3:16 Dark Devotion was replaced with proficiency in Wisdom saves, which is weaker against Charmed and Frightened than advantage, but more generally useful.
As a DM, i welcome the extra vulnerabilities. You cannot fathom the ammount of times my players took features that allowed them to learn stuff about enemies, and theyd always ask about vulnerabilities first. They knew it wasnt common. They still thought it was worth it over learning resistances. Id sometimes add vulnerabilities where it could be logical just so their efforts werent wasted
Vulnerabilites and resistances always have such fun interplay. I remember the delight when my players realised mummies are vulnerable against fire. You could downright see the glint in the eyes of our draconic sorcerer. Similarily it is super fun when they have to switch tactics to deal with an enemy. E.g dealing psychic damage over fire to deal with resistances and immunities.
A bunch of these creatures have ranged attacks that deal more damage than their melee attacks. This feels massive if the players know about it, as it shifts the focus for players to fighting in melee so those creatures will have disadvantage on more powerful attacks, rather than engaging from a safe distance. This has the potential to be a literal game-changer. I'm not sure what to make of the fact that they're generally less accurate - maybe it's to prevent the creature's offensive CR from changing, but it does also make disadvantage an even bigger deal.
I quite like that they made resistance to bludgeoning and piercing more powerful but less common. Makes it feel more unique, hopefully without feeling like a significant nerf against martials
If it will be common, that they dont difference between non magical and magical weapon attacks, would that mean, that martial become weaker. Because, until now was most resistence only again non magical weapon attacks. Had whe +1 weapon, was the dmg normal. And only the caster was mostly resisted. But, as long as not to many Monster are resistent again all weapon Typs, would whe have now a reason, to carry weapons from all 3 typs with us (what could suck, if you want to be a specific weapon User, like a spearman or swordman, and doesnt want to wear maces and so one).
I think a useful note about the pirate captain is that the rapier grants advantage his next attack. The pistol would normally be at disadvantage since its a ranged weapon (and presumably hes in melee to attack with sword). So he can use the pistol in melee more easily than he otherwise would.
@@InsightCheck I've been running things that way anyway as I tend to homebrew most of the monsters I use - still, will be quite nicer if that's not always needed!
It seems to me that WotC has moved the 5.5E monster statblocks more towards the 4E monster statblock format in that there's less "natural language" text and more straight to the point mechanics explanation. For example, reactions now have Trigger and Response.
I'm happy they're making ranged options much more powerful cause that makes kiting no longer the literal strongest encounter ender vs most monsters. Good.
3:13 The Cultist gained proficiency in Wisdom saving throws in place of the Dark Devotion trait. This kind of change seems pretty common; several of the Beasts in the PHB lost Keen Senses in favor of proficiency or expertise in Perception.
You always could 😢 These changes feel too gimicky though. They made the NPC’s stronger but no reason behind it. A lot feels like they are directly attacking Barbarian builds which is not healthy.
@@peterwhitcomb8315 two things: 1. Maybe you've experienced this, you're making a monster stat block and it deviates from whatever has been printed out since 2014. You bring it to the table as the DM and you start playing with it and the players begin questioning why it has certain abilities that work in certain ways that are not reflective of the printed material. I use different elements; some from older D&D editions and some of my own ideas from other inspirations in modern games and even translatable concepts from video games. I strove to emulate what I saw in printed materials because I thought that would be more easily accepted by my players. But now some of the things I'm seeing from the 2024 stat blocks allow me to do things I've already thought about but haven't been able to execute because of the same reason. 2. As a DM, I do not care that the Barbarian feels a little bit less robust now. This is more of a 2014 problem that they've been addressing for the whole magical weapons versus mundane weapons issue, and it's a little bit more complicated than that, but both as a player and a DM it does not matter to me that Barbarian is a little bit less sturdy.
What interests me the most with the new monsters are the spellcasters! I'm curious if we'll see more monsters in the Monster Manual that have Action spellcasting, Bonus Action spells, and Reaction spells. Since creatures don't use spellslots we might run into a monster that could do something like: Cast Fireball, then Misty Step, and Counterspell someone trying to Counterspell them. This would likely be a powerful spellcasting creature, but neat to see!
Considering legendary creatures have multiple reactions a creature with reaction based spells that don't use spellslots would be...impressive. Imagine casting shield, counterspell and hellish rebuke.
I'm sad to see the benefit of Adamantine weapons disappear from the stat block. It was one of the more unique damage interactions, which made it interesting. I wonder if that will come back in some form? Does the new DMG or PHB mention adamantine weapons at all, and do they have any extra effectiveness against constructs?
Making monsters have thr ability to cast and multiattack was the first change I did as a dm with my monstets. Also bumping damage and hp a lot. Love it!
Something I just noticed after seeing all the stat blocks back to back here that finally clicked for me. 2024 Monsters that have Dex Save Prof get to add their Prof to Initiative
I loved playing a Moon Druid and turning into a Fire Elemental. So many ways to do damage on another creatures turn. Dealing damage when hit was actually kinda cool. Add in the Fire Shield spell, or heaven forbid the Armor of Agythis and you've basically become a very hittable target that no one wants to swing at. I'm interested to see how this one plays out with the addition of the aura and the loss of damage dealing upon being hit
Didn't even realize they dropped a new mini adventure! This was an excellent and informative video, my players are on a ship right now so I'm immediately dropping the Pirate Captain into my game.
Whoa what a trip whenever I see you pop up in here lol! Yeah, it was so under the radar and easy to miss. I’m surprised they didn’t make much of a deal about but I’m so glad to see what they did here!
@InsightCheck I guess I do have to buy the the monster book when it comes out. I thought I could save some money on that one, but with these changes I actually want the updated monsters. They are so much more engaging:D
I like the changes to attack damage types but wonder what would happen if the PCs wanted to get the Cultist Fanatic's Pact Blade after killing them. I guess that's also something to consider with the Tough Boss's Warhammer and H-Xbow that have different damage dice - would the PCs get a 2d8 Warhammer?
Yeah I wonder about that too. I have to imagine the boosted damage just applies to the creature for… reasons lol. The 2d10 Longbow on the Knight for example I don’t think is actually a 2d10 Longbow for anyone else. I should have discussed that during the video!
It's not listed under gear, so I imagine that much like a Warlock's conjured Pact Weapon, it disappears when they die or when it's separated for them for a minute.
6:00 The cult fanatic could upcast Inflict Wounds for a chance to deal 4d10 damage, which is pretty strong when you encounter them at 2nd or 3rd level. So losing that spell and spellslots seems significant. And losing sacred flame gets rid of most of their ranged damage options.
2:52 that is kind of a problem. It’s a meta game minigame. I like the old feature because it was supposed to make these guys like barbarians. Also the pirate captain multiattacking with a pistol will raise some eyebrows. At least the giff from 5e 2014 had a feature to address this, ignore the reload property.
But that kind of leads people to blend character abilities with monster ones. I think the point here is to create more distinction between PCs and NPCs. They shouldn't always be 1:1.
@ sure not always 1:1, but it’s not necessarily a bad thing occasionally and sometimes the feature makes a bit more sense if you are also describing the attacks with flavor (not just treating this like a tactical war game). Why is the new berserker getting advantage vs enemies w/o max hp? If it’s like a blood lust, then why isn’t this a trait? It’s arbitrary. I guess we will just have to see other examples they have for monsters with edits to the attack roll description. I also find it interesting they did away with the “one target” component. You could say it was pointless, but I just think WotC designers failed to capitalize on it. Anytime a monster could harm more than one, like a sweeping attack, it was instead done as a saving throw for the targets.
Great video, i am very excited about new monster's design. You should see Alphastream's very informative video about combat encounter math in PHB24, the budget for monster is a lot more generous past lvl 5, so that is another factor to consider for monster's power
12:11 This and the Incubus Block sounds like it will be interesting to modify for an NPC who was an Apprentice Wizard (Level 4 at the time now Level 17) who was Wished into a Succubus when the Apprentice's Master tried to Wish himself into a Pit Fiend(Was put on a waiting list as an Amnizu) 🙃
While I’m not 110% on players being more powerful across the board, some certainly are. As a DM, I’m absolutely excited to see monsters being more versatile, and able to hit harder. So many of the 3rd party designers have made vast improvements to the standard monsters with even subtle changes.
It seems like intellectual skills are just being left off of monsters, as are things like Insight and maybe some other social skills in some cases. I suspect there's gonna be a note early on in the MM that DMs can add those kind of skills in if necessary, but it's interesting.
Here are all the old pirates Neogi Pirate AC 16 HP 33 CR 3 BOO 41 Boo Astral Meagerie Pirate AC 12 HP 11 CR 1/8 MM 343 Pirate Bosun AC 12 HP 27 CR 1/2 GOS 247 Ghost of Saltmarsh Pirate Captain AC 14 HP 45 CR 2 GOS 247 Pirate Captain AC 12 HP 65 CR 2 MM 344 Pirate Deck Wizard AC 12/15 HP 32 CR 1 GOS 248 Pirate First Mate AC 16 HP 26 CR 1 GOS 248 So maybe the pirate first mate is the one they coverted
I think the bonus attacks, and multi attacks increase is due to weapon mastery. Ex. Sap does disadvantage on next attack roll. So First swing is a possible miss but the second attack does not care for your disadvantage.
I HATE that monsters straight up do not use the same rules as PCs. A Pirate’s rapier does 2d8 damage but when I pick it up as loot it now does 1d8?! If I give it to an NPC does it go back to doing 2d8? I HATE that.
A Big Miss in 2014 monsters (that I usually fix before they hit my table) is the lack of ranged options... I generally make them *less* deadly at range... but they should still have Something Significant to do if they can't close...
Great video!!! First in depth look at how monsters will work in 2024 (2025? 🤪) MM that I have seen. Love the comparison vs 2014. The monsters now all seem like mini PCs for the DM to run... This should be a lot of fun for DMs going forward! The pirate in particular seems so flavorful, with the rapier/and. Then a pistol shot with advantage on a different PC. This is making me want to DM!
I hadn’t really seen anyone talking about it either and I LOVE discussing monster design so it was a perfect opportunity! The new monsters look like so much fun to run, I can’t wait to see more!
I'm not convinced that the One Leveled Spell Per Turn rule is sidestepped by the way they formatted monsters, IE Cultist Fanatic. They are all formatted as X/Day, and that could be to simplify the creatures rules for the DM as there's no slots to keep track of, just spell uses. So I'm not 100% sure what's intended here lol.
I'm scared barbarians are nerfed by the new statblocks. There might be a lot more monsters that can do damage other than bludgeoning piercing and slashing damage.
Wow this is awesome!!!!! I love these changes a lot! Though I'm against the cutting back on some of these traits (like the knight), I can understand why. The easier it is to run creatures, the better it is for the DM to play encounters with 4-8 creatures each having their unique traits Lots of flexibility, you love to see it. Flexibility of options is different from number of options, and this is so clearly seen in this design where they cut down some options but made the available options more powerful and meaningful while also adding stuff
Just got to the bit on pirates, and I wonder if, instead of the Saltmarsh pirate, if the new pirate is supposed to compare to the Vampirate and Vampirate Captain from Spelljammer? Let's see... Will update with thoughts. Edit: There's some obvious differences, of course, like being Undead or not, but I do think the Vampirate was the starting point that they built these new Pirates from. They look like a ton of fun! :D
I’m not the biggest fan of 5e’s implementation of vulnerability, so I’m not sure I want to see more done with it. It becomes too much of a force multiplier and swings balance pretty massively. I think the Pathfinder method of having flat additional damage (maybe even flat damage per damage die instead of per hit) or having effects on the creature when taking a certain damage type are way more interesting.
What I hope we see more of is the types of “vulnerability” that we saw with the Frost Salamander in Monsters of the Multiverse. Whenever it took fire damage, it automatically recharged its breath weapon. Vulnerability is a dangerous thing to incorporate too broadly but there can be some very interesting ways to incorporate it that don’t feel to meta gamey and destructive.
Hi there! Unrelated GM/DM question that would make for a great video IMO: For a DM that hasn’t been paying attention and their players really want to move to the 2024 rules, what do you feel are the biggest, most impactful changes and what new abilities, features, and changes, should we expect to see from our players?
I would say that pirates (though particularly Swashbucklers) are well known for their quick feet and graceful movements. Remember, it’s “Enthralling Panache” referring to their confidence or style which can be so captivating as to “charm”. Knights are often warriors of good, sometimes anointed as Paladins, which can also explain the Radiant damage.
I honestly can't get my head around why a number of people are confused by the radiant damage on the Knight. Knight as short hand for divine or holy warrior is not new in DnD...
As a DM since 1996, I like the new variations and abilities of the NPC´s and will enjoy using them, but it will be more difficult for inexperienced DMs to get all of the additional effects, flexibility in actions, upcasting spells etc. right.
I do want to point out, spiritual weapon did not require concentration in 2014 but the new rules changes kinda renders that moot for monsters as technically this is an ability and not the spell
It indicates the Proficiency Bonus of a creature. It can be used to figure out how numbers make sense or if you wanted to flavour a creature to give it proficiency or expertise in something, you know what you can add.
Actually I'm quite glad they removed the new *Inflict Wounds* from the Cultist Fanatic! It's a much worse spell than it was, but for a CR 2 monster, effects with save for half damage have a much greater impact on players. That's literally unavoidable damage, which especially impacts those lower level PCs like when you'd be fighting these.
This video has me very worried for when we get 2024 tarrasque they've had 10 years of "how to kill tarrasque" videos to make this guy a truly godzilla level threat Can't wait for the ranged attack they will likely give it
Good video but Im not excited about 2024, I think the power creep is not going to be beneficial to most games. More complicated, yes, but clunkier and less beginner friendly and that applies to most gamers I am playing with right now.
It’s referring to the “proficiency bonus” which can be useful to understand where the numbers are coming from or to help a DM give a monster custom skills or weapons!
I like that many monsters are getting stronger, but I dislike that, after changing spells into abilities in Monsters of the Multiverse, now suddenly they are taking the opposite route and changing abilities into spells. It follows this design pattern were everything is being simplified and standardized, and as a consequence it makes these monsters feel less unique. Like, the succubus is a seductive fiend, so her charm was one of her signature abilities, an important part of what she was and something she could inflict on others due to her very nature. Now, she just casts a spell on you with components like any wizard would do, AND it can be counterspelled. Kinda meh, honestly. It’s also one of those things that makes the design team job easier, but the DM’s job actually a little harder. It’s better when the thing a monster’s action does is written on the stat block and doesn’t demand you to check something else on another book or platform to make sure the spell is being done right, specially when you may already have multiple monster stat blocks to pay attention to in a single combat and some of them may have many different spells, and you often want to play their turns fast in order to avoid slowing down the pace of the encounter. On the other hand, I loved what they did with the action economy of some monsters. I specially appreciate the shapeshifting at bonus action for the succubus. I actually homebrewed that into a succubus once because it would feel weird as hell for her to spend her action to reveal her true form and then do nothing for the entire round. The same thing applies for Night Hags.
They kind of just stripping away all interesting tactical decisions and replacing it with regular damage bumps. Adding ranged options actually makes the creature less complex mechanically because it no longer matters where it’s position on the battlefield is
@ I mean adding ranged attacks to creatures that were intended to be melee. Archers are interesting because when you get into melee they either have to switch to a weapon that deals significantly less damage , or make their attacks at disadvantage. If they just pull out a rapier or something and do the exact same amount of damage with an identical or near identical accuracy, then that gets rid of strategic meaning as well. Most monsters should be significantly better at one range rather then the other
@ like when mmom decided that wizards are just as capable in melee as at long range because there force blasts could be melee or ranged without any other difference, that got rid of strategic relevance of the battle map as they are equally effective no matter where they are on the battlefield
May be a hot take, but I actually hate that so many of these monsters get to auto dump radiant damage or charms. Radiant is something I associate with divine energy, not your average plate armor wearing martial opponent. And what about the average pirate makes him able to charm you any time he wants? I realize we’re trying to up the combat challenge of some of these creatures, but seems like they sacrificed the setting these monsters operate in to make them a challenge. These aren’t supposed to be just assemblies of numbers to overcome, they’re supposed to represent the average creature of that type in the game world. I’m also salty about the succubus losing telepathic bond and going ethereal. Was writing an adventure that relied those features of the succubus for a particular character choice to work. I’ll work around it, and yes, I can use the old stat block for my own game if I want. I get all that. I just couldn’t publish as an AL adventure using the older version of the stat block. I started playing under 5e, and heard older players talk of power creep. I watched it happed with every new sourcebook, and hoped it would all get reset and dialed back with ‘24, but it looks like we went the other way. Just give more power to the monsters. Well maybe in 10 more years with a real 6th edition.
The knight no longer feels like a knight, now its a paladin lite. The best way to run that boi is with the 2014 statblock plus a feat of some sort. Switching the sword for a halberd and giving it polearm master or having it be mounted with a lance with mounted combatant + charger is quite better. Also, the new weapon masteries are great to turn against players.
You would vastly increase the CR doing that though. On the other hand, not every knight is a leader, and another stat block might have those abilities you want. Find one and give it heavy armor, and the weapon you want. Maybe the mastery property of that weapon too, built into the attack like the pirate's rapier so you don't have to remember it in combat.
Can they still call it the "2024 Monster Manual," when it comes out in 2025? One more reason I don't understand why they're being so set on calling it "Fifth Edition." Just call it "5.5" & be done with it.
Honestly I dislike all the monster changes. While I do agree additional damage/ability/vulnerabilities were needed - changing the monsters to seem much more like a video game just makes all combats expected to be these large dice rolls and more spam attack scenarios. It just seems like they tried to make it like elden ring.
Even if RAW spellcasting enemies CAN cast multiple spells due to the lack of spell slot, I think I’m still going to DM them as good-faith intentions of the rules. Sure they may not explicitly have spell slots, but spellcasting enemies, to me, would suffer the same limitations as my spellcasting PCs. That is, of course with exception to special and specific abilities. Just like an Archfey Warlock can now cast Misty Step without a spell slot AND a Pact Slot spell in a single turn through the use of a subclass feature, creatures like the Stone Golem could cast Slow through its special feature and potentially another leveled spell (if it had one) that was applicable to action economy.
I don’t think there is anything good faith/bad faith about then interpretation presented in the video. There is even a paragraph in the spellcasting section that mentions how monsters typically have spells limited in some other way. They’re also still limited by action economy. I don’t think there’s anything wrong or even slightly questionable about a monster being able to cast a spell in the same way that a player can. Most of the monster spells are way more limited by resources anyway.
I don't like this. Some changes are nice but the succubus being able to cast 8th level Dominate Person at will is waaaay too powerful, and the Knight for some reason being able to shoot twice with a Giant Sized Crossbow (because 2d10) and doing an extra 1d8 radiant just makes no sense... Also removing proficiencies, and advantage on stuff and then giving expertise or nothing is just so boring... That on top of Legendary Actions being removed for the infuriating Reactions makes me more convinced to just not buy the new MM and use whatever free monsters I get if I like them more xd.
The 5e14 succubus already had an ability that was basically Dominate Person, allowing the succbus to command the target to commit suicide if it wanted and the target would only get an extra saving throw.
It's a normal sized crossbow, they just get bonus damage with it. You can dislike that, but it's what's going on. They have an unlisted ability to just add an extra weapon damage die, which seems reasonable to me for a monster.
The the problem I have with 5e creatures are that many of CR 7 creatures being too weak. So, I personally don't really think these monsters have been fixed with these buff.
Tbh, I've found most low CR creatures to be about right, except low CR spell casters that I have found to be consistently under tuned. These changes generally look good to me. Also, keep in mind that even at level 1, 2024 most PCs will be noticeably stronger than 2014. Each PC will have a feat, not to mention buffs that most classes have at level 1 (all martials, half casters, and some casters).
@@DevilsFourString Shadows (CR1/2) and Kobolds (CR1/4) can TPK even high level party and there too many story of them doing so. Quicklings are just so unfair in many ways for a CR1 creature, their attack is like if Death Knight can deals damage equal to twice amount of Adult Red Dragon's Breath Attack with a single longsword attack while they can attack 3 times. Speaking of dragon, a CR1 Chopper Dragon Wyrmling can literally TPK whole party using a single Breath Attack, its like if Adult Red Dragon can deals 3-5 times of its original Breath Attack damage. Those are just few example of how unfair these low CR creatures. I gave my players bonus Feat at level 1, with Crusher, Slasher, and Piercher not even being feat and simply just default mechanic, all to make them have better shape to deals with these low CR nonsense.
@Mardshima89 kobolds have never been an issue for me, and I'm not even putting them against optimizers. A pack of them can definitely be scary for level 1 parties, but they're well balanced IME. The copper dragon wyrmling's breath weapon is devastating for a level 1 party, absolutely. But I would be shocked if it managed to get a whole party with it - it hits 4 PCs at most, and I bet only 2 the majority of the time. It seems appropriate to me. Shadow I'm torn on. All of its stats seem very appropriate to me, but that strength drain IS a big deal. That alone *might* be worth bumping it up to CR 1. Obviously your experience sounds different than mine, and that's valid. I think you're doing things right by adjusting things for your table. No matter what the RPG, no matter what the design philosophy, no matter what the intended difficulty, that kind of adjustment will always be necessary at some tables. I think something to keep in mind for 2024 is that the vast majority of level 1 PCs are stronger than their 2014 counterparts, so a slight boost at low CRs will likely be a wash in overall difficulty.
This looks like good changes overall. 2014 had issues with CR being generally overestimated and inconsistent. Do you have any thoughts on the lore changes? Some of the updates they mentioend a while back were disappointing, seems like sanitising it in many places.
There are a number of things I don’t like about these new stat blocks. The succubus/incubus lost a ton of power and roleplay ability for the sake of simplicity. The more of the new direction of the game I see the more I realize just how little it can actually be used for long lasting rpg experiences. Knights in the game world now deal radiant damage with attacks just because. What if a player takes their sword now they too have a random magic item which will add to their power. Low levels are meant to be more mundane but this just isn’t that. I will assume some more “narrative” DMs will like these changes but honestly any game can give similar narrative content while still keeping a consistent setting. If cultists just have magic weapons why do lycanthropes even exist? A village can have a group of level 1 heroes wipe out twenty guys who are looking to summon a fiend then loot the poor fools. When everyone is magic it stops being magic. These magic items don’t even have names they are just random knight’s magic greatsword and apparently every knight in the setting just has one.
You're... just incorrect. The items are not magic items; the damage types added are a part of the creature using them, not the weapon. If your player picks them up, they won't have that same effect. If your players get upset about it, so be it, but the monsters are designed this way to provide adequate challenge to PCs. Let them do their job. No vitriol or anything, of course. We're talking about a game, here. Cheers!
The Knight is not carrying a magical sword. The radiant damage is coming from them. If it was magical, I'm sure the gear section in the stat block would say so.
@@CooperAATE Where in the stat block does it actually say the monster generated magic with any weapon they use? In 5e if a monster who adds force damage to a weapon they use uses a weapon it is made known. A knight is not a magical creature it is just a guy with a sword and armor so why do they now deal radiant damage? It’s not a gameplay feature because in dnd the rules do not work that way.
@@DevilsFourString That is not how DnD items are laid out. For 2024 DnD they are moving away from magical and non magical weapon damage. Damage doesn’t just come from nothing and it is never stated that this is just an effect a knight produces as they act. Think about the cultist these guys have no magic whatsoever yet they deal necrotic damage with their blades. Why do they do so? Did their dark gods bless their weapons? If so then anyone who uses them could make use of the magical effects. Heck what I am saying is a thing used in 5e anyways especially with powerful items like a Solar’s bow or if you took a Oni’s glave it would deal 2d10 damage instead of 1d10 because of the size difference. In the new version they are just making up new damage which of you as a player want to take you can. Unlike a video game in DnD you can just pick up the weapon of villian and if that villian was just dealing necrotic damage to your barbarian friend you would expect it to still deal that damage unless specifically mentioned that it ends as per a spell.
@epicsavagebros7400 except the Gear section in the stat block (for the Knight) says Greatsword. If the Greatsword were magical, it probably would say so. THAT IS how items work in DnD. Granted, you are correct that there was usually some basis in the stat block for additional damage (size, brute trait, etc...) in 5.14. I, however, have zero issue assuming that weapons and armor are totally mundane if not called out otherwise in the Gear section. I suspect the omission is intentional and to save space. I think it bears waiting to see the MM and if there is guidance on these situations. There very well might be a blurb that indicates these kinds of discrepancies are due to the monster in question, not the gear they use. The new DMG actually provides solid guidance on distributing magic items, so I really don't expect the MM to be giving out magic items willy nilly.
Why not? Probably the most popular 5e adventure, Lost Mine or Phandelver has an encounter with an AOE caster and bugbears. Literally BBEG fight is this. This isn’t even close to an unrealistic scenario.
Great video. It's encouraging to see this peek at more dangerous opponents.
Absolutely! It’s really starting to frame what “power” is going to look like with the new books!
And thank you :)
Creatures that used to have Advantage on saves against being Charmed, Frightened, etc. now just get proficiency in Wisdom saves.
A neat way of giving them that bonus and take less space on the block.
Yeah it’s more space efficient and still yields a similar effect!
It's also less flavorful, not a fan personally but I understand the logic
3:16 Dark Devotion was replaced with proficiency in Wisdom saves, which is weaker against Charmed and Frightened than advantage, but more generally useful.
Yup, I missed that! Someone else brought it up in a comment too! I like the move!
Wis prof this early is pretty big!
As a DM, i welcome the extra vulnerabilities. You cannot fathom the ammount of times my players took features that allowed them to learn stuff about enemies, and theyd always ask about vulnerabilities first. They knew it wasnt common. They still thought it was worth it over learning resistances. Id sometimes add vulnerabilities where it could be logical just so their efforts werent wasted
This is awesome on your behalf to reward player curiosity by adding vulnerabilities to stat blocks. Congrats on being a good GM!
I nerfed vulnerability to be only 50 percent more damage , and then I slapped that s**t on almost everything
Vulnerabilites and resistances always have such fun interplay.
I remember the delight when my players realised mummies are vulnerable against fire. You could downright see the glint in the eyes of our draconic sorcerer.
Similarily it is super fun when they have to switch tactics to deal with an enemy. E.g dealing psychic damage over fire to deal with resistances and immunities.
A bunch of these creatures have ranged attacks that deal more damage than their melee attacks. This feels massive if the players know about it, as it shifts the focus for players to fighting in melee so those creatures will have disadvantage on more powerful attacks, rather than engaging from a safe distance.
This has the potential to be a literal game-changer. I'm not sure what to make of the fact that they're generally less accurate - maybe it's to prevent the creature's offensive CR from changing, but it does also make disadvantage an even bigger deal.
The changes we are seeing in these creatures definitely shifts the dynamics of a battlefield in a big way! Great observation!
It's also interesting cuz the opposite is generally true for players now, where they nerfed ranged damage and buffed melee
I quite like that they made resistance to bludgeoning and piercing more powerful but less common. Makes it feel more unique, hopefully without feeling like a significant nerf against martials
If it will be common, that they dont difference between non magical and magical weapon attacks, would that mean, that martial become weaker.
Because, until now was most resistence only again non magical weapon attacks.
Had whe +1 weapon, was the dmg normal. And only the caster was mostly resisted.
But, as long as not to many Monster are resistent again all weapon Typs, would whe have now a reason, to carry weapons from all 3 typs with us (what could suck, if you want to be a specific weapon User, like a spearman or swordman, and doesnt want to wear maces and so one).
I think a useful note about the pirate captain is that the rapier grants advantage his next attack. The pistol would normally be at disadvantage since its a ranged weapon (and presumably hes in melee to attack with sword). So he can use the pistol in melee more easily than he otherwise would.
Veeeeerry nice - love to see more dynamic creatures. Damage types interacting with vulnerabilities and resistances makes me quite happy,
Very very much this! They’re taking
Much bigger steps than I expected!
@@InsightCheck I've been running things that way anyway as I tend to homebrew most of the monsters I use - still, will be quite nicer if that's not always needed!
It seems to me that WotC has moved the 5.5E monster statblocks more towards the 4E monster statblock format in that there's less "natural language" text and more straight to the point mechanics explanation. For example, reactions now have Trigger and Response.
I'm happy they're making ranged options much more powerful cause that makes kiting no longer the literal strongest encounter ender vs most monsters.
Good.
3:13 The Cultist gained proficiency in Wisdom saving throws in place of the Dark Devotion trait. This kind of change seems pretty common; several of the Beasts in the PHB lost Keen Senses in favor of proficiency or expertise in Perception.
Yeah, a couple people brought this up in the comments! I’ll pin a comment about it :)
I finally feel like I can create the monsters I want to create using these as templates. FINALLY! What a great time!
You always could 😢 These changes feel too gimicky though. They made the NPC’s stronger but no reason behind it. A lot feels like they are directly attacking Barbarian builds which is not healthy.
@@peterwhitcomb8315 two things:
1. Maybe you've experienced this, you're making a monster stat block and it deviates from whatever has been printed out since 2014. You bring it to the table as the DM and you start playing with it and the players begin questioning why it has certain abilities that work in certain ways that are not reflective of the printed material. I use different elements; some from older D&D editions and some of my own ideas from other inspirations in modern games and even translatable concepts from video games. I strove to emulate what I saw in printed materials because I thought that would be more easily accepted by my players. But now some of the things I'm seeing from the 2024 stat blocks allow me to do things I've already thought about but haven't been able to execute because of the same reason.
2. As a DM, I do not care that the Barbarian feels a little bit less robust now. This is more of a 2014 problem that they've been addressing for the whole magical weapons versus mundane weapons issue, and it's a little bit more complicated than that, but both as a player and a DM it does not matter to me that Barbarian is a little bit less sturdy.
IMO the Knight's crossbow dmg should of stayed 1d10 and the Ogre should have reach 10ft, not 5ft on it's greatclub
What interests me the most with the new monsters are the spellcasters! I'm curious if we'll see more monsters in the Monster Manual that have Action spellcasting, Bonus Action spells, and Reaction spells. Since creatures don't use spellslots we might run into a monster that could do something like: Cast Fireball, then Misty Step, and Counterspell someone trying to Counterspell them. This would likely be a powerful spellcasting creature, but neat to see!
I am so excited to see this kind of thing too. How all the versatility is going to play out for casters. Can’t wait to grab the new MM!!
Considering legendary creatures have multiple reactions a creature with reaction based spells that don't use spellslots would be...impressive. Imagine casting shield, counterspell and hellish rebuke.
I'm sad to see the benefit of Adamantine weapons disappear from the stat block. It was one of the more unique damage interactions, which made it interesting. I wonder if that will come back in some form? Does the new DMG or PHB mention adamantine weapons at all, and do they have any extra effectiveness against constructs?
They're in the DMG but don't have anything for constructs, only objects.
Maybe they got tired of people saying a golem could kill an ancient dragon like in 2014?
Love that new Stone Golem. I had a really boring encounter with 4 Stone Golems 3 sessions ago, and I'm glad he got buffed
It’s a massive upgrade for it!
Making monsters have thr ability to cast and multiattack was the first change I did as a dm with my monstets.
Also bumping damage and hp a lot.
Love it!
The Fire Elemental sets creatures on fire with burning in the aura as well.
Something I just noticed after seeing all the stat blocks back to back here that finally clicked for me. 2024 Monsters that have Dex Save Prof get to add their Prof to Initiative
I loved playing a Moon Druid and turning into a Fire Elemental. So many ways to do damage on another creatures turn. Dealing damage when hit was actually kinda cool. Add in the Fire Shield spell, or heaven forbid the Armor of Agythis and you've basically become a very hittable target that no one wants to swing at. I'm interested to see how this one plays out with the addition of the aura and the loss of damage dealing upon being hit
Didn't even realize they dropped a new mini adventure! This was an excellent and informative video, my players are on a ship right now so I'm immediately dropping the Pirate Captain into my game.
Whoa what a trip whenever I see you pop up in here lol!
Yeah, it was so under the radar and easy to miss. I’m surprised they didn’t make much of a deal about but I’m so glad to see what they did here!
Oh my God, I love it!
Same! Some really big swings here!
@InsightCheck I guess I do have to buy the the monster book when it comes out. I thought I could save some money on that one, but with these changes I actually want the updated monsters. They are so much more engaging:D
I like the changes to attack damage types but wonder what would happen if the PCs wanted to get the Cultist Fanatic's Pact Blade after killing them. I guess that's also something to consider with the Tough Boss's Warhammer and H-Xbow that have different damage dice - would the PCs get a 2d8 Warhammer?
Yeah I wonder about that too. I have to imagine the boosted damage just applies to the creature for… reasons lol. The 2d10 Longbow on the Knight for example I don’t think is actually a 2d10 Longbow for anyone else.
I should have discussed that during the video!
It's not listed under gear, so I imagine that much like a Warlock's conjured Pact Weapon, it disappears when they die or when it's separated for them for a minute.
6:00 The cult fanatic could upcast Inflict Wounds for a chance to deal 4d10 damage, which is pretty strong when you encounter them at 2nd or 3rd level. So losing that spell and spellslots seems significant. And losing sacred flame gets rid of most of their ranged damage options.
2:52 that is kind of a problem. It’s a meta game minigame. I like the old feature because it was supposed to make these guys like barbarians.
Also the pirate captain multiattacking with a pistol will raise some eyebrows. At least the giff from 5e 2014 had a feature to address this, ignore the reload property.
But that kind of leads people to blend character abilities with monster ones. I think the point here is to create more distinction between PCs and NPCs. They shouldn't always be 1:1.
@ sure not always 1:1, but it’s not necessarily a bad thing occasionally and sometimes the feature makes a bit more sense if you are also describing the attacks with flavor (not just treating this like a tactical war game). Why is the new berserker getting advantage vs enemies w/o max hp? If it’s like a blood lust, then why isn’t this a trait? It’s arbitrary. I guess we will just have to see other examples they have for monsters with edits to the attack roll description. I also find it interesting they did away with the “one target” component. You could say it was pointless, but I just think WotC designers failed to capitalize on it. Anytime a monster could harm more than one, like a sweeping attack, it was instead done as a saving throw for the targets.
Loved the video, great analysis!
Great video, i am very excited about new monster's design. You should see Alphastream's very informative video about combat encounter math in PHB24, the budget for monster is a lot more generous past lvl 5, so that is another factor to consider for monster's power
Sounds good I will definitely check it out!
12:11 This and the Incubus Block sounds like it will be interesting to modify for an NPC who was an Apprentice Wizard (Level 4 at the time now Level 17) who was Wished into a Succubus when the Apprentice's Master tried to Wish himself into a Pit Fiend(Was put on a waiting list as an Amnizu)
🙃
We need the new monster manual yesterday, lol.
Hard agree lol!
The initiative on the pirates is really high too. I think they added their prof. Bonus to it
That berserker change is crazy, if you’re missing hp then they can never have disadvantaged to attack you
While I’m not 110% on players being more powerful across the board, some certainly are.
As a DM, I’m absolutely excited to see monsters being more versatile, and able to hit harder.
So many of the 3rd party designers have made vast improvements to the standard monsters with even subtle changes.
It seems like intellectual skills are just being left off of monsters, as are things like Insight and maybe some other social skills in some cases. I suspect there's gonna be a note early on in the MM that DMs can add those kind of skills in if necessary, but it's interesting.
Here are all the old pirates
Neogi Pirate AC 16 HP 33 CR 3 BOO 41 Boo Astral Meagerie
Pirate AC 12 HP 11 CR 1/8 MM 343
Pirate Bosun AC 12 HP 27 CR 1/2 GOS 247 Ghost of Saltmarsh
Pirate Captain AC 14 HP 45 CR 2 GOS 247
Pirate Captain AC 12 HP 65 CR 2 MM 344
Pirate Deck Wizard AC 12/15 HP 32 CR 1 GOS 248
Pirate First Mate AC 16 HP 26 CR 1 GOS 248
So maybe the pirate first mate is the one they coverted
Oh cool!
Yeah it’s possible that was what they based it on, I can see it.
I think the bonus attacks, and multi attacks increase is due to weapon mastery. Ex. Sap does disadvantage on next attack roll. So First swing is a possible miss but the second attack does not care for your disadvantage.
I HATE that monsters straight up do not use the same rules as PCs.
A Pirate’s rapier does 2d8 damage but when I pick it up as loot it now does 1d8?!
If I give it to an NPC does it go back to doing 2d8?
I HATE that.
A Big Miss in 2014 monsters (that I usually fix before they hit my table) is the lack of ranged options... I generally make them *less* deadly at range... but they should still have Something Significant to do if they can't close...
Great video!!! First in depth look at how monsters will work in 2024 (2025? 🤪) MM that I have seen. Love the comparison vs 2014. The monsters now all seem like mini PCs for the DM to run... This should be a lot of fun for DMs going forward! The pirate in particular seems so flavorful, with the rapier/and. Then a pistol shot with advantage on a different PC. This is making me want to DM!
I hadn’t really seen anyone talking about it either and I LOVE discussing monster design so it was a perfect opportunity!
The new monsters look like so much fun to run, I can’t wait to see more!
I wonder if 2014's Thug stat block got renamed to Tough in the 2024 MM, and the Tough Boss is a higher CR version? The stats look similar.
I'm not convinced that the One Leveled Spell Per Turn rule is sidestepped by the way they formatted monsters, IE Cultist Fanatic. They are all formatted as X/Day, and that could be to simplify the creatures rules for the DM as there's no slots to keep track of, just spell uses. So I'm not 100% sure what's intended here lol.
I'm scared barbarians are nerfed by the new statblocks. There might be a lot more monsters that can do damage other than bludgeoning piercing and slashing damage.
Wow this is awesome!!!!!
I love these changes a lot! Though I'm against the cutting back on some of these traits (like the knight), I can understand why. The easier it is to run creatures, the better it is for the DM to play encounters with 4-8 creatures each having their unique traits
Lots of flexibility, you love to see it. Flexibility of options is different from number of options, and this is so clearly seen in this design where they cut down some options but made the available options more powerful and meaningful while also adding stuff
Yeah there is some flavour loss (Leadership trait from the Knight) but overall, thee is a lot of really great changes here!
My Homebrew monsters based on the original monster manual 2014 will have good alt versions now...
Wait till you see the new commoner with their petrifying gaze and their club attack has been replaced with a 3/day Thunderwave!
Just got to the bit on pirates, and I wonder if, instead of the Saltmarsh pirate, if the new pirate is supposed to compare to the Vampirate and Vampirate Captain from Spelljammer? Let's see... Will update with thoughts.
Edit: There's some obvious differences, of course, like being Undead or not, but I do think the Vampirate was the starting point that they built these new Pirates from. They look like a ton of fun! :D
I’m not the biggest fan of 5e’s implementation of vulnerability, so I’m not sure I want to see more done with it. It becomes too much of a force multiplier and swings balance pretty massively.
I think the Pathfinder method of having flat additional damage (maybe even flat damage per damage die instead of per hit) or having effects on the creature when taking a certain damage type are way more interesting.
What I hope we see more of is the types of “vulnerability” that we saw with the Frost Salamander in Monsters of the Multiverse. Whenever it took fire damage, it automatically recharged its breath weapon.
Vulnerability is a dangerous thing to incorporate too broadly but there can be some very interesting ways to incorporate it that don’t feel to meta gamey and destructive.
Hi there! Unrelated GM/DM question that would make for a great video IMO: For a DM that hasn’t been paying attention and their players really want to move to the 2024 rules, what do you feel are the biggest, most impactful changes and what new abilities, features, and changes, should we expect to see from our players?
These monsters might be more challenging but they don't make sense. Why do pirates charm? Why do knights do radiant damage?
I would say that pirates (though particularly Swashbucklers) are well known for their quick feet and graceful movements. Remember, it’s “Enthralling Panache” referring to their confidence or style which can be so captivating as to “charm”.
Knights are often warriors of good, sometimes anointed as Paladins, which can also explain the Radiant damage.
I honestly can't get my head around why a number of people are confused by the radiant damage on the Knight. Knight as short hand for divine or holy warrior is not new in DnD...
As a DM since 1996, I like the new variations and abilities of the NPC´s and will enjoy using them, but it will be more difficult for inexperienced DMs to get all of the additional effects, flexibility in actions, upcasting spells etc. right.
What about masteries? Do monsters get them? Or is it not mentioned?
I do want to point out, spiritual weapon did not require concentration in 2014 but the new rules changes kinda renders that moot for monsters as technically this is an ability and not the spell
Since most enemies only last 1 encounter once per day is just once
15:30 When would you actually use Panache, tho? The only situation I can see it being better than other options would be a 1-on-1 duel.
What does resistance do against 1 point of damage? 😅
My DM found the 5R player stuff neat but without better monsters he will not "upgrade" This brings some hope.
Is draining kiss a perm reduction or did they miss out until long rest part?
What does the PB +2 after the xp value indicate?
It indicates the Proficiency Bonus of a creature. It can be used to figure out how numbers make sense or if you wanted to flavour a creature to give it proficiency or expertise in something, you know what you can add.
I’m all for monster multi attacks bc they’re almost always outnumbered…. less/no minions needed. Also makes (the spell) Slow way more powerful
Actually I'm quite glad they removed the new *Inflict Wounds* from the Cultist Fanatic!
It's a much worse spell than it was, but for a CR 2 monster, effects with save for half damage have a much greater impact on players.
That's literally unavoidable damage, which especially impacts those lower level PCs like when you'd be fighting these.
Monster Automatic when 😞
Enthralling Panache... Will we be getting Swashbuckler?
This video has me very worried for when we get 2024 tarrasque
they've had 10 years of "how to kill tarrasque" videos to make this guy a truly godzilla level threat
Can't wait for the ranged attack they will likely give it
I was joking about this yesterday actually haha. I can’t wait to see what we get!
@@InsightCheck I can just imagine laser beams out of the horns or something
Where I can find this release of new monsters?
It’s on DNDBeyond and is free to claim!
Good video but Im not excited about 2024, I think the power creep is not going to be beneficial to most games. More complicated, yes, but clunkier and less beginner friendly and that applies to most gamers I am playing with right now.
What's the "PB+[#]" in the XP entry?! 😮
It’s referring to the “proficiency bonus” which can be useful to understand where the numbers are coming from or to help a DM give a monster custom skills or weapons!
I like that many monsters are getting stronger, but I dislike that, after changing spells into abilities in Monsters of the Multiverse, now suddenly they are taking the opposite route and changing abilities into spells. It follows this design pattern were everything is being simplified and standardized, and as a consequence it makes these monsters feel less unique. Like, the succubus is a seductive fiend, so her charm was one of her signature abilities, an important part of what she was and something she could inflict on others due to her very nature. Now, she just casts a spell on you with components like any wizard would do, AND it can be counterspelled. Kinda meh, honestly.
It’s also one of those things that makes the design team job easier, but the DM’s job actually a little harder. It’s better when the thing a monster’s action does is written on the stat block and doesn’t demand you to check something else on another book or platform to make sure the spell is being done right, specially when you may already have multiple monster stat blocks to pay attention to in a single combat and some of them may have many different spells, and you often want to play their turns fast in order to avoid slowing down the pace of the encounter.
On the other hand, I loved what they did with the action economy of some monsters. I specially appreciate the shapeshifting at bonus action for the succubus. I actually homebrewed that into a succubus once because it would feel weird as hell for her to spend her action to reveal her true form and then do nothing for the entire round. The same thing applies for Night Hags.
They kind of just stripping away all interesting tactical decisions and replacing it with regular damage bumps. Adding ranged options actually makes the creature less complex mechanically because it no longer matters where it’s position on the battlefield is
So stuff like cover and disadvantages in melee range doesn't matter now?
@ I mean adding ranged attacks to creatures that were intended to be melee. Archers are interesting because when you get into melee they either have to switch to a weapon that deals significantly less damage , or make their attacks at disadvantage. If they just pull out a rapier or something and do the exact same amount of damage with an identical or near identical accuracy, then that gets rid of strategic meaning as well. Most monsters should be significantly better at one range rather then the other
@ like when mmom decided that wizards are just as capable in melee as at long range because there force blasts could be melee or ranged without any other difference, that got rid of strategic relevance of the battle map as they are equally effective no matter where they are on the battlefield
Perfect moment for adds.
The incubus started, and it came a add for this new Ai girl app^^
LOOOOL that’s hilarious
Also, not to be that guy, but the barbarian at 19:49 is a snack.
They have turned the original D&D into a superhero RPG.
Insert the “always was” meme here
That pirate is what the party should have faced in the encounter at the Elfsing in chapter 1 of Decent into Avernus ans not the TPK one 😂
May be a hot take, but I actually hate that so many of these monsters get to auto dump radiant damage or charms. Radiant is something I associate with divine energy, not your average plate armor wearing martial opponent. And what about the average pirate makes him able to charm you any time he wants?
I realize we’re trying to up the combat challenge of some of these creatures, but seems like they sacrificed the setting these monsters operate in to make them a challenge. These aren’t supposed to be just assemblies of numbers to overcome, they’re supposed to represent the average creature of that type in the game world.
I’m also salty about the succubus losing telepathic bond and going ethereal. Was writing an adventure that relied those features of the succubus for a particular character choice to work. I’ll work around it, and yes, I can use the old stat block for my own game if I want. I get all that. I just couldn’t publish as an AL adventure using the older version of the stat block.
I started playing under 5e, and heard older players talk of power creep. I watched it happed with every new sourcebook, and hoped it would all get reset and dialed back with ‘24, but it looks like we went the other way. Just give more power to the monsters. Well maybe in 10 more years with a real 6th edition.
The knight no longer feels like a knight, now its a paladin lite. The best way to run that boi is with the 2014 statblock plus a feat of some sort. Switching the sword for a halberd and giving it polearm master or having it be mounted with a lance with mounted combatant + charger is quite better. Also, the new weapon masteries are great to turn against players.
You would vastly increase the CR doing that though. On the other hand, not every knight is a leader, and another stat block might have those abilities you want. Find one and give it heavy armor, and the weapon you want. Maybe the mastery property of that weapon too, built into the attack like the pirate's rapier so you don't have to remember it in combat.
Can they still call it the "2024 Monster Manual," when it comes out in 2025?
One more reason I don't understand why they're being so set on calling it "Fifth Edition." Just call it "5.5" & be done with it.
Why the F should a random cultist get random necrotic damage on their mundane sickle attack?
Honestly I dislike all the monster changes. While I do agree additional damage/ability/vulnerabilities were needed - changing the monsters to seem much more like a video game just makes all combats expected to be these large dice rolls and more spam attack scenarios.
It just seems like they tried to make it like elden ring.
Some of these (like berserker) are definitely way too strong. 2 swings at a wizard and the player is down.
Even if RAW spellcasting enemies CAN cast multiple spells due to the lack of spell slot, I think I’m still going to DM them as good-faith intentions of the rules. Sure they may not explicitly have spell slots, but spellcasting enemies, to me, would suffer the same limitations as my spellcasting PCs.
That is, of course with exception to special and specific abilities. Just like an Archfey Warlock can now cast Misty Step without a spell slot AND a Pact Slot spell in a single turn through the use of a subclass feature, creatures like the Stone Golem could cast Slow through its special feature and potentially another leveled spell (if it had one) that was applicable to action economy.
I don’t think there is anything good faith/bad faith about then interpretation presented in the video. There is even a paragraph in the spellcasting section that mentions how monsters typically have spells limited in some other way. They’re also still limited by action economy. I don’t think there’s anything wrong or even slightly questionable about a monster being able to cast a spell in the same way that a player can. Most of the monster spells are way more limited by resources anyway.
Woulodnn't the Kinght suffer disadvantage on the Xbow attack given the Dex < 13 ?
A regular Heavy Crossbow also only deals 1d10 and not Radiant damage so I guess they’re playing a bit fast and loose here lol
Terrifyingly promising.
~_~
I don't like this. Some changes are nice but the succubus being able to cast 8th level Dominate Person at will is waaaay too powerful, and the Knight for some reason being able to shoot twice with a Giant Sized Crossbow (because 2d10) and doing an extra 1d8 radiant just makes no sense... Also removing proficiencies, and advantage on stuff and then giving expertise or nothing is just so boring... That on top of Legendary Actions being removed for the infuriating Reactions makes me more convinced to just not buy the new MM and use whatever free monsters I get if I like them more xd.
The 5e14 succubus already had an ability that was basically Dominate Person, allowing the succbus to command the target to commit suicide if it wanted and the target would only get an extra saving throw.
@@tibot4228 that doesn't mean it should be like this xd
It's a normal sized crossbow, they just get bonus damage with it. You can dislike that, but it's what's going on. They have an unlisted ability to just add an extra weapon damage die, which seems reasonable to me for a monster.
@@LoudYapper Completely agree. Many of CR
The the problem I have with 5e creatures are that many of CR 7 creatures being too weak. So, I personally don't really think these monsters have been fixed with these buff.
Tbh, I've found most low CR creatures to be about right, except low CR spell casters that I have found to be consistently under tuned. These changes generally look good to me.
Also, keep in mind that even at level 1, 2024 most PCs will be noticeably stronger than 2014. Each PC will have a feat, not to mention buffs that most classes have at level 1 (all martials, half casters, and some casters).
@@DevilsFourString Shadows (CR1/2) and Kobolds (CR1/4) can TPK even high level party and there too many story of them doing so. Quicklings are just so unfair in many ways for a CR1 creature, their attack is like if Death Knight can deals damage equal to twice amount of Adult Red Dragon's Breath Attack with a single longsword attack while they can attack 3 times. Speaking of dragon, a CR1 Chopper Dragon Wyrmling can literally TPK whole party using a single Breath Attack, its like if Adult Red Dragon can deals 3-5 times of its original Breath Attack damage. Those are just few example of how unfair these low CR creatures. I gave my players bonus Feat at level 1, with Crusher, Slasher, and Piercher not even being feat and simply just default mechanic, all to make them have better shape to deals with these low CR nonsense.
@Mardshima89 kobolds have never been an issue for me, and I'm not even putting them against optimizers. A pack of them can definitely be scary for level 1 parties, but they're well balanced IME.
The copper dragon wyrmling's breath weapon is devastating for a level 1 party, absolutely. But I would be shocked if it managed to get a whole party with it - it hits 4 PCs at most, and I bet only 2 the majority of the time. It seems appropriate to me.
Shadow I'm torn on. All of its stats seem very appropriate to me, but that strength drain IS a big deal. That alone *might* be worth bumping it up to CR 1.
Obviously your experience sounds different than mine, and that's valid. I think you're doing things right by adjusting things for your table. No matter what the RPG, no matter what the design philosophy, no matter what the intended difficulty, that kind of adjustment will always be necessary at some tables.
I think something to keep in mind for 2024 is that the vast majority of level 1 PCs are stronger than their 2014 counterparts, so a slight boost at low CRs will likely be a wash in overall difficulty.
This looks like good changes overall. 2014 had issues with CR being generally overestimated and inconsistent.
Do you have any thoughts on the lore changes? Some of the updates they mentioend a while back were disappointing, seems like sanitising it in many places.
There are a number of things I don’t like about these new stat blocks. The succubus/incubus lost a ton of power and roleplay ability for the sake of simplicity. The more of the new direction of the game I see the more I realize just how little it can actually be used for long lasting rpg experiences.
Knights in the game world now deal radiant damage with attacks just because. What if a player takes their sword now they too have a random magic item which will add to their power. Low levels are meant to be more mundane but this just isn’t that.
I will assume some more “narrative” DMs will like these changes but honestly any game can give similar narrative content while still keeping a consistent setting. If cultists just have magic weapons why do lycanthropes even exist? A village can have a group of level 1 heroes wipe out twenty guys who are looking to summon a fiend then loot the poor fools.
When everyone is magic it stops being magic. These magic items don’t even have names they are just random knight’s magic greatsword and apparently every knight in the setting just has one.
You're... just incorrect. The items are not magic items; the damage types added are a part of the creature using them, not the weapon. If your player picks them up, they won't have that same effect. If your players get upset about it, so be it, but the monsters are designed this way to provide adequate challenge to PCs. Let them do their job.
No vitriol or anything, of course. We're talking about a game, here. Cheers!
The Knight is not carrying a magical sword. The radiant damage is coming from them.
If it was magical, I'm sure the gear section in the stat block would say so.
@@CooperAATE Where in the stat block does it actually say the monster generated magic with any weapon they use? In 5e if a monster who adds force damage to a weapon they use uses a weapon it is made known. A knight is not a magical creature it is just a guy with a sword and armor so why do they now deal radiant damage?
It’s not a gameplay feature because in dnd the rules do not work that way.
@@DevilsFourString That is not how DnD items are laid out. For 2024 DnD they are moving away from magical and non magical weapon damage. Damage doesn’t just come from nothing and it is never stated that this is just an effect a knight produces as they act.
Think about the cultist these guys have no magic whatsoever yet they deal necrotic damage with their blades. Why do they do so? Did their dark gods bless their weapons? If so then anyone who uses them could make use of the magical effects.
Heck what I am saying is a thing used in 5e anyways especially with powerful items like a Solar’s bow or if you took a Oni’s glave it would deal 2d10 damage instead of 1d10 because of the size difference. In the new version they are just making up new damage which of you as a player want to take you can. Unlike a video game in DnD you can just pick up the weapon of villian and if that villian was just dealing necrotic damage to your barbarian friend you would expect it to still deal that damage unless specifically mentioned that it ends as per a spell.
@epicsavagebros7400 except the Gear section in the stat block (for the Knight) says Greatsword. If the Greatsword were magical, it probably would say so. THAT IS how items work in DnD.
Granted, you are correct that there was usually some basis in the stat block for additional damage (size, brute trait, etc...) in 5.14. I, however, have zero issue assuming that weapons and armor are totally mundane if not called out otherwise in the Gear section. I suspect the omission is intentional and to save space.
I think it bears waiting to see the MM and if there is guidance on these situations. There very well might be a blurb that indicates these kinds of discrepancies are due to the monster in question, not the gear they use. The new DMG actually provides solid guidance on distributing magic items, so I really don't expect the MM to be giving out magic items willy nilly.
I feel so stupid for buying Monsters of the Multiverse
lol I mean it was nearly 3 years ago at this point and did do a lot to streamline monster design. This is just the next evolution of that.
I don't. I like that book, and I'm gonna like the new MM. Most statblocks to throw my players for a loop!
You'd never pair up a CR 2 creature with an AoE capable spellcaster vs a low level party. Be realistic.
Why not? Probably the most popular 5e adventure, Lost Mine or Phandelver has an encounter with an AOE caster and bugbears. Literally BBEG fight is this. This isn’t even close to an unrealistic scenario.