fudging at all. They're exactly what makes this game fun. The DM is generating things on the fly and reacting to the player actions. The quantum ogre is only a bad thing if it circumvents player agency.
I understand the argument and design philosophy around normalizing the action paths of Monsters to correspond to the CR of the monster, but I think that there is an unintended consequence, which is that it takes away some of the significance of player tactical decisions to mitigate certain paths. It also means that if everything is fungible, then you may as well just call it an attack. If the club is as effective as the rock toss, or the multiattack is as effective as the breath weapon, then there isn't much of a reason to do one over the other for anything other than flavor.
I was thinking I heard that they removed some of the lore and physical descriptions from the various monsters, and that was the primary cut. They framed it such that it allows for greater variance of use, particularly for new GMs who might not use a monster if the lore doesn't match with their campaign for some reason.
I had an encounter where the ghost necromancer possessed the wizard PC. The other players beat up the wizard to 0 HP to get the ghost out. At the end of the combat, I set it up so that same wizard got the killing blow rather than track actual HP because it was the more satisfying ending. It only gave the monster maybe 20% more HP anyways, and that was from the average number listed.
Several creators have been allowed to show certain statblocks, and every one I've seen has been buffed in some way. The lich, for example, now has over 300hp! Increases in damage seems to be sweeping and the new layout looks really nice. Saves and stats are easier to find at a glance and resistance is basically gone. They kept legendary actions instead of multiple reactions, and they gave the terrasque a ranged atk. I'm looking forward to it.
@SlyFlourish man I've watched so many vids about it over the past week I'm having trouble remembering which video I saw it on. I'm gonna try and find it again to let you know. They didn't show the statblock but mentioned changes including the new HP and AC of the lich. I want to say the ac was 20? Anyway, I'll try and find it again.
I mean when i have built monster or modified monsters using the dmg the new one having that section being absent. 24:24 thats how it works. You calculated the math about the optimal use.
Oh speaking of ice elves, the first two episode of solo leveling have fight scenes with them that are crazy. Those ice arrows. Also winter eladrin is the only eladrin in magic the gathering they didn't print the other three yet.
I saw the new mage somewhere, sorry don't remember where, but I can confirm that the new monster NPC stat bloks for spell casters are going to be similar in style to the ones in Monsters of the Multiverse
There are players who know the rules really well and then are rewarded for their system mastery by being able to make certain builds etc. but even if they don’t use system mastery for optimization, players knowing the rules always speeds up the game a lot. Similarly since the DM is a player I think stat blocks with spells and needing to know what a spell does is just another level of system mastery. Whatever someone’s way of looking of spells may be, whether it’s spelled cards or an app or D&D Beyond it’s pretty easy to either screenshot the spells that you’re about to run or in certain apps make A list that when you click them they open up or on D&D Beyond. Like I think it can be a simple 5 minute part of prep to add sticky notes in your PHB to quickly access the spells. Not a fan of the free fireball every turn that’s not a spell.
My table always did a simplified initiative system, before going to 2024 rules for our first Lev 11-20 campaign. I'm glad we switched to the book rules for initiative, because my players are super powerful except for their pathetic initiative bonuses. The only way I can keep encounters fun is by having my monsters beat them on initiative.
If you're looking for a monster book with deep lore and hooks etc, consider Folklore Bestiary published by Merry Mushmen. It's amazingly evocative, and the hardback is a beautifully made book. Questing Beast did a good review of it if you want a look.
Mike. I've been meaning to ask. You know you published those multi-levelled pre-generated character sheets for Grendleroot where it had levels 1-5 in the one character sheet? Are you going to upgrade it, or make a new version for 2024 5e rules? Those things are a massive timesaver to take along to gaming groups.
1:40 I feel like there is a good answer to this question, but why is everything a kickstarter now? I understand when launching a new system, a kickstarter is great. But supplemental materials and splats, it just leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Especially from established companies like KP. It's not even just TTRPGs. Roxley Games does a KS for every new Dice Throne release, even though its a wildly popular and successful game. There is little doubt that a new DT season box would fly off the shelf. Yet, DT is like 5 or 6 kickstarter's deep at this point. I'm sure someone who knows the industry more could elaborate as to why.
Sadly, it's usually necessary. The profit margin on full color TTRPG books gets pretty narrow once you factor in all the extra costs and paying all the people involved. In my experience, a new book, after the KS campaign, will only make 10-20% of the sales made during the campaign. Without KS, that initial 80% is significantly lower. It's really a bit scary that so much of the TTRPG hobby/industry depends on that one platform to survive. (Backerkit is gaining but still doesn't generate as much organic support as KS.) Mike hasn't really talked much about that angle recently IIRC, but Crowdfunding is definitely one of those candles related to the health of the hobby.
Hey Mike, do you still plan to continue your series where you review all the main DMG's that are out. You've already did a walkthrough for the tales of the valiant DMG and 2024 DMG and those were very insightful. Will you do a walkthrough for the 2014 DMG?
They will definitely cut on lore. With all the missing DM tools for monster creation, optimal rules as the 2014 DMG, and so on, I'm a 100% sure we'll get a DMG 2 early in 2026. Maybe a PHB 2 even with the Artificer and some "missing subclasses".
I have used monsters from the 2014 MM with the best abilities and it has not made any difference. I don’t accept WotC rational for CR. Thanks for the discussion.
Monsters being just as good at whatever they try is TERRIBLE design. If my players fight an Ogre, I expect them to trick them (because Ogres are dumb and easy to confuse) or attack them from range (maybe by climbing a tree, or getting behind fort walls with arrow slots etc...) They should be rewarded for those clever tactics. The Ogre shouldn't be able to throw rocks for the same damage as their club!
You are correct. Based on previews so far, the amount of stuff in the MM is refocused, from setting specific lore. The Cyclops now has a few very small paragraphs, down from 1/4th of a page describing their behavior. But the information that is put in is now polished to JUST the actionable information. Cyclopses are assocaited with gods, have connections to prophecy, and want to make sure that those seeking to avert fate are thwarted. That's more than what the 2014 Cyclops lore ever had, which was a lot of words to say 'Kinda like a Hill Giant, but 1 eye.' Basically all the table usable material you pointed out in the other book is present. Names and behaviors are not expansive, but there's enough there to say why an adventure would include a Cyclops. I do think you're being rather fussy about it referencing a unified table in the DMG rather than having it on the page, but that's kind of why I like your videos.
I don’t feel that WOTC is kicking out enough books fast enough…. Don’t want em as fast as they did for 3.5 or 4.0 but definitely need to step it up…. Especially monster manuals
Cheating is breaking the social contract everyone at the table expects. Fudging is changing the expected outcome to conform to the social contract of the game. If the contract established is "all rolls are final," then all rolls are final. If you, as the GM, have a roll that is objectively bad and you change the result, then you have broken the contract. The table wants those types of rolls and results. That's how I've used them. I'm the forever DM, and the only thing that's ever really hurt gameplay is when I cheated. I broke the social contract. I distinctly remember those moments, too. It took away the player's fun. It didn't add to mine at all. It was ultimately pointless other than hindsight value.
So, I have a rare moment where I disagree with Shea here. I think having wide swings in damage potential is incredibly useful. Having every attack do mostly similar damage is great from the mechanics, but what happens when I have a random encounter that's accidentally way too hard for the party? One of the levers I used to be able to pull was to use suboptimal "paths" through the statblock to give the PCs a break. If every attack is the same, though...that's no longer an option.
If you're making a dice roll where you need to potentially fudge the dice, You've already failed. Don't roll dice when you can't live with both the potentially good and the potentially bad outcome.
Free5e is a wonderful and noble goal and I wish the project all the best... However in my experience of trying something similar I firmly believe that the base 5e system conflicts with the goal of accessibility in TTRPGs due to its complexity and philosophy towards storytelling. Granted the system does have widespread adoption which does help, but fundamentally I think a simpler system with greater emphasis on narrative over simulation of fighting monsters would be better suited to it's goals.
One of my biggest issues with spellcasting changes in the newer 5th Edition books is that it shoehorns monsters into only casting spells that require a Magic action or Bonus Action, and it doesn't specify under cantrip-equivalent powers (such as Arcane Bolts used by many of the new wizard stat blocks) that these attacks are considered spells. It makes Counterspell virtually useless in many situations, especially in a game where PvP is not the design intent.
I know pronounciations vary from person to person... but hearing you pronounce sahuagin as sa-who-agin... it's never been how I pronounced it. I always said it sa-hwa-gin.
As a DM, it is my job to know what spells do, how to use creatures effectively, and to know and learn the rules. If you don't understand things, then how can you run a game or play something that you don't know what your character can do? I say go play a board game or checkers; then maybe it's more your speed. Oversimplifying the rules eliminates the complexity and challenge of the game. I love chess and find it fun, but checkers is simple and less so, so stop trying to make chess into checkers
Recently found your channel, absolutely love the content. Been watching a lot of the back log. Campaign prep has been very helpful.
Thank you!
Mike's content and books are absolutely wonderful. I've learned so much over the years.
My shill-meter is usually extra sensitive, but you add so much value to the hobby in general that I have zero issue with you talking about these projects that you worked on. Thanks for the disclaimer regardless.
Free 5e is a fantastic idea. I hope you'll promote this one a lot Mike.
I always appreciate your transparency on what you have worked on and how. I enjoy your view points even when I disagree with a specific point. You are always clear you are presenting your take on things and I learn from them. Thank you for all your insight and input into our hobby.
Looks like a fun group of baddies. The appendix creatures also cool. I like to add these Kobold creatures to my game to keep the long-time D&D players guessing!!!
I prefer when monsters have some attacks/abilities that are more effective than others. This adds a layer of tactics where characters can try to force their foe into a circumstance where they are stuck with the less effective action or have to do something desperate. It adds to the stakes and dynamics of play.
They do seem to be putting a lot of rollable tables in for monster traits In the new MM which is right up your alley, excited to see how useful they are.
Whoa, that Hag section from LevelUp 5e looks amazing! That looks like it could make it so easy to integrate monsters into an adventure or build an adventure around them.
I can understand why Wizards is cutting on word count so they can fit more stat blocks and art (obvious selling points), but it's definitely a shame that the narrative and context surrounding them is taking a hit and getting sidelined to the DM to figure out more.
Also, signed up for the newsletter. Love the idea of a single-sheet adventure generator, single-sheet 5e, and single-sheet map reference! I plan to run a lot of one-shots in the coming months. Return of the Lazy Dungeon Master has a lot of great stuff, but this might be just what I need.
I still think Quantum Ogre isn't great. Why give players 2 paths if both paths lead to the same encounter? Just use one path in that case.
I only do two paths if one leads to starting the encounter in a different way, like a side entrance meaning you encounter a different group of enemies first.
My hunch about how they will save space in the Monster Manual is that whenever the monster has variants, one of the variants will have the lore information and the other variants will have much smaller blocks. Also, the variants will all be in the same art, so that saves space.
While I appreciate seeing the monsters in action or in the environment, I think we might not get white background images to use as tokens, sadly
I think you’re right
Another fabulous weekly RPG digest Mike - thank you!
Your podcast is always super high-value, Mike. Thanks for your hard work!
The Fudge section was very interesting. The advice basically is, bend towards fun, but allow the scales to balance back to default. It's more of an intuition built with experience about how and when to basically change things in the world that don't remove agency. It could also be called improvisation - for the betterment of the game, the pacing or narrative, etc.
I use hit point reduction as a dial a lot, and i don't feel like i'm fudging anything. I'm doing the right thing given the context, and combat is already very long in 5e.
I run a table with 3 players. So I always have monsters at 3 set Initiatives, even when I do a single Boss monster. This how I do it and it's works like a dream.
Multi Monster Encounter:
20 -
15 - Monster group 1
10 - Monster group 2
5 - Monster group 3
1 -
Boss Encounter:
20 - Boss Action
15 -
10- Boss Turn
5 -
1- Lair Action
(I use Lair actions and Boss Actions or [Villian Actions] from MCDM's Flee Mortals instead of Legendary actions)
Then, the players get added in with their rolls, and off we go!
I run something very similar with set initiatives! It's so streamlined and simple and then I can immediately focus on grabbing my players' initiatives.
Lately I've been having monsters "take a 10", so there's a little variance, but not more than +/-5
I'd prefer to use the random tables in the DMG, rather than the MM waste space listing treasure.
What I would like to “see next” is a book with more subclasses, species, backgrounds, feats, and (for the DM) variant rules (such as those in the 2014 DMG)
Yeah. I bet we get another Xanathar’s but I hope it’s some time away.
31:31 I would be surprised if WotC added Spell Descriptions to the monsters just for word count reasons, but also they want us using DDB where they include hover hyperlinks for spells.
I will often not roll initiative for the monsters and just divide the players initiative counts in a way that will make the combat interesting for all of us.
31:20 that also seems to be approach they are taking in the new Monster Manual 2025. Look at the Mage statblock they previewed for example - it has counterspell and shield in the Reactions block, you don't need to dig through the spell list to find it.
Thanks for those adventure generator pages! I've been on the newsletter for years but I never realised, must have lost it in the deep recesses of my inbox
I started that thread on fudging, and I used the following definition where dice are involved: any time DURING PLAY you choose to roll a die in order to determine some element in play (whether an attack roll or random treasure generation or NPC personality traits) and you decide to do something else after the roll, that's fudging. Note that this does not put a value judgement on fudging -- just a definition.
What is more interesting, though, is discussing fudging outside of die rolls.
Great thread!!
I agree with this definition. It matches my experience with how the word has been used since I started RPGs in 1979.
Kendo get's no credit. Yay Kendo!
Dice Roller: I need primary Dice or Diffo color Dice so I hace a With Fear or Rage or whatever that thing is for Daggerheart. For Nimble, there should be a primary die and the ability to do stacking advantage dice that will drop the worst two or best two or three dice for the Stacking Advantages. Thanks for doing what you do for the community!
thanks
i am sooooo eager to start playtesting with the newest monsters, as well as the traps and environmental hazards, toward estimating the total challenge per encounter
Interesting discussion. It's neat to see how different 5e based games handle monster design.
I wasn't gonna spring for yet another monster book, but Mike, you talked me into it!
Free 5e sounds like a very very good idea - looking forward to see that project and to support it.
My issue with the Quantum Ogre is that it has become a meme and people want to look for it to call out, which means a lot of assumptions and false positives. When ending my first 5e campaign I built this big dungeon that had two different paths with different encounters and one of the players made a joking accusation that it was a Quantum Ogre and either path would have ended up the same...and like...why is that the assumption or need to be brought up?
Re Quantum ogre- One idea ive been playing around with is using basic stats from FoF to set up a easy medium hard encounter with medium/ hard often using a hazard/ monument but not assigning creatures to these stats until play /deciding what the momentum/hazard is. Then have a small list of traits from different kinds of creatures that are in the adventure. Similar to secrets and clues. That ways if my pc decide to take a right hand turn and go after the bandits instead of the cultists and depending on pacing i can just put out the bandit tokens attach the appropriate traits and choose a difficulty. Allows for heaps of flexibility as any creature can be the easy/medium/hard encounter all a need to do is add the trait and some flavour descriptions.
I'm glad you brought up fudging without touching the dice. It seems to me that changing die rolls is a quarrelsome topic, but other forms of fudging seem to be more acceptable (or aren't even seen as fudging to begin with).
Maybe you're comfortable with changing the dice, maybe you're not, but you don't mind turning failures into 'success at a cost', or you don't mind dropping monsters to 1 hit point mid-fight. At the end of the day you can use whatever method you're comfortable with to unkink the game during play and keep things flowing. That's really the goal.
As long as the players get to feel what they do matters.
As a DM I feel like I have to keep encounters running for 3 or 4 rounds but as a player I feel cool if I blast through an encounter in 1 or 2 rounds cos I used a good tactic or rolled a big critt.
As a DM I'm wary that I'm not just blanding out an encounter by dragging it out just because of my sense of pacing
(Spelling)
I’m just getting into DnD after playing BG3 for a year and just got the 2014 monster book and 2024 player guide this past weekend.
Welcome to the hobby!!
Thank you, already having a blast.
Those kobold pess monster groups are really really cool
My general feeling about fudging is that if it makes the game more fun for the players, I’m willing to do it. If it results in a less fun game or stays neutral, then I’m not.
I’ve always been amused by how put out people get about the quantum ogre because at the end of the day, if your players don’t know, then it has no negative impact on their enjoyment of the game, and it was funny you gave an example with players who did know and it still didn’t seem to affect it much at all.
Free5e sounds like it's basically a retro-clone. People familiar with the OSR community will understand the concept immediately -- it'll be an OSRIC for 5e. Sounds like a fantastic idea honestly, I look forward to learning more and supporting the project.
I ran Kragmaw Castle very recently and I really didn't want Gundren to get killed by King Groll. I let the plyers roll with advantage to stop King Groll, I set the DC based on a die roll and it wasn't looking good so I figured the most I feel comfortable fudging dice is when I give a player inspiration because I want them to succeed in a given moment. So I gave myself one last roll to see if I could bend fate but it wasn't enough so we all had to agree that that was Gundren's fate. A payer later asked me how I felt about retconning his turn so he could use hold person instead of what he chose first time round. I decided it really was too late by that point. We'll see how the PCs react to their somewhat failed mission. They're all dwarves so it was kinda important to them that they save Gundren.
The dice fall where they may. I roll in the open to allow for the appearance of threat at all times. The fudge for me happens by opponent behavior within an encounter. Not every creature is going to fight to the death using tactics that put Alexander the Great to shame.
The fudging examples stated aren't fudging at all. They're exactly what makes this game fun. The DM is generating things on the fly and reacting to the player actions. The quantum ogre is only a bad thing if it circumvents player agency.
I understand the argument and design philosophy around normalizing the action paths of Monsters to correspond to the CR of the monster, but I think that there is an unintended consequence, which is that it takes away some of the significance of player tactical decisions to mitigate certain paths.
It also means that if everything is fungible, then you may as well just call it an attack. If the club is as effective as the rock toss, or the multiattack is as effective as the breath weapon, then there isn't much of a reason to do one over the other for anything other than flavor.
I was thinking I heard that they removed some of the lore and physical descriptions from the various monsters, and that was the primary cut. They framed it such that it allows for greater variance of use, particularly for new GMs who might not use a monster if the lore doesn't match with their campaign for some reason.
I had an encounter where the ghost necromancer possessed the wizard PC. The other players beat up the wizard to 0 HP to get the ghost out. At the end of the combat, I set it up so that same wizard got the killing blow rather than track actual HP because it was the more satisfying ending. It only gave the monster maybe 20% more HP anyways, and that was from the average number listed.
IMO if there is one show to watch on RPGs, this is the one to watch.
Several creators have been allowed to show certain statblocks, and every one I've seen has been buffed in some way. The lich, for example, now has over 300hp! Increases in damage seems to be sweeping and the new layout looks really nice.
Saves and stats are easier to find at a glance and resistance is basically gone. They kept legendary actions instead of multiple reactions, and they gave the terrasque a ranged atk.
I'm looking forward to it.
Wooo. Where’s the lich?
@SlyFlourish man I've watched so many vids about it over the past week I'm having trouble remembering which video I saw it on. I'm gonna try and find it again to let you know. They didn't show the statblock but mentioned changes including the new HP and AC of the lich. I want to say the ac was 20? Anyway, I'll try and find it again.
@@SlyFlourishit was in the actual reveal video last week. They spoke about how terrible the archmage, lich etc were and how they are changing it.
40:53 "*Treasure*: _treasure_" 😂😂😂
I mean when i have built monster or modified monsters using the dmg the new one having that section being absent. 24:24 thats how it works. You calculated the math about the optimal use.
Oh speaking of ice elves, the first two episode of solo leveling have fight scenes with them that are crazy. Those ice arrows. Also winter eladrin is the only eladrin in magic the gathering they didn't print the other three yet.
I saw the new mage somewhere, sorry don't remember where, but I can confirm that the new monster NPC stat bloks for spell casters are going to be similar in style to the ones in Monsters of the Multiverse
There are players who know the rules really well and then are rewarded for their system mastery by being able to make certain builds etc. but even if they don’t use system mastery for optimization, players knowing the rules always speeds up the game a lot. Similarly since the DM is a player I think stat blocks with spells and needing to know what a spell does is just another level of system mastery. Whatever someone’s way of looking of spells may be, whether it’s spelled cards or an app or D&D Beyond it’s pretty easy to either screenshot the spells that you’re about to run or in certain apps make A list that when you click them they open up or on D&D Beyond. Like I think it can be a simple 5 minute part of prep to add sticky notes in your PHB to quickly access the spells. Not a fan of the free fireball every turn that’s not a spell.
You can find a MM 2025 version of the mage in Uni and the Hunt for the Lost Horn.
They kept saying that one wasn’t final but I’m beginning to wonder
@@SlyFlourish That's fair. It is marked as not final. I hope the format for reaction spells is different.
My table always did a simplified initiative system, before going to 2024 rules for our first Lev 11-20 campaign. I'm glad we switched to the book rules for initiative, because my players are super powerful except for their pathetic initiative bonuses. The only way I can keep encounters fun is by having my monsters beat them on initiative.
If you're looking for a monster book with deep lore and hooks etc, consider Folklore Bestiary published by Merry Mushmen. It's amazingly evocative, and the hardback is a beautifully made book.
Questing Beast did a good review of it if you want a look.
Mike. I've been meaning to ask. You know you published those multi-levelled pre-generated character sheets for Grendleroot where it had levels 1-5 in the one character sheet? Are you going to upgrade it, or make a new version for 2024 5e rules? Those things are a massive timesaver to take along to gaming groups.
1:40 I feel like there is a good answer to this question, but why is everything a kickstarter now? I understand when launching a new system, a kickstarter is great. But supplemental materials and splats, it just leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Especially from established companies like KP. It's not even just TTRPGs. Roxley Games does a KS for every new Dice Throne release, even though its a wildly popular and successful game. There is little doubt that a new DT season box would fly off the shelf. Yet, DT is like 5 or 6 kickstarter's deep at this point.
I'm sure someone who knows the industry more could elaborate as to why.
It’s still a great way to get interest in the product and help finance it before production.
Sadly, it's usually necessary. The profit margin on full color TTRPG books gets pretty narrow once you factor in all the extra costs and paying all the people involved. In my experience, a new book, after the KS campaign, will only make 10-20% of the sales made during the campaign. Without KS, that initial 80% is significantly lower.
It's really a bit scary that so much of the TTRPG hobby/industry depends on that one platform to survive. (Backerkit is gaining but still doesn't generate as much organic support as KS.) Mike hasn't really talked much about that angle recently IIRC, but Crowdfunding is definitely one of those candles related to the health of the hobby.
41:20 Mike, no one wants to roll on the Colon Treasure table.
Hey Mike, do you still plan to continue your series where you review all the main DMG's that are out. You've already did a walkthrough for the tales of the valiant DMG and 2024 DMG and those were very insightful. Will you do a walkthrough for the 2014 DMG?
I don’t think so. I have an article about it from a while back.
To have what you want out of a monster manual there would need to be several books like there was for 3.x edition.
A5E did it
Free5e is a great idea
either the kickstarter is being slammed by your recommendation, or its just not loading. i did follow the creator though visible @ 11:26
You may want to adjust your lighting or camera angle; you look even better in person!
I just need the rest of the 2014 subclasses from them at some point... in particular the wizard subclasses that didn't make the 2024 phb.
They will definitely cut on lore.
With all the missing DM tools for monster creation, optimal rules as the 2014 DMG, and so on, I'm a 100% sure we'll get a DMG 2 early in 2026. Maybe a PHB 2 even with the Artificer and some "missing subclasses".
Argh, I can't find the adventure generator anywhere in my in-box. Do I need to unsubscribe and resubscribe?
That will do it.
Very curious to see how that monster manual words certain things 😂
I have used monsters from the 2014 MM with the best abilities and it has not made any difference. I don’t accept WotC rational for CR. Thanks for the discussion.
Monsters being just as good at whatever they try is TERRIBLE design. If my players fight an Ogre, I expect them to trick them (because Ogres are dumb and easy to confuse) or attack them from range (maybe by climbing a tree, or getting behind fort walls with arrow slots etc...)
They should be rewarded for those clever tactics. The Ogre shouldn't be able to throw rocks for the same damage as their club!
You are correct. Based on previews so far, the amount of stuff in the MM is refocused, from setting specific lore.
The Cyclops now has a few very small paragraphs, down from 1/4th of a page describing their behavior.
But the information that is put in is now polished to JUST the actionable information. Cyclopses are assocaited with gods, have connections to prophecy, and want to make sure that those seeking to avert fate are thwarted.
That's more than what the 2014 Cyclops lore ever had, which was a lot of words to say 'Kinda like a Hill Giant, but 1 eye.'
Basically all the table usable material you pointed out in the other book is present. Names and behaviors are not expansive, but there's enough there to say why an adventure would include a Cyclops.
I do think you're being rather fussy about it referencing a unified table in the DMG rather than having it on the page, but that's kind of why I like your videos.
I can live being fussy
"Fudging" = when the number rolled on the dice doesnt equal the number you use to determine the results.
I don’t feel that WOTC is kicking out enough books fast enough…. Don’t want em as fast as they did for 3.5 or 4.0 but definitely need to step it up…. Especially monster manuals
Fudging- I _am_ saying your way is the right way
Cheating is breaking the social contract everyone at the table expects. Fudging is changing the expected outcome to conform to the social contract of the game.
If the contract established is "all rolls are final," then all rolls are final. If you, as the GM, have a roll that is objectively bad and you change the result, then you have broken the contract. The table wants those types of rolls and results.
That's how I've used them. I'm the forever DM, and the only thing that's ever really hurt gameplay is when I cheated. I broke the social contract. I distinctly remember those moments, too. It took away the player's fun. It didn't add to mine at all. It was ultimately pointless other than hindsight value.
❤
So, I have a rare moment where I disagree with Shea here. I think having wide swings in damage potential is incredibly useful. Having every attack do mostly similar damage is great from the mechanics, but what happens when I have a random encounter that's accidentally way too hard for the party? One of the levers I used to be able to pull was to use suboptimal "paths" through the statblock to give the PCs a break. If every attack is the same, though...that's no longer an option.
I really think it should have just been called 5Free
*immediately checks Android for "crit happens"* :(
Adding rando damage dice to "weak" attacks to justify the awful CR system is... really kind of awful.
If you're making a dice roll where you need to potentially fudge the dice, You've already failed. Don't roll dice when you can't live with both the potentially good and the potentially bad outcome.
Word!
Free5e is a wonderful and noble goal and I wish the project all the best... However in my experience of trying something similar I firmly believe that the base 5e system conflicts with the goal of accessibility in TTRPGs due to its complexity and philosophy towards storytelling. Granted the system does have widespread adoption which does help, but fundamentally I think a simpler system with greater emphasis on narrative over simulation of fighting monsters would be better suited to it's goals.
One of my biggest issues with spellcasting changes in the newer 5th Edition books is that it shoehorns monsters into only casting spells that require a Magic action or Bonus Action, and it doesn't specify under cantrip-equivalent powers (such as Arcane Bolts used by many of the new wizard stat blocks) that these attacks are considered spells. It makes Counterspell virtually useless in many situations, especially in a game where PvP is not the design intent.
I know pronounciations vary from person to person... but hearing you pronounce sahuagin as sa-who-agin... it's never been how I pronounced it. I always said it sa-hwa-gin.
As a DM, it is my job to know what spells do, how to use creatures effectively, and to know and learn the rules. If you don't understand things, then how can you run a game or play something that you don't know what your character can do? I say go play a board game or checkers; then maybe it's more your speed. Oversimplifying the rules eliminates the complexity and challenge of the game. I love chess and find it fun, but checkers is simple and less so, so stop trying to make chess into checkers