TheRPGSite

Pen & Paper Roleplaying Central => Pen and Paper Roleplaying Games (RPGs) Discussion => Topic started by: jadrax on August 14, 2014, 06:14:42 PM

Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: jadrax on August 14, 2014, 06:14:42 PM
Fresh from twitter

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BvCBe_TCAAEd6_L.jpg:large)

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BvCCXkAIIAAstjB.jpg:large)

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BvCCZa6CUAANjmL.jpg:large)
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: One Horse Town on August 14, 2014, 06:17:21 PM
Ooh, Remorhazes.
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Brasidas on August 14, 2014, 06:29:27 PM
33 pages devoted to dragons, I see.
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: jadrax on August 14, 2014, 06:38:21 PM
Quote from: One Horse Town;779709Ooh, Remorhazes.

Yeah, looks like they have divided them by age.
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Necrozius on August 14, 2014, 06:55:49 PM
Only 2 pages for dinosaurs :(

Otherwise, I am pleased!
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Blacky the Blackball on August 14, 2014, 06:56:31 PM
Modrons!
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Haffrung on August 14, 2014, 06:59:26 PM
Wow. They absolutely nailed it. All of the classic AD&D monsters, and the best from each subsequent MM and edition.
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Sacrosanct on August 14, 2014, 07:32:31 PM
SO GLAD they organized it like this instead of like the downloads.  I most certainly did not want to go to the A's for Adult dragon and Y's for Young dragon.
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Gold Roger on August 14, 2014, 07:32:36 PM
Things I still miss:

Barghest

Eladrin, Archon and Guardinal

Neogi

Howler

Elder Brain

Frogemoth

I'm also not sure all kinds of Modron are present.


Not that I'm complaining, that's a small list and apart from the celestials and barghest they aren't monsters I'd have expected to see in a MM1.

The list is a big improvement on 3rd and 4th.

I don't mind that absense of named fiends. They belong in different books.

Still, I can't wait for the elder brain. Legendary actions and lairs should make that one a blast. Maybe even mind blowing.


I'll get my coat.


edit: I also wanted leucrotta. Wotc should start the second MM asap.
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Natty Bodak on August 14, 2014, 07:50:38 PM
Can you spot the only D&D monster created by the Argentinian master of magical realism? Hint: it's the one with the incongruously human shadow.

Color me surprised and pleased.
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Sacrosanct on August 14, 2014, 07:57:42 PM
No cave fisher.  I am disappointed.  Oh well, easy enough to stat up on my own.
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Larsdangly on August 14, 2014, 08:02:02 PM
29 pages of demons and devils! So stoked. As noted above, they exercised excellent taste.

Edit: Yikes, no Lurker Above ?!?!?!!

On the other hand, 4 pages of orcs sounds promising. As someone who likes D&D in their middle earth, I appreciate having a range of orc types (it is useless to tell me D&D doesn't work in middle earth, as I've foolishly gone ahead and done it many times).
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Saplatt on August 14, 2014, 08:06:25 PM
No nymphs?
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Saplatt on August 14, 2014, 08:18:07 PM
Quote from: Natty Bodak;779737Can you spot the only D&D monster created by the Argentinian master of magical realism? Hint: it's the one with the incongruously human shadow.

Color me surprised and pleased.

The Peryton?
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Natty Bodak on August 14, 2014, 08:34:46 PM
Quote from: Saplatt;779749The Peryton?

The one and only! I may like Jorge Luis Borges a little too much.
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: YourSwordisMine on August 14, 2014, 08:37:53 PM
booo...

No Thouls...
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: YourSwordisMine on August 14, 2014, 08:39:45 PM
So, dragon ages are Wyrmling, Young, Adult, and Ancient

It is kind of odd that they are spread throughout and not in the Dragon section. I guess keeping it all alphabetical is just as easy.
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Natty Bodak on August 14, 2014, 08:45:11 PM
Quote from: YourSwordisMine;779754So, dragon ages are Wyrmling, Young, Adult, and Ancient

It is kind of odd that they are spread throughout and not in the Dragon section. I guess keeping it all alphabetical is just as easy.

The dragons are indeed all in the dragon section if I'm reading this correctly.  It's just the listing in the index of stat blocks that had the wonkey ordering.
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: LibraryLass on August 14, 2014, 08:52:27 PM
I wish there were more dinos. I'd like some kind of raptor, a hadrosaur, an Apatosaurus or other sauropod, and Stegosaurus, just to get all the stock ones covered. That's the only really glaring omission IMO, though.

I wonder if Devas are the blue reincarnating Istari types from 4e. Those guys were pretty cool.
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: jibbajibba on August 15, 2014, 02:27:29 AM
Quote from: Blacky the Blackball;779718Modrons!

Well that ruins that :)....

Worst monster ever. Yes even worse than the Mimic and the Wolf-in-sheeps-clothing
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Blacky the Blackball on August 15, 2014, 06:23:38 AM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BvBOkYKCEAAz6yy.jpg)

(It didn't seem worth its own thread.)
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: BarefootGaijin on August 15, 2014, 07:02:18 AM
...and where are the Puddings? Do they fall under Ooze?

I see they have included the Succubus and Incubus. Shall I go warm the engine of the Purple Coloured Outrage Mobile?
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: selfdeleteduser00001 on August 15, 2014, 07:08:35 AM
I guess the books and books of monsters for 2e, 3e, OSR clones and the like will all be quite useable, although with an element of 'use at own caution'..

e.g. lower the AC in 3e, boost the hp in OSR clones, watch for any really high attack bonuses, or just fuck it, kill the players anyway!
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: jadrax on August 15, 2014, 07:14:03 AM
Quote from: BarefootGaijin;779834...and where are the Puddings? Do they fall under Ooze?

Yes, Black Pudding in on page 241.
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: BarefootGaijin on August 15, 2014, 08:02:30 AM
Quote from: jadrax;779838Yes, Black Pudding in on page 241.

*puts glasses on*

oh yeah!
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Bill on August 15, 2014, 08:18:10 AM
Some great stuff here for me;
Many of my favorite monsters are in:
Rakshasa, Revenant, Behir, Death Knight, Yuan-ti, Slaadi, Mind Flayers, Medusa.

And...over 15 pages of demons and devils!
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Shipyard Locked on August 15, 2014, 08:22:18 AM
Ogre mage is "oni" now for keeps.

All the elemental genies are present. :)

Winged kobold gets an entry. :confused:

Standard player races don't get monster entries.

Jackalwere is here!?
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: estar on August 15, 2014, 08:28:39 AM
Quote from: Shipyard Locked;779845Standard player races don't get monster entries.

They are meant to be combined with the NPC templates in the appendix.
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Bill on August 15, 2014, 08:28:44 AM
Quote from: BarefootGaijin;779834...and where are the Puddings? Do they fall under Ooze?

I see they have included the Succubus and Incubus. Shall I go warm the engine of the Purple Coloured Outrage Mobile?

Just realized the Succubus/Incubus are not in the Demon or Devil section.

Clearly, a targeted attack on Purple.
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Natty Bodak on August 15, 2014, 12:16:22 PM
Quote from: Shipyard Locked;779845Winged kobold gets an entry. :confused:

Why the confusion?

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;779845Standard player races don't get monster entries.

Except for "Elves: Drow"?
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Armchair Gamer on August 15, 2014, 12:27:40 PM
Quote from: Bill;779848Just realized the Succubus/Incubus are not in the Demon or Devil section.

Clearly, a targeted attack on Purple.

   That's part of their attempt to split the difference between pre-4E demonic succubi and 4E diabolic succubi. Given that the creatures and their equivalents (2E-era erinyes) have always stood outside the standard progression of demon types or diabolic hierarchies, making them something outside the Big Two groups makes sense.

   Personally, I don't see a need for them in the core MM. But that's a minority position based on the premises that
   
 Still, it's by no means a deal-breaker, just like the involvement of Zak S and the Pundit wasn't. :) And I have no objection to them in things like Planescape or Ravenloft; indeed, Van Richten's Guide to Fiends is one of my favorite books in large part because it uses fiends, including a succubus, to address those deeper themes
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Planet Algol on August 15, 2014, 01:01:20 PM
Wow,  despite the lack of Froghemoth, I'm happily surprised with how solid this lineup is.

I don't see any 4e critters, not that I'm an expert. Are there any in this? I guess I could just go to purple and see what Ezekiel is throwing a fit about this week.
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Haffrung on August 15, 2014, 01:18:44 PM
Quote from: Planet Algol;779918Wow,  despite the lack of Froghemoth, I'm happily surprised with how solid this lineup is.

I don't see any 4e critters, not that I'm an expert. Are there any in this? I guess I could just go to purple and see what Ezekiel is throwing a fit about this week.

I think Nothics are a 4E monster. There may be others.
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Natty Bodak on August 15, 2014, 01:24:27 PM
Looking through the monsters in the basic rules and the previews others have posted here, it seems like immunity to non-magical weapons has generally been nerfed to resistance. Is my perception accurate, and is this a result of a world with pew-pew cantrips or something else?
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: YourSwordisMine on August 15, 2014, 01:30:38 PM
Quote from: Blacky the Blackball;779826(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BvBOkYKCEAAz6yy.jpg)

(It didn't seem worth its own thread.)

haha that's funny. Glad to see they are keeping the trend going
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Sacrosanct on August 15, 2014, 01:34:48 PM
Quote from: Natty Bodak;779927Looking through the monsters in the basic rules and the previews others have posted here, it seems like immunity to non-magical weapons has generally been nerfed to resistance. Is my perception accurate, and is this a result of a world with pew-pew cantrips or something else?

Probably due to the fact that magic items aren't assumed anymore, and are much rarer than in any other edition.  You might hit level 5-6 before you get your first magic weapon in 5e.
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Shipyard Locked on August 15, 2014, 01:42:12 PM
Just noticed the "Rug of Smothering". I could have used that during my last campaign!

Quote from: Natty Bodak;779897Why the confusion?

Heh, I dunno, struck me as a weird option, but that's subjective on my part for sure.

Quote from: Natty Bodak;779897Except for "Elves: Drow"?

Oh yeah, but they don't count to me.

QuoteI don't see any 4e critters, not that I'm an expert. Are there any in this? I guess I could just go to purple and see what Ezekiel is throwing a fit about this week.

So far I haven't spotted any, but a lot of classic monsters were re-interpreted in 4e, so we'll have to see their entries to find out which version they went with.
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: LibraryLass on August 15, 2014, 02:13:14 PM
Quote from: Planet Algol;779918Wow,  despite the lack of Froghemoth, I'm happily surprised with how solid this lineup is.

I don't see any 4e critters, not that I'm an expert. Are there any in this? I guess I could just go to purple and see what Ezekiel is throwing a fit about this week.

Flameskull and Revenant are 4e monsters (unless they're using the weird Mentzer revenant, but I'm 90% sure they're not). Deva might be. The name Oni instead of Ogre Mage is also a 4e-ism. I think Nothics might have been a late 3.5 thing that got a bit more attention in 4e.

Edit: Oh, and Blood Hawk is the 4e name for what previously had been known as a Dire Hawk in 3e and a Giant Hawk before.
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: jadrax on August 15, 2014, 02:23:52 PM
Quote from: Haffrung;779923I think Nothics are a 4E monster. There may be others.

3rd edition, Miniatures Handbook, I believe.
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Planet Algol on August 15, 2014, 02:24:45 PM
Blood Hawks were in the 1E Fiend Folio,  from what I remember of the basic PDF it's basically the same critter.

I like the Flameskull!
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: jadrax on August 15, 2014, 02:28:33 PM
Quote from: LibraryLass;779942Flameskull and Revenant are 4e monsters (unless they're using the weird Mentzer revenant, but I'm 90% sure they're not). Deva might be. The name Oni instead of Ogre Mage is also a 4e-ism. I think Nothics might have been a late 3.5 thing that got a bit more attention in 4e.

Edit: Oh, and Blood Hawk is the 4e name for what previously had been known as a Dire Hawk in 3e and a Giant Hawk before.

Blood Hawk is 1st edition, from the Fiend Folio.
Flameskull is 2nd edition, Forgotten Realms campaign setting.
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Sacrosanct on August 15, 2014, 02:31:21 PM
As bummed as I am there is no cave fisher, with the extra useability of monsters due to bounded accuracy, and the large content of this book, it just very well might be the best MM since 2e's hardback.
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Bill on August 15, 2014, 02:33:18 PM
Quote from: Planet Algol;779918Wow,  despite the lack of Froghemoth, I'm happily surprised with how solid this lineup is.

I don't see any 4e critters, not that I'm an expert. Are there any in this? I guess I could just go to purple and see what Ezekiel is throwing a fit about this week.

Boycott until Froghemoth is released?
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Shipyard Locked on August 15, 2014, 03:26:04 PM
Quote from: Sacrosanct;779953As bummed as I am there is no cave fisher, with the extra useability of monsters due to bounded accuracy, and the large content of this book, it just very well might be the best MM since 2e's hardback.

Between this and the incredible completeness of the PHB, maybe the plan really is to make splatbooks redundant and focus on the non-rpg elements of the I.P.
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Haffrung on August 15, 2014, 04:13:49 PM
My only favourite not in the MM is Jermlaine. Don't know why aren't firmly entrenched as a classic monster by now.
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: LibraryLass on August 15, 2014, 05:59:05 PM
Quote from: Planet Algol;779951Blood Hawks were in the 1E Fiend Folio,  from what I remember of the basic PDF it's basically the same critter.

I like the Flameskull!

Huh, I stand corrected.

Quote from: jadrax;779952Blood Hawk is 1st edition, from the Fiend Folio.
Flameskull is 2nd edition, Forgotten Realms campaign setting.

Well fuck.

What the hell original monsters are there in 4e, come to think of it?
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Planet Algol on August 15, 2014, 06:04:09 PM
I think the swordwing was? And I liked it enough whip up an oldschool conversion.
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Planet Algol on August 15, 2014, 06:05:37 PM
Holy crap,  they ditched the goofy 3e dire designation for giant animals!
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: LibraryLass on August 15, 2014, 06:14:15 PM
Quote from: Planet Algol;780025Holy crap,  they ditched the goofy 3e dire designation for giant animals!

I do wish they'd kept it for badgers, though. Dire Badger sounds awesome.
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Natty Bodak on August 15, 2014, 06:24:31 PM
Quote from: Shipyard Locked;779933Just noticed the "Rug of Smothering". I could have used that during my last campaign!



Heh, I dunno, struck me as a weird option, but that's subjective on my part for sure.



Oh yeah, but they don't count to me.



So far I haven't spotted any, but a lot of classic monsters were re-interpreted in 4e, so we'll have to see their entries to find out which version they went with.

I think the winged kobold appeared somewhere during 2e, not that I've ever seen them used much.

Speaking of drow, I'm kind of surprised there hasn't been any wailing and gnashing of teeth about the sunlight disadvantage for PCs. Bet that gets house ruled away a lot.
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Natty Bodak on August 15, 2014, 06:26:40 PM
Quote from: Sacrosanct;779932Probably due to the fact that magic items aren't assumed anymore, and are much rarer than in any other edition.  You might hit level 5-6 before you get your first magic weapon in 5e.

That could be it, although that could describe a fair number of 1e games I've played too.

Now I'm anxious to see if Shadows are still the stuff of nightmares for unprepared low level parties.
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: jadrax on August 15, 2014, 06:38:00 PM
Quote from: LibraryLass;780019What the hell original monsters are there in 4e, come to think of it?

Kruthik?
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: LibraryLass on August 15, 2014, 06:41:47 PM
Quote from: jadrax;780033Kruthik?

3e Book of Vile Darkness, I'm pretty sure.
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: jadrax on August 15, 2014, 06:50:07 PM
Quote from: LibraryLass;7800363e Book of Vile Darkness, I'm pretty sure.

Yeah, they are also apparently appear in the Miniatures Handbook.

I really should try and pick the Miniatures Handbook up, it appears to contain everything, ever.
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Gold Roger on August 15, 2014, 08:51:01 PM
Original 4th edition monsters:

4th edition archons- somewhat humanoid elementals with armor and weapons. They where new in everything but name.

And I'm stumped. That is all I can think of and I don't have that MM anymore.

There's a bunch of monsters that got pushed in 4th, but originated in 3rd.

The Nothic and Kuthrik both come from the Miniatures handbook. Shadar-Kai where from the Fiend Folio. As where those far realm humanoids whose name I can't remember, though they where different then. Boneclaws where MM 3 or 4.


From the 3rd edition MM, I'd actually like to see a return of the Delver and Destrachan. Yes, they are stupid, but awesome stupid, like the Frogemoth, Flail Snail or the Wolf in Sheep's Clothing. They belong in the same book.
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Gold Roger on August 15, 2014, 08:53:17 PM
Quote from: jadrax;780041Yeah, they are also apparently appear in the Miniatures Handbook.

I really should try and pick the Miniatures Handbook up, it appears to contain everything, ever.

You really shouldn't. There's a reason everything remotely useful in it got reprinted. That reason is that it was a horrible book.
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Natty Bodak on August 15, 2014, 09:01:45 PM
Quote from: Gold Roger;780074Original 4th edition monsters:

4th edition archons- somewhat humanoid elementals with armor and weapons. They where new in everything but name.

And I'm stumped. That is all I can think of and I don't have that MM anymore.

There's a bunch of monsters that got pushed in 4th, but originated in 3rd.

The Nothic and Kuthrik both come from the Miniatures handbook. Shadar-Kai where from the Fiend Folio. As where those far realm humanoids whose name I can't remember, though they where different then. Boneclaws where MM 3 or 4.

From the 3rd edition MM, I'd actually like to see a return of the Delver and Destrachan. Yes, they are stupid, but awesome stupid, like the Frogemoth, Flail Snail or the Wolf in Sheep's Clothing. They belong in the same book.

You're thinking of Foulspawn, perhaps?
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Natty Bodak on August 15, 2014, 09:12:17 PM
Quote from: LibraryLass;780019What the hell original monsters are there in 4e, come to think of it?

Did any of the Starspawn pre-date 4E?
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Planet Algol on August 15, 2014, 09:26:29 PM
I liked the rotwing zombies!

And the foulspawn, and I think they're 100 percent 4e?
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: LibraryLass on August 15, 2014, 09:28:29 PM
I thought of another one. Catastrophe Dragons. Which were pretty cool, wouldn't mind seeing them back.

Quote from: Planet Algol;780083And the foulspawn, and I think they're 100 percent 4e?

3e Fiend Folio.
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Gold Roger on August 16, 2014, 01:07:03 AM
Quote from: Natty Bodak;780076You're thinking of Foulspawn, perhaps?

Yep. 4th edition Foulspawn. Had the name and background of the otherwise different 3rd edition Fiend Folio version and at least partially based on monsters called Ushemoi in the MM5.

I think razorwings (was that the name?) where based on the Vivisector from the MM5 as well.

But then, the MM5 was something of a preview and testing ground for 4th edition anyway.
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: jadrax on August 19, 2014, 04:25:00 AM
Quote from: Natty Bodak;780031Now I'm anxious to see if Shadows are still the stuff of nightmares for unprepared low level parties.

Phone breaking spoiler.

Spoiler

(http://i.imgur.com/S0IHzUQ.jpg)
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: jadrax on August 19, 2014, 04:50:30 AM
Other MM News:

Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Saplatt on August 19, 2014, 08:58:19 AM
Bunches of preview pics can be found in this  (http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?358381-Does-anyone-who-got-an-mm-at-Gencon-want-to-offer-up-spoilers-to-us/page6)thread at Enworld.

Among others: Planetar, Pit Fiend, Thri-Keen, Rakshasa, Lich, Succubus/Incubus, Empyrean.

Also an example of a template (the half-dragon)

The art is fabulous. Far better, IMO, than the PHB.
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Raven on September 07, 2014, 01:21:59 PM
Brief look back at the Clay Golem (http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/excerpt-golems) and a MM preview (http://media.wizards.com/2014/downloads/dnd/MM_Golem.pdf)
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Exploderwizard on September 07, 2014, 04:50:31 PM
I thought that it was announced at GenCon that the MM release would be Sept 16th which means Wizards network stores would have it NOW!!!!!

Anyone know what happened to that? The preview says Sept 30th which means no MM until the 19th. Grrrrr.......:(
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: jadrax on September 08, 2014, 02:00:10 PM
preview of the Aarakocra, one of the few creatures so far that seems not to call back to its 1e roots.

http://christopherburdett.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/dungeon-dragons-monster-manual-aarakocra.html
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: LibraryLass on September 08, 2014, 10:34:42 PM
Quote from: jadrax;785865preview of the Aarakocra, one of the few creatures so far that seems not to call back to its 1e roots.

http://christopherburdett.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/dungeon-dragons-monster-manual-aarakocra.html

Perhaps not surprising, given how it was Dark Sun where they really hit their stride. It looks to be more influenced by that depiction of them.
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: The Ent on September 10, 2014, 02:06:48 AM
Quote from: Saplatt;780899Bunches of preview pics can be found in this  (http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?358381-Does-anyone-who-got-an-mm-at-Gencon-want-to-offer-up-spoilers-to-us/page6)thread at Enworld.

Among others: Planetar, Pit Fiend, Thri-Keen, Rakshasa, Lich, Succubus/Incubus, Empyrean.

Also an example of a template (the half-dragon)

The art is fabulous. Far better, IMO, than the PHB.

Wow that's awesome art. :) Especially the Pixie. This kinda strengthens my desire to play an Archfey Chain Warlock. :D
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: FaerieGodfather on September 10, 2014, 02:32:05 AM
Three cheers for Thri-Kreen!

Any chance they might have a race write-up?
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Planet Algol on September 10, 2014, 02:51:46 AM
I'm pretty happy the Rakshasa is smoking a pipe.
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Saplatt on September 11, 2014, 05:59:00 PM
Monsters in the 5E MM by CR rating (http://s3.amazonaws.com/slyflourish_content/monsters_by_cr.pdf).

(from Mike Shea's Review (http://www.critical-hits.com/blog/2014/09/10/review-monster-manual-for-dungeons-dragons-5th-edition/))
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: One Horse Town on September 11, 2014, 07:28:19 PM
Quote from: Saplatt;786500Monsters in the 5E MM by CR rating (http://s3.amazonaws.com/slyflourish_content/monsters_by_cr.pdf).

(from Mike Shea's Review (http://www.critical-hits.com/blog/2014/09/10/review-monster-manual-for-dungeons-dragons-5th-edition/))

Cockatrice is CR 1/2!
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Larsdangly on September 12, 2014, 12:42:00 AM
Quote from: Saplatt;786500Monsters in the 5E MM by CR rating (http://s3.amazonaws.com/slyflourish_content/monsters_by_cr.pdf).

(from Mike Shea's Review (http://www.critical-hits.com/blog/2014/09/10/review-monster-manual-for-dungeons-dragons-5th-edition/))

That is a terrific review. I'm encouraged that they seem to have figured out how to get the lightning back in the bottle this time around!
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Sacrosanct on September 12, 2014, 09:59:19 AM
Quote from: One Horse Town;786514Cockatrice is CR 1/2!

I imagine because of this:

"The cockatrice gives an attacked creature two chances to save before petrification and the cockatrice's petrification only lasts for a day."
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Exploderwizard on September 12, 2014, 12:04:14 PM
Quote from: Sacrosanct;786594I imagine because of this:

"The cockatrice gives an attacked creature two chances to save before petrification and the cockatrice's petrification only lasts for a day."

:rotfl:

" You were supposed to meet us at the inn yesterday man, what happened?"

" Sorry dude, I was on my way then I got stoned."
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: One Horse Town on September 12, 2014, 12:21:32 PM
Quote from: Exploderwizard;786623:rotfl:

" You were supposed to meet us at the inn yesterday man, what happened?"

" Sorry dude, I was on my way then I got stoned."

Given i doubt that the PCs should know the length of the petrification, i imagine a lot of characters will get left behind...
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Sacrosanct on September 12, 2014, 12:25:31 PM
I imagine the cockatrice will go from deadly fearful beast to a prank.

"See ol' Lord Fancypants over there?  When he's taking a bath, we'll drop this here cockatrice in his room.  Then we'll take his "statue" and place it in the city square.  Tomorrow great fun will be had"
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Gold Roger on September 12, 2014, 01:22:22 PM
Quote from: Sacrosanct;786626I imagine the cockatrice will go from deadly fearful beast to a prank.

"See ol' Lord Fancypants over there?  When he's taking a bath, we'll drop this here cockatrice in his room.  Then we'll take his "statue" and place it in the city square.  Tomorrow great fun will be had"

It certainly gives it a unique place among the petrification beasties.

Basilisk, Gorgon and Medusa are plenty enough deadly fearful beasts with petrification for me.

The Cockatrice is now quite useful for more purposes than pranks. It can be bred and possibly trained without access to advanced magic.

Law enforcement could use it for non-lethal takedowns.

Healers could use the beasts bite to put the progress of deadly conditions on temporary hold.

There might be a sport of capture the cockatrice on festivals. When the victors celebrate their victory, the loosers are put on disply.

Or petrification could be used as humiliating punishment. Spending a day as a statue in a compromising position on the marketplace is not a pleasant proposition. Especially when you come back smeared with grafiti.
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Necrozius on September 12, 2014, 02:42:47 PM
Petrification has always come across as horrifying to me because of the implications of reversing it on a statue that's been broken in places.

I mean, suddenly you're awake again and your arm is gone and is gushing blood and you're missing a chunk of your head.
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Saplatt on September 12, 2014, 03:18:39 PM
Quote from: Sacrosanct;786626I imagine the cockatrice will go from deadly fearful beast to a prank.
...

Well, it is basically a chicken.
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: LibraryLass on September 12, 2014, 04:06:29 PM
I confess I'm not quite a fan of this 24-hour petrification thing. That feels like an effect that should last until it's reversed.
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Tahmoh on September 14, 2014, 12:24:33 AM
Easily changed by a houserule.
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: LibraryLass on September 14, 2014, 05:40:20 AM
Quote from: Broken-Serenity;786845Easily changed by a houserule.

For sure. It's just weird.
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Necrozius on September 14, 2014, 06:38:37 AM
I think that I may just make it more unpredictable. Perhaps the petrification lasts 2d12 hours. Or until the creature is killed by a holy weapon. Or that the effect can only be reversed within a 24-hour window. Or until the next sunrise or sunset (which is far more dramatic). If they don't find a cure then it's permanent.

Something other than just 24 hours because that feels a little too artificial and predictable.

But to each their own!
Title: [D&D 5e] Monster Manual Contents Page
Post by: Larsdangly on September 14, 2014, 10:12:16 AM
Perhaps the correct move here is to take a page from DCC and encourage all monsters to be unique in at least some respects. The Cockatrice of Banesville Tower has struck again! They say his victims stand still as stones until the light of the next full moon shines on them!