Angry Drunk Review - 5e Monster Manual: A Modern Relic (2025)

Its a new day children. Wizards has released the newest edition of the biggest RPG around, and its time to actually read it. This brings me back, and its time for Uncle Krusk to tell you all about the joys of the good old days. RPGs were made for Real Men, and players respected the DMs divine will without even thinking of debate, and Rules Lawyers didn't exist... oh, wait? Were you a player? Sorry, this essay was for DM's. Let me swap gears for you real quick, hold on...

Welp, it happened. 5e DND has been released. This is the begining of the end, and should be considered a return to the dark ages. All the years of advancement with rules, mechanics, player agency, and even tone is out the window. DND is going back to the Bad Old Days, where knowing the rules gets you burned at the stake. It looks like 3e may well be the best we will ever get. Bend over, and warm up your mouth, because you will be sucking a lot of dick.

Welcome to the Drunk Review of 5e's Monster Manual. The first book for 5e that gives us context as to what players really should be expected to be able to do. Our drink for the evening is Yeti, because its both delicious, but also decently proofed which I will need to get through this book. I said elsewhere that there were off the top of my head 10 monsters that didn't piss me off and we will see how good a guesser I am.

One thing this review won't touch on is the obvious error of bonded accuracy. Its obviously terrible, and explained at length elsewhere. Go ahead and google stuff if you want. What I will touch on is the general composition of monsters, and why they were horrible. In addition to bonded accuracy. I'll also let you know how each monster fairs against some basic teams, specifically two major tests. 1 - Can it beat 6 dudes with bows at a decent range. (For which I will use the Challenge 1/2 Scout at the back of the book) and 2 - Can it beat a flying dude. For which I won't use stats, and will point out that most things in this book can't deal with flying foes (or even dudes in a tree). To be fair to the book, I will call out any improvements it does make. These are few and far between, but do deserve recognition. I'll also probably nit pick the hell out of it, but thats why they probably should have hired an editor to check for consistancy.

*Edit Thanks for the TOC Aryxbez
Monsters A-Z

The Credits
Ill start with the un-numbered credits page first. Mostly to make a few call outs. Specifically the idea that [zs] didn't touch this book. Reading this sequentially after the players handbook, this makes you excited. I won't name him because I don't want this to turn into the same as all of his threads and hope this avoids his google analytics. Overall this is exciting. I opened the MM and this was the first thing I checked.

I'll also call out the playtesters. They don't exist for this book. Or rather, "over 175,000 fans of D&D" playtested this. Thats obviously a marketing BS thing, but its here. I'd like to have maybe seen the real playtesters listed as well afterwards. Maybe that was the "Additional feedback provided by" right afterwards that doesn't have any spacing, but that seems really vague and potentially random. I also suspect no one actually playtested this.

No, this is an RPG, not a card game. But yes, it is completely ridiculous.

Contents
This is a table of contents. Its also not numbered but real page numbers start on 4, so maybe this is 3? Not really a big deal. The picture associated is amazing. Its some sort of giant frog eating a dude. This is probably the happiest I was reading this book. I'd post it but I can't find an art gallary yet. Which is disappointing, because I'd think that would let me show people how cool this frog is, and convince people to buy the book. Just take my word for it.

Introduction
To this books credit they only have one introduction. I don't know why so many RPGs have 4-5 of them with different names. This one they all fall under introduction, but have different sub titles. This book claims that all monsters in it are culled from previous editions (Drink for grognard appeal!). I don't see that as a great thing, and would have liked some new ones, but its also the first book in a new edition. So, I can see the appeal of "hey here are updated stats for stuff" over "here is new stuff". Unfortunatly they chose some real lame monsters. It also then goes on to say that the DM can change anything in this book to fit their world. Not unheard of, but it basically just invalidates the entirety of the fluff in this book from a players perspective. "Hey this might be how your DM does it. But maybe not". This is the gripe of not having a core setting, and a subject for a whole other thread.

How to use this book
I actually am not too upset with this part. It explains that this is a core book and the DM should read it to get ideas for monsters and adventures. I'm not crazy about the idea that it says its for DMs only, but straight up has tons of players options in it though.

What is a Monster
"A Monster is defined as any creature that can be intereacted with and potentially fought and killed". It then goes on to explain that this totally includes elves, dwarves and humans that might be friends with the player characters. That said, you don't get stats for them. Its got a suggestion at the end for giving them stock NPCs random racial buffs, but we will discuss that later. Short term, no entry for humans, dwarves, or whatever.

The book also claims to have ready to play easy to run monsters for all levels in any climate. I found it was hugely over populated with underdark foes and had very few "Woods" foes or "any plane but hell" foes.

where do monsters dwell?
This section was an awesome idea. It basically gives examples of things that can be dungeons and encounter areas for dungeons, the underdark, the wilderness, towns and cities, underwater, the planes of existance. I'd have prefered an entry on each plane, and maybe an entry on deserts, artic wastes, swamps, jungles, etc seperatly. Basically more of this. On one hand, no other edition I've read the MM for has it presented so straight forwardly and easily found, but on the other they have had a long time to get it right. Its also got an awesome underdark fungal forest on page 5.

what monsters to use?
here is where they break down size, type, speed, CR and all the stuff you care about. My first big hurdle? The max size is 20X20ft "or larger". Gargantuan is the biggest now. That thing people always complained about with dragons, where they are too small for the sense of scale you want? Well now its official. Unless they are "or larger" for whatever that is (Drink for unclear rules implying the DM should just Make Some Shit Up)

Also, right next to a size chart is an explanation of templates. It doesn't seem to have context, but it also just says "Templates are applied to stuff. Go buy the DMG for tips", which seems totally un-needed.

This is what you wanted, right?

Types
The classics are there, along with a quick definition of what they mean. Aberrations are Aboletihs and Beholders that sort of thing. I'd prefer they give aberations people who haven't played the game before might understand but whatever.

Beasts are new. This now includes all animals and magical beasts. I approve of getting rid of magical beasts but this really became a catchall "We don't know where else to put it". Its got rules like "Most are unintelligent" and "some have magical powers" but also "includes all varieties of ordinary animals". I don't really know that I'm a fan of the Unicorn and housecat sharing a grouping.

Celestials are also new. they are basiclly the whole "Gods = Good" problem, and all celestials are employed by gods, and also good aligned. Basically angels. I don't really see this being broad enough to be in the same league as "Every single normal animal, and a bunch of made up ones" but I can sort of see it.

Dragons - The section on how dragons are magic is interesting. Mostly because according to this same book.. well we will get to that.

Fiends - Oh evil gods get these. But maybe also good aligned angels? Probably not.

Giants - They really restict their future work space with giants in this book. Here they mention there are 6 varities of true giants. So hopefully no one needs a splat book later.

Humanoids - Now get monsterous humanoids too.

Monstrosities - This is literally described as a catch all for everything that cant be placed elsewhere. As in they use the words "in some sense serve as a catch-all catagory for creatures that don't fit into any other type". Generally sentient humanoid shaped stuff though. So not unicorns which are sentient horse shaped. Because that would be silly.

Plants - Because of their weird definition earlier, they actually have to go and spell out that trees aren't plants, but are actually considered "Flora". I'm positive this will F up plenty of PHB stuff, for druids and clerics in regards to spells. I like that they call out fungal creatures as plants. Venus fly trap. Plant. Oak Tree. Flora. Mushroom? Depends how big, but maybe and probably.

alignment
I just want to thank them for saying unintelligent beings with low intelligence have no alignment. Especially if they have no concept of good v evil and act on instinct. I mean, it totally falls apart later in this book when they don't use it, but hey at least they came up with one.

Armor Class
They explain how natural armor, shields and AC are factored into monsters listed ACs and noted which they use. It dosn't call out how to apply it if I fight a dude with both. I'm from baltimore, so all I can think about is crabs. Crabs have an exoskeleton and thus have natural armor. If I were a crab dude I'd wear armor every time I knew I'd fight something. Why? because when you punch through my carapace it takes forever to heal, and its probably not as strong as say a magical ice pick this adventurer is swinging at me. That dude will punch holes and destroy my innards. I want something say, magical and hard to protect me.

See, this one gets it. Wear a set of shell-platemail.

Anyway. The Monster Manual gives no explanation for how to get armor on a crab person. Its basically left to "You figure it out" (Drink!). I guess you could say its either or, or maybe say its both? Who knows. the example on the page after armor stuff actually calls this out as an option for hill giants. Giving them different armor based on whim without adjusting Challenge Rating (which I'll get to in a minute), but doesn't really explain how to do it for things with natural armor.

Dancing Otyogh
The dancing otyogh on page 8 is pretty fun. Basically this book is like a medieval manuscript. It sucks to write, but occasionally someone draws something funny in it.

Challenge Rating
They go on to explain that this works the same way as 3rd edition. I mean they don't use that language, but thats what CR still means. That said, it all seems totally ad-hoc in how CR is handed out. So enjoy that as we get to the monster section.

special traits
Some monsters have spells innately and some have it as though they were casters. Its basically the same as 3.5. You can swap what spells are known for caster monsters but it "might cause the monster to bea greater or lesser threat than suggested by its challenge rating". Not going to tell you how much, or how to tell. Just that it could come up.

also stuff sometimes is psionic. This works just like spells, but we wanted it to be a different word. Its as tacked into the section as it was to this.

multiattack
This is in the middle of the "how to attack" section which is pretty blank overall. Its the same as the PHB, go read that. What is interesting is the multiattack mechanic. See, someone in 5e realized it sucks to only get to do one thing a turn. Their solution was not to let people do more than 1 thing a turn. Their solution was to give well over 50% of the monsters multiattack. Multiattack means they attack a few times as the same action. I feel like it would have been easier to give out more than one action, but hey at least this way you fuck the players only.

grapple
Get that bottle read, because this is where we really get going. The grapple rules for monsters are in a sidebar in the middle of a bit on limated usage actions. X/day, recharge, all that BS. Its two half paragraphs that just says "Sometimes monsters fuck you." Some monsters apparently just grapple you. No check, no save nothing. Just a big old dicking. On your turn you can spend your action to try to break free, but you probably can't. Drink up buddies, its all down hill from here.

this is basically how 5e goes.

equipment
Randomly thrown in at the end is a bit on equipment and how can equip monsters with stuff. You'd think this is where they mention armor rules or something, but they don't. Instead they explain that "you [the DM] decide how much of a monster's equipment is recoverable after a creature is slain and whether any of that is still usable". Yeah. They double dicked on that one sentance. The DM decides if you can recover it, and if you do recover it, the DM decides if you can use it. I know thats always sort of been the case, in that the DM says if you broke stuff, but this section only exists to remind the DM that "Hey maybe the players broke the armor of that dude they just killed and can't use it". Oh and they bring it up again just to be clear. "A battered suit of armor made for a monster is rarely usable by someone else". Its seriously a two sentance paragraph, and they bring that point up 3 times. Fuck you players, you are not allowed loot. Ever. (Drink)

legendary creatures
This being the big thing for 5e monsters, you'd think it gets a lot of page space for it. It gets 4 paragraphs totalling 14 sentances. I won't devote a lot of time to it, because it basically it says "Remember immediate actions, monsters get those and you don't. Fuck you".

Well thats the boring stuff. I'll move into actual monsters shortly. Before I do I want to touch on two generic things.

1 - I actually like the art style. This doesn't mean I like each piece, but overall I like the style. So Ill only complain a little about this sort of thing. Apparently I'm the extreme minority.
2 - They do this god awful thing where hide mechanics outside the stat block to make it look like the statblock is clean and easy to read. In reality this means that a DM who just flips open the book to a page and says fight (95% of them) is fucked. You've seriously got to read the entire entry to ensure that your monster doesn't have some crazy hidden immunity or attack power. This is probably the worst part of the book. (Drink).

Ill post this now, so I've got something up, and come back later tonight/tommorow and get the next one posted. I figure 3k words isn't bad for a start. I'll do monsters A - Bored.

*Ok, notepad was obviously not where to write this, suggestions?