Monsters of the Multiverse releases as a stand-alone book in May

[137beth]

After the previous complaints that WotC hadn't said when Monsters of the Multiverse would be available outside of the 3-book bundle, D&D Beyond says it will be available (https://www.dndbeyond.com/marketplace/sourcebooks/mordenkainen-presents-monsters-of-the-multiverse) May 17. Polygon claims (https://www.polygon.com/22883750/dnd-monsters-of-the-multiverse-6e) that it will also be available as a stand-alone print book on the same date.

I still think it's annoying that the only way to buy the book at first will be alongside two older books, but at least now we know exactly how annoying.

[Unoriginal]

Well I for one am REALLY hoping the article's writer messed up when they said the monsters weren't tied to planes anymore, and just meant the whole "humanoids just have 'any alignment' now".


'cause if you're throwing away stuff like the Nine Hells, what the heck.

[diplomancer]

I actually think they did well by doing it the way they did. Makes it clear that, like the other two books, this is mostly a re-print, marketed to those who don't have the previous books.

And if you're a completionist, you can give them some extra cash for very little work, so everyone's happy, I guess.

[Psyren]

Well I for one am REALLY hoping the article's writer messed up when they said the monsters weren't tied to planes anymore, and just meant the whole "humanoids just have 'any alignment' now".


'cause if you're throwing away stuff like the Nine Hells, what the heck.

Pretty sure they mean "plane" as in "Faerun, Eberron, Ravnica" and not "plane" as in "Abyss, Celestia, Limbo." Campaign Setting in other words.

[Unoriginal]

I actually think they did well by doing it the way they did. Makes it clear that, like the other two books, this is mostly a re-print, marketed to those who don't have the previous books.

And if you're a completionist, you can give them some extra cash for very little work, so everyone's happy, I guess.

They said there would be new monsters and that many of the old monsters would be re-worked, though.

Hope someone publish a list of the ones who got modified.


Pretty sure they mean "plane" as in "Faerun, Eberron, Ravnica" and not "plane" as in "Abyss, Celestia, Limbo." Campaign Setting in other words.

Well that would be the article's writer messing up.

"Plane" is not the correct term for people who know DnD lore, and using it doesn't help people who don't know the DnD lore understand what the writer is talking about either.

[GooeyChewie]

The fact that the book will have new monsters entices me somewhat, but probably not enough to pick up a physical copy of the book. As somebody who doesn't own any books on D&D Beyond yet, I might get that version so that I have my own access to a wider selection of races/monsters.

[diplomancer]

They said there would be new monsters and that many of the old monsters would be re-worked, though.

Hope someone publish a list of the ones who got modified.

I'd say the difference between "re-working monsters" and "selling you errata" is a matter of marketing.

One thing I am curious about is how they will implement it in D&D Beyond. People who bought the old books but not the new books keep their old version? Or do they get automatically updated "for free" (assuming people would want that). People who buy the new book but had the old books get their compendium versions updated (thus losing what they'd paid for)? Or will they have Yuan-ti and Yuan-Ti*?

[Psyren]

Well that would be the article's writer messing up.

"Plane" is not the correct term for people who know DnD lore, and using it doesn't help people who don't know the DnD lore understand what the writer is talking about either.

I don't disagree - I'm merely pointing out that expecting exact syntactical precision from a publication (Polygon) that doesn't even focus on tabletop gaming in general, never mind D&D specifically, might be unrealistic on your part.

(Remember too that D&D/WotC does call campaign osettings "planes" at various points too. Every single one of the MTG settings is considered a plane for instance, which is where "Planeswalker" comes from.)


I'd say the difference between "re-working monsters" and "selling you errata" is a matter of marketing.

One thing I am curious about is how they will implement it in D&D Beyond. People who bought the old books but not the new books keep their old version? Or do they get automatically updated "for free" (assuming people would want that). People who buy the new book but had the old books get their compendium versions updated (thus losing what they'd paid for)? Or will they have Yuan-ti and Yuan-Ti*?

If you add both books to your campaign it will likely default to the newer version, much like adding both TCoE and ERFtLW will give you the new Artificer IIRC. But if you only allow the old version that's what you'll get.

[KorvinStarmast]

One thing I am curious about is how they will implement it in D&D Beyond. People who bought the old books but not the new books keep their old version? Or do they get automatically updated "for free" (assuming people would want that). People who buy the new book but had the old books get their compendium versions updated (thus losing what they'd paid for)? Or will they have Yuan-ti and Yuan-Ti*?
Good question.

I don't disagree - I'm merely pointing out that expecting exact syntactical precision from a publication (Polygon) that doesn't even focus on tabletop gaming in general, never mind D&D specifically, might be unrealistic on your part. AMen.


(Remember too that D&D/WotC does call campaign osettings "planes" at various points too. Every single one of the MTG settings is considered a plane for instance, which is where "Planeswalker" comes from.) I recall the early MtG port Planeshift Zendikar...

[Trask]

"Plane" is not the correct term for people who know DnD lore, and using it doesn't help people who don't know the DnD lore understand what the writer is talking about either.

They would be material planes wouldn't they? Alternate material planes.

[Unoriginal]

They would be material planes wouldn't they? Alternate material planes.

By 5e lore, they're all in the same Material Plane.

[ProsecutorGodot]

By 5e lore, they're all in the same Material Plane.

Yea, Fizban's pretty much cemented the single material plane thing with the introduction of Greatwyrm and dragonsight to the edition. I think it was already well established before then but it helps when the most recent books following the newest design philosophies still match that sentiment.

[Envyus]

Well I for one am REALLY hoping the article's writer messed up when they said the monsters weren't tied to planes anymore, and just meant the whole "humanoids just have 'any alignment' now".


'cause if you're throwing away stuff like the Nine Hells, what the heck.

No they are largely just not tying them to certain worlds. (With exceptions) Devils are still from hell and all of that.



Hope someone publish a list of the ones who got modified.


It seems pretty much every single one got some minor changes at least. And a good deal notable changes.

For a broad change the Magic Weapon trait has been retired.

[Unoriginal]

For a broad change the Magic Weapon trait has been retired.

Wait, what?

Why would they do that?

Did they replace it by something on the attack description?

[Envyus]

Wait, what?

Why would they do that?

Did they replace it by something on the attack description?

All creatures that used to have the trait instead do a different damage type instead. Force is very common. Take Demogorgon instead of his tentacles dealing bludgeoning damage they deal force damage now.

[Millstone85]

All creatures that used to have the trait instead do a different damage type instead. Force is very common. Take Demogorgon instead of his tentacles dealing bludgeoning damage they deal force damage now.I am going to echo Unoriginal.

Wait, what?

Why would they do that?

[ProsecutorGodot]

All creatures that used to have the trait instead do a different damage type instead. Force is very common. Take Demogorgon instead of his tentacles dealing bludgeoning damage they deal force damage now.

Wow, feels bad to be a Barbarian. If this is going to be design going forward I can't help but agree with the comments in that subclass to main class thread that Bear totem 3 should be rolled into standard rage.

I think I feel pretty comfortable saying that this is a decidedly negative change.

[Envyus]

Here is a lightly changed monster in Geryon
https://imgur.com/a/hkdaYCD

[Millstone85]

Also, wait, is force damage inherently magical? I guess it does say page 196 of the PHB that "Force is pure magical energy focused into a damaging form", but it feels like even more rule minutia.

[Envyus]

Also, wait, is force damage inherently magical? I guess it does say page 196 of the PHB that "Force is pure magical energy focused into a damaging form", but it feels like even more rule minutia.
It’s less that and more that damage resistance tends to be against Bludgeoning, Slashing, or Piercing. By changing the damage type they bypass it, and they no longer have to devote space to giving creatures the Magic Weapons trait. If they want a creature to bypass it, they can just make it’s attacks do a different type.

[Unoriginal]

It’s less that and more that damage resistance tends to be against Bludgeoning, Slashing, or Piercing. By changing the damage type they bypass it, and they no longer have to devote space to giving creatures the Magic Weapons trait. If they want a creature to bypass it, they can just make it’s attacks do a different type.

But there is lore implications to damage types, and to damage resistances.

Demons being able to hurt Devil thanks to having more Magic Weapons trait monsters doesn't carry the same implications than "they punch you but it does Force damages instead".


Here is a lightly changed monster in Geryon
https://imgur.com/a/hkdaYCD

https://c.tenor.com/sl9LOXQe9OMAAAAC/this-is-madness-300.gif

[Melphizard]

Question is how places like Roll20 and D&D Beyond will handle the selling of the book. Will they sell the bundle early and book later? Will they just sell the book? Questions among questions.

[Unoriginal]

Question is how places like Roll20 and D&D Beyond will handle the selling of the book. Will they sell the bundle early and book later? Will they just sell the book? Questions among questions.

I've read the book is already available as pre-command now on those sites. Or at least one of them.

[Melphizard]

But there is lore implications to damage types, and to damage resistances.

Demons being able to hurt Devil thanks to having more Magic Weapons trait monsters doesn't carry the same implications than "they punch you but it does Force damages instead".
[/IMG]


Tbf I think they're only resistant, not immune, at least in most cases. Gives a decent reason for why a small army of druids with conjure animals can't stop any demonic threat in a matter of minutes. Also the Blood War with this fact in mind makes their battle seem more like this:
https://i.imgflip.com/6220so.jpg

[Envyus]

Question is how places like Roll20 and D&D Beyond will handle the selling of the book. Will they sell the bundle early and book later? Will they just sell the book? Questions among questions.

Already confirmed as book later in May. The new stuff won’t replace the old, but instead will be an alternative.