http://www.enworld.org/forum/content.php?1832-Check-Out-The-Monster-Manual-Table-of-Contents!#.U-1BcVawjx4
And all rejoiced for the presence of modrons and flumphs.
Actually, I'm quite curious to see what four pages of orc material looks like.
Where are creatures like the phoenix or Celestials? Is this only the first monster manual?
Melwick wrote:
I really want to see stats for the phoenix in the 5th edition monster list.
I'm interested what the Lich CR will be.
It's nice to see the Yugoloths return.
Setzer_G wrote:
I usually get the relevant stats I need for the monsters I want on one sheet and go from there instead of flipping through 3 different monster manuals looking for who's up, what they do, and how they do it? So much easier to take their entry page out of the binder, use it for the night, put it back when I was done.
You don't even have to pay for binding, covers, etc, Wizards, you could put them out in small shrink wrapped packets that we can just slot in alphabetically or whatnot. Smaller updates more often, or (gasp) just downloadable and printable on the web and we'd be good to go.
Looks like we're getting only two named monsters in the book. The Tarrasque was revealed earlier, and I can make out what looks like Acererak in the index, supposedly on page 49. It's blurry, but Demilich is clearly on page 48, so.... Can anyone see any other named monsters? I certainly might be missing some.
Hmm anyone else notice that the succubus/incubus is a separate entry and is neither a demon, nor a devil in 5e.
Grazel wrote:
Setzer_G wrote:
DLfan wrote:
I like the monster list very much. Very glad demons and devils and angels are called such, and not outsiders or whatever. Art is also excellent, love it.
Over 30 pages of dragons! A proper Monster Manual.
Also another topic of discussion: Mearls suggested that the MM features a playable Gith race. What other races might be in here?
Setzer_G wrote:
It's a whole book of monsters. It's a whole book of monsters! It's a whole book of monsters!
*runs to the WotC headquarters to kiss all the books*
Sorry, I... running a playtest game at level 20... having to homebrew every single creature in every adventure for ten levels... I may be a bit traumatized...
Ooh, look! Thri-Kreen!
I'm just hoping we get the archons, guardinals, and eladrins somehow. I'm pleased we have the other exemplars, but lack of the Upper Planar ones is just throwing off my symmetry man. Maybe we can hope for a web enhancement. That's how we got 3e modrons.
Sword_of_Spirit wrote:
DLfan wrote:
It's REALLY nice to see Acererak appearing in the Monster Manual. But I'm actually really disappointed that Shadar-kai didn't make the cut. They were one of my favourite monsters/NPC races/PC races in 4e.
I also seem to have found one of the first errata-bits needed or bits of conflict with the Monster Manual: the Index calls a particular creature a Plesiosaurus, while the DM's Basic Rules included a Plesiosaur monster – which presumably was copied straight from the Monster Manual. Since they sent the MM off to the printers before the DM's Packet was out, I expect the Dinosaurs entry to include a Plesiosaur, but the Index to conflict and call it a Plesiosaurus. Similarly, the Index calls a certain creature a Warhorse (and also there's a Warhorse skeleton); the DM's Packet includes a War Horse. Not a big deal, but still worth errata.
I do have a question for the lot of you before I get into my comments on other people's comments: anybody know what that miscellanious creature that's name starts with B is that's at the top of the B-list, before Badger? Looks like Baceech or something, I have no idea what it could be. Also, there's a Demons name in the C-list I can't make out, it starts with Ch and is between Chain Devil and Chimera in the index.
Lord_Kyrion wrote:
Marandahir wrote:
Marandahir wrote:
Thanks GilbertMDH. I should have realised it was Baboon (since that was given to us in the DM's Packet.
And thanks Mecheon. With Chasme, I now have a clear reference page on my ongoing Monster spreadsheet with all the monster names, their chapters (where each ToC heading is a chapter), and their page. :D
I'm hoping erinyes got put back to their pre-4E state. If not, it's not a huge deal; I'll just have to stat up my own. But having the "official" stats is always nice.
TiaNadiezja wrote:
thewok wrote:
Empyrean sounds vaguely familiar, but I can't place it. Anyone have any ideas?
Thanks
I'm still wondering where the phoenix is.
I don't know, but to me, it seems like these are either Inevitables (like Maruts) or general Celestials (like Guardinals or Pre-4e Archons) with a name change. Considering it's only 1 page, and there's only one stat-block, it can't be more than one creature (or if there are others, we only got a single sample of Empyreans).
I know there was such a thing as Empyrean Jade, which came from the Upper Planes, in 3.5e. But I don't think there were actual Empyreans (correct me if I'm wrong). I would be happy if this is the dog-headed Archon from Planescape and 3.5e – that would mean Archon could remain for the elemental warriors of the Inner Planes.
Leugren wrote:
Melwick wrote:
Mecheon wrote:
Melwick wrote:
Can anyone mirror this? EN World (along with the Wizards main site, but not the forums for some reason) gets blocked by my job's filters. 
Brightmantle wrote:
Mecheon wrote:
Marandahir wrote:
Marandahir wrote:
Mechagamera wrote:
I think I recall Mymidons as well as a proposed 4e Archon name. I'm okay with that, as long as they remain in the game. Never much liked the for-the-sake-of-alignment-balance celestials. 4e Angels were much cooler, and I hope the Planetars and Solars in this game are much like those. And Eladrin were never interesting until they were perilous fey lords and the Court of the Stars was moved to the Plane of Faerie. It seems that the Eladrin Lore has been preserved in the High Elf race, and given that during the Spellplague, in the Realms they discovered that Sun and Moon Elves were in fact Eladrin, and since Sun and Moon Elves are still a part of the Realms, I would gather that Eladrin, while High Elf is the core name used in the PHB, is the High Elf. Look, logic.
I see no reason why some Eladrin can't inhabit Arborea/Arvandor with their deities, though. I don't see the conflict, really, as long as Eladrin can keep their 4e lore. It was one of the coolest lore elements, and trying to wipe 4e off the map of lore would be just as offensive as wiping the old Archons and Guardinals off. There is a place for them – a lot of people care for them. I just don't much care for them, and don't need them to run my game. I would appreciate it if you didn't get so offended by every little comment I say. It's about my game; I have no desire to screw with other people's games.
Brock_Landers wrote:
We KNOW what all the Stat blocks are, though. There are 3 angels in the Monster Manual: the Solar, the Planetar, and the Deva. If you look at the index of monster stat blocks, you'll find them. You'll also find only ONE Empyrean. No Eladrin. No Guardinals. No Archons. That doesn't mean they aren't part of the assumed setting – they just didn't make the Core Rules. Not everything can.
Marandahir wrote:
32 pages of Dragons! Does anyone know if this will be limited to Chromatics and Metallics?
Azzy1974 wrote:
marius4 wrote:
mboss77 wrote:
Marandahir wrote:
Oh, you missed my caveat there, BadMike. I said I expect to see them in the DM's Guide, rather than the MM. 4e may have had these in the appendix of the MM, but I see no appendix for that in the 5e MM. I just listed those as I flicked through the ToC and the list of stat blocks for monsters that seemed reasonable as PC races, based on past playability, important PC characters from past editions, core monster-enemy-races, etc.
Marandahir wrote:
was i the only one excited to see the peryton is back?
blake_marlowe wrote:
Did you guys notice how many page of monsters and NPCs are in appendix A and B? It looks like the MM will have the stats for things like city watch, cultists, bandits, etc . That's very usefull because it means that the DM can wing a city scenario without having to do a lot of prep work.
After looking at this table of contents I 'm very happy with it. We have one page per monster again. Even the first 2e monster compendium (binder pages) didn't have as great a selection of monsters as this one.
With a quick glance I'm not seeing any new monsters, but I'm at least happy I have about 80% of the monsters that I typically use.
Setzer_G wrote:
dmgorgon wrote:
BadMike wrote:
Marandahir wrote:
TiaNadiezja wrote: