Another way to describe a monster

[Karemare]

Looking trough Goodman Games "Big Bugs" 4E supplement, I noticed that all monsters a pleasantly easy to read and tactics-transparent (more so than in core 4E). Then I thought... Hey! Monster can be even more transparent and obvious if described/depicted more visually!

Like this:


It's a newt (not a lizard, since it can't breath air) from "Monster Geographica: Marsh & Aquatic" by Expeditious Retreat Press. Statistics are Open Content under OGL while the image is Closed Content.

I wonder if monster descriptions will be like that when personal e-books will become mundane like cellphones are today...

[Kask]

This is the 3rd Ed House rules forum. You might get more replies posting in the 4th Ed forum...

[Karemare]

Why? The monster is 3.5, and my point was: you don't have to change editions to have rules/tactics-transparent monsters.

Except for - I got some opinions that this layout isn't that great as it looks to me. So, more opinions/criticism is appreciated %)

(Ouch, made typo in own nick... Gotta fix that.)

[Katemare]

Ok, now, let's try again. Hello, EN World.

[Scurvy_Platypus]

So.... I'm guessing you're saying that 3rd Ed could adopt a similar approach, and then people wouldn't have to switch to 4th Ed?

People are making the edition change for a _lot_ of reasons. Monster Statblocks are only one of 'em.

As for what you've done...

Well, first I'll say it looks groovy.

After that...

I honestly don't know how many people would be willing to see a full monster manual done up in this style. I _personally_ think it'd be interesting, but part of the deal with a lot of 3E fans is the issue of consistency.

Right or not, there's a strong desire and push for things to be as standardized as possible. Creatures, NPCs, Characters... everyone following the same rules.

The sort of thing you've got there on the other hand, I'm not sure you could really do the exact same (or really close) type of layout and illustration for every kind of creature.

If you have to shift the layout around and locate information (say size and saves for example) in different places owing to the size of the stat block or the art, people are going to complain (long and loud) about how they have to "struggle" to find the information.

I'll also note that one thing I seem to recall 3E fans bitching about in regards to 4e is the lack of flavor text. I'm not seeing anything in that display other than basic stat stuff.

I think it's cool, but I think people would need to see a number of different creatures done up to see how it might all look. Maybe one of each creature type for example or something.

On the other hand, if you're not actually proposing some sort of rule or looking to do this as a project (you're just saying, "isn't this cool") then... yeah, I guess it's cool. Now what?

[Katemare]

Nay, fortunately, I don't have wild dreams of reworking all existing or future 3.5 supplement for this design %) Although I think that we'll see something like this in 2012 or so in 5th edition, especially if "D&D Insider" will be profitable for Wizards.

Of course, main reason why I've done this thing is because this challenge interested me. Currently I gathered some opinions and working on improved design for this lizard and the Bloodseeker from "Necromantic Lore". In my imaginary monsterbook with this layout, flavor text is placed under the essential picture, in scroll- or encyclopedia-styled format.
Yeah, I don't get unicorns with "hail from Feywyld, guard forests and lakes" pokemon-like descriptions, too.

The improvements that was suggested to me were:
1. Try to keep same section order as in standard descriptions.
2. Try to place sections in the same place in every description (draw the monster that way so it can be done).
3. Infoblocks should have distinct frame and semi-solid background.

If I'd make 12 monsters like this it would pass for a free supplement, I think.

[Typhoonoftempest]

I would have to agree with Scurvy that the entry lacks fluff n' stuff (like the Tarrasque's unknown past and the like). If there was a space devoted to filling in fluff, it'd do fairly well.

[Noumenon]

Maybe not for every statblock in the MM but when people introduce new monsters in modules or homebrew this would make them a lot more attractive to the eye. This brings across the realism and "concept" of a monster a lot better than a stat block. It's a great way to get people psyched up about your new monsters.

New magic items could be statted up this way as well, with arrows pointing to the secret caches and stuff.

[Noumenon]

double post

[Katemare]

So, another try with different monster. Now with flavor text and frames. But - I couldn't place information is the same order as in standard layout. But maybe I could use _this_ layout for other monsters as well...

(The monster is from "Legends & Lairs: Necromantic Lore" by Fantasy Flight Games. The text, except for gothic font, is Open Content, the rest and the image is Closed Content.

Image hosting by ImageShack.)

[Noumenon]

That's just really cool. I really want to play that monster now, which is the basic goal of a stat block, isn't it? I also like

• the color coding for flavor text
• the way you list what abilities the monster doesn't have so we don't have to just notice they're missing
• the suggested encounters
• the way you mix little flavor bites in around the rules text, so you get introduced to the monster's stats and its flavor at once

I have read my share of adventure modules with new monsters, and none of them ever grabbed me like this. At best it's a slow attraction that creeps over you as you read the text and mentally "get" what the author thought was cool about it. This lets you get it right away. More modules should do this, not only for new monsters but for their bosses.

Now unrelated to the visual presentation, design stuff. You didn't design this monster, though, did you? You just added the presentation?

• Isn't summoning more associated with CR 5 monsters like devils?
  
• I really like the Induce Nightmares ability, which should really make a player feel haunted and off his balance from playing fatigued. Very fun. But does it interfere with a wizard's ability to memorize spells? That's almost as powerful as the 5th-level spell Nightmare.
  
• Terrifying Howl -- I like how this thing kind of has a mechanical resemblance to the krenshar, with its retractable face and the bloodseeker not having a face. Mechanically, it would work better if it worked like the krenshar and caused the target to flee instead of paralyzing.
  --Why? Because the bloodseeker's coolest abilities trigger off it having tasted your blood. The only way those are ever going to see play is if it enters combat with you and survives. That doesn't normally happen, unless the monsters play like cowards. But with the fear ability, it can bite someone, then howl, and then you can have it allow them to escape. At speed 30 it will snap at their heels, feeding on their fear, until they make it to town or up a tree or an elvish ranger pops up in the nick of time and drives the beast off.
  
• I just thought of another way it can bite someone and then come back later: the turning mechanic. That's a great synergy with that rule. It makes me want to design more undead that benefit from surviving encounters.
  
• What's the FF 14 T 12 listed under the hit points?
  
• I personally always note for undead that they are mindless and immune to critical hits, because otherwise I forget. So this "friendly" stat block might want to stick that in somewhere.
  
• I don't think blindsight is especially needed because skeletons don't have eyes either and they don't need it. Maybe just change the Relentless Tracker ability to "Can pinpoint the location of the last creature whose blood it tasted." That way you don't kill all invisibility, but the target can't run and it can't hide.

I never would've gotten so into optimizing this monster if your picture hadn't hooked me on it! I think in the end, with all those awesome abilities and the uniqueness, I would bump up its other stats and make it more like a CR... 5?

[Katemare]

Thanks for a detailed opinion %) although seems like you're the only person who likes the mixed layout of flavor and statistics blocks. With the next monster I'll try to place them less chaotically, to justify them around borders...

You're right about undead immunities and nightmares' effect on magic, I should've mention that - and I will when I'll develop good design for all this. "FF" and "T" are "flat-footed AC" and "touch AC". Too bad these abbreviations are not that well known as I thought they are :\

Yeah, the monster and its abilities are not mine, although I adjusted some traits (converted from 3.0 and stuff). The thought that it would be hard to hook PCs for a targeted hunt crossed my mind. I think the villain might use some sort of blood-collecting creature for that - a strige or a vampire bat...
* recalls the scene from the Hunk comics when a swarm of mechanical rats was sent get at least a drop of his blood. The battle during a storm night was quite epic.

I used this creature once, with the EL 2 scenario. The hound was just shot for some chunks of flesh and went on its way. So, I don't know yet if it's balanced or not... But - your suggestions how to fine-tune it look great and adventure-oriented %)

[Noumenon]

Originally Posted by Katemare

seems like you're the only person who likes the mixed layout of flavor and statistics blocks.

That's because the others are thinking in terms of running the monster. I'm thinking about introducing the monster and making you interested in it. I always copy the important stats for a monster to a 3x5 card before I run it anyway, since I keep initiative with a card for each player and monster.

Originally Posted by Katemare

I used this creature once, with the EL 2 scenario. The hound was just shot for some chunks of flesh and went on its way.

That's what I want to avoid -- making a monster with tons of awesome abilities that never come into play. I think the idea you have here also points to a higher CR monster that's worth the effort of sending something out to get blood. It would be fun to sic a bunch of CR 2 leeches or mosquitoes on a level 8 party and have them going, "Why are we fighting these little insects?" Later... "ohhh... I see now."

[Katemare]

That's because the others are thinking in terms of running the monster. I'm thinking about introducing the monster and making you interested in it.

You mean - introducing to players or introducing to readers?
From the opinions I collected, D&D _fans_ don't like breaking of the routine of standard layout (they're comfortable with it), but those who just like D&D or are indifferent think it's more attractive and clear than plain text statblock.

Hmm... Do you think I should include init+stat card with it, for quick battle reference?

That's what I want to avoid -- making a monster with tons of awesome abilities that never come into play.

Nah, it's not why I didn't actually see this monster in play. That game died really fast, after the first session, because it was chat-based and two of three players were not very interested in RPGs. Otherwise the party could track the hound to the dungeon boss or at least see the scene where it takes on him. Or engage it and have a CR 2 fight.

[Noumenon]

Hmm... Do you think I should include init+stat card with it, for quick battle reference?

Sure. A little block labeled "Combat Stats" holding the iniative, AC, HP, saves, and maybe the speed and Spot checks. Those are not the interesting parts of the monster anyway, so there's no point giving them special little floating boxes. Put that functional stuff by itself where DMs can use it.

Otherwise the party could track the hound to the dungeon boss or at least see the scene where it takes on him.

Oh, I misinterpreted "shot for some chunks of flesh." So it didn't attack the party back, I guess maybe because it already had another target's blood in its nostrils? Can the bloodseeker have more than one target at a time? That would be another fine way to get its abilities activated. Have the party encounter it while it is pursuing someone else. It can bite one, do its howl, and lope off. Then when the party finds their NPC contact dead with his throat torn out, bardic knowledge will tell them that the bloodseeker always gets its quarry, and they're next on the list! Man, I love the story potential of this monster.

I also like the story potential revealed in one of your encounter suggestions: "a reclusive wizard pays gold for a captured dire wolf and hires assistants for the ritual." That sounds like a fun timed encounter where you can reward the PCs for speed. Quick enough, and they only have to fight a drugged dire wolf, or they get to fight the wizard first and witness the transformation later for two separate easier fights, or the ritual goes off and they have to fight them both together in a very tough fight.

I think it's kind of weird that the flavor text says, "Presently, the ritual of its creation is widely known." Usually, these things are shrouded in mystery. If it's widely known, what is it? Did they explain that in the original adventure and you just didn't include it?

A couple more things about graphic design. I think you should consistently put all of the bloodseeker's attacks in big red print like you did with Terrifying Howl. That will help DMs who are playing the monster see what options they have and skip all the flavor text. "CR 2" is not something that needs to be stressed so I'd take the red letters off of that one. And I found myself not remembering the monster's name even the third time I posted in the thread; that might be my fault or maybe it should be in some kind of underlined, centered, or "header" font.

If you have any thought of doing another statblock like this, I think you should start a new thread in the General RPG section. This isn't just another user-created monster like all the others, it's a whole new way of presenting monsters, and a cool thing to look at too. It deserves a wider audience. This thread might have lost some views because it started with a little frog instead of a cool undead wolf or dragon. I want people to give it another shot.

[Katemare]

Thanks for the suggestions, they are very useful... %) Currently I'm doing the bulette, as per advice from other RPG community. That monster has great tactics potential - so, great opportunity to show its tactics visually. Although I was disappointed with its core abilities...

[Lizard]

You know, I thought there was something oddly familiar about that one...

I created it. I had to check my old writing archives to be sure.

Damn cool!

[Lizard]

In case anyone's interested, here's a 4e version of the beastie: Bloodseeker

[Noumenon]

katemare -- I said I wasn't excited by the first monster in this thread, but I am actually going to use it! I'm prepping an adventure based on Improved Reduce Person to reduce the PCs' size to Tiny (Goodman Games' "The Dragonfiend Pact"). With the PCs so small they could jump on a lilypad, I remembered the first monster you posted in this thread and came to nab it. So while the underlying monster wasn't that exciting*, your presentation did make it memorable.

*I may or may not be trying to prompt you into making more encounter suggestions like you did with the white dragon.

Edit: the following is a misapprehension that I'm leaving in just to show you how it was possible not to "get" a monster you showed before you had the "encounters and tactics" sections.
I really don't see this monster working against a normal, not-Tiny-sized party though -- how is something that size gonna drag you underwater? More likely it'll just dangle off your knee until it suffocates. Or kill you with poison, in which case it's basically an aquatic giant bee.
After reading more carefully, I see that the way it works is to auto-attach, Dex drain you every round, and stay attached while you sink to the bottom of the pool. I thought the poison hit Con rather than being a Con-based DC. And I thought "tries to drag you underwater" meant "using its grapple check," which seemed kind of ridiculous even if it was mechanically possible.

[Debby]

Visually, these are superb. As a reader of monsters, I absolutely adore the visual addition. As a DM, I'm concerned that some of the vital information isn't immediately noticable. I would absolutely love to see more of these. For an entire monster manual to be presented that way, might be difficult. It helps to have to have a stat block just to have the information easily accessible. However, as an addition to rather than a mere substitute for a monster manual, this woud be AWESOME indeed.

Debby