WotC Considering NPC Stat Format Change

solamon77 · Mar 9, 2019

Osgood said:
Maybe I'm getting too old for this s#!$ but I think having to read a whole sentence to express what should be a few words and abbreviations is a terrible idea. Walls of text are a pain to read through when at the table, so having a parenthetical with the stats to catch the eyes makes things a little easier. That complete sentence may make your grade school grammar teacher happy, but it's not doing anything for the DM.

Imagine if they tried this with monster stat blocks...
The Ogre is a large-sized chaotic evil giant, possessed of a prodigious strength score of 19, a sub-par dexterity score of 8, an impressive 16 constitution. It's limited mental capabilities include an Intelligence score of 5 and wisdom and charisma scores of 7; the ogre speaks the Common and Giant languages. Thanks to its hide armor the ogre has an armor class of 11, but what it lacks in defense, it makes up for in health as its 7d10+21 hit dice provide it with an average of 59 hit points. Additionally the ogre has a speed of 40 feet per round, the ability to see in darkness to a range of 60 feet, and a passive perception score of 8.
The ogre can use a greatclub to make melee weapon attacks, which have a +6 bonus to hit, a reach of 5 feet, and may affect one target, dealing 2d8+4 points of bludgeoning damage, for an average of 13 points. As a ranged attack the ogre can hurl javelins to a range of 30 feet, or 120 feet with disadvantage on the attack roll. The javelin has a +6 bonus to hit, and deals 2d6+4 points of piercing damage on a hit, which averages to 11 points of damage. The javelin can also be used to make a melee attack with a reach of 5 feet, with the same attack bonuses and damage. Characters who defeat this level 2 challenge earn 450 experience points.

Can't wait!

Totally agree. I hate this idea. Stat blocks are supposed to be concise.

Sent from my VS501 using EN World mobile app

guachi · Mar 9, 2019

Mercule said:
Wait... That's a thing?

I mean, I've bought adventures that I've never run, and that were still enjoyable to read, but I always read them with my "GM's eye", which means looking for the stat blocks, etc.

I can accept that there are folks that buy adventures with no intent of running (or looting) them, but I'd still expect them to care about the game mechanics stuff, at least enough to be able to follow along. Otherwise, my brain kinda hurts.

I think it has to be a thing in 5e. I mean, "gorgeous" isn't really high on the list of things necessary to run an adventure. And I find 5e adventure books terribly laid out and not at all easy to use.

So I assume WOTC's primary purpose with their adventure books isn't for people to actually run them.

Jester David · Mar 9, 2019

lowkey13 said:
Is it weird that I was just thinking about how I missed the short stat blocks of 1e?

"4 Bull Thistles (AC 6; MV 9”; HD 4; hp 4 x 24; #AT 3; D 2-8/2-8/3-13; SD 25% magic resistance)"

(Source: EX1)

I remember seeing those while running adventures in my 2e days and they always seemed kinda useless.
It was never enough to run anything but the simplest of monsters. You always needed to find the monster entry anyway.

ShadowFox981 · Mar 9, 2019

This sounds like a situation in which the dev team is trying to rewrite a book for DMs to make it an easier reading experience for the player. This doesn't logically make sense because the player will likely never read the source material. The beauty of a statblock is that, within 2 seconds, I can determine the creature's name, gender, race, and whether or not my players can murder it to death or bamboozle it into helping them. I have a fairly high words-per-minute reading speed, but if this ever happens, I'm literally going to write all of the information out into a statblock because it'll just be easier to read and gather information from quickly. Please don't make reading modules any more annoying and convoluted.

lowkey13 · Mar 9, 2019

*Deleted by user*

dave2008 · Mar 9, 2019

guachi said:
And I find 5e adventure books terribly laid out and not at all easy to use.

So I assume WOTC's primary purpose with their adventure books isn't for people to actually run them.

What is a good adventure layout / design to you? I am honestly curious as I have never found any adventure (from 1e-5e & BECMI & PF) to make much sense to me. I don't know if that is the cause or the effect of the fact I don't run published adventures! Back on the old WotC D&D boards people would complain about how much better Paizo adventures were, but when I look at them they just seemed as horrible to follow to me. So I am honestly wondering what is a good adventure design? Can you give me an example of a good, well laid out adventure for D&D or PF that I should check out?

FYI, In 30 yrs of gaming, prior to 5e, I have only bought two adventure modules (White Plume Mountain & The Immortal Storm, I also have Keep on the Borderlands, but I don't remember buying it). I have looked through them many times and I also have a lot of Dragon / Dungeon magazines but I just never use them. At best I mine them for ideas.

dave2008 · Mar 9, 2019

ShadowFox981 said:
This sounds like a situation in which the dev team is trying to rewrite a book for DMs to make it an easier reading experience for the player. This doesn't logically make sense because the player will likely never read the source material. The beauty of a statblock is that, within 2 seconds, I can determine the creature's name, gender, race, and whether or not my players can murder it to death or bamboozle it into helping them. I have a fairly high words-per-minute reading speed, but if this ever happens, I'm literally going to write all of the information out into a statblock because it'll just be easier to read and gather information from quickly. Please don't make reading modules any more annoying and convoluted.

He is not talking about replacing the stat block. He is talking about in an adventure when the reference an NPC without providing a full stat block. Generally they are explaining how to modify an existing stat block (at least that is what I think)

dave2008 · Mar 9, 2019

lowkey13 said:
Really?

I never did.

The vast majority of monsters don’t require much explication, and I was experienced enough that a brief reference would trigger my knowledge for the few that did.

AFAIK, most 1e DMs were the same.

Really, you knew most of the DMs worldwide back in the 1e days and how they played. You must be well traveled good sir!

That being said, I generally agree. A little blurb is generally enough to spark my memory. However, I still prefer a full stat block. If I have the full stat block I can more easily modify it to suit my needs and adjudicate improvised actions. Of course I can always wing it too!

lowkey13 · Mar 9, 2019

*Deleted by user*

Jester David · Mar 9, 2019

lowkey13 said:
Really?

I never did.

The vast majority of monsters don’t require much explication, and I was experienced enough that a brief reference would trigger my knowledge for the few that did.

AFAIK, most 1e DMs were the same.

Key word there being “experienced”. And the implication of memorization. Which didn’t work when a new monster was introduced in the adventure, or you were using a monster you’d never run before.

And, again, it was really only good for monster that were big bags of hit points. That format wouldn’t work at all for a beholder or mind flayer.

TheBanjoNerd said:
I've been DM'ing 5e since it was released and I use essentially the same stat block @lowkey13 presented because it gets all of the relevant information across quickly and concisely. I don't need to know what an NPC's bonds and flaws are when it comes to combat.

Well... yeah. But you also don’t need their name, gender, or even race in combat. The implication is this is the write-up for NPCs who you may or may not be getting into combat with. People you talk to, allies that might help you, rivals trying to trip you up, the quest giver offering you a reward.