MM page 197 has the stat block for the Kraken, a Garguantuan Monstrostity (Titan). It is listed as CR 23, and 50,000 XP.
Something is not right, I think, because the Ancient Blue Dragon, Ancient Silver Dragon and Empyrean all have CR 23 and 32,500 XP. Likewise, the Ancient Gold Dragon and Ancient Red Dragon are CR 24 and 36,500 XP.
So should the Kraken be something else (CR 25, perhaps?) or is the XP wrong?
It is the 3rd highest CR rating in the book, but the 2nd highest XP.
EDIT:
It was noticeable as I was going through the MM and created an Excel spreadsheet that lists all the entries by Name/Size/Type/Tag/Alignment/CR/XP/Page Number for easy reference and sorting. Handy reference for DMs.
Oddly the Experience Points by Challenge Rating table on page 9 lists CR 23 monsters as giving 50,000 xp
As does the Monster by Challenge Rating PDF: http://media.wizards.com/2014/downloads/dnd/MM_MonstersCR.pdf
Challenge 23 (50,000 XP)
Ancient blue dragon
Ancient silver dragon
Empyrean
Kraken
You're not going mad though, since my MM also lists the Ancient blue dragon. Ancient silver dragon and Empyrean as worth 32,500 XP... which is slightly less than a CR 21 monster than the Solar (CR 21, 33,000 XP).
So I think the Kraken is actually right, the other three presumably have a triple copy/pasta bug from an earlier XP value table.
And that is why is why it is smart to release the product via PDF first, so you can work out the majority of the problems before you go to print.
CyberGeek wrote:
Yeah, also extensive public playtesting to catch major and minor problems…
Er... um yeah…
Spartan506 wrote:
I really like this MM, but to be honest it is riddled with errors like this. I haven't closely studied the vast majority of monsters inside, but of the few that I have, I have found many errors, e.g., regular drow gain a +3 bonus to their AC from a +1 chain shirt (compared to a non-magical chain shirt), drow elite warriors have reach 10 with their shortswords, Cloud giants have a proficiency bonus of 4 for skills but 3 for saving throws, etc. etc. etc.
I really wish they had considered proofreading...
"Aaracokra seek signs of the pieces'
locations in order to rebuild what is now know as the
Rod of Seven Parts."
known not know.
Spelling/grammar error in the 1st monster entry. And there are many more mistakes, sadly. WotC doesn't know how to hire a good copy editor. It really pisses off my mom, lol. She's a retired newspaper editor, and a D&D fan.
The XP values *may* not be an error, but I can't say for sure since the alpha MM mostly just had a $ for the CR and XP values, so we weren't able to provide any feedback/proofreading on them.
While there are plenty of other math errors in the entries (eg. The banshee's Cha save should be +5 not +4), I would like to think there aren't as many as there might have been thanks to the keen eyes of my fellow alpha testers.
After all, if they didn't appreciate the feedback we gave them, our names wouldn't be in the credits. #humblebrag
Yeah, I am bugged that they misspelled the Aarakocra in the Serach for the Seven Shards block. I mean, that is pretty bad, as clearly Aarakocra showed up in spell check, and one would assume they added the correct spelling to their dictionary, so the incorrectly spelled version should have flagged. Its one thing to substitute 'know' for 'known' as at least both of those words are correctly spelled, but one would think a decent grammar check would catch it. I know Word 2007 does, as I just checked 
Math errors are bad, but simple spelling / grammar errors are inexcusable in this modern age.
Illithidbix wrote:
DavidArgall wrote:
Bumamgar wrote:
CR and XP-value aren't always coherent.
CR is the value at which a monster becomes beatable for a 3-5 party without too much threat. An ogre can kill off a ast level character with one hit, for example, so he got CR 2, where most characters gets enough beef to withstand it. Another case would be the rakshasa, which is stat-wise not much of a threat as a CR 13 monster, but his spell immunity makes him much harder to beat, since casters of lower levels would be laughed at. So the rakshasa got less XP than his CR would suggest.
MechaPilot wrote:
seti wrote:
MechaPilot wrote:
In my idealistic youth, I would've railed against the typos, but as I've gotten older, I've become more pragmatic. While I still notice typos without looking for them, they don't bother me like they used to. Unless they impact on the clarity of the game mechanics, they really are unimportant. We are all human. No book is completely error free. Even Tolkien admitted that revisions of his works introduced as many new typos as they fixed existing ones.
Bumamgar wrote:
RCanine wrote:
I always thought that CR was the approximate level where the monster presents a suitable challenge and the XP is the DM "budget" for encounter building. I.e. two monsters with the same CR could have significantly different XP totals depending on if the monster in question is a suitable challenge for an entire party, or if it is more something you fight ten at the time.
If CR 20 dragons award the same XP as CR 20 foot soldiers then, IMHO, the design team has dropped the ball.
kalil wrote:
kalil wrote:
Timborama wrote:
FFSAA wrote:
Bumamgar wrote:
The slightly confusing thing is that 5E's challenge rating and encounter system is kinda a mix of 4E and 3E.
But isn't either of them.
It's kinda explained in the DM Basic PDF. http://media.wizards.com/2014/downloads/dnd/DMDnDBasicRules_v0.1.pdf
Challenge Rating determines 3 things.
1) The number of experience points (XP) a monster is worth is based on its challenge rating. See the Experience by Challenge Rating table in the DM Basic PDF or MM. Note, this isn't a range, every CR 20 monster should be worth 25,000 XP. Hence it looks like there are... 3 typos with CR23 monsters.
2) The level you can throw the monster at players and expect them to be able to cope with it's special abilities and attacks.
3) Roughly if you put the XP value of a CR X monster into the Encounter Guidelines they are a Hard Encounter for a party of 4 level X players. And this is partially how CR is defined:
An appropriately equipped and well-rested party of four adventurers should be able to defeat a monster that has a challenge rating equal to its level without suffering any deaths.
Are they assuming a lower CR number if they are not in their respective lairs for the dragons?