While I understand the sentiment "the monster is only going to be around for 3-5 rounds, does it really need all these things?", I think the other side of that coin is: "If the monster is only going to be around for 3-5 rounds, let's make sure it can do cool stuff in the little time it has and doesn't fail to create cool moments because it was out of range, or the few cool actions it has were negated by some other circumstance or player ability."
Question! If you could add one thing (section, feature, design, monster, ect.) to the 2025 MM that you think it is lacking, What would it be? And if you could Omit on thing, what would it be? I personally would have loved a Monster by CR list. Would love to hear your insights as you are both excellent game designers. Thanks for taking the time to read and consider my questions. Cheers.
If a DM is putting a hi-CR creature in, it seems like they'd think through the creature's actions ahead of time. At the table isn't the time to pull out an ancient dragon with no prep. At least not for ne
I’m thoroughly enjoying these deep dives into individual monsters and your critiques of the changes. I agree that keeping all the spells in the stat block makes more sense from a usability standpoint, and would prefer that, even if it required including a spell level for CounterSpell calculations and that then decreased the number of spells you’d want to include. If the new Centaur Warden can have a unique mini Sunbeam, I’m fine with codifying it as a spell to allow for CS. I can see efforts to increase efficiency in some areas by designating different types of camouflage as Stealth bonus or Shapechange (with limits), but I’d prefer most creatures below top tier CR to just have 3-4 things max that are their shtick, instead of making Grand Unified “Actions.” However, that’s after years of actual play viewing and a few attempts at playing or running 5E, so perhaps the ease of introducing new players to a Stealthy Gargoyle that works in the same way as the Rogue player, is the point. Can’t wait to see your ongoing coverage of these monster changes. Thank you both again for another entertaining episode.
It seems poison damage is applied automatically, not requiring a failed saving throw. The saves are only required for poison condition. It makes the imp for example really more powerful than they used to be in my opinion. That's a lot of damage for such a CR creature, no?
Hey Friends! The gold dragon is very interesting and powerful mainly because of the banish ability it gets to do every turn. This feature alone is simultaneously repositioning damage control and acts as a counter spell all in one. Because it banishes the player for one round and then allows the dragon to choose where they reappear, the dragon can place the player right next to another player so that they all get fire breath, or perhaps place them in the air so that they fall. In addition, while you are banished, you are incapacitated, which means you instantly lose concentration on any spells. This thing actually feels like a monster designed to fight against high-level players. It's doing tons of damage and then it is banishing a player each round (or at least attempting to) and likely it's going to be a spellcaster so that the spellcaster loses concentration on something. This may be one of the few monsters that can actually challenge players of an appropriate level without having any minions whatsoever.
The 2014 vampire was already problematic in that it either a) party bursts in 3 rounds or less OR b) the fight goes on forever due to the regeneration keeping it alive, and its low damage every round just takes too long to kill off the party. Low damage in 2024 is disappointing.
Question for y'all: What structural issues with D&D's game loop can arise when you flip the script of the "standard fantasyland" on its head? Context: I'm thinking of a D&D campaign where the monsters have won, and world is being upended as humans experience systematic subjugation and the constraint of the law, but not its protection. The PCs will have to use dungeons as bases, evacuate people from tyranny, and then work with those survivors to develop what the world should look like next.
I struggle with monster abilities like casting banish. It may make tactical sense, but anything that takes a player out of play (with exception to rolling a save each round) for what could be a good chunk of time seems like someone is going to have a bad time. When those abilities factor into the math of the CR, it really forces the hand on how to run them as a threat.
That is where my mind went too. I'd be giing them something to do while Banished - maybe where they go reveals something extra about the Dragon - like the pocket dimension is where is keeps its stuff.
While I understand the sentiment "the monster is only going to be around for 3-5 rounds, does it really need all these things?", I think the other side of that coin is:
"If the monster is only going to be around for 3-5 rounds, let's make sure it can do cool stuff in the little time it has and doesn't fail to create cool moments because it was out of range, or the few cool actions it has were negated by some other circumstance or player ability."
Question!
If you could add one thing (section, feature, design, monster, ect.) to the 2025 MM that you think it is lacking, What would it be? And if you could Omit on thing, what would it be?
I personally would have loved a Monster by CR list.
Would love to hear your insights as you are both excellent game designers.
Thanks for taking the time to read and consider my questions. Cheers.
34:00 that made me laugh pretty hard. 😂
i totally support a short mini reveal at the end of every episode! those look great. i need to get more.
I kinda love that chonky Pit Fiend!
Loved the show! More, please!
If a DM is putting a hi-CR creature in, it seems like they'd think through the creature's actions ahead of time. At the table isn't the time to pull out an ancient dragon with no prep. At least not for ne
I’m thoroughly enjoying these deep dives into individual monsters and your critiques of the changes.
I agree that keeping all the spells in the stat block makes more sense from a usability standpoint, and would prefer that, even if it required including a spell level for CounterSpell calculations and that then decreased the number of spells you’d want to include. If the new Centaur Warden can have a unique mini Sunbeam, I’m fine with codifying it as a spell to allow for CS.
I can see efforts to increase efficiency in some areas by designating different types of camouflage as Stealth bonus or Shapechange (with limits), but I’d prefer most creatures below top tier CR to just have 3-4 things max that are their shtick, instead of making Grand Unified “Actions.” However, that’s after years of actual play viewing and a few attempts at playing or running 5E, so perhaps the ease of introducing new players to a Stealthy Gargoyle that works in the same way as the Rogue player, is the point.
Can’t wait to see your ongoing coverage of these monster changes. Thank you both again for another entertaining episode.
Digging the Geneseo hat!
It seems poison damage is applied automatically, not requiring a failed saving throw. The saves are only required for poison condition. It makes the imp for example really more powerful than they used to be in my opinion. That's a lot of damage for such a CR creature, no?
Hey Friends!
The gold dragon is very interesting and powerful mainly because of the banish ability it gets to do every turn. This feature alone is simultaneously repositioning damage control and acts as a counter spell all in one. Because it banishes the player for one round and then allows the dragon to choose where they reappear, the dragon can place the player right next to another player so that they all get fire breath, or perhaps place them in the air so that they fall. In addition, while you are banished, you are incapacitated, which means you instantly lose concentration on any spells.
This thing actually feels like a monster designed to fight against high-level players. It's doing tons of damage and then it is banishing a player each round (or at least attempting to) and likely it's going to be a spellcaster so that the spellcaster loses concentration on something.
This may be one of the few monsters that can actually challenge players of an appropriate level without having any minions whatsoever.
Thanks.
More great info ❤🎉 love you guys!
I like monsters having more options as it helps me prepare encounters better -- what might the monster do before the encounter?
Totally agree with Teos that Gargoyle's False Appearance was cool and far superior to stealth proficiency. "Indistinguishable" seems clear.
Is it alphabetical but split between Melee and Ranged options?
The 2014 vampire was already problematic in that it either a) party bursts in 3 rounds or less OR b) the fight goes on forever due to the regeneration keeping it alive, and its low damage every round just takes too long to kill off the party. Low damage in 2024 is disappointing.
Question for y'all: What structural issues with D&D's game loop can arise when you flip the script of the "standard fantasyland" on its head?
Context:
I'm thinking of a D&D campaign where the monsters have won, and world is being upended as humans experience systematic subjugation and the constraint of the law, but not its protection. The PCs will have to use dungeons as bases, evacuate people from tyranny, and then work with those survivors to develop what the world should look like next.
I struggle with monster abilities like casting banish. It may make tactical sense, but anything that takes a player out of play (with exception to rolling a save each round) for what could be a good chunk of time seems like someone is going to have a bad time. When those abilities factor into the math of the CR, it really forces the hand on how to run them as a threat.
That is where my mind went too. I'd be giing them something to do while Banished - maybe where they go reveals something extra about the Dragon - like the pocket dimension is where is keeps its stuff.