Unless the early access version ofDungeons & Dragons’ 2025Monster Manualdiffers significantly from the print version, it is still unclear whether the game is meant to be run as an open book test or a guessing game, where combat is concerned. The 2024Player’s Handbookintroduced a new Action type called the Study Action. This Action allows a player to roll Intelligence-based skills to “call to mind an important piece of information” about a particular subject. It appearedthis might be the official way for players to know monster weaknesses and abilities in-character, but this remains entirely ambiguous.
The2024DnD PHBretained vague rules, instead of providing clarity, offloading game design from the highly paid team of professionals to individual Dungeon Masters.Many DMs assumed the Study Action would receive some elaboration in theDungeon Master’s Guide, only to be let downwhen the book was released. 2025’sMonster Manualoffered a final chance to provide transparency as to the design intent behind the Study Action, and what sort of monster information it is meant to convey to the players, if any. This nebulous addition simply adds another point of confusion toDnD, slowing the game down.
Older D&D Withheld Basic System Information From Players
Veteran hobbyists recall thestrangeness ofAdvancedDnD’s THAC0 rules, which provided a table with figures based on a character’s class and level, noting what number they had to roll “to hit armor class zero,” hence the acronym. What some fans of older editions fail to recall is that this information was not always player-facing. The 1eAD&Dsystem put its Attack Matrix tables in theDungeon Master’s Guide, meaningplayers would not even know how one character class differed from another in its attack accuracy. Saving Throws were similarly restricted to tables in theDMG, leaving players to guess.
A clearly defined Difficulty Class based on monster Challenge Rating could have revealed specific aspects of a monster’s stat block on a success, with multiple Study Actions needed to grasp a monster’s full capabilities.
WhileAD&Drobbed Dave Arneson of royalties, it also was a system that defined tabletop RPGs for many years. The game assumed a model wherein a single participant was a group’s dedicated DM, and everyone else would only have access to player content. Obviously, nothing stopped a player from purchasing theMonster Manualor an adventure module and reading it for themselves. Today, the hobby has evolved, andit is rare to find any dedicatedDnDfan who has not participated in the game as both a DM and as a player, making the opaque 1eAD&Dapproach feel archaic.
While the 2025DnD Monster Manualhas chilling art, evoking the vibe of the 2eAD&D MM,the game certainly leans more towards transparency than needlessly siloed rules like its legacy editions had. All classes have shared a unified attack progression since 4eDnD, and all class features are clearly displayed in thePlayer’s Handbook, not hidden in tables in theDMG. These rules may have been kept away from the players in pursuit of immersion, but they put far too much of a burden on the DM. It remains unclear how much monster information is meant to be accessible.
2024 D&D Rules Seem To Prioritize Transparency
The Ambiguous Rules That Will Slow Down Play Stand Out As Flaws
The2024DnD DMGclarifies magic items, so DMs know exactly how many the party should have at any given level, and specifically how much they should cost to purchase. Tool Proficiencies have clearer rules, and some spells likecommandhave been significantly improved. There seems to be a broad push for clarity and transparency in the 2024DnDrevision, butthe Study Action’s murky function contradicts this theme in design. At first glance, Study seems to be the official way PCs might know monsters’ vulnerabilities or immunities in-character based on their subject matter expertise, but this is only an interpretation.
I Hope D&D Is Paying Attention To The Ennies' AI Ban For TTRPGs
TTRPGs face a critical decision, on being a human-created art form or AI-generated content. The ENNIES are on the right side, but D&D might not be.
A revisedMonster Manualdoes not turnDnDcombat into a rules-lite game, as it remains a combat-focused system where battles are the primary source of challenge. Since Study requires a full Action to use, if it did potentially offer insight into specific aspects of a monster’s stat block,it would not be overpowered, certainly. The Keen Mind feat allows a character to Study as a Bonus Action, which could make it more viable in battle. As written, it is unclear whether that is of any real benefit, since outside of combat, the round-to-round action economy is far less important.
The bigger problem is not that the revised edition chose to embrace transparency, or that it elected to keep monsters mysterious, but that it is not at all clear which way the designers intended to go.
The 2025DnD Monster Manualchanges monster typesfrom 2014’s version, but every creature remains tagged with a specific creature type, as before. Since the Study Action pairs specific Intelligence skills with creature types,it is intuitive to assume it was intended to reveal information about those types of monsters. Nature, for example, is associated with Beasts, Dragons, Oozes, and Plants, according to the 2024PHB. A clearly defined Difficulty Class based on monster Challenge Rating could have revealed specific aspects of a monster’s stat block on a success, with multiple Study Actions needed to grasp a monster’s full capabilities.
An Informed D&D Party Still Has Challenges
The Revised Rules Should Have Made Design Goals Clearer
ThoughDnDcrowds other tabletop RPGs outof the small market that is the hobby, innovative small press and indie RPGs are released every year. Some games, likeCloudbreaker Alliance, lean into the same “crunchy,” highly tactical combat asDnD, but they take an “open book” model. Players are expected to have full knowledge of a monster’s statistics inCloudbreaker, meaningthe challenge does not come from guessing how the group might win, but analyzing how to apply the group’s resources to achieve a victory via tactics. This TTRPG, and others, demonstrate that transparency does not remove satisfying combat challenges.
Kobold Press' alternative 5e revision,Tales of the Valiant, provided official ways a character could learn a monster’s current HP total, and other third-party 5eDnDvariant rule sets offer similar mechanics.
Given the ubiquity of 5eDnD, it is highly possible players would forego the Study Action in combat, sincemany likely know common monster stat blocks from their own time acting as Dungeon Master. The bigger problem is not that the revised edition chose to embrace transparency, or that it elected to keep monsters mysterious, but that it is not at all clear which way the designers intended to go. Clear rules on exactly what information the Study Action provides on monsters would have been well-received. Instead, it adds toDungeons & Dragons’vague rules that slow down gaming sessions.
